djhollowman Posted May 10, 2008 Report Share Posted May 10, 2008 (edited) Hi all, I have a Morley Bad Horsie wah pedal. Is it possible to convert it so that it has a true bypass? I believe it is claimed that it already has true bypass, but I'm sure it doesn't. It really sounds like it sucks the tone a bit when it's included in the circuit. I have it going straight in to the front of a Marshall AVT275 2x12 combo. It's not in the FX loop, and there are no other pedals. I run it from a 9v battery as I don't have a regulated power supply for it - don't know if that's significant. I have a schematic for it in .pdf format, but I just don't understand enough about it! Any thoughts anyone? Thanks. DJ Edited May 10, 2008 by djhollowman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
borge Posted May 10, 2008 Report Share Posted May 10, 2008 does signal get through when you remove the battery? post the schematic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregP Posted May 11, 2008 Report Share Posted May 11, 2008 If it's true bypass, that might be the very cause of the tone suckage. Without the preamp stage staying inline with the signal, you might be inadvertently running the signal through a too-long length of cable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djhollowman Posted May 11, 2008 Author Report Share Posted May 11, 2008 does signal get through when you remove the battery? post the schematic. There is a VERY weak signal you can just make out with the battery removed. I mean VERY weak, I had to have the gain channel cranked half up to hear anything, and even then it was a thin sound. The schematic is a .pdf - how do I post this please? If it's true bypass, that might be the very cause of the tone suckage. Without the preamp stage staying inline with the signal, you might be inadvertently running the signal through a too-long length of cable. I think my understanding of these matters needs work! I do have a longer-than-necessary cable from the wah to the amp, it's about 5 metres. Maybe I should try a shorter one then? DJ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
borge Posted May 11, 2008 Report Share Posted May 11, 2008 its not true bypass, if signal doesnt get through when unpowered it has some sort of buffer circuit (the tone sucking bit). im not familiar with this particular pedal but making a wah true bypass is pretty straight forward, you'll need a dpdt stomp switch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djhollowman Posted May 11, 2008 Author Report Share Posted May 11, 2008 its not true bypass, if signal doesnt get through when unpowered it has some sort of buffer circuit (the tone sucking bit). im not familiar with this particular pedal but making a wah true bypass is pretty straight forward, you'll need a dpdt stomp switch. Cool, thanks! I understand the switch you mention, but my pedal has an optical arrangement for the pedal travel. There is no stomp switch. Would this make it impossible? Here's the schematic: hope this helps! DJ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prostheta Posted May 11, 2008 Report Share Posted May 11, 2008 I'm sure both sides of this discussion are saying that buffered and true bypass both suck tone. Probably true in various situations I guess. Mechanically switched bypass (DPDT stomp) wouldn't suck tone if you've buffered the signal prior to a (long) guitar lead run > fx > amp etc. A unity buffer may perhaps colour the sound or add noise, or - help us - may remove the "sucked tone" people may be unwittingly used to with passively driven cable runs, but hey. Anything can happen, and i'm probably just spilling opinion as usual :-D I'm also sure that true bypass means different things to different people as it's obviously been subject to the "marketing terms teams" who've probably taken innocent discrete electronics terminology and bastardised it into sales spiel. Anyway. Enough of that. Back to the issue in hand. Do you run active pickups, or perhaps are able to compare active to passive DJHM? I'm not entirely sure it is worthwhile converting the pedal, or at least that would be my view. Do you know of anyone else that has done this to great effect, or has it been mentioned that the bypass sucks (pun not intended) on this pedals? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
borge Posted May 12, 2008 Report Share Posted May 12, 2008 its not true bypass, if signal doesnt get through when unpowered it has some sort of buffer circuit (the tone sucking bit). im not familiar with this particular pedal but making a wah true bypass is pretty straight forward, you'll need a dpdt stomp switch. Cool, thanks! I understand the switch you mention, but my pedal has an optical arrangement for the pedal travel. There is no stomp switch. Would this make it impossible? Here's the schematic: *pic* hope this helps! DJ I dont know how the switch works and the schems to small fo my eys but I'd guess it cant be done/not worth doing, but dont take my word for it, ask on a stompbox forum. just checked the morley site, it has a "clear-tone" buffer circuit....... i hope the music shop salesman wasnt the one who said it was true bypass i run 6-12 pedals depending on who im playing with, ive found having the 1st and last pedal buffered and the rest true bypass the best compromise in terms of tone suck. but if i was to use 1 pedal I'd want it TB unless the stage was huge (ie long cables required) in which case I'd want a buffer (and remember not all buffers are made equal!). "true bypass" means one thing: the circuit is totally removed from the signal. various "marketing terms" are used to try and fool people "true tone" "clear bypass" "clear tone" ect but ive never seen "true bypass" on something that isnt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djhollowman Posted May 12, 2008 Author Report Share Posted May 12, 2008 Thanks for all the input fellas! Reckon I might just leave this one alone for now. Just for the record, I actually bought this pedal 2nd hand on "the 'bay" (I'm sure you know what I mean......), so I had no issues with salesmen and mispresentation or anything like that. This is more like my own curiousity. I'd been reading somewhere about tone loss, and how having true bypass could help - wondered if it could be applied to this pedal, as I feel the tone "shrinks" slightly when I have it plugged in. It's not something I can't live with, though. I'm happy enough with the pedal, but I did have to alter the optical switching LED a fraction, as it was peaking in the wrong place and sounded odd! The fact that I've found modding info on the net would suggest that it's not uncommon to have to do this! The switch works like this: an LED and a light sensor face each other, with a thin strip of black card between them. The card is attached to the pedal (but perpendicular to it), and has a triangular hole placed where the LED and sensor meet. As you move the pedal, the triangle widens and lets more light through the card, which is registered by the light sensor and it converts that into the wah effect. It's great cos there's no stomp switch - you just put your foot on the pedal and it switches on. It also has a wah delay function, where you can set how long the wah remains after taking your foot off the pedal. The schematic hasn't come out very clear I'm afraid! I had it as a .pdf, and had to convert it to .jpg, which has made it smaller and less clear - sorry! Thanks again! DJ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Marossy Posted May 14, 2008 Report Share Posted May 14, 2008 I don't think you can true bypass that since it's a LDR circuit with an electronic switch arrangement. I would suggest an external true bypass box if you want to take it completely out of the signal path... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.