ProCo RAT...Which model?
marko
Is there a sound difference between an old vintage Rat pedal and a
brand new Rat?
I heard Foo Fighters use Rat pedals,,, does anyone know if this is
true? I would like to try and get a sound similar to Foo Fighters.
Brian Shaw
marko wrote:
Yes it's true. Dave and Pat used Rat 2's and Turbo Rats. I don't know
about those losers that replaced Pat.
Brian
Stu
There are a few different old Rats, I don't find much differencein the new
to the old, but I never played with an older model
long enough to know for sure. I use a Rat 2 and love it. It's
a bit fuzzier than the 'vintage' Rat sound which I actually prefer,
plus it has an LED, takes up less space on my
pedal board, and it's cheaper. I detest any fuzz/distortion
with out an LED. If I am using a few different dist. pedals,
I can get turned around pretty easy on stage wondering
which one is on and which is off, real Spinal Tap moments...
Stu
Ook
it has a much higher output level. FWIW, I've never found that high of an
output to be necessary. My Vintage Rat and Rat2 sound almost identical, I
think the Vingate Rat is maybe a tad more mellower.
"marko" <rock...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:200320011049072075%rock...@yahoo.com...
Daniel
>it has a much higher output level. FWIW, I've never found that high of an
>output to be necessary. My Vintage Rat and Rat2 sound almost identical, I
>think the Vingate Rat is maybe a tad more mellower.
>
The original or "Vintage" Rat and the Rat 2 use the same effect circuit. The
only different is the bypass switch circuit, the vinatge has true bypass with
no LED, the Rat II has an LED but not true bypass. The Turbo Rat also has the
LED and no true bypass, and the only difference I know of in the circuit is the
removal of one of the clipping diodes.
Daniel.
Ook
"Daniel" <son...@aol.comedancing> wrote in message
news:20010321234654...@ng-cf1.aol.com...
Actually, they have subtle differences in the effect circuitry - well, OK,
it is the filtering after the distortion, and the output buffering, that was
changed the most - there are several different versions, internally, of the
"Rat". But I don't think it makes a whole lot of difference either way as
far as the sound goes.
Stu
not sure about the Turbo.
Stu
Daniel
>not sure about the Turbo.
>
>Stu
Not unless they've changed it recently. The Turbo Rat also does not have true
bypass.
Daniel
Stu
From what it says on the ProCo site,the Vintage and 2 have it, Turbo does not.
All I now is I can hear no difference like I do
with EH, MXR, Crybaby wahs, and it has
a great sound.
http://www.procosound.com/prod01.htm
>>> The true bypass mode utilizes passive switching of both input and
output from the signal path to eliminate the loss of power and clarity
often caused by other devices. The LED indicator on the RAT 2 is
driven by a unique FET sensor circuit to avoid the noise of
unnecessary buffer stages and preserve the great RAT sound.<<<
Stu
Daniel
>not.
That's interesting. I guess they did change it. As far as I know the Rat II
used to use a DPDT with one pole doing the switching like an SPDT and the other
pole turning the LED on and off. I guess they're using an active scheme that
works like the Millenium bypass at geofex.com rather than the passive DPDT
scheme that the vintage and and Rat I use. Anyone know if they just stated
doing this recently or if I'm just totally screwy?
Daniel
Stu
Well you made me check twice!
They may have changed it,
I got mine about 4 months ago and that was one of the
selling points. I thought they were all TB, but it seems
the Turbo is not. It's rather odd that the Rat 2 is smaller
and has an LED, yet it cost less than the Vintage Rat.
Stu
Daniel
>and has an LED, yet it cost less than the Vintage Rat.
It's more odd that the Vintage lists for so much more when it's almost the same
circuit as the rat II. It's probably because people prefer the Vintage Rat to
the the Rat II. They must have upped the price on the Vintage Rat though. I
bought one in '93 and it was $50, $10 lower than the Rat 2's were going for,
and $20 less than the Turbo Rats. It was eventually lost or possibly stolen.
But, I found an 80's Rat I, small box with no LED, for $20 at a pawn shop last
summer so it all worked out ok.
Daniel
Kate Ebneter
The pricing is definitely weird. The sheet-metal box for the Vintage
Rat may cost more, though. I think they should just reissue the small-
box original, like the one you have -- that's my favorite of all of
them, although the REALLY old Rat I have with a tone control (rather
than a filter control) is wicked cool as well...
Kate Ebneter
Collector of Noise Toys
Daniel
>box original, like the one you have -- that's my favorite of all of
>them, although the REALLY old Rat I have with a tone control (rather
>than a filter control) is wicked cool as well...
So, can you tell the difference between the tantalum and mylar caps?
Daniel
Kate Ebneter
Well, the two pedals don't sound exactly alike, but I don't know that
I'd attribute it to that. The tone control is implemented differently,
after all.
Ed Guidry
says "filter"? and possibly they reversed the wiring on the pot so
that it acts like a tone control? Did they use a tone stack, like the
big muff, which blends a low pass filter with a high pass filter?
Kate Ebneter
>
> What's the difference, other than one knob says "tone" and the other
> says "filter"? and possibly they reversed the wiring on the pot so
> that it acts like a tone control? Did they use a tone stack, like the
> big muff, which blends a low pass filter with a high pass filter?
Not sure. I don't have an original schematic, and I'm too lazy to dig
them both out right this minute. :-)
Thijs Schrama
sorry.. but there may be some important misunderstanding going on here ...
passive by-pass is not the same as thrue-by-pass...
All the RATs are passive by-pass.. (?) but not thrue-by-pass.. the
guitar-input is always connected to the gain-circuit.. only the output is
switched ... for thrue-by-pass you need to break/make 2 connetiions... so a
thrue-by-pass with led needs three break/make connections ... right?
You can easely check for passive by-pass swithcing by using the RAT with no
battery and i've it still passes the dry guitar signal it's passive
by-pass switching ... not like BOSS pedals...
anyway..
The filter dial .. is a high-pass filter.. I think the old RAT also has a
high-filter and not a tone-blender-big-muff thing....
But.... the gain dial .. also functions as a EQ...really check it in a
PSPICE simulator.. that's why a RAT turned all the way up doesn't sound all
that great.... (?)
Goodlck
Thijs
Mike Gintz
bypass.... i could be wrong, though.
--
peace- mike
-------------------------
(yes, i'm the same guy as ender1616)
Thijs Schrama <tsch...@bio.uva.nl> wrote in message
news:3ACB0DCF...@bio.uva.nl...
Daniel
The original Rats and "Vintage" Rats use a DPDT with no LED for true bypass.
The Rat II uses a DPDT and FET for true bypass with LED (see www.geofex.com for
expanation of thie circuit). The Turbo Rat is has an LED and either uses the
same switching as the Rat II, or else it's not true bypass. I'm not sure about
that one.
Daniel.
Kate Ebneter
Turbo Rat is switched the same as the Rat II.
Ook
vom. My Rat II does *not* have a DPDT, it has a 3PDT switch in it, and it
has true bypass. Input resistance to ground with the pedal on is about 2Meg
ohm or so, which is what I believe the specs call for. Input resistance to
ground with pedal off is infinite, indicating that the input is being
isolated from the input circuitry of the pedal. Resistance from input to
output with pedal off is 0, again indicating true bypass.
"Daniel" <son...@aol.comedancing> wrote in message
news:20010404132223...@ng-cf1.aol.com...
Ook
is disconnected from the circuitry when the pedal is off - and it has a 3PDT
switch in it.
"Thijs Schrama" <tsch...@bio.uva.nl> wrote in message
news:3ACB0DCF...@bio.uva.nl...
Daniel
>vom. My Rat II does *not* have a DPDT, it has a 3PDT switch in it, and it
>has true bypass.
Really? How new is your Rat? There's only 2 brands of 3PDT stomp switches out
there that I know, one is the Fulltone and the other is the cheap looking ones
that Fulltone used to use. It has 9 solder terminals on it?
Daniel
Ook
"Daniel" <son...@aol.comedancing> wrote in message
Oops - I'm suffering from extreme stupidity today - it's a DPDT switch -
DOH!!!!
Too many stupid pills - think I'll go crawl back under my rock.....
Thijs Schrama
oke so it is a Double Switch on the RAT II ..
so it has a LED witch is switched.... with or without FET it needs to be
switched indipendendly (?)
and it measures infinite resistance when OFF and 2MOhm when on ... is this
measured with cables injected in the input and output?
The infinite resistance should indicate a Thrue-Bypass shouldn't it?
thijs
Daniel
>
It should read Zero Ohms for true bypass. Infinite would mean there's no
continuity and you'd have no signal getting through at all.
Daniel
Ook
the pedal on, it was 2M or so. Some Rats have a 1M resistor that goes from
input to ground before the first coupling cap, others have this after the
cap. Not sure what mine has, if my meter is accurate the resistance was
closer to 2.5M.
The zero ohm reading was from input to output with the pedal off, indicating
that the input was directly coupled to the output.
"Daniel" <son...@aol.comedancing> wrote in message
news:20010409142737...@ng-ci1.aol.com...
Ook
I didn't bother putting cables in, since I had it apart already. I measured
from the input terminals at the connectors.
Infinite resistance to ground more-or-less indicates that the input is
isolated from the circuitry of the Rat. This can be misleading if the input
of the pedal goes through a capacitor first, as your meter would measure
infinite resistance when it is still connected. In the case of the model I
have, there is a resistor (1M or so) to ground before the coupling
capacitor, so this is a safe assumption.
It also passes the signal through when the battery is removed and the power
is unplugged, that is a good indication of true bypass. The above test also
tells us that the input circuitry of the Rat is disconnected when it is
bypassed.
I have 2 rats and 6 DOD pedals hooked up in my pedal board, and I have no
tone sucking problems at all - that is more or less what I go by, does it
sound the same with all of the pedals off? In my case it does, so I'm happy
:-)
"Thijs Schrama" <tsch...@bio.uva.nl> wrote in message
news:3AD1823A...@bio.uva.nl...
Thijs Schrama
this set-up:
Strat-->Rat2-->SmallStone-->BigMuf-->amp with all tone controlls up, gain set to
clean tone
This works for me oke.. but the smallstone and bigmuff suck tone like hell.. but
it still is passive switched?
Why do they suck tone sooo much?
greets
Thijs
Kate Ebneter
>
> HI,, thanks fot the info!.. good thinking going on there..... I use mostly
> this set-up:
>
> Strat-->Rat2-->SmallStone-->BigMuf-->amp with all tone controlls up, gain set to
> clean tone
>
> This works for me oke.. but the smallstone and bigmuff suck tone like hell.. but
> it still is passive switched?
>
> Why do they suck tone sooo much?
Passive bypass != true bypass. They're passively switched, all right,
but the signal still gets loaded by the effect when they're switched
out because they use SPDT switches. The active FET switching on the
Rat2 is effectively (no pun intended) true bypass because the resistance
is so high that the signal all goes straight through to the output,
and the effect doesn't load the circuit.
You can install DPDT switches in the Small Stone and Big Muff to get
true bypass.
Thijs Schrama
"Passive bypass != true bypass".... not in my vocabulary... true bypass does not
load the signal in anyway because it true bypasses all the effect components.... or
not?
please tell me because I'm confused (again).. for me passive bypass is a bypassing
switching method that uses only passive electronic components (no FET, opamps
etc.).. but is may still load the signal
Passive bypass IS NOT true bypass !
But now the important thing....loading the signal (with 2MOhm or 500KOhm will reduce
signal amplitude just a bit (Zoutput = 10KOhm) but not very much ... but this does
not explain why I lose the treble in my tone much more then bass tones... this is
what I mean but tone sucking... it is something different then lose of signal
amplitude...Any ideas on that?
Greetings,
thijs
Ook
Strat
DOD Harmonic Enhancer
Rat2
DOD American Metal
DOD Grunge
DOD Phasor/201
DOD Flanger
DOD Chorus
DOD Delay
Randall RG50 Solid State amp
I have no tone sucking at all, even if all of the pedals are off. In your
case, the Small Stone and/or BigMuff and/or your amp probably has input
circuitry that loads the pickup coils of the guitar enough to cause
noticeable tone sucking when they are all hooked up together. One pedal
usually won't do this, but sometimes it only takes 2 or 3 to cause problems.
I'd eliminate them from the loop one at a time and see if it is just one
causing the problem.
I suspect the small stone is the problem - I'm looking at the schematic, and
the input isn't loaded too badly, I see an effective resistance of 470K in
parallel with some other circuitry that can drop it down - I'm guessing
about 300K or so.
The BigBuff likewise has a low input impedance - about 100K, I'm surprised
it is that low. Put the two together and you can have some tone sucking. You
might try to get a buffer of some sort - I use a DOD Harmonic Enhancer at
the front of the chain, and it's always on. Not only does it boost the
highs, but it can buffer your guitar and prevent tone sucking.
"Thijs Schrama" <tsch...@bio.uva.nl> wrote in message
news:3ADC1486...@bio.uva.nl...
Kate Ebneter
>
> Hi, well ...... ehhhhhh....
>
> "Passive bypass != true bypass".... not in my vocabulary... true bypass does not
> load the signal in anyway because it true bypasses all the effect components.... or
> not?
> please tell me because I'm confused (again).. for me passive bypass is a bypassing
> switching method that uses only passive electronic components (no FET, opamps
> etc.).. but is may still load the signal
> Passive bypass IS NOT true bypass !
Uh, yeah, that's what I said. :-) Sorry, "!=" is computerese for "not
equal to".
> But now the important thing....loading the signal (with 2MOhm or 500KOhm will reduce
> signal amplitude just a bit (Zoutput = 10KOhm) but not very much ... but this does
> not explain why I lose the treble in my tone much more then bass tones... this is
> what I mean but tone sucking... it is something different then lose of signal
> amplitude...Any ideas on that?
The problem is that guitar pickups are inductive as well as resistive,
and the net result is that the amount of signal loss is related to
frequency. In particular, high frequencies are attenuated more than
low ones -- hence "tone sucking." Look at R.G. Keen's page on the
technology of bypass switching at http://www.geofex.com.