-which DIEZEL is the most raw, unpolished sounding-

Out of the hagen is more raw than your herbert as is fokker and dmoll however all are pretty refined comparative to say a marshall.
 
sg guy":2flmy6wl said:
-former Herbert owner, I'm thinking I need a DIEZEL, but I want some less refined, gritty,

I agree. When I think of Diezel raw and unpolished are certainly not the adjectives that come to mind! :D I have had the VH4 , Herbert, Dmoll and currently the Hagen. I think all Diezels are a very refined tone. IMHO.
 
I think there are two things that set the Diezel sound apart:
The mids are very soft and the bass is compressed, which makes for easy recording when playing palm mutes. Quite the opposite of raw.
When using a 6505, you have to compress between 150 and 250 Hz to get the bass under control in the mix.
The presence control starts quite low, so if you turn up presence on a Diezel, you get more high mids, but that is not what a Diezel is supposed to sound like.
 
Based on popular opinion of the words "raw and unpolished" I'd recommend the Paul or Big Max. Otherwise, buy a Wizard. They are about as open and raw sounding as an amp gets. Or an old Marshall SL Plexi.
 
I have a VH4 and a Hagen and had an Einstein in the past, in my opinion all these amps can sound quite raw. The thing is that most of the folks scoop the mids too much and use high output pickups, in that scenario they are not so raw sounding. With a good amount of mids dialed in and medium/low output pickups one can get a raw sound out of these amps without problems. In fact this is why I really like these amps cause they can sound more polished or more raw depending on the pickups, eq, and cab. IMHO
 
ProgFree":2cbnm18k said:
I have a VH4 and a Hagen and had an Einstein in the past, in my opinion all these amps can sound quite raw. The thing is that most of the folks scoop the mids too much and use high output pickups, in that scenario they are not so raw sounding. With a good amount of mids dialed in and medium/low output pickups one can get a raw sound out of these amps without problems. In fact this is why I really like these amps cause they can sound more polished or more raw depending on the pickups, eq, and cab. IMHO
I agree to an extent but they'll still never get as raw or organic as something like the old mark series boogies or older marshalls no matter what you do even with more mids and lower output pickups (which is what I do). If you're picky about getting a very raw sound (like me) then diezels wont satisfy you. That being said, I'm still very interested in trying a Paul and Big Maxx.
 
braintheory":3fkznv4g said:
ProgFree":3fkznv4g said:
I have a VH4 and a Hagen and had an Einstein in the past, in my opinion all these amps can sound quite raw. The thing is that most of the folks scoop the mids too much and use high output pickups, in that scenario they are not so raw sounding. With a good amount of mids dialed in and medium/low output pickups one can get a raw sound out of these amps without problems. In fact this is why I really like these amps cause they can sound more polished or more raw depending on the pickups, eq, and cab. IMHO
I agree to an extent but they'll still never get as raw or organic as something like the old mark series boogies or older marshalls no matter what you do even with more mids and lower output pickups (which is what I do). If you're picky about getting a very raw sound (like me) then diezels wont satisfy you. That being said, I'm still very interested in trying a Paul and Big Maxx.

So many subjective adjectives...when I think of "raw" I also think of mids. I have the Hagen and Herbert and mids are definitely there for the dialing, but agree there are other "more middy" amps for sure.
 
"Open", "organic" "touch responsive" are the words I most often use to describe the amps that I tend to gravitate towards. And for me, the Diezel Paul fits the bill.

I definitely love the raw sound of a good Marshall amp, but I also like a bit more versatility and a sound that is a touch more refined. For that, I find the Diezel Paul to be just about perfect. For the OP, channel 2 with gain below noon is pretty open, raw and aggressive sounding. When you turn up the gain too much, it becomes too soft and you lose too much edge. Keep the volume up and the gain down to about 11 o'clock and you can definitely get pretty raw.

Here's a quick clip I made a few weeks ago. It can at least give you an idea of the kind of sounds you can get on Channel 2.



https://app.box.com/s/7hp7t0x3ju9rlkto9lyf00shp69t2skd
 
Vin Diezel":11odzr8q said:
I think there are two things that set the Diezel sound apart:
The mids are very soft and the bass is compressed, which makes for easy recording when playing palm mutes. Quite the opposite of raw.
When using a 6505, you have to compress between 150 and 250 Hz to get the bass under control in the mix.
The presence control starts quite low, so if you turn up presence on a Diezel, you get more high mids, but that is not what a Diezel is supposed to sound like.


THIS.
 
When I mean having mids I mean at times an eq Brent Hinds of Mastodon style ;)

 

Attachments

  • Diezel Masto .jpg
    Diezel Masto .jpg
    181.4 KB · Views: 3,516
Diezel mids knob is low mids, not weird if you want a bigger rather than clearer sound. They go for more vintage inspired tones.
 
I tried it out and listened to the recordings.

a) Standard Diezel tone: everything noon.
b) Raw Diezel tone: Presence full, treble 0, everything else stays noon.

Option b) is maybe good for rehearsal - it adds more of the upper mid frequencies that other amps have and that I often eq out...
 
It is just a matter of not scooping the mids. The mids of the vh4 are pretty wideband when compared to other amps. And quite dynamical when interacting with the bass and treble. Just recorded this clip with a mesa std cab and a sm57 to show this. First take everything at noon with mids little over noon. Second take scooped mids at around 10 O'clock. Do you hear the big difference?
People tend to scoop the mids too much probably due to habits of the times when Marshal were the only thing around. To get a great tone with a more raw character out of the Diezels one should not be scooping the mids. IMHO YMMV

 

Attachments

  • mids vs scoop VH4.mp3
    1.4 MB · Views: 345
littleguitars":9xv0glfq said:
"Open", "organic" "touch responsive" are the words I most often use to describe the amps that I tend to gravitate towards. And for me, the Diezel Paul fits the bill.

I definitely love the raw sound of a good Marshall amp, but I also like a bit more versatility and a sound that is a touch more refined. For that, I find the Diezel Paul to be just about perfect. For the OP, channel 2 with gain below noon is pretty open, raw and aggressive sounding. When you turn up the gain too much, it becomes too soft and you lose too much edge. Keep the volume up and the gain down to about 11 o'clock and you can definitely get pretty raw.

Here's a quick clip I made a few weeks ago. It can at least give you an idea of the kind of sounds you can get on Channel 2.



https://app.box.com/s/7hp7t0x3ju9rlkto9lyf00shp69t2skd


I agree with this /\. I have owned a Herbert, D-Moll and now this Paul. It is the most raw or organic out of the bunch. The mids just come through like a freight train on this amp. :thumbsup:
 
ProgFree":3k2loxci said:
It is just a matter of not scooping the mids. The mids of the vh4 are pretty wideband when compared to other amps. And quite dynamical when interacting with the bass and treble. Just recorded this clip with a mesa std cab and a sm57 to show this. First take everything at noon with mids little over noon. Second take scooped mids at around 10 O'clock. Do you hear the big difference?
People tend to scoop the mids too much probably due to habits of the times when Marshal were the only thing around. To get a great tone with a more raw character out of the Diezels one should not be scooping the mids. IMHO YMMV


Yes and no. No matter where you turn the mids knob, this knob does not add those marshally high mids. The presence knob does a bit on a Diezel.
 
Back
Top