Budda Wah vs Wizard Wah

[arsegras]

Anyone would like to comment on the Budda versus the Wizard? Anyone A/B-ed before? Which do you like better and why?

 

[gsonique]

it depends on the foot that is rockin it ...my fren !! :lol:

 

[ChanMin]

interesting.. i have been gasing for a WAH for the longest time...
always been into budda based on the reviews... would love to hear an a/b of it in action with other wahs.

anyone???

 

[gsonique]

i would go for the wizard ...its got the mojo !!

hear it for yourself here

 

[ShredCow]

A/B-ed a Budda with an RMC 2, side by side.

Verdict:

The RMC 2 has a more... vocal quality to it. More "warm" and just more throaty.

The Budda sounded more boxy and had a slightly... what's that word... "plastic-y?" tone.

The Buddha would be nice for those funky clean kind of lines you know... but the RMC 2 is a-mazing on gain.

 

[gsonique]

yup nice before, mojoistic after, dirt ...its got the "teese" !! :lol:

 

[suckasucks]

they are very different. never played the wizard though. the budda has a nice vowelly wah sweep with little treble, not as throaty and vocal as the RMCs like shred said. doesn't work as well with gain as the wizard i expect, since the wizard is supposed to be THE high gain wah.

 

[arsegras]

that said, what's the most versatile wah you guys have ever tried?

 

[gsonique]

 

[snuffleupagus]

for me personally, I have only owned and tried a few variations of the dunlop wah pedals since 1990's , but im currently using the wizard wah.

I love the wizard wah for its application with gain, it has a slight boost to it which is good for me, and i also enjoy the sweep spectrum as in the treble side...really cuts thru for me..

For cleans though, i would say the wizard is so-so , I've heard better, but for dirty it is good at what it does.

no idea about the budda wah, purple reminds me of barney

 

[suckasucks]

rmc 2/3 imo. the power of tweakability

 

[arsegras]

I was just at the RMC site. Is it really true it should not be powered by a 1 spot? Why not?

 

[ShredCow]

what do you mean... is it true? It is on Teese's site right?

No idea why, you could email Teese, friendly chap.

Prob because of the Foxrox buffer though.

 

[snuffleupagus]

I think it has something to do with one-spot having 1700mH, and that teese wahs prefer less

 

[suckasucks]

my rmc1 takes quite awhile to drain out a normal 9v batt - about 2 weeks maybe, not alkaline or whatever (supposed to use normal batteries anyway). but i use a 1spot anyway(lazy) and theres really not much difference as opposed to drive pedals' tone when using PSU or batt.

TS, shawn right? an RMC is WORTH the wait (although i didnt for mine last piece).

 

[ShredCow]

You guys gotta note.

Teese puts DO NOT USE > 200mA on his website but we still insist on going with a 1Spot. Come on.

In anycase, there is a DIFFERENCE now that the new Teese wahs come with the Foxrox Buffers. Note that pre-2006 (or whenever the buffers came in the wahs) you could use 18v power to up the headroom (those Teese himself said it wasn't anything to yell about) but in the current run, you'll fry the Foxrox buffer.

So note that... those of you with older wahs, that "don't use > 200mA" wouldn't apply to you.

 

[suckasucks]

oh yeah. forgot about that. mine is pre-06, no buffer in it.

 

[8fingermadness]

then what can you use to power the wizard other than batts? I'm getting mine soon and it's the new version. thanks!

 

[ShredCow]

What's wrong with battery.

Probably quieter and will last a long time in a wah circuit.

 

[suckasucks]

just use a battery. if the wah's your first pedal in the chain, like most people like it, its not that difficult to disconnect after use.

anyway it lasts very long.