If You Had $1,600 For A New Amp...?

Re: If You Had $1,600 For A New Amp...?

I've only ever used one attenuator (THD Hot Plate). It's great for taming a loud amp down to bar / club / rehearsal room volume, but not so great for bedroom volume. A clean tube amp with pedals in front or (dare I say it...) a good solid state amp sound better to me for low volume playing.
 
Re: If You Had $1,600 For A New Amp...?

i guess i'll try one of those attenuators. i heard they're like $150 though. know of a cheaper or better product for that price?
Knowing your issues, you want maximum tweakability, Weber's 'tens have the most tweakability, but guess what? you need 200watt ten as you have a 100watt amp that you like to drive, and he has yet to release a 200watt version.

http://www.tedweber.com/atten.htm
 
Re: If You Had $1,600 For A New Amp...?

The Randalls are cool, but if you want to take it up a step and spend just a bit more than your $1,600 (you won't need your Marshall if you get this), I highly recommend the Engater Mod 50. Amazingly versatile and great tone. Power tube swaps and bias within minutes with almost any power tube. The various modules sound great. I just picked one up a few months ago and have just been floored. Check out some clips at the Indoor Storm website. He doesn't play hard rock, but believe me, the amp does rock hard!
 
Re: If You Had $1,600 For A New Amp...?

I think that I'd look real hard at a Hughs and Kettner Switchblade combo(100w, 2x12, el34). At $1599, you save a buck!
 
Re: If You Had $1,600 For A New Amp...?

+1
Most elegant high-gain there is. Yeah, Engls are bit more defined at bottom end but I agree GL Soldano's have the BEEF. I still cant hear how can people say that SLO is pretty similar tone to 5150.

+2

or a splawn
 
Re: If You Had $1,600 For A New Amp...?

If an attenuator is on your list of aquisitions, I would also suggest that you look at the Weber Mass line also. You'll need a 150 if they make that size to properly accomodate the 100watt amp, but it is a phenominal attenuator and well worth the money. I've heard more complaints about hotplates than Mass units, but they are supposed to be fairly comparable. Please note that an attenuator will aid in recording etc, but the amp will likely still sound pretty muffled at low volumes because the speakers aren't working at their normal efficiency range. Some speakers just gotta be cranked just like tube amps need to be cranked. Attenuators will help a loud amp, but they still require some volume to sound good no matter what. Just checked out the 150 watt model. It works on 8 ohm cabinets primarily, but apparently will be OK in other units as well. Seems that the lows and highs are set with one volume knob and the mids are set with another knob. Seems like a great setup to me. I almost wish I had bought this instead of my Mass 100.

https://taweber.powweb.com/weber/mass150.htm
 
Re: If You Had $1,600 For A New Amp...?

i guess i'll try one of those attenuators. i heard they're like $150 though. know of a cheaper or better product for that price?

There are lots of cheaper products that may be better at what they do, but only an attenuator is going to do what attenuators do. Do you mean other amps that sound good at low volumes or...what?
 
Re: If You Had $1,600 For A New Amp...?

There are lots of cheaper products that may be better at what they do, but only an attenuator is going to do what attenuators do. Do you mean other amps that sound good at low volumes or...what?

well wahwah mentioned something by zvex or something that's supposed to do what i'm looking for. i don't know how much they cost yet, but it sounds like it might do what i want.
 
Re: If You Had $1,600 For A New Amp...?

Gonna cover several points (didn't read *every* post so if this is repost, I apologize)...

a 100 watt amp (or any amp over 15-18 watts) will never sound good at low volumes, no matter what someone says (without an attenuator)

Great tone at low volume is attainable with much lower wattage amps.

I've run sound professionally and semi-professionally for about 8 years now and I've heard guys on stage with Peavey bandits, specials, Gorilla amps, Stinger amps, Yorkville bass amps (used with guitar)....and some of those guys sounded AMAZING. It's all about learning the gear you have, ya know? Gotta learn all of the little quirks with your gear. I have two main amps, and I am still discovering their sweet spots two years into my relationship with them!

My advice (for what it's worth) is to get an attenuator, then sit and work with your gear searching out the sweet spots. When you find them, write them down! And then for more fun, move your amp to another room or even just another part of the same room, it might not sound the same where you move it and you have to find a different sweet spot. It's all about learning what your amp is capable of.

I'm not gonna knock technique as I haven't even heard your clips yet, I'm simply going on what 8 years of live sound experience and many years as a working musician has taught me.

Hope this helps you bro. Looking forward to hearing the amazing music you're GOING to make when you really nail what you're going for.
 
Re: If You Had $1,600 For A New Amp...?

i guess i'll try one of those attenuators. i heard they're like $150 though. know of a cheaper or better product for that price?

Now you're talking. An attenuator is a great idea, but I'd suggest you don't skimp when shopping for one. Avoid marshall's power brake and look at the weber MASS or the THD hotplate.

-also be aware that even the best attenuators start munging your tone up a bit after a 15db reduction. So an attenuator will be a great help, but it won't work miracles.

Look into buying a 1x12 cabinet specifically for recording. 2x12 and 4x12 cabs sound great when you stand in front of them, but for recording, nothing beats the focus of a single 12. It's also a great way to cut down recording volume further.

To go an extra step, drop your wattage. Your marshall is a nice amp, but you could look at getting a 50w amp to help cut down on volume a bit. And a 50w amp will play ANY venue. Trust me on that one.

Now, as far as tone/playing frustration goes, it pays to relax a bit if you can. Recording your playing is an excellent idea, as it's a fantastic way to understand what your strengths and weaknesses are. But it's also great to take a break and come back fresh. I'm also a strong advocate of playing clean with no effects or playing unplugged, as that was you'll get a real understanding of where your hands are at compared to your brain/soul.

From hearing your clips, your tone isn't too bad at all, in fact much better than many home recording players I hear. That's not to say it's truly inspiring, pro-level stuff, but it's not too shabby either. I'd say you'd be better off refocusing on some technique spadework in a few areas: bending intonation, rushing your timing, and cleanliness of technique. You've set yourself high standards by trying to play the stuff you've recorded, but those standards are attainable if you work at it and are honest with yourself.

Originality goes a long way. You're about the ten millionth young player to post 'still got the blues' and 'cliffs of dover' clips on an internet forum in the hope that other players will tell you that you play/sound really good. and you could easily become one of the several thousand players out there who can nail this stuff, too. If that's the limit of your ambition, cool. But if you really want to engage with others, playing something original is the only way for people to really hear the real you. Be brave.

And nothing beats the real world for advancing as a musician. Get yourself a gig, and try not to get angry when one of those real world people offers some advice. Chances are they're trying to help.
 
Re: If You Had $1,600 For A New Amp...?

Now you're talking. An attenuator is a great idea, but I'd suggest you don't skimp when shopping for one. Avoid marshall's power brake and look at the weber MASS or the THD hotplate.

-also be aware that even the best attenuators start munging your tone up a bit after a 15db reduction. So an attenuator will be a great help, but it won't work miracles.

Look into buying a 1x12 cabinet specifically for recording. 2x12 and 4x12 cabs sound great when you stand in front of them, but for recording, nothing beats the focus of a single 12. It's also a great way to cut down recording volume further.

To go an extra step, drop your wattage. Your marshall is a nice amp, but you could look at getting a 50w amp to help cut down on volume a bit. And a 50w amp will play ANY venue. Trust me on that one.

Now, as far as tone/playing frustration goes, it pays to relax a bit if you can. Recording your playing is an excellent idea, as it's a fantastic way to understand what your strengths and weaknesses are. But it's also great to take a break and come back fresh. I'm also a strong advocate of playing clean with no effects or playing unplugged, as that was you'll get a real understanding of where your hands are at compared to your brain/soul.

From hearing your clips, your tone isn't too bad at all, in fact much better than many home recording players I hear. That's not to say it's truly inspiring, pro-level stuff, but it's not too shabby either. I'd say you'd be better off refocusing on some technique spadework in a few areas: bending intonation, rushing your timing, and cleanliness of technique. You've set yourself high standards by trying to play the stuff you've recorded, but those standards are attainable if you work at it and are honest with yourself.

Originality goes a long way. You're about the ten millionth young player to post 'still got the blues' and 'cliffs of dover' clips on an internet forum in the hope that other players will tell you that you play/sound really good. and you could easily become one of the several thousand players out there who can nail this stuff, too. If that's the limit of your ambition, cool. But if you really want to engage with others, playing something original is the only way for people to really hear the real you. Be brave.

And nothing beats the real world for advancing as a musician. Get yourself a gig, and try not to get angry when one of those real world people offers some advice. Chances are they're trying to help.

thanks for taking the time to explain this stuff and for the feedback on my playing. i actually NEVER play covers which might explain why i'm not too good at it. i never liked to play them and have always been much more interested in my own stuff. since i cannot record worth a dam however, i just record a few clips of stuff that people have heard before. trust me though, i'm 99.9% an original player. i don't even practice cover stuff anymore or bother learning any new covers. i might learn pieces of songs that i like and incorporate them into my playing, but that's the extent of it.

as far as playing some piece of a solo and trying to get people to tell me i'm a good player, that's just not my style. if that were the case, i'd take a lot more care in doing that. like i said before, i don't rehearse stuff i post. i could, but why? i think there are already too many people out there who record pink floyd solos over an internet backing track in order to get recognized as good players or something. i'm just raw and play it the way it comes out hte first time.

as far as cliff of dover or still got the blues, i could care less. i haven't tried to play that stuff in years, and when i did, i never really tried to nail it anyway. then again, don't get me confused with the 10 million people who do that stuff because i'm an original player by nature. i woudn't fit in with those people anyway
 
Last edited:
Re: If You Had $1,600 For A New Amp...?

thanks for taking the time to explain this stuff and for the feedback on my playing. i actually NEVER play covers which might explain why i'm not too good at it. i never liked to play them and have always been much more interested in my own stuff. since i cannot record worth a dam however, i just record a few clips of stuff that people have heard before. trust me though, i'm 99.9% an original player. i don't even practice cover stuff anymore or bother learning any new covers. i might learn pieces of songs that i like and incorporate them into my playing, but that's the extent of it.

Cool. Record your original stuff, if you aren't already. The best thing about recording original stuff is there's nothing anyone can get the magnifying glass out and compare it to. They just have to judge it on it's own merits.

And look at recording as a process, just like learning to play. If you work at it, you'll get better.
 
Re: If You Had $1,600 For A New Amp...?

FTR, I have a DR. Z Airbrake attenuator and it's very simple and very effective and doesn't affect your tone very much on normal operating levels.
 
Re: If You Had $1,600 For A New Amp...?

i've seen some pretty good deals already. dr.mahavashi linked to one that looks pretty good to me. i've decided to build a little studio instead of investing money into attenuators and stuff. i'm going to soundproof it and everything, so it's going to be pretty professional when i'm done. to hell with the small stuff. i want to crank my marshall and have it sound good like that. i have an el diablo combo i can use at home.
 
Re: If You Had $1,600 For A New Amp...?

Three pieces:

1) Mesa Boogie Mk IV top (or similar amp with many knobs)

2) One 2x 12" cabinet with 2x EV 12L.

3) One 2x 12" cabinet with 2x Celestion 30W Vintage.

3b) a dozen spare speakers for the latter :)
 
Re: If You Had $1,600 For A New Amp...?

i've decided to build a little studio instead of investing money into attenuators and stuff. i'm going to soundproof it and everything, so it's going to be pretty professional when i'm done. to hell with the small stuff. i want to crank my marshall and have it sound good like that. i have an el diablo combo i can use at home.

Real soundproofing might be more difficult and expensive than you think. Do you have neighbors? If so, how close are they? The thing is, even if you can get the sound down to "legal db levels", the neighbors may still be able to recognize the sound and be annoyed by it...all laws are different, but many do not simply have db limits, they also include language on "annoyance", etc. (note that this is not a comment on your playing...its the language used in the local ordinances).

I was once a partner in a professional recording studio (one of Mix Magazines "best west coast rooms" in the mid 1990's) and we had a cinder block building complete with sand in the cinderblock...the highs were well attenuated, but the lows still penetrated it. The chug chug thump of a 100 watt marshall cranked was still audible outside, and we had to spend thousands of dollars to soundproof it.

I would still vote for a lower powered amp + attenuator..there are some great ones out there, as you can see by all the posts.

For what it's worth, it has been my experience that a cranked high wattage amp nearly always sounds smaller on tape than a cranked low wattage amp. Many of the greatest sounds ever were produced on small amps (perhaps this was already stated...I didn't get a chance to read all the posts).
 
Re: If You Had $1,600 For A New Amp...?

Real soundproofing might be more difficult and expensive than you think. Do you have neighbors? If so, how close are they? The thing is, even if you can get the sound down to "legal db levels", the neighbors may still be able to recognize the sound and be annoyed by it...all laws are different, but many do not simply have db limits, they also include language on "annoyance", etc. (note that this is not a comment on your playing...its the language used in the local ordinances).

I was once a partner in a professional recording studio (one of Mix Magazines "best west coast rooms" in the mid 1990's) and we had a cinder block building complete with sand in the cinderblock...the highs were well attenuated, but the lows still penetrated it. The chug chug thump of a 100 watt marshall cranked was still audible outside, and we had to spend thousands of dollars to soundproof it.

I would still vote for a lower powered amp + attenuator..there are some great ones out there, as you can see by all the posts.

For what it's worth, it has been my experience that a cranked high wattage amp nearly always sounds smaller on tape than a cranked low wattage amp. Many of the greatest sounds ever were produced on small amps (perhaps this was already stated...I didn't get a chance to read all the posts).

i'm only going to crank it loud enough to improve my tone. it's my understanding that around 2-3 should be enough to get it cooking at a decent level.
 
Re: If You Had $1,600 For A New Amp...?

i'm only going to crank it loud enough to improve my tone. it's my understanding that around 2-3 should be enough to get it cooking at a decent level.

The point several of us keep labouring is that for recording purposes, a smaller wattage amp on 6-8 will always track to tape better than a large amp on 2-3. People in home and pro studios all over the world will tell you this. I'm certain that whatever you don't like about your recorded tone is due to not running the amp at a loud enough volume.

We're not making this sh*t up just to annoy you.

Get a smaller wattage amp, an attenuator and a 1x12 cabinet and CRANK the f*cker. Don't worry, you'll still need some soundproofing...
 
Last edited:
Re: If You Had $1,600 For A New Amp...?

Yeah... it's a fact that tube amps generally sound best (Marshalls ALWAYS sound better) when the tubes are cooking at somewhere in the upper range of the power they can produce. This does make lower-wattage amps more feasible for recording, especially at home.
 
Back
Top