Re: Turn the normal channel of you old Fender into a Plexi
STRATDELUXER97 said:
................if you compare the 2 schematics,you'd see that the BF's tone controls come very early in the preamp...The Marshall's tone stack comes up very late in the preamp circuit...Marshalls don't give you as much tonal adjustment because of where the tone stack is compared to the BF Fender circuit...
John
Ah, I don't know about that ... that's a matter of perspective I think ...
The marshall gives you more control over the tone of the distortion itself, as it's later in the circuit and more harmonics (from the distortion) are being fed into it, the fender gives more control over the tone of the guitar itself ... if it's to flabby you can lean the bass up, to thin you can pull back the treble some ... all at the cost of gain however. Once overdriven though it doesn't do much to change the sound of the distortion though ( you can't very well get a scooped metal rhythm tone from a fender (unless you are running a distortion peadl into it, which places the eq after the distortion (or most of it ... ala marshall). the marshall on the other hand doesn't allow you the ability to same fatten out a tele, or thin out and brighten a LP, with the fender you can get the keep the tele from sounding to thin (well it helps), and get rid of any muddiness on the low side with an LP. The fender allows you to influence the *way the amp overdrives*, but again tonal flexiblity of the tone of the overdrive is limited; the marshall has overdrive tonal flexibility as it's strong suit, bit if the guitar is dark, or thin sounding, that reflects in the overdrive, and there's nothing you can do about it.
I guess we have a different manner of viewing the situation, depending which way one looks at it.
The earlier Boogs (Mark I, Mark II) sufferend from the fender thing bad, essentially you had one tonal character once overdriven (unless you had the 5 band eq, which was later in the circuit), although you could fatten up, or thin out out,or brighten up, or darken up the actual *guitar* itself. The best possible configuration shares both, one of the most useful setups I've run across was a little thing that I did one time for a friend, had a marshallized SF (extra 12ax7 added in standard plate to cathode follower config.), we ran off the first triode plate,thru a coupling cap,into a *tilt control*{my thing} , thru a preamp volume, into the grid of the second triode whose plate went into the grid of the third triode, came off the cathode of that into the tone stack, into a master volume (for that channel),out of that into the grid of the fourth triode, off it's plate on to where ever the guy before me routed the stuff too
(I didn't added the gain stages, that was there already), the volume control had been changed to a concentric controls for preamp/channel master, and the treble/bass I changed to concentric, where the bass knob was was now the *tilt* control. What it basically did was either cut upper treble, or cut bass ... So if the guiatr was to thin, roll off the highs, if it was to dark, roll off the lows, the amp had a lot of gain, so you could get the distortion (preamp that is) that you wanted, and you still had the eq farther down the line. Worked out very well, although it still could have been fine tuned a bit more, as the extreme positions were to much. The intent was to correct for the character of the guitar feed into it,without tying up the tone stack doing so. Food for thought ... :cool3:
