JMP 2204 MK2 50 Watt vs.100 Watt
adam79
versions (pre jcm800 models w/ master volume and 2 vertical inputs). Do they
sound different, or are they pretty much the same amp, but louder? I'm
looking for that "brown" distortion. My cab is an older Marshall JCM800
1960A cab (the ones that have one input on the lower back, pre mono/stereo
switch) with 4 oringinal UK Celestion G12-65s.. i just had the speakers
rewired with a thick guage wire.
Thanks,
-Adam
ada...@toast.net
Jim
> I was wondering what your opinions are regarding the JMP 2204 50 and 100watt
> versions (pre jcm800 models w/ master volume and 2 vertical inputs). Do they
> sound different, or are they pretty much the same amp, but louder?
I'm pretty sure that they ARE different. Different voltages on the
tubes, not just a different output transformer and an additional two
power tubes.
> I'm
> looking for that "brown" distortion.
Then you want the 50W version. The 100W version uses higher voltages.
Grip
"Jim" <as...@beforeyousend.com> wrote in message
news:13mvtu2...@corp.supernews.com...
I totally agree...the 50 watter, and I've had both.....You heard from the
right guy too, I used to think I knew JMP's till reading a couple of years
of Jim's posts!
Jim
Thanks. I'm a gearhead and need to put some of that effort back into my
playing!
adam79
Marshall JMP 2204. He comes across the 50 watters often, and is waiting to
find an unmodded gem for me.. he said that he might have found the needle in
the haystack. One of the things he mentioned was that it has the original
"mustard caps." Is there a website about the JMP 2204 50watters that's about
the amp.. something that will explain to me why theses original mustard caps
is a positive thing.. this way i won't have to bother you guys with all
these questions.
Thanks,
-Adam
ada...@toast.net
Chief...@hotmail.com
Completely different amps, in both pre-amp and power section.
The 50W 2204 is designed like the traditional 'plexi' amp, with
'minimized' V1 channel input networks and a few component value
changes (mix resistors, V2a Rp, etc).
the 100W 2203 is a completely different amp. Check them out for
yourself, if you can understand the schematics:
http://www.schematicheaven.com/marshallamps/jmp_mastervol_100w_2203u.pdf
http://www.schematicheaven.com/marshallamps/jmp_mastervol_50w_2204u.pdf
jh
Chief,
that愀 only true for the very first units in 1976 and perhaps some in
1977. From then on they shared almost identical circuits. I have a 1978
2204 and it's of the "normal" cascaded preamp style similar to the 2203
with a few differences. The boards are clearly marked.
Unil now I扉e not seen a letter box type 2204 with the old circuit.
regards
Jochen
Chief...@hotmail.com
> Chief_Bi...@hotmail.com schrieb:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 24, 12:47 pm, "adam79" <ada...@toast.net> wrote:
> >> I was wondering what your opinions are regarding the JMP 2204 50 and 100watt
> >> versions (pre jcm800 models w/ master volume and 2 vertical inputs). Do they
> >> sound different, or are they pretty much the same amp, but louder? I'm
> >> looking for that "brown" distortion. My cab is an older Marshall JCM800
> >> 1960A cab (the ones that have one input on the lower back, pre mono/stereo
> >> switch) with 4 oringinal UK Celestion G12-65s.. i just had the speakers
> >> rewired with a thick guage wire.
>
> >> Thanks,
> >> -Adam
> >> ada...@toast.net
>
> > Completely different amps, in both pre-amp and power section.
> > The 50W 2204 is designed like the traditional 'plexi' amp, with
> > 'minimized' V1 channel input networks and a few component value
> > changes (mix resistors, V2a Rp, etc).
> > the 100W 2203 is a completely different amp. Check them out for
> > yourself, if you can understand the schematics:
>
> >http://www.schematicheaven.com/marshallamps/jmp_mastervol_100w_2203u.pdf
>
> >http://www.schematicheaven.com/marshallamps/jmp_mastervol_50w_2204u.pdf
>
> Chief,
> 1977. From then on they shared almost identical circuits. I have a 1978
> 2204 and it's of the "normal" cascaded preamp style similar to the 2203
> with a few differences. The boards are clearly marked.
>
>
> regards
>
> Jochen- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Jochen: I'm no expert, and I rely ON the experts for the info I post.
That said, these comments
and those schematics I posted are also available on the www.drtube.com
web-site: http://www.drtube.com/marshall.htm#JMP
2203 JMP Master Volume Lead, 100W head
This amp was in production from 1975 up to 1981.
Amp schematic with 3x ECC83 & 4x 6550 (Unicord, 1976).
http://www.drtube.com/schematics/marshall/2203u.gif
2204 JMP Master Volume Lead, 50W head
This amp was in production from 1975 up to 1981.
Amp schematic with 3x ECC83 & 2x 6550 (Unicord, 1976).
http://www.drtube.com/schematics/marshall/2204u.gif
Now, I do find a schematic originally dated 24-4-81 (April 24, 1981)
indicating a common
MV preamp used on the 2103, 2104, 2203, and 2204. So these amps
having this common preamp,
which is very much like the original 2204 50W pre-amp cited above,
would likely have been introduced no sooner than late
1980/early 1981 unless Marshall drew up their schematics significantly
later than they produced the products.
In summary, if the 2204 50W amp is in question, then it's safe to say
that the pre-amp is very much like the plexi-style configuration.
If a 2203 100W, then the pre-amp may be one having the cascaded gain
V1 configuration or it may have the plexi-like configuration and one
would have to determine the date of manufacture pre/post 1980 or
better yet open it up and look to see which pre-amp topology it has.
Frohe Weinacht.....
Jim
Those are only the early models. I think the schematic change is 2/78.
But even though the 2203 and 2204 has much of the shared circuit,
CHECK VOLTAGES.
Here's the 2204:
http://www.seattle-attorney.com/2204_voltage.jpg
Bias listed for GE6550A, for US import of course.
Jim
> On Dec 25, 9:59 am, jh <jh-audiop_NOS...@t-online.de> wrote:
>
>>Chief_Bi...@hotmail.com schrieb:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>On Dec 24, 12:47 pm, "adam79" <ada...@toast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>I was wondering what your opinions are regarding the JMP 2204 50 and 100watt
>>>>versions (pre jcm800 models w/ master volume and 2 vertical inputs). Do they
>>>>sound different, or are they pretty much the same amp, but louder? I'm
>>>>looking for that "brown" distortion. My cab is an older Marshall JCM800
>>>>1960A cab (the ones that have one input on the lower back, pre mono/stereo
>>>>switch) with 4 oringinal UK Celestion G12-65s.. i just had the speakers
>>>>rewired with a thick guage wire.
>>
>>>>Thanks,
>>>>-Adam
>>>>ada...@toast.net
>>
>>>Completely different amps, in both pre-amp and power section.
>>>The 50W 2204 is designed like the traditional 'plexi' amp, with
>>>'minimized' V1 channel input networks and a few component value
>>>changes (mix resistors, V2a Rp, etc).
>>>the 100W 2203 is a completely different amp. Check them out for
>>>yourself, if you can understand the schematics:
>>
>>>http://www.schematicheaven.com/marshallamps/jmp_mastervol_100w_2203u.pdf
>>
>>>http://www.schematicheaven.com/marshallamps/jmp_mastervol_50w_2204u.pdf
>>
>>Chief,
>>that愀 only true for the very first units in 1976 and perhaps some in
>>1977. From then on they shared almost identical circuits. I have a 1978
>>2204 and it's of the "normal" cascaded preamp style similar to the 2203
>>with a few differences. The boards are clearly marked.
>>
>>Unil now I扉e not seen a letter box type 2204 with the old circuit.
>>
>>regards
>>
>>Jochen- Hide quoted text -
>>
>>- Show quoted text -
>
>
> Jochen: I'm no expert, and I rely ON the experts for the info I post.
> That said, these comments
> and those schematics I posted are also available on the www.drtube.com
> web-site: http://www.drtube.com/marshall.htm#JMP
>
> 2203 JMP Master Volume Lead, 100W head
> This amp was in production from 1975 up to 1981.
> Amp schematic with 3x ECC83 & 4x 6550 (Unicord, 1976).
>
> http://www.drtube.com/schematics/marshall/2203u.gif
>
>
> 2204 JMP Master Volume Lead, 50W head
> This amp was in production from 1975 up to 1981.
> Amp schematic with 3x ECC83 & 2x 6550 (Unicord, 1976).
>
>
> http://www.drtube.com/schematics/marshall/2204u.gif
Well, there's A LOT of information on the net. Only some of it is accurate.
Here's a .pdf file of the schematic that came with my JMP 2204 that I
bought new in 1981 (produced in 1980). This is a Marshall supplied
document, came with my amp. Note the schematic date of 2/28/78.
http://www.seattle-attorney.com/guitar/JMP2204_schematic.pdf
>
> Now, I do find a schematic originally dated 24-4-81 (April 24, 1981)
> indicating a common
> MV preamp used on the 2103, 2104, 2203, and 2204. So these amps
> having this common preamp,
> which is very much like the original 2204 50W pre-amp cited above,
> would likely have been introduced no sooner than late
> 1980/early 1981 unless Marshall drew up their schematics significantly
> later than they produced the products.
2/28/78
And, again, just because the circuit is the same, don't forget the voltages!
>
> In summary, if the 2204 50W amp is in question, then it's safe to say
> that the pre-amp is very much like the plexi-style configuration.
ONLY the earliest have that design.
Jim
Different types of coupling capacitors do affect tone in an amp. Same
with transformers. These are a couple of reasons that reissues ain't.
Chief...@hotmail.com
>
> Well, there's A LOT of information on the net. Only some of it is accurate.
>
> Here's a .pdf file of the schematic that came with my JMP 2204 that I
> bought new in 1981 (produced in 1980). This is a Marshall supplied
> document, came with my amp. Note the schematic date of 2/28/78.
>
> http://www.seattle-attorney.com/guitar/JMP2204_schematic.pdf
>
That's the pre-1980 Model 2004 cascaded V1 circuit (Hi-sense input) I
was referring to,
which is different than the pre-amp of the 2203. In the HI input
circuit V1a drives into V1b.
In the LO input circuit, the signal goes direct into V1b, bypassing
V1a.
John Mastrangelo
Forget Jim's advice regarding B+ voltages. Unless an amp is out of spec,
the sonic effect of the plates voltages is minute at most. Any difference
will be swamped by the tolerances of the components that truly matter, those
being the handful of resistors and capacitors in the tone control circuit.
95% of the amps personality lies there. All this chatter about carbon comp
resistors and silver mica capacitors is a bunch of balony.
The 2203 and the 2204 with the same pre-amp are going to sound identical,
save for the volume. Some of the posters in this thread have already given
you the important info, that being the two different pre-amps used for this
model. That is what you need to be aware of. The two preamps are very
different, the cascaded one having much higher gain of course. Otherwise,
they are sonically very similar.
The cascaded 2203/4 is probably the greatest rock amp ever built. There are
some super cool mods for the cascaded preamp that simply involve swapping
two wires. If you are interested, let me know.
John Mastrangelo MSEE
Osprey Amplification
"Jim" <as...@beforeyousend.com> wrote in message
news:13n3vem...@corp.supernews.com...
J.P.
So, being an inquisitive amateur, exactly what did you discover about
resistors and caps?
I am also interested in the two wire swap since I will eventually be
building one of these...J.P.
Jim
The way I read your messages, you posted an incorrect schematic for up
to 1981.
Jim
> To adam79,
>
> Forget Jim's advice regarding B+ voltages. Unless an amp is out of spec,
> the sonic effect of the plates voltages is minute at most.
Take it from somebody who has played amps with both voltages:
THE ABOVE IS SIMPLY NOT TRUE.
There is a difference in tone with the lower plate voltages. Why the
heck do you think EVH ran his Super Leads at lower voltages via variac???
Any difference
> will be swamped by the tolerances of the components that truly matter, those
> being the handful of resistors and capacitors in the tone control circuit.
> 95% of the amps personality lies there. All this chatter about carbon comp
> resistors and silver mica capacitors is a bunch of balony.
>
> The 2203 and the 2204 with the same pre-amp are going to sound identical,
> save for the volume.
FALSE. And I'm an owner that has played the different types.
Peter Alerich
<jfmast...@comcast.net> wrote:
>The cascaded 2203/4 is probably the greatest rock amp ever built.
Amen, brother.
Peter
Ether
>
> Forget Jim's advice regarding B+ voltages. Unless an amp is out of spec,
> the sonic effect of the plates voltages is minute at most.
Hogwash. Plate voltage differences often have a MASSIVE effect upon
tone. If you don't think so, either you lack firsthand experience, or
you have a tin ear.
> Any difference
> will be swamped by the tolerances of the components that truly matter, those
> being the handful of resistors and capacitors in the tone control circuit.
> 95% of the amps personality lies there.
Again, I'll chalk this ridiculous opinion up to your lack of
experience. You really think that transformers have no effect upon
tone?
> All this chatter about carbon comp resistors and silver mica capacitors is a bunch of balony.
Maybe so. That's not even in the same league as output tube plate
voltages, though.
> The 2203 and the 2204 with the same pre-amp are going to sound identical,
> save for the volume.
Not if the output tube plate voltages are significantly different. 50
watts at 400V is going to have a very different character than 100
watts at 478V, even if the preamps were identical.
> Some of the posters in this thread have already given
> you the important info, that being the two different pre-amps used for this
> model. That is what you need to be aware of. The two preamps are very
> different, the cascaded one having much higher gain of course. Otherwise,
> they are sonically very similar.
>
> The cascaded 2203/4 is probably the greatest rock amp ever built. There are
> some super cool mods for the cascaded preamp that simply involve swapping
> two wires. If you are interested, let me know.
>
> John Mastrangelo MSEE, Tin Ear
> Osprey Amplification
--E
Chief...@hotmail.com
wrote:
> To adam79,
>
> Forget Jim's advice regarding B+ voltages. Unless an amp is out of spec,
> the sonic effect of the plates voltages is minute at most.
John:
When I reduced the HT (B+) voltage from the rectifier in my JTM45-
clone from 440 to 410 (which also reduced all other
DC voltages proportionately), it had a significant and, IMO, positive
effect on the tone and 'feel' of the amp. At 440 the amp was
'tighter',
but at the lower voltage the tone is more 'soulful', and the amp feels
a little spongier. Volume change is insignificant.
west
Thats VERY interesting.....................
My '78 2204's V1 is wired in parallel like my plexi Super Lead. WITH the
low plate voltages. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
Those cascaded stages look very nice, indeedy!
jh
Hi west,
Indeed very intersting,
What kind of cosmetics does your amp have? Do you know the exact date
and the S/N?
regards
Jochen
west
> To adam79,
>
> Forget Jim's advice regarding B+ voltages. Unless an amp is out of spec,
> the sonic effect of the plates voltages is minute at most. Any difference
> will be swamped by the tolerances of the components that truly matter, those
> being the handful of resistors and capacitors in the tone control circuit.
> 95% of the amps personality lies there. All this chatter about carbon comp
> resistors and silver mica capacitors is a bunch of balony.
>
> The 2203 and the 2204 with the same pre-amp are going to sound identical,
> save for the volume. Some of the posters in this thread have already given
> you the important info, that being the two different pre-amps used for this
> model. That is what you need to be aware of. The two preamps are very
> different, the cascaded one having much higher gain of course. Otherwise,
> they are sonically very similar.
>
> The cascaded 2203/4 is probably the greatest rock amp ever built. There are
> some super cool mods for the cascaded preamp that simply involve swapping
> two wires. If you are interested, let me know.
>
> John Mastrangelo MSEE
> Osprey Amplification
>
>
>
I don't nave a masters, but I have ears, and Marshalls with both high
(495 b+, '72 1959) and low (405 b+, '78 2204) plate voltages. Both have
the same front end. The dynamics and sound are different.
EVH was on to something.
west
Amps at my shop. I'll post details around lunch time. Maybe a link to
some external images. It has a "k" suffix, places it in '78.
Exterior is rough, but sounds great.
jh
> On Dec 25, 9:59 am, jh <jh-audiop_NOS...@t-online.de> wrote:
>> Chief_Bi...@hotmail.com schrieb:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Dec 24, 12:47 pm, "adam79" <ada...@toast.net> wrote:
>>>> I was wondering what your opinions are regarding the JMP 2204 50 and 100watt
>>>> versions (pre jcm800 models w/ master volume and 2 vertical inputs). Do they
>>>> sound different, or are they pretty much the same amp, but louder? I'm
>>>> looking for that "brown" distortion. My cab is an older Marshall JCM800
>>>> 1960A cab (the ones that have one input on the lower back, pre mono/stereo
>>>> switch) with 4 oringinal UK Celestion G12-65s.. i just had the speakers
>>>> rewired with a thick guage wire.
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> -Adam
>>>> ada...@toast.net
>>> Completely different amps, in both pre-amp and power section.
>>> The 50W 2204 is designed like the traditional 'plexi' amp, with
>>> 'minimized' V1 channel input networks and a few component value
>>> changes (mix resistors, V2a Rp, etc).
>>> the 100W 2203 is a completely different amp. Check them out for
>>> yourself, if you can understand the schematics:
>>> http://www.schematicheaven.com/marshallamps/jmp_mastervol_100w_2203u.pdf
>>> http://www.schematicheaven.com/marshallamps/jmp_mastervol_50w_2204u.pdf
>> Chief,
>> 1977. From then on they shared almost identical circuits. I have a 1978
>> 2204 and it's of the "normal" cascaded preamp style similar to the 2203
>> with a few differences. The boards are clearly marked.
>>
as Jim already posted the transitional circuit of your schematic (or dr
tubes') only applies to a few units.
With only two exceptions (both from 76' with the "old" design and toggle
switches) every 2204 i扉e seen, serviced or owned had the "modern"
circuit with the cascaded preamp.
Take a brief look at the "MV-schematics" you cite and you will see that
they do not have the old plexi design (or a slightly modded one), but
one very similar to the 2203 with the cascaded preamp.
Sorry, but that愀 the way it is.
regards und frohe weihnachten,
Jochen
BTW the transitional design has exceptional tonal qualities. I don愒
know why they discontinued it. Perhaps not enough buzz
west
jh
Hi west,
now it gets even more confusing...
My 2204 is S/A 08xxJ -thus a 77- and is definately a cascaded preamp
circuit. So there was a real transition phase, or they shipped different
units to the US....
Great amp, isn't it? And a nice cab you have - 8x10s?
regards
Jochen
Jim
Preamp voltages are also lower on the JMP 2204.
west
I bought that ('68, I think ) 8x10 in '76 for $100 and the seller
couldn't take my money fast enough. I lugged the box all over Houston
and Pasadena Tx for a decade. Played a Marshall, Bassman, and even a
bare tweed Deluxe chassis through it. Still all original, and sounds
great. I want to use it for my casket.
The amp's circuit board *looks* like it was meant to be used as both a
50w or 100w board. Board notations show where an "x" or "s" means 50
watt or super lead version. There are unused spots that would be filled
in to complete a Super Lead circuit. The printed component values follow
the plexi circuit; They are not the same as Jim's schematic. I'm
seriously thinking of cascading the channels. Wouldn't be too difficult,
and I could always change it back.
John Mastrangelo
The issue in question is the difference in tone between a 50W 2204 and a
100W 2203. I stated that any difference in tone that is caused by the
(small) difference in plate voltage is swamped by the changes in the tone
stack due to component tolerances. I did not state that a 100V change in
plate voltage on a subject amp is imperceptable. I challenge anyone in this
group to identify a recording of a dimed 2203 from a dimed 2204 and tell
they difference based on plate voltage alone.
Regarding my "lack of first hand experience" , let's just take a quick
tour...
Playing guitar since age 10
Built my first effects at 13 (started from Craig Anderton's book)
Modifying Fenders, Marshalls, etc at 16
BSEE 1985 Lehigh Univ
MSEE 1986 Cornell Univ
President and Owner of Osprey Amplification since 1992
Owner of stacks of vintage and hand -built amplifiers
Designed and built more than 40 original amps
Currently making a very healthy salary as an aerospace engineer and
retired from alt.guitar.amps (insufficient SNR)
So would someone with golden ears, Jim and Ether come to mind, care to
explain to me exactly how the difference in plate voltages between a 2203
and 2204 create massive differences in tone? And how this difference is
greater than variations in the tone stack? Because if you can hear that
difference them something is happening right? What is it? I'm dying to know
:)
John
John Mastrangelo
that is a valid comparison. The question is whether a 2203 sounds different
from a 2204. I maintian that the natural variation in component values
between the two amps (and variations in plate voltages too!) makes the
difference in tone between the two amps negligable.
And thank you for the civil and thoughtful reply.
John
<Chief...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:093341c9-0caf-430f...@e4g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Ether
You just hit the nail on the head. John Mastrangelo, take note.
--E
Ether
John Mastrangelo wrote:
> The issue in question is the difference in tone between a 50W 2204 and a
> 100W 2203. I stated that any difference in tone that is caused by the
> (small) difference in plate voltage is swamped by the changes in the tone
> stack due to component tolerances. I did not state that a 100V change in
> plate voltage on a subject amp is imperceptable.
Take a look at the schematics. The 2204 has a plate voltage of 400V.
The 2203 has a plate voltage of 478V. Therefore you just as good as
said a 78V plate voltage delta is imperceptible. Like I said--
hogwash.
I don't care how far out of whack the component tolerances are--the
difference in plate voltage are still going to have a major impact on
the tone and feel of the amp.
I also mentioned that the 50-watt 2204 and 100-watt 2203 have very
different output transformers. That too will have an effect on tone.
You ignored my comment.
> I challenge anyone in this
> group to identify a recording of a dimed 2203 from a dimed 2204 and tell
> they difference based on plate voltage alone.
In person, it would be easy, at least for a player with some
experience and a decent ear for tone.
>
> Regarding my "lack of first hand experience" , let's just take a quick
> tour...
> Playing guitar since age 10
> Built my first effects at 13 (started from Craig Anderton's book)
> Modifying Fenders, Marshalls, etc at 16
> BSEE 1985 Lehigh Univ
> MSEE 1986 Cornell Univ
> President and Owner of Osprey Amplification since 1992
Uh oh--I'm hoping for the sake of your customers that these aren't
guitar amps...
> Owner of stacks of vintage and hand -built amplifiers
> Designed and built more than 40 original amps
> Currently making a very healthy salary as an aerospace engineer and
> retired from alt.guitar.amps (insufficient SNR)
And yet, you still don't have enough useful experience to tell the
difference that higher vs. lower plate voltage can make. Not a big
deal, John. Not everyone has great ears. And the healthy salary
won't help that.
>
> So would someone with golden ears, Jim and Ether come to mind, care to
> explain to me exactly how the difference in plate voltages between a 2203
> and 2204 create massive differences in tone? And how this difference is
> greater than variations in the tone stack? Because if you can hear that
> difference them something is happening right? What is it? I'm dying to know
> :)
See Chief_Billy's last post. He describes the effect of different
plate voltages perfectly.
>
> John
--E
Fit E. Cal
LIIIIVE! :-) mvm
jh
My 2204 has the same board. I had the pleasure to service one of thos
"non-cascaded" amps this year. IMHO - in combination with an appropriate
pedal - they are even better than the "modern" 2204s. Top versatility
and a great round sound to start from.
I must confess that I changed mine to the 1987 circuit a few weeks after
i got it years ago. I intend to reverse the changes as i found a 1987T
regards
Jochen
regards
Jochen
Jim
> The issue in question is the difference in tone between a 50W 2204 and a
> 100W 2203. I stated that any difference in tone that is caused by the
> (small) difference in plate voltage is swamped by the changes in the tone
> stack due to component tolerances. I did not state that a 100V change in
> plate voltage on a subject amp is imperceptable. I challenge anyone in this
> group to identify a recording of a dimed 2203 from a dimed 2204 and tell
> they difference based on plate voltage alone.
>
> Regarding my "lack of first hand experience" , let's just take a quick
> tour...
> Playing guitar since age 10
> Built my first effects at 13 (started from Craig Anderton's book)
> Modifying Fenders, Marshalls, etc at 16
> BSEE 1985 Lehigh Univ
> MSEE 1986 Cornell Univ
> President and Owner of Osprey Amplification since 1992
> Owner of stacks of vintage and hand -built amplifiers
> Designed and built more than 40 original amps
> Currently making a very healthy salary as an aerospace engineer and
> retired from alt.guitar.amps (insufficient SNR)
>
> So would someone with golden ears, Jim and Ether come to mind, care to
> explain to me exactly how the difference in plate voltages between a 2203
> and 2204 create massive differences in tone?
Well, Mr. MSEE, the first difference between a 2203 running at 460+V and
a 2204 running at under 390V on the plates should be VERY obvious.
Better than double the power for the 2203. If you really play rock
guitar on tube amps, you ought to know that most guitarists want earlier
breakup. And if your ears can't tell the differences in tone between
EL34's with a 20% voltage drop, I don't know what to tell ya. ...then
there's the bigger OPT.
> And how this difference is
> greater than variations in the tone stack?
Not only is there a difference in tone between a 2203 and a 2204,
there's a difference in tone between a 2204 at 390V and one at 460V.
This is from a PLAYERS standpoint, not some MSEE listening to a
recording. It ain't about you fiddling with a tone stack and trying to
fool somebody. It's about a guitarist using the best tool available.
And they ARE different. Any guitarist with decent ears can hear it.
> Because if you can hear that
> difference them something is happening right? What is it? I'm dying to know
> :)
>
> John
Ask Eddie Van Halen. Or anybody that's listened to his music.
Jim
> But you kept everything else the same. You compared an apple to an apple and
> that is a valid comparison. The question is whether a 2203 sounds different
> from a 2204. I maintian that the natural variation in component values
> between the two amps (and variations in plate voltages too!) makes the
> difference in tone between the two amps negligable.
That is NOT my experience. When's that last time you played a JMP 2204
running at the lower voltages, anyway?
west
The same reason dropping the plate voltages on the 12ax7s in my
fender amps change the sound. They get more compressed, with less gain
and head room.
Ether
That thread? Nah. There's much more stultifying stuff in here to wake
me up. I've just been on the road a lot in the past several months.
Something most here wouldn't understand!
I see PSU won. Out drinking yet?
--E
John Mastrangelo
Sorry, But this does not explain anything. This is purely a subjective
explanation (which I am not denying that Chief_Billy experienced). What does
it mean to be "tighter" or "more soulful"? Is it the frequency response? Is
the it impulse response of the output stage? Is it the non-ideal behavior of
a resistor creating harmonics under high voltage swings? When you can relate
*an actual electrical phenomenon* to an adjective (i.e. tighter, more
soulful, etc..) and then explain how a different (plate voltage, capacitor,
resistor, output transformer, etc) affect that phenomenon then you will have
a modicum of credibility. In the meantime, you have no more credibility than
a 16 year old stoner who flips burgers for minimum wage.
And by the way Ether and Jim, exactly what are *your* credentials?
"Ether" <et...@x-mail.net> wrote in message
news:6e9d48d0-86df-49e2...@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Chief_Bi...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Dec 26, 4:04?pm, "John Mastrangelo" <jfmastrang...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
> > To adam79,
> >
> > ?Forget Jim's advice regarding B+ voltages. Unless an amp is out of
Jim
> Sorry, But this does not explain anything. This is purely a subjective
> explanation (which I am not denying that Chief_Billy experienced). What does
> it mean to be "tighter" or "more soulful"? Is it the frequency response? Is
> the it impulse response of the output stage? Is it the non-ideal behavior of
> a resistor creating harmonics under high voltage swings? When you can relate
> *an actual electrical phenomenon* to an adjective (i.e. tighter, more
> soulful, etc..) and then explain how a different (plate voltage, capacitor,
> resistor, output transformer, etc) affect that phenomenon then you will have
> a modicum of credibility. In the meantime, you have no more credibility than
> a 16 year old stoner who flips burgers for minimum wage.
>
> And by the way Ether and Jim, exactly what are *your* credentials?
You do NOT impress me by talking about your MSEE.
I obviously have better ears than you do, and I bought the amp that I'm
talking about off the showroom floor over 25 years ago and still own it
and play it regularly.
Beyond that, electronics has been a hobby of mine since grade school.
You see, my dad was also a MSEE and design engineer for Bell Labs before
getting bored with EE and becoming a patent attorney. I've built,
modified, and fixed many a tube amp. I've also designed my own mods for
amps and effects. I own several tube guitar amps from 1W to over 100W.
I own several different cabs including two different era Hiwatt/Fane
4x12 (70's and 80's real Hiwatts), British Celestion Vintage 30, G12M80,
etc....
So I not your average yahoo that spouts off a newsgroup. I have an
understanding of how they work, and experience both playing them and
working with them.
I could talk about how plate voltages affect headroom and dynamics, but
why bother? I care about what I HEAR with my ears, and what I FEEL at
the strings. And I know that a 50W Marshall running at lower plate
voltages SOUNDS and FEELS different than the same circuit running at
higher voltages (yup, I'm saying a second 50 watter, taking the 100W
element out of the argument). If you can't tell the difference, no skin
off my nose.
Lord Valve
If there's anything I can't stand, it's fucking snobs. Especially
the academic type, who screech about their credentials and
wave their goddamn sheepskins in everyone's faces. Fuck you,
college boy. I don't need to squirt math out of every orifice I
possess to be able to get good tone out of a guitar amp.
The dude took his plate voltage down and he liked the
result. You gonna argue with him about what he hears?
One thing is for sure - with less voltage on the output
stage, the amp will clip at a lower power level. When driven
hard, this will translate *directly* to output stage compression.
And compression, as most musicians know, is fucking
magic. Santana built a career on it. So next time you
get your undies in a bunch over someone's "credibility,"
you just remember that Leo Fender (radio/TV repairman)
and Jim Marshall (drummer) didn't have any letters after
their names. And as far as I go, you'll find my "credentials"
in liner notes, on the radio, the Clapton tour, etc. The
conclusion is inescapable - I FOOLED 'EM ALL into
hearing what they did not hear. I dazzled 'em with math
and "credentials." *Fuck* credentials. *Ward Churchill*
has credentials. 'Nuff said.
Lord Valve
Expert (please obsess)
Les Cargill
> Sorry, But this does not explain anything. This is purely a subjective
> explanation (which I am not denying that Chief_Billy experienced). What does
> it mean to be "tighter" or "more soulful"? Is it the frequency response? Is
> the it impulse response of the output stage? Is it the non-ideal behavior of
> a resistor creating harmonics under high voltage swings? When you can relate
> *an actual electrical phenomenon* to an adjective (i.e. tighter, more
> soulful, etc..) and then explain how a different (plate voltage, capacitor,
> resistor, output transformer, etc) affect that phenomenon then you will have
> a modicum of credibility. In the meantime, you have no more credibility than
> a 16 year old stoner who flips burgers for minimum wage.
>
While I sympathize with your ... quest here, it's not
gonna happen, unless you find somebody to pay for
the mapping. You'll also have to overcome thirty
years worth of guitar amp reviews in magazines.
"Tighter" makes sense - more damped. "Soulful" ...
yeesh. Dunno. Less damped? Ringier? Probably
"more like a Deluxe Reverb or Super Reverb."
With guitar amps, it's usually about transient response
or just plain ole old school harmonic distortions -
to the extent those are seperable. They could deconvolve
the thing and you still couldn't reproduce it by
convolution - too many weird nonlinearities. I've tried. :)
Some high-end mic amp and compressor guys have literally gone
through schematics of things like 1176s and produced 'C' code
to emulate each component - to construct a plugin which
emulates the thing. Daunting task, and I'm not sure
they do that anymore.
> And by the way Ether and Jim, exactly what are *your* credentials?
>
>
<snip>
That's a pretty counterproductive line of query. Guitar amps
are notoriously famous for being a "tech" thing - the best
guitar amp guys are usually either self-taught, or they
might have a military tech background. I don't they
they do Marshalls in the MSEE programs. Maybe Marshall
Leach...
At least in the past, by the time graduated college, we
were warned that we had simply "learned how to learn" in
college. And one thing you learn is to listen to the
techs.
(ObDisclosure: BSCS, so laugh now! but hey, i know what
convolution is so neener neener neener...) :)
--
Les Cargill
It's that guy again...
>Guitar amps
>are notoriously famous for being a "tech" thing - the best
>guitar amp guys are usually either self-taught, or they
>might have a military tech background.
While some folks who are big in the amp world do have 'sheepskins'
of some sort, it's those who have been there, done that, with either
musicians or companies, whose names, if dropped, crack the ground,
that KNOW their shit. Buttons mean nothing unless they are pushed.
I wouldn't trade my decades in the real worlds amp field for 4 years
in Harvard. Sure, I'd be making more money, but I have been doing this
since I was 14 (52 now), and only regret I didn't take more pictures,
but back then, it was just doing the job. 'Names' ment nothing to me.
But hey, everyone have a safe New Years, and *P*L*E*A*S*E* do NOT
drink and drive. M'Lady and I are staying home. Safer that way,
due to the snow and the idiots out there. God Bless & keep you all.
JJTj
I wear Brooks clothes and white shoes all the time
I wear Brooks clothes and white shoes all the time
Get three "Cs," a "D" and think checks from home sublime
I don't keep no dogs or women in my room
I don't keep no dogs or women in my room
But I'll love my Vincent Baby, until the day of doom
Rinehart, Rinehart, I'm a most indiff'rent guy
Rinehart, Rinehart, I'm a most indiff'rent guy
But I love my Vincent Baby, and that's no Harvard lie
Institute and Porky are my clubs
Institute and Porky are my clubs
And I think that girls at Radcliffe all are dubs
Went to Groton and got a big broad A
Went to Groton and got a big broad A
Now at Harvard and follow an indiff'rent way
Do my drinking down in the cool Ritz Bar
Do my drinking down in the cool Ritz Bar
Dad is Racquet and Chilton is my ma.
http://harvardmagazine.com/2002/09/i-love-my-vincent-baby-.html
Jim
>>Guitar amps
>>are notoriously famous for being a "tech" thing - the best
>>guitar amp guys are usually either self-taught, or they
>>might have a military tech background.
>
>
> While some folks who are big in the amp world do have 'sheepskins'
> of some sort, it's those who have been there, done that, with either
> musicians or companies, whose names, if dropped, crack the ground,
> that KNOW their shit. Buttons mean nothing unless they are pushed.
>
> I wouldn't trade my decades in the real worlds amp field for 4 years
> in Harvard. Sure, I'd be making more money, but I have been doing this
> since I was 14 (52 now), and only regret I didn't take more pictures,
> but back then, it was just doing the job. 'Names' ment nothing to me.
It's very fair to say that I know more about tube amps than my father,
even though he has a MSEE and was a design engineer for Bell Labs. But
I still sometimes go to him when I'm trying to figure out some mods to
SS stompboxes.
>
> But hey, everyone have a safe New Years, and *P*L*E*A*S*E* do NOT
> drink and drive. M'Lady and I are staying home. Safer that way,
> due to the snow and the idiots out there. God Bless & keep you all.
>
> JJTj
Yeah, I'll also be at home where it's safe and warm.
SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT:
I was in an accident recently. Sitting at a red light, when some moron
plowed into me. At the hospital, they automatically drew blood and
tested my alcohol level (along with a lot of other tests for internal
bleeding, spleen, pancreas...). My alcohol level was ZERO, but it got
me to thinking... What if it was New Years Eve and I had a couple of
drinks and a Champagne toast?
Even if you don't get hurt, a cab is cheaper than a DWI/DUI. Heck, a
limo is cheaper! Designate an alcohol free driver, take a cab, or rent
a limo! Going "downtown" to a party? Get a room and don't worry about
driving home.
I have a friend who was once a great guitar player. He drove after
drinking. Now he can't play guitar, and has a hard time even talking
(brain damage from his accident). Don't let that happen to you!
If you are sober and driving, stay out of packs of cars. Be extra
defensive. Too many drunks to worry about.
My wife and I use to host an annual New Years Eve party. We'd ask every
guest to bring their favorite bottle of Champagne. I'd keep a list for
people who asked for suggestions. I'd fill in the blanks with several
select bottles. I'd serve good food, and people would be guaranteed
over a dozen different quality Champagnes to sample. But I haven't done
that in a while, because of worries about drinking and driving. Some
people weren't big on Champagne. Oh, they'd bring a good bottle for the
party. ...but they'd also bring a fifth of whatever they preferred. It
got to be too much to worry about.
Gary Gerhart
> Even if you don't get hurt, a cab is cheaper than a DWI/DUI. Heck, a
> limo is cheaper! Designate an alcohol free driver, take a cab, or rent
> a limo! Going "downtown" to a party? Get a room and don't worry about
> driving home.
Agreed. I once bought roundtrip airfare from Los Angeles to
Santa Maria. This is, maybe, a two hour drive. But I was playing
in a golf tourney ( the kind where having a great time with
friends is the primary goal) and didn't want to drive two hours
after 18 holes of drinking. I figured $300 or whatever it was
was a bargain.
Have a safe New Year
Gary Gerhart
Gerhart Amplification
west
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAfukinMeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeennnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn!
Elvis Kabong
It appears that AGA's self-appointed vacuuming fart bottler,
Wet Fart Willy has taken upon himself to launch an intellectuallly
stupefying and vastly daring leap at the jugular of new guy John
Mastrangelo.
Now it's time for the toadies to engage in their typical feeding frenzy
as well as a few leaks of their hidden jealous rage.
It's as comical as seeing Willy post in a thread called, "Calling
all guitarists who can write too."
"Lord Valve" <detr...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:4779470B...@ix.netcom.com...
John Mastrangelo
"work" that your ex-customers had me fix through the 90's I never said an
unkind word about you. I guess you just get crankier by the day. No wonder
too, spending your life in that rat-hole you call NBS Electronics.
"Lord Valve" <detr...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:4779470B...@ix.netcom.com...
John Mastrangelo
I'm not a newbie. I was a regular in this newsgroup through the mid 90's
(Google me). I poke my head back in once in awhile to see what's going on
but the SNR apparently has deteriorated dramatically. Case in point, a
decade or so back when there were a fair number of knowledgable contributors
to the group, Fat Willie was known as a vulgar, gun-totin' hot air blowin'
buffoon. Now he calls himself Lord ( but I'm the snob!) but clearly, nothing
has changed.
I guess after being surrounded by people with education, intellect,
integrity, and a desire to understand the workings and application of
technology, I've forgotten just how hateful and moronic the typing heads of
this group are.
If anyone wants to have a reasonable, respectful discussion or exchange of
ideas regarding amps or aerospace hardware, feel free to contact me. Future
flames will be ignored.
John Mastrangelo
"Elvis Kabong" <ampsc...@tuneland.com> wrote in message
news:wFfej.21604$L27....@bignews9.bellsouth.net...
Elvis Kabong
"It's that guy again..." <up.urs.con> wrote in message
news:papin39uducaeme3s...@4ax.com...
>
>>Guitar amps
>>are notoriously famous for being a "tech" thing - the best
>>guitar amp guys are usually either self-taught, or they
>>might have a military tech background.
>
> While some folks who are big in the amp world do have 'sheepskins'
> of some sort, it's those who have been there, done that, with either
> musicians or companies, whose names, if dropped, crack the ground,
> that KNOW their shit. Buttons mean nothing unless they are pushed.
>
> I wouldn't trade my decades in the real worlds amp field for 4 years
> in Harvard. Sure, I'd be making more money, but I have been doing this
> since I was 14 (52 now), and only regret I didn't take more pictures,
> but back then, it was just doing the job. 'Names' ment nothing to me.
>
> But hey, everyone have a safe New Years, and *P*L*E*A*S*E* do NOT
> drink and drive. M'Lady and I are staying home. Safer that way,
> due to the snow and the idiots out there. God Bless & keep you all.
>
> JJTj
Statistically, more car crashes are caused by people falling
asleep at the wheel than by driving drunk.
On the other hand, overdosing on alcohol can kill you,
but no one has ever died from an overdose of cannabis.
Meth doesn't rot teeth - sugar *does*. And it causes diabetes
and is alleged to be addictive. And now we have high fructose
corn syrup that injures livers. And the corn is most likely a GMO.
Our rights and freedoms were demanded by protestors.
They were not provided by the military.
Where's the freedom of choice when everything is now made in
shit-ass China?
Why should corporate profits be privatized while their risk taking
is socialized?
The government is our enemy and the marketplace is our friend?
Here's hoping we go back to right side up in 2008. Republican upside down
world sucks.
Happy New Year to everyone!
M...@disney.com
So what's you opinion?
Lord Valve
LV
Elvis Kabong
"John Mastrangelo" <jfmast...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:V6idnahgc6R_IOTa...@comcast.com...
> Hey Elvis,
>
> I'm not a newbie. I was a regular in this newsgroup through the mid 90's
> (Google me). I poke my head back in once in awhile to see what's going on
> but the SNR apparently has deteriorated dramatically. Case in point, a
> decade or so back when there were a fair number of knowledgable
> contributors to the group, Fat Willie was known as a vulgar, gun-totin'
> hot air blowin' buffoon. Now he calls himself Lord ( but I'm the snob!)
> but clearly, nothing has changed.
>
> I guess after being surrounded by people with education, intellect,
> integrity, and a desire to understand the workings and application of
> technology, I've forgotten just how hateful and moronic the typing heads
> of this group are.
>
> If anyone wants to have a reasonable, respectful discussion or exchange of
> ideas regarding amps or aerospace hardware, feel free to contact me.
> Future flames will be ignored.
>
> John Mastrangelo
Garsh John, I hope you don't join the following group of engineers
and techs who left the group who were basically chased away by the
self-appointed g-u-r-u "authority" here, Lard Wilbur. Of course,
some left because of their distaste of the political bashing, the
political divisiveness, the flamings and increase of Off Topic
threads, but for the most part it appears Lard Wilbur seems
like he needs to be the number one top dog king of hill and
would say anything to destroy any intellectual competition
by using character assassination in order to imply that anyone
of superior intellect or knowledge was simply invalid.
Here's a partial list of cool, intelligent, humorous, civil and
very knowledgeable guys who left thanks to Lard Wilbur:
RG Keen
Kevin O'Connor
Danny Russell
Roy Blankenship
Gil Ayan
Dave Stork
Tim Tube
Dave Moore
Marc Ferguson
Chris Mohrbacher
I hope you don't join them and instead stay here. If enough of
good guys come back and outnumber Wilbur and his sycophants
perhaps it could be On Topic most of the time and yet still be
the uncensored free-for-all place for insanity and entertainment too.
Ed
Elvis Kabong
M...@disney.com
<ampsc...@tuneland.com> wrote:
That 8" tree I sheered off in Denver would not agree with you on that
>>>On the other hand, overdosing on alcohol can kill you,
>>>but no one has ever died from an overdose of cannabis.
You have never smoked hash oil have you?
>>>Meth doesn't rot teeth
Again..you haven't done much meth either...or you are doing it and
living in denial like a motherfucker! Ask you local VN vet Ranger
about the results of eating all of those white crosses on his teeth..
>> sugar *does*. And it causes diabetes
False.... eating cheap shit foods like McDonalds may help though!
>>>and is alleged to be addictive.
That is likely true..and corps put it in everything they sell just
like salt. Salt covers up shitty tasting food...
> And now we have high fructose
>>>corn syrup that injures livers.
References for this? It is in everything also...
>>And the corn is most likely a GMO.
Very possible...not sure of the problems with this. Might be causing
damage or disease..
>>>Our rights and freedoms were demanded by protestors.
In some cases...
>>>They were not provided by the military.
Not true! Nothing like a fucking Army running up your ass to get your
attention! Ask G'damn Insane...oh yeah, you can' anymore..
>>>Where's the freedom of choice when everything is now made in
>>>shit-ass China?
In corporate pockets that are silently feeding capital into the
communist's war machine. They are giving them access to top secret
technology and expect to be spared when China tries to take over..but
there will be no friends if they succeed. Just dumbasses that were
stupid enough to believe that bullshit.
>>>Why should corporate profits be privatized while their risk taking
>>>is socialized?
????? Uh..okay...
>>>The government is our enemy and the marketplace is our friend?
I think some politicians are enemys as are some corps
>>>
>>>Here's hoping we go back to right side up in 2008. Republican upside down
>>>world sucks.
More like greedy, self centered, sword swallowers that have
infilterated political parties...all of them! And Ted Nugent didn't
bother to run...
>>>Happy New Year to everyone
Happy New Year NOLA...! Hope your gun is working right!
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/nation/5417468.html
>> So what's you opinion?
>What's yours?
>
To the city of New Orleans rode a stranger one fine day
Hardly spoke to folks around him didn't have too much to say
No one dared to ask his business no one dared to make a slip
for the stranger there among them had a big iron on his hip
Big iron on his hip
It was early in the morning when he rode into the town
He came riding from the south side slowly lookin' all around
He's an outlaw loose and running came the whisper from each lip
And he's here to do some business with the big iron on his hip
big iron on his hip
In this town there lived an outlaw by the name of Ed the Red
Many men had tried to take him and that many men were dead
He was vicious and a killer though a youth of fifty four
And the notches on his pistol numbered one an nineteen more
One and nineteen more
Now the stranger started talking made it plain to folks around
Was an Arizona ranger wouldn't be too long in town
He came here to take an outlaw back alive or maybe dead
And he said it didn't matter he was after Ed the Red
After Ed the Red
Wasn't long before the story was relayed to Ed the Red
But the outlaw didn't worry men that tried before were dead
Twenty men had tried to take him twenty men had made a slip
Twenty one would be the ranger with the big iron on his hip
Big iron on his hip
The morning passed so quickly it was time for them to meet
It was twenty past eleven when they walked out in the street
Folks were watching from the windows every-body held their breath
They knew this handsome ranger was about to meet his death
About to meet his death
There was forty feet between them when they stopped to make their play
And the swiftness of the ranger is still talked about today
Ed the Red had not cleared leather fore a bullet fairly ripped
And the ranger's aim was deadly with the big iron on his hip
Big iron on his hip
It was over in a moment and the folks had gathered round
There before them lay the body of the outlaw on the ground
Oh he might have went on living but he made one fatal slip
When he tried to match the ranger with the big iron on his hip
Big iron on his hip
Ether
I'ts not often you'll find me agreeing with Willie, but I sho' 'nuff
do here.
--E
Ether
<jfmastrang...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > "Ether" <et...@x-mail.net> wrote in message
> > news:6e9d48d0-86df-49e2...@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> > > > > Chief_Bi...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > > > > On Dec 26, 4:04?pm, "John Mastrangelo" <jfmastrang...@comcast.net>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > To adam79,
> > > > spec,
> > > > the sonic effect of the plates voltages is minute at most.
> > > >
> > > > John:
> > >
> > > When I reduced the HT (B+) voltage from the rectifier in my JTM45-
> > > clone from 440 to 410 (which also reduced all other
> > > DC voltages proportionately), it had a significant and, IMO, positive
> > > effect on the tone and 'feel' of the amp. At 440 the amp was
> > > 'tighter',
> > > but at the lower voltage the tone is more 'soulful', and the amp feels
> > > a little spongier. Volume change is insignificant.
> >
> > You just hit the nail on the head. John Mastrangelo, take note.
> >
> > --E
>
> explanation
No shit! Sound is subjective. But if a dozen people listen to the same
sound and come to the same conclusion, you have a consensus.
> (which I am not denying that Chief_Billy experienced). What does
> it mean to be "tighter" or "more soulful"? Is it the frequency response? Is
> the it impulse response of the output stage? Is it the non-ideal behavior of
> a resistor creating harmonics under high voltage swings?
Some or all of those things. Electrically, a lot of complicated
phenomena are taking place simultaneously inside a guitar amp during
play. But ultimately, what matters is the sound produced. If you can
change one variable and produce a change in sound--as is the case here
with plate voltage--you can say that changing that one variable
definitely affected the sound. Case closed.
> When you can relate
> *an actual electrical phenomenon* to an adjective (i.e. tighter, more
> soulful, etc..) and then explain how a different (plate voltage, capacitor,
> resistor, output transformer, etc) affect that phenomenon then you will have
> a modicum of credibility.
You can spend all day looking at 'scopes--and there are times when
that helps--but what matters is the sound produced by the amp. The
scope will not tell you what sounds better, worse, or different.
That's why we have ears, and subjective opinions.
> In the meantime, you have no more credibility than
> a 16 year old stoner who flips burgers for minimum wage.
We're not talking about your teen years, John.
> And by the way Ether and Jim, exactly what are *your* credentials?
I have plenty of credentials, John. Much more impressive than yours.
But in the end, here are the only two that matter, and you can't match
'em--
1--I'm not a moron.
2--I can hear the difference between two otherwise identical amps with
significantly different plate voltages.
It's no coincidence that NOBODY else here shares you opinion. The only
conclusion we can come to is that you don't know what you're talking
about. So learn from the more experienced players here. By the way--
were you an engineer for CBS Fender?
--E
Ether
A-MEN!
--E
Ether
> John Mastrangelo wrote:
> > Sorry, But this does not explain anything. This is purely a subjective
> > explanation (which I am not denying that Chief_Billy experienced). What does
> > it mean to be "tighter" or "more soulful"? Is it the frequency response? Is
> > the it impulse response of the output stage? Is it the non-ideal behavior of
> > a resistor creating harmonics under high voltage swings? When you can relate
> > *an actual electrical phenomenon* to an adjective (i.e. tighter, more
> > soulful, etc..) and then explain how a different (plate voltage, capacitor,
> > resistor, output transformer, etc) affect that phenomenon then you will have
> > a modicum of credibility. In the meantime, you have no more credibility than
> > a 16 year old stoner who flips burgers for minimum wage.
>
> While I sympathize with your ... quest here, it's not
> gonna happen, unless you find somebody to pay for
> the mapping. You'll also have to overcome thirty
> years worth of guitar amp reviews in magazines.
>
> "Tighter" makes sense - more damped. "Soulful" ...
> yeesh. Dunno. Less damped? Ringier? Probably
> "more like a Deluxe Reverb or Super Reverb."
>
> With guitar amps, it's usually about transient response
> or just plain ole old school harmonic distortions -
> to the extent those are seperable. They could deconvolve
> the thing and you still couldn't reproduce it by
Exactly. It's impossible to sample everything that's happening inside
a guitar amp and produce a formula or datasheet that perfectly
describes it mathematically. That's probably why amp modelers aren't
totally convincing. So ears are the best tool for deciding what sounds
the best.
That's not a bad thing, either. Somehow, even though we all have
different ears, players have come to a consensus on what amps sound
the best. Now, I'm sure there's a guy out there who says that the
blackface Fender Deluxe Reverb, BF Super Reverb, Marshall JMP, Vox
AC30, etc. all suck shit, but that guy would be a moron.
Similarly, knowlegeable players have also come to a consensus on the
effect that cathode vs. fixed bias has on a given amp's behavior. And
apperently--except for John--what effect lower and higher plate
voltages have on a given amp's sound. Just ask Rick Koerner about
that! Every power tube has a voltage sweet spot.
--E
M...@disney.com
wrote:
There are two parts of and education.One is going to school and
getting the learning part and maybe a degree. The second is the
apprenticeship part of education that gives a person hands on
knowledge and the tech skills to think correctly, beware of safety
issues, fills in the gaps that the too short public education system
provides, rebutes rumors and bad theory with real logic, and teaches
people skills when dealing with co workers, customers, and management.
Both are required for a well rounded education and it is obvious to
those who have both to any degree when someone comes around spewing
the knowledge part without the logic part. And coming into this
newsgroup flaming the regulars here is just wasting causing trouble.
We don't give a damn if you can work all the math in the world. If you
don't have the workbenching credentials, please don't waste our time
with this flaming bullshit.. and engineers are nortorious forfalsely
thinking they are better than the techs that keep them in a job doing
the real models they design and putting the real world corrections on
their off designs and math irregularities while the engineers gladly
take their mods and use them with pride correcting their mistakes and
taking ownership as if they had found them theirselves.
So you got an education and couldn't get anyone to hire you because
of your caustic attitude? How's the work at McDonald's going? Mr.
Burger flipper!
Big E. Ratt
>
>
> Sorry, But this does not explain anything. This is purely a subjective
> explanation (which I am not denying that Chief_Billy experienced). What
> does it mean to be "tighter" or "more soulful"? Is it the frequency
> response? Is the it impulse response of the output stage? Is it the
> non-ideal behavior of a resistor creating harmonics under high voltage
> swings? When you can relate *an actual electrical phenomenon* to an
> adjective (i.e. tighter, more soulful, etc..) and then explain how a
> different (plate voltage, capacitor, resistor, output transformer, etc)
> affect that phenomenon then you will have a modicum of credibility. In the
> meantime, you have no more credibility than a 16 year old stoner who flips
> burgers for minimum wage.
>
> And by the way Ether and Jim, exactly what are *your* credentials?
>
Any experienced electric guitar player reading your response (above) now
knows that
YOU don't know shit about amplifiers and guitar tone. I can't believe you
stuck you
foot so far up you own ass with that post...LMAO. BTW, I'm calling Greg
Germino
right now and advising him to discontinue his Low-voltage version of his
Marshall Plexi
amp because, according to your opinion, it's of no value.
Stephen Cowell
"Big E. Ratt" <Bi...@ratt-land.com> wrote in message
news:477b9d57$0$2546$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
>
> "John Mastrangelo" <jfmast...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:0fednWnnFNeFueXa...@comcast.com...
>>
>>
>> Sorry, But this does not explain anything. This is purely a subjective
>> explanation (which I am not denying that Chief_Billy experienced). What
>> does it mean to be "tighter" or "more soulful"? Is it the frequency
>> response? Is the it impulse response of the output stage? Is it the
>> non-ideal behavior of a resistor creating harmonics under high voltage
>> swings? When you can relate *an actual electrical phenomenon* to an
>> adjective (i.e. tighter, more soulful, etc..) and then explain how a
>> different (plate voltage, capacitor, resistor, output transformer, etc)
>> affect that phenomenon then you will have a modicum of credibility. In
>> the meantime, you have no more credibility than a 16 year old stoner who
>> flips burgers for minimum wage.
>>
>> And by the way Ether and Jim, exactly what are *your* credentials?
>
> Any experienced electric guitar player reading your response (above) now
> knows that
> YOU don't know shit about amplifiers and guitar tone.
Reading comprehension is not big around
here... all John's asking for (besides troll
food) is an explanation for the effect.
Look at pentode curves... pretty damn flat
way out there, right? More non-linearity
closer to the knee? I put this forward as
one explanation for the feel difference.
NFB would reduce this, one supposes.
The triodes are self-biasing and tend to
compensate AFA operating point goes... but
bigger signals, same geometry... more
cross-coupling, meaning more possibilities
for local feedback to affect frequency response.
Different power supply components will give
a different sag, affecting PA compression
(sustain).
__
Steve
.
Big E. Ratt
retract/delete my response , if I could. I realize now that you were not
being critical, but were simply looking for an explanation of those
subjective qualities cited associated with different pre-and power amp
voltages within an amp which do have some degree of influence on the tone
and 'feel' of an amp.
"Big E. Ratt" <Bi...@ratt-land.com> wrote in message
news:477b9d57$0$2546$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
>
Lord Valve
Ether wrote:
I hate it when you agree with me.
I sentence myself to five solid hours of Hammond time, starting in a half hour.
That'll learn me.
Lord Valve
Organist
Les Cargill
I wish I really knew for sure, but... it's not "impossible", it's
more like "infeasible" - it would cost way more than it's worth.
Story has it that back when DAW plugins were new, people were literally
disassembling expensive and rare studio boxes ( like 1176 limiters )
and writing code to simluate them, part by part. Did this work? I
don't know. The sims were certainly available as commercial products.
http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/CompBundleVS/ I don't
know that UA is able to eat on what those plugins did for 'em
as business.
I believe the economics of tube amps mean we'll have 'em for
a very long time.
> That's probably why amp modelers aren't
> totally convincing. So ears are the best tool for deciding what sounds
> the best.
>
Modelers get close enough to be used frequently. I have
seen reports that Pete Anderson ( plays guitar masterfully
for Dwight Yoakum ) used one but went beck to a Deluxe
Reverb. True? Dunno. Clean Fender amp with a Tele is probably
where modellers did the best work.
Fender's got
a new modeler out that I'm rolling the bones on. But it's also
a tube amp - the Fender Super Champ XD. We'll see. It
might be a "race to the bottom" product, but it seems a lot
like a PoD plus one of those "tube PoD" docking stations in
one box.
I'd really rather have a Super Reverb for my own purposes, but
*I might be better off with a dang Peavey Bandit than with
the Super Champ or a Super Reverb*. I used an SS Fender
for a long time. The only thing out there I liked better
than the SS Fender for an entire gig was the VHT Pitbull,
and it cost too much.
It's a weird world.
> That's not a bad thing, either. Somehow, even though we all have
> different ears, players have come to a consensus on what amps sound
> the best. Now, I'm sure there's a guy out there who says that the
> blackface Fender Deluxe Reverb, BF Super Reverb, Marshall JMP, Vox
> AC30, etc. all suck shit, but that guy would be a moron.
>
If they didn't take up so much space and cost so much, I'd have
one of each :)
Some of this has to do with what people grow up with. But don't
assume the kids are tone-deaf ( I had begun to wonder during
the Mesa Boogie TripleRecto era ) - lotta post-rock bands use
what sounds like Super Reverb amps and low-output pickups, and
get tone to die for.
Post-rock is kinda "surf with delusions of grandeur".
> Similarly, knowlegeable players have also come to a consensus on the
> effect that cathode vs. fixed bias has on a given amp's behavior. And
> apperently--except for John--what effect lower and higher plate
> voltages have on a given amp's sound. Just ask Rick Koerner about
> that! Every power tube has a voltage sweet spot.
>
> --E
>
>
--
Les Cargill
Ether
Nice try, Willie, but you're not getting off that easy. I'm thinking
8 years of Hillary will be a more appropriate penance.
Enjoy!
--E
Lord Valve
Ether wrote:
Ain't gonna happen. You heard it from me first. You *will* remember - either way. ;-)
LV
Fit E. Cal
> On Dec 28, 12:58 am, "Fit E. Cal" <ya...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 28, 12:54 am, Ether <et...@x-mail.net> wrote:
>
> > > John Mastrangelo wrote:
> > > > The issue in question is the difference in tone between a 50W 2204 and a
> > > > 100W 2203. I stated that any difference in tone that is caused by the
> > > > (small) difference in plate voltage is swamped by the changes in the tone
> > > > stack due to component tolerances. I did not state that a 100V change in
> > > > plate voltage on a subject amp is imperceptable.
>
> > > Take a look at the schematics. The 2204 has a plate voltage of 400V.
> > > The 2203 has a plate voltage of 478V. Therefore you just as good as
> > > said a 78V plate voltage delta is imperceptible. Like I said--
> > > hogwash.
>
> > > I don't care how far out of whack the component tolerances are--the
> > > difference in plate voltage are still going to have a major impact on
> > > the tone and feel of the amp.
>
> > > different output transformers. That too will have an effect on tone.
> > > You ignored my comment.
>
> > > > I challenge anyone in this
> > > > group to identify a recording of a dimed 2203 from a dimed 2204 and tell
> > > > they difference based on plate voltage alone.
>
> > > In person, it would be easy, at least for a player with some
> > > experience and a decent ear for tone.
>
> > > > Regarding my "lack of first hand experience" , let's just take a quick
> > > > tour...
> > > > Playing guitar since age 10
> > > > Built my first effects at 13 (started from Craig Anderton's book)
> > > > Modifying Fenders, Marshalls, etc at 16
> > > > BSEE 1985 Lehigh Univ
> > > > MSEE 1986 Cornell Univ
> > > > President and Owner of Osprey Amplification since 1992
>
> > > Uh oh--I'm hoping for the sake of your customers that these aren't
> > > guitar amps...
>
> > > > Owner of stacks of vintage and hand -built amplifiers
> > > > Designed and built more than 40 original amps
> > > > Currently making a very healthy salary as an aerospace engineer and
> > > > retired from alt.guitar.amps (insufficient SNR)
>
> > > And yet, you still don't have enough useful experience to tell the
> > > difference that higher vs. lower plate voltage can make. Not a big
> > > deal, John. Not everyone has great ears. And the healthy salary
> > > won't help that.
>
> > > > So would someone with golden ears, Jim and Ether come to mind, care to
> > > > explain to me exactly how the difference in plate voltages between a 2203
> > > > and 2204 create massive differences in tone? And how this difference is
> > > > greater than variations in the tone stack? Because if you can hear that
> > > > difference them something is happening right? What is it? I'm dying to know
> > > > :)
>
> > > See Chief_Billy's last post. He describes the effect of different
> > > plate voltages perfectly.
>
> > > > John
>
> > > --E
>
> > FrankenEther! Must have been the ohm, amp/cab thread...Bzzzt. It's A-
> > LIIIIVE! :-) mvm
>
> That thread? Nah. There's much more stultifying stuff in here to wake
> me up. I've just been on the road a lot in the past several months.
> Something most here wouldn't understand!
>
> I see PSU won. Out drinking yet?
>
> --E- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Yeah, I knew Joe Paterno (he was briefly the Athletic Director at PSU
in my boxing days) and have high regard for his ethics. Once he
leaves, I really won't care about PSU football. As to booze,
shitcanned it long ago. There's nothing in a
bottle that I don't get from playing guitar or hard workouts.
Fit E. Cal
>
> - Show quoted text -
Jim is a lawyer. He has decided to play the part of amp tech in AGA
but he's a hobbyist player and general gear head, that's all. He has
no business insulting you, particularly with "...I obviously have
better ears than you do, and..." owes
you an apology.
I like seeing someone with;
> Playing guitar since age 10
> Built my first effects at 13 (started from Craig Anderton's book)
> Modifying Fenders, Marshalls, etc at 16
> BSEE 1985 Lehigh Univ
> MSEE 1986 Cornell Univ
> President and Owner of Osprey Amplification since 1992
going for him, adding to discussions in AGA.
Jim? Man up and be cool. You over play your hand in the tech game WAY
too often. Your specialty is law as it applies to
dog owners isn't it? What if one of these guys started making
assertions in an academic area you cut your teeth in? At
a minimum, you ought to post a sample of your playing. Try to chill.
Everyone is at risk of getting emotional and some fools are virtually
incapable of anything else.
Regards,
mvm
Fit E. Cal
<jfmastrang...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
> It's about time Fat Willy chimed in. You know, despite the amount of your
> "work" that your ex-customers had me fix through the 90's I never said an
> unkind word about you. I guess you just get crankier by the day. No wonder
> too, spending your life in that rat-hole you call NBS Electronics.
>
post ROCKS as the best in AGA
2007. Took to the VERY last day too. Killer. I am smiling ear-to-ear.
John, you've won the trophy, plaque,
roses and check with this one. Congratulations. :-) mvm
Fit E. Cal
<jfmastrang...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Hey Elvis,
>
> I'm not a newbie. I was a regular in this newsgroup through the mid 90's
> (Google me). I poke my head back in once in awhile to see what's going on
> but the SNR apparently has deteriorated dramatically. Case in point, a
> decade or so back when there were a fair number of knowledgable contributors
> to the group, Fat Willie was known as a vulgar, gun-totin' hot air blowin'
> buffoon. Now he calls himself Lord ( but I'm the snob!) but clearly, nothing
> has changed.
>
> I guess after being surrounded by people with education, intellect,
> integrity, and a desire to understand the workings and application of
> technology, I've forgotten just how hateful and moronic the typing heads of
> this group are.
>
> If anyone wants to have a reasonable, respectful discussion or exchange of
> ideas regarding amps or aerospace hardware, feel free to contact me. Future
> flames will be ignored.
>
> John Mastrangelo
:-) Excellent.
Fit E. Cal
>
> - Show quoted text -
Now THIS is a reasonable, intelligent post. I'd rather see two guys
with credentials and experience collaborating in a positive vein than
getting all AGA in AGA. There's a middle ground. The human ego factor
is giving the likes of whiticre
a little O2 that waste of skin doesn't deserve! :-) mvm
Fit E. Cal
>
>
> please don't waste our time with this flaming bullshit..
>
>
> of your caustic attitude? How's the work at McDonald's going? Mr.
> Burger flipper
>
>
mvm
Fit E. Cal
> John: I apologize for over-reacting you your post (below) and would
> retract/delete my response , if I could. I realize now that you were not
> being critical, but were simply looking for an explanation of those
> subjective qualities cited associated with different pre-and power amp
> voltages within an amp which do have some degree of influence on the tone
> and 'feel' of an amp.
>
> "Big E. Ratt" <Bi...@ratt-land.com> wrote in messagenews:477b9d57$0$2546$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
>
>
Cool. mvm
Fit E. Cal
>
> - Show quoted text -
>
whackjob subtracts from.
As to which ludicrously overfunded, lying bullshitter politician gets
installed as the govt's. mouthpiece to the world, who gives a fuck?
Wake me up on that one when the running platform is about overhauling
the U.S. taxcode- something meaningful with real traction. Religion?
bullshit. There's nothing for *any* of these yakking faces to discuss
that hasn't already been debated in some Jr. High student council
election.
If AGA stayed on amps, gear, music etc., DURING an election year it'd
prove to be a great barometer on the emptiness
of this election. The ONLY great news for Americans is that the
jerkoff from Texas becomes a footnote this year. :-)
M...@disney.com
TiffE if this ng was actual conversations among persons on a fucking
boat your ass would have been trying to outswim the sharks a long
assed time ago...
Fit E. Cal
Bakersfield, CA) and see who you're typing at. As man-gina's go, your
crapper's been a snapper since douglas and claude vaporlocked to a
Bowie tune. Now, remember, if the sun was a wet asshole, you'd be a
defective sun flower seed with bone-smuggler fantasies from whatever
bar last bounced you out to whatever bowling alley mens room last
witnessed one of your all-rainy-day suck-O-thons! Here's a bottle
opener, -when you come to, have a few more, then work on getting
well! ;-)
"....> >> please don't waste our time with this flaming bullshit.."
Ack.
M...@disney.com
<ya...@earthlink.net> wrote:
Stop posting those scat links asscrack...
Fit E. Cal
>
> - Show quoted text -
David Dietz = Dover = Disney
(Bakersfield, CA)
Searchable Record
Premier Spigot
> I have an
> understanding of how they work, and experience both playing them and
> working with them.
Not at all, yes, possible.
Fit E. Cal
This thread peaked and detonated in technocolor 4th of July style,
when John M. blew william's filthy, fat, stinking head out of the back
of a Crate amp, smoking...to think, --the poor mailman had JUST
arrived to drop off william's skinhead hate mag subscription renewals,
IRS warnings and cub scout snuff film dvd's when the whole boiling
cloud of coondog semen hurl came flying out of the combo enshrouding
william's hateful, negatron-beamed humorless head.
Pictures at www.rotten.com
Fit E. Cal
Rewind to thread's highlight fer shitz'ngrinz:
Newsgroups: alt.guitar.amps
From: "John Mastrangelo" <jfmastrang...@comcast.net>
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 19:12:37 -0700
Local: Mon, Dec 31 2007 8:12 pm
Subject: Re: Forget the voltages was - Re: JMP 2204 MK2 50 Watt vs.100
Watt
Reply | Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show
original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
Ether
I'm not sure about that. For example, if Line 6 could perfectly model
every amp a Pod claims to emulate, if would be worth the expense. Or
it would be worth the expense to a competitor. The bigger challenge
is modeling exactly what happens when you change the knobs, induce
feedback, drastically change dynamics, etc.. That has proven elusive.
So I would conclude that there are too many variables to track
accurately, or in all behavioral situations. SA you say, too many
"weird nonlinearities". Ever-increasing computational power will
probably get us there eventually. It's got to be easier than
simulating nuclear explosions.
> Story has it that back when DAW plugins were new, people were literally
> disassembling expensive and rare studio boxes ( like 1176 limiters )
> and writing code to simluate them, part by part. Did this work? I
> don't know. The sims were certainly available as commercial products.
>
> http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/CompBundleVS/I don't
> know that UA is able to eat on what those plugins did for 'em
> as business.
Some digital models of effects are great. Others are best handled by
anolog devices.
> I believe the economics of tube amps mean we'll have 'em for
> a very long time.
That, and the need for heat in the wintertime.
>
> > That's probably why amp modelers aren't
> > totally convincing. So ears are the best tool for deciding what sounds
> > the best.
>
> Modelers get close enough to be used frequently. I have
> seen reports that Pete Anderson ( plays guitar masterfully
> for Dwight Yoakum ) used one but went beck to a Deluxe
> Reverb. True? Dunno. Clean Fender amp with a Tele is probably
> where modellers did the best work.
If you compress a recording enough, it's hard to tell what the
original tone was coming from, anyway.
>
> Fender's got
> a new modeler out that I'm rolling the bones on. But it's also
> a tube amp - the Fender Super Champ XD. We'll see. It
> might be a "race to the bottom" product, but it seems a lot
> like a PoD plus one of those "tube PoD" docking stations in
> one box.
Report back on what you think. Considering the low price, I don't
expect the modeling to be phenomenal.
> I'd really rather have a Super Reverb for my own purposes, but
> *I might be better off with a dang Peavey Bandit than with
> the Super Champ or a Super Reverb*. I used an SS Fender
> for a long time. The only thing out there I liked better
> than the SS Fender for an entire gig was the VHT Pitbull,
> and it cost too much.
>
> It's a weird world.
>
> > That's not a bad thing, either. Somehow, even though we all have
> > different ears, players have come to a consensus on what amps sound
> > the best. Now, I'm sure there's a guy out there who says that the
> > blackface Fender Deluxe Reverb, BF Super Reverb, Marshall JMP, Vox
> > AC30, etc. all suck shit, but that guy would be a moron.
>
> If they didn't take up so much space and cost so much, I'd have
> one of each :)
>
> Some of this has to do with what people grow up with. But don't
> assume the kids are tone-deaf
Most are--until they gain experience.
> ( I had begun to wonder during
> the Mesa Boogie TripleRecto era ) - lotta post-rock bands use
> what sounds like Super Reverb amps and low-output pickups, and
> get tone to die for.
That was basically SRV's approach. What newer bands are you talking
about?
>
> Post-rock is kinda "surf with delusions of grandeur".
>
> > Similarly, knowlegeable players have also come to a consensus on the
> > effect that cathode vs. fixed bias has on a given amp's behavior. And
> > apperently--except for John--what effect lower and higher plate
> > voltages have on a given amp's sound. Just ask Rick Koerner about
> > that! Every power tube has a voltage sweet spot.
>
> > --E
>
> --
> Les Cargill
--E
Les Cargill
I could be wrong, but back when the original PoD came out,
a discussion included a seasoned DSP/maths guy who reasoned that it's
doable, but nobody has enough money to get in the NRE to do
it right. The Line6 people had enough to get it as far as
they got it, and people will continue to take a swipe at it.
Given that a nice industry refurbing old tube amps and
creating new ones is around, then we're much less
likely to see it. That works out because the barrier to
entry is lower and people can make a decent living doing that
on a slightly more "retail" basis.
> So I would conclude that there are too many variables to track
> accurately, or in all behavioral situations.
Maybe. It bet it reduces more than that, but it's gonna
be expensive to do the basic research. You can get a long
way with just deconvolution.
> SA you say, too many
> "weird nonlinearities". Ever-increasing computational power will
> probably get us there eventually. It's got to be easier than
> simulating nuclear explosions.
>
>> Story has it that back when DAW plugins were new, people were literally
>> disassembling expensive and rare studio boxes ( like 1176 limiters )
>> and writing code to simluate them, part by part. Did this work? I
>> don't know. The sims were certainly available as commercial products.
>>
>> http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/CompBundleVS/I don't
>> know that UA is able to eat on what those plugins did for 'em
>> as business.
>
> Some digital models of effects are great. Others are best handled by
> anolog devices.
>
>
>> I believe the economics of tube amps mean we'll have 'em for
>> a very long time.
>
> That, and the need for heat in the wintertime.
>
:)
>>> That's probably why amp modelers aren't
>>> totally convincing. So ears are the best tool for deciding what sounds
>>> the best.
>> Modelers get close enough to be used frequently. I have
>> seen reports that Pete Anderson ( plays guitar masterfully
>> for Dwight Yoakum ) used one but went beck to a Deluxe
>> Reverb. True? Dunno. Clean Fender amp with a Tele is probably
>> where modellers did the best work.
>
> If you compress a recording enough, it's hard to tell what the
> original tone was coming from, anyway.
>
>> Fender's got
>> a new modeler out that I'm rolling the bones on. But it's also
>> a tube amp - the Fender Super Champ XD. We'll see. It
>> might be a "race to the bottom" product, but it seems a lot
>> like a PoD plus one of those "tube PoD" docking stations in
>> one box.
>
> Report back on what you think.
I did.
> Considering the low price, I don't
> expect the modeling to be phenomenal.
>
I have some demo clips up on Soundclick. I like heck out of
the thing. But I don't like what most guitar players
like in a tube amp. To me, the thing sounds like Mike
Cambpell & Tom Petty on Cash's "American Series II"
album, which is a lot where I want to be.
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=330567
I don't think the modelling is that hard, it's just hard to
get it done.
Vox has a new modeller too. It's nice as well.
>> I'd really rather have a Super Reverb for my own purposes, but
>> *I might be better off with a dang Peavey Bandit than with
>> the Super Champ or a Super Reverb*. I used an SS Fender
>> for a long time. The only thing out there I liked better
>> than the SS Fender for an entire gig was the VHT Pitbull,
>> and it cost too much.
>>
>> It's a weird world.
>>
>>> That's not a bad thing, either. Somehow, even though we all have
>>> different ears, players have come to a consensus on what amps sound
>>> the best. Now, I'm sure there's a guy out there who says that the
>>> blackface Fender Deluxe Reverb, BF Super Reverb, Marshall JMP, Vox
>>> AC30, etc. all suck shit, but that guy would be a moron.
>> If they didn't take up so much space and cost so much, I'd have
>> one of each :)
>>
>> Some of this has to do with what people grow up with. But don't
>> assume the kids are tone-deaf
>
> Most are--until they gain experience.
>
I never got past Duane Eddy in over 40 years myself. A little
more Fender-ey, but that's about it. Junior Brown, that sort
of thing.
>> ( I had begun to wonder during
>> the Mesa Boogie TripleRecto era ) - lotta post-rock bands use
>> what sounds like Super Reverb amps and low-output pickups, and
>> get tone to die for.
>
> That was basically SRV's approach. What newer bands are you talking
> about?
>
Explosions in the Sky, Do, Make, Say Think.
>> Post-rock is kinda "surf with delusions of grandeur".
>>
>>> Similarly, knowlegeable players have also come to a consensus on the
>>> effect that cathode vs. fixed bias has on a given amp's behavior. And
>>> apperently--except for John--what effect lower and higher plate
>>> voltages have on a given amp's sound. Just ask Rick Koerner about
>>> that! Every power tube has a voltage sweet spot.
>>> --E
>> --
>> Les Cargill
>
> --E
--
Les Cargill
Endro
I think I an very late here but.. just my 2 cents & sharing my
stories ..
I am not an amp expert, but usually have been messed-up with amp for
Weekend ..
here, when I saw this 2204 ..
------------------------------------------
http://cgi.ebay.com/1976-MARSHALL-50W-JMP-MASTER-VOLUME-2204-HEAD_W0QQitemZ320187589948QQihZ011QQcategoryZ38075QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
I remembered I red this somewhere on net.. after found out the web ..
Pls read the text after stated "The first of the Master Volume series
from 1976" ...
---------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.legendarytones.com/marshallshoppers2.html
http://www.legendarytones.com/76MV2203.jpg
Then I do remember also some Master Volume mod's ..
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.tone-lizard.com/Ultimate_JCM800.htm
when I read carefully the suggestion within that mod,
all value can be reflected into this 11/11/'76 schematic ..
----------------------------------------------------------------------------'
http://www.drtube.com/schematics/marshall/2204u.gif
finally, I found something on the real basis, to prove 11/11/'76
schematic's concept, inside the chasis within disscussion on metroamp
forum ..
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://forum.metroamp.com/viewtopic.php?t=15205&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0&sid=5ffbc7c2a39e86d37bcaddf40b5909d6
I end-up to believe, there is "a bit of different" sound between JMP
and JCM 800 era of Marshall Master Volume ...
as, you might know.. this can be just only for your input..
not trying to reinvent the wheels ..
sorry for late reply ...
:o)
- Endro
On Dec 25 2007, 12:47 am, "adam79" <ada...@toast.net> wrote:
> I was wondering what your opinions are regarding the JMP 2204 50 and 100watt
> versions (pre jcm800 models w/ master volume and 2 vertical inputs). Do they
> sound different, or are they pretty much the same amp, but louder? I'm
> looking for that "brown" distortion. My cab is an older Marshall JCM800
> 1960A cab (the ones that have one input on the lower back, pre mono/stereo
> switch) with 4 oringinal UK Celestion G12-65s.. i just had the speakers
> rewired with a thick guage wire.
>
> Thanks,
> -Adam
> ada...@toast.net