| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#81
|
|||
|
|||
"Lord Valve" wrote in message ... Karl Uppiano wrote: But Harvey, you must remember, LV knows everything. Does he know *why* tube amps sound different than transistor amps? Probably. ;-) Does he know *how* a transistor amp might be designed to sound like a tube amp? Does he give a ****? Probably not. ;-) Hint: It has to do with how these amps overload, iron in the signal path (or lack of it), and the amount, type and speed of feedback, etc. Gosh, thanks. Don't mention it. I'm just throwing stuff out there because I think it's interesting. I've always been puzzled about why people obsess over implementation details. Hint: Tubes *and* FETs are both field-effect devices. Hint: trons need plenty of room to frolic. Now, if you wanna squish 'em all up into an itty-bitty piece of sand, you go right ahead. I prefer free-range organic trons which have plenty of room to do the bop, the shimmy, the shake, or whatever other gyrations their little homespun inspiration may lead them to try. Don't need no consarned foreign molecules in the way, or no dope, neither. Discuss. Go right ahead. It has already started. Lord Valve Uberrohrenfuhrer, Thousand Year Glass Reich |
|
#82
|
|||
|
|||
|
Karl Uppiano wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message And I can build you a transistor amp and you can swap the 2N3055 output transistors for MJ10004 (and rebias) and it'll sound different, again because the distortion spectrum is measurably different. (The same goes for a tube amp with swaps between tube types). That wouldn't surprise me, but if/when the distortion is below the noise, what is it that we're perceiving, if anything? If you can answer that question with good solid supporting evidence, you can probably get a whole issue of the JAES all to yourself. That is a question that people have been asking for 75 years or so. The answers get better, but they remain pretty diffuse. FETs actually were the first transistors, having been discovered some time in the late 19th century. But they weren't practical (to the point of being able to carry useful current) until well after junction transistors had become popular. I'll think of the guy that discovered the things... Wentz I want to say? It's discussed in the MIT Press book on the history of electric power distribution. I should have said "practical transistors". I'm _still_ waiting for practical transistors today. Either you can get low noise or high breakdown voltages, you can't get both. And if you want high breakdown voltages and high input impedance, you can't get low Miller capacitance. This isn't the future I was promised. And semiconductor guys are increasingly trying to sell me lower and lower voltage parts. For God's sake, I want _higher_ operating levels, not lower ones. Take your 3V rails and stick them, Maxim. I want +/-48V supplies minimum. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#83
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#84
|
|||
|
|||
|
play-on wrote in message . ..
On 24 Nov 2004 17:38:51 -0800, (Georg Grosz) wrote: From what I can tell, the famous guitarists are the ones using modern solid state gear. There may still be tube amps being used by some rock and blues players, but on jazz gigs, I see mostly small solid state amps. Maybe jazz players use them, but if you are going to talk about really "famous" guitar players (most jazz guitarist being totally unknown to the general public) the vast majority continue to use tube amps. Al Yeah, that's funny. Almost everyone I know uses tube amps. Jazz players tend to be the exception. Then you'll see Polytones and JC 120s. Both of which are too clean and dry for rock, blues, etc. |
|
#85
|
|||
|
|||
|
BB king plays a Lab Series. LV When I've seen him it was a Fender Twin. Lab Series, ugh. The few I've heard rather sucked but there may be exceptions. |
|
#86
|
|||
|
|||
|
Sure, but the curves are different. Hell, for that matter, the curves on
beam power tetrodes and straight pentodes are totally different. And the curves on different FET configurations are different. It's all different. It's a wonder anyone can agree on how things should sound at all. ---scott No one can agree.... |
|
#87
|
|||
|
|||
|
All the research in the AES isn't going to change a player's attitude.
If they play blues, they'll play tubes until there's no more vacuum. It isn't about high fidelity. It's about attitude. Umm, c'mon Mike it's about more than 'attitude'. It's about TONE. It's also most impossible to explain. In general tube guitar amps just feel better, more organic to the player. Kinda like the difference between a real piano with nice action and a digital piano with nice action. Not that there aren't decent soild state amps. But there's just something 'bout them tubes. Plus you can't argue with a 40 year old amp that has never failed me. (Though it did about knock me unconscious once before I installed the grounded plug.) Comparing guitar amps is more subjective than microphones. There's the interaction of the player, guitar and whatever little boxes are plugged in too. I own a POD. Useful tool but there's just a bit of latency between the picking of the note and the hearing of the note that bothers me. |
|
#88
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#89
|
|||
|
|||
|
x-no archive: yes
Mike Rivers wrote: I own a POD. Useful tool but there's just a bit of latency between the picking of the note and the hearing of the note that bothers me. Hardly representative of a solid state amplifier. That's like a fair-to-middlin' digital piano with a bad action. This is .sig material! g -- ha |
|
#92
|
|||
|
|||
|
A more appropriate assessment is that a tube amp fails in a predictable way,
and as it fails (speakers break up, transformer sags, etc) it produces a sound that seems to emanate from the interaction of the player, guitar and amp. But it's like using a soften function on a digital photo. While the photo may become more pleasing on the overall view, it's actually less sharp and less detailed. Or, maybe it's more warm than true to the color, or whatever. That's why guitar players like what they hear when they've cranked the amp up to get the transformer to sag and why they are dumping 100 watts into vintage 25 watt speakers, etc. I know because I bought my first electric guitar in 1961 (still have it) and so I have some serious guitar playing under my belt too. But the fact is that I've dealt with hundreds of guitar players over the years, and to a fault most rock players simply have no ability to determine WHY they like the sound of an overdriven amp, they just do, and mostly, to be totally honest, is because it hides most of the stuff they do wrong, and allows they to pin their perceived playing abilities on the amp's ability to hide what they don't do right. I'm sure you've run into situations where players sound good on a Les Paul/Marshall combination but when they get hold of an acoustic, they can't play for a good ****. They explain it as a difference in the way the guitars are set up, but the fact is they never learned good guitar technique in the first place. They are jammers. The reason I say this is that, like I said, I've dealt with tons of players, and the best ones are the ones that know the guitar inside and out, can use an amp or not, and can make any music they play sound good. Now I'm not doubting your abilities, Al, I'm just making a generalized statement here from my experiences over the years. Guitar players are a dime a dozen, but good guitar players are more like $100 per pound. Gantt Kushner, here locally in DC is an example of a good guitar player. His amp is a Bogner, and while it can crank and kick with the best of the blues boys in town, it's capable enough to allow him to do anything his playing abilities can come up with. Then there's Steve Abshire, Paul Bollenbach, Paul Winger, and a number of other fantastically good players that can sit in on any session or live event without so much as a "what key" statement. I'd say fully 98% of the guitar players out there don't fit this mold. So I'd suggest that the tale of the vintage guitar amp is a tale of minimal pages in the runes of guitar playing. While certain amps seem to work best for the majority, it's the spectacular that belie the myth. -- Roger W. Norman SirMusic Studio "play-on" wrote in message ... On 29 Nov 2004 21:34:04 -0500, (Mike Rivers) wrote: In article writes: Umm, c'mon Mike it's about more than 'attitude'. It's about TONE. This goes hand in hand with "attitude" when it comes to guitar players. also most impossible to explain. In general tube guitar amps just feel better, more organic to the player. Kinda like the difference between a real piano with nice action and a digital piano with nice action. Not that there aren't decent soild state amps. But there's just something 'bout them tubes. This is "attitude" for sure. No Mike, it's not. Listen, I've been playing as a pro guitarist for over 30 years, and I have tried just about every amp over the years. Tube amps are a "feel" thing -- as he said, it's a bit like keyboard action. A tube amp, when pushed, pushes back a little bit and the guitarist can play with the dynamics of this. It's kind of like having a giant tube compressor. Al |
|
#93
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article playonATcomcast.net writes: This is "attitude" for sure. No Mike, it's not. Listen, I've been playing as a pro guitarist for over 30 years, and I have tried just about every amp over the years. It sounds like you have an "attitude" there. You've been playing for 30 years so you know what's right. YOu have a preference, and that's fine. It's your craft. When you insist that the other kind doesn't feel right to you, that's "attitude." Tube amps are a "feel" thing -- as he said, it's a bit like keyboard action. A tube amp, when pushed, pushes back a little bit and the guitarist can play with the dynamics of this. It's kind of like having a giant tube compressor. Why isn't this possible in solid state amplifiers? I'll bet it is. Could be you've just never wanted to believe it's possible. Or that since you found your sound, you just didn't worry about all the other possibilities. That's perfectly normal. -- I'm really Mike Rivers ) However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over, lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo |
|
#94
|
|||
|
|||
|
Then again, of the number of amps I have, one is a Traynor Mark III 100 watt
with 4 GT 6L6s and at full tilt it plays absolutely clean into an Ampeg V22 4-12 cab (the entire amp has been re-tubed). Yanked two of the 6L6s and it's got some ability to do something else. So obviously, if the amp is tube and it only plays clean as designed, then your speculation is incorrect. There are tons of factors involved, like how much voltage is being put across the tube plates, how beefy the power transformer is, what the efficiency of the speakers and cabinet are, etc. To simply suggest that tubes are what make the difference is folly. And even if it were true, then tube age would make a more pronounced difference than any tube aficionado is going to allow for, because I've seen players with 20 year old tubes adamantly suggesting their amp is the best whilst other players with new tubes in their old rigs or NOS tubes in their new rigs kick the most butt. AND I've recorded Charley Bird playing an acoustic/electric who's tone was to die for. Unfortunately he did within a month of his last concert of which I recorded. But the point is that the "stuff" of playing guitar is the guitar playing, not the amp it goes through. -- Roger W. Norman SirMusic Studio "Yuri T." wrote in message om... play-on wrote in message . .. On 24 Nov 2004 17:38:51 -0800, (Georg Grosz) wrote: From what I can tell, the famous guitarists are the ones using modern solid state gear. There may still be tube amps being used by some rock and blues players, but on jazz gigs, I see mostly small solid state amps. Maybe jazz players use them, but if you are going to talk about really "famous" guitar players (most jazz guitarist being totally unknown to the general public) the vast majority continue to use tube amps. Al Yeah, that's funny. Almost everyone I know uses tube amps. Jazz players tend to be the exception. Then you'll see Polytones and JC 120s. Both of which are too clean and dry for rock, blues, etc. |
|
#95
|
|||
|
|||
|
Would it then be possible to call for help whilst stranded in the middle of
an Ohio river flood in spring? -- Roger W. Norman SirMusic Studio "Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1101599642k@trad... In article writes: And semiconductor guys are increasingly trying to sell me lower and lower voltage parts. For God's sake, I want _higher_ operating levels, not lower ones. Take your 3V rails and stick them, Maxim. I want +/-48V supplies minimum. And in your cellular phone, too. -- I'm really Mike Rivers ) However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over, lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo |
|
#96
|
|||
|
|||
|
Roger W. Norman wrote: A more appropriate assessment is that a tube amp fails in a predictable way, and as it fails (speakers break up, transformer sags, etc) it produces a sound that seems to emanate from the interaction of the player, guitar and amp. But it's like using a soften function on a digital photo. While the photo may become more pleasing on the overall view, it's actually less sharp and less detailed. Or, maybe it's more warm than true to the color, or whatever. That's why guitar players like what they hear when they've cranked the amp up to get the transformer to sag and why they are dumping 100 watts into vintage 25 watt speakers, etc. I know because I bought my first electric guitar in 1961 (still have it) and so I have some serious guitar playing under my belt too. But the fact is that I've dealt with hundreds of guitar players over the years, and to a fault most rock players simply have no ability to determine WHY they like the sound of an overdriven amp, they just do, and mostly, to be totally honest, is because it hides most of the stuff they do wrong, and allows they to pin their perceived playing abilities on the amp's ability to hide what they don't do right. I'm sure you've run into situations where players sound good on a Les Paul/Marshall combination but when they get hold of an acoustic, they can't play for a good ****. They explain it as a difference in the way the guitars are set up, but the fact is they never learned good guitar technique in the first place. They are jammers. The reason I say this is that, like I said, I've dealt with tons of players, and the best ones are the ones that know the guitar inside and out, can use an amp or not, and can make any music they play sound good. Now I'm not doubting your abilities, Al, I'm just making a generalized statement here from my experiences over the years. Guitar players are a dime a dozen, but good guitar players are more like $100 per pound. Gantt Kushner, here locally in DC is an example of a good guitar player. His amp is a Bogner, and while it can crank and kick with the best of the blues boys in town, it's capable enough to allow him to do anything his playing abilities can come up with. Then there's Steve Abshire, Paul Bollenbach, Paul Winger, and a number of other fantastically good players that can sit in on any session or live event without so much as a "what key" statement. I'd say fully 98% of the guitar players out there don't fit this mold. So I'd suggest that the tale of the vintage guitar amp is a tale of minimal pages in the runes of guitar playing. While certain amps seem to work best for the majority, it's the spectacular that belie the myth. Good, thoughtful post here, Roger. There's a reason that many savvy players use the word "forgiving" to describe certain amps and guitars. It is sometimes used as a compliment, to indicate that the amp or guitar makes 'good sounds" regardless of how its played. A lot of compression, harmonic distortion, amp/speaker sag, or spacial FX like 'verb or cathedral-like delay can have that effect on certain players. But a great player may wish for a more "accurate" translator of his technique, so that a wide variety of tone shadings can be under his voluntary control. That sort of player will feel more comfortable with an acoustic guitar, for example, and also with a less "forgiving" amp that translates more faithfully the details of his right hand picking technique and dynamics. I think you're referring to players like that in your description above, Roger. A quick note- this issue is not NECESSARILY a solid-state vs tubes one. For example, within the world of tube amps, there are amps based more on the Blackface Fender models which tend to compress less, have a pronounced treble peak, etc, and others in the modded hi-gain Marshall camp that are made to overdrive easily, compress a lot, and produce a recognizable, familiar tone no matter HOW the guitar is played, and by whom. Different players will like one or the other, or possibly both... but one amp is far more "forgiving" than the other. Also, one is capable of being more tonally variable and individually expressive than the other. When a player says he loves the "tube amp tone", it's not clear which quality he's referring to... but it's often one or the other, but not both. Paul Paul Asbell www.paulasbell.com |
|
#97
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 11:23:02 -0500, "Roger W. Norman"
wrote: A more appropriate assessment is that a tube amp fails in a predictable way, and as it fails (speakers break up, transformer sags, etc) it produces a sound that seems to emanate from the interaction of the player, guitar and amp. But it's like using a soften function on a digital photo. While the photo may become more pleasing on the overall view, it's actually less sharp and less detailed. Or, maybe it's more warm than true to the color, or whatever. That's why guitar players like what they hear when they've cranked the amp up to get the transformer to sag and why they are dumping 100 watts into vintage 25 watt speakers, etc. I know because I bought my first electric guitar in 1961 (still have it) and so I have some serious guitar playing under my belt too. But the fact is that I've dealt with hundreds of guitar players over the years, and to a fault most rock players simply have no ability to determine WHY they like the sound of an overdriven amp, they just do, and mostly, to be totally honest, is because it hides most of the stuff they do wrong, and allows they to pin their perceived playing abilities on the amp's ability to hide what they don't do right. I'm sure you've run into situations where players sound good on a Les Paul/Marshall combination but when they get hold of an acoustic, they can't play for a good ****. They explain it as a difference in the way the guitars are set up, but the fact is they never learned good guitar technique in the first place. They are jammers. The reason I say this is that, like I said, I've dealt with tons of players, and the best ones are the ones that know the guitar inside and out, can use an amp or not, and can make any music they play sound good. I can do that. But I still prefer tube amps given the choice. Now I'm not doubting your abilities, Al, I'm just making a generalized statement here from my experiences over the years. Guitar players are a dime a dozen, but good guitar players are more like $100 per pound. Gantt Kushner, here locally in DC is an example of a good guitar player. His amp is a Bogner, and while it can crank and kick with the best of the blues boys in town, it's capable enough to allow him to do anything his playing abilities can come up with. Then there's Steve Abshire, Paul Bollenbach, Paul Winger, and a number of other fantastically good players that can sit in on any session or live event without so much as a "what key" statement. I'd say fully 98% of the guitar players out there don't fit this mold. I wasn't talking from the perspective of wanna-bees or kids who can't really play. Just for your future reference, I've been playing professionally since 1972... I've been lucky enough to work with some really great people, many of them legends of American popular music. I've done network television, major label albums, toured the country, done theatrical gigs, and have played in pretty much every possible venue, from the high to the low. So I'd suggest that the tale of the vintage guitar amp is a tale of minimal pages in the runes of guitar playing. It's not about vintage, it's about tubes. I usually use newer tube amps for live work & use smaller vintage amps in the studio. While certain amps seem to work best for the majority, it's the spectacular that belie the myth. I rarely use my amps pushed really hard & turned up super loud as I'm not really a "rock" player. I can, and have gotten good guitar sounds going into a solid state amp, or even going direct. It's in the fingers, not the gear. But, I still vastly prefer tube amps, more for the clean (but "colored") tone they get than for the balls-to-the-wall overdrive. The overdriven sound with solid state modeling amps is actually pretty good, where they can't compete in my book is in the warm, low gain tones. I haven't yet heard a solid state amp that can sound like a nice Fender tube amp with the volume on "3". Al |
|
#98
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#99
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 13:32:50 -0500, "Roger W. Norman"
wrote: But the point is that the "stuff" of playing guitar is the guitar playing, not the amp it goes through. Certainly... it's the guy not the gear in the final analysis. That doesn't stop people from wanting the best gear they can get. When you start talking about electric guitar, in many generes the amp has become part of the instrument, not just a way to make the guitar louder. A guitarist can be as picky about an amp as he might be about a guitar. Al |
|
#100
|
|||
|
|||
|
.... So I'd suggest that the tale of the vintage guitar amp is a tale of minimal pages in the runes of guitar playing. It's not about vintage, it's about tubes. I usually use newer tube amps for live work & use smaller vintage amps in the studio. While certain amps seem to work best for the majority, it's the spectacular that belie the myth. I rarely use my amps pushed really hard & turned up super loud as I'm not really a "rock" player. I can, and have gotten good guitar sounds going into a solid state amp, or even going direct. It's in the fingers, not the gear. But, I still vastly prefer tube amps, more for the clean (but "colored") tone they get than for the balls-to-the-wall overdrive. The overdriven sound with solid state modeling amps is actually pretty good, where they can't compete in my book is in the warm, low gain tones. I haven't yet heard a solid state amp that can sound like a nice Fender tube amp with the volume on "3". Al Yes... what Al said goes for a LOT of highly experienced, expert players... myself included. Paul Paul Asbell www.paulasbell.com |
|
#101
|
|||
|
|||
|
Paul Asbell wrote: ... So I'd suggest that the tale of the vintage guitar amp is a tale of minimal pages in the runes of guitar playing. It's not about vintage, it's about tubes. I usually use newer tube amps for live work & use smaller vintage amps in the studio. While certain amps seem to work best for the majority, it's the spectacular that belie the myth. I rarely use my amps pushed really hard & turned up super loud as I'm not really a "rock" player. I can, and have gotten good guitar sounds going into a solid state amp, or even going direct. It's in the fingers, not the gear. But, I still vastly prefer tube amps, more for the clean (but "colored") tone they get than for the balls-to-the-wall overdrive. The overdriven sound with solid state modeling amps is actually pretty good, where they can't compete in my book is in the warm, low gain tones. I haven't yet heard a solid state amp that can sound like a nice Fender tube amp with the volume on "3". Al Yes... what Al said goes for a LOT of highly experienced, expert players... myself included. Paul Paul Asbell www.paulasbell.com The amps I built for Derek Trucks to use with the Allman Brothers Band are tubers. Stage level was a problem. The Allmans use *three* drummers at the same time, and they work huge venues. DT had been using a SS Randall, which was plenty loud, but it lacked something he was looking for, especially in the feedback characteristics. DT does a lot of controlled feedback stuff - super tasty, in fact - and while he was getting exactly what he needed out of the (LV-tweaked) '65 BFSR which he was using with his own band, he couldn't use it with the Allmans. It just wasn't loud enough. Ordinarily, when a stage level problem is encountered, the fix is to bring the amp's mike up in the monitor mix - but that *doesn't work* for guitar feedback technique. DT doesn't sing, and he hates monitors anyway. That's one of the reasons his own band (the Derek Trucks Band) carries two full-size Leslies instead of just one small one - DT likes to hear the real thing, because a Leslie simply doesn't sound "right" through a monitor. What he needed for the ABB tour was the Super Reverb from Hell, and that's what I built him - a modified Super Six, jacked up to 118 watts output, running Mercury Magnetics iron through six custom-built Weber 10" "Pyle clone" speakers. A few proprietary tweaks here and there, to be sure. ;-) I delivered another one back in April when the ABB rolled through Denver, and since then he's taken to using BOTH of them at the same time, especially outdoors. He can stand further from his rig and still do his feedback tricks that way (so he says). BTW - all you FX freaks might want to know about DT's processing gear: It's called a guitar cord. ;-) Catch DT with the ABB or his own band (which I prefer) and you won't soon forget it. Lord Valve |
|
#102
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article playonATcomcast.net writes: I know what's right for me -- why shouldn't I, after so many years of experience? I'm speaking for myself... that is "attitude"??? Not when you make it clear that it's your preference. But when you declare that a tube amplifier is better, and then use your experience to back that up, it's what I call attitude. Call it what you want, or nothing. Everyone else is welcome to play thru whatever they want... but the fast point is many many pro guitarists agree with my preference for tube amps. Hey, many people had a preference for George Bush, too. That doesn't mean he's better than the other guy. You are welcome to use whatever you want... go for it... but wait a minute, you don't even play the electric guitar, do you? Well, no, but I understand what you're talking about. However if solid state amplifiers didn't work for guitar players, they wouldn't sell so many of them. I'll admit that there ARE a lot of tube amplifier out there - it's the largest market for vacuum tubes so they must be doing something right. But I know a lot of guitar players who have learnd to become comfortable with solid stage amps and choose to use them for their primary benefits - size, weight, and reliability. See, it's not just about the sound... to a non-player, the sound may be almost the same. But for the guy playing, it's the response that makes the difference. I can say the same about banjos. But there isn't just one kind of banjo that I'm comfortable playing. -- I'm really Mike Rivers ) However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over, lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo |
|
#103
|
|||
|
|||
|
Lord Valve wrote: I rarely use my amps pushed really hard & turned up super loud as I'm not really a "rock" player. I can, and have gotten good guitar sounds going into a solid state amp, or even going direct. It's in the fingers, not the gear. But, I still vastly prefer tube amps, more for the clean (but "colored") tone they get than for the balls-to-the-wall overdrive. The overdriven sound with solid state modeling amps is actually pretty good, where they can't compete in my book is in the warm, low gain tones. I haven't yet heard a solid state amp that can sound like a nice Fender tube amp with the volume on "3". Al Yes... what Al said goes for a LOT of highly experienced, expert players... myself included. Paul Paul Asbell www.paulasbell.com The amps I built for Derek Trucks to use with the Allman Brothers Band are tubers. Stage level was a problem. The Allmans use *three* drummers at the same time, and they work huge venues. DT had been using a SS Randall, which was plenty loud, but it lacked something he was looking for, especially in the feedback characteristics. DT does a lot of controlled feedback stuff - super tasty, in fact - and while he was getting exactly what he needed out of the (LV-tweaked) '65 BFSR which he was using with his own band, he couldn't use it with the Allmans. It just wasn't loud enough. Ordinarily, when a stage level problem is encountered, the fix is to bring the amp's mike up in the monitor mix - but that *doesn't work* for guitar feedback technique. DT doesn't sing, and he hates monitors anyway. That's one of the reasons his own band (the Derek Trucks Band) carries two full-size Leslies instead of just one small one - DT likes to hear the real thing, because a Leslie simply doesn't sound "right" through a monitor. What he needed for the ABB tour was the Super Reverb from Hell, and that's what I built him - a modified Super Six, jacked up to 118 watts output, running Mercury Magnetics iron through six custom-built Weber 10" "Pyle clone" speakers. A few proprietary tweaks here and there, to be sure. ;-) I delivered another one back in April when the ABB rolled through Denver, and since then he's taken to using BOTH of them at the same time, especially outdoors. He can stand further from his rig and still do his feedback tricks that way (so he says). BTW - all you FX freaks might want to know about DT's processing gear: It's called a guitar cord. ;-) Catch DT with the ABB or his own band (which I prefer) and you won't soon forget it. Lord Valve I'm not personally a huge ABB fan, but Derek and his band is definitely a personal fave. I love his sound in that group... if you're in part responsible for his SR sounding so good, Congrats! I have also longed for the "just like my SR, but louder"... sounds like you nailed it for DT. -- Best regards Paul Paul Asbell www.paulasbell.com |
|
#104
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#105
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article playonATcomcast.net writes: Right, size, weight, and reliability... I notice you didn't mention tone or sound as a "primary benefit". For serious guitarists tone is the #1 thing. I did say "become comfortable with" and that doesn't mean being lazy, I meant getting a sound they like out of it. You say you can't, I say you don't care enough to try hard enough, and that's all right if you don't mind lugging around a heavy amp and changing tubes. There used to be a rock bar band around here that carried a small grand piano with them because the pianist didn't like the sound of the electronic pianos of the period (this was 20 years ago or more). They took the legs off so they could put it in a van and set it up on stage on milk creates. Four of them could handle it, the fifth carried his own drums in. But I'll bet that today he plays something he can carry under one arm. But suit yourself. -- I'm really Mike Rivers ) However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over, lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo |
|
#106
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#107
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#108
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#109
|
|||
|
|||
|
Yuri T. wrote: I've been playing guitar since I was 10, now 36. I've have played through literally 100's of amplifiers. I worked at 3 different music stores in the past. Chuck Levin's, Veneman's and Zavarella's. Hey, a DC boy... I worked at Chuck's before you were born, whippersnapper. ;-) Hell, my band used to go downtown to Chuck's when we needed gear. (I can't remember where it was - 7th avenue? It got burned down in the MLK riots and that's when he moved to Wheaton.) We bought from Veneman's, too. I bought my first Hammond from the Wheaton Hammond Organ Studio, which was about 100 feet from Chuck's front door. (Ain't there no more.) I got my first Leslie from Chuck's (in Wheaton). So - does DC still suck? ;-) Lord Valve Old |
|
#110
|
|||
|
|||
|
Lord Valve wrote:
So - does DC still suck? ;-) It's only sucked since Charlie Byrd died and Ramsey Lewis left town. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#111
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#112
|
|||
|
|||
|
Lord Valve wrote in message ...
Lord Valve Old Rage, rage against the dying of the light. - Dylan Thomas, poet of thermionic truth Arm the wrinklies! - Andre Jute, libertarian |
|
#113
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Yuri T." wrote in message om... (Mike Rivers) wrote in message news:znr1101769678k@trad... In article writes: Umm, c'mon Mike it's about more than 'attitude'. It's about TONE. This goes hand in hand with "attitude" when it comes to guitar players. LOL and this goes hand in hand with 'attitude' when it comes to engineers. Just heard (again) on the radio some folklore regarding Keith Richards getting "knocked out" by a shock off a mic with a ground-fault-power-problem, lying there semi-comatose for 7 minutes, then getting up and carrying on playing his guitar as if nothing had happened. Truth be known, it did actually kill him - he's looked post-mortem pretty much ever since. Mind you, he looked a bid ghoulish before too ... geoff |
|
#114
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#115
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article , Roger W. Norman
wrote: A more appropriate assessment is that a tube amp fails in a predictable way, and as it fails (speakers break up, transformer sags, etc) it produces a sound that seems to emanate from the interaction of the player, guitar and amp. And the story is that when recording the Marty Robbin's "Don't Worry 'Bout Me" the bass player hit a note and it was distorted. A tube had fallen out. He put it back, and then the producer decided he liked it better with it out. Thus the first 'fuzztone' was born. A few days later Grady Martin recorded a song featuring this new sound called "The Fuzz". This dates to about 1958 - and remember playing both on the radio then. Of course only one becamse a hit. Bill -- Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com |
|
#116
|
|||
|
|||
|
(Bill Vermillion) writes:
In article , Roger W. Norman wrote: A more appropriate assessment is that a tube amp fails in a predictable way, and as it fails (speakers break up, transformer sags, etc) it produces a sound that seems to emanate from the interaction of the player, guitar and amp. And the story is that when recording the Marty Robbin's "Don't Worry 'Bout Me" the bass player hit a note and it was distorted. A tube had fallen out. He put it back, and then the producer decided he liked it better with it out. Thus the first 'fuzztone' was born. A few days later Grady Martin recorded a song featuring this new sound called "The Fuzz". This dates to about 1958 - and remember playing both on the radio then. Of course only one becamse a hit. Hey Bill - thanks for a great story! -- Randy Yates Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications Research Triangle Park, NC, USA , 919-472-1124 |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| James Randi gets clarified on audio biz | High End Audio | |||
| ALL amps are equal?? | Car Audio | |||
| rec.audio.car FAQ (Part 1/5) | Car Audio | |||
| Rockers Unite to Oust Bush | Audio Opinions | |||
| Mechanic blames amplifier for alternator failing?? Help>>>>>>>>>>> | Car Audio | |||
Linear Mode
