About to record: which amps?

spirit7

spirit7

Active member
Hi all,

So, I currently have one of the world's best dilemmas. My band is in the middle of recording our second record - broadly, pretty heavy progressive metal with some post-metal elements. We have the following amps available to use (which will go through a Diezel 2x12 FL:)

Peavey 5150 II
Diezel Herbert
Bogner XTC 20th
VHT Pitbull UL
Gower-modded Marshall JCM 800 Killer Kali ++

I cannot for the life of me decide which 2 amps to use. I was tempted to use all of them but we would prefer a homogenous guitar tone throughout the record, rather than a mixture.

What do you think? My initial view is to mix the Diezel or the VHT and the Marshall, so you have the former's huge, tight bottom end with the high-mid growl of the latter. However, I know how good (for example) the 5150 II sounds under a mic...

-C
 
do you have time to test them out at the studio or you have to decide this in advance?

the Diezel + Marshall sounds like a good crushing mix, the 5150 ii is tried and tested

if you can take all 3 with you and try them out, and see what the sound engineer thinks of what works well with the rest of the elements
 
university81":3phhqekf said:
do you have time to test them out at the studio or you have to decide this in advance?

the Diezel + Marshall sounds like a good crushing mix, the 5150 ii is tried and tested

if you can take all 3 with you and try them out, and see what the sound engineer thinks of what works well with the rest of the elements
Click to expand...

We have our own studio and the other guitarist is the "sound engineer" :LOL: :LOL: To be honest, I'm sure any of the amps will sound killer but it would be good to identify the best combo.

-C
 
I would spend a day recording all of them, and then pulling them up next to each other. You might find that you need 3 or just 1.
A good idea is to use different amps for different qualities, and then EQ out everything else.

Once you have found the right amps, experiment with mic's. A blend of everything should give you a good sound to work with. Record and double it ;)
 
Which one's do you find track the best or sit in the mix the way you like? Nobody here can help you decide on that, and that's what should be at the heart of your decision. If I were you, I'd take a few in, mic them up, see which one(s) are working for you, and run with it. Fortunately for you, it appears that there are no bad choices. Good luck!
 
When I had nine amps at once:

(vht d120,
krank rev 1 ,
Diezel Einstein
mesa single rec,
framus dragon,
splawn quick rod,
bogner twin jet uber,
HK TRIAMP,
engl Blackmore )

I painstakingly did a ton of testing to choose pairs. I even went so far as to mix and match preamps and power amps with the fx loops.

IMO you cannot decide what will sound awesome together without trying them. Each head has it's own frequency response , only careful scientific testing and data would allow you to choose matches on "paper."


To make this story much shorter, the heads I assumed would work didn't and the combinations I wound up with were all unsuspected.

Some tips.

Choose amplifiers that have different midrange voicing. One that focuses high mids and the other that focuses on low mids to start, these compliment rather than fight over the same sonic space.

Also personally I preferred a marshall type preamp topology mixed with a mesa/slo topology. They seem to fill each other's weakness out. Using more congruent preamp types had less noticeable effects other than doubled harmonics.

And lastly I usually let the song tell me what tone is necessary to serve the part rather than the other way around.

Good luck.



Also since you said you are recording yourself. DO NOT DECIDE NOW. Get set up for reamping and try all of them after the fact. Then you lose no options.
 
I'd track 'em all. :D I also am not a huge fan of reamping. I think the subtle "mistakes" you make layering tracks makes multi tracked parts sound better. I know peeps that reamp and try to "move" the layers around the beat when copying/pasting, and it's just not the same as recording each layer/amp separately. The parts on our upcoming recording are going to be a VHT UL, Bogner TJ, and 1978 Marshall JMP 2003 (cranked on every knob with no OD in front). :rock:
 
The album I'm doing now, I'm using a Friedman Modded Marshall and a SLO for one tone (then doubled the parts). . . then did the same parts again with a Bogner Ecstasy and Vox AC30 (and then doubled those). So, the parts a quad-ed. Sounds huge. We obviously won't use all four tracks all the time, but when the choruses come in, they'll be there.

Big Fat Rock tone - not 'metal' at all, just big fat ROCK.
 
As it is my normal rig now, I can tell you the Pittbull UL and 5150 compliment each other VERY well! Might be worth a nice blend
 
moronmountain":314r2jyj said:
I'd track 'em all. :D I also am not a huge fan of reamping. I think the subtle "mistakes" you make layering tracks makes multi tracked parts sound better. I know peeps that reamp and try to "move" the layers around the beat when copying/pasting, and it's just not the same as recording each layer/amp separately. The parts on our upcoming recording are going to be a VHT UL, Bogner TJ, and 1978 Marshall JMP 2003 (cranked on every knob with no OD in front). :rock:
Click to expand...

Sounds like you don't really know what reamping is.

Reamping is simply taking a performance after the fact and running it through an amp. You can still multitrack as many layers as you want, just like you would any other time. Only it gives you the benefit of retracking through a different amp after the fact...Regardless if it's it's one take or you want to reamp several. All those "subtle mistakes" are still there in all your performances.

most people who reamp (like myself) still track through an amp and set that for the tone they want...But then since you've captured a DI you can go back and re-track if the mix ends up not vibing they way you wanted through the amp you initially chose.

I love reamping because I'm a home studio guy and it allows me to seperate my performance side of things from my production side of things.
 
I think what he's saying is that the performances sound better to him when they're not FULLY in sync (the guitar tracks)...you can't do that with re-amping... but when you double, triple or quad a part separately one at a time there are subtle differences in timing and execution that can be interesting to hear in the finished track.
 
paulyc":eekhez66 said:
I think what he's saying is that the performances sound better to him when they're not FULLY in sync (the guitar tracks)...you can't do that with re-amping... but when you double, triple or quad a part separately one at a time there are subtle differences in timing and execution that can be interesting to hear in the finished track.
Click to expand...

Again, reamping is simply taking a performance and running it through an amp after the performance has been captured via DI.

Reamping is NOT necessarily simply taking one performance and running that same performance over and over into the same (or different amps). Sure, you can do that, but reamping is simply taking a recorded DI and running it through an amp after the performance has been captured...How many performances and how many tracks are reamped through however many rigs are of no consequence.

You can take those doubled, tripled or quadrupled tracks that you tracked 1 at a time and reamp each on it's own...And the result is EXACTLY the same as if you miked an amp live and recorded double, triple, or quad tracks...

I've quad tracked my band's CD's, I've double tracked, I've triple tracked...And each performance was reamped.

Also, taking the same performance and running it through multiple amps and spreading those through the stereo spectrum isn't even the definition of double tracking, quad tracking, etc. at all.

I guess I'm puzzled as to why people aren't understanding that.
 
Sometimes a song will dictate a certain sound? You have some great choices there to work with!

Good luck! I'm liking the Marshall and VH4 combo personally.
 
spirit7":1mlqyt18 said:
Hi all,

So, I currently have one of the world's best dilemmas. My band is in the middle of recording our second record - broadly, pretty heavy progressive metal with some post-metal elements. We have the following amps available to use (which will go through a Diezel 2x12 FL:)

Peavey 5150 II
Diezel Herbert
Bogner XTC 20th
VHT Pitbull UL
Gower-modded Marshall JCM 800 Killer Kali ++

I cannot for the life of me decide which 2 amps to use. I was tempted to use all of them but we would prefer a homogenous guitar tone throughout the record, rather than a mixture.

What do you think? My initial view is to mix the Diezel or the VHT and the Marshall, so you have the former's huge, tight bottom end with the high-mid growl of the latter. However, I know how good (for example) the 5150 II sounds under a mic...

-C
Click to expand...

I can say from experience that the Diezel/Bogner
combination, go together like Peanut Butter and
Chocolate!! Those two Blend so well, no major
phasing issues like I've experienced with other
combinations in the past.
That would be my recommendation. :rock:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top