Palmer PGA-04?

[Rogue]

I have a few questions..

There is one available here on CL for $300. Is this a good price on a used one?

Does anyone know if it is a reactive load or a resistive load? I have a weber mass and DI box into the DAW with IRs for cab sims for a direct set up now. It works, but there is certainly room for improvement. It is my experience thus far that resistive loads (like my weber) tend to choke the signal....makes it mid heavy (and can't dial it out), dirty sounding, and just doesn't breath for lack of a better term.

So how does the Palmer PGA-04 stack up to an attenuator set to load in terms of the tone? Does it sound better, does it do the same thing, or does it do the same thing but sound better?

How is the direct out (as opposed to the simulated out)? Is it a nice signal for use with IRs?

There is also an original Groove Tube Speaker Simulator for $225, but I don't know anything about them. Is this worth looking into?

Any thoughts or advice would be appreciated.

 

[glpg80]

basically, aspen pittman patented the speaker inductive load palmer uses now - many years before palmer began using it. there was a class action lawsuit against palmer from aspen due to patent breachings but eventually aspen ran out of cash or something along those lines and couldnt finish the lawsuit.

so basically the speaker load section that palmer uses is the same damn thing as a groove tubes speaker load. however - each companies take on the simulation section of the circuits are different in their own remarks with tweaks here/there.

when you use a resistive load as an impedance load on an amplifier you will get the choking attitude you are talking about - you will get it with speakers as well actually - the more the impedance load becomes more resistive the same thing happens and you loose the abilities of the speakers to act as a natural bass boost/treble bleed by cone and coil designs.

IMHO the palmer and GT units i would have to play back to back to get a solid answer as to what you are talking about. in the inductive load sections of either of them its almost fucking identical - hence the lawsuit issues. the line out tone would have to be played to really get a take on it as to whether you like it or not. some like it, others dont.

IMHO i prefer impulses for final recorded tones..............hence why i was looking at two-note vr101 and 201 units at one point in time. the palmer and GT speaker simulator's are more road worthy though and more solid built - a better road alternative than carrying a computer laptop around with a DAW, direct boxes, and running impulses at live gigs. its just not practical. i do know that sharkdriver - co-owner of tone merchants prefer's palmer's because of the road worthy and set it/forget it type of attitude the units carry. and for live use the tone is good enough for what it does.

i do know that shark driver and many others prefer the tone of the original PG-03 model that they reissued not to long ago. thats the same unit that Phil Collen from def leppard used live and is the same unit that joe bonnomassa uses live in his euro-setup.

if i were you i wouldnt get the palmer unless it was a pg-03 model, and i would rather own the GT model for the price and history that i know between aspen and palmer. but tone for tone i would take a pg-03 model against either of them, and a two-notes VR model over any of them if i had the cash.

 

[Rogue]

Thanks gl. Does the GT have a direct out that is not emulated?

 

[Audioholic]

I preferred the features on the 04, but the 03 had a sound that mostly worked slightly better. just captured the guitar a tad better. I LOVED that you could dial in some of the unfiltered signal on the 04, but overall the filtered sound was just a tad more mushy and rounder then I wanted it

I did a side by side clip comparison a while ago, but I think my files are lost somewhere.

 

[Rogue]

I preferred the features on the 04, but the 03 had a sound that mostly worked slightly better. just captured the guitar a tad better. I LOVED that you could dial in some of the unfiltered signal on the 04, but overall the filtered sound was just a tad more mushy and rounder then I wanted it

Did you try using the unfiltered sound with cab sims in the DAW? I'd be fine if the unfiltered direct out was a nice signal and just using the Redwires as I am now. My biggest concern is that signal. The attenuated signal from the weber just isn't very good. I would assume that signal from the Palmer would be better, but I have no idea if it really is or not.

 

[glpg80]

Thanks gl. Does the GT have a direct out that is not emulated?

im not too familiar with them to be honest, ive always been with palmer because i always liked Phil's live tone, but i found the lawsuit issues on another forum and it turned me sour against palmer - im thinking either faustine phantom for a load and running impulses, two-notes unit, a GT unit, or researching and building my own model.

 

[Audioholic]

I preferred the features on the 04, but the 03 had a sound that mostly worked slightly better. just captured the guitar a tad better. I LOVED that you could dial in some of the unfiltered signal on the 04, but overall the filtered sound was just a tad more mushy and rounder then I wanted it

Did you try using the unfiltered sound with cab sims in the DAW? I'd be fine if the unfiltered direct out was a nice signal and just using the Redwires as I am now. My biggest concern is that signal. The attenuated signal from the weber just isn't very good. I would assume that signal from the Palmer would be better, but I have no idea if it really is or not.

No i didn't try it. Was a few years ago before I knew much or anything about IR's, nor was there really any good ones at the time. that would be a great way to use the 04 however if it worked that way. All unfiltered going into your system. It might be worth a try. But IR's are the way to go over ANY analog speaker sim I have ever tried.

 

[glpg80]

But IR's are the way to go over ANY analog speaker sim I have ever tried.

i tend to agree time and time again. im amazed at the impulses that exist nowdays and the tones people are pulling. keeps me from being like Dave and owning 12 different cabinets and another $2,000 in microphones and recording equipment.

 

[steve_k]

The 03 was many years the predecessor to the 04. The 04 is the best of both worlds. Get a DI in to the mixer or FOH and dial your tone in. Use a thru jack to go straight to your cab and mic it. Playing live you got both tracks tracking, and in the studio. I used them to drive stage monitors too.

Go to www.palmergear.com and read all about the 03, 04 and Palmer Audio history. Mercenary Audio has them too. These are not the Made In China trash at Guitar Center.


Steve

 

[Audioholic]

The 03 was many years the predecessor to the 04. The 04 is the best of both worlds. Get a DI in to the mixer or FOH and dial your tone in. Use a thru jack to go straight to your cab and mic it. Playing live you got both tracks tracking, and in the studio. I used them to drive stage monitors too.

Go to http://www.palmergear.com and read all about the 03, 04 and Palmer Audio history. Mercenary Audio has them too. These are not the Made In China trash at Guitar Center.


Steve

It was the predecessor, and they "Claim" the 04 is the same circuit, just continous filter rather then fixed, but it DOES sound different. You can't make the 04 sound like the 03, it does sound different. I had both at the same time and did back to back testing. As I said, the 04 has much better features, but the 03 just has a sound that I mostly preffered, specially on overdriven sounds. for clean, the 04 is nice cause you can dial in some of the unfiltered sound, but for dirt, the 03 just jived better. For some reason the 04 was rounder and mushier. Alot of people have felt the same way, which is a reason why the 03 is re-issued. But I never thought about using the 04 for simply running line into an IR. that might rock. The attenuation works ok up untill a certain level. IE, I doubt you are going to get a great unsmashed sound with a 100 watter cranked master. Maybe half way up would be max at what it can handle well.

 

[steve_k]

The 03 was many years the predecessor to the 04. The 04 is the best of both worlds. Get a DI in to the mixer or FOH and dial your tone in. Use a thru jack to go straight to your cab and mic it. Playing live you got both tracks tracking, and in the studio. I used them to drive stage monitors too.

Go to http://www.palmergear.com and read all about the 03, 04 and Palmer Audio history. Mercenary Audio has them too. These are not the Made In China trash at Guitar Center.


Steve

It was the predecessor, and they "Claim" the 04 is the same circuit, just continous filter rather then fixed, but it DOES sound different. You can't make the 04 sound like the 03, it does sound different. I had both at the same time and did back to back testing. As I said, the 04 has much better features, but the 03 just has a sound that I mostly preffered, specially on overdriven sounds. for clean, the 04 is nice cause you can dial in some of the unfiltered sound, but for dirt, the 03 just jived better. For some reason the 04 was rounder and mushier. Alot of people have felt the same way, which is a reason why the 03 is re-issued. But I never thought about using the 04 for simply running line into an IR. that might rock. The attenuation works ok up untill a certain level. IE, I doubt you are going to get a great unsmashed sound with a 100 watter cranked master. Maybe half way up would be max at what it can handle well.

Well said. Its got its limits. For studio, you can mess with it a bit and get it tracking several. If any of you are playing a stadium gig and plan to dime a 100 watt amp, you probably need to move on to something different.

Steve

 

[SoulIncision]

I preferred the features on the 04, but the 03 had a sound that mostly worked slightly better. just captured the guitar a tad better. I LOVED that you could dial in some of the unfiltered signal on the 04, but overall the filtered sound was just a tad more mushy and rounder then I wanted it

Did you try using the unfiltered sound with cab sims in the DAW? I'd be fine if the unfiltered direct out was a nice signal and just using the Redwires as I am now. My biggest concern is that signal. The attenuated signal from the weber just isn't very good. I would assume that signal from the Palmer would be better, but I have no idea if it really is or not.

I do this now. Tube Amp -> Palmer -> Unfiltered out to...Axe FX

 

[Rogue]

I do this now. Tube Amp -> Palmer -> Unfiltered out to...Axe FX

You're using the cab sims in the AxeFX? Or some user defined ones? What are your thoughts on this setup? Do you feel your tone suffers from it in anyway? Clips?

 

[Rogue]

No i didn't try it. Was a few years ago before I knew much or anything about IR's, nor was there really any good ones at the time. that would be a great way to use the 04 however if it worked that way. All unfiltered going into your system. It might be worth a try. But IR's are the way to go over ANY analog speaker sim I have ever tried.

I would like to give it a shot. I did find this comparison of a miced cab, the PDI-03 simulated, and PDI-03 unfiltered direct out into DAW using Redwires...

http://www.ultimatemetal.com/forum/...r-pdi-03-vs-redwirez-cab-ir-clips-inside.html

The miced cab sounds better, which is to be expected. The Redwires clip doesn't sound bad. It doesn't sound all congested. He said it was the only one of the clips without any post EQ. Given the flexibility of using mutliple IRs, this could be a decent direct solution.

I have liked what I have heard from the Sequis Elemental though, but I'm not sure it has an unfiltered direct out. However, the simulated line out sounds pretty dang good (based on a Celestion Blue with some controls) AND works as an attenuator and apparently a pretty good one. Can't get that one cheap though.