tbonesullivan

Yeah... this is honestly one of the reasons I love having amps with built in reverb: it covers up a lot of stuff!

This was talked about a bit in the JEL-50 thread, but Friedman had been working on a Jose Arrendondo "tribute" amplifier, and had actually brought the family in, and had Jose's daughter Marisol with him at NAMM, talking about all the stuff that her dad did in terms of mods. She had helped out at the shop so she knew quite a bit about the different pieces of equipment he worked on, which were not just Marshall amps. Anyway, Dave Friedman had known Jose, and actually purchased a Modded amp directly from him when he was 18 or something, and also has worked on a lot of Jose modded amps. He pretty much found out all the mods that Jose did, and put them all into ONE AMP based on a Marshall 4 input Super Lead, using a more modern implementation than Jose did. It's got two different presence knobs, so you can have the original presence, as well as the Jose style one which is almost more like a negative feedback control. It's also got two different master volumes, the various different gain mods that Jose did, and so forth. While it doesn't have the word "Marshall" on it, it does have Jose's Face and signature. There are no "official" demos yet, just some videos from NAMM, but if someone was after the "ultimate modded 80s Marshall", this might be it.

Right? They were all analog with lots of filters and well-designed. Were they engineered by Scholz himself? I can't remember. They seem to have been used by a ton of people for recording during the 80s.

Well, it IS NAMM time, which means that we get stuff like this. I love Boston songs, and I especially love THAT guitar sound. The Tom Scholz sound is as distinctive as the EVH sound, the Brian May sound, the David Gilmour sound, and others. As best I can tell, with this new pedal, you can get that legendary sound in a foot pedal, which seems to be designed to run direct to board / PA. The chorus is set to mono mode by default, but a switch inside can turn it to stereo. Even without headphones, the stereo imaging of the chorus effects sounds great.

Just noticed this part. Curious, how was it "upside down"? Was the rare panel attached incorrectly? Or was the vent on the bottom?

There are some companies that have chosen to stay they size they are. The growth model is not for everyone, and also comes with a ton of risks. One of those IS the loss of that feel and work ethic. Look at Soldano amplifiers: they never really grew huge, and then joined up with Boutique Amp Distribution after they had to close the factory.

Honestly, I've never quite been able to wrap my head around fuzz pedals. So many players for decades have used them to make great music and sounds, but I often find them just too rough / raw when compared to an overdrive or distortion pedal. This stuff sounds great though, so maybe I'll have to play with my OD-20 a bit more on the fuzz models to see if I can get something I like.

Sounds great, both the guitar and the vocals! A resonator is one thing I've always loved the look and sound of, but I'm just not a good enough player to really make one sound good. Is that one of the Dual Caliber amps? I also think I spy a Fulltone pedal on top of it. Yes I am that guy who is often more interested in gear than anything else.

Around the same time the IIC+ reissue rumors started, there was also word that Mesa was also working on a "90's Rectifier" reissue. It now is out, at the princely sum of $3499 MSRP, which is quite a bit more than the Multi-Watt Three Channel Dual Rectifiers with more bells and whistles were at $2699. I guess this kinda means that the transition to a "reissue" brand is complete. It definitely DOES sound awesome. It's got a series effects loop, the clean mode on the orange channel was revoiced so it actually sounds good, and all the switching components used back in the 90s that they don't make anymore have been swapped out. Mesa has NOT said whether it is closer to a Rev G or Rev F Dual channel, though since most of the Two Channel Dual Rectifiers were Rev G, I would assume that is what this one is based off of. Still, that's a pretty steep price, especially when compared to amps that have impeccable build quality like Soldano and Friedman. You can also pick up OG used Rev G Two Channels in very good shape for quite a bit less than $3500, even ones that are well maintained and have been sent back to Mesa for servicing. Rev G's are not massively priced unobtanium like the original Mark IIC+ is, so I honestly don't see nearly the same level of demand. I guess time will tell. I've got a Dual Rectifier Tremoverb combo, so this is of zero interest to me, but I can see people who don't have an early rectifier wanting to get one with a warranty and no obsolete parts inside going for this. The Ola Demo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEpJrAOiLbc The Mesa Demo / Walkthrough: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1LQZtnjMLA

Heh. Well it's only 8 tubes, 4 matched pairs. But that is enough to last a while. Two of the pairs are matched, so I could use them in a 100 watter, but I'm not playing arena shows.

HAH! It is definitely Fridge sized. That bass stack came to PSP V or VI. I can't remember which. Maybe both. I know the rack came with me every time. I really need to get back out there.

Those are great amps though. LOUD, but great. Those early designs were the favorites of people like Santana and Keith Richards. One of the guys that hangs out in the Mesa facebook groups owns one of "keef's" former Mesas. Also seen some of Prince's old Mark IIB and Mark IIC+ coliseum heads floating around.

Does it bark? Yes, yes it does indeed, and it is full of KERRRAAAANNNGG. Classic Marshall tones from the 70s and 80s, done right. I had been thinking about a Friedman, particularly the JEL-20, for a long time, before this one was announced. As I have a good stock of SED EL34s, and wanted a bit more "thump", i decided to go for the larger wattage example. There were a bunch of pretty much brand new returns, so I saved a bit and picked one up. Cabinet is an Avatar contemporary closed back with two Avatar M65 speakers by FANE. I did not expect to bright switches to have such a huge impact on the sound, especially at lower gain levels. Gonna get to know it a bit better, and then swap in some old production glass into V1 and V2. Also gotta change the strings on the guitar to 9.5 or 10 gauge, as 9s feel like noodles to me. As it is, channel 1 is pure plexi style, and it's got the three way bright switch, which is almost like a gain control at lower gain levels. With it to the right I think it's the same as an OG Plexi, which is quite bright, though I don't have confirmation on that. In that setting it's hard to even get a clean sound, but with the bright switch in the left, or the center where it's the least bright, it's got a great clean sound. As you up the drive you get more dirt, and I think even near the highest gain levels you still get a good amount of extra bite with the bright switch to the right. With the gain fully dimed you're definitely a bit past AC/DC level gain, but if you want the real "plexi" sound you do need to get the master up above 5. However per Pete Thorn, Dave Friedman designed the amp so it isn't as woofy at lower master volume levels, so it still sounds good. Channel 2 is the JCM 800 style channel, and serves that up just right. The bright switch is also quite useful at lower gain settings, but once you get above 7 or so you can barely tell it's on. I'm not sure if it even makes a difference when you pull out the boost on the lead gain, but I think I can hear a change. The gain is usable throughout the entire range, and pulled and pushed are kinda like two different voicings, so there's a lot of ability to customize the sound using the pull gain and the bright switches. The presence and thump in the back are great as well, though they are more something I would set depending on the room I'm in, or the cabinet I'm using. And speaking of that, this is the first time I REALLY got to put some volume through the Avatar cabinet with the M65 speakers as well, and I can say they are definitely some really nice speakers. I'm fairly certain that Avatar pretty much asked Fane to make some Creamback style speakers, but they definitely have their own voice. Nice and crunchy with a lot of definition. I'm going to make that my standard cab for a while, and hopefully break them in a bit more.

One of these days, I'll actually put together a Guitar pedalboard based around the Plethora X5. Just trying to decide if I want to get an outboard Noise SUpressor, or to use the "Sentry" that is part of the pedal. Also gotta get a pedalboard that can handle a Bad Horsie Wah.

I've got a DC-5 which I played a lot for a while, but since I got a Mark V combo, it pretty much hasn't gotten any love, so I'll have to move that along. Mesa also just announced a "Reissue" of the "90s Dual Rectifier", the two channel version that doesn't really have any of the "modes" the current ones do. I already have a tremoverb combo, which aside from weighing like 80lbs, also sounds incredible. They make good amps, but they are not the easiest to service due to how complex a lot of their recent offerings have been, with the Fillmore being a notable exception due to the simple design.

First I heard that the OG Rev F or Rev G Two Channel Dual Rectifier Solo Heads were making a return, and that preorders were being taken. Never saw any official. Then I heard the same thing about the vaunted Mark IIC+, which over the course of the pandemic suddenly became an amp worth over 10K USD depending on the load out. Well, it appears that at least one of those rumors is true. Do I have any interest? Probably not. Paying $3500 for an amp that is very lacking in features that I like, and probably not made at all in the way the originals were? When I already have a Mark V? Nope. But I'm sure these will be sold out everywhere.

I found that the Plethora X5 was more manageable if I used up slots with things like noise suppressors and a switchable loop for an overdrive pedal or wah. I also like it because it is somewhat limited in what you can do, and comes with some great presets. I however also have watched some videos on people who have massive pedal boards and effects setups, and I don't know how they do it. I have enough trouble dialing in a nice tone for just overdrive sometimes.

Well, just got this in the old email. I guess the prayers have been answered, though I kinda miss the "limed mahogany" color, but I guess people really want TV Yellow to look like an old TV yellow guitar. https://heritageguitars.com/pages/core-collection-h-137

What kind of music do you play? Are you more of a clean player? The SD 59's are nice, but they are definitely a bit "rude" sounding, designed to sound good for rock and roll. Dimarzio 36th Anniversary PAF pickups aren't super expensive, and are really REALLY nice sounding. Not as crystal clear as say the Schaller Golden 50s that Heritage used for years, but very balanced and just really nice sounding pickups.

It's all about the $$$$. The biggest sellers that Heritage has and has had for years are the H150 and H535 models, which correspond to two of the G-brands most popular models. It is kinda sad that pretty much all the models that separated them from G-brand are gone, but they have to make the guitars that the market wants and will sell to keep going.

SUPER SCORE. With the HRWS that's great, and the color is awesome. The pickups in their now are also a really good choice for a semi-hollow.

Yes, and also no. Musical instruments are not engineered, they are designed, and decisions made often can fly in the face of what an engineering or mechanical standpoint would be. My other musical side is a brass musician, and I have spent far FAR more time involved in playing Tenor, Bass, and Alto trombone than I probably ever will while playing guitar and bass. And I have seen many products of "superior engineering" fall flat on their face in that market, just as they do in the guitar world. Because it's not about engineering, it's about design, it's about produced sound, it's about the feel of the instrument, and other things that cannot be quantified. You have people who are all about trying to market how their product / design is the product of superior engineering, ignoring the fact that where instruments are today is the result of hundreds of years of change and evolution. They also tend to ignore the fact that often, they were NOT the first person to think up the design, and that it didn't work the first time. Then you also have to remember to throw in the placebo effect, which results in some people always thinking every change they make results in something better. It's pretty amazing to see how many different takes their are on the "best" bridge for a G-style guitar, and what aspects of that particular bridge make it "the best". Ted McCarty had a degree in engineering. He oversaw GIbson during the time when the Tune-O-Matic was originally created. Yet, the PRS design he consulted on, which premiered in 1994, came with not the PRS adjustable Stoptail bridge, but with the bridge that they have used for years now: a stop tail that is a solid piece of metal, with screws at the back for rough intonation. Pretty much a lightning bar. Minimal pieces should result in maximum sound conduction, and with all of the tension of the strings applied to the threads in the bushings, that should result in a large amount of engaged surface area under a lot of pressure. But is that really the secret to the "best" tone and sustain? Look at the ABR-1. The strings rest directly on the saddles, which are on a threaded insert, which rests in/on the bridge. This itself rests on wide threaded washers which are on 6-32 x 1-1/16" posts threaded directly into the wood of the guitar. Many consider the ABR-1 without the wire to be the best bridge for G-style guitars, even with the fact that they can collapse over time (some state that the first few years used a better alloy and won't collapse), and that the range of intonation adjustment is limited. This however seems to have a lot less potential for sound conduction than the lightning bar in some ways, so is that really what the "secret sauce" is? I won't mention the nylon bridge inserts that Gibson went to in the early 60s, which are Angus Young's favorite, but others hate. It's all about the sound, and they are supposed to give a softer edge on the notes due to construction. Look at the two major types of tremolos out there: fulcrum and roller based. The Floyd Rose type and Kahler type are the epitome of the design, especially in their current form, though they are often felt to lack sustain. However the solution to that for many is pretty simple: Materials and Mass. Brass Rollers and Saddles on the Kahler. Heavier Tremolo Block on the Floyd. I guess I'm rambling now, but I always come back to how Eric Clapton has blocked tremolos on his Strats and doesn't just use the hardtail version, as he feels they sound better. Tone secret: One of the guitars used on Early ZZ Top records was a hardtail strat. Everything from an engineering standpoint, if you want optimal sound conduction, should favor the hardtail. But many don't, even if they never use the Tremolo.

I have the roller bridges on two of my Heritages, and one has a Bigsby, which really makes it a better choice, for me anyway. For the other, just never noticed a difference, and kinda liked the unique look of the Schaller tailpiece and bridge, and they also matched the chrome schaller pickups on the guitar. I have heard that the Kluson ABR-1 may be the "closest" to the "original". There are, of course, a ton of magical properties assigned to the ABR-1 design, and the changes over the 1950s and 1960s have been sliced and diced to bits, with many claiming they have the "one true" replica. It's like they forget that even in the 1950s, Gibson was a COMPANY, making a PRODUCT. Why did they use acrylic inlays? They were more cost effective. The changes to the ABR-1 were often cost related, as was the change to the Nashville style bridge. The early ABR-1s were supposed to have fairly soft brass saddles, and there may have been variations in the alloys used for making the main body of the bridge. These days many makers use alloys in their ABR-1s that won't collapse over the years, so who can say how accurate they are. And then there are the Babicz bridges, which are designed so that the entire bottom of the bridge is in contact with the body via a shim.

I was at one of the PSPs when Vince Lewis was there, and he had the Schaller roller bridge on his guitar. He said it gave a warmer tone. Schaller makes great hardware, and I actually had the original style hardware put back on my H535 when I got it. I like the look.

The H-158 "Classic" I has both a laminated arched top and back, with no electronics access plate.