Under Lock and Key

[Anonymous]

There is no way the ULAK dirty rhythm tone is a Rockman. Anyone who owned one at the time knows there is no way that thing had enough gain for that tone. I'll buy that it might've been used for the clean tones. No way for dirt. Plus, as Ralphie mentioned, Michael Wagener, who gave a detailed description never mentioned a Rockman.

On another note, that dirty rhythm tone on ULAK is one of my favorite hard rock guitar tones. I definitely was modeling my live tone after it once I heard it back then...

Steve

 

[charveldan]

There is no way the ULAK dirty rhythm tone is a Rockman. Anyone who owned one at the time knows there is no way that thing had enough gain for that tone. I'll buy that it might've been used for the clean tones. No way for dirt. Plus, as Ralphie mentioned, Michael Wagener, who gave a detailed description never mentioned a Rockman.

On another note, that dirty rhythm tone on ULAK is one of my favorite hard rock guitar tones. I definitely was modeling my live tone after it once I heard it back then...

Steve

This sounds like TOTAL Rockman to me going thru a hotrod Marshall.

 

[chumbucket]

The thing about the Rockman i didn't like was there was no way to adjust the speed or depth of the chorus, it was a bit too wet for me.

Yeah I agree with that. It was a pretty cool unit. Using it without the chorus and other fx instead would get some interesting tones. ....and get away from the signature "Boston" sound.

Some of the 1/2 rack units were cool too. The delay and eq units I got alot of use from.

The Smart Gate was a decent unit too. I still use a Rockman EQ half-rack in my recording rig. Perfect for notching out an annoying frequency.

 

[tnourse]

Love it! One of my all time favorites!!

 

[Greazygeo]

There is no way the ULAK dirty rhythm tone is a Rockman. Anyone who owned one at the time knows there is no way that thing had enough gain for that tone. I'll buy that it might've been used for the clean tones. No way for dirt. Plus, as Ralphie mentioned, Michael Wagener, who gave a detailed description never mentioned a Rockman.

On another note, that dirty rhythm tone on ULAK is one of my favorite hard rock guitar tones. I definitely was modeling my live tone after it once I heard it back then...

Steve

Put an od or eq pedal set as a boost in front....it's right there. I spent alot of hours running one of those into my 4track. That tone is right there.

 

[uglyfuzzface]

Are we talking about the rockman separate units or the one that used headphones ?

 

[Anonymous]

There is no way the ULAK dirty rhythm tone is a Rockman. Anyone who owned one at the time knows there is no way that thing had enough gain for that tone. I'll buy that it might've been used for the clean tones. No way for dirt. Plus, as Ralphie mentioned, Michael Wagener, who gave a detailed description never mentioned a Rockman.

On another note, that dirty rhythm tone on ULAK is one of my favorite hard rock guitar tones. I definitely was modeling my live tone after it once I heard it back then...

Steve

This sounds like TOTAL Rockman to me going thru a hotrod Marshall.

A Rockman going through a hotrod Marshall is not a Rockman...

Steve

 

[Anonymous]

There is no way the ULAK dirty rhythm tone is a Rockman. Anyone who owned one at the time knows there is no way that thing had enough gain for that tone. I'll buy that it might've been used for the clean tones. No way for dirt. Plus, as Ralphie mentioned, Michael Wagener, who gave a detailed description never mentioned a Rockman.

On another note, that dirty rhythm tone on ULAK is one of my favorite hard rock guitar tones. I definitely was modeling my live tone after it once I heard it back then...

Steve

Put an od or eq pedal set as a boost in front....it's right there. I spent alot of hours running one of those into my 4track. That tone is right there.

My point was that there was not enough gain in a Rockman alone to make that dirt rhythm tone. Still, that tone sounds like a real amp to me. if they mixed in a Rockman, fine, but it still sounds like the majority of the tone is coming from a real amp and Wagener confirms that, which is good enough for me... My opinion...

Steve

 

[jerrydyer]

there was definately rockman mixed in with all the other gear he had for that.

 

[charveldan]

The Rockman had a line out, the chain was guitar > Rockman > Marshall, it was part of the era.

Also the Rockman and it's budget brand cousin the Hot Watt definetly had enough gain to slam the front end of a Marshall or any other amp, Boston, Def Leppard, ZZ Top and others recorded entire albums with a Rockman by itself going into the board.

 

[Anonymous]

Are we talking about the rockman separate units or the one that used headphones ?

I was talking about the headphone deal. Is that what everyone else is talking about?

Steve

 

[Anonymous]

The Rockman had a line out, the chain was guitar > Rockman > Marshall, it was part of the era.

Also the Rockman and it's budget brand cousin the Hot Watt definetly had enough gain to slam the front end of a Marshall or any other amp, Boston, Def Leppard, ZZ Top and others recorded entire albums with a Rockman by itself going into the board.

Hey I can put a pedal in front of my Marshall and get that much gain. I thought we were talking about a headphone based Rockman alone, not slamming the front of a screaming Marshall... If I'm just using the thing like pedals in front of an amp, most of the tone's character is coming from the amp IMO...

I don't remember my headphone based Rockman having a line out, but I admit I could be wrong there...

Also, anyone care to speculate on why Wagener would leave out the Rockman 25 years after the fact? Is it that much of a secret...

Steve

 

[charveldan]

The Rockman had a line out, the chain was guitar > Rockman > Marshall, it was part of the era.

Also the Rockman and it's budget brand cousin the Hot Watt definetly had enough gain to slam the front end of a Marshall or any other amp, Boston, Def Leppard, ZZ Top and others recorded entire albums with a Rockman by itself going into the board.

Hey I can put a pedal in front of my Marshall and get that much gain. I thought we were talking about a headphone based Rockman alone, not slamming the front of a screaming Marshall... If I'm just using the thing like pedals in front of an amp, most of the tone's character is coming from the amp IMO...

I don't remember my headphone based Rockman having a line out, but I admit I could be wrong there...

Also, anyone care to speculate on why Wagener would leave out the Rockman 25 years after the fact? Is it that much of a secret...

Steve

It had a line out, so did the Hot Watt, we're talking 27 years ago, i would have killed to have a ZW-44 Wylde Overdrive or similar back then.

 

[JakeAC5253]

Headphone level audio is the same as line level audio.

 

[Mailman1971]

i would have killed to have a ZW-44 Wylde Overdrive or similar back then.

I think a lot of men back then would have killed to have what we do now and we keep trying to re-create their old shit

Couldnt of said it better myself!

True....so true!

Now If I can only transport myself back to 1987 and spy on the rigs of the famous guys...
I would be all set!

 

[pstar]

no way it was just a rockman by it self. own at least 5 of them, back in the day. Use to run into P.A. mains, and to the monitors, talk about unwanted noise. Now over 2o years guys get woodys doin the same thing, hhmmm history does repest. But always went back to the mark 2b's and 2c's with altec drivers double stacks for each, it just killed everyone who ever heard my set up. Competing band's would go and hide if they were featured on the venue. Kick my self hard for selling them. Had 6 of them. yj good old days.

 

[Greazygeo]

Hey I can put a pedal in front of my Marshall and get that much gain. I thought we were talking about a headphone based Rockman alone, not slamming the front of a screaming Marshall... If I'm just using the thing like pedals in front of an amp, most of the tone's character is coming from the amp IMO...

I don't remember my headphone based Rockman having a line out, but I admit I could be wrong there...

Also, anyone care to speculate on why Wagener would leave out the Rockman 25 years after the fact? Is it that much of a secret...

Steve

Steve,

Recording with a Rockman it's weird. Don't use the chorus, just the dirty sound alone. Record with it direct sometime. When you listen back after recording it, it sounds like alot more gain. My old Zoom 9005 was the same way. All my recordings in the early days were on tape and it may have been the combination of the Rockman and tape, but it is that sound.

I wish I still had mine, but its long gone. If someone has one they want to part with, I'll record some Dokken with it.

 

[Digital Jams]

Not on for a few days and I see this shit

Closest I have heard ULAK was Ralph's old Bray marshall, that amp nailed it if memory serves me right.

 

[Gainfreak]

Ok, Here is my take on what I believe is going on and you can take it with a grain of salt.

We need to definine what the debate is. Are We saying that the main tone is a Rockman only or are we saying that a Rockman might have been added in conjunction with other layers.
I KNOW a Rockman alone was NOT the basis for that tone and if a Rockman was used, it was most definitely layered on top of the main tone.


All of the Rockman units have their midrange freequency based heaviliy in the 800hz area. It's what gives it that sound.
When I listen to that tone, it most definitely has that freequency present, which is why I think people believe there was a Rockman used.
That sound could have been created with a graphic EQ before an amp bumped at 800hz which will give you the Rockman sound or
the mysterious Fostex with the Level Cranked could have added that in to. What I'm saying is that there are many ways to get 800hz into the mix.

So I guess we should address if a Rockman was used as a layer because the main tone aint only a rockman PERIOD.
It would have been either an added layer slamming the front end of an amp or just a track added and most definitely would have been an addition to multi tracks. I'll wait for Michael Wagener to comment,
All In my humble opinion.

 

[Jack Napalm]

This is from an old version of the Lynch website.

The workhorse amplifier setup consisted of 1968 and 1971 100-watt Marshall Super Lead heads powering vintage Marshall cabinets with metal handles, green Tolex and 25/30-watt speakers. In a couple of these 4x12"
boxes Lynch installed Fane speakers pulled from Vox Bulldog cabinets. He also employed a variety of other
amplifiers for the LP.

George used a mix of these different Marshall set-ups in the studio which resulted with a clean power section to
preamp through. Included here are two 1968 Marshall plexi heads and a 100-watt Marshall Super Tremolo that
were modified by Lee Jackson of Metaltronix, fitting them with 6550 power tube sections.
Signal routing was more simplistic than presented here. As Lynch explained it at the
time, "I use an old Ibanez Tube Screamer or a Boss GE-7 to preamp my amps a little.
Other than that, I don't use pedals except an A/B switch to throw on another guitar. I
go stereo out of a Lexicon PCM-41 with 28 milliseconds of delay to fatten up my
rhythms." Also pictured here two Rocktron HUSH II-C's to keep things quiet on both
sides of stereo application. A Rockman Distortion Generator was used to push the
signal a little more to the power section. Used in A/B switching, there is also a
Rockman X100-B in a Rockmount for a chorused clean signal. While using the clean
alongside the high gain in an A + B application in tandem, Lynch describes the sound
as "giving it a a bit of a shimmer and percussion" to the rhythm guitar parts.

As mentioned, Lynch used an old Ibanez Tube Screamer or the BOSS GE-7 to preamp his amps. Above is the
TS-808 that has been present for most of Lynch's recording career, as was used during the 1985 recording of
Dokken's "Under Lock And Key" album.