You know what I loved about non-true bypass pedals?

[Aceman]

We used to spend more time worrying about how we sounded, than the bypass function of this pedal or that pedal. I personally have no trouble finding amazing tones from the non-true bypass days. Yet these days, even though we live in a world of ultra uber high end booteek-ness, yawn at most every guitar sound I hear.

Discuss.


[Updated - later on this is going to turn into a really deep insightful discussion about how to blend buffered and true bypass pedals in your signal chain. ]

[Big Flannel]

Re: You know what I loved about non-true bypass pedals?

I tend to agree with this. Granted, I may not have the best ear in the world but I've never used a pedal and thought that it would sound better with true-bypass.

[trevorus]

Re: You know what I loved about non-true bypass pedals?

I use a Line 6 wireless, so it's buffered to start with. I generally don't worry about it. Sometimes true bypass pedals click and pop when switched. I hate that, so buffered pedals are preferable in that circumstance.

[ErikH]

Re: You know what I loved about non-true bypass pedals?

Two pedals I owned for years, even before the TB craze, and knew they sucked some of my tone away were my Crybaby and Phase 90 (several of them). It was obvious to the ear. I'm fine with the Boss and Ibanez pedals. The old MXR bypass circuit just plain sucks, IME/IMO. There's buffered bypass, true bypass, and there's tone-sucking non-buffered single-switch bypass.

I think a large part is we've heard new things and can be so used to what we started with that no matter what, the old way still works best. Nothing wrong with that.

[Swampy]

Re: You know what I loved about non-true bypass pedals?

I know what your saying, but before I modded my Vox wah to true BP, it was almost never in the chain unless I knew I was going to stomp it. That pedal was big time suckage of the tone.

[superpete]

Re: You know what I loved about non-true bypass pedals?

yeah my vox v847 was the biggest tone sucking pedal ever. i got one of the 1st reissues when i was a teenager in the 90s. i had a tiny peavey rage amp and was far from a tone connoisseur, but even then i was like "what is wrong with this thing?"

that being said i think the obsession with true bypass is silly. if you're using one pedal, ok, true bypass. but if you're running a big pedal board with all true bypass pedals you're gonna need a buffer in there somewhere or there will be tone loss.

[Rodney Gene]

Re: You know what I loved about non-true bypass pedals?

Its the polarization that makes the issue an issue at all.

True Bypass is a god send in many situations, seriously necessary... and yet so is a buffered circuit. Sometimes a dedicated or intentional buffer is best and sometimes a built in buffer works best. It depends on the design and intent such as the buffer in my Ethos pedals. And sometimes a pedal would work fine either way. The only trouble we have today is that if you advocate 'for' True Bypass' then you must somehow be 'against' buffered circuits. Makes it nearly impossible to have a basic dialogue about the end goal which should always just be good tone. Anybody without tone deafness can hear where either is useful. When one side of the story is shoved down our throats through the personal agendas of some anonymous troll or self authoritative type, whether in a review, article, designer etc... then it becomes an issue. In real life day to day, it is just part of the consideration in achieving our end result. Fewer and fewer people have to rely on their own ears nowadays.

Cheers,

RG

[GuitarStv]

Re: You know what I loved about non-true bypass pedals?

I find that if I can keep the number of pedals under five, the bypass type doesn't really matter too much. If you want to run a board with 8-10 pedals it starts to become much more important, and you might need to learn some strategies (like putting a buffer at the front of a bunch of TB pedals to account for the cable capacitance of all those circuits) or will sacrifice some tone . . . the sound is not subtly effected.

[DankStar]

Re: You know what I loved about non-true bypass pedals?

I also like how stuff that sounded good to us in the past is magically crap now (or must be updated to keep up with the times). There's a video with Scott Ian where he talks about pulling out his old Marshall and TC Electronics booster for the recording of Worship Music or something, after using different amps for years. He was like "it sounded just like it used to!" No sh!t.

[Lazarus1140]

Re: You know what I loved about non-true bypass pedals?

I have played many pedals both as stand alone or in tandem with others that very obviously sucked tone whether engaged or bypassed.

[Vasshu the humanoid typhoon]

Re: You know what I loved about non-true bypass pedals?

Sometimes that...erm suck.....was a part of the sound.
Shaved off some of those nasty harshy sounds.....

[beaubrummels]

Re: You know what I loved about non-true bypass pedals?

I use the strongest true bypass known to man - I plug straight into the amp.

[the guy who invented fire]

Re: You know what I loved about non-true bypass pedals?

If you don't care that's fine but for some players it can be very important.

I find that the guys that simply don't care often have pretty crappy tone (no matter what they tell you about their sound!) and more often than not do not play out much if at all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JeffB]

Re: You know what I loved about non-true bypass pedals?

I am a fan. In fact I avoid pedals that do not have TB. I agree some old pedals have some magic tone mojo, old Boss Chorus units for example, but given a choice I do not want anything interfering with my craptacular straight in tone.

[Vasshu the humanoid typhoon]

Re: You know what I loved about non-true bypass pedals?

Seems to remember one guy from the late 60's.....he must have had about worst bypass ever