Cleans on channel switchers...

[glassjaw7]

Just curious, why are the clean channels on many channel switchers very dull or lacking in tone?

I mean, is it that hard to take a variation of the basic Blackface Fender circuit or a Vox circuit and put it in an amp along with a good dirty channel? I don't understand why so many good high gain amps have shitty cleans. So often I hear, "it's a good clean, but not Fenderclean". Well then just put the damn Fender clean circuit in the amp and be done with it! Everyone copies the Marshall circuits so it shouldn't be a big deal, right? Boogie is one of the ones that gets it right IMO. Is it maybe because builders would rather try to make their own circuit rather than use a tried and true design based off of Fender or similar???

 

[bigangryguitar]

I don't get that either. My Blackstar has killer cleans as did the Engl, JSX and Mark IIB I used to own. But.... I have played more amps than I can count that have killer lead channels and dull, lifeless cleans. I don't get it either.

 

[Marshall Freak]

A lot of the time, it has to do with where the EQ is placed in the circuit. Fender does it differently than most Marshall circuits. Also, they have to use the same preamp tubes, so changing out the entire clean channel circuit might be difficult.

Also, most people wanting an amp with multiple channels will probably spend 90% oft their time on the dirty channels, so why compromise them to make the clean incredible.

Just guessing.

 

[Jordon]

Rivera K Tre

 

[glpg80]

A lot of the time, it has to do with where the EQ is placed in the circuit. Fender does it differently than most Marshall circuits. Also, they have to use the same preamp tubes, so changing out the entire clean channel circuit might be difficult.

Also, most people wanting an amp with multiple channels will probably spend 90% oft their time on the dirty channels, so why compromise them to make the clean incredible.

Just guessing.

and you guessed right on the money.

you try to make due with the preamp tubes you have - its not exactly easy when most clean circuits require a totally different layout and mindset in design compared to full out gain channels. alot of the time you just dont have the room, OR it is not worth installing a 6th or 7th preamp tube for it.

it can be done, just alot of guys including myself dont see the extra gains worth the extra effort.

 

[glassjaw7]

The clean channel is just as important as the dirty channel for me. I like how Friedman operates. Uses a Blackface inspired clean circuit and a killer Marshall based dirty channel. Best of both worlds!

 

[supersonic]

The clean channel is just as important as the dirty channel for me. I like how Friedman operates. Uses a Blackface inspired clean circuit and a killer Marshall based dirty channel. Best of both worlds!

Yep, the Marsha clean is excellent, one of the best.

 

[protoplasma]

I just talked about this a bit over on HRI. As some of you already touched, it usually has to do with compromises and circuit layout. First of all, if the amp has a shared EQ you're limited. Most of those great Fender cleans have the tone stack close to the beginning of the signal chain. In higher gain stuff, it is typically later. That being said, if you use independent EQs, you no longer have to worry about this limitation.

Further, most amps share the first gain stage after the input jack. This requires a compromise in tone based on how you bias this first triode. It's possible to adjust this on the fly with relays and such, but it's usually more trouble than amp designers are willing to go through. Also, it's best to have a completely different B+ at the plate resistor, and this is harder to adjust cleanly through switching. It's much easier in the long run to have more triodes which of course means more cost.

That being said, I'm going to shamelessly plug my amps and say that I usually design my clean circuit separate from the dirty channels. The guitar input splits off into two separate triode stages, one for the clean and one for the dirty. This separate signal path continues most of the way through the preamp amp until the final voltage amplifier and cathode follower. For example, on the Colossus, V1 is Clean, V2 is Crunch/Lead, V3 is Lead, V4 is the final shared stage and CF, V5 is the loop, and V6 is the PI.

Check out the cleans in these two videos and let me know what you think.

And sorry again for the shameless plug.

 

[glpg80]

its not bragging if you can back it up

awsome amplifiers

 

[glassjaw7]

I just talked about this a bit over on HRI. As some of you already touched, it usually has to do with compromises and circuit layout. First of all, if the amp has a shared EQ you're limited. Most of those great Fender cleans have the tone stack close to the beginning of the signal chain. In higher gain stuff, it is typically later. That being said, if you use independent EQs, you no longer have to worry about this limitation.

Further, most amps share the first gain stage after the input jack. This requires a compromise in tone based on how you bias this first triode. It's possible to adjust this on the fly with relays and such, but it's usually more trouble than amp designers are willing to go through. Also, it's best to have a completely different B+ at the plate resistor, and this is harder to adjust cleanly through switching. It's much easier in the long run to have more triodes which of course means more cost.

That being said, I'm going to shamelessly plug my amps and say that I usually design my clean circuit separate from the dirty channels. The guitar input splits off into two separate triode stages, one for the clean and one for the dirty. This separate signal path continues most of the way through the preamp amp until the final voltage amplifier and cathode follower. For example, on the Colossus, V1 is Clean, V2 is Crunch/Lead, V3 is Lead, V4 is the final shared stage and CF, V5 is the loop, and V6 is the PI.

Check out the cleans in these two videos and let me know what you think.

And sorry again for the shameless plug.

Thanks for getting into detail. And your amps sound really good!

 

[protoplasma]

Thanks for getting into detail. And your amps sound really good!

its not bragging if you can back it up

awsome amplifiers

Thanks guys! A lot of work went into that amp, glad to see people are digging it.

 

[university81]

i usually go in assuming the clean on a gainy amp/hi gain amp will essentially suck , so i'm sometimes surprised by what i hear

the 5150 iii is pretty good imo, and a fair few mesa amps do it well,
as people have said the circuitry/eq placement goes a long way, and also how the power tube section reacts imo

probably a reason why i've settled on all pedals into a real good clean amp , but i'd love to try out some of those high end boutique amps to see (Marsha, Bogner etc..) they're not too too common around these parts unfortunately

 

[Mark Day]

The Suhr stuff has amazing cleans. OD100, PT100. Very Fender like.

Mark

 

[petejt]

Mesa/Boogie Mark series amps like my MarkIV, have pretty good clean tones on their rhythm channels. I like it.

Although often I prefer to stay on the dirty channel that is cranked up, and roll the guitar's volume control down & split the humbucker coils for a clean tone. I really love that sound when playing on a cranked old single-channel Marshall amp.


I guess that multi-channel amps have cascading gain stages, where the first gain stage is optimised for distortion. I don't see why that can be modified to accomodate all the channels? What about an initial low level gain stage that splits to each channel, that have their own separate gain stages? I don't know.

EDIT: I just read protoplasma's post. Nice work!

 

[duesentrieb]

All a question of the design. There are enough multichannel amps with excellent cleans out there.

Some use simply a Fender circuit (CAE, Shiva . and they don't cascade, they "share" V1A for all channels, then add individual triodes for the other stages, the common fender design has "just" two triodes" - and more for the other channels), others have their own stuff going on with a limited number of stages (2 normally) and a CF (Diezels, modern Marshalls, . . .).

Esp. when the amps have muting circuitry installed you can also switch cathode values on V1A to get really close to "real Fernder-ness" and still use V1A for the dist. gainstages.

The problem (often) is the loop design, which takes away dynamics and makes the amp "flat".

So in total 2/3 design things which seperate the men from the boys

 

[PeteLaramee]

The cleans on my Dual Lead Voodoo Amps V-Rock and Voodoo modded DSL are awesome.

There are others too...the knucklehead and OD100 have great cleans, but I really didn't like the high gain tones.

 

[memberzonly]

Guytron.

 

[petejt]

The problem (often) is the loop design, which takes away dynamics and makes the amp "flat".

That might be why I don't like effects loops.

 

[EchelonEngineering]

Rivera Knucklehead 100 watt head.....totally awesome amp. Has 2 clean channel modes (tweed, and blackface) and has a killer grind on the distortion channel w/built in footswitchable boost that can be used on either channel. Other than that, the Peavey JSX's clean channel was impressive to me (maybe because I was expecting a shitty one like most other high gain amps).

 

[Anolin]

The cleans on my Renegade are some if the best I've heard on a channel switcher...