You know, for something with internal trim pots, you'd think they would make this thing easier to access. Also, at least 1 trillion allen wrenches at my house, and not a single one fits
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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.
Envelope filter/follower addict support group
- Thread starter moon-bass
- Start date
The backplate screws on mine use a star bit (Torx). Not sure why they went with thoseYou know, for something with internal trim pots, you'd think they would make this thing easier to access. Also, at least 1 trillion allen wrenches at my house, and not a single one fits
Long term, they have much less tendency to strip out compared to most more common options. And they cam/slip/pop out less and let you use more torque and are less likely to work themselves out. A zillion times better than Phillps heads, which will strip and cam out much more easily.
Now that I look closer, same here. And I have a torx driver that fits!
In other news, bass player's eyes might worsen with age along with their ears ... Or maybe just mine
Allright, I got pics!
First up is the AF-9. Sure enough, three trim pots inside. Weirdly enough, they are not labeled in any way, nor are they mentioned in the manual at all. Also, I noted that the board inside is labelled AF-9. These are hi-rez pics, so you can zoom in.
Next up, the AFL. Bigger PCB board, has three internal trim pots, and the pots are labeled. I don't know much about electronics, but the components look very different to me. Also, interesting to note that the Board is labeled AF-2001 ... and there is an Ibanez/Maxon AF-201. Naturally, I'm curious about the AF-201 in comparison, but for some reason they seem to be very overpriced as compared to the AF-9 and AFL/1.
Best I can tell, the AF-201 came first (late 70's, early 80's) and is probably the most expensive out of the three because it is the most vintage, and most rare. The AFL/AF-1 came out mid-80's, and then the AF-9 came out after that. I could be wrong, but this is based on the research I've done on the webs as well as the housing/style of the pedals.
Given that the PCB for the AFL is labeled AF-2001, could be that the AFL/AF-1 is a repackaged AF-201. Maybe, maybe not.
Dammit, do I really want to spend $300 just to satisfy my curiosity?
Last edited:
I still have that Agent Funk Clone on the way (USPS sez tomorrow), and I've got an Iron Ether Xerograph Deluxe (as half of the Subterrograph) on it's way as well. That, and I never pulled the 3 Leaf GR2 of my board. So, I am going to wait until I can get recordings of all of them to give my non-Mutron-alike final rankings. That being said, I'm going to go ahead and post the text of the reviews ahead of time.
Last edited:
3 Leaf Proton
The 3 Leaf Proton is such a nice little envelope filter. It certainly has it's roots in the MuTron, but really it's it's own thing.
Side note: It's a core component of the 3 Leaf trifecta, which also include the Octabvre octave pedal and the You're Doom fuzz - all three work very well together for synthy tones, and lately it's been one of my favorite plaything.
So honestly, what's not to love about the 3 Leaf? It's super responsive, almost impossible to get a bad sound out of, and can go from dark to bright with the twist of a knob. The sound is smooth, it reacts well to fast playing, and the decay really helps helps with the envelope closing. It gets plenty stanky (although TBH not quite as stanky as the TruTron, MuTron, of AFL), but it's up there, and adding a boost helps.
If I didn't have a GR2, it would probably be my main filter.
Pros: Sounds great, responsive, smooth and stanky
Cons: None
The 3 Leaf Proton is such a nice little envelope filter. It certainly has it's roots in the MuTron, but really it's it's own thing.
Side note: It's a core component of the 3 Leaf trifecta, which also include the Octabvre octave pedal and the You're Doom fuzz - all three work very well together for synthy tones, and lately it's been one of my favorite plaything.
So honestly, what's not to love about the 3 Leaf? It's super responsive, almost impossible to get a bad sound out of, and can go from dark to bright with the twist of a knob. The sound is smooth, it reacts well to fast playing, and the decay really helps helps with the envelope closing. It gets plenty stanky (although TBH not quite as stanky as the TruTron, MuTron, of AFL), but it's up there, and adding a boost helps.
If I didn't have a GR2, it would probably be my main filter.
Pros: Sounds great, responsive, smooth and stanky
Cons: None
Otto Filter
This one was a surprise - I never expected to even think that I would even want to try it! Someone on TB recommended this as a good dark horse EF, and they couldn't have been more right!
It's built like a tank - heavy duty for sure! But aside from that, it's a cool little piece of kit. It's very synthy for an EF - if I were to guess, I would guess that this is not optical based, but that's just a guess. It's very smooth, and also kind of dark - I don't know if it came thru in the recordings to y'all, but it's got a deeper, darker tone to it, and if you push it a little it gets kinda gritty, but not stanky, if that makes sense. If stanky is the gain circuit overdriving, then gritty is like the gain circuit being pushed into light distortion with a clean blend. I'd describe it as deep and kinda moody, responsive to playing and the filter seems to dwell a little bit, like it's closed just a tad more slowly than some of the others. It's got a nice synthy vibe to it, and plays very well with a distortion and fuzz. Even without a fuzz pedal, it's got a nice growl to it.
I have answered the question: The Line 6 Otto Filter is ABSOLUTELY the best envelope filter for metal.
Pros: unique filter sound, dark, growly
Cons: You gotta like dark and growly
This one was a surprise - I never expected to even think that I would even want to try it! Someone on TB recommended this as a good dark horse EF, and they couldn't have been more right!
It's built like a tank - heavy duty for sure! But aside from that, it's a cool little piece of kit. It's very synthy for an EF - if I were to guess, I would guess that this is not optical based, but that's just a guess. It's very smooth, and also kind of dark - I don't know if it came thru in the recordings to y'all, but it's got a deeper, darker tone to it, and if you push it a little it gets kinda gritty, but not stanky, if that makes sense. If stanky is the gain circuit overdriving, then gritty is like the gain circuit being pushed into light distortion with a clean blend. I'd describe it as deep and kinda moody, responsive to playing and the filter seems to dwell a little bit, like it's closed just a tad more slowly than some of the others. It's got a nice synthy vibe to it, and plays very well with a distortion and fuzz. Even without a fuzz pedal, it's got a nice growl to it.
I have answered the question: The Line 6 Otto Filter is ABSOLUTELY the best envelope filter for metal.
Pros: unique filter sound, dark, growly
Cons: You gotta like dark and growly
DOD 545-A
Another surprise, I bought this knowing absolutely nothing about it. It's optical based, but still sounds morre synthy than chewy. Very full sounding tho, and has almost a lush ambiance to it. The attack knob is super cool - further clockwise, it makes this cool bowing/swelling filter that sounds like the attack is coming after the note. It responds well and has a decent range, but it's not the easiest to get a traditional EF sound from it, and TBH it will never get mistaken for a MuTron - but I think that is a good thing! It is it's own thang, if you know what I mean.
I would say that this is not a filter for fast passages - I'd think of using this for slower and dramatic synth tones, especially when paired with a fuzz. In fact, like the other two DOD filters, it EXCELS when looking for funky synthy sounds.
Pros: Synthy, it's own thang, works great behind a fuzz, unique sounds
Cons: Won't replace a traditional envelope filter
Another surprise, I bought this knowing absolutely nothing about it. It's optical based, but still sounds morre synthy than chewy. Very full sounding tho, and has almost a lush ambiance to it. The attack knob is super cool - further clockwise, it makes this cool bowing/swelling filter that sounds like the attack is coming after the note. It responds well and has a decent range, but it's not the easiest to get a traditional EF sound from it, and TBH it will never get mistaken for a MuTron - but I think that is a good thing! It is it's own thang, if you know what I mean.
I would say that this is not a filter for fast passages - I'd think of using this for slower and dramatic synth tones, especially when paired with a fuzz. In fact, like the other two DOD filters, it EXCELS when looking for funky synthy sounds.
Pros: Synthy, it's own thang, works great behind a fuzz, unique sounds
Cons: Won't replace a traditional envelope filter
DOD FX25 and DOD FX25B
I included these together, simply because they are very similar. That being said, they DO sound different.
I'll get this out of the way - I ranked the FX25B after the FX25 for two reasons - 1) I don't need the blend knob and 2) the FX25B sounds thinner and brighter than the FX25. That's it. Listening to the recordings, it's plain as day.
Otherwise, they are pretty much identical - they sound similar (except as noted above), they respond similar, the knobs ranges seem to be the same, etc. To me, they seem like little siblings to the 545, as they share a lot of similarities - great dub tones, limited sounds, and great behind a fuzz for a synth tone. In fact, I might keep one of these around JUST because they sound so good behind a fuzz.
They are also pretty easy to dial in.
Both sound less full than the 545, and both sound more synth-like, if that makes sense. I know that some folks actually like these as envelope filters (Flea comes to mind).
Pros: Synthy, easy to dial in, great behind a synth
Cons: Limited sounds, FX25B sounds brighter
Edit: I should also note that I tried the DODFX25 EXTREME!!!!!!!!!!!! and it was extremely poopie. Thin, shrill, maybe good for an extreme guitarist, but not even worth making a recording of it IMO.
I included these together, simply because they are very similar. That being said, they DO sound different.
I'll get this out of the way - I ranked the FX25B after the FX25 for two reasons - 1) I don't need the blend knob and 2) the FX25B sounds thinner and brighter than the FX25. That's it. Listening to the recordings, it's plain as day.
Otherwise, they are pretty much identical - they sound similar (except as noted above), they respond similar, the knobs ranges seem to be the same, etc. To me, they seem like little siblings to the 545, as they share a lot of similarities - great dub tones, limited sounds, and great behind a fuzz for a synth tone. In fact, I might keep one of these around JUST because they sound so good behind a fuzz.
They are also pretty easy to dial in.
Both sound less full than the 545, and both sound more synth-like, if that makes sense. I know that some folks actually like these as envelope filters (Flea comes to mind).
Pros: Synthy, easy to dial in, great behind a synth
Cons: Limited sounds, FX25B sounds brighter
Edit: I should also note that I tried the DODFX25 EXTREME!!!!!!!!!!!! and it was extremely poopie. Thin, shrill, maybe good for an extreme guitarist, but not even worth making a recording of it IMO.
Last edited:
I messed with the internal trim trim pots on the AFL/AF-9. I picked these up from an old, old TB post from 2003:
SR-1 - controls how low the filter will sweep in Down Drive mode
SR-2 - controls the overall frequency range in either Hi or Lo range
SR-3 - control how high the filter will sweep in Up Drive mode
And also found these:
SR1 adjusts the beginning filter frequency in Drive Up mode.
It's factory-preset at almost fully CCW. Turn it CW for higher freq.
SR2 determines the range of filter frequency change (up or down, depending
on whether Drive is set Up or Down). Turn it CW for narrower range.
SR3 adjusts the beginning filter frequency in Drive Down mode.
It's factory-preset at a little CCW from the center position. Turn it CW
for lower freq.
I didn't mess with SR-3 because I don't fool with no down mode.
I started with the AF-9
SR1 added more sustain, but thinned the sound out a bit and lost bass focus. I preferred it fully CCW.
SR2 makes the tone darker or lighter - I read elsewhere that this acts like a tone knob, and I think that's a good description. At the lowest levels, it gained some stank and some booty, and I was thinking that maybe the AFL had SR2 (labeled VR2 on the AFL) had a different setting on the that trim pot, and it seemed like it was the same. Messing with the trim pots on the AFL had similar results, except, you know .. just a little more stanky. It had just a little more grit, that pleasing overdrive, especially at the peaks.
Messing around with SR2 on the AF-9 did give some more stank and it was more pronounced at the peaks, but there was something just a little more about the AFL.
It's probably not overly noticeable, and definitely not noticeable live/with a band.
SR-1 - controls how low the filter will sweep in Down Drive mode
SR-2 - controls the overall frequency range in either Hi or Lo range
SR-3 - control how high the filter will sweep in Up Drive mode
And also found these:
SR1 adjusts the beginning filter frequency in Drive Up mode.
It's factory-preset at almost fully CCW. Turn it CW for higher freq.
SR2 determines the range of filter frequency change (up or down, depending
on whether Drive is set Up or Down). Turn it CW for narrower range.
SR3 adjusts the beginning filter frequency in Drive Down mode.
It's factory-preset at a little CCW from the center position. Turn it CW
for lower freq.
I didn't mess with SR-3 because I don't fool with no down mode.
I started with the AF-9
SR1 added more sustain, but thinned the sound out a bit and lost bass focus. I preferred it fully CCW.
SR2 makes the tone darker or lighter - I read elsewhere that this acts like a tone knob, and I think that's a good description. At the lowest levels, it gained some stank and some booty, and I was thinking that maybe the AFL had SR2 (labeled VR2 on the AFL) had a different setting on the that trim pot, and it seemed like it was the same. Messing with the trim pots on the AFL had similar results, except, you know .. just a little more stanky. It had just a little more grit, that pleasing overdrive, especially at the peaks.
Messing around with SR2 on the AF-9 did give some more stank and it was more pronounced at the peaks, but there was something just a little more about the AFL.
It's probably not overly noticeable, and definitely not noticeable live/with a band.
The Agent OOFunk is way cool. Where have you been all my life, gorgeous?!?!?
There's this one on Reverb, but I really think they should be rusty like that?
"In very good condition with some cosmetic blemishes and a few rust spots typical for those pedals."
Really?
"In very good condition with some cosmetic blemishes and a few rust spots typical for those pedals."
Really?
If it helps, this isn't exactly uncommon with the older batches, and they seem to stand up fine. That being said, I am pretty sure that I saw one for a good price on the classifieds here on TB.There's this one on Reverb, but I really think they should be rusty like that?
"In very good condition with some cosmetic blemishes and a few rust spots typical for those pedals."
Really?
And yes, you need one
You can do better.There's this one on Reverb, but I really think they should be rusty like that?
"In very good condition with some cosmetic blemishes and a few rust spots typical for those pedals."
Really?
This one is much better, and I love that color .. I'm actually a little jealous
For sale 3 Leaf Audio - PROTON // NEON GLOW
3 Leaf Audio - PROTON // NEON GLOW
NOVEMBER 2024 // PROTON MK4 // NEON GLOW // EDITION OF 333.
Like-new condition.
Ships from Seattle.
- m_cc (+10 /0 /-0)
- Updated
- Views: 266
- Reaction score: 2
- Category: For Sale: Effects and Pedals
$365.00
$350.00
2 watching
No interest in the Emma Discumbobulator?
I’ve always liked my no-frills V1, and I got my son a V3 not too long ago but never had a chance to try it out myself. The V3 has a couple of extra features and supposedly works better with higher output instruments.
Admittedly, I don't have experience with many different EF’s.
I’ve always liked my no-frills V1, and I got my son a V3 not too long ago but never had a chance to try it out myself. The V3 has a couple of extra features and supposedly works better with higher output instruments.
Admittedly, I don't have experience with many different EF’s.
I had an Emma a few years ago, and at the time I thought it was every bit as good as the Proton. At the time, though, I was radially reducing the size of my board, so it was a space issue and the Emma was bigger so ...
I've thought about picking one up again to give it another shot.
So many envelope filters, so little time ....
