Herbert vs VH4, differences - and similarities!

L

lovegun

New member
Yes I know, this isn't the first thread on the topic but I feel I just have to know your opinions and the facts.

I've owned both the Herbert and the VH4 but not at the same time, and I have never directly compared them or even used them with the same cab. I love the VH4 Ch3 / Herbert Ch2+ Diezel tone, and I plan on getting back into the Diezel game. I'm far off from any dealer so I'm looking for some advice about the other channels, here we go;

Ch1, clean: To me the Herbert clean seemed more smooth and warm while the Ch1 on the VH4 was more bright and perhaps even somewhat harsh. I saw a post where Peter explained that the preamp circuits were basically identical, so is this difference due to different the power sections or am I just imagining?

VH4 Ch4 vs Herb Ch3: To me the Ch4 of the Vh4 seems to be one of the most underrated channels out there, I was massively impressed with it (with keeping the gain not passed noon), full and creamy and had its own character. Sounds like the Ch4 has some additional gain stage(s) to it, is this the reason for the extra 12ax7?
The Herbert Ch3 didn't add much to the Ch2+ and I didn't feel it was that unique as the Ch4 of the VH4 was. Is the Ch4 designed fundamentally differently with more gain stages than the Ch3 of the Herbert?
 
Me and some other guys compared two Herbert's and two VH4 together.
The biggest difference are the clean channels an the midcut.
The crunch channels without midcut are pretty the same. Maybe 1% difference. The difference depends more on where you are standing and listening to the amp or speakers.

For me it's more important in this case if you prefer a 3 or 4 channel amp and other details they deliver.
 
Did you find any difference between the Herbert ch3 and the VH4 ch4? When looking at the tube chart they seem to be designed differently
 
In my case;

I tried the vh4 and i didnt like it. I whent trough all the channels.
After a view years i got the Herbert.

CH1: Amazing clean channel, perfect for me. Comping, touch style the Herb delivers.
Ch2: I use this for both rythem and lead. You had it so you know ;)
Ch3: I didnt use this channel when i first got the amp. But most of my lead work i do on this channel. After the 1th month or so i got the feel how to dail it in. I used way to much gain, there for the compression and loss of dynamics. The mid and bass freq. are more pronounced on this channel so i basicly set it up to sound like ch.2 but just with a bit more of everything.

I hope this helps.
 
lovegun":3v3e0m0j said:
Did you find any difference between the Herbert ch3 and the VH4 ch4? When looking at the tube chart they seem to be designed differently
Click to expand...

These are the channels I hardly heard any difference. Only with midcut engaged. And in case of hearing any difference you can eq it to sound identically.

We used the same cab with an AB switcher. After a few switches you can't hear any difference.

After this experience the herbert for me is an evolution of the VH4. Herbert is more versatile. I made the easy switch mod on ch2 so I can call 8 different sounds with the amp.
And dialed in the midcut correctly, herbert can do the hair metal sound better than the VH4. An I love hair metal a lot!
 
I would say every Diezel product has
more than enough bottom end.
Please adjust it careful in the band context.

Cheers,
Peter
 
Peter Diezel":in0wx94t said:
I would say every Diezel product has
more than enough bottom end.
Please adjust it careful in the band context.

Cheers,
Peter
Click to expand...
Under statement of the year. Diezel amps have no shortage of bass...

The VH4 has tons of bass, the thing with the Herbert is that it has this "sub bass" frequency or something, that when matched with a good tight cab, is unique and awesome.
 
I owned both. Swayed toward the VH4 at the finish line. Jammed it last night with my drummer and it was pure brutality. :shocked: :worship:
Then back it up a bit and it was rock Bliss. :yes:
Perfect amp for me. :thumbsup:
 
Peter Diezel":wvrdpvfy said:
Sorry,

the attack is very low.

It´s me or the recording ?

Thanks,
Peter
Click to expand...

It's definitely not you Peter. Even though the amps sound incredible and huge in the room, I suck at recording them and to capture their real feeling.
 
Please don´t take me wrong.

Have a new DAW and hopefully it works out.
I´m working on some analog solutions to get
a bit of the "stay in front" sound to the monitors.

Cheers,
Peter
 
Of course not Peter. I totally agree with your comment. I will try to see how I can get more attack in my recordings. I'll start with dialing less gain :)
 
I see after so many years the questions have not changed around here :LOL: :LOL:

Here you go, detail explanation of it all:
viewtopic.php?f=49&t=38953

And BTW you are not imagining, I don't know about the circuit, but the sound of channel 1 is definitely different. I'm not sure about harsh, but it's different.

Now that I'm not so much a gear freak anymore, after so many years I can say that I prefer VH4 Channel 4 with low gain setting to anything else for very distorted metal sounds.
Herbert Channel 1 is still hard to beat for a real clean sound.
 
Peter Diezel said:
I would say every Diezel product has
more than enough bottom end.
Please adjust
Click to expand...
Bato said:
Me and some other guys compared two Herbert's and two VH4 together.
The biggest difference are the clean channels an the midcut.
The crunch channels without midcut are pretty the same. Maybe 1% difference. The difference depends more on where you are standing and listening to the amp or speakers.

For me it's more important in this case if you prefer a 3 or 4 channel amp and other details they deliver.
Click to expand...
Hey Bato does the OD on the VH4 channel 3, sound close / similar to the Herberts OD. Was looking at a second hand Herbert in Australia. Thanks
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top