October 2025 – Vintage Guitar Gear Collections Within A Collection: Part II – CRAVE Effects

HI Y’ALL GOOD FOLKS. HOW ARE YOU DOING OUT THERE? The CRAVEman bids you a warm welcome and hopes all is as well as it can be, wherever you are on our precious shared planet. It is kinda a rhetorical question intended to encourage one to consider, albeit very briefly, the importance of one’s own health and wellbeing. I am not expecting responses. Honest. Well, here we are, heading irretrievably towards winter in the northern hemisphere. Gracious greetings once again, it’s fab to have you along in the abstruse alliterative arena of CRAVE Vintage Guitar Gear. I thank you, sincerely, for your attendance – it is genuinely and humbly appreciated. I’m sure you probably have much better things to do than join me in my repetitively random rants and ramblings.

Just a short up‑front re‑statement in support of my on‑going cultural campaign to promote humanity’s desperate need to bring peace and harmony to our divided, embittered world. Amity is not only about stopping existing conflict but also about preventing future hostilities. True and lasting peace can only be achieved through unceasing efforts to stimulate genuine understanding, co‑operation and tolerance. Reconciliation and peaceful collaboration should be a collective imperative for everyone on our only world. War is ignorance. Peace is wisdom. Simple. Apologies but this is my only platform to disseminate that vital message.

“Authoritarian societies are inherently corrupt, and corrupt societies are inherently unstable” – William Gibson (1948‑)


Prelude

Last month’s article looked at ‘Vintage Guitar Gear Collections Within A Collection: Part I – CRAVE Guitars & CRAVE Basses’. This month, we have the sequel, based on CRAVE Effects, which delves into the weird, wonderful and occasionally wild dark side of vintage gear to explore what vintage effect pedals are, what they do and why they might be of interest. Vintage effects are a bit of a niche interest and can often be overlooked by the mainstream ‘collecterati’, so they are by default of interest to your humble host.

Upfront, I really love old analogue effect pedals. I’ve owned some of my favourite pedals since the late 1970s and they are still going strong. It is probably needless to say that modern digital effects provide pristine, crystal clear tones, low noise levels, consistent and reliable power supply, and feature seemingly limitless combinations of control. Call me old school but the excellent new models lack that grubby, grimy imperfectness that makes the oldies the goodies. Some manufacturers recognise this and, alongside their modern DSP (Digital Sound Processing) based ‘computers’, companies reissue and/or (try to) replicate the vintage classics. However, from my perspective, these modern effects can be considered ‘too good’ in comparison, lacking a bit of warmth, soul and charm. An analogy may be like comparing a clapped out old Citroën 2CV with a brand new Bentley Continental. I’d actually go for the cheaper and decidedly more eccentric Deux Chevaux.

As with last month, this article’s featured quotes bring a few carefully selected thoughts about human ‘perception’ to the proceedings. As usual, no AI was used in the writing of this article, just the tired and worn out brain cells of your mentally atrophied author. Apologies for intellectual standards falling short of real intelligence. I did, however, use AI image creation for The CRAVEman image towards the end of this article.

“It’s not what you look at that matters, it’s what you see” – Henry David Thoreau (1817‑1862)


Previously… on Collections and Collections within a Collection

There is little point in reiterating the original idea on which this article is based. If you wish to view/review CRAVE Guitars articles on the compulsion of vintage gear collecting and guitar/bass collections within a collection, those blogs can be accessed by following the links below (each link opens a new browser tab).

May 2025 – The Compulsion to Collect Vintage Guitars
September 2025 – Vintage Guitar Gear Collections Within A Collection: Part I – CRAVE Guitars & CRAVE Basses

Last month, guitars and basses were grouped by other criteria for an alternative perspective. Sadly, there aren’t enough CRAVE Amps to justify a similar treatment, so there won’t be a Part III. However, effect pedals just cry out for a different method for appreciating their vintage charm, hence this article.

“If the doors of perception were cleansed, everything would appear to man as it is — infinite” – William Blake (1757‑1827)


Effect Brands

Since the 1990s and particularly since the beginning of the 21st Century, there has been an explosion of interest in, as well as supply of and demand for, effect pedals. The massive proliferation in effect pedals (way too many to mention here) is effectively excluded from this article on vintage pedals, as CRAVE Guitars has an arbitrary cut‑off of 1989. All the effect pedals featured herein all come under the heading of CRAVE Effects.

For the purpose of this article, a good starting point is to define the effect brands featured on the CRAVE Guitars’ web site. The ‘big four’ and ‘the rest’ are:

  1. Electro‑Harmonix (EHX)
  2. MXR
  3. BOSS
  4. Ibanez
  5. Other – Colorsound, Dallas Arbiter, DOD, Dunlop, Jen, Marshall, Pro Co, Sola Sound, VOX

On the CRAVE Guitars’ web site (as CRAVE Effects), effect pedals are organised according to the de facto ‘standard’ way of cataloguing vintage gear brand. Like other vintage guitar gear, effects are usually referred to by brand, model and date. This is how effects are grouped on the web site features and galleries. It is also how I tend to keep track of the pedals in which I’m interested. Therefore, I am assuming that this standard methodology of curatorship is a given and I won’t expand on this further.

As mentioned on the web site, not all these brands are American. CRAVE Effects is the only part of the ‘collection’ where I extend the boundaries to include brands from across the globe. The reason is that these pedals were integral to the cultural zeitgeist of, particularly, American and British music from the 1960s onward, possibly more so than instruments. While I am usually pedantic about such things, I am flexible in this regard. ‘They’ say there is always an exception to a rule. ‘They’ also say that rules are there to be broken. ‘They’ should really make ‘their’ mind(s) up.

There are some notable effect brands missing from the above list, for instance Binson, Digitech, Maestro, Maxon (who made effects for Ibanez), Morley, Musitronics, Roland (who make BOSS), ROSS, Shin‑Ei, Thomas Organ, etc. The simple reason is that this article is focusing on CRAVE Effects and the ‘collection’ doesn’t have any of these effect brands (yet). As with instruments, the scope has to be limited, if only for my sanity. The point will, nevertheless, hopefully be made anyway.

For clarity, there are no rack effects featured here, even though some were common during the period covered (for instance from Roland and MXR). Also, there are no digital multi‑effect units or software effects, as these tended to appear more recently than vintage pedals.

“Everything hinges on how you look at things” – Henry Miller (1891‑1980)


Effect Types

The standard methodology, as you may have gleaned from last month’s article, isn’t the only way to look at things. Even more than instruments, effects fall relatively easily into an alternative, convenient set of groupings. It is this that I’ll be using for the rest of this article. This might prove interesting because it isn’t easy to view this perspective on the web site.

There are plenty of resources on the hinterwebby thingummy that suggest a variety of different effect types. I analysed these and I don’t necessarily agree with any of them. In the end, I went with my own intuition and came up with the following broad categories, noting that some pedals fall across or between these groups (for instance, compression and EQ often feature a clean boost and hybrid effects such as octave/fuzz, wah/fuzz and wah/volume pedals are commonplace). There are also some effects that could be classified entirely within a different category, for instance compression, which doesn’t easily fall within any category.

  1. Gain Effects (e.g. clean/treble boost, overdrive, distortion, fuzz)
  2. Modulation Effects (e.g. phaser, flanger, chorus)
  3. Time‑Based Effects (e.g. reverb, echo/delay)
  4. Filter Effects (e.g. wah‑wah, envelope follower, ‘synth’, ring modulator, EQ, talk box)
  5. Amplitude Effects (e.g. tremolo, volume, swell, compression, limiter, noise gate)
  6. Pitch Effects (e.g. vibrato, octave, pitch shifter, harmonizer)
  7. Speciality Pedals (e.g. tuner, channel switch, buffer, power supply, effect loops)

Breaking the above groups down, there are around 30 different sub‑types, which provide a seemingly obvious way of looking at effects differently, something that I have not previously done with CRAVE Effects.

You may well argue that pedals grouped under #7 above aren’t effects at all and you’d be right. However, they are more or less, integral to many musician’s pedalboards, so for this article, they are included as an additional category. There are also some effects often used by guitarists/bassists that don’t fall into any of the above categories, for instance drum machines and loopers.

CRAVE Effects currently doesn’t have some effect sub‑types, for instance analogue synth, ring modulator, tremolo, limiter, noise gate, pitch shifter, etc. That means that there are some gaps at the time of writing. My aspiration is for the collection to become more comprehensive over time.

Phew! That’s even before we get started for real. Fewer words from here on in, mainly images – ‘they’ (again) say an image speaks a thousand words, so that’s what I’m banking on. Enjoy the colourful world of diminutive floor‑based stomp boxes with the following 7 headlines and 15 mini‑collections, each with an introductory section explaining what the grouping means for the sounds we hear.

“One person’s craziness is another person’s reality” – Tim Burton (1958‑)


Mini Collections 1 – Gain Effects (16)

Gain effects work by boosting the signal to varying degrees in certain ways. At its simplest, a clean boost will simply amplify a signal, making it stronger (louder). Used carefully, it can be used to overload the input stage of subsequent effects or (valve) amplifiers, causing then to start ‘clipping’ the signal – effectively flattening off a normal sine wave signal. In itself, an average clean boost doesn’t clip a signal. Overdrives take the principle a bit further by intentionally overloading circuits to force them into ‘clipping’, intended to produce a warm saturated valve‑like sound. Distortion effects inherently create a definite ‘clipping’ as an integral part of their circuits and present these already distorted sounds to whatever follows them. A good distortion effect will retain the core signature of the signal it receives. Fuzz pedals take the effect to logical extremes by forcing a sine wave signal into a brutal square wave signal, creating a wall of heavily distorted sound that can, if pushed, even obscure the original signal altogether.

Boost Effect Pedals (2)

Left‑right: 1976 Electro‑Harmonix LPB‑2, 1980 MXR Micro Amp


Overdrive Effect Pedals (4)

Left‑right, top‑bottom: 1980 BOSS OD‑1 Over Drive, 1985 BOSS SD‑1 Super Over Drive, 1981 Ibanez TS‑808 Tube Screamer Overdrive Pro, 1981 Ibanez TS9 Tube Screamer


Distortion Effect Pedals (7)

Left‑right, top‑bottom: 1975 MXR Distortion +, 1981 BOSS DS‑1 Distortion, 1985 BOSS HM‑2 Heavy Metal, 1983 Ibanez SD9 Sonic Distortion, 1984 Ibanez SM9 Super Metal, 1989 Marshall The Guv’nor, 1988 Pro Co RAT


Fuzz Effect Pedals (5)

Left‑right, top‑bottom: 1977 Electro‑Harmonix Big Muff Pi, 1978 Electro‑Harmonix Little Big Muff Pi, 1975 Colorsound Supa Tone Bender, 1969 Dallas Arbiter Fuzz Face, 1976 Sola Sound Tone‑Bender Fuzz

“What you see and hear depends a good deal on where you are standing; it also depends on what sort of person you are” – C.S. Lewis (1898‑1963)


Mini Collections 2 – Modulation Effects (21)

Modulation relies, in theory, on a time‑based effect but they produce a distinctive sound. First of all, they retain the original signal. A phase effect will copy a signal and put it through an analogue delay circuit called a bucket brigade device (BBD). A BBD will store the original signal and delay it very slightly. Then it does the same again to the delayed signal and so on. This creates a delayed signal that is out of phase and mixed with the original signal – hence phasing. Controls usually feature rate and depth (strength). Flange takes the concept and extends it, producing a second audio signal and mixing it with the original, causing a swooshing or ‘airplane engine’ sweep across frequencies. Chorus works by layering multiple copies of the original signal and slightly detuning and delaying them, thereby creating what was intended to sound like multiple instruments. Chorus is often used to thicken and deepen the overall sound.

Phaser Effect Pedals (10)

Left‑right, top‑bottom: 1980 Electro‑Harmonix Bad Stone, 1977 Electro‑Harmonix Small Stone, 1976 MXR Phase 45, 1977 MXR Phase 90, 1982 MXR Phase 100, 1979 BOSS PH‑1 Phaser, 1981 BOSS PH‑1r Phaser, 1978/79 Ibanez PT‑909 Phase Tone, 1981 Ibanez PT‑909 Phase Tone, 1982 Ibanez PT9 Phaser


Flanger Effect Pedals (5)

Left‑right, top‑bottom: 1977 Electro‑Harmonix Electric Mistress, 1982 MXR Micro Flanger, 1981 BOSS BF‑2 Flanger, 1981 Ibanez FL301‑DX Flanger, 1982 Ibanez FL9 Flanger


Chorus Effect Pedals (6)

Left‑right, top‑bottom: 1981 Electro‑Harmonix Small Clone, 1980 MXR Micro Chorus, 1982 MXR Stereo Chorus, 1980 BOSS CE‑2 Chorus, 1981 Ibanez CS‑505 Chorus, 1984 Ibanez CS9 Stereo Chorus

“We don’t see things as they are, we see them as we are” – Anaïs Nin (1903‑1977)


Mini Collections 3 – Time‑Based Effects (8)

Delay effects fall broadly into two general types. The subtler of the two is reverb. It works by delaying the original signal very slightly so that the resulting sound creates a feeling of space, as if sound waves were reflecting of surfaces and gradually decaying. Reverb recreates sound wave reflections reaching the listener at slightly different times, for example in a large open space, such as a church, cathedral, cave, hall or empty venue. Echo effects basically do what they say on the tin. It copies the original signal and replays it one or more times with a delay that is sufficient for the brain to process it as a separate sound wave from the original. Originally tape loops were used to record, play back and then erase the signal. Solid state analogue BBD circuits superseded tape but are limited in clarity and the time between repeats. However digital delays can create very long delays with crystal clean echoes. The ultimate extreme of delays is used as the basis for modern looping effects.

Reverb & Delay/Echo Effect Pedals (8)

Left‑right, top‑bottom: 1987 BOSS RV‑2 Digital Reverb, 1977 Electro‑Harmonix Deluxe Memory Man, 1978 MXR Analog Delay, 1986 BOSS DD‑2 Digital Delay, 1982 BOSS DM‑2 Delay, 1984 BOSS DM 3 Delay, 1982 Ibanez AD9 Analog Delay, 1980 DOD Analog Delay 680,

“Beauty is no quality in things themselves: It exists merely in the mind which contemplates them; and each mind perceives a different beauty” – David Hume (1711‑1776)


Mini Collections 4 – Filter Effects (10)

Filter effects effectively add or remove certain frequencies within a signal thereby changing the tone of the signal. They generally do not affect the volume or pitch of a signal, just the amount of bass, middle or treble. The simplest of these is the equivalent of a passive tone pot on a guitar or bass being used to shape the sound. Putting a tone pot in a treadle and operating it with the foot creates a filtered tone sweep (the crying wah‑wah effect) when the signal is changed continuously or, if kept in a fixed position, create a sound with an emphasis either on bass or treble characteristics of the original signal. An envelope filter, derived from analogue synthesiser technology attempts to recreate the wah‑wah type sound electronically without the need for the player to control the signal manually. EQ (short for equalisation) can be a straightforward ‘graphic equalizer’ with different controls for different parts of the signal, meaning that the sound spectrum can be shaped very accurately. EQ can also be parametric, where one control selects a certain frequency and a second control varies the tone around that frequency (often found in recording studio desks). Counter‑intuitively, low cut filters preserve high frequencies and vice versa (also slightly more sensibly called high and low pass filters).

Wah‑Wah Effect Pedals (3)

Left‑right, top‑bottom: 1977 Colorsound Supa Wah‑Swell, 1980s Dunlop Original Cry Baby GCB‑95, 1980 Jen Cry Baby Super


Envelope Follower Effect Pedals (5)

Left‑right, top‑bottom: 1976 Electro‑Harmonix Doctor Q Envelope Follower, 1980 Electro‑Harmonix Zipper Envelope Follower, 1978 MXR Envelope Filter, 1985 BOSS TW‑1 T Wah, 1981 Ibanez AF 201 Auto Filter


EQ Effect Pedals (2)

Left‑right: 1981 MXR Six Band Graphic Equalizer, 1981 Ibanez GE‑601 Graphic Equalizer

“Though we see the same world, we see it through different eyes” – Virginia Woolf (1882‑1941)


Mini Collections 5 – Amplitude Effects (7)

Put simply, amplitude effects change the volume of a signal. They generally do not affect the tone or pitch of signals. Amplitude and frequency affects are often confused, for instance, tremolo (affects the volume) and vibrato (affects the pitch). They are fundamentally very different things. At its simplest, a swell pedal puts a volume control in a treadle that can be foot operated, giving the same result as a volume control on a guitar or bass. A swell effect is actually very hard to replicate electronically. Tremolo provides a ‘throbbing’ or ‘pulsing’ sound by increasing and reducing volume in a predetermined cycle and was the first on‑board effects in vintage valve amps. Compression generally falls into this bracket and works by boosting low level signals and cutting (or limiting) high level signals thereby ‘compressing’ the dynamics of a signal that can vary from slight to significant. Compression can be used to smooth, warm, thicken and sustain a signal, often very useful for guitar signals that are usually dynamic with sharp attack, rapid decay and short sustain. Noise gates work in the opposite way, by eliminating low level signals including extraneous noise.

Volume & Swell Effect Pedals (3)

Left‑right, top‑bottom: 1970s Colorsound Swell, 1960s VOX Volume/Expression, 1979 BOSS SG‑1 Slow Gear


Compression Effect Pedals (4)

Left‑right, top‑bottom: 1980 MXR Dyna Comp, 1980 BOSS CS‑1 Compression Sustainer, 1981 Ibanez CP‑835 Compressor II, 1982 Ibanez CP9 Compressor/Limiter

“There is no fixed physical reality, no single perception of the world, just numerous ways of interpreting world views” – Deepak Chopra (1946‑)


Mini Collections 6 – Pitch Effects (3)

Pitch effects do what they say, they affect the pitch of a signal without changing the tone, tempo or volume. Pitch effects can be used on their own, such as a simple octave generator which mixes the original signal with a tone that may be one or more octaves up or down. A harmonizer is more complex in being able to shift the pitch by degrees, e.g. thirds, or fifths up or down, creating a harmony that depends on the key of a piece of music. Some of the simpler pitch effects are often combined with other effects, particularly octave and fuzz being a popular option thanks to one James Marshall Hendrix. The MXR Blue Box below is an example of a combined fuzz/octave effect pedal.

Octave Effect Pedals (3)

Left‑right, top‑bottom: 1976 Electro‑Harmonix Octave Multiplexer, 1975 MXR Blue Box, 1985 BOSS OC‑2 Octave

“Most of the mistakes in thinking are inadequacies of perception rather than mistakes of logic” – Edward de Bono (1933‑2021)


Mini Collections 7 – Speciality Pedals (2)

As mentioned above, speciality pedals may or may not affect the overall sound effect at all but can be vital for guitarists or bassists as an integral part of a pedalboard.

Channel Switch Pedals (2)

Left‑right: 1970s Electro‑Harmonix Switch Blade Channel Selector, 1986 BOSS PSM‑5 Power Supply & Master Switch

“It is a narrow mind which cannot look at a subject from various points of view” – George Eliot (1819‑1880)


Yet Another Alternative Perspective

As always, there are different ways of looking at ‘collections within a collection’. To be exhaustive would be gruelling and extraordinarily dull, so I will use just one example, grouping by model series, rather than effect.

During the early days of Ibanez pedals, they released a series of effect pedals commonly known as the Ibanez ‘0’ series pedals – with the ‘0’ being the middle number of the model designation (puzzlingly except for the CP‑835 Compressor II). The most famous of the Ibanez ‘0’ Series pedals was the iconic TS‑808 Tube Screamer Overdrive Pro. The ‘0’ series pedals were distinguished by the unique square footswitch.

Ibanez ‘0’ Series Effect Pedals

In reality, the ‘0’ series did not last long and was really a transitional model. It was replaced by the completely restyled Ibanez ‘9’ series pedals, with the ‘9’ being the last number of the model designation. For instance, the TS‑808 became the TS9. The most obvious design change is that the ‘9’ series pedals replaced the square footswitch with a more traditional large (BOSS‑style) treadle‑operated footswitch.

Ibanez ‘9’ Series Effect Pedals

These two ‘mini collections’ clearly show the evolution of effect pedals during a short and very prolific period for stomp boxes. While there are many other permutations, this comparison makes the point quite clearly that other approaches can be taken. Say no more.

“Perception and reality are two different things” – Tom Cruise (1962‑)


The CRAVEman’s Pedalboard

Many people get confused about the general sequence in which effects should be placed in the signal chain. ‘The conventional wisdom’ (NB. Commonplace beliefs that are generally accepted to be true without critical questioning – a term often credited to Canadian/American economist John Kenneth Galbraith in ‘The Affluent Society’ (1958), even though it might originally date back to c.1838) suggests the following sequence:

Instrument –> filter effects –> amplitude effects –> gain effects –> modulation effects –> time‑based effects –> amp.

This sequence is only a guide, not a diktat. Many guitarists change it up to create a different type of soundscape that suits them. No surprise, I prefer a different effect pedal order that I developed over several years playing in a band. Even so, it still doesn’t mean that it’s fixed in perpetuity. What I learned was, ‘do your own thing’ to suit you and create your own signature sound.

“Often when you think you’re at the end of something, you’re at the beginning of something else” – Fred Rogers (1928‑2003)

The CRAVEman’s favourite effect pedals, regardless of brand, represent a back‑to‑basics approach and may provoke a debate based on opinion. For me, in order of favourites, it was/is #1 echo, #2 fuzz, #3 flangers, #4 envelope followers. The CRAVEman’s least favourite effect pedals #1 phasers (too common), #2 chorus (ditto), #3 overdrive (others do it better), #4 pitch shifters (inconsistent tracking). May I be cast into the abyss of Tartarus in the underworld to suffer eternal torment, such is the extent of my judgemental wickedness! However, I stand by my heresy and shall not repent.

Unlike many contemporary musicians, my preferred pedal line‑up is very simplistic. I do play around with it but I keep coming back to a core that suit my playing style and musical leanings. They are all classics in their own right and are all very analogue. The creative possibilities with this set can be quite ‘out there’. It also has the advantage that pedals from the same manufacturer are also more likely to work together than a mix‑and‑match approach. Are there better examples of each effect from other brands? Undoubtedly, but not for me. Here’s my go‑to line up…

  • Electro‑Harmonix Big Muff Pi
  • Electro Harmonix Bad Stone
  • Electro‑Harmonix Electric Mistress
  • Electro‑Harmonix Zipper Envelope Follower
  • Electro‑Harmonix Deluxe Memory Man

I also use a combined wah/volume pedal but no specific model. You notice I have a soft spot for EHX effect pedals. There is no particular reason, it’s just that they sound and behave the way I like. Admittedly, they were also the first serious pedals I used, alongside Dallas Arbiter/Colorsound/Sola Sound pedals. Others come close, for instance the MXR 100 phaser, as well as the MXR and DOD analogue delays. There are plenty of newer exceptional effect units (e.g. Line6) but this article is about vintage pedals, so that’s where I’m focused. While undoubtedly excellent, most Japanese pedals (e.g. BOSS/Ibanez) just don’t do it for me, which is a bit weird.

“All our knowledge is the offspring of our perceptions” – Leonardo da Vinci (1452‑1519)


Final Thoughts on Effect Collections within a Collection

I hope you enjoyed the colourful selection of CRAVE Effects’ stomp boxes viewed from a slightly different perspective. In one sense, they all look alike, while on closer inspection, they are all very different aesthetically. Although ‘new’ acquisitions are currently in abeyance, I have become besotted with vintage effect pedals, for better or worse. Vintage effect pedals represent quite a convoluted playground, fostering much confusion, misunderstanding, debate and conjecture.

I have finally given up the fight and I now concede that I am a small‑scale, limited ‘collector’ of vintage guitar gear. I think that this and the previous articles tend to cement this unfortunate conclusion. Yup, I have become something I have tried hard to avoid becoming. Darn it! I refuse, as far as I am able, to go full ‘collecterati’ though.

Even though a single effect pedal doesn’t take up much space, collectively, they do. The CRAVEcap (the constraint of space and funds) currently in place means that any ‘new’ acquisitions to CRAVE Effects may be a while off yet. It may come as a surprise that some rare effects can cost more than vintage guitars, basses or amps, including several pedals featured herein and on the web site.

“Before you become too entranced with gorgeous gadgets and mesmerizing video displays, let me remind you that information is not knowledge, knowledge is not wisdom, and wisdom is not foresight. Each grows out of the other, and we need them all” – Arthur C. Clarke (1917‑2008)

One thing, though, does ‘bother’ me about the whole world of vintage effect pedals. One of the fundamental principles of vintage guitar tone is to keep the signal chain as short and as direct as possible. Vintage gear enthusiasts will often spend (many) thousands of pounds/dollars on expensive vintage guitars, basses and amps because of their undeniably unique and attractive tonal characteristics.

Then what do we go and do? Those same enthusiasts buy a cheap little box crammed full of transistors, resistors, capacitors, pots, ICs, switches, circuit boards and wiring, and then we put them directly in the signal path. A few older effects may be passive, while most others are battery driven (usually one or two 9V 6LR61/MN1604/PP3 blocks), which has proved to be an unreliable power source dependent on charge levels. The alternative is to use AC power transformed into DC, often with variable voltages and currents as well as polarities. In addition cable attenuation is also a problem – lots of pedals use lots of interconnects. Pedal circuit boards, components and cables usually comprise budget items originally ordered in bulk quantities for mere cents/pennies per unit. Older circuits were often also hand assembled using whatever was lying around and often constructed with variable soldering quality. All things considered, consistency and quality control certainly weren’t manufacturing strong points in the 1960s and 1970s.

Open up some older pedals and one can be amazed at the crude nature of the assembly. Open some of the newer pedals and there are massive amounts of components, often with multiple IC (Integrated Circuit) chips suddenly placed directly into the signal chain, seemingly intent on corrupting it. When analysed, many electronic circuits are inherently ‘noisy’, often with unintended audio effects, which we can hear. There can be profound issues with mixing and matching ‘true bypass’ effects with buffered effects, as well as issues combining analogue with digital effects. A complex pedalboard can also be very sensitive to the order in which effects are used. Many modern amps have an effect send/return loop between pre and power stages, rather than the traditional method of effects feeding directly into the pre‑amp’s input stage.

Bottom line, there has really been nothing fundamentally new in the last 65 years of effect pedal development since the early days of innovation. Many modern pedals are copies of classic pedals or just variations of tried and tested themes. The old ways of specialist analogue pedals have been superseded by an overwhelming multiplicity of layered digital complexity. However, the principal aims and core characteristics have remained largely unchanged.

“Perception is a mirror not a fact. And what I look on is my state of mind, reflected outward” – Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803‑1882)

Nowadays, inline effects and amps are not always needed and guitarists rely on DI (Direct Input) into studio/stage digital audio processors, weirdly set to mimic vintage analogue gear. Then we also add in wireless signal transmission. All of these factors can affect the tone of the rest of the signal chain, often very significantly. Problems are frequent and often hard to identify and eradicate.

Yet, we continue to adore and admire these miniature miracles of electronic bits and pieces for destroying the very things we so desire from the rest of our vintage equipment. Go figure! This dilemma completely blows my mind when I stop and try to rationalise it objectively. Am I alone in contemplating this peculiar incongruity or is it a widespread understanding? I have absolutely no idea; the whole gamut of convolutions is not straightforward to resolve.

When I rejuvenated my guitar playing in the 1990s, I tried a multi‑effect unit but found I was spending more time working out how to use the seemingly unlimited and not very intuitive controls, rather than to focus on what mattered, playing guitar. The multi‑effect was soon ditched and I reverted back to a mix‑and‑match approach of separate pedals. This soon changed again, by replacing new effect pedals with vintage ones and the rest, as ‘they’ say, is history.

Believe it or not, digital effects started appearing in the early 1980s, supplementing rather than superseding analogue ones. Some of these early vintage digital stomp boxes are included here (I’m not prejudiced!). Digital processing started appearing, mainly in delay/echo pedals and reverb effects (reverb can’t easily be replicated using analogue circuits).

Another question. Are some effect reputations worthwhile? In my opinion, sometimes but not always. Some highly regarded pedals are good but overrated, often hyped by artist association, rather than by their inherent characteristics. Others can really surprise because they ‘fit’ with a particular situation. Some will swear that a script logo MXR Phase 90 sounds better than a block logo one, even when the internals are identical and the change is purely cosmetic. Some models will sound different from pedal to pedal, even if the circuit design is the same. Some circuits behave differently from pedal to pedal, for instance anything with an environmentally sensitive germanium resistor. Some seemingly identical pedals used different components from one to the next due to component availability and/or price at the time. Some commentators will also swear that component ‘a’ sounds great while component ‘b’ sounds like total garbage, while to the average user, the differences are so slight as to make no audible difference, especially in a band setting. Does it really matter or does snobbery fit the bill (again)?

What I’m really trying to say is, go with your ears and instincts, rather than brand name, effect specification and hype. The best way to sound unique is not to go with the flow but to do your own thing. Be creative and experiment not only with the pedals you use but also in the order they are used. It is way more fun creating the unique way you want to sound, rather than trying to sound like someone else. Inspiration can be found in these marvellous and magical miniscule machines (Ed: alliteration still alive and well then).

The effects featured here aren’t the only effects owned by CRAVE Guitars/Effects. I have a number of newer (i.e. non‑vintage) pedals, as well as a number of studio rack effects. Hunting down vintage effects, though, has become my main focus. The non‑vintage effects are excluded from this article.

“People only see what they are prepared to see” – Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803‑1882)

Some vintage effect pedals are ubiquitous and can be picked up for very little money. Others however can cost astronomically silly amounts. This may be because they are highly regarded and much in demand, for instance, early Dallas/Colorsound/Sola Sound Tone Benders, Dallas Arbiter Fuzz Faces, and Ibanez Tube Screamers. Others are just very hard to come by, especially in good condition (remember these things are used on the floor and tend to get a lot of physical abuse). Some others are pricey because they were niche products only produced either for a short time or in very small numbers (or both), for instance the BOSS Slow Gear featured.

One of the reasons I got into vintage pedals in the first place was during a period of austerity lasting many years. During that time, I couldn’t afford or accommodate guitars, basses and amps but effects were relatively cheap and didn’t take up much space. Thus, they became a serious part of the CRAVE Guitars/Basses/Effects/Amps family. The fascination with these little bits of gear heritage suffer from the same GAS (Gear Acquisition Syndrome) that affects most guitarists. This means that ‘collecting’ vintage effect pedals can be seriously addictive – be warned!

Will traditional single‑effect pedals be replaced by modern digital modelling ones? Probably, but not just yet. Studio DAW (Digital Audio Workstation) software has already gone a long way down that path in many home and pro studios and there is plenty of scope for further improvement. In fact, one might wonder where AI will take effect pedals and digital plug ins in the future. For many, the AI‑influenced future will look very bright. Me? I’m defo old skool. Personally, I think the archaic noisy, temperamental, analogue effects have a certain allure and charm that no end of digital meddling will ever be able to replace (a bit like our enduring love for real valve amps and vinyl records).

As of 2025, the effect industry is largely alive and well and still thriving (within the overall operating environment of a declining music industry), especially in the rarefied realms of boutique pedals. It seems that guitarists and bassists can’t get enough of these tone mangling monstrosities. Love ‘em. When it comes to the crunch, these are serious toys with which a creative musician can extract great fun and satisfaction in our own inventive sound pits. Enjoy.

“Our senses enable us to perceive only a minute portion of the outside world” – Nikola Tesla (1856‑1943)


A Seasonal Message From The CRAVEman

This section has nothing to do with vintage guitars. However, it does take a brief look at a different aspect of western society’s cultural heritage. Apologies.

At the end of October each year, we tend to celebrate Halloween on the 31st of the month. The traditional roots of Halloween go back some 2,000 years ago (or more) with Irish and Scottish Celtic harvest festivals signifying the beginning of the dark half of the year and the onset of winter.

Celebrations around this time of the year and the origins of Halloween as a mystical event derive from the festival of Samhain (NB. translated as ‘summer’s end’ from Old Irish), with its roots in pagan custom for honouring dead ancestors. It was believed that the veil between the living and the dead of the Otherworld was at its weakest, allowing spirits to manifest and roam in the world of the living. Believers would set bonfires to ward off evil spirits and wear masks to avoid being recognised by ghosts.

In Christianity, All Hallows’ Eve (from where we get the word, ‘Halloween’) on 31 October is the holy day before All Hallows’ Day (All Saints’ Day) and All Souls’ Day on 1 and 2 November respectively (NB. The noun ‘hallow’ means a saint or holy person and the verb means to honour as holy). The relative timing of such festivities led to a blending of pagan, Roman and Christian traditions over the centuries.

In Mexico, ‘el dia de los muertos’ (literally, the day of the dead) festival coincides with the end of October/beginning of November every year, when families gather to remember and pay respect to those that have died. This suggests that paranormal revelries at this time of year have become widespread across many countries.

Incidentally, the film, ‘Halloween’ (1978) is one of the author’s favourite cinematic masterpieces, directed by the legendary John Carpenter and starring Jamie Lee Curtis. A great horror film for a Halloween party/film night. Great soundtrack too.

It therefore seems appropriate to conclude this seasonal message with a fittingly festive “Happy Halloween” from your favourite Stone Age guitarist and founder of CRAVE Guitars, The CRAVEman. Rock On!

“There are misfortunes in life that no one will accept; people would rather believe in the supernatural and the impossible” – Alexander Dumas (1802‑1870)


CRAVE Guitars’ ‘Album of the Month’

In keeping with the theme of this month’s article, I thought I’d delve into one of the landmark American bands that went to extreme lengths to introduce inventive soundscapes to their music. The band in question made extensive use of heavily modified guitars, alternative tunings and abused effect pedals to produce oodles of off‑the‑wall clamour. The band I’m talking about is Sonic Youth from New York who went out of their way to sound like no other band around at the time. They formed in 1980 and, sadly, after over 30 years, they disbanded in 2011. During those three decades, the main three audio terrorists of the band were Thurston Moore, Lee Ranaldo (both on guitar) and Kim Gordon (on bass). They had a string of highly regarded studio albums including ‘Evol’ (1986), ‘Sister’ (1987), ‘Daydream Nation’ (1988), ‘Goo’ (1990), ‘Dirty’ (1992) and ‘Washing Machine’ (1995). However, my choice is not one of these but it is a personal favourite…

Sonic Youth – Sonic Nurse (2004): Sonic Nurse was Sonic Youth’s 13th studio album released in June 2004 on Geffen Records, comprising 10 tracks over an hour’s running time. The cover was designed by renowned American conceptual artist Richard Prince (1949‑). Despite being a lot less well known that their peak period albums, Sonic Nurse is close to where the band would eventually end up. This album was the middle one of a later career resurgance including, ‘Murray Street’ (2002) and ‘Rather Ripped’ (2006). Track one (6:33) is clearly influenced, fittingly so, by acclaimed American‑Canadian author, William Gibson’s cyberpunk novel, ‘Pattern Recognition’ (2003).

Sonic Youth – Sonic Nurse (2004)

Basically, any of the albums mentioned here can provide a great insight into what the band could do and fans will all have their own favourite. It just so happens that Sonic Nurse is mine. Even their very early albums (not mentioned here) have a great deal going for them. Naturally, there are inconsistencies but, over their career, those lesser albums were also better than most others in the experimental alternative noise rock genre. Turn up the volume and listen to the aural mayhem on show at your peril.

Alas, Sonic Youth fell apart in October 2011 following the separation of Moore and Gordon, after 27 years of marriage. The band’s influence and legacy has been profound in modern rock music and they deserve to be admired and respected for ploughing their own unique furrow throughout their career, rather than capitulating to studio mundanity for the sake of commercial success. Despite the hopes of many loyal fans, the band has, to‑date, not reunited and its status is officially ‘in hiatus’.

BELIEVE IN MUSIC!

“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses” – Abraham Lincoln (1809‑1865)


Tailpiece

As usual, I’m at a loss for what to do next month but I’m sure I’ll think of something. It is getting harder to come up with different material, so I hope you’ll bear with me. Once the quality starts dropping off, I’ll have to call it a day but I don’t think the time has come just yet. You may think otherwise, of course! I don’t want to outstay my welcome. That’s it. No more in the way of dreary diatribe for this month. The holidays are a‑comin’. Yay!

Truth, peace, love, and guitar music be with you always. The CRAVEman, signing off for now. Until next time…

CRAVE Guitars’ ‘Quote of the Month’: “Always have great first thoughts, then you’ll never need to have second thoughts”

© 2025 CRAVE Guitars – Love Vintage Guitars.


 

Like it? Why not share it?

June 2018 – A Potted History of the Guitar Part IV

Without further ado, let’s get stuck into Part IV of the history of the guitar. As the story was left at the end of the last article during the 1920s and early 1930s, something new was needed to ensure that guitars would not only be able to compete with other instruments in a live situation but also become the catalyst for a musical revolution to mirror what was taking place in wider society. Just in case you were lulled into a sense of coherent continuity, this month’s article is a bit different from what has been covered so far.

This part is presented as part of a whole. If you wish to recap on previous articles in the ‘Potted History of the Guitar’ series, you can access them here (each part opens in a new browser tab):

Please remember that this is written purely for entertainment purposes and is not intended as an academic tome. While I have tried to be diligent in my research, there are undoubtedly improvements that could be made, so corrections and clarifications are genuinely welcomed. This is quite a long article, so I hope you are sitting comfortably.

Needing to be heard

The problem for guitarists in the 1920s was a simple but fundamental and frustrating one. The amount of volume that could be attained from purely acoustic guitar designs had got as far as it was likely to get at the start of the 1930s. Guitarists were still struggling to be heard in noisy live music environments as part of jazz, swing, big band and dance orchestras. Despite the strengths of steel strung folk guitars, archtop guitars and resonator guitars, the lack of volume continued to be a problem for guitarists throughout the early part of the 20th Century. A number of clever innovations attempted to help acoustic guitarists cut through the mix but they didn’t really capture mainstream attention and passed into obscurity, leaving demanding musicians still yearning for louder instruments.

Creative inventors, engineers and entrepreneurs were determined to find a workable solution. Perhaps the biggest game‑changing watershed in the entire history of guitar building was about to take place in America in the 1930s. The transformation depended on coincidental and mutually dependent developments; the magnetic pickup, the portable valve amplifier and its associated loudspeaker(s). Undoubtedly, the amplifier came first, simply because it could be driven by other inputs, such as early microphones, while the pickup followed to take advantage of the opportunity. Logic suggests that the converse would make little sense, as a pickup without some means of manipulating the signal s essentially redundant.

By the end of the 19th Century, early microphones were being used in telephone, broadcasting and recording industries. In 1916, the first condenser microphone was invented and in 1923, the first moving coil and ribbon microphones were developed. Given the timing, it seemed logical to experiment with microphones to capture the sound from acoustic guitars. However, the results weren’t particularly successful and the microphone proved to be a dead end for guitarists at the time. A more practical and reliable alternative was required to capture the physical energy produced by a stringed instrument and convert it into a usable electrical signal that could then be amplified and output.

Before starting to look at the early electric instruments that changed modern guitar music forever, it is worth taking a temporary detour to look at the catalysts that led to the step change. Once the technical inhibitors had been overcome and the various elements combined, electric guitars became a realistic and achievable proposition.

The electro magnetic guitar pickup

By the 1920s and 1930s, the science of using magnetism and wire coils to induce an electric current had been understood for several decades. It would, however, take some ingenuity to apply the various scientific principles involved to overcome the specific practical problems experienced by guitarists of the time. Within this context, we need to go right back to basics as a starting point.

An electromagnetic guitar pickup is basically a passive transducer that uses Faraday’s law of induction, named after English scientist Michael Faraday (1791‑1867), to produce an electromagnetic force. The physical movement of the vibrating steel string of a strummed or plucked guitar disturbs the magnetic field and induces a small voltage of between 100mV and 1V through the coil. This differs from a simple microphone, which works by converting pressure variations in the air (sound waves), into the mechanical motion of a diaphragm, which in turn produces an electrical signal (depending on the type of technology used).

A simple electromagnetic guitar pickup is generally constructed from one or more permanent magnets, wrapped many thousands of times in a coil made of fine copper wire. Most early guitar pickups comprised only one magnet and coil, hereafter referred to as single coil pickups. The weak electrical signal is then passed down an electrical lead to a separate amplifier where the signal is multiplied many times to drive a passive loudspeaker that reproduces the original signal at greater volume.

Unlike a microphone, the electromagnetic pickup does not reproduce the actual acoustic sound waves emanating from the guitar. The natural resonance of the instrument may cause the strings to vibrate in a certain way and this variation is picked up by the transducer, which may explain the differences in sound between two instruments using the same pickup, electrics, amplifier and speakers. As a result, at least in the early days, the characteristics of the pickup combined with the rest of the signal chain probably had more to do with the sound that audiences heard, rather than that of the actual instrument itself. There are innumerable permutations in which the basic components of magnets and wire can be configured to produce different outputs and over the years, pickup designers have used these variations to differentiate their pickups from those produced by others.

Gibson employee, Lloyd Loar had experimented with stringed instrument pickups as early as 1924, shortly before he left the company. Loar attempted to produce an electrical signal from vibrations passed from the strings through the bridge to the magnet and coil. Loar’s work did not lead to a successful product and guitarists had to wait a while longer.

American inventor and musician, George Beauchamp, who had been involved with the National String Instrument Corporation and the development of their resonator guitars, was also involved with another resourceful enterprise at the beginning of the 1930s. He teamed up with Adolph Rickenbacher to form the company was originally called Ro Pat In Corporation, which later became Electro String Instrument Corporation and later still, Rickenbacker, a name that most guitarists will recognise. Ro-Pat-In was instrumental in taking a fundamental new approach to electric guitar design.

Through Electro String, Beauchamp filed a patent in June 1934 setting out his pickup design as part of a complete ‘Electrical Stringed Musical Instrument’. Beauchamp’s ‘horsehoe’ pickup design comprised two ‘U’‑shaped magnets encircling the strings. Beauchamp’s application was granted by the U.S. Patent Office in August 1937. The patent was important because it was for a solid body electric guitar using a magnetic pickup, not just the pickup on its own – the development of the instrument will be covered in the next part of the story so, for now, the focus is solely on the pickup.

Ironically, in February 1936, Guy Hart filed a patent on behalf of Gibson for an ‘Electric Musical Instrument’ and this was awarded by the Patent office in July 1937, just 28 days before Beauchamp’s earlier patent application was confirmed.

Although unknown at the time, another single coil guitar pickup patent was filed in September 1944 by American inventor and entrepreneur Leo Fender. That application was for a ‘pickup unit for instruments’, which was awarded in December 1948. Although not as historically significant as other pickup patents, it was a clear indication of the direction that Leo Fender was heading prior to founding the company that would bear his name.

Another important principle of basic physics caused a significant problem for early pickup designers, and it still does even today. In addition to the desirable characteristic of electrical induction for guitar pickups, electromagnetic coils also act as directional antennae. As far as musical instruments go, this unwanted ‘feature’ means that single coil pickups not only pick up string vibrations but they also pick up interference from alternating mains current used by electrical appliances. Depending on position of the pickup in relation to other electrical equipment, of which there are usually many in a live music venue, the interference manifests itself as a continuous and insistent hum, which is then in turn amplified by a guitar amplifier.

One ingenious solution to the problem of mains‑induced hum was to invent a guitar pickup that still produced a signal from string vibrations while eradicating the interference from nearby electrical equipment. The clever answer was the invention of the ‘humbucking’ pickup, which uses two magnets, each with a coil of wire wound in opposite directions. Electrically induced mains interference affects both coils equally and, because each one is wound in opposing directions, the interference is cancelled out, thereby eradicating (or ‘bucking’) the hum. More importantly, not only do the coils still induce a voltage, they output a stronger signal because there are two coils instead of one. As the problem is all but removed at source, there is no hum to be amplified.

Arguments persist as to who invented the humbucking guitar pickup. Many commentators give the accolade to Seth Lover (1910‑1997), who was an electronics designer working for Gibson at the time and filed a patent in June 1955. Lover’s closest competitor in the race to be recognised for the humbucking pickup came from Joseph Butts, who later worked for Gretsch. Butts filed another humbucking pickup patent some 18 months later in January 1957. It was Butts’ application that was awarded first in June 1959, while Lover’s patent was awarded in July 1959. As far as many working musicians were concerned, the invention was successful and that was all that mattered.

Generally speaking (but not always, especially if obscured by a cover), it is relatively easy to spot the difference between slim single coil pickups and their larger dual‑coil humbucking counterparts. The latter normally have two coil bobbins traditionally mounted side‑by‑side. Within these two broad types, there are many, many different makes and styles of pickup to suit most needs.

Hum is not the only affliction that electric guitar builders have to deal with. All electromagnetic pickups, even those produced today, are prone to audio feedback, which is often heard as an undesirable high pitched shriek or howl. Feedback is a phenomenon called the Larsen Effect after the Danish scientist Søren Absalon Larsen (1871-1957) who discovered it. Audio feedback is caused by a sound loop that exists between an audio input such as a pickup or microphone and an audio output such as an loudspeaker fed by an amplifier. The electrical signal from the input is amplified through a loudspeaker and is then picked up again by the input and so on, continuously. The sound of the feedback is shaped by the resonant frequencies and proximity of the various components in the loop, including room acoustics. Most of the time, feedback is considered problematic and often unpredictable. However many guitarists have learned to harness and control feedback in a positive musical way to create additional sounds.

Some contemporary pickup manufacturers go to great lengths to replicate the authentic tonal characteristics of vintage pickups. One of those widely imitated pickups is also probably the most famous of humbucking pickups. Used on Gibson guitars from the late 1950s, the PAF (Patent Applied For), named after the black sticker on the baseplate, has come to define Gibson’s sound for many guitarists. The PAFs are particularly revered, as they were used in sunburst Gibson Les Paul Standards from 1958‑1960, often regarded as the ‘golden years’ for Gibson.

Today, many independent pickup builders not only pay homage to vintage designs but also strive to create their own distinctive reputation. Third party pickup builders may make OEM (Original Equipment Manufacturer) and aftermarket pickups in a huge range of types. Such companies include Seymour Duncan, Di Marzio, EMG, Lollar and Bare Knuckle, among many others. Pickup choice in the 21st Century is very much down to personal preference and the options are nigh on infinite – very different from the 1930s.

The sounds generated by single coil and humbucking pickups are noticeably different. Not only do single coil pickups tend to produce a weaker signal, they sound thinner and cleaner, while more powerful humbucking pickups tend to sound fatter and warmer. Guitarists noticed this variation and took advantage of the differences to shape their own playing style and develop their distinctive tone. In addition, humbuckers are often considered better suited to overdriving pre‑amplifiers, thereby adding some controllable, distinctive and desirable harmonic distortion, making them popular in higher gain rock music.

By the 1950s manufacturers were commonly using two or more pickups on a guitar for added tonal versatility, initially adding a second or third pickup of the same type, for instance commonly used configurations include 2 humbuckers (e.g. Gibson Les Paul) or 3 single coils (e.g. Fender Stratocaster). Many guitar makers today mix different types of pickups on one guitar to broaden the range of sounds available.

Some pickup arrangements also allow pickups to be engaged in series or parallel or in/out of phase to give musicians a greater number of tonal options. Since the 1970s, pickup designers have enabled the signal from the two coils of a humbucking pickup to be ‘split’ (NB. not ‘tapped’). By using a switch, guitarists may enable a split humbucker to sound either like a traditional humbucker or to emulate the distinctive sound of a single coil pickup. All these various techniques provide guitarists with greater flexibility from their pickup(s).

Simplistically, guitar pickups may also be described either as passive or active. Passive pickups are the basic devices that have been described so far, while active pickups incorporate some form of electronic circuitry in the guitar to modify the signal, normally powered by an on‑board battery. Outwardly, there is often little to distinguish whether pickups are active or not. Putting active electronics into a guitar has been around since at least the 1960s and can range from a simple pre‑amp to boost the pickup signal to elaborate on‑board effects or even low powered amplification.

Since its inception 1930s, the humble guitar pickup has been adapted into many diverse forms. The majority of pickups in the early 21st Century remain passive single coil or humbucking types. However, there have been other pickup innovations along the way diverging from the norm. These alternative technologies include, amongst many other pickup types; hexaphonic (that feed individual string signals to MIDI/synthesizer controllers), piezoelectric (using crystals to induce current), microphonic (converting sound wave vibrations to electricity), electrostatic (using a capacitor to vary electrical capacitance), optical (interrupting a beam of light detected by a sensor), etc.

The understanding of the science behind pickup materials and dynamics between the components has been improved and refined significantly since the 1930s. However, the basic principles behind the passive transducing electromagnetic pickup remain pertinent today and are likely to remain so for the foreseeable future. Magnetic pickups are, by far, the most common type used by electric guitars in the late 20th and early 21st Centuries. This may be about to change.

With the digital revolution, there are numerous innovations occurring today that will lead to radical new pickup designs in the future. Future musicians can expect many new ways of converting the vibrations from humble plucked guitar strings into electrical signals that can be manipulated in ways we cannot yet contemplate. The possibly unstoppable migration from analogue to digital technology will continue. We can only speculate as to how far digital processes will encroach into the hitherto staunchly analogue domain of the guitar. Already, we have seen digital devices that enable the output from a guitar’ pickup to ‘model’ other types of guitar and even other instruments by modifying the signal digitally. We have also seen guitars as being a source trigger for external synthesis and various guitar synths have been around since the 1970s. It seems somewhat ironic that the digital age is enabling ever more accurate simulations of the earliest analogue pickups including the original’s crude and accidental inconsistencies.

While this section of the story is about guitar pickups, it is worth remembering that pickups have also been used successfully on many other types of stringed instrument.

Once the concept had been proven, the next step was to apply actual real‑world pickups in a practical way. There were essentially two methods of implementing an electromagnetic pickup for use on a guitar. One way was to add a pickup to existing acoustic instruments and the other was to invent an entirely new type of guitar with the pickup as an integral part of the design. How these two approaches came about will be covered in the next part of the story.

The pickup on its own, however, is of little use in isolation. Another crucial part of the equation was to take the weak signal from the guitar’s pickup and manipulate it electronically to make it much louder, which is where a completely different solution was needed.

The electric guitar amplifier

Possibly the major challenge with introducing guitar pickups was to turn the tiny voltage produced by the pickups into a sound that provided practical real‑world volume and tone for working musicians playing in noisy bands on the road.

The essential piece of equipment actually comprises two crucial components, the electrical amplifier and one or more loudspeakers. Amplifiers largely fall into two broad categories – either as discrete units comprising the electronics in a ‘head’ unit with loudspeakers installed in a separate cabinet, or with both amplifier and speaker(s) integrated into a single ‘combo’ amp. It is worth looking at the origins of both the electronics and the loudspeaker separately.

For travelling musicians from the 1930s on, amps also needed to be portable, so size and weight were particular considerations, as was electrical safety, durability and reliability. In addition, some degree of industry standardisation to enable interchangeability between instruments, electronics and venues was important.

The Amplifier

In the early days, amplifying a signal from a pickup was all that a guitar amp was really required to do. Controls were very basic, usually just a single input channel with a volume and, maybe, a tone knob. It would take some time before more flexible electronics were added to these basic amplifier circuits. Nowadays, the diversity of amps ranges from the very simple to the incredibly complex. The latter often including, just for starters, multiple switched channels, gain controls, effects loops, digital modelling alongside advanced EQ, flexible on‑board effects and digital interfaces. However, the fundamental principles of amp utility haven’t really changed that much since amps were first invented in the 1920s and when guitarists started to use them in the 1930s.

Put very simply, an amplifier is made up of active electronics that are designed to take an input signal, multiply it many times in strength and output it to a loudspeaker at a volume that is considerably louder than the original input. The electronics of an amplifier comprise essentially two discrete parts, a pre‑amp that controls the incoming signal and shapes it ready to be boosted and output by the power amp section that then drives the loudspeaker(s). It is these two amp sections that determine the overall character and volume of the audio output.

Amplifier output is usually measured in watts and provides a crude indication of power output (volts x amps = watts). The relationship between watts and sound pressure levels heard by the human ear is logarithmic. Generalising, it takes ten times the output power in watts to double the perceived audio volume. In addition, it takes considerably more amplifier power to reproduce low-frequency sound, especially at high volume, so bass amps tend to have higher power output ratings.

While early amplifiers were configured to the environment in which they were most likely to be put, such as practice, studio or stage amps, many modern amps use various techniques to minimise this artificial distinction, such as master volume controls, power attenuators or circuits used to modify amplifier stages to suit.

Up until the 1970s, thermionic valves – also known as vacuum tubes – were a principal electronic component and one that contributed significantly to both the power and sonic character of the amplifier. A valve is a relatively simple device used to control electrical current between its electrodes. The first valve was invented in 1904 by English electric engineer John Ambrose Fleming (1849-1945).

At its most basic, a valve comprises an external glass container used to maintain a vacuum is attached to the valve base. Inside the valve there is a heater, an electron‑emitting cathode/filament and an electron‑collecting anode/plate. Electrical current, in the form of negatively charged electrons, flows through the vacuum in one direction only from the cathode to the anode. An electrical grid can be used to control the current and is the one often used for amplification because the grid can be used to vary the number of electrons reaching the anode and, thereby, controls the amount of gain. Valves are often described by the number of electrodes, for instance; diode, triode, tetrode  or pentode valves (2, 3, 4 and 5 respectively). The humble valve has been used in many applications, such as amplification, rectification, switching, oscillation, and display.

Valves come in many shapes and sizes and vary according to the function they are required to perform in the amp stages. Generally speaking, pre-amp tubes tend to be smaller, while power amp valves tend to be larger.

There are numerous alternatives and variations of valves and there isn’t room to cover the range of technical differences. Thankfully, there has been a degree of commonality in amplifier design over the decades. Typical valves used in pre‑amps include models such as the 12AX7/ECC83. Typical valves used in power amps include models such as the EL-34, EL-84, KT66/77/88, 6L6/5881 and 5150. Valves impart a characteristic ‘natural’ sonic signature and tend to be sensitive to a guitarist’s playing dynamics, which is why they are still widely favoured by many musicians to this day. While technically outdated and obsolete, there is a notable modern‑day industry built around valve production, amp manufacturing and valve amp maintenance.

The valve is the technological precursor to modern semiconductors. Semiconductors are often made of silicon, although they can be made from other materials, such as germanium. A transistor is a solid‑state semiconductor that roughly performs the same function as a valve and is commonly used for amplification. Transistors are smaller, cheaper, lighter, run cooler, are more reliable and more resilient than valves. Some manufacturers produce hybrid amps that aim to take the best characteristics of both valve and transistor technologies.

Taking things even further away from archaic valve technology, electronics using complex digital microprocessors are commonplace. Not only can DSP (Digital Signal Processor) chips produce their own sounds but also they enable a single unit to model a multiplicity of amplifier models that would be impossible using traditional technology. In addition, they can also emulate multiple effects, speaker cabinets, microphone placements, studio interfaces, and so on. Reliable and robust digital processing amps able to be used equally well at home, in the studio and on stage are once again attempting to usurp territory previously held by archaic analogue amps.

Specialist amps are made to make the most of other, albeit similar, electric instruments. For instance, electro‑acoustic guitars (acoustic guitars with pickups) produce a wider frequency range and tend to be ‘cleaner’ sounding than electric guitar amps, which has led to increasingly elaborate amp electronics to cater for the particular needs of acoustic guitar players. Bass amps and speakers are also engineered specifically to provide for the demanding amplification used by bass guitarists. There are no hard and fast rules, the lines are not always clearly drawn and there is inevitably some interchangeability between the general types.

One of the keys to success is to match the characteristics of the amplifier stages to the loudspeakers, so it is worth looking next at the humble loudspeaker and the important part it plays in the guitar sound’s signal chain.

The Loudspeaker

The latter part of the 19th Century was ripe for invention in the field of sound reproduction. As with other sections, only a few of the key milestones can be covered here. Prior to the invention of the modern loudspeaker, megaphones and bulky ‘radio horns’ had been used to increase acoustic volume. However these proved impractical because of their size and weight, limited frequency range and low sound pressure levels.

German teacher, Johann Philipp Reis was, perhaps, the first to develop a rudimentary type of experimental electric loudspeaker in 1861. Alexander Graham Bell was the first to patent his loudspeaker design in 1876 for use in his telephone, shortly followed by Ernst W. Siemens who patented his ‘magneto-electric apparatus’ in 1874. Thomas Edison and Nikola Tesla were also experimenting with sound around the same time. By 1898, Horace Short was working with compressed air drivers and Oliver Lodge was developing a ‘dynamic’ speaker using magnets and moving coils with horns to amplify sound. Danish‑American engineer Peter L. Jensen (1886-1961) is often cited as co‑inventor of moving coil speakers in 1915 and he started applying the technology for use in real world situations. Jensen founded his company, Magnavox, in 1915 to market products for telephones and public address (PA) systems. Magnavox is now part of the massive Philips corporation.

Things changed considerably in the 1920s with the introduction of the first amplified moving coil loudspeaker using a conical paper speaker diaphragm, which was invented in 1925 by Edward W. Kellogg and Chester W. Rice, both of whom worked for General Electric in New York, USA. Their research was important as it established both the principle of the amplifier to boost a signal and a speaker able to reproduce a wide and uniform frequency range. Rice filed a patent for the electrodynamic direct radiating ‘loud speaker’ in 1925, which was awarded in April 1929. Their speaker was introduced to the market under RCA’s Radiola brand in 1926.

Early speakers used powered electromagnets, as permanent magnets were scarce at the time, although Jensen released a fixed magnet speaker in 1930. Lightweight Alnico alloy magnets became available after WWII, making the technology more accessible enabling further innovations to take place. Other inventions along the way included, for example, 2‑way systems using a crossover to separate frequency bands (1937) and coaxial speakers (1943). Once the concept of the moving coil speaker had been proven in practical applications, it has become the de facto standard within the music industry for nearly a century.

The loudspeaker, as we know it today, is essentially a mechanical electroacoustic transducer that serves the opposite function to a microphone in that it converts an electrical signal into sound waves. A traditional moving coil speaker is passive in that it relies on an already amplified signal being fed to it and it doesn’t require its own power supply. The incoming amplified signal is fed into a coil of wire, known as the voice coil, suspended between the poles of a permanent magnet. The voice coil is attached to the apex of a conical diaphragm known as a speaker cone, originally made of paper. The outer edge of the cone is mounted within a fixed metal chassis, usually within a cabinet. The electrical signal makes the voice coil move back and forth rapidly within the magnet thereby pushing on the cone to produce sound waves. The more air that the moving speaker cone displaces, the louder the perceived sound is. Different sizes and types of speaker are used to deliver different sound frequency ranges. Generally, larger speakers are used to deliver lower bass frequencies and smaller ones used for higher treble frequencies.

Loudspeakers are usually attached to a flat panel (baffle) with circular holes cut into it such that the sound waves produced by the speaker cones can escape directly into the listening environment. The baffle with its speaker(s) is normally mounted inside either an open‑back or closed‑back wooden cabinet.

Like amplifier outputs, speaker output is usually measured in watts, which is the electrical power needed to drive the speaker. More watts generally, although not always, indicates greater volume. Like all electrical devices, a speaker provides some opposition to the signal being fed into it, called impedance, measured in ohms. Some speakers are ‘hard to drive’ and have a low impedance, which means that it requires greater current from the amplifier to result in the same output level than a high impedance speaker. As a result, it is important to match a speaker’s characteristics to the amp that is driving it.

Most loudspeakers, even those produced today, are relatively inefficient devices with only about 1% of the electrical energy being converted into acoustic energy. Most of the remaining energy is converted into heat. The sensitivity of the speaker describes how much relative electrical energy is converted into sound pressure level, measured in decibels.

The other important factor for loudspeaker performance is its frequency response. Human hearing generally covers the range 20-20,000 Hertz (cycles per second). People’s sensitivity to frequencies is not uniform and it varies depending on pitch. Human hearing is usually most sensitive in the 2,000-4,000 Hertz range.

Famous names in the field of loudspeaker manufacturing today include Celestion, Jensen, Weber, Electro Voice, JBL, Bose, Fane, Altec Lansing, Mackie, and Peavey amongst many others.

Despite its many drawbacks, the moving coil loudspeaker was (and generally still is) the most effective mechanism for the job and they remain in very wide use today. Speakers come in a multiplicity of shapes and sizes and are used in so many different ways. However, like the pickup and amplifier, the basic principles of speaker design can be traced back to the early part of the 20th Century.

 

Guitar Amps

Initially, bulky battery‑powered valve amps and speakers were used in PA systems and in movie theatres of the time. Because of their bulk and relative fragility, these early systems tended to be fixed installations. From c.1927, portable AC mains‑powered amps became available and musicians started to adopt the technology.

In 1928, Stromberg‑Voisinet advertised the first electric instrument and amplifier package. However, it was not a commercial success and no verified examples exist today. In 1929, Vega introduced a portable amplifier to be used with banjos.

It wasn’t until 1932 when the Electro String Instrument Corporation – later to become Rickenbacker – was formed to bring the electric guitar to market that things really took off. Electro launched a ‘high output’ guitar amp to accompany their new solid body electric lap steel guitars, as Hawaiian music was highly popular at the time across America. The first commercial solid bodied electric guitar and amplifier made by Electro String essentially established the format for early combo amps comprising an electronic amplifier mounted inside a wooden cabinet along with a speaker. The new combo amp also had a carrying handle to make it portable and, shortly after, the company added metal corners to protect the cabinets in transit.

In 1933, Dobro introduced the first guitar amp combo with twin 8 inch speakers. By around 1935, the demand for amplified electric guitars became unstoppable and the electric guitar music revolution had begun. Other companies such as National, RCA Victor, Audio-Vox, Vivi‑Tone, Premier, Vega, Kay, Valco and Volu‑Tone, promoted their own amps to musicians, with varying degrees of success during the 1930s and 1940s. Gibson was also experimenting with amplifiers in the early 1930s although none were made commercially available at the time. Most of the early valve amplifiers were low powered by today’s standards, usually less than 10-15 watts and using small speakers, often of 10 inches or less in diameter.

In 1938, American electronics technician, Clarence Leonidas ‘Leo’ Fender (1909-1991) established Fender Radio Service to repair a wide variety of electronic equipment. He found that musicians would come to him for PA and amplifier repairs and rentals. Seeing the potential of the music industry and started to focus more on musical equipment manufacture. Fender began a short‑lived venture in 1944 with Clayton ‘Doc’ Kauffman, a former employee of Rickenbacker called K&F Manufacturing Corporation with the intention to build Hawaiian lap steel guitars and amplifiers.

In 1946, after Kauffman and Fender parted company, Leo founded the company with which he will forever be associated, Fender Electric Instrument Manufacturing Company, based in Fullerton, California. Shortly thereafter, they introduced the first guitar amps carrying the Fender name. Early Fender combo amplifiers included the Fender Princeton (1947-1979) and Champion 800 (1948-1982).

In 1952, shortly after Fender introduced their Broadcaster guitar which would become the legendary Telecaster, the company introduced what would be, perhaps, its most celebrated combo amp, the famous Fender Twin. The Twin moniker derived from its dual 12 inch speakers. The Twin has been released in many versions over its long history, with its power output ranging from its original 25 watts to a high of 135 watts in the late 1970s. The perennial Fender Twin remains in production today and has become an industry standard.

Meanwhile, based in Kent, England Tom Jennings (1918-1978) founded British company Vox in 1947 to produce musical equipment. It wasn’t until 1958 that Vox released its first guitar amp, the 15‑watt AC15. A year later, at the request of The Shadows’ guitarist Hank Marvin, Vox introduced its most famous model, the AC30, intended to compete with America’s powerful Fender Twin amp. The AC30 proved to be a very successful product and in updated form, it remains in production today.

It wasn’t until the 1950s that mass produced guitar amplifiers really became commonplace and incorporated many of the features now expected from an amp including, for instance, multiple tone controls, tremolo and reverb.

In addition, contemporary popular music of the time was developing rapidly and guitarists began to experiment by overdriving their amplifiers to distort the guitar’s sound at much higher volumes. From the mid‑1960s guitarists sought to control the level of overdrive and distortion (also known as clipping) as a creative tool. One particular characteristic of natural valve distortion is that clipping also tends to compress the signal as the volume is increased, meaning the output tends to sound ‘thicker’, rather than louder, emphasising the guitar’s sustain.

Guitarist Dave Davies of English band The Kinks is often credited with popularising guitar distortion. On one occasion, Davies himself admitted to slashing the speaker cone of his Elpico AC55 ‘little green amp’ with a razor blade out of frustration and in the process of doing so, he made it sound distorted and nasty. The Kinks’ song, ‘You Really Got Me’ (1964) is often cited, rightly or wrongly, as the first hit record featuring heavy guitar distortion (using a Vox AC30).

The search for new guitar sounds in the 1960s helped to ignite the drive for compact guitar effect pedals, initially with simple fuzz and wah effects. A whole industry developed during the late 1960s and 1970s including brands such as Electro‑Harmonix, MXR, Maestro, Boss and Ibanez, amongst many, many others. Effects have ever since been used to complement guitars and amps as an integral part of a musician’s signal chain. The market for effect pedals has grown into a massive industry in its own right.

The development of guitars, amps and popular musical styles of the 1950s defined the template on which succeeding generations of guitarists would build incrementally. Many modern amps and amplifier innovations hark back to the best examples of this ‘golden’ period. Driven by the success of the 1950s, particularly the popularity of Fender amps, the quest for more volume seemed unquenchable. The first 100 watt amps were made by Leo Fender for surf guitarist Dick Dale, while Jim Marshall of legendary British amplifier manufacturers Marshall did the same for Pete Townshend and John Entwistle of rock band The Who.  Dr. Jim Marshall OBE was affectionately nicknamed, ‘the father of loud’.

High power, high gain valve guitar amps became the norm at the end of the 1960s and into the 1970s. It was not uncommon to see large stages filled with gargantuan ‘stacks’ of loudspeaker cabinets powered by banks of high powered amps. Marshall is the brand most associated with the classic guitar stack, which at its simplest comprises a 50 or 100 watt amp on top of two 4×12” closed back speaker cabinets, thanks again to Pete Townshend of The Who as well as the likes of Jimi Hendrix and Eric Clapton. The guitar stack has since become inextricably linked with hard, heavy and metal rock music. Music and its essential components very much reflected the cultural and social changes of the times.

There have been several technological challenges to the humble valve. A concerted trend away from vacuum tubes towards solid state transistor amps occurred in the 1970s, led by companies like Roland, Peavey and H/H. Other manufacturers adopted a best‑of‑both‑worlds approach by making hybrid solid state/valve amps, led by Leo Fender during his time with Music Man.

Arguably, Fender, Marshall remain the two predominant and recognisable amplifier brands and, respectively, have come to define the ‘American sound’ and ‘British sound’ respectively. Notably, unlike Fender, Gibson has never had much commercial success with building guitar amps, despite producing some credible models along the way. There are now a myriad of other amplifier manufacturers including famous brand names such as Mesa Boogie, Peavey, Ampeg, Randall, Rivera, Bogner, PRS and Supro in America, and Vox, Orange, Blackstar, Victory, Hi-Watt and Laney in the UK. Outside the USA and UK, there are many successful brands including Hughes & Kettner, Engl, Line6, Roland, Yamaha, BOSS, etc. In order to keep production costs down, many budget models are now produced in the Far East, while the majority of small boutique amp builders cater for the high‑end, being manufactured in limited numbers in America and Europe.

Many other famous brand names have passed into history, such as Traynor, Sunn, Multivox Premier, Univox, WEM/Watkins, Sound City, H/H, Selmer, Cornford and Carlsbro although, to be fair, some of these continue to operate in some form or other and may well be rejuvenated at some point. There are far too many brands, past and present, to mention here.

Ironically, there is increasing interest in capturing the retro sound and looks of the earliest guitar amplifiers. Many companies are now recreating classic analogue models of the past, often incorporating modern adaptations for reliability, safety and convenience to meet the demands of today’s guitarists. There are many boutique amp builders looking to take the best of old and new and present something different from the current mainstream manufacturers.

At this point, no article focusing on guitar amps would be complete without mentioning Dumble amplifiers. Dumble amps are made in very small numbers by Alexander ‘Howard’ Dumble in L.A., California, often by request of well‑heeled professional musicians. The Dumble Overdrive Special is widely regarded as the zenith of limited production boutique amps and, as a result of their quality and rarity, new or used examples have gained almost mythical status and demand extremely high values on the open market.

Despite the remarkable sustained popularity of valves, digital modelling technology is now making major inroads into the tube’s traditional territory. As the technological advances behind digital modelling processors that began with the iconic Line 6 Pod through to ever‑improving digital advances from companies like Fractal and Kemper. The audible difference between the ‘antiquated’ originals and modern digital recreations is rapidly diminishing to the point where professional musicians see a competitive advantage in moving to a digital platform.

Despite stiff competition from solid state and digital circuits, the valve guitar amp currently remains the de facto standard for many discerning professional guitarists, despite the decidedly old-world technology involved. It will be interesting to see how long genuine valve amplifiers will continue to prosper in the face of the digital revolution. Only time and hindsight will tell. It is likely that valve, analogue solid state and digital technologies will be able to coexist for many years yet.

Get connected

Guitars need to be connected to an amp in order to work, often with effect pedals in between. Before wireless and/or digital technology takes over completely, the venerable guitar lead has been the necessary link between input and output since the 1930s. At each end of a traditional interconnecting lead is a remarkable piece of analogue kit that most guitarists rarely think about but cannot live without. Similarly, guitars, amps and effects also have the other part of the same connection.

The essential connector in question is the ¼“ (6.35 mm) jack plug and its associated socket, which originally dates from c.1878. The first jack connector was invented by George W. Coy and was used for the first commercial manual switchboard at the telephone exchange in New Haven, Connecticut, USA. It is astonishing that, after nearly 1½ centuries, this enduring piece of industry standard equipment is still in ubiquitous use today, long after it became obsolete in telephone systems.

End of Part IV

This has been a self‑contained article that departs from the usual topic of guitars per se. While it might seem a lengthy, in‑depth examination, it only just scratches the surface. As I don’t have the space, knowledge or resources to write comprehensively on the subject, I highly recommend that readers wanting to delve into the historical detail take a look at the innumerable resources available on the ever‑present hinterwebby thing. NB. Credit to all original photographers for images used from Google Images.

Arguably, without the complementary inventions of the electromagnetic pickup, the dedicated valve amplifier and the moving coil loudspeaker, the revolution in guitar technology that started in the 1930s and which really took off in the 1950s would not have been possible. It is notable that the scientific principles underpinning today’s electric guitars are still relevant nearly a century later. It is, at least to me, remarkable that, technically, we haven’t really evolved a great deal over the intervening decades. Advances have been incremental refinements, rather than ground breaking. Digital technology may change all that. Watch this space.

At long last, in Part V, the story will finally unleash the breakthroughs that led directly to the early electric archtop and solid body guitars. The next revolution in guitar music making was about to happen. Who could possibly have anticipated the impact that the congruence of the three seemingly innocuous bits of music technology covered above would have when brought together.

I hope you have enjoyed the journey thus far and thank you for reading. I also hope that you’ll come back and join me on the next part of the guitar’s long journey to the current day. Time to get some vintage gear out and plug in. Until next time…

CRAVE Guitars ‘Quote of the Month’: “Excess in any form does not indicate wisdom; rather it evidences the lack of it”

© 2018 CRAVE Guitars – Love Vintage Guitars.

← Return to ‘Musings’ page

Like it? Why not share it?