Cliff Hanger Usage

[Donner]

Those of you that have had time on one:

What rigs are you using it with and how ?

What other pedals do you combine with it?

What does it NOT do well?

Any further improvements you would make to it?

Anything else you want to share about your Cliffhanger experience?

thanks

[melodichaotic]

Those of you that have had time on one:

What rigs are you using it with and how ?

What other pedals do you combine with it?

What does it NOT do well?

Any further improvements you would make to it?

Anything else you want to share about your Cliffhanger experience?

thanks

Hey Donner,
Was lucky enough to pick one up 2nd hand, and have been playing with it for a while, mainly using a 58 RI LP through a '94 Matchless DC-30 combo 2x12(w/ mismatched 25 and 30 watt voiced Celestions) with the completely different sounding pentode and dual triode channels.

The amp is run without the master volume, so the reference sound is loud and clean adding no grit whatsoever, and EQ run fairly flat and not very bright at all-not dark either, but certainly less bright than most rigs I've heard/played through.


I've been mainly using it alone(no stacking), and I really dig it very much. The closest comp I can make is to the Dyna Red which I had, and what I love about the core tone of the CHV2, is it's very uncompressed, focused, and "toothy" sounding, meaning it translates both chords and single notes with great articulation and bite.

It's a "finger-board squeak" pedal, in that there is no added junk between you and the amp and very pure and revealing...a major plus.(I'm not a big fan of added delays/reverbs to basic clean or dirty sounds--I like it dry as pie)

I'm also not a big fan of stacking, although with other BJF's I've found a few nice combos, since I feel the original character and voicing of any single pedal gets lost(Model H and SYOD come to mind in particular).

The CHV2 has plenty of gain, and I'm a gain-hog in that I always like to have a little too much in the range to accommodate lower output P/U's, and also be able to dial it back for 'buckers.

I run the CH with the gain at about 3/4 and the treble no further than noon on the dial.

The only two things I feel are missing, is that there is some bottom end missing, and that there is actually too much treble on tap.

Comparing it to other BJF's, I'm talking about the thickness in counter-clock-wise position of the EGDM, and the more full, amp cabinet-like feel of the Model H, or even the AWF even at fully clock-wise position, is fuller sounding with more bottom end than the CH, EQ-wise.

I have e-mailed BJ about this as well. Really, upon further thought, I would think that the bottom end you can dial in with the SBEQ would be EXACTLY what I'd love to hear...more plumpness that is tight and focused to compliment the wonderful immediacy of the CH voicing.

Whether this could be voiced with one knob as effectively as separate bass and treble knobs, I'm not sure(and in no way am I under-estimating the tonal magic that BJ is well capable of conjuring).

This is the same issue I had with the Dyna Red(not enough bottom-end/too much treble), although otherwise I dug that pedal for the classic compressed character/classic rock vibe it imparts that is different yet complimentary to the CH(again, more aggressive EQ, more immediate sounding).

It's also worth noting that jjguitarranch's video, while very good, was in drop-D tuning,(and overall his tuning was slightly flat to A-440), and playing through albeit a great rig( Hiwatt halfstack), has plenty of bottom-end on it's own as well...certainly no disrespect to him, or his playing which was nice.

To that end of it, I think the CH as is, would be exceptional as a distortion for dropped tunings/7-string blasting of all sorts, because the focus and articulation would help translate all that bottom end, but why not have more bottom end available to dial in more fatness for standard tuning 6-string things(especially for single coils), and also be able to dial it back for the dropped tunings.

I will post some audio/audio-video demos in the near future(I know for me they have been long over-due) to further illustrate and detail what I have described.

[jjguitarranch]

Those are all very good comments melodichaotic. Thanks for checking out my youtube clip of the CH 2 and you have a great set of ears! (should have been 440 but I just quickly grabbed that guitar). I have picked up a tripod and will get a more dynamic, better lit clip together soon.

It works best for me with a powerful head/4x12 combo. I have had the best results in front of a 72 Hiwatt DR 103. Seems to be the best combination for me with the gear I have. I can't get this tone when using a Marshall style amp... That may be a user issue because I bet this pedal would sound monstrous in front of a Marshall Major which has a lot of headroom...

I need to spend more time playing this pedal at loud volumes before I can offer a serious critique. I can say that I like it very much the way it is (CH 2). The added control of the CH 2 may address the needs of melodichaotic. When I first used this pedal I thought that maybe it could benefit from a fourth control knob, a Resonance control. But then when I used the pedal at rehearsal type volume levels I realized this kind of control would be redundant and is clearly not needed. An unexpected bonus was how amazing the rolled off guitar volume tone is. I would imagine that those more familiar with BJFE pedals would expect that... As a point of reference, my high gain amps do not clean up as well on the distorted channel. Also, I like that this pedal does not sound compressed.

I can see how useful the CH 2 can be for the hard rock musician or a player wishing for a high gain style lead tone. I hate to make these types of comparisons, but recently some Alice in Chains popped up on the iPod and I thought, this is exactly how the CH 2 sounds. That is all intended as a very high compliment!

Respectfully, the only addition I can now think of would be to add more depth, as a fourth control. If it had to be a set parameter like a mini toggle on/off maybe a second stomp switch would be ideal. Could depth be controlled by a fourth control pot? More depth would appeal to guitar players who dabble in the more extreme forms of hard rock/metal. Maybe that would also help chub things up a bit for guitarists who are not playing at loud volumes or through big rigs?

[Donner]

By depth do you mean more bass or more saturation or something else......

I was just playing it last night into a Homey Bee and fuuuhhhhh it just sang effortlessly without sounding compressed or saturated just sanggggggg - I know Ive tried this before but I dont remember it being this perfect......

[jjguitarranch]

I think what I mean is a toggle/control for a second type of voiced distortion that is at it's core very CH 2 sounding, yet more deeper (depth) sounding. Not necessarily more bass in terms of the way the existing eq response is on the pedal... Maybe this concept of depth is just a different pedal idea or a tone that could be dialed in by stacking, as you mentioned...

I love the CH 2 just the way it is. CH 2 = Jack Bauer.

[Donner]

I think what I mean is a toggle/control for a second type of voiced distortion that is at it's core very CH 2 sounding, yet more deeper (depth) sounding. Not necessarily more bass in terms of the way the existing eq response is on the pedal... Maybe this concept of depth is just a different pedal idea or a tone that could be dialed in by stacking, as you mentioned...

I love the CH 2 just the way it is. CH 2 = Jack Bauer.

Ah Ok ! a different voicing - yeah maybe thats another pedal all together ....

hmmm maybe the drive knob should go to 24

[jjguitarranch]

Too funny! But seriously, maybe a pedal named: 24 would be cool. Or maybe even 24 HR (Heavy Rock). Black on black on black graphics/box/knobs would be a freaking show stopper!

[Bobby D]

24 for the WIN!




i gotta try the CHII......

[melodichaotic]

Those of you that have had time on one:

What rigs are you using it with and how ?

What other pedals do you combine with it?

What does it NOT do well?

Any further improvements you would make to it?

Anything else you want to share about your Cliffhanger experience?

thanks

Hey Donner,
Was lucky enough to pick one up 2nd hand, and have been playing with it for a while, mainly using a 58 RI LP through a '94 Matchless DC-30 combo 2x12(w/ mismatched 25 and 30 watt voiced Celestions) with the completely different sounding pentode and dual triode channels.

The amp is run without the master volume, so the reference sound is loud and clean adding no grit whatsoever, and EQ run fairly flat and not very bright at all-not dark either, but certainly less bright than most rigs I've heard/played through.


I've been mainly using it alone(no stacking), and I really dig it very much. The closest comp I can make is to the Dyna Red which I had, and what I love about the core tone of the CHV2, is it's very uncompressed, focused, and "toothy" sounding, meaning it translates both chords and single notes with great articulation and bite.

It's a "finger-board squeak" pedal, in that there is no added junk between you and the amp and very pure and revealing...a major plus.(I'm not a big fan of added delays/reverbs to basic clean or dirty sounds--I like it dry as pie)

I'm also not a big fan of stacking, although with other BJF's I've found a few nice combos, since I feel the original character and voicing of any single pedal gets lost(Model H and SYOD come to mind in particular).

The CHV2 has plenty of gain, and I'm a gain-hog in that I always like to have a little too much in the range to accommodate lower output P/U's, and also be able to dial it back for 'buckers.

I run the CH with the gain at about 3/4 and the treble no further than noon on the dial.

The only two things I feel are missing, is that there is some bottom end missing, and that there is actually too much treble on tap.

Comparing it to other BJF's, I'm talking about the thickness in counter-clock-wise position of the EGDM, and the more full, amp cabinet-like feel of the Model H, or even the AWF even at fully clock-wise position, is fuller sounding with more bottom end than the CH, EQ-wise.

I have e-mailed BJ about this as well. Really, upon further thought, I would think that the bottom end you can dial in with the SBEQ would be EXACTLY what I'd love to hear...more plumpness that is tight and focused to compliment the wonderful immediacy of the CH voicing.

Whether this could be voiced with one knob as effectively as separate bass and treble knobs, I'm not sure(and in no way am I under-estimating the tonal magic that BJ is well capable of conjuring).

This is the same issue I had with the Dyna Red(not enough bottom-end/too much treble), although otherwise I dug that pedal for the classic compressed character/classic rock vibe it imparts that is different yet complimentary to the CH(again, more aggressive EQ, more immediate sounding).

It's also worth noting that jjguitarranch's video, while very good, was in drop-D tuning,(and overall his tuning was slightly flat to A-440), and playing through albeit a great rig( Hiwatt halfstack), has plenty of bottom-end on it's own as well...certainly no disrespect to him, or his playing which was nice.

To that end of it, I think the CH as is, would be exceptional as a distortion for dropped tunings/7-string blasting of all sorts, because the focus and articulation would help translate all that bottom end, but why not have more bottom end available to dial in more fatness for standard tuning 6-string things(especially for single coils), and also be able to dial it back for the dropped tunings.

I will post some audio/audio-video demos in the near future(I know for me they have been long over-due) to further illustrate and detail what I have described.

Just wanted to add that taking into account different set-ups clean headroom-wise(wattage, tubes, speakers, cabinets, guitar, p/u's etc) and their inherent EQ profile, and how that EQ changes as the volume is increased or decreased, I think either there could be:

1)An internal trim-pot to increase the lower frequencies--again with a tight voicing to match the aggressive response of the circuit

2)A four knob set-up with volume/gain/bass/treble where the the bass and treble are highly interactive with each other allowing for a more natural and varied tonal variation, not just additive/subtractive in design

3)A three knob set-up with vol/gain and the third being a Nature or Voicing control(as with the EGDM) where the treble content is mostly present in the full range sweep(and that content in the range of about 12-1 o'clock on the current design where the circuit starts to open up and breathe before getting too crisp),

whereby counterclockwise on this Nature or Voicing knob is where the bottom end lives, heavy and pronounced, great for single coils, then very gradually tapering off in clockwise motion until about 2-3 o'clock, where it would be at it's current voicing, then have the last 1/4 sweep be for that extra presence if needed for darker set-ups.

That way the pedal could be dialed in for either single coils or humbuckers with more than ample bottom and top end content, and would probably be more agreeable with most set-ups


Of course this could be more easily done with option #2.

I say this all in context of how I am fond I am of how sweet, musical, raw, and uncompressed this pedal is--another unique voice in the BJF line...it's also a given at lower gain settings it's excellent overdrive qualities.

[jjguitarranch]

I wanted to refresh my memory and played the CH 2 today. It is an awesome pedal. I was shocked that it sounded BETTER then I remembered it sounding. Very tight and thick... The pedal is perfect the way it is in my opinion. Something else would be something else...