• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Behringer announces Bass Brassmaster Fuzz

#43
I recently started using my Malekko B:ASSMASTER with the band and I love it. I've had mine for like 7/8 years and I remember thinking it was too overpowering in our mix before too. But for whatever reason, this time around, it works great with our mix. Maybe it's because we use lower tunings now? Idk. I use it with harmonics and some delay and reverb in a couple parts and it sounds magnificent! Then in parts I just wanna chainsaw the part. Works great. But I saw this posted on FB and I would def like to try the Behringer. See how it stacks up. May get one next year when they are readily available.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Novarocker, Snake101st and lowplaces
#47
Deleted member 271037 said:
Both the Mk 2 and Mk 1.5 SHOULD be germanium. I believe the Mk 3 was silicon.

I have no idea about what the Behringer clone is though. Probably the cheapest they could get away with in every possible way. I strongly suspect that the clone you've built is better, and that if you want a Mk 1.5 your best option would be to build one yourself (or buy a more high-end clone).

In my opinion the Brassmaster is mostly of historical interest and totally useless for most types of music. Like you said, very splattery, and that's on the BEST settings. On most settings I personally think it sounds absolutely horrible. But some people love it for bass, so I guess it's a matter of personal taste.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately the Behringer Bender is silicon SMD. It should be like a Tone Bender version of a silicon Fuzz Face? It's a good sounding one, but I'll stick to my germanium build.
 
#48
Bob_Ross said:
Y'all say that like it's a bad thing...

:)
Click to expand...

:DHaha, don't get me wrong, I love a good, splattery fuzz. Unfortunately (IMO) the Brassmaster is a very poor, harsh sounding splattery fuzz, even on the best settings I'm able to dial in. Most of the settings are absolutely horrible to my ears.

Some people seem to love them for bass though so I guess it must be a matter of personal taste, and/or what type of music you play.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Iristone and BrentSimons
#50
Iristone said:
Unfortunately the Behringer Bender is silicon SMD. It should be like a Tone Bender version of a silicon Fuzz Face? It's a good sounding one, but I'll stick to my germanium build.
Click to expand...

If this is correct it means that Behringer has copied the visual appearance of the more popular Tone Bender MkII (and Mk1.5) but that the actual circuit inside must be either one of the later (and less desirable) silicon Tone Benders or something else entirely that isn't a faithfull copy of ANY specific Tone Bender. It may still sound ok and be "close enough" for most players of course, but the marketing is questionable at best IMO.

No surprises there. We are after all talking about the company who copied the visual appearance of classic, vintage ribbon mics and stuck a cheap condenser mic inside them. You can't really sink any lower than that. Disgusting company with questionable ethics and an even worse customer support IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: andare and Iristone
#51
Deleted member 271037 said:
:DHaha, don't get me wrong, I love a good, splattery fuzz. Unfortunately (IMO) the Brassmaster is a very poor, harsh sounding splattery fuzz, even on the best settings I'm able to dial in. Most of the settings are absolutely horrible to my ears.

Some people seem to love them for bass though so I guess it must be a matter of personal taste, and/or what type of music you play.
Click to expand...
Not harsh enough, I'd say!

Give me a Fender Blender!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deleted member 271037
#52
Deleted member 271037 said:
If this is correct it means that Behringer has copied the visual appearance of the more popular Tone Bender MkII (and Mk1.5) but that the actual circuit inside must be either one of the later (and less desirable) silicon Tone Benders or something else entirely that isn't a faithfull copy of ANY specific Tone Bender. It may still sound ok and be "close enough" for most players of course, but the marketing is questionable at best IMO.

No surprises there. We are after all talking about the company who copied the visual appearance of classic, vintage ribbon mics and stuck a cheap condenser mic inside them. You can't really sink any lower than that. Disgusting company with questionable ethics and an even worse customer support IMO.
Click to expand...
It could be the silicon Fuzz Face situation: the circuit is correct, only the transistors are changed. It still sounds good, but different from a real clone.
The Mark 3 tone bender should be germanium; later they changed to a Big Muff-like silicon circuit and changed its name to Supa Tone Bender. I think some Tone Bender IV's are also made that way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Novarocker and Deleted member 271037
#53
Iristone said:
It could be the silicon Fuzz Face situation: the circuit is correct, only the transistors are changed. It still sounds good, but different from a real clone.
The Mark 3 tone bender should be germanium; later they changed to a Big Muff-like silicon circuit and changed its name to Supa Tone Bender. I think some Tone Bender IV's are also made that way.
Click to expand...
Ah, now I understand what you meant with the silicon Fuzz Face reference.

Yeah, I think you're right, that's probably the most likely scenario. I guess it doesn't matter as long as it sounds great and you're not expecting an exact clone of the Mk2 (which unfortunately I think many guitar players will, when Behringer has copied the visual appearance of the Mk2...).

Btw, from what I've read online (which I always take with a grain of salt...) there were actually two versions of the Mk3. One was silicon and the other was germanium. It seems that the Mk4 was the first version that was silicon only. But please correct me if I'm wrong!?!?
 
#54
Iristone said:
It could be the silicon Fuzz Face situation: the circuit is correct, only the transistors are changed. It still sounds good, but different from a real clone.
The Mark 3 tone bender should be germanium; later they changed to a Big Muff-like silicon circuit and changed its name to Supa Tone Bender. I think some Tone Bender IV's are also made that way.
Click to expand...
Pretty sure the original Brassmaster was silicon, anybody who knows better correct me if I'm wrong. Why assume it's something other than what they say it is, a clone of the Brassmaster? Is there something I'm missing?
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back