Foxx Tone Machine to Ultimate Octave

[mojotron]

Does anyone know the right mods to convert a Foxx Tone Machine to an Ultimate Octave? Or maybe an Ultimate Octave schematic?

[radio]

Hello

I just listened to the "ultimate octave" sound-sample.

It s more like the "tycobrae octavia" than the "foxxtone machine".

(octavia is the last world of the describing text too)

The "foxxtone machine" octave is done"Green Ringer" like

and has no transformer. I unfortunatly have no evidence which

in this case would be your requested schematic.

Greetings JMErnzer

[cd]

The Ultimate Octave is a Foxx Tone Machine clone.  The Octafuzz is a Tyco Octavia clone.  In the case of the latter, Fuller even says so on his website.

I have notes on the UO somewhere, IIRC it's only two or three caps that are different.  Off the top of my head, it's the input cap, and the cap in the tone control that controls the high pass filter, and maybe one other cap, and different transistors (the one I looked at had BC108Cs).

[hairyandy]

Actually, the Fulltone Ultimate Octave is not a Foxx Tone Machine clone at all.  It is intended to approximate the sound of the Univox Super Fuzz with a switchable octave if I'm not mistaken.  I've got an Ultimate Octave as well as a first issue Super Fuzz and a Foxx Fuzz-Wah-Volume which is the same as the Tone Machine.  The Ultimate Octave seems to me a tamer version of the Super Fuzz for sure...

My $.02

[cd]

Actually, the Fulltone Ultimate Octave is not a Foxx Tone Machine clone at all.  It is intended to approximate the sound of the Univox Super Fuzz with a switchable octave if I'm not mistaken.  I've got an Ultimate Octave as well as a first issue Super Fuzz and a Foxx Fuzz-Wah-Volume which is the same as the Tone Machine.  The Ultimate Octave seems to me a tamer version of the Super Fuzz for sure...

My $.02

You are mistaken, the UO is a dead on FTM clone, I've traced it.  It's NOTHING like a Univox Super Fuzz.

[hairyandy]

Right on, I'll take your word for it since you've traced and compared them and I haven't.  The UO sure sounds way crappier than my FTM or any other one that I've played though.  Also, the FTM doesn't have a fat/bright function like the UO but the SF does?

[cd]

Right on, I'll take your word for it since you've traced and compared them and I haven't.  The UO sure sounds way crappier than my FTM or any other one that I've played though.  Also, the FTM doesn't have a fat/bright function like the UO but the SF does?

I have to go home to look for and check my notes, but IIRC the cap differences amount to reducing the high and low end early on in the signal path, which would tame some of the FTM's craziness.  I don't have it anymore, but when I had the UO I remember it being too refined and not crazy enough (which is why I sold it).  

The fat/bright switch just switches in a different tone cap.  Not in the original, but a useful modern add-on.  Similar to the switchable input caps in many Rangemaster clones.  I can't remember if it's the .03u cap or the .047u cap, I'm pretty sure it's the .03u cap, I think one value was smaller and one value was larger than .03u.  IIRC the "fat" mode was really the "normal" sound and the "bright" mode was a notched mid type of sound.  

Everything else was the same though, 10u electros, black/blue Ge diodes.

[hairyandy]

I don't have it anymore, but when I had the UO I remember it being too refined and not crazy enough (which is why I sold it).

Same here.  That's why I only pull mine out for studio work where it might be good in some circumstances and the octave effect is somewhat controllable.  Both my Foxx Fuzz-Wah-Volume (FTM) and my Super Fuzz smoke the UO in general though.

I figured that the fat/bright switch was just a change in caps.  Maybe I'll have to go open my UO up and see what's going on in there...

[mojotron]

cd or anyone else, do you have more details on the differences between the Ultimate Octave and the FTM?

Thanks, for the responces so far.

[Mark Hammer]

Before folks fly off on a "It's only a..." tangent, keep in mind that simply building the FTM to the schematic spec is not a guarantee of flawless octaving.  Whenever one is using the phase-splitter/complementary-rectifier method of producing octaves, it's all about the balance between the two phase-splitter outputs.  Achieving that balance becomes all about picking components.

[mojotron]

Ya, I built a FTM and it's great, I wish I had one of these years ago. The octave is very pronounced, and the fuzz can get pretty wild.

I actually like the sound of the Ultimate octave too as it's a bit tamer, I'm really thinking of finding what mods make a UO from a FTM and building something kindof in the middle.

[cd]

I actually like the sound of the Ultimate octave too as it's a bit tamer, I'm really thinking of finding what mods make a UO from a FTM and building something kindof in the middle.

Sorry if I sound like a d*ck, but if you honestly want to find your own middle ground, there's more than enough info in this thread and forum search function.  You're building pedals as a business I see, you should be able to figure it out.  Honestly I could throw out the exact cap values but how long would it be until a "MOD YOUR FTM RI TO OCTAVE ULTIMATE KIT!!!" shows up on eBay (and I've seen auctions with text DIRECTLY lifted from this forum)?  Pfft, I'd rather let those leeches blow their own time and $ to figure it out.  Which is not to say you would do such a thing, but it's a simple case of some people ruining it for others.

If you want to tame the octave, you have to limit the original signal's frequency reponse.  Think of a Tubescreamer: if you do a common mod to "increase" the bass (increase the value of the cap on the - of the clipping opamp), what happens?  The distortion turns all muddy and sounds like crap.  You let more low end into the circuit which gets clipped and you get all kinds of crap in the midrange.  OTOH, look at the Tubescreamer's tone control: at full clockwise (no high end cut) the sound is bright and raspy.  Turn down the tone control (cut highs), and things smoooooth out to a great degree.

[Doug_H]

If you want to tame the octave, you have to limit the original signal's frequency reponse.  

There's a good article at GFR's site about how to tame an octave-up distortion using a low pass filter:

http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Studio/2987/

I used this years ago on the bobtavia and it was real effective in taming it.

Doug

[mojotron]

I actually like the sound of the Ultimate octave too as it's a bit tamer, I'm really thinking of finding what mods make a UO from a FTM and building something kindof in the middle.

Sorry if I sound like a d*ck, but if you honestly want to find your own middle ground, there's more than enough info in this thread and forum search function.  You're building pedals as a business I see, you should be able to figure it out.  Honestly I could throw out the exact cap values but how long would it be until a "MOD YOUR FTM RI TO OCTAVE ULTIMATE KIT!!!" shows up on eBay (and I've seen auctions with text DIRECTLY lifted from this forum)?  Pfft, I'd rather let those leeches blow their own time and $ to figure it out.  Which is not to say you would do such a thing, but it's a simple case of some people ruining it for others.

Ya, I've read the threads about people taking others ideas and trying to make some money off of it... I never worry too much about info I share on this forum, if that enables someone to make some money that's ok with me, but if you are not ok with that then that's fine too. I personally would rather see info shared rather than held back as this forum is all about sharing ideas/information. If someone had to reverse engineer everything that they wanted to know about it would impede the rate of more interesting stuff being developed and shared. Everyone on this forum has benefited from information shared where some one else did some work to find it out, without that it wouldn't be much of a forum. New information does not flow in very well to a closed society. There will be some who would just troll for info in places like this, wanting capitalize on that, I think we just have to except that and move on... However, if you're concerned about that more than I am, that's fine too - everyone is going to have a comfort level on an issue like this...    

If you want to tame the octave, you have to limit the original signal's frequency reponse.  Think of a Tubescreamer: if you do a common mod to "increase" the bass (increase the value of the cap on the - of the clipping opamp), what happens?  The distortion turns all muddy and sounds like crap.  You let more low end into the circuit which gets clipped and you get all kinds of crap in the midrange.  OTOH, look at the Tubescreamer's tone control: at full clockwise (no high end cut) the sound is bright and raspy.  Turn down the tone control (cut highs), and things smoooooth out to a great degree.

Thanks, this helps. I was wondering what the differences were at just this sort of level.. because I don't nessasarily want to make an UO - I would rather like to figure out how to get the sound I'm looking for - which is closer to an UO than FTM - but pretty close to either.

[mojotron]

If you want to tame the octave, you have to limit the original signal's frequency reponse.  

There's a good article at GFR's site about how to tame an octave-up distortion using a low pass filter:

http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Studio/2987/

I used this years ago on the bobtavia and it was real effective in taming it.

Doug

Outstanding! Thanks again!

[mojotron]

Refering to the GGG schematic at http://www.generalguitargadgets.com/diagrams/ftmsc.gif

I dropped C2 down to 470pF and wow the octave tracks extremely well - but wow is that a brite sound.

So, I then went to .47uF on C3 then .002uF on C2. I kept C1 at .1uF and the octave less pronounced, but has a much better tone. I also bumped C10 up to .005uF - this sounds good with a distortion box in front of it.

Anyone else have some FTM mods they really like?