Question for the high wattage amp guys here about playing at home

SQUAREHEAD said:
Nope
That’s it.
Click to expand...

Square! You made it to the party! Check out this asshole who joined this morning at 5am, and doesnt understand why headroom makes any difference for heavy metal guitar sounds! He apparently thinks linking youtube videos is incontrovertible evidence of his incredibly scientific magical toan method, which you can buy in Ebook, Paperback, and Hardcover format!
 
TheToneDig said:
-6 db. That's the difference.

Most of the albums we all love aren't going to be in the past 10 or 5 years. The gear we have today wasn't there for a lot of it.

There are plenty of examples of smaller wattage high-gain heads that will deliver on tones of their bigger brothers.

SLO 30.
Friedman Runt Head 20W.
Marshall Studio 20W.
Revv 20W.
Laney 30W.

I would be very surprised if people can tell the difference in a recording these days between those and the 100W versions.

Why do you think they make 50W BE-ODs and EVHs if the same signature tone wasn't there?
Click to expand...


Notice how the novice thinks the only difference in these amps is SPLs?

Well get used to it, because this novice thinks he's an EXPERT folks!
 
TheToneDig said:
-6 db. That's the difference.

Most of the albums we all love aren't going to be in the past 10 or 5 years. The gear we have today wasn't there for a lot of it.

There are plenty of examples of smaller wattage high-gain heads that will deliver on tones of their bigger brothers.

SLO 30.
Friedman Runt Head 20W.
Marshall Studio 20W.
Revv 20W.
Laney 30W.

I would be very surprised if people can tell the difference in a recording these days between those and the 100W versions.

Why do you think they make 50W BE-ODs and EVHs if the same signature tone wasn't there?
Click to expand...



volume. Isn’t. The. Reason. 100. Watt. Amps. Are. Used. On. Records.


Read that again before you make your self look any less smart.


You are all over the place with your logic ( or lack there of). Just a few posts ago, you said that the reason they make bigger versions of the amps is all because of marketing, but now you are saying, that it’s NOT marketing when they try to make you believe their 20 watt counterparts sound the same as their big brothers? Do you see why people are slamming you yet, or no?


Also, what kind of once again ASININE assumption is it to say that “most of our favorite tones weren’t in the last 5-10 years ? And that “
The gear today wasn’t there for it”? Just about every metal record that I and many others enjoy here, regardless of how new it is, had gear that’s been around for decades used on it, from the 80s onwards.

Peavey 5150 ( 1991 or 92)
Mesa rectifier ( 1992-1993)
Marshall jcm800 and newer ( 1980)
Diezel amplification ( 1990s)
Mesa mark series ( 1980s)
Modded Marshall’s ( 1980s)
Engl savage ( 1990s)


The majority of tones the last 30 years or so, has been done with those Amps: I’d say upwards of 90%, probably a higher percentage than that.


You know what gear won’t be on any of the biggest metal productions from here on out? Literally any of the amps you listed… I’ll bet my mortgage on it.

I need a drink….
 
VESmedic said:
volume. Isn’t. The. Reason. 100. Watt. Amps. Are. Used. On. Records.


Read that again before you make your self look any less smart.


You are all over the place with your logic ( or lack there of). Just a few posts ago, you said that the reason they make bigger versions of the amps is all because of marketing, but now you are saying, that it’s NOT marketing when they try to make you believe their 20 watt counterparts sound the same as their big brothers? Do you see why people are slamming you yet, or no?


Also, what kind of once again ASININE assumption is it to say that “most of our favorite tones weren’t in the last 5-10 years ? And that “
The gear today wasn’t there for it”? Just about every metal record that I and many others enjoy here, regardless of how new it is, had gear that’s been around for decades used on it, from the 80s onwards.

Peavey 5150 ( 1991 or 92)
Mesa rectifier ( 1992-1993)
Marshall jcm800 and newer ( 1980)
Diezel amplification ( 1990s)
Mesa mark series ( 1980s)
Modded Marshall’s ( 1980s)
Engl savage ( 1990s)


The majority of tones the last 30 years or so, has been done with those Amps: I’d say upwards of 90%, probably a higher percentage than that.


You know what gear won’t be on any of the biggest metal productions from here on out? Literally any of the amps you listed… I’ll bet my mortgage on it.

I need a drink….
Click to expand...


I already started drinking, it makes listening to this dude a whole lot more funny and a whole lot less annoying.
 
ackshually.jpg

@VESmedic

How much do you want to bet he asks for youtube videos as "evidence" that they arent exactly the same?
 
VESmedic said:
Also, what kind of once again ASININE assumption is it to say that “most of our favorite tones weren’t in the last 5-10 years ? And that “
The gear today wasn’t there for it”? Just about every metal record that I and many others enjoy here, regardless of how new it is, has been around for 30+ years.
Click to expand...

Why did you make up that bit in quotes?

I never said that. I said,

Most of the albums we all love aren't going to be in the past 10 or 5 years.

Meaning of course it's going to be older gear and more than likely 100W. However, even 50W amps make an appearance in studio recordings including the ones you listed. That's because studios didn't need the 100W to get the signature tones. Many of these amps could have their signature tones in 20-30W. That is what has happened in the past 10 years to compete with modelers and other amp brands.

BTW, I mentioned these forums as a place to go to learn some things in my book. I haven't brought my book up elsewhere, and this is far from my first rodeo on here. If someone has something to teach about what we can't do at home without 100W for high gain stuff then have at it. However this view that you can't get there with lower wattage amps is something I think is old.

I explained my point and didn't need to do ad-hominems. I referenced videos. People can go check it out for themselves.
 
Smashedguitarist said:
why don't you record us something with your 20 watt amp? I think that would show us
Click to expand...


Exactly… the burden of proof is on you homie. Apparently the Grammy award winning engineers I referenced that have never used anything less than a 4x12 and a ( in general) powerful tube head aren’t proof enough with this guy…


Also, apparently I have to say this, even though I know you guys all understand: this is not a slight against modelers, specifically the Kemper, either. I’m talking about a more apples to oranges comparison. Where as, a 100 watt dual Recto into a 4x12 is always going to be better than a 20 watt recto into a two notes loadbox ( inferior load box) and an IR. That is what I’m saying here. That’s an apples to oranges comparison, no matter how apples to apples this guy wants to make it. Where as, a dual recto and a 4x12 vs a profile of that same exact setup, would be more apples to apples. I hope that makes sense what I’m trying to say.
 
TheToneDig said:
I could but how about just listening to one of the thousands of videos out there doing just that.

Click to expand...



Sounds good… doesn’t sound like my favorite tones, or tones I consider superior by any means, so what’s your point here? It’s real easy to sit here and argue your point with absolutely no context, isn’t it?
 
VESmedic said:
Sounds good… doesn’t sound like my favorite tones, or tones I consider superior by any means, so what’s your point here? It’s real easy to sit here and argue your point with absolutely no context, isn’t it?
Click to expand...
My point hasn't changed. These days you can get much lower wattage versions of the bigger brother amps for a studio recording which makes home use also a lot easier. That this view that 100W is necessary for high gain modern metal tones, is not something I subscribe to anymore. All it takes is for these amp makers to just go do it. Which they are.
 
TheToneDig said:
Click to expand...




That’s the example you wanna show to prove your point? Did you listen to the last 4 minutes comparing the small amp to the big amp? You think those differences would be SMALL in a mix? Wow…I can tell you from a recording standpoint, those two aren’t even in the same ball park. The big boy was like lifting a blanket off the amp and taking the brakes off the amp. Do you not hear that? It’s a serious question. If you think for two seconds that those two Amps would “ sound the same in a Mix and no one could tell” you are so incredibly far off it’s not even funny. I thought the mini amp sounded great too… until I heard the big boy. My god.


Also notice how he wouldn’t even TRY to compare it to his 2203? Gee… I wonder why…
 
They are doing it to draw in bigger crowds. 20 watts more accessible=sells more amps. Probably has a lot more to do with a gimmicky money grab than them being just as good for recording. Everyone uses front of house now. How many guys you see gigging with one of those lunchbox 20 watt amps?
 
Smashedguitarist said:
They are doing it to draw in bigger crowds. 20 watts more accessible=sells more amps. Probably has a lot more to do with a gimmicky money grab than them being just as good for recording. Everyone uses front of house now. How many guys you see gigging with one of those lunchbox 20 watt amps?
Click to expand...


You need to watch the video he postrd comparing the mini 800 to the ZW 2203… go on… do it… the last 4 minutes… so you can see what this guys thinks “is the same as the big amp”… this is hillarious.
 
VESmedic said:
You need to watch the video he postrd comparing the mini 800 to the ZW 2203… go on… do it… the last 4 minutes… so you can see what this guys thinks “is the same as the big amp”… this is hillarious.
Click to expand...
I cannot fucking believe he used THIS video as an example.
 
VESmedic said:
Apparently the Grammy award winning engineers I referenced that have never used anything less than a 4x12 and a ( in general) powerful tube head aren’t proof enough with this guy…
Click to expand...
I have said several times why they use 4x12s. Choice speakers.

The physics for this idea that 4x12s over 2x12s have some special tonal properties has long ago been debunked. Do you remember my point about why not a full-stack then for recording? You claim a half-stack is the ticket. Why not a full-stack then? If louder and more resonance is better then surely that's the better tone?

Do you know why 4x12 is popular in records we all love? For more volume and 100W amps, they went with four speakers in cab. So you stand four times the chance of getting a choice speaker. That's it. When you are in a recording studio you mic a single speaker spot, especially for high gain tones. You aren't as interested in room dynamics or speaker blending. That single speaker, that mic location, and whatever resonance, and that's your ticket there. Not because it's a 4x12 or 2x12 or 1x12 but because you found a sweet spot.

VESmedic said:
That’s the example you wanna show to prove your point? Did you listen to the last 4 minutes comparing the small amp to the big amp? You think those differences would be SMALL in a mix? Wow…I can tell you from a recording standpoint, those two aren’t even in the same ball park. The big boy was like lifting a blanket off the amp and taking the brakes off the amp. Do you not hear that? It’s a serious question. If you think for two seconds that those two Amps would “ sound the same in a Mix and no one could tell” you are so incredibly far off it’s not even funny. I thought the mini amp sounded great too… until I heard the big boy. My god.
Click to expand...

The problem is when it comes to doing the blind challenge. People fail them. Unless they see the amp, like in the video, they generally only randomly guess which is which.

Anyway, I changed my mind after years of thinking as you did. 100W or go home type of thinking. Not for me and I think a lot of others would find themselves getting on just fine with the amps I have mentioned in those videos. The difference is a nothing burger when it comes to recordings.
 
TheToneDig said:
I have said several times why they use 4x12s. Choice speakers.

The physics for this idea that 4x12s over 2x12s have some special tonal properties has long ago been debunked. Do you remember my point about why not a full-stack then for recording? You claim a half-stack is the ticket. Why not a full-stack then? If louder and more resonance is better then surely that's the better tone?

Do you know why 4x12 is popular in records we all love? For more volume and 100W amps, they went with four speakers in cab. So you stand four times the chance of getting a choice speaker. That's it. When you are in a recording studio you mic a single speaker spot, especially for high gain tones. You aren't as interested in room dynamics or speaker blending. That single speaker, that mic location, and whatever resonance, and that's your ticket there. Not because it's a 4x12 or 2x12 or 1x12 but because you found a sweet spot.



The problem is when it comes to doing the blind challenge. People fail them. Unless they see the amp, like in the video, they generally only randomly guess which is which.
Click to expand...
ok. So, lets here it. Did you think the small one sounded as good?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top