Man O War build, 22n for 27n? 3n3 for 3.9n?

[half_smith]

I've heard to keep values within 5% but

can I get away with using a 22n for a 27n?
how about a 3n3 for 3.9n?

they both seem to be in the runup to a Q.
Is that a common filter or bias arrangement. Will using a slightly lower value for those caps...hit the Q harder?

Is it worth it to trust the designer and wait for the exact parts?

[Zerro]

Hi, those are lowpass filters for certain frequency - to work properly, it is better to use values in schematics. (let's suppose, that they made proper setting calculation) At the other side, this is not so important position, so you can slightly experiment. Paralelly with 22n join 4n7, and paralelly with 3n3 join 560pF. That would be sufficient.

[half_smith]

the 22n and 3n3 are on the board (I haven't finished building it, or even tested it once yet).
Assuming the pedal functions ok,
What will I notice by these values being changed from the schem?

I have a few other small differences in my build between the schem and what I could find...
(e.g., I used a 25kB for the Feedback pot instead of 20kB, I don't know how to wrap my head around how this will affect the outcome)

Paralelly with 22n join 4n7, and paralelly with 3n3 join 560pF. That would be sufficient.

Hi Zerro, are you saying I would use the 22n but add a 4n7 in parallel - to make up for the 22-27 difference? (and same idea for the 3n3 - 3n9 difference)

[Zerro]

Hi Half Smith, those settings will aproximate proper values of caps. 22n+4n7 will give 26n7 etc... But, for those Low pass filters putting off clock frequencies from signal this will be almost the same put there values, you have. Resonant freq will be moved slightly to the higher F0. Listen signals with high freq (aliquotes on strings) and controll if there are not interferencies (ring modulations). If not, don't mind it. Aditional caps you can connect there allways. Feedback pot is not problem - it is only volume divider.

[half_smith]

Thanks Zerro, your explanation is helpful