When did the GT-75 hate start? You’re deaf, clips inside.

CrazyNutz said:
It's because the midrange scoop era throughout the 90's (which the T-75's worked perfectly for) , people got tired of that sound, and started shitting on it, and anything associated with it.

I remember hating anything vintage during this time. You could buy old plexis, and LPs for cheap back then because people didn't want them, they wanted a scooped recto type thing 🤷‍♂️

Honestly everything comes back around. It'll all become desirable again at some point.
Click to expand...


I just absolutely don’t think they are scooped sounding at all. I mean hell, if I look at the graph on pro q 3 the only place they are semi scooped MAYBE is in the shit area you wanna cut midrange anyways, around 3-500 hz. Which I cut everytime in a mix. And honestly, they have just as much midrange as any other speaker in the same realm to me. There is no huge dips at all when looking at the graph with them on pro q 3 at all, pretty flat across the spectrum except for the extended high highs and low lows.
 
VESmedic said:
I just absolutely don’t think they are scooped sounding at all. I mean hell, if I look at the graph on pro q 3 the only place they are semi scooped MAYBE is in the shit area you wanna cut midrange anyways, around 3-500 hz. Which I cut everytime in a mix. And honestly, they have just as much midrange as any other speaker in the same realm to me. There is no huge dips at all when looking at the graph with them on pro q 3 at all, pretty flat across the spectrum except for the extended high highs and low lows.
Click to expand...
I had a 1983 800 cab with H100s…there is no more mid scooped Celestion than that one. Metal is literally the only thing you could attempt to play with it.
 
Racerxrated said:
I had a 1983 800 cab with H100s…there is no more mid scooped Celestion than that one. Metal is literally the only thing you could attempt to play with it.
Click to expand...


I’ve played those a few times and I tend to agree with that. But, I’m also generally not a fan at all of higher wattage speakers either.
 
That's a killer tone. Cab sounds really ballsy.

TBH, I haven't played through a 1960A or B either. Now wishing I had.
 
My 2nd favorite speaker behind the G12M Reissues. And I also prefer the modern ones over the ones in my 1988 1960A. Those sound closer to g12-65's..........which I can't stand.
 
Racerxrated said:
I had a 1983 800 cab with H100s…there is no more mid scooped Celestion than that one. Metal is literally the only thing you could attempt to play with it.
Click to expand...
That's the secret weapon used by Billy Gibbons on Eliminator (great tone IMO)...but in a 1x12 cabinet or combo. Perfect example of a speaker that may be too scooped in a 4x12 but perfect in a enclosure with fewer drivers. 1x12s have more mids & less lows/highs than 2x12s, which in turn have more mids & less lows/highs than 4x12s.
 
thegame said:
75s are ok but for big sounding (not V30s or GBs) Celestions I prefer Redbacks, G12-65s/80s, G12K-85 and G12H-100. All of these have better mids while sharing the 75's wide frequency response.
Click to expand...
Agreed. I’ve been especially liking Redback’s lately, but generally for higher powered, bigger sounding speakers there are imo way better options like the vintage crescendo’s, JBL’s or Altec’s. It seems like most guys on here don’t step out of the Celestion box. I find Celestion’s forte is mids (unmatched there IME), but much weaker in the outer frequencies vs those other brands, so I often now mix RB’s or 20w GB’s with one of those 3 brands to get a more complete package to me
 
Last edited:
DanTravis62 said:
I agree, the early versions are just less "picky" with amps - slightly smoother and a hair less scooped

The modern versions sound quite good though IMO, especially with Marshalls

It's always funny hearing the hate from tan pants types, because 1960s are literally UBIQUITOUS at punk and metal shows of all sizes, everywhere in the world
Click to expand...
The vented versions IME really sound more like a higher powered Greenback, while the non-vented version that came after sound much more similar in voicing to the current ones. I found the vented ones had more applications of use for me, but I couldn’t justify keeping either with some of the other vintage speakers I got later on
 
braintheory said:
The vented versions IME really sound more like a higher powered Greenback, while the non-vented version that came after sound much more similar in voicing to the current ones. I found the vented ones had more applications of use for me, but I couldn’t justify keeping either with some of the other vintage speakers I got later on
Click to expand...
I had a cab from 85/86 (you can always tell those years by the faded cloth, looks brown) that had the version after the vented ones and they were still good sounding but had less mids than the vents
 
Racerxrated said:
I had a cab from 85/86 (you can always tell those years by the faded cloth, looks brown) that had the version after the vented ones and they were still good sounding but had less mids than the vents
Click to expand...
Yeah both sound good. The non-vented I found had deeper lows and more high end also, more metal sounding imo and pretty decent cleans too actually. I compared both my vented and non-vented quads in my Kerry Wright 412 as well as comparing the speakers individually in isolation. I think both can be quite good speakers for the price for something vintage, although the best stuff I’ve tried I guess you gotta splurge a bit more, but worth it imo
 
braintheory said:
The vented versions IME really sound more like a higher powered Greenback, while the non-vented version that came after sound much more similar in voicing to the current ones. I found the vented ones had more applications of use for me, but I couldn’t justify keeping either with some of the other vintage speakers I got later on
Click to expand...

I really enjoy the vented ones, they are a good middle ground between a low powered "classic" celestion and the newer more modern ones
 
I’d love to try all 75s I’m a straight cab . I played with me with a slant and I just don’t how slants do with the low end in the room
 
VESmedic said:
I just absolutely don’t think they are scooped sounding at all. I mean hell, if I look at the graph on pro q 3 the only place they are semi scooped MAYBE is in the shit area you wanna cut midrange anyways, around 3-500 hz. Which I cut everytime in a mix. And honestly, they have just as much midrange as any other speaker in the same realm to me. There is no huge dips at all when looking at the graph with them on pro q 3 at all, pretty flat across the spectrum except for the extended high highs and low lows.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying they are scooped, but they worked better for the scooped sound because they are a little less mid range, and less honky than v30's
More modern, less vintage.
 
braintheory said:
Agreed. I’ve been especially liking Redback’s lately, but generally for higher powered, bigger sounding speakers there are imo way better options like the vintage crescendo’s, JBL’s or Altec’s. It seems like most guys on here don’t step out of the Celestion box. I find Celestion’s forte is mids (unmatched there IME), but much weaker in the outer frequencies vs those other brands, so I often now mix RB’s or 20w GB’s with one of those 3 brands to get a more complete package to me
Click to expand...
I really liked the Redbacks at first. Then I recorded them, and heard the thin raspy fizz hiding underneath that I personally don't care for, and then I could never un-hear it.



 
GJgo said:
I really liked the Redbacks at first. Then I recorded them, and heard the thin raspy fizz hiding underneath that I personally don't care for, and then I could never un-hear it.



Click to expand...

I’m admittedly a novice to recording, but so far I found close mic’ing Redbacks to be the least fizzy or thin speaker I’ve tried so far in that context using an SM57 and Royer 122V. I was really listening for it since you mentioned it in your experience and I couldn’t find it and I’m also very opposed to that sound in recording (meaning fizzy, thin or too harsh). Maybe it’s other variables, not sure
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top