can i get more feedback from my flanger?

[spirograph]

a while ago i decided to do something a bit risky, and buy a flanger from thomann(that bit aint risky - i trust those guys), even though i had no idea if i liked it. turns out i did the right thing, cos its one of the lushest things ive ever heard. no funny noises, no level drops/boosts, no disappearing in the middle of the sweep. it dont take anything away from the sound, and looks quite pretty too.
thing is, its just not quite mad enough. the fx level knob fades out the flanged signal at one extreme, but doesnt fade out the clean sound at the other. this in itself wouldnt really bother me, except the amount of feedback never quite goes mental enough for me.
if the feedback knob had the (currently) maximum sound a bit further down the pot, maybe halfway, and/or if the fx level knob went from fully wet to fully dry, this thing would be the best flanger ever. as it is, its one of the best flangers ever, but a little tame.
so i guess im asking if anyone knows about modding flangers, if its even possible to make the mods i mentioned above, and what i should/shouldnt expect.

its a rocktron hypnoticflange by the way, and thank you for any help.

[Mark Hammer]

I looked online for a gutshot, but couldn't find any. Is it a surface-mount board, or do the leads for the parts go through the PCB? If surface mount, I wouldn't touch it, if I were you.

[spirograph]

mark thank you so much for looking! il try to get inside it real soon, and post a pic if it aint surface-mount. i havent a clue about the insides of fxpedals, but i love em. i know what sounds i like, and i can solder when i put my mind to it, but i dont have the experience or knowledge of modulation circuits to start blindly 'experimenting'. the flange sounds i like are the ehx polychorus type sounds. real growly, thick and watery, with long decay. and i know this thing is capable of it. and in general its a really well behaved, transparent-sounding pedal, so i dont wana part with it.

[jmaf]

This mod shouldn't be rocket science, but if you're not experienced with electronics I wouldn't risk ruining the pedal you liked so much.

It is important to note though that increasing the effect mix may raise the noise level which is something you praised about it.

[Mark Hammer]

Many pre-1990 issues flangers will come with internal trimpots to set the maximum feedback/regeneration before oscillation (howling) begins. Typically, at the factory, the Feedback pot would be maxed, and the internal trimpot adjusted to juuuuuuuuuuussst below where the oscillation occurs, so that the user culd never accidentally turn up the know and find themselves facing ugliness on stage.

If the HF comes with such a trimpot, you may be able to coax a little more out of it without resorting to mods.

It IS possible to introduce even more feedback/resonance by reducing the bass in the feedback path. I've made this suggestion to several folks who were much more pleased with the performance of their Boss BF-2 as a result. But this would necessitate either having a schematic diagram and parts layout, or the sort of electro-detective chops for identifying critical components that your note suggests you don't have yet.

Finally, I think it is fair to note that the frequent incentive for folks to purchase flangers is the sounds they've heard on recordings. All too often, they don't factor in thatthose sounds, while they may use a flanger, also use multi-source mixdown signals, which provide much broader bandwidth than a lowly guitar. Flangers, and higher-end phasers, alsways sound best when processing broad-bandwidth content. The same flanger that sounds a little disapponting with guitar will sound absolutely kickass when fed with white noise, simply because you can't hear the notches produced if there is no audio content where many of the notches are created. One has to be accepting of the limitations that use of one measly instrument - even fuzzed out - can provide.

[spirograph]

i figured it either would be impossible or it would be not rocket science, and i dont trust myself to assume what the right thing to do is. your comment about noise, jmaf, this thing is so quiet i think it might be worth sacrificing a little bit of shush if i can get a good amount more evil from this pedal.
incidently, the bf2 is one of the best flangers ive heard, thats not silly money. never used on in my own rig before, but i do like them.
i understand the thing about flangers sounding more dramatic with more harmonics, or a richer sound generally, and this thing is quite rich and almost dramatic, but from my perspective, it needs to be in an fx loop (a good series one), or i guess what im saying, it needs to be a bit more assertive so it can cut through a lightly dirty amp. i find i cant turn the volume control on any preceding fuzzbox/overdrive high enough to make an amp sound good, without the flange sound vanishing behind the amps strugle. but i figure if the flanger was more feedbacky it might not become inaudible. strangely, i tried it in the fx loop of a marshall jtm60, and it sounded amazing, until i turned the fuzz on, and it vanished. i thought seeing as the amps contribution the the dirtiness overall was before the flanger in the overall scheme of things, the flanged sound would still be prominent.
sorry im talking in paragraphs, but im confused by this thing. and thanks for your help!

[Mark Hammer]

One of the difficulties with higher untreated feedback is that they don't gain in audible notch emphasis across the audio spectrum. Rather, they start to sound like "Cylons" with much of the resonance being situated in the range where it sound like you're yelling into an empty 19oz. tomato sauce can. Broadly attenuating the low mids and bass in the feedback path can make the increased emphasis seem more spread out, and less boxey-sounding. That can be easily achieved by identifying the cap that limits the DC and low end in the feedback path, and making its value smaller. But, to reiterate an earlier point, if its an SMD build, that's gonna be a bitch to do.

Your instincts to want to stick it in an amp's FX loop are good,since many of the benchmark flanger tones that moved us to get one were post-production effects, and not flangers stuck after a fuzz, going into an amp. An FX loop is not quite post-production, but is more in that direction.

And, not to disparage the BF-2, but there's better out there. For stuff that verges on slow Leslie, and chorus sounds, it does the job as well as anything. But for dramatic swoops, one needs a much greater delay sweep-range than the BF-2 provides. This one ( http://hammer.ampage.org/files/Hyperflange.PDF ) provided an 88:1 sweep range. The BF-2 is in the vicinity of 8:1. the chief difference is what the delay chip is able to do with, and without, assistance. To keep footprint and production costs down, Boss uses an unassisted configuration, which limits how short a delay time it can achieve.

[spirograph]

that hyperflange looks very interesting, but a bit much for me to try building any time soon, ive got too many half-finished things lying around as it is. never mind that ive never built an fx unit. i think what im going to do is stick to using the hypnoflange as a really heavy chorus sound, and acquire an electroharmonix stereo electric mistress for the really dramatic stuff. any thoughts on this particular flanger? ive been watching demos on youtube, and although i know i cant take them as gospel, they are informative.

[Mark Hammer]

The TC Electronics Vortex looks like a nice flanger: TC Electronic | Vortex Flanger
I might also put in a word for the Line 6 Liqui-Flange, which I was fortunate to be in the beta-test group for, and appear to have made some very peripheral contributions to the design of (the relationship between LED brightness and tap tempo). Although digital, it does the through-zero thing very nicely, and has a number of modulation options that many other flangers lack. I'm rather partial to the "step" function and the envelope-controlled flanging. Weighs a frickin' ton, but their decline in popularity has brought the price down considerably. The Liqui-Flange's features are not found in any of the other modeller series from L6.

[spirograph]

firstly - thank you all for your time and patience, thats something rare these days.
finally got around to taking this thing apart. it wasnt easy. had to take the side panels off, followed by the battery plate on the bottom. then it turned out that the in/outs are on the pcb, so i had to take the washers off them to get the side panels off, and then slide the pcb/top plate assembly sideways out of the chassis. at this point, i gave up, 'cos the pots are also mounted on the pcb, and i couldnt get the knobs off the pots without resorting to explosives or something. having a good look round, i couldnt see any trimpots, and the way i had to get inside it made me think no-one would semi-build this thing and then set a trimpot, and then put it together, so i gave up. took some pics, but tbh, i dont think theyre worth putting up, cos i didnt get to see/photograph the top of the pcb in any detail. from looking inside my EHX bassballs (one of the most underrated fx in my opinion), trimpots go through a pcb and are adjustable from underneath (correct me if im wrong). so what i can say categorically, is that it aint surface mounted, and it seems certain that theres no tweakage to be had, without warming up the iron. so i think i will go with the EHX SEM for more intense sounds.
regarding line6, i find that they dont integrate with anything else very well, but ive only ever used line6 amps, not pedals.
thank you all for your help, im sure ill be on here again with more questions about something or other.

[sammieburke23]

This conversation is very interesting. Thanks for all this information.


Just wanted to share something shade sails perth.