Diezel Herbert Mk3 vs Friedman JJ-100

Racerxrated said:
I agree with most of what's been said; however I do think the Friedman line has the ability to get much brighter and cut much better than the previous versions from a few years ago. It is the more 'polished recorded tone' amp line; but the earlier versions I could max the presence and treble and STILL not get it bright enough. The recent versions can get much brighter thankfully.
I think if the OP wants an amp that will cut and give a great lead tone, I'd go with a BE Deluxe IF I were going Friedman. JJ will be too dark and for that matter, so will the Herbert. IMO.
Click to expand...

Agreed, and I should’ve added, I definitely have heard this About the new Friedman’s as well... I just in the last few weeks plugged into the SS-100: I can not tell you how much that amp DIDNT do for me. Just absolutely felt like a flat dark boring mess. I know that’s harsh, but it was the worst offender by far of the Friedman’s I had heard, so that doesn’t help change my opinion, especially given that this was so recent. Again, to be fair I have definitely heard the new Friedman’s don’t suffer from this neutering, but man, I just don’t get it at all... actually that’s not true, I DO get it, because I can see why guys who mostly play at home or who have never done any recording or play live love them, I get it. And nothing against those guys at all, and that’s not all of them by any means. But whoever in this thread said the amp “ sounds like an amp designed not to offend anyone”, absolutely NAILED IT... that’s it to a T.. and quite frankly in my opinion, that’s what’s wrong with modern metal production as a whole these days, people are afraid of high end and nastiness and going against the grain: but that’s another topic completely, this is just the amp version of literally THAT phenomenon going on right now if that makes sense :)

And I would tend to agree with you about the Herbert, it can definitely be on the darker side, but I think at the same time I just find it’s controls are just very usable. I can crank up the treble and presence, mic way up on the cone and it’s extremely aggrsssive and bright, all the while never getting harsh. But still can be on the darker side there is no doubt about it, it’s midrange is not Marshall at all for sure! It’s just an amazing amp to me in how it can do so much and yet never has the negatives associated with doing extend things ( such as boosting highs and presence a ton and micing way up on the cone, it never gets harsh!)
 
OP what kind of tone, band/album/player are you going for? If the Wizard isn't your thing, maybe the lack of compression is why? I was shocked when I first plugged into the first one I had, a 50w MTL...I liked it but it was SO dry and uncompressed...the mids sat in a weird place so I sold it. But my 2nd one was a MCI 100w that had nice mids plus it took boosts well, so I could add some compression in. A VHT/Fryette will also be in the same ballpark compression wise, so I'd steer away from that.
Have you thought about a Rectifier? They take boosts well, the older G Triples (or F of course) have great clarity while getting saturated enough for nice feel/playability where you aren't fighting it. They can be dialed to be super heavy mid scooped or modded Marshall. I'd easily take my F Triple over any Diezel, Friedman and many more I've forgotten about..right now I did some super easy Rev C mods to my F Triple and I A/B it with my C+ Coliseum and they are very close when it comes to clarity, feel(great but different from the C+) thump and a top end that is never abrasive. Some amps sound flat when compared to other great ones; this Triple sounds on par with my Coliseum in all the right ways. I'd consider a vintage Recto or a Badlander as that's one that guys seem to compare favorably to the older Rectos.
 
VESmedic said:
On the other side, I personally can not stand Friedman Amps for just about anything. Do they sound good? Yes, but like how a really good practice amp sounds good in the room. Does it sound like a practice amp? No, that’s not what I’m saying. What I am saying is, Friedman takes all the frequencies that people think are “harsh” or “too bright” and flattens them out. And what you are left with is a perfectly polished high gain guitar tone that has absolutely no high end or teeth or aggression that wouldn’t work for anything... for ME. They are extremely dark, flat, and honestly just sound “neutered” to me. Like a Marshall that they took everything out of it that makes it a Marshall and cut through, and neutered it.
Click to expand...

I guess I've never read a better description about Friedman amp and how I feel about them. True, they sound great in a solo scenario, almost record-like, no annoying frequencies, fat sounding, loads of balls, smooth and easy to handle, very "organic". But hell, most of em (haven't tried the whole bunch) don't have the rawness, sharpness and the high mid aggression that pierces thru any mix, that ANY Marshall has, and believe me it's funny when at rehearsal you see bands with a guitar duo and the Friedman + PRS loaded guy gets buttspanked by the fella with a st00pid DSL + LP Studio.


Also they say Friedman amps have bias running too hot from the factory lately.
 
I don't have any first hand experience in this but I'm surprised to hear all of this Freidman wont cut through a mix talk. The last 2 bands that I saw live that use Friedman's, both Foo Fighters and Alice In Chains sounded freakin massive. Jerry has one of the best live tones I've ever heard tbh. Now if we're talking bands playing at the local dive bars and not cutting through a mix then yeah I can't comment on that, haha.
 
OP. Not sure where you're located, but I have most of the amps being discussed in this thread here at my disposal. If you're within driving distance, you're welcome to come out and put a couple through their paces.

I think everyone here has done a good job at describing the differences and characteristics of each amp.

Friedman - Refined, polished Marshall tones. I own the 2016 BE100, Runt 50 and Butterslax. All 3 are fairly smooth amps. Like your ideal recorded Marshall tone vs an actual raw and roaring Marshall.

Diezel Herbert - I own the MKI and can't speak on the others, but these are compressed, saturated, liquid feeling chug machines.....in the best way. They will definitely have a hard time cutting through, depending on the situation. The right speaker, pickup and boost compliment and settings will get you there, fairly easily though, and there are some tricks to gettings the right frequencies out of the amp for live situations.

Mark III - Raw, Tight, tricky to dial in but should cut like a knife and punch you in the gut once you get it figured out. Boost it up front and play with the gains to really figure out your saturation. It's mostly a dry amp but can get fairly liquid feeling with the right settings.

Badlander - it is what they say it is. A modernized, rectifier inspired amp that's meant to be more tight and open than the older Rectifiers. Some love it, some hate it. I love it, but it's also a situational amp for me. Crunch channel boosted with a beefy guitar and cab and it sounds just right. For thrash. Can be thin if you're looking for a wall off sound type thing that a normal recitifer brings.
 
Apex1Rg7X said:
I don't have any first hand experience in this but I'm surprised to hear all of this Freidman wont cut through a mix talk. The last 2 bands that I saw live that use Friedman's, both Foo Fighters and Alice In Chains sounded freakin massive. Jerry has one of the best live tones I've ever heard tbh. Now if we're talking bands playing at the local dive bars and not cutting through a mix then yeah I can't comment on that, haha.
Click to expand...

I don’t think it’s so much that they “won’t cut through” in the same vein that the herbert might have issues (live that is, recording is a different story), it’s just that they don’t have the rawness and typical aggression and dare I say “spikey” frequencies that cut through and made a Marshall sound like, well, a Marshall. And that argument brings up a whole nother can of worms because I know they aren’t Marshall’s. But to me, when an amp sounds that sounded off and refined and inorganic and not “raw” ( I hate these terms, I really do but what’re you gonna do), it just almost sounds, dare I say, fake to me. You could argue that the Diezel is in the same vein of adjectives as well: “too perfect” sounding, Hifi, “like a perfectly recorded tone” etc, but it’s different to me, in that it still has tons of teeth and aggression. It’s like it’s raw but polished at the same time. I’m sure someone is laughing at this no doubt haha! But if you’ve played the Herbert at length, you know what I mean I’m sure. The Friedman just sounds neutered to me and doesn’t get the teeth when you dig in, or really ever sound out of control, doesn’t have the high end I like etc. this is hard to do, describe sounds like this but if you play them both, I think it becomes obvious what I mean with these adjectives.

also I never really reference a bands live sound, given the fact that obviously a professional FOH at every single level of the chain makes all of these points null, because a professional FOH that a band like AIC is going to have, is going to make anything sound good. There’s just no bones about it when it comes to that. So it’s hard to say an amp is amazing or not given that context. Bands on that level are going to sound better no matter what they are using, in general.
 
VESmedic said:
I don’t think it’s so much that they “won’t cut through” in the same vein that the herbert might have issues (live that is, recording is a different story), it’s just that they don’t have the rawness and typical aggression and dare I say “spikey” frequencies that cut through and made a Marshall sound like, well, a Marshall. And that argument brings up a whole nother can of worms because I know they aren’t Marshall’s. But to me, when an amp sounds that sounded off and refined and inorganic and not “raw” ( I hate these terms, I really do but what’re you gonna do), it just almost sounds, dare I say, fake to me. You could argue that the Diezel is in the same vein of adjectives as well: “too perfect” sounding, Hifi, “like a perfectly recorded tone” etc, but it’s different to me, in that it still has tons of teeth and aggression. It’s like it’s raw but polished at the same time. I’m sure someone is laughing at this no doubt haha! But if you’ve played the Herbert at length, you know what I mean I’m sure. The Friedman just sounds neutered to me and doesn’t get the teeth when you dig in, or really ever sound out of control, doesn’t have the high end I like etc. this is hard to do, describe sounds like this but if you play them both, I think it becomes obvious what I mean with these adjectives.

also I never really reference a bands live sound, given the fact that obviously a professional FOH at every single level of the chain makes all of these points null, because a professional FOH that a band like AIC is going to have, is going to make anything sound good. There’s just no bones about it when it comes to that. So it’s hard to say an amp is amazing or not given that context. Bands on that level are going to sound better no matter what they are using, in general.
Click to expand...
Exactly. I saw Andy LaRocque playing a Line 6 Spider Valve with King Diamond, and his tone was killer. Lol
 
VESmedic said:
I saw that tour a few yesss back as well. Their tone and mix was godlike here in Orlando for that show. November of 2019 I believe.
Click to expand...
Damn right man, that show killed. I also saw a live video of Amon, with the Hoffmans from Deicide, playing through the same Line 6 amp and their tone was fucking sick. Maybe I should stop using that amp for this example and get one. :LOL:
 
Beyond Black said:
Exactly. I saw Andy LaRocque playing a Line 6 Spider Valve with King Diamond, and his tone was killer. Lol
Click to expand...
I saw a band in a small club, with 2 guitarists, several years back, right after the Mark V had come out. One guitarist's Line 6 combo amp surprisingly sounded better to me than the other's MkV thru a vertical 2x12. I remember being kinda confused by that. Lol
 
Racerxrated said:
I agree with most of what's been said; however I do think the Friedman line has the ability to get much brighter and cut much better than the previous versions from a few years ago. It is the more 'polished recorded tone' amp line; but the earlier versions I could max the presence and treble and STILL not get it bright enough. The recent versions can get much brighter thankfully.
I think if the OP wants an amp that will cut and give a great lead tone, I'd go with a BE Deluxe IF I were going Friedman. JJ will be too dark and for that matter, so will the Herbert. IMO.
Click to expand...
You're right about the later versions of the BE, they are brighter.
And I agree about the Deluxe (I have the BE 100 Deluxe) being a better option, it can be as bright as you want, plus if you really want it to sound like the JJ, it can get very close. Dave Friedman himself gave the settings here in the Friedman subforum.
 
Racerxrated said:
OP what kind of tone, band/album/player are you going for? If the Wizard isn't your thing, maybe the lack of compression is why? I was shocked when I first plugged into the first one I had, a 50w MTL...I liked it but it was SO dry and uncompressed...the mids sat in a weird place so I sold it. But my 2nd one was a MCI 100w that had nice mids plus it took boosts well, so I could add some compression in. A VHT/Fryette will also be in the same ballpark compression wise, so I'd steer away from that.
Have you thought about a Rectifier? They take boosts well, the older G Triples (or F of course) have great clarity while getting saturated enough for nice feel/playability where you aren't fighting it. They can be dialed to be super heavy mid scooped or modded Marshall. I'd easily take my F Triple over any Diezel, Friedman and many more I've forgotten about..right now I did some super easy Rev C mods to my F Triple and I A/B it with my C+ Coliseum and they are very close when it comes to clarity, feel(great but different from the C+) thump and a top end that is never abrasive. Some amps sound flat when compared to other great ones; this Triple sounds on par with my Coliseum in all the right ways. I'd consider a vintage Recto or a Badlander as that's one that guys seem to compare favorably to the older Rectos.
Click to expand...
This is my old band. My new band is similar doing some heavier, but also in the ethereal realm as well. Tuned to drop C, B, and A#.

https://www.reverbnation.com/elision
 
Veritas0Aequitas said:
This is my old band. My new band is similar doing some heavier, but also in the ethereal realm as well. Tuned to drop C, B, and A#.

https://www.reverbnation.com/elision
Click to expand...
So for that style I can see why the Wizard wasn’t ideal for you. Wouldn’t be my choice either for that. If I were to do a re-amp/recording for that my first choice would probably be my Rev F/C Triple Rec and other ones I’d consider would be my Naylor with a boost, Blueface or Badlander. I wouldn’t like Friedman’s for that style. Herbert I think could sound good for that stuff too, but wouldn’t be my first choice. The only thing is the cleans on the old Rec’s may not be good enough
 
I think back in the day I tracked that with a Dual Rec. I just didn't like it enough so I moved onto a VH4.

But those clips of the Mark IIC+ and the IV (more affordable) interest me a lot too. The Badlander also may be an option, I'd love to play one. I am going to sell my older VH4 and get a newer one because the one I have just isn't the tone I'm looking for. The Herbert is still really interesting to me too.

Maybe a Herbert and a Badlander? Can you tell me what years of early Triple Recs I'd be looking for? Will also look at a Naylor eventually.

Very good cleans are EXTREMELY important to me.
 
Last edited:
Veritas0Aequitas said:
I think back in the day I tracked that with a Dual Rec. I just didn't like it enough so I moved onto a VH4.

But those clips of the Mark IIC+ and the IV (more affordable) interest me a lot too. The Badlander also may be an option, I'd love to play one. I am going to sell my older VH4 and get a newer one because the one I have just isn't the tone I'm looking for. The Herbert is still really interesting to me too.

Maybe a Herbert and a Badlander? Can you tell me what years of early Triple Recs I'd be looking for? Will also look at a Naylor eventually.

Very good cleans are EXTREMELY important to me.
Click to expand...
Seems like those options are probably on the right track. I actually love the cleans on my Naylor and consider it one of the top 5 best cleans I’ve heard, but it’s a specific type of clean tone and different than most of the kind of cleans in your recordings. For the type of cleans in your stuff, I probably would’ve used either my Schroeder or ‘63 Vox Top Boost AC30. The Badlander has very solid cleans for a high gain amp and imo an appropriate flavor of cleans for your stuff. IIC+ has probably the best cleans I’ve heard in a high gain amp. A lot of guys like the Herbert cleans, but I don’t. Too sterile and bland. It is very clean, high headroom and even, but there’s just nothing inherently lush or beautiful about the Herbert’s tone on any of its channels. It’s a more cold, clinical sounding amp

I don’t know much about years or serial numbers with Rectifiers, others can chime in for that, but the Rev F would do it and am guessing earlier revisions too (haven’t tried them). The 3 channels and later Recto’s aren’t as good. It’s like going from fresh squeezed to concentrate oj from something like rev F to 3 channel
 
Last edited:
I think the JP2C and the Mark V should be up for consideration as well. They're hard to find right now though, because Mesa has a 6-month backlog with orders.
 
I owned both for a time and I prefer the JJ. Overall tightness and tone, I just jived with it better. The Herbert has some great tones in it, but it was too lose for me. Anytime I played with an actual song with my PA set up, palm mutes just seemed to get lost in the mix. I'd go back to the JJ and it was instant gratification. I don't play in a band or record, but that was my take. I found the JJ tighter and bigger. The Herbert had great lead tones and tons of sustain, but the JJ beat it overall.
 
jeff5 said:
I owned both for a time and I prefer the JJ. Overall tightness and tone, I just jived with it better. The Herbert has some great tones in it, but it was too lose for me. Anytime I played with an actual song with my PA set up, palm mutes just seemed to get lost in the mix. I'd go back to the JJ and it was instant gratification. I don't play in a band or record, but that was my take. I found the JJ tighter and bigger. The Herbert had great lead tones and tons of sustain, but the JJ beat it overall.
Click to expand...
JJ was the one Friedman I gelled with - not worth the price alone given what it does - but it was my fave Friedman outta the lot. I find Friedmans pretty expensive for what they are but if they make people happy so be it - make 'em happy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top