Psst... Ready to join TalkBass and start posting, make new friends, sell your gear, and more?  Register your free account in 30 seconds.

Cry Baby Bass

Discussion in 'Effects [BG]' started by nabster18, Mar 12, 2006.


  1. nabster18

    nabster18

    Mar 12, 2006
    Wales
    Hello all, I am intrested in getting a 105Q Crybaby Bass Wah peal. Does any one have ne thing to say which you think I should know? All comments on the Pedal (good or bad) will be much abliged!!!!
     
  2. lowmid

    lowmid

    Feb 2, 2005
    belgium
    it's reaaly good, the auto bypass is a cool functionnality, it's very sensible but tweakable(vol and Q)

    it's not a cheap pedal though
     
  3. my only beef with this pedal is that its switchless. Rock too far back and it will disengage. Though, i could stick one in a looper and remove the spring from it.

    Personally i dig my Weeping Demon though. very versatile.

    peace
    blake
     
  4. Nyarlathotep

    Nyarlathotep Banned

    Feb 5, 2006
    West Coast of Canada
    If you want a switched version of the 105q I'd suggest the Dime Crybaby From Hell. It gives you the Q and volume controlls, though the boost button has to be in for the volume, plus you get 6 selectable heel frequencies (between 250-440, if I remember). And, you can control how far the sweep distance is. Plus as an added bonus you get a second out/in so you can have all the cable on one side of the pedal, or, useing a mini mixer you can blend your clean and wah sounds (if used as an out the signal is uneffected). And thats if you have the little switch by the out/in set for that. Set the other way that jack becomes a second effected out!

    Anyway, enough of my corporate whoring, I'd recomend the 105q just cus it's Dunlop. Built like a tank. Plus the new ones have an "off delay" controll, from what I hear.
     
  5. hrmmm... I MUST NOT SPEND MORE MONEY ON A WAH.
    I MUST NOT SPEND MORE MONEY ON A WAH.
    I MUST NOT SPEND MORE MONEY ON A WAH.
     
  6. Nyarlathotep

    Nyarlathotep Banned

    Feb 5, 2006
    West Coast of Canada
    HAHAHAHA!!!!! YOU CAN'T RESIST!!!!!!!

























    ;)
     
  7. hrmmm... i really like my demon, although id love a growly deep sounding wah, a la timmy c.
     
  8. hey DarkHarted. Have you still got some of the clips of the CBFH?
     
  9. Nyarlathotep

    Nyarlathotep Banned

    Feb 5, 2006
    West Coast of Canada
    These were done back when I was "IcedEarthWOM":

    http://www.ourmedia.org/node/147231 : Listen to the last 1/4 of the recording for a noisy (cus of my rec setup at the time...) example of the barkyness of the wah. I believe that it was set up on the lowest heel freq, sweep range at min, volume for unity (boost on). The Q was set high, but not high enough that it sounded "strained" at the heel.

    http://www.ourmedia.org/node/133437 : This one was when I had my wah set up with no fuzz/dist, but with a lot of treble going into it. Another good example of the bark you can get out of it. I believe the settings were as above...

    These should get you started...

    EDIT: just so you know I boosted the bass at the amp for both of these to counter the bass suck that you get. That's where the demon is really great, and why I kinda wish I had better luck with it :( , it has a bass booster. Obviously though, if you get an EQ or just boost the bass on your amp (at the expence of headroom... :( ), you'll get the same effect as the BB on the Demon.
     
  10. Nyarlathotep

    Nyarlathotep Banned

    Feb 5, 2006
    West Coast of Canada
    Another from my "IcedEarthWOM" days:

    http://www.ourmedia.org/node/152991 : A less noisy example when I "updated" my rig. I've done that so many times, I forget what the updates were :scowl: :bag: . I believe that the settings were: Highest heel freq (more fuzz at heel), lowest range (for the abruptness), and I think that the Q was set to the low so that it didn't make a diff when the fuzz was off, but still kicked a$$ with the fuzz!
    Again: the Wah action is the last 1/4 of the sample...

    Listening to these again has made me realize 2 things:

    1) I had a really sucktackular recording setup (for the most part). Don't even ask me how I had it all set up. It was noisy, and for the most part more complicated than it had to be. At least now I can do recording properly, with very little noise :bassist: :D

    and 2) I've yet to test out the fuzz -> wah with the PDDI! I sorta meant to, and even took a pic of the setup, but never really got around to it. I might have to actually set up fuzz -> wah -> PDDI. I really like the bark the wah has.

    Oh well, at least I don't have to buy anything! lol :p
     
  11. HELLonWHEELS

    HELLonWHEELS

    Jun 13, 2005
    Los Angeles
    The 105q does give a very clean wah it gives a bit of a growl.
     
  12. thanks man. I think ive been looking at achieving growl in the wrong way... active electronics and boosted mids. I just played a 60s re issue fender jazz, passive, and that vintage growl... oo baby. So i think that might be on the list instead of a new wah.

    Thanks for the clips anyways tho bro.

    Peace
    Blake
     
  13. Nyarlathotep

    Nyarlathotep Banned

    Feb 5, 2006
    West Coast of Canada
    Your welcome for the clips. Listening to them again got me into trying out the Fuzz -> Wah again! The thing is that I've always thought that the CFH with the Muff'n always sounded too "clean" on the back end but had a real growly sweep. Ran it through my PDDI yesterday and managed to get a great setting to dirty things up when the wah is back. It also makes the sweep even dirtier :D

    When I get a chance I'm gonna record some clips!

    Oh, and on the note of bass "growl", mine comes from a passive P pickup run trough the PDDI with blend on full and a little mid boost in the 170-200Hz range. Works for me anyway :smug: :bassist:
     
  14. i think the 105Q is the best bass wah out so far, i like that fact that you can get a really big sweep out of it...of course, thats all imo, but i think a lot of people will agree :)