EP-3 preamp magical or just what they had at the time?

[LLL]

Re: EP-3 preamp magical or just what they had at the time?

"Fakes" as in targeting the market for EP-3 preamps and marketing their stomps as Echoplex preamps (some to the point of actually using the "Echoplex" or "EP" label), but having a different circuit or even FET than the real thing. They are blatant with pushing their product as Echoplex preamps, when they're not.

A parallel I suppose would be the Agile "les paul" series of guitars (AL-3000, etc)... if they were to place an "LP" on the headstock, or even place a "Les Paul" on the headstock - fake.

I had the xotic EP-Booster (hmm.. wonder what the "EP" stands for...? :lol: ), it does not do what the Badgerplex (for ex.) does... hence my selling of it.

I owned the xotic for maybe 3 months; I've had my Badgerplex since 2013 and still do.

Ain't nothin like the real thing.

 

[LLL]

Re: EP-3 preamp magical or just what they had at the time?

Yeah, I later realized that you could have posted "Badgerplex" a million times and I wouldn't have known what it was.

Is it safe to say this circuit pays off the most with the low/mid-gain amps?

I am still intrigued and hope to try one out eventually but the realization that I don't like Page's tone and don't want to sound more like early EVH has kind of pushed it from "gotta try one NOW!" to "really gotta try one of those someday." Now it's second in line behind the Catalinbread Talisman I keep hoping to score cheap. Missed one a month or so ago...

I don't think it would be of any use for modern metal, for ex. ... it's a period piece and works awesome for the period-style music it was in.

Low/mid gain mainly, yes.

Lots more dudes than Page and EVH used an Echoplex. Brian May for example. Eric Johnson (used to anyways, for a long time). etc

 

[eclecticsynergy]

Re: EP-3 preamp magical or just what they had at the time?

I think when they say "inspired by" it means they're trying to approximate the tone but using a different circuit. My understanding is that most of these are essentially EQ pedals and IMO they lack something special that the real ones deliver.

Authentic ones recreate the actual circuit from the old units. And some I think go a step further and use all NOS parts rather than just the vintage transistor which is at the heart of it.

 

[Jacew]

Re: EP-3 preamp magical or just what they had at the time?

I'll quote myself here:

"From my understanding, the Xotic EP Booster and pedals such as the EP-Pre by ClinchFX, the Baderplex by Badger Effects, or the Secret Preamp by Chase Tone are different beasts entirely. Kind of like the difference between 'inspired by' (EP Booster) and 'based on' (EP-Pre, Badgerplex, and Secret Preamp)."

By fake, LLL maybe meaning those pedals 'inspired by' and as you said, merely aiming to recreate a similar sounds/tone of the EP3 preamp rather than the pedals using the identical electronic topology and parts like the Badgerplex.

That's pretty much my point. By same definition every piece of gear using modeling technology is "fake"?

Are micro sized EHX Electric mistresses also "fake"? Or every variant of TS, Big Muff, etc... that isn't using exactly same components than original?

 

[LLL]

Re: EP-3 preamp magical or just what they had at the time?

That's pretty much my point. By same definition every piece of gear using modeling technology is "fake"?

Are micro sized EHX Electric mistresses also "fake"? Or every variant of TS, Big Muff, etc... that isn't using exactly same components than original?

Yes.

(except probably micro sized EHX EMs)

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fake

fake adjective

\ ˈfāk
\
faker; fakest
Definition of fake

(Entry 1 of 5)
: not true, real, or genuine : counterfeit, sham He was wearing a fake mustache. She held up the bowl to the window light and smiled her fakest smile yet …

This is especially fake:

 

[Jacew]

Re: EP-3 preamp magical or just what they had at the time?

Yes.

(except probably micro sized EHX EMs)

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fake



This is especially fake:

View attachment 102434

Well... Can't argue with that.

I personally consider calling something fake implies genuine deception, which might be a case with the Dunlop, but definitely not with the EP booster, as it's never implied, and no one who knows what it is would never think on their own, that it really is genuine Echoplex preamp.

Actually one could argue that Dunlop as the name owner has full right to change the scheme and sell it as Echoplex (just like EHX going digital in micro EM pedals). But that's pointless semantics.

They are what they are.

 

[Dave Locher]

Re: EP-3 preamp magical or just what they had at the time?

I hate to see any thread devolve into bickering...but what the hey, we're already here! The Tube Screamer knockoffs are all duplicates of the original circuit. They do what a TS does.
I believe if you go back to the launch of the EP Booster you saw all kinds of reference to "that Echoplex magic."
LLL is right: if a product suggests that it does what the Echoplex does and the circuit is fundamentally different it is either "fake" or at the very least "misleading."

If someone duplicates the circuit with equivalent components then it is "legitimate" or "authentic."

If someone somehow created a different circuit that does all the same things to a guitar signal I would call that "inspired by" or "captures the magic of..."

But a booster that doesn't do the phase shifting thing is just a booster. Just like an overdrive with no midhump and no clean signal in parallel is just an overdrive.

 

[LLL]

Re: EP-3 preamp magical or just what they had at the time?

Well... Can't argue with that.

I personally consider calling something fake implies genuine deception, which might be a case with the Dunlop, but definitely not with the EP booster, as it's never implied, and no one who knows what it is would never think on their own, that it really is genuine Echoplex preamp.

Actually one could argue that Dunlop as the name owner has full right to change the scheme and sell it as Echoplex (just like EHX going digital in micro EM pedals). But that's pointless semantics.

They are what they are.

I don't necessarily think that if something is "fake", that it is inherently or always bad/negative - it's just not the real thing.

The other thing is, there are shades of deception - the Dunlop above is full on, while the xotic EP Booster is just a little by using "EP" in its name (they jumped on the Echoplex preamp stomp wave/craze and rode it).

 

[Jacew]

Re: EP-3 preamp magical or just what they had at the time?

I hate to see any thread devolve into bickering...but what the hey, we're already here! The Tube Screamer knockoffs are all duplicates of the original circuit. They do what a TS does.
I believe if you go back to the launch of the EP Booster you saw all kinds of reference to "that Echoplex magic."
LLL is right: if a product suggests that it does what the Echoplex does and the circuit is fundamentally different it is either "fake" or at the very least "misleading."

If someone duplicates the circuit with equivalent components then it is "legitimate" or "authentic."

If someone somehow created a different circuit that does all the same things to a guitar signal I would call that "inspired by" or "captures the magic of..."

But a booster that doesn't do the phase shifting thing is just a booster. Just like an overdrive with no midhump and no clean signal in parallel is just an overdrive.

I get your point. Not really much worth arguing about meaning of pointless marketing jargon, it's 95% crap anyway

No booster is just a booster though. There's always different variety they add in.

 

[B2D]

Re: EP-3 preamp magical or just what they had at the time?

Hey guys, just FYI the Chase preamp appears to have a discount going on. I just ordered one for $130 after shipping and they're starting price is $170 ish on Reverb.

https://chasetone.com/secret-preamp/

I'l see how I like it and whatnot... I currently have an SP compressor as an 'always on' pedal, especially for cleans. I didn't care for the EP boost that much but this does sound different to my ears, at least from clips.

 

[Dave Locher]

Re: EP-3 preamp magical or just what they had at the time?

Hey guys, just FYI the Chase preamp appears to have a discount going on. I just ordered one for $130 after shipping and they're starting price is $170 ish on Reverb.

https://chasetone.com/secret-preamp/

I'l see how I like it and whatnot... I currently have an SP compressor as an 'always on' pedal, especially for cleans. I didn't care for the EP boost that much but this does sound different to my ears, at least from clips.

Report back! I'd love to hear from someone trying one out for the first time.

 

[B2D]

Re: EP-3 preamp magical or just what they had at the time?

Report back! I'd love to hear from someone trying one out for the first time.

Ship date is 2 weeks from order time. Expect a report back after then. I'm intrigued as well!

 

[BlakeC27]

Re: EP-3 preamp magical or just what they had at the time?

For those who might be interested, I did a simulate of the actual Echoplex Preamp based on the schematic found on page 27 of this PDF.

The Echoplex EP-3 Schematic: Serial Numbers 9451 to 12960 (from the above PDF):


The edited schematic minus all the delay circuitry:


The equivalent schematic in LTSpice:


The Frequency response of the simulation:

 

[Dave Locher]

Re: EP-3 preamp magical or just what they had at the time?

BlakeC27 can you explain in layman's terms what that image shows?

 

[BlakeC27]

Re: EP-3 preamp magical or just what they had at the time?

BlakeC27 can you explain in layman's terms what that image shows?

Hi Dave. Sorry I didn't actually finish this post until just now, I posted it originally last night before but had posted the incorrect images, forgot to add one, etc. But it's how I intended it to be now. The schematics are pretty self-explanatory, the top image is of the schematic of the entire Echoplex, I've then removed all the delay circuitry to show only the preamp circuit (the second image). The third image is one of the same schematic, but drawn in LTSpice (a software tool for simulating circuits) and the final image is probably the one most guitarist are interested in.

The red line on the graph below represents unity gain; the green line is the change in the level of gain of the guitar signal across the audio spectrum with the y-axis representing the frequency (in hertz; from 10Hz up to 100Khz in this case) and the x-axis, the magnitude of the gain (in dB).



The guitar signal sits just under unity gain until it hits approximately 1.1Khz and then is gradually boost to a peak of about 6.4dB at approximately 9.5Khz before steadily dropping off again. I hope that helps explains things a bit better?

 

[Dave Locher]

Re: EP-3 preamp magical or just what they had at the time?

Thanks, BlakeC27. I'm just trying to learn! The circuit diagrams I can follow, it was the last image that confused me.

So if I understand my quick Google search correctly, human ears hear from around 20Hz to around 20kHz.
So in a simulated world the Echoplex preamp lowers the frequencies too low to hear by about 3dB, everything up to 1kHz by around 1-2dB, and boosts everything above that, at least within our range of hearing? Would that account for the clarity and sparkle?

I am still trying to get my head around this "phase shift of certain frequencies" thing. Honestly I think I'm just going to have to hear it for myself to really "get" it. I hate to buy just to try but I can't figure out how else to accomplish it...

 

[LLL]

Re: EP-3 preamp magical or just what they had at the time?

That 10KHz bump explains the "chimey sheen" that I stated previously.

It does more than just EQ curve, however. But overall the (overall) effect is subtle.

 

[BlakeC27]

Re: EP-3 preamp magical or just what they had at the time?

I'm just trying to learn!

Me too.

I am still trying to get my head around this "phase shift of certain frequencies" thing.

Again, me too.

That 10KHz bump explains the "chimey sheen" that I stated previously. It does more than just EQ curve, however. But overall the (overall) effect is subtle.

It is just that, subtle.

 

[Jacew]

Re: EP-3 preamp magical or just what they had at the time?

I'm not that learned in electronics to say absolutely certainly, but there's nothing in that schematic that would make any phase shift in preamp, so I'm calling it bogus.

Unless scueme is wrong or someone clarifies how it should be doing it.

 

[Hank-]

Re: EP-3 preamp magical or just what they had at the time?

Thanks, BlakeC27. I'm just trying to learn! The circuit diagrams I can follow, it was the last image that confused me.

So if I understand my quick Google search correctly, human ears hear from around 20Hz to around 20kHz.
So in a simulated world the Echoplex preamp lowers the frequencies too low to hear by about 3dB, everything up to 1kHz by around 1-2dB, and boosts everything above that, at least within our range of hearing? Would that account for the clarity and sparkle?

I am still trying to get my head around this "phase shift of certain frequencies" thing. Honestly I think I'm just going to have to hear it for myself to really "get" it. I hate to buy just to try but I can't figure out how else to accomplish it...

Guitar speakers roll off after 5-6kHz range and before 55Hz I think, so a boost in the 10kHz region will be very subtle effect.