.....and what does such a waveform look like?

Is "square" the true goal or do things sound "fuzzier" to our ears when some other waveform is involved?

Are variations of "sick fuzz" merely a question of EQ-ing (e.g., imposing malevolent midscoop filters), and taxing a gain circuit in the process of producing a square wave from some other sort of input?

What exactly would "the most fuzz" look like on a scope?

I think its also partly in theway the way it responds to your picking and playing dynamics, not just how square the output is. And many of the "really sick" fuzzes often have got an kind of octave or ring modulator type thing going on as well....

I think "most most fuzz" is total sonic destruction, barely any guitar left in there at all
edit: though then again, is there a line you cross between fuzzboxes and noise makers?

Well, I guess my question is really directed at controllable, pitched fuzz.  That is, something where a melody line can be obviously heard and does not disappear in a haze of sideband products, oscillations, and such.

But your point helps me expand the question in a different way.  Can we identify some proportion of identifiable harmonics, and relative amplitude that is the hallmark of "most fuzzy"?  Or is it the case that "most fuzzy" is NOT an identifiable waveform, but rather something that constantly threatens to lose stability?

I'm not asking the questioning just to be provocative.  Rather, I'm wondering if, having some sort of idealized waveform goal, we could now turn around and say "Okay, if that's the goal, how does one achieve it most consistently and efficiently?".

Since many of the standard Fuzzes have asymmetrical distortion, I'm thinking the wave form would be thin square waves on one side and fat ones on the other.  I'm sure this isn't universal, but one thing that distinguishes a fuzz from a distortion for me, is the lack of low frequency roll off thru the distortion producing that fat buzzy sound.  Think "Hello, I Luv You" the Doors.  Some folks speak of "Bloom" with the Fuzz Face.  "Wooliness" is a term I think off, and the GE transistors do that best.  Definition - That fuzz which makes you feel the sickest in your stomach.

Hi, i think you have to take into account the evolution of the waveform over time, I  -think- that it´s an important factor in psichological perception of sound, whatever its characteristics. Music evolves/develops in time, right? My humble opinion..

Morocotopo

To me, fuzz is produced by circuits that have a lot of odd order harmonics - which would essentially be square wave-ish in nature, with slightly rounded edges. That type of sound is usually produced by a circuit that really amplifies the sgnal a lot and then totally clips the heck out of the signal. It sounds "buzzy/fuzzy" and it ends up looking a lot like this:

fuzz is something I pull out of my belly button 

but I agree with WGTP here. Especially since I'm a bassist; most fuzz effects I've tried keep most of the low end intact; distortion boxes, on the other hand, have always sounded tinny to me.

Quote from: Paul Marossy on August 15, 2006, 01:49:16 PM
To me, fuzz is produced by circuits that have a lot of odd order harmonics - which would essentially be square wave-ish in nature, with slightly rounded edges. That type of sound is usually produced by a circuit that really amplifies the sgnal a lot and then totally clips the heck out of the signal. It sounds "buzzy/fuzzy" and it ends up looking a lot like this:

Right... but the thing is.... all the oscilloscope shots I've seen have been of something that started as a pure sine wave and then clipped. If I remember correctly, doesn't a simple note from a guitar contain multiple harmonics above the fundamental, and therefore looks much different than a nice, round, symmetrical sine wave?  Then throw more than one note together....

What does that look like on an oscilloscope?
Then
What does that look like when you fuzz it? 

Do the peaks of the fundamental get levelled off, but let the smaller peaks of the overtones still poke out?  Do the overtones get flattened first, and THEN the fundamental?  Is the whole thing just steamrollered down to where we can then start simplifying it on a ratio:  "X:Y original signal to plateau, and at 40% plateau, chord definition is lost, over 60% plateau all melody is lost, etc."

Oar am I high on levalbuteral again? 

QuoteRight... but the thing is.... all the oscilloscope shots I've seen have been of something that started as a pure sine wave and then clipped. If I remember correctly, doesn't a simple note from a guitar contain multiple harmonics above the fundamental, and therefore looks much different than a nice, round, symmetrical sine wave?  Then throw more than one note together....

Yes, that's all true. You would need to play yer geetar thru a given circuit while looking at it with a spectrum analyzer to see what's happening to the fundamental(s) and all of the overtones. The scope will give you some basic idea of what happens to the individual notes when you play a guitar chord. Any single frequency of the same amplitude will pretty much look the same at the output of the circuit. Where things get really interesting is when you have 6 strings going thru it. Then you can hear how it affects things as a whole. And, in practice, each frequency comes thru in a different "strength" so it might accent the bass more, etc.

QuoteDo the peaks of the fundamental get levelled off, but let the smaller peaks of the overtones still poke out?

Yep.

QuoteDo the overtones get flattened first, and THEN the fundamental?

Nope.

QuoteIs the whole thing just steamrollered down to where we can then start simplifying it on a ratio:  "X:Y original signal to plateau, and at 40% plateau, chord definition is lost, over 60% plateau all melody is lost, etc."

I think that can all be calculated out given the right parameters.

You're high on fuzz, baby!

Morocotopo's point is an interesting one.  Perhaps things can sound "more" fuzzy when the waveform is not static.  In other words, having a perfect square-wave all the time for every note may not be what we associate with a "fuzzier" sound.  Perhaps what is needed is a shifting of harmonics over time such that there is lots of harmonics, but no fixed proportion.  After all, it's not "distorted" just because there is more overtones.  It's "distorted" because the note becomes harder to recognize underneath all that "hair" and busy-ness.

Again, what I'm aiming for is some sort of parametric description of a sound that would lead any or all of us here to say "Man, I'm not sure anything could BE any more fuzzy than that!"  Of course, at that end of the spectrum, one could still distinguish between different tonalities of fuzziness, and probably even have aesthetic preferences, even while being able to say "Yup, sound samples A, B, C, and D are all what I'd classify as ridiculously over-the-top fuzzy".

Quotehaving a perfect square-wave all the time for every note may not be what we associate with a "fuzzier" sound.  Perhaps what is needed is a shifting of harmonics over time such that there is lots of harmonics, but no fixed proportion.

That's a good way to put what I'm trying to get at in my feeble way of getting my point across. 

EDIT: Sound is so subjective. I was thinking that something a little more technical like waveforms and spectral analysis would be a little more conclusive, thus my approach to the question. To me, a Z. Vex Fuzz Factory is the fuzziest that it gets.

EDIT #2": Add to that the Crash Sync - that's does produce square waves all the time. 

Mark, as you have pointed out, a nice big notch filter can really nasty things up.  I heard some Hendrix at lunch and remember when he first came out that his sound was to abrasive for my taste.  Now, it seems pretty mild.

Many of the "new" bands I hear are using thousands of dollars worth of boutique tube amps and processors to get a sound that reminds me of a cheap fuzzbox into a solid state Sears amp.  WTF???

Would this sound include the fuzz overdriving a series of 12AX7's in the pre-amp stage of a vintage tube amp?  Probably not as that might diminish the fuzziness.   

Even though a static waveform in its most fuzzy migth be a square wave, I think the amount of percieved "fuzz" is dependent other things. I'd like to think that the animation or movement in a sound might add to the impression of "more fuzz". To my ears, beyond a certain point the sound gets more static and "unfuzzy" as it moves towards a square wave. An unfiltered Juno bass synth patch doesn't sound very fuzzy. It's static.

QuoteTo my ears, beyond a certain point the sound gets more static and "unfuzzy" as it moves towards a square wave.

A pure square wave from a function generator sounds basically like a slightly distorted sine wave. I agree, that sounds lackluster. But, if you play a 1st position G chord, you're going to have fundamentals, even & odd order harmonics and a series of overtones. In my "studies", the amount of odd order harmonics in the mix is what contributes the most to the amount of fuzziness (or buzziness) depending on what frequencies are attenuated/accented. I'm not suggesting at all that things are static - they're typically dynamic and frequency dependent.

EDIT: You know, I just had a thought. I think another key here is the amount of intermodulation distortion that is occurring in the circuit. I think that's a big factor in how fuzzy it sounds.

But as Seljer pointed out, there's a line between a fuzz and just a noisemaker. Intermodulation distortion can certainly lend the nastiness to a fuzz, which would be an answer to Mark's 3rd question, maybe?; I personally think that the nastier (more intermodulated) a fuzz gets, the more synth-sounding it gets.

Quote from: Paul Marossy on August 15, 2006, 03:49:13 PM

QuoteTo my ears, beyond a certain point the sound gets more static and "unfuzzy" as it moves towards a square wave.

A pure square wave from a function generator sounds basically like a slightly distorted sine wave.

Or even a 'mostly pure' square wave from a 555 oscillator?  I was playing around with those, expecting some horrendously fuzzy, distorted, kill-whales-from-two-continents-away tone, but it was surprisingly smooth.  Of course running a square wave into a distortion circuit didn't really do much.

QuoteI agree, that sounds lackluster.
EDIT: You know, I just had a thought. I think another key here is the amount of intermodulation distortion that is occurring in the circuit. I think that's a big factor in how fuzzy it sounds.

I guess while we're on the subject-  Many times i've considered wiring up a 6-pole pickup, building 6 independent amplifiers, and thus distorting each string seperately.  Will the intermodulation distortion *still* be a factor, with soundwaves mixing in the air?  What if you distort each string seperately, but then mix them together in the power amp to send out of one speaker, or 3+3 in stereo?

Man, that's a good question! I think we've touched on this several times, but it's hard to define. Fuzz to me can be several different tones. To me it's when you get synth sounding, and there is really nothing there to tell you what the original guitar tone sounds like. Everything else that does allows any type of the original signal through is some type of distortion. I'm not sure that there shouldn't be some new type of catagory for the types of static sounds that a lot of bands use now, that basically turn the guitar into a percussion instrument. I always thought it would be nice to say that a particular song has a certain type of fuzz sound to be able to define it futher.

More food for thought: Another thing that is a quirk of fuzz circuits is gating. Some of the really nasty fuzz circuits sound like they are on the edge - like they are going to go into gating mode at any moment, but never quite get there. I've noticed that those sorts of circuits also seem to sound extremely fuzzy. Kind of like the "Velcro Fuzz" sound from a Fuzz Factory for example.

Not sure how to explain that one. Would that be a characteristic of intermodulation distortion? (not the cause, but a byproduct)

I associate that near gating sound with mis-biasing.  At least that is how I have induced it.  It seems to generate an even sicker sound.   

aren't some fuzz circuits designed around an intentionally mis-biased transistor?