Randy Rhoads 1959SUPER LEAD

[Bob Savage]

You missed the point. A 10 channel amp with 2 good sounding channels is no better than a 2 channel amp with 2 good sounding channels. The other 8 channels sound bad so they add no value to the amp.

A 2 channel amp with 2 good sounding channels and felixble programming of the boosts, master volumes, effects loops, etc (like the JVM has) is better than a 2 channel amp with 2 good sounding channels but lacking the flexibility.

I see, so you've built the assumption into your opinion that some of the channels on multi-channels amps always sound poor. You do understand the subjectivity involved here, right?

For me, all that flexible programming means nothing because I generally just want one good tone but I would never boldly proclaim my opinion as objective dogma as I believe your posts seem to be presented.

 

[Digital Jams]

I wonder if it gets that awful thin fizzy tone from Blizzard Of Oz?

Yeah, it's so weird that Randy's tone was so thin and fizzy on that Blizzard of Ozz album. It's really in contrast to the absolutely huge sounding drums and massive sounding bass guitar on that album.

That ALBUM sounds very poorly produced 28 years later because, well, it WAS poorly produced. Ozzy had no budget whatsoever and could not even afford a producer, so they used the studio's in house ENGINEER as the producer. That was Max Norman and he was a total NOOB on that record. Listen to Rhoads live bootlegs from around that same time. FOR THE TIME, Randy's tone was freaking huge. I blame Randy's studio tone on the guy responsible for capturing Randy's tone and getting it to tape, Max Norman.

And before anyone brings up the Tribute album tone, listen to the original recording of the concert Tribute was taken from. Max Norman in an interview talked about how heavily they EQ'd Randy's live tone from the concert for Tribute to make it sound more like the albums. When I read that before Tribute was released I wanted to smack Max Norman silly

And let's try and get some perspective here. NO ONE at the time was saying Rhoads tone was thin and fizzy. Max Norman became one of the most sought after producers AFTER he recorded those two Ozzy albums. Loudness, George Lynch and everyone else wanted Max Norman to produce them. Why would all these guitar oriented bands want Norman if his claim to fame, which obviously was Ozzy and RHOADS, was a horrible guitar tone?

So yeah, 20-28 years after the fact, Randy's tone WAS kind of thin. I don't know why Randy didn't use a Dual Rectifier or a Diezel, or Engl or Bogner Uberschall......... oh wait, there was no such thing. There were Marshalls, or there were Marshalls. Anyone ever hear an old Super Lead with a ton of low end thump? Now of course Van Halen had a way better Super Lead tone two years before Randy did, but Van Halen had Warner Bros and Ted Templeman behind them. Ozzy had anyone with a pulse behind the console and was scraping for change under the couch cushions to pay for that first album.

Now that I think about it, how wimpy was J.S. Bach's tone when he used that harpsichord? Why didn't he play a Schecter Hellraiser 7-string tuned down to drop Q through a Krank Bachenstein?

AC/DC had good tone with Marshalls before Blizzard.

Van Halen had good tone with Marshalls before Blizzard.

The Scorpions had good tone with Marshalls before Blizzard.

Def Leppard had good tone with Marshalls before Blizzard.

Judas Priest had good tone with Marshalls before Blizzard.


I'm not saying that Randy's tone might have been good coming out of the amp but ended up sounding lousy on tape, but the fact is that the guitar sounds on Blizzard are not what I would consider good tone, especially for a classic Marshall. To market an amp based on that sound seems odd to me.

Those guys did not have the gain working that RR had back in 1980.

 

[Odin]

Yea, but the guitar tone on Diary is f'n awesome.

I think the guitar tone on Diary was definitely improved over Blizzard. I prefer Randy's playing on Blizzard, it's my favorite Ozzy album.

 

[zuel69]

Yea, but the guitar tone on Diary is f'n awesome.

I think the guitar tone on Diary was definitely improved over Blizzard. I prefer Randy's playing on Blizzard, it's my favorite Ozzy album.

Those are the top 2 albums I'd like to have when I get stranded on that desert island.

 

[Chubtone]

AC/DC had good tone with Marshalls before Blizzard.

Van Halen had good tone with Marshalls before Blizzard.

The Scorpions had good tone with Marshalls before Blizzard.

Def Leppard had good tone with Marshalls before Blizzard.

Judas Priest had good tone with Marshalls before Blizzard.


I'm not saying that Randy's tone might have been good coming out of the amp but ended up sounding lousy on tape, but the fact is that the guitar sounds on Blizzard are not what I would consider good tone, especially for a classic Marshall. To market an amp based on that sound seems odd to me.

AC/DC had good sounding albums before Blizzard.

Van Halen had good sounding albums before Blizzard.

The Scorpions had a good sounding albums before Blizzard.

Def Leppard had a good sounding album before Blizzard.

Judas Priest had a good sounding album before Blizzard.

Answer some questions for me. How do the drums and bass sound on Blizzard? How is the overall production on Blizzard? Was it Randy's fault that the drums and bass sound wimpy on that album too?

 

[Odin]

You missed the point. A 10 channel amp with 2 good sounding channels is no better than a 2 channel amp with 2 good sounding channels. The other 8 channels sound bad so they add no value to the amp.

A 2 channel amp with 2 good sounding channels and felixble programming of the boosts, master volumes, effects loops, etc (like the JVM has) is better than a 2 channel amp with 2 good sounding channels but lacking the flexibility.

I see, so you've built the assumption into your opinion that some of the channels on multi-channels amps always sound poor. You do understand the subjectivity involved here, right?

For me, all that flexible programming means nothing because I generally just want one good tone but I would never boldly proclaim my opinion as objective dogma as I believe your posts seem to be presented.

Strangely enough, when I was giving my opinion on the amp it was MY opinion, so yes it may vary from your opinion on amps. Of course the sound of any amp is purely subjective. I've owned many and played most multi channel amps on the market. I have yet to find a 3 channel amp that I love all 3 channels. That doesn't make them bad amps, but I find no value in a channel that I never play so I wouldn't pay extra for channels that I don't use.

On the JVM, I don't care for the 2 OD channels, so it's a 2 channel amp for me (clean and crunch). I would have to compare the JVM to other amps with 2 channels that I like (regardless of how many channels they may be capable of). When I do that, the JVM seems pricey for what I get.

My Splawn Quickrod is a 2 channel amp, but for me it's a 1 channel amp because the clean channel is useless to me. It's 1 channel is extremely versatile, with the 3 Gears covering a lot of tonal territory, and the OD1/OD2 feature and the Clean Boost feature make the amp essentially a "3 channel" amp (OD1, OD2, OD2 with Clean Boost) for my purposes.

 

[Odin]

AC/DC had good tone with Marshalls before Blizzard.

Van Halen had good tone with Marshalls before Blizzard.

The Scorpions had good tone with Marshalls before Blizzard.

Def Leppard had good tone with Marshalls before Blizzard.

Judas Priest had good tone with Marshalls before Blizzard.


I'm not saying that Randy's tone might have been good coming out of the amp but ended up sounding lousy on tape, but the fact is that the guitar sounds on Blizzard are not what I would consider good tone, especially for a classic Marshall. To market an amp based on that sound seems odd to me.

Those guys did not have the gain working that RR had back in 1980.

This is very true. Randy's extra gain came from a solid state pedal, which may have heavily contributed to the thinned out tone. The fact that he played with more gain doesn't do anything for me if I don't like the tone. I think I would have preferred hearing Blizzard with the early Van Halen Marshall tone, which was about as gainy as Randy's tone.

 

[zuel69]

Pardon me if I missed the point...I do believe Blizzard's production value is the only reason it my sound less than stellar to some. I get blinded by the love of the tunes.

 

[Odin]

AC/DC had good tone with Marshalls before Blizzard.

Van Halen had good tone with Marshalls before Blizzard.

The Scorpions had good tone with Marshalls before Blizzard.

Def Leppard had good tone with Marshalls before Blizzard.

Judas Priest had good tone with Marshalls before Blizzard.


I'm not saying that Randy's tone might have been good coming out of the amp but ended up sounding lousy on tape, but the fact is that the guitar sounds on Blizzard are not what I would consider good tone, especially for a classic Marshall. To market an amp based on that sound seems odd to me.

AC/DC had good sounding albums before Blizzard.

Van Halen had good sounding albums before Blizzard.

The Scorpions had a good sounding albums before Blizzard.

Def Leppard had a good sounding album before Blizzard.

Judas Priest had a good sounding album before Blizzard.

Answer some questions for me. How do the drums and bass sound on Blizzard?

Dismal.

How is the overall production on Blizzard?

Lousy.

Was it Randy's fault that the drums and bass sound wimpy on that album too?

I don't know what his role was in making the album, but I doubt it.

 

[Chubtone]

So then, if as you say Mr. Odin, the drums, bass and production are dismal and lousy on the album in question, what reasonable man can expect the guitar to not suffer a bit also? Thank you. You may step down. No further questions.

 

[again with this]

I wonder if it gets that awful thin fizzy tone from Blizzard Of Oz?

Yeah, it's so weird that Randy's tone was so thin and fizzy on that Blizzard of Ozz album. It's really in contrast to the absolutely huge sounding drums and massive sounding bass guitar on that album.

That ALBUM sounds very poorly produced 28 years later because, well, it WAS poorly produced. Ozzy had no budget whatsoever and could not even afford a producer, so they used the studio's in house ENGINEER as the producer. That was Max Norman and he was a total NOOB on that record. Listen to Rhoads live bootlegs from around that same time. FOR THE TIME, Randy's tone was freaking huge. I blame Randy's studio tone on the guy responsible for capturing Randy's tone and getting it to tape, Max Norman.

And before anyone brings up the Tribute album tone, listen to the original recording of the concert Tribute was taken from. Max Norman in an interview talked about how heavily they EQ'd Randy's live tone from the concert for Tribute to make it sound more like the albums. When I read that before Tribute was released I wanted to smack Max Norman silly

And let's try and get some perspective here. NO ONE at the time was saying Rhoads tone was thin and fizzy. Max Norman became one of the most sought after producers AFTER he recorded those two Ozzy albums. Loudness, George Lynch and everyone else wanted Max Norman to produce them. Why would all these guitar oriented bands want Norman if his claim to fame, which obviously was Ozzy and RHOADS, was a horrible guitar tone?

So yeah, 20-28 years after the fact, Randy's tone WAS kind of thin. I don't know why Randy didn't use a Dual Rectifier or a Diezel, or Engl or Bogner Uberschall......... oh wait, there was no such thing. There were Marshalls, or there were Marshalls. Anyone ever hear an old Super Lead with a ton of low end thump? Now of course Van Halen had a way better Super Lead tone two years before Randy did, but Van Halen had Warner Bros and Ted Templeman behind them. Ozzy had anyone with a pulse behind the console and was scraping for change under the couch cushions to pay for that first album.

Now that I think about it, how wimpy was J.S. Bach's tone when he used that harpsichord? Why didn't he play a Schecter Hellraiser 7-string tuned down to drop Q through a Krank Bachenstein?

Hillarious sarcasm. Great post. Very interesting.

This amp may actually cause me to need to own a Marshall. If semi-reasonably priced...

So, sounds like still no Mashall for Scotty.

 

[Odin]

So then, if as you say Mr. Odin, the drums, bass and production are dismal and lousy on the album in question, what reasonable man can expect the guitar to not suffer a bit also? Thank you. You may step down. No further questions.

So we agree, the guitar tone on Blizzard was lousy?

I never pontificated as to why the tone sucked, I simply stated that the tone sucked.

Randy Rhoads was known mostly for his work on Blizzard and Diary (yes, there was Quiet Riot and other Ozzy recordings, but 99% of the people know him for those 2 records). Blizzard is the more popular of those 2 records, and contains a lot of the signature Randy Rhoads guitar work that people love. And the guitar tone on Blizzard is weak. I wouldn't buy an amp that was purported to recreate the sound I heard on Blizzard. Sounds like Marshall is willing to hook up with the relatives of any dead guitar hero to reissue an amp with their signature on it and make some money. It's sad and it cheapens the original artist in my opinion.

I have not, and will not, bash Randy Rhoads. I have not, and will not, bash Marshall amps. I have not, and will not, bash the Blizzard of Ozz album. I like Randy Rhoads and I like Marshall amps and I like the Blizzard of Ozz album. But the guitar tone that Randy Rhoads played, through a Marshall amp, on the Blizzard of Ozz album sucks, period, and I wouldn't buy an amp that purported to recreate that tone. That's my opinion.

 

[Chubtone]

I never pontificated as to why the tone sucked, I simply stated that the tone sucked.

Randy Rhoads was known mostly for his work on Blizzard and Diary (yes, there was Quiet Riot and other Ozzy recordings, but 99% of the people know him for those 2 records). Blizzard is the more popular of those 2 records, and contains a lot of the signature Randy Rhoads guitar work that people love. And the guitar tone on Blizzard is weak. I wouldn't buy an amp that was purported to recreate the sound I heard on Blizzard. Sounds like Marshall is willing to hook up with the relatives of any dead guitar hero to reissue an amp with their signature on it and make some money. It's sad and it cheapens the original artist in my opinion.

I have not, and will not, bash Randy Rhoads. I have not, and will not, bash Marshall amps. I have not, and will not, bash the Blizzard of Ozz album. I like Randy Rhoads and I like Marshall amps and I like the Blizzard of Ozz album. But the guitar tone that Randy Rhoads played, through a Marshall amp, on the Blizzard of Ozz album sucks, period, and I wouldn't buy an amp that purported to recreate that tone. That's my opinion.

I move to have this hate-filled, racist, misogynenist, homophobic outburst stricken from the record!

 

[Anonymous]

I move to have this hate-filled, racist, misogynenist, homophobic outburst stricken from the record!

Dude - you would make a great trial lawyer! You gonna be at NAMM Friday? Lemme buy ya a drink...

Steve

 

[Bob Savage]

Blizzard is the more popular of those 2 records, and contains a lot of the signature Randy Rhoads guitar work that people love. And the guitar tone on Blizzard is weak. I wouldn't buy an amp that was purported to recreate the sound I heard on Blizzard. Sounds like Marshall is willing to hook up with the relatives of any dead guitar hero to reissue an amp with their signature on it and make some money. It's sad and it cheapens the original artist in my opinion.

Yet another unfounded assumption. Marshall provided Randy with the original amp. What makes you think they have modified the new model to sound like the albums production rather than re-issuing the amp that Randy originall got from Marshall? The article seems to lend itself to the amp being like the original amp which has little to do with studio production.

 

[Odin]

Blizzard is the more popular of those 2 records, and contains a lot of the signature Randy Rhoads guitar work that people love. And the guitar tone on Blizzard is weak. I wouldn't buy an amp that was purported to recreate the sound I heard on Blizzard. Sounds like Marshall is willing to hook up with the relatives of any dead guitar hero to reissue an amp with their signature on it and make some money. It's sad and it cheapens the original artist in my opinion.

Yet another unfounded assumption. Marshall provided Randy with the original amp. What makes you think they have modified the new model to sound like the albums production rather than re-issuing the amp that Randy originall got from Marshall? The article seems to lend itself to the amp being like the original amp which has little to do with studio production.

You're assuming that Marshall would market a signature amp to sound different from the player's signature sound? Seems odd to me. I doubt the reissue will sound any more like Randy Rhoads than you can get with a MXR D+ and a JMP, it's all marketing.

 

[Chubtone]

You're assuming that Marshall would market a signature amp to sound different from the player's signature sound? Seems odd to me. I doubt the reissue will sound any more like Randy Rhoads than you can get with a MXR D+ and a JMP, it's all marketing.

I'd be surprised if you're wrong on this one. I just tried my Distortion + out with my Peacemaker the other night and man, I don't know how anyone ever used that pedal.

 

[Gitfiddler]

thin, shitty tone and terrible song/riff writing

gibson should take note and come out with a RR LP

i bet the RR marshall will be some $$

 

[Chubtone]

Dude - you would make a great trial lawyer! You gonna be at NAMM Friday? Lemme buy ya a drink...

Steve

Trial lawyer? It took me 6 years to get a Bachelors. It would take 30 more years for me to finish law school. I don't suppose you can pull any strings for me and get me into USC?

I will be at NAMM on Friday, are you going? A drink? You probably haven't stopped drinking after celebrating that Rose Bowl win over whatever Pop Warner team that was Illinois sent out here to play you guys.

 

[Greazygeo]

I think I would have preferred hearing Blizzard with the early Van Halen Marshall tone, which was about as gainy as Randy's tone.

That would be horrible...VH tone =