ricepr wrote:I got to have my buffer. Period........
And instead of adding a blaster on board, I use a clean boost pedal. I wish I had two, one always on, and another for oomph. Pedals easier to step on than flipping a switch for me
The problem with this approach is that one of the key reasons for having the buffer on board is so that there is no cable run between pickup and buffer, no cable capacitance to suck tone when setting the guitar at volumes less than 100%. If the buffering is in a pedal, then the guitar suffers some tone loss on the way to that pedal. Waldo has pointed out how SO much of Jerry's playing was done with the guitar set well below clipping, way below 100%. To keep that same clarity at all volumes I don't see any good way around having the buffer in the guitar itself. But in practice, if you use as short a cable run as possible with really good, ultra-low capacitance cable, you can kind of get close, but even still there's nothing like the zero-capacitance sound of having the buffer in the guitar.
And I've found it to be true what Waldo says about the GGG "blaster" circuit using a modern J201 or similar. These JFET's don't bias properly using the original Blaster resistor values and headroom is lost and they can clip more easily from a hot pickup or hard pick attack. It would be better to alter the resistor values to better bias these newer JFET's. I'll try to scope out some better J201 blaster values when I find the time, and I'll share that info here. There is indeed something kind of special about the original Blasters or at least those original JFET's. I've still got two Blasters that I bought in the 80's.