Conference napalm::guitar

    I've been reading a lot about using seperate pre-amps (ADA MP-1) and
    power amps lately, and I know some of you are doing this.
    
    What line level output do these have?  Are they different than std
    effects?  Someone mentioned in another note about using a GP8 (or
    was it a <insert combination effects unit of your choice here>)
    for a preamp.
    
    Would something like a Chandler Tube Driver (or Real Tube, or...) be
    suitable for a pre-amp, or is this strictly an effect?
    
    gh

    You can use a chandler as a preamp.  Some of the preamps I've seen
    on the market are:
    
    ADA MP-1
    Metaltronix GP-1000 Perfect Connection
    Groove Tube GP??
    Roland GP-8
    GK CPL2000
    Chandler Tube Driver
    ?? MX-1
    Scholtz Rockmodules
    
    I know the output of the ADA is line level, so it matches well with
    otehr rack effects & power amps.  Its a neat way to go about a system.
    It much quieter, and you can add/subtract pieces from the system
    without a big headache.  Most people who have amps without effects
    loops can't do this.  Even if you have an effects loop, if its not an
    active loop you still lose some of your signal in the chain.
    
    Just a different approach. 

    It seems like an approach that has a lot of advantages.  Does anyone
    have recommendations on any of the preamps that Buck mentioned? I'm not
    very familiar with the Metaltronix GP-1000, the GK CPL2000, or the
    Scholtz units. 
    
    I know he likes the ADA MP-1 a lot, and I've tried and like the
    Chandler a lot.  I've heard very good things about the Groove Tube
    preamp, but the price seems a little out there. 
      
    gh

    I would read through the following notes:
    
    764
    638
    603
    
    These notes cover some of the units you mentioned. Another unit
    that may do what you want is the new Mesa Boogie Studio Preamp
    which sells for $499 and has many of the same features as the
    Quad preamp.
    
    Something I would like to see on a preamp, which most of them do
    not have, is a stereo effects loop. The Mesa Quad has a stereo
    loop, but the price is over $1000.
    
    Mark Jacques
    
    
    

    note 860 covers the GP8 and ME5. 
    
    Mark Jacques
    

    correction to .3 See note 674, not 764.
    
    Also, note 638.8 and 638.9 refer to the GT preamp
    
    Mark
    

    Thanks for the pointers, Mark.  I had read all those at the time,
    but rereading them was interesting.
    
    Still interested in the GK and the Metaltronix which weren't mentioned
    in these others.  Anyone tried them out?
    
    Greg
    

    
    I bought a Gallien Krueger 2000CPL preamp last January. I kept it
    for a week, and returned it to the store for an exchange. I couldn't
    get the sounds I wanted out of it. The effects loop didn't seem
    to work too well with my MidiverbII. You might still like it, but I
    just couldn't get it to sound good with the rest of my gear.      
    
    The Metaltronix preamp is a differant animal than the GK, it is
    a tube preamp. If you like the Chandler preamp, there is another
    similar preamp called a Realtube available in rack mount or floor
    model like the Chandler. The Metaltronix is in a much higher price
    range than the Chandler or Realtube, which sell for about $200.
    The Metaltronix is selling around $499. It was developed by Lee
    Jackson. He is known for modifying amps for people like Eddy Van
    Halen, etc.
    
    I'd like to know if anyone has tried a new Mesa Boogie studio preamp?
    If so, what did you think?  What features does it have?
                                                           
    Later,
    Mark
    

    
    Re: Boogie
    
    The Studio preamp is supposed to be the same as the preamp used
    in the Caliber series combos (as opposed to the Mark III).
    
    

    
    Some of you may be as confused as me between the Chandler Tube stuff
    and the Real Tube stomp boxes and preamps which look pretty identical,
    along comes Dean Markley with the "Overlord", a tube stomp box which
    looks just like Chandler and Real Tube except for better graphics.
    
    Same setup; volume, drive, 3 band EQ. Don't know if it's actually
    in stores yet, the ad just appeared in the new GP.  

    
    The Real Tube people have introduced two new units....one is a stomp
    box, the other a rack mount.  Both are called "Blue Tube" (since
    the Real Tube is all black, the ads talk about "available black
    or blue" ha-ha).
    
    It is intended for bass, keyboards or "jazz and fusion guitar".
    I would guess it is set up to be used more as a clean preamp to
    provide a warm tone.  
    
    I plan on checking one out as soon as I can find one!!!
    
    

	Has anyone here ever built a preamp?

	I see schematics for simple preamps all the time in Radio Shack 
booklets.  Most of the time they are not much more than an op-amp and
some other small parts.  What makes these basic designs different from the
preamps found in amp combos or preamp separates?  How would one of these
preamps sound if used for guitar?  How do preamps create an overdriven sound?

	Please excuse me if the answer is obvious - I'm only an occasional
dabbler in electronics.

	Dan

	I build a lot of my own signal processing gear. I use parts from
	Radio Shack when possible. The thing to consider is that you need
	a fairly high slew rate op amp (ie. the speed at which a signal
	transitions from a high voltage level to a low voltage level &
	vica-versa). 741 op amps are .5 volts per micro-second, the ones
	that I prefer (radio shack has some dual op-amps in an 8 pin 
	package that are ok) are between 10 and 70 volts per microsecond.

	Why you ask?? Because an op-amps bandwidth decreases depending
	upon the amount of gain that you need. Slight gains are no
	problem, but frequency boosts may be in the range of 1000, as
	well as distortion boosting might be in the range of 1 million.

	With this in mind, yes, the circuits are quite simple to build &
	work pretty well if you choos the right parts. If you have low gains,
	then you can use the cheap carbon resistors (I do & they work fine
	for most things). If you have high gain, or sensative circuits,
	you need to look elsewhere for resistors. Capacitors tend to be
	easy to find & usually getting a part that's close (like using
	a 5 pf cap in place of a 4.7 pf cap) is no big deal.

	Current draw is probably going to be an issue if you are considering
	battery operated circuits, and input impeadance loading will
	be quite important unless the effect that you are adding especially
	if the effect is the first one in the chain of effects.

	Some layouts tend to be noisy & some wiring tends to be noisy.

	However, this simple circuit will let you tweek the gain of an
	input from unity (1X) to 11X more output:

						  +------+
					50K       V      |
				  +-----/\/\/---/\/\/----+
				  |	        500K	 |
	      10uf                |    |\	Pot	 |
     In O--+--||-----\/\/\--------+----|-\		 |   10uf
	   | +	      50K	       |  >--------------+---||---+--O Out
	   \			  +----|+/		    +     |
	   /		          |    |/			  \
	   \ 1 meg	          \				  / 1 meg
	   /			  / 50K				  \
	   |			  \				  /
	  gnd			  /			          |
				  |			         gnd
				 gnd

	The + and - on the OP-AMP indicates (-) Inverting, and (+)
	non-inverting inputs. You'll note that the output of the
	OP-AMP feeds back into the (-) Inverting input. This is
	called negative feedback. To change the gain, keep the ratios
	of the input resistors (in this case, both 50K's - 47K's are
	fine also) and the output resistors in mind. With the pot
	(500k) turned all of the way down (ie 0 ohms) the ratio is
	50:50, or 1:1. With the pot turned all the way up (500k) the
	ratio is 50:550, or 1:11. The gain happens to follow this
	ratio closely, so the gain would be 11 when turned full up,
	and 1 when turned full down (this is oversimplified, but
	accurate enough for your use).

	As for the OP-AMP, use a high slew rate one & use 2  9 volt
	batteries:

		+      gnd      -
		^       ^       ^
		|       |       |
		+ 9v - === + 9v -


	or a single 9 volt with a voltage divider:

	      +           gnd           -
	      ^            ^            ^
	      |    10K     |     10K    |
	      +---/\/\/----+----/\/\/---+
	      |                         |
	      + ===== 9 V Battery ===== -
	
	Looks pretty simple, but, you have to learn how to read the 
	schematic & figure out how to relate each diagram to the
	actual part & also how to solder & assemble everything. If
	you build this, use 1/4 watt carbon resistors & substitute
	part values that are close to the numbers shown. This is
	the basic ciruit that I use in my stomp box gain booster for
	when I take a solo (helps cut thru). With a slight variation,
	it can become a distortion box.

							Jens

	If you're asking just for academic interest you can skip the rest
	of this reply.  If you're asking because what you really want is
	to feed your guitar output into something that requires a
	line-level input here's another possibility:  get one of the
	little practice amps intended to drive headphones and cable the
	headphone output to your line-level device.  Works for me... 

	You can also use these little headphone goobers to make a
	portable amp out of a ghetto blaster that has a cassette player. 
	You just plug in one of those adaptors made to allow playing your
	portable CD player through your car's tape deck. 

                                                      
    	Yeah, I've built a preamp...
    
    	By what I'm reading in here as far as the *cost* of professionally
    available units go, it's basically _not worth_ building your own,
    except in the context of "learning something". What *I* learned
    is that you can spend hours and hours and hours screwing around
    with resistances, capacitance, circuit topology and maybe get a
    good sound if you're lucky. Or, you can just work hard here at DEC
    and spend $100 on something where all that's been done for you already.
    
    	I'm actually shocked to hear myself say that! I'm shocked to read
    what you can get for about $100 these days! Rackmount tube distortion
    boxes, eh?...
    
    	Distortion sound verses what a particular circuit does is a
    very complex problem. The little op amp circuits, the real simple
    ones, will give you the "frying popcorn" sound at best. They all
    break up at the end of the sustain, cause unless you have a really
    good op amp with sub millivolt offset, the distortion cant remain
    clean out "to the last drop".
    	
    	A better distortion uses logrithmic feedback, which changes
    the gain of the distortion element depending on the input signal
    strength, which avoids "splattering" - another real bogus attribute
    to the "cheap 'n dirty" designs. See what you're getting into? Ever
    even hear of "logrithmic feedback" before?
    
    	One of my favorite "projects" is to take an old amplifier,
    sometimes tube, sometimes not (you wouldnt *believe* the sound that
    this transistor job made - from a smashed "kids" record player I found
    in my apt building's parking lot) and just stitch it up to operate
    WFO. Pre and Post are easy to wire in; typically a 500K pot (dual
    for the Post) goes after the first tube stage and just before the
    output tubes. Quite often they scream, but remain generally
    unappreciated. Why? Cuz for $100, you can just go out and buy something
    that's pretty nice looking, rack mount, and screams too.
    
    	I've got a homebrew amp for sale, with a unique circuit topology,
    with pre/post volumes, that's about on the order of a fender bassman 
    (2 6L6) in power. *Every* person who's ever heard the thing has
    commented favorably on _the sound_ it makes - "I've got to take it"
    or whatever. Right now, I'm running 0 for 3 on getting a lousy *$50*
    for it!!! Tonight, we'll see if this kid from Acton makes it 0 for
    4 - if he bothers to me call back...He'll probably think about it
    some, and say "Gee, for $75 more, I can just get a Tube-y-tronix XL250
    rackmount"
    
    	You cant possibly compete, and other than for an exercize in
    self-discovery or for pure acedemic interest, IMHO you're wasting
    your time trying to roll your own.
    
    	Joe Jas 

Well I spent a year once designing a box that had a compressor followed
by a 3 band eq followed by a distortion followed by a clean booster followed
by another type of distortion. It was entirely solid state. Once it was
finished it worked pretty well (except the eq). The distortion was the trickiest
to get right but I felt it did a real good job, better than any stomp box
that was on the market at that time..and did it distort! the first stage had a
gain of about 100K (adjustable) and it would do anything from slight bluesey
distortions to more than Black Sabbath would use..

but -.1 is right it's cheaper to buy unless you're in it for the fun

dbii

	I have 4 (thats right, 4) distrortion boxes. All of them sound
	different with each guitar that I own. My favorite one is the
	on that I built myself. I like it because it's got a tube
	sort of distortion sound. Great for chords & just enough bite
	for leads, but not too trebly. Sounds like trash on 2 of my guitars,
	great on 2 others. I use different ones for recording than I
	do for playing live. I built my own because I thought I'd
	have better control & while I did, I spent a lot of time
	tweeking things. Building your own can give you some room to tweek
	all sorts of things & find what you like, rather than searching
	for that 'certain sound'. The lest flexible distortion box I
	have is the REX50 (Yamaha), it only sounds good with my Gibson
	SG (P-90 soap bar pickups). Distortion is so subjective. Simple
	gain preamps usually are not.

	I say, give it a try, you might like what you build.

								Jens

	The new flyer from Guitar Center has a guitar preamp (either Boss
	or Roland, I can't remember which) for $40.  Might be fun to get
	one of these already nicely constructed boxes and "tweak" it a
	little... 

    I built an on-board preamp with adjustable gain for my Hamer.
It uses a single non inverting op amp. The guitar screams. The only
    drawback is that under high gain situations it picks up radio
    sations.
    
    Dennis

    The ART PowerPlant is 1 rack space and even has XLR 600 ohm out
    to go direct into the mixing board at mic line levels.
    
    List is $299.
    
    Mike

      The BEST guitar preamp is the Kitty Hawk Quattro (IMO). Too bad
    they are hard (or impossible) to get anymore. It got the greatest
    review in Guitar Player the same month it was discontinued 
    (9/89). Actually it was more of the German manufacturer having a
    falling out with the distributor. They may be back in the future.
    In the mean time the previous distributor (LP Music group) is looking
    at building their own replacement for it since it was such a strong
    seller. More info : 1103.*
    							john r.
    

One of Kitty Hawk's other problems is/was with Boogie. They stold part of thier
preamp from the mark III's..and boogie was suing according to the NE area rep.

dbii

I don't remember where, but someone asked in here a long time ago if anyone 
had plans for constructing a tube preamp.  I just noticed an old note in
COMMUSIC (1504.78) that mentioned that the "current" issue of Electronic
Musician had just such plans.  That note was posted in the middle of January, 
so they could have been referring to either the January or Febuary issues.

If you're looking for this sort of thing, time to hit the library!

Greg

    	I would like to eventually buy a separate guitar preamp. Initially
    I will probably use the preamp for recording directly to a recording
    deck, or connecting directly to a PA. Eventually, I may build a
    complete guitar rack system with a power amplifier and speakers.
    
	It seems to me that the guitar preamp business must be rather
    lucrative, seeing as how many of the units on the market are priced
    similar to full-blown combo amps including the power amp, speakers,
    and cabinet. I expect that Fender will eventually take the cue from 
    most of the other major manufacturers and market a preamp of their own.

	One alternative to buying a preamp is to use a speaker emulating
    direct box with your existing combo or head. Of course, this does not 
    lend itself to rack systems.

    	The units I am familiar with include the following (this is all
    from memory).
    
	Tube preamps:
    
    Mesa Boogie Studio preamp (~$550.00) - Available direct, or from Daddy's
    Mesa Boogie Quad preamp (~$1200.00)  - ditto
    Groove Tube guitar preamp ($999)     - EU Wurly (Boston only)
    Kitty Hawk Quattro (?)               - L.P. (Latin Percussion) Music Group
    Kitty Hawk Testarossa (?)            - Ditto
    Kasha RockMod (~$800)		 - ?
    Chandler Tube driver pedal (~$129)   - EU Wurly
    Chandler tube driver rackmount (~$199) - Ditto
    Realtube (the original, and the latest entry) available in pedal and rack,
     	prices comparable to Chandler units.
    Hughes and Kettner Metal Shredder (?)   }
    Hughes and Kettner Blues Machine  (?)   } All of these combine tubes with
    Hughes and Kettner Cream Machine  (?)   } transistors
    Marshall 9000 series preamp (~$500)     

    
    Solid State units: (I am not up on transistorized units, as I tend 
	to favor tubes for guitar).

    Roland GP8
    Roland GP16
    Roland Guitar driver 
    Gallien Krueger (I should know the model number of the preamp, as I
        owned one for all of a week, and returned it).
    SR&D Sustainer

    I'll get into the details of some of the units I have demoed in another
    reply.
    
    Stay tuned.
    Mark
    

    Good topic. I've been wondering about these devices and probably you
    could answer some questions about them. 
    
    1. How do you use them? Are they primarily for recoding to eliminate
    mics/speakers/placement? My guess is that they are, however it'd seem
    that there's no reason that you couldn't use it as a front end to your 
    present amp. Extrapolating upon that, it would also seem that in so
    doing, Fender dudes like you and I could change the sound of a
    relatively clean amp to a Marshall, or a Boogie. This brings me to my
    second question.
    
    2. Presuming I'm not far off in #1 above, how in the hell do you all 
    justify the $$$ (especially to your lady). I mean, why might I be
    interested in just buying the Boogie $1200 preamp instead of getting a
    real live amp...one that's got a speaker or two. 
    
    3. Is this something I really gotta have and just not realize it yet?
    This may be the case since I'm picking with a dude who uses a signal
    processor (Roland GP8 I think). I hate the damn thing only because he
    uses it for every tune. What happens is that by comparison I feel like
    I sound like a kid in a hi school band trying to keep up with his 
    Sears Silvertone. This doesn't mean my stuff is junk, I really like the
    sound I get when I play it. It's just that by comparison when he's
    buried in all this hyperturbo megadrive with full saturation bitonal
    equity and cross filtered synaptic blastboost...I feel as though I got
    my thumb up my butt. I like his stuff too, perhaps just a bit more in
    moderation, but it's his band. 
    
    
    "sakman"

Yo Sakman,

Maybe I can help a little here, having been through the amp/preamp thing.

>  1. How do you use them? Are they primarily for recoding to eliminate
>    mics/speakers/placement? 

They are a portion of what you'd find in a typical amp, which contains both
a preamp and a power amp.  The idea is that you can mix and match to get the
exact sound you want, eg more flexability.

The purpose is to increase the level of an input signal from instrument level
to line level for input to a power amp.  Most of them minimally include 
features like channel switching and tone controls.

>    My guess is that they are, however it'd seem
>    that there's no reason that you couldn't use it as a front end to your 
>    present amp. 

Not exactly the intent.  Most of them will allow you to not perform the level
increase of the signal, retaining the instrument level as input and adding on
the channel switching (distortion) and whatever other features it has.  At 
this point the preamp is not being used as a preamp, but simply as an effect.

>Extrapolating upon that, it would also seem that in so
>    doing, Fender dudes like you and I could change the sound of a
>    relatively clean amp to a Marshall, or a Boogie.

"Fender Dudes like you and I", bite your tongue!  ;^)

If you believe that using effects will give you the sound of a Marshall or 
a Boogie, then yes.  I don't personally believe it's as easy as that.  You
might get close, but it won't be quite the same.
 
>    2. Presuming I'm not far off in #1 above, how in the hell do you all 
>    justify the $$$ (especially to your lady).

Equipment justification is an art and a lot of work.  I won't say I'm real 
good at it, but I've done ok.  I justified the purchase of my MP-1 on the
grounds that it would give me increased sonic flexability in a smaller, more
transportable package.  (This was before I bought and fell in love with the 
Kitty Hawk...)

>    3. Is this something I really gotta have and just not realize it yet?

My opinion is no.  If you're in the market for another amp, you may want to 
consider the seperate preamp/poweramp setup as an alternative to buying a
high line (Marshall, Boogie, other) amp head.  If you're not in the market
for an amp, you're probably not in the market for a preamp.

>    This may be the case since I'm picking with a dude who uses a signal
>    processor (Roland GP8 I think). I hate the damn thing only because he
>    uses it for every tune. What happens is that by comparison I feel like
>    I sound like a kid in a hi school band trying to keep up with his 
>    Sears Silvertone. This doesn't mean my stuff is junk, I really like the
>    sound I get when I play it. 

I think you hit on the key point there, the signal processing (effects) not 
the fact that the unit will also function as a preamp.  If you like the 
basic sound of the amp you're using, buy effects, maybe a unit like an ART 
SGE which will do a lot of different effects would meet your needs (maybe
it would be too much).  If you want a new amp with effects, consider a 
combination effects unit and preamp, such as the GP-8/GP-16, and a seperate
power amp.  (but remember that you'll get hit extra for the power amp too,
they also run in the range of what a decent full function amp will cost...)

>    It's just that by comparison when he's
>    buried in all this hyperturbo megadrive with full saturation bitonal
>    equity and cross filtered synaptic blastboost...I feel as though I got
>    my thumb up my butt. 

Easy solution!  Just crank up enough that you don't hear him...     ];^)

(...and get your thumb outta your butt, it's detrimental to your picking 
 technique there!)

BTW, on the serious side; Have you suggested to him that he use his effects 
a little more sparingly?  I've found that when you have a band with two 
guitars, you want to keep things a little simpler so that you don't stomp
on each other so much.

Greg   8^)

    
    
    
                  CROSS-FILTERED SYNAPTIC BLAST BOOST!!!
    
    
                        The ULTIMATE tone!

                A friend  of  mine  (and coworker) uses a Pignose
                amp as a preamp to his Fender amp.  It's normally
                a  9V battery operated  amp  that  you  can  take
                anywhere, but you can get  the AC adapter for it.
                He uses it to overdrive the  Fender  amp.   I can
                get    more    information   on  it  if  anyone's
                interested,  since he sits in the office next  to
                me. (But he's out w*rking right now. :^))
                
                BTW,  A  Pignose  runs around $100 and it does  a
                great  job.    We've  been  in a few jam sessions
                together, and that's  how  I found out about this
                cheaper alternative for a preamp.
                
                Matt

    -1
    
    In all due respect to your friend, METALord, there is a better
    solution;  Instead of having to lug around a pignose, which is 
    just a glorified distortion box, I would opt to install an on-board
    active preamp in the guitars body cavity.  Same sound or BETTER,
    quiet, convenient...what more can I say.
    
    Kevin Mcdonough has a preamp in his guitars (courtesy of DAL Systems)
    that made a Fender Twin SCREAM at a past DEC jam session.  I couldn't
    believe my ears...a Silver-faced Fender that sounded like a Marshall,
    I was in awe!
    
    Check it out,
    Buck

    Oops, almost forget.  An on-board active preamp, with installation is
    undeer $100.  For price/performance, you can't really beat it.

re .2
    
	> I do use my preamp for the frontend of an amp and not for an
effect as Greg is suggesting.... 

    1. How do you use them? Are they primarily for recoding to eliminate
    mics/speakers/placement? 

	> I've used a variety of front end's of amp's for recording,they
don't seem to have the "tone" of a speaker,and they are usually noisy,
when in live situations they also do not sound the same as an amp miked.
	I found the speaker emulator circuitry to work very well for 
recording. 
	Preamp's eliminate the need for explaining to the neighbors,police
and your wife about late night recording sessions.
  	  
    2. Presuming I'm not far off in #1 above, how in the hell do you all 
    justify the $$$
    
	 >I didn't justify spending $1200 to my wife,but what I did do is 
eliminate three amp's I was using which were "vintage" and were always
in need of tubes,repairs and inconsistent and bulky. I could justify spending
$600 on a preamp,but keep in mind I did trade in equipment too offset
the cash layout. 
	I make money with my equipment so I justify some expense,right down
to the picks and strings.....
	The quad preamp is nice however it is really 2 Studio preamp's in one,
this gives you more flexibility at your feet.
	
    3. Is this something I really gotta have and just not realize it yet?
    
	>No this is not something you gotta have! It's just another
tool or option. Just like you could buy individual components to a stereo. 
	Instead of a directional open back 1 12 combo cab you can select the 
cab you want,and the power amp you want. You can rack mount your preamp,effects
and power amp in one case.(or 2 if you want to save your back)
	I'm very biased about GP8's as my experiance with a former guitar
player was very negative. Nothing he did sounded good though this box. 
However when he just plugged into an amp he sounded much better. To me
it's a very processed sound and tone.
	I ended up using a solid state power amp with the preamp,I've 
tried several multieffects units and they just seem to make your tone
harsher even when in bypass mode so I avoid using effects.
	I really just created a combo amp in a rack,with a variety of
possible speaker combo's to choose from. By having this all in a anvil road
case I avoid alot of wear and tear that equipment usually takes in moving
around.
	It was a cheaper solution than buying a MKIII for $1500,and I was
able to add as I found items which fit "my sound" to the rack. Plus I 
didn't like the Simul class sound. I'm presently looking around and saving
bucks for another Mesa. Out of all the Tube amp's I've looked at inside,
they have highest quality in manufacturing,components and durability.


.......If anything I've learned Mesa's are not made for everyone.....but
it is in the hands and fingers.....as to how good they sound.


							Rick

    I'd like a shot at answering .3 as well.
    
    I don't advocate driving a preamp into another preamp. This is
    what you would be doing if you placed a preamp in series with
    your present amp. The reason I say this is because each preamp 
    has it's own eq section, and you end up over-eq'ing your signal,
    plus you tend to add lot's of noise when you do this. If you
    boost some signals on one preamp, then cut them on the other,
    (or vice-versa) this makes no sense, and you end up losing more
    tone than you gain.
    
    Like Greg said, buying a separate preamp and power amp affords
    you far greater flexibility than buying a combo (usually). The 
    same goes for home stereo. You can buy a complete stereo system
    for a modest price and it might satisfy you, but buying separates
    alows you to hand pick the preamp. amp, cd player, speakers, etc..
    As an example the Mesa Boogie Quad preamp allows you to set up 4
    differant tones, and switch between them on the fly without having 
    to tweak knobs. I don't know of any combo amps that can do this
    (with the exception of some of the midi-controlled combos, and they
    don't count because they are mostly solid state). Some people might 
    think this is over-kill. Others are using preamps like the ADA MP1 
    which provides 128 differant sounds with midi control, so there is 
    really a great deal of disagreement about how much is enough/too much. 
    I prescribe to the "Kiss" principle which translates to "Keep it 
    simple, stupid". I personally am satisfied with two great basic 
    "tones", clean and distorted. You can always add efx to these two 
    basic tones to provide a variety of sounds. 
    
    Preamps can be plugged directly into a recording console, but they 
    certainly aren't limited to this, and many people feel that you have 
    to drive your signal through a power amp and speaker to get a great
    tone. This requires micing, which can be a pain in a recording studio.
    
    Personally, I am not in the market for a new amp. I have a new Fender
    "The Twin" which sounds great. I just don't feel like having to mic
    the thing all the time to get a good recording. There are times when
    I sit in at jams sessions and gigs where is it much easier to simply
    show up with my guitar in one hand and a small rack in the other hand,
    and plug into the PA. I may not get a "killer" sound when I do this
    but I personally feel you can get a damn good tone just the same, and
    it is easier to balance yourself with the rest of the band if they
    have a real good PA and monitor system.
    
    As far as money is concerned, this is a personal matter, and all the
    advice in the world will not change your relationship with your wife.
    Personally, I do not spend money on anything except paying bills and 
    buying musical equipment. I know people that spend money every week
    on skiing, golf, racquet-ball, tennis, cars, nightlife, etc. I prefer
    to spend the time with my family, and sock a little money aside each
    week until I have enough to make a major investment in a new guitar,
    or other piece of gear. For example, if you save $20.00/week you
    will have $500.00 after only six months and this is probably enough
    to buy a guitar, or new addition to your rack. One good thing about 
    rack equipment is that your *significant other* will find the whole 
    thing rather mind-boggling, and probably won't pay much attention to 
    what is in your rack. The less they know about the equipment you're 
    using, the better. As long as you keep up with the bills you are 
    responsible for, who's gonna notice your latest toy =|;^)   It's also 
    much easier to justify spending if you are in a gigging band, and can 
    finance purchases with gig money. On many occasions, I have sold gear
    that I am not using much to finance new purchases (anyone wanna buy
    my old twin?).
    
    Hope this helps....
    Mark
    
    
    

      I agree with Mark that driving one preamp into another isn't
    really gonna get you a better sound. Usually that will just overload
    the input of the second preamp and it just won't cut it.
      I can justify speaking out on behalf of the preamp/FX/power-amp
    set-up because that's what I use on gigs 95% of the time. My stack
    is a pain to lug around, and I'm not afraid to admit that it's
    way too big for a lot of the clubs we play. My combo is more portable
    and sounds great (KH of course), but my effects and patch bayette
    (which is connected to the foot controller) are mounted in the rack
    so I'd have to bring the rack anyway. 
      No doubt there's a wide range of rack gear out there to do just
    about anything you want. On the low end you've got the Peavey Raxx
    series and Tube Works (BTW - I keep hearing good stuff on their
    MosValve power amp), on the high end there's Marshall, Mesa Boogie,
    ADA, Hiwatt, Exef, ENGL, and Kitty Hawk. Then there's the effects 
    processors that can work as a preamp, like Roland's GS-6, GP-16,
    and GP-8. I prefer the tube preamps coupled with a multieffect,
    and powered by a good sounding (not-necessarily tube) power amp.
      I've been racked up for about a year and it's worked out real
    well.
    
    							----/boom/----

re .11
    
>    and sounds great (KH of course), but my effects and patch bayette
>    (which is connected to the foot controller) are mounted in the rack
>    so I'd have to bring the rack anyway. 
    
     You could always split your gear into two smaller racks. This saves
     you from many a backaches, and allows you to leave gear home that you
     don't need. As a general rule of thumb, I place power amps and efx in
     separate racks.
    
     Another selling point about rack systems, is that (unlike buying a 
     combo) you don't have to spring for the whole system at the same 
     time. You can get some efx now, a preamp later, and eventually get
     a power amp and speakers, at the same time, you could sell off your 
     old gear to finance the new.
    
     Mark
     
    
     

>   to buy a guitar, or new addition to your rack. One good thing about 
>   rack equipment is that your *significant other* will find the whole 
>   thing rather mind-boggling, and probably won't pay much attention to 
>   what is in your rack. The less they know about the equipment you're 
    
    Mark, I think you've got something here.  The first really good reason
    I've heard to consider going rack :-)
    
    /rick

RE: ADA MP-1 being overkill...

Well, yeah I agree.  128 presets are more than anyone could remember.
I use about 10 now...However, one thing I like about having the extra memory is
that I can invite friends to write patches for me.  For instance, I had Bulldawg
sit down with his Gibson and write a slightly overdriven patch.  I've been 
using it ever since.  My neighbor wrote an Angus Young (from AC/DC) patch
that is PERFECTAMUNDO!

Also, when people point out new patches, you can plug them in without
overwriting your "performance presets"...  I've got about 35 presets that I go
in and tweek around.  When I get them right, I copy them over to the first 
couple of banks and use them.  Bottom line (IMHO) is that it's better to have
to much memory, than not enough.  ;)

BTW - It took me a LONG TIME to finally stumble on what I think are good
sounds.  There are quite a few variables to consider when you sit down to 
edit.  I still have fun writing new patches.

The nice thing about a preamp/poweramp deal is the portability and 
flexability.  You can get 128 possible presets and 125 watts per channel
in a 25 pound package.

jc

    RE: METALord"
    
    What's there to muck up?  A simple rewire of std controls is not a
    major mod IMHO.
    
    Whatever,
    Buck, who thinks a preamp in a tele would work wonders!!

    
    	Looks like there's several kinds of "pre-amp" discussions going
    on here! There's -
    
    	- The kind that goes in your guitar
    	- The kind that drives a seperate power amp
    	- The kind that you can directly record from, ala "Rockman"...
    
    	Each one serves a specific purpose, so the one you want depends
    on your application, as always. 
    
    	Joe Jasniewski

    
    
    
    	I still have a schematic (I copied it from the Guitar handbook
    <blush>) that I'll send to anyone who wants a copy..
    
    regards,
    Steve

    Joe, 
    
    	I agree that there is a big differance between a Rockman,
    and a rack-mount preamp, but most rack-mount preamps can be
    driven directly into a recording console. Some have built-in
    headphone jacks, etc. 
    
    	Buck sort of side-tracked the subject by mentioning the
    preamps you build into your axe, in an attempt to save .2 from
    abandoning his combo for an expensive alternative.
    
    	I agree that many of the preamps are geared towards a rack
    stage setups with preamp > efx > power amp > speakers, but there
    are several exceptions ie:
    
    	The Groove tube guitar preamp. This unit has a 30w power amp
    built in (which can be used to drive a speaker if you'd like) and
    a *patented* speaker emulator circuit which the 30w power amp get's
    dumped into and simulates the sound of a speaker. The resulting
    output is a near perfect means of recording without mics. This unit
    has one other nifty feature... It has gain-sensitive inputs, which
    essentially treats the volume pots on your guitar like distortion
    controls. The output of the preamp remains constant regardless of
    the input signal level. As you crank the volume on your guitar up
    the sound gets dirtier. This is a GREAT recording preamp, but rather
    pricey at $1000, and is not very well suited to stage use.
     
	Mesa Boogies' Studio preamp is also designed for the studio and
    it includes a set of recording outputs which simulate the sound of
    speakers, but it does it differantly than the Groove Tube unit. This 
    preamp also has regular line level outputs for driving a power amp. 
    This unit works great for recording, but maybe not quite is well 
    as the Groove tube unit. Then again, it's half the price, and is 
    better suited to stage use than the Groove tube unit. Of course, 
    it always comes down to personal preferance. Some people might
    even like the sound of the studio preamp better. The studio preamp
    is set up like the caliber series boogies, and has a tone very similar
    to the .50 caliber. This is the preamp I will most likely end up 
    buying unless something better comes along. I am starting to get
    a little itchy about buying a preamp, so I doubt anything new will
    come along before I make my move.
    
    	Hughes and Kettner has 3 1/2 rack guitar preamps on the market
    which they claim are great for recording direct. I can't say either
    way how well they work. I may give them a demo before I make a
    decision.
    
    	My cousin has a Roland GP8 and he has done some recording with
    it direct. The results were very satisfactory. He uses the efx 
    sparingly, which is the main reason he get's good sound.
    
	I can't comment on the other preamps on the market, as far as
    how well they record direct. Can anyone else ? I read an ad in the
    latest GP for the Marshall 9000 series preamp, and they claim it 
    sounds great direct, but you can't always believe ad hype.
    
    	I have only gone into a professional recording studio once.
    This was about ten years ago. We got very poor results for many
    reasons. We had to rush, because we couldn't afford much studio
    time, and had to do a general mix. One of the biggest reasons the 
    results were poor was because my Twin reverb was bleeding into 
    all the mics, making it nearly impossible to get a good mix. The
    drums were set up in the same room, and they bled into the mics
    too. The way of the future is to record everything direct if
    possible, and isolate drums, or use a drum machine.
    
    Mark
    

    RE .14 by Mr.Cooper;
    128 presets may seem to be overkill but the way I see it,during
    a gig you would use (10 you said?) the presets you like and sequence
    thru them for a set list.You would have no problem setting up for
    various set lists due to the tremendous amounts of presets available
    so why not use the extra memory to your benefit?????
    -Just a suggestion
    
    -Bill =BvQ 

	Hey Mark,why isn't the GT Preamp/amp not well suited for stage
use? Having a 30 watt tube amp appeals to me... Are they really going for
$1000??? What's suggested list price?
	The Mesa Studio Preamp is actually more like a Mark III Boogie,
as opposed to the Calibre series. It has tone switches and has both lead
drive and lead master control's,plus a 2 level switch for the effects loop.
	Earlier Calibre Boogies,did not have a lead master control,I've
played a couple of these and I found they were harder to setup....
	I heard recently that Mesa is going to be offering satelite
combo's also. this is a power amp/speaker combo which will take your
mono combo and make it stereo....
	

							Rick    

    
    The reason I say the Groove tube unit is not well suited for live
    use is because of the gain-sensitive inputs. Like I said, the volume
    pots on your guitar essentially become distortion controls, and the
    output of the preamp is constant, unless you shut the volume pot
    on your guitar all the way off. I suppose you could get around this
    by placing a volume pedal between the preamp and amp, but it would
    have to be designed to handle line levels. Also 30 watts is not much
    power for live use. It is plenty for driving a speaker in a studio
    environment, and is essential in getting the speaker emmulator to
    work. Let's face it, it shines in the studio, and can be used
    live, but live use is not it's strongest point. I looked into it
    about 2 years ago. Very few stores carried them, and the few that 
    did were asking $1000.00. Perhaps things have changed since then,
    but I really have not seen many of these units.
    
    According to the Mesa Boogie literature I have, the studio preamp is
    set up much like a calibre series Boogie. Since I haven't demoed one
    of these yet, I'm going by what I have read. I must admit, the
    literature is badly lacking in info on the Studio preamp, but says a lot
    more about the Quad.  
    
    I know you wrote a rather lengthy note on the Studio preamp after you
    bought yours. Could you provide a pointer to that note ?
    
    Mark
    
    

It's an idea...

However, basically what I have is:
 
Bank 1
-------
Patch 1:  Twin Reverb (on steroids)
Patch 2:  Twin Reverb (not much distortion - ala SRV)
Patch 3:  Hyper-sideways Marshall from hell (ala Yngwie, Metallica)
Patch 4:  Crystal-clean and compressed (ala White Lion)

Bank 2:
-------
Patch 5:  Same as 1, with a little more volume for lead
Patch 6:  Same as 2, "				      "
Patch 7:  Same as 3, "                                "
Patch 8:  Same as 4, "                                "

The way my MIDI foot controller works, if I'm using patch 1
for rhythm, all I have to do is "BANK UP" to catch a little more
volume for a lead.  The MP1 switches with not a trace of sound,
and it's pretty useful.

I'm pretty fussy about the presets I store, so as I play with it
more, I'm sure I'll come up with more patches, and may go something
like:
 
Bank 1 - All my clean sounds  
Bank 2 - All my lead levels
Bank 3 - All my distorted sounds
Bank 4 - All my lead leves

The way we tend to play on stage is "Bag the set list, let's play
some Stones tune" (or whatever).  If the set list was cast in stone,
I'd love to sequence my stuff.

There seems to be some freak law of nature that sez: "Thou shalt not
stick to the frigging set list!" (Gawd I hate that!)
Grumble, grumble...

jc

    re. 22 Mark,try note 1294.....
    
    	Most Mesa literature I've have show's the "prototype" of the
    preamp. You got me on what they wrote,but at best (this my opinion
    only) The studio preamp is very similiar to there Calibre 22 with
    certain exceptions as I noted which are taken from the Mark III
    design.......
    	
    							Rick
    BTW ...you can demo a Quad in Nashua,NH
    

    I'm assuming there are differances between the prototype studio preamp
    and the one they are currently selling. For example, you mentioned
    that your preamp has 3 jacks on the back for foot switches (one
    to channel switch, one for reverb on/off, and one for eq in/out).
    I am correct?  How many foot switches are supplied with the preamp ?
    
    I also understand the price has increased from $500 to $550-$600
    depending whether you buy direct or from a dealer. I know that Mesa
    makes their dealers fair-trade, but is there any room to negotiate
    the price ?
    
        Mark
    
    	

    I'm assuming there are differances between the prototype studio preamp
    and the one they are currently selling. For example, you mentioned
    that your preamp has 3 jacks on the back for foot switches (one
    to channel switch, one for reverb on/off, and one for eq in/out).
    I am correct?  How many foot switches are supplied with the preamp ?

****** You have a one stereo jack to control EQ and Reverb and a separate
mono jack for EQ and reverb. Mesa sell's an EQ/reverb footswitch(2 switches
in one box with a stereo cable connection) You also have channel switching
jack in the front and back and an input jack in the front and back. There
is a mono send with a left and right returns and a effects send level switch.
	Left and right Recording output's(Speaker emulator),Left and right 
preamp outputs. 
	There is a volume control for left and right,and this is one beef
I had with the preamp. These control's are very touchy around 1-3 after
4 and 5 the increase was minimal from what I could hear. Must be Audio
taper pots. I solved the problem by using a linear pot as the input to
my power amp(1 Meg).
	One footswitch and cable is supplied with the preamp for channel 
switching,a manual and rack ears. I got a box too!!!!!! :^)

    I also understand the price has increased from $500 to $550-$600
    depending whether you buy direct or from a dealer. I know that Mesa
    makes their dealers fair-trade, but is there any room to negotiate
    the price ?

********I bought mine at the old price right before the increase of $550
to $600 which I believe was in April/May. I'll double check my slip if I can 
find it. I believe the price went up due to the fact you could buy 2
Studio preamp's for less than a Quad.......
	At the time  when I bought mine,I decided to trade a couple of items 
in(a SRD Sustainor,EQ and PV 701R) on the preamp as I was inbetween bands and 
not happy with hardware. I didn't argue or negotiate price as it was the 
last day of the month and they had one preamp left in the chain. I also 
knew they were giving me "fair market value" for my used gear and not "Blue
book" value. I had found out what "blue book" was before I went in and was
prepared for the worst. It was one of the few times I felt I got a "good"
deal where I walked out of a music store with some of my cash in hand.
	Even though there was one other time I did much better,but that's
another story altogether.
	It consequently setup a profesional working relationship for future 
buisness transactions. And provided some level of technical info when I 
need it.Sorry to be so wordy.....
	So I'd say you might be able to negotiate tradewise,but I doubt it
with cash..... Even today I would not sell my preamp for less than I paid for
it.... nor would I consider selling it for more.....
		
								Rick

    	I run the preamp out volumes on the Mesa on 10 and control my
    overall volume with my power amp volume control......which is an
    input volume of the power amp.
    
    					

Never did any recording with my ADA...

I've got a few choices of how to do it, but the obvious solution
to me would be to come out of my headphone jack.

Any other ideas ??

jc (Whos' 4-track should be back tonight!)

    I wouldn't try recording off the headphone jack. Headphone jacks
    typically have as much as a watt or more of power, and the voltage
    swings can exceed several volts. I would connect the line-level 
    output directly into the tape deck, or recording mixer, and back 
    the trim all the way down to the minimum. 
    
    Mark

Okay, I'll try it and let you know !!

    
    	Mark,
    
    	Thanks for reply .19 -
    
    	I guess what I was alluding to was that the preamps intended
    for direct recording had some sorta speaker emulator / ambience
    generator built in, lest you end up with the "Big Muff Pi" into
    the mixer board sound.
    
    	A lot goes on, in terms of shaping the sound, on the downstream
    side of your tone controls! I mean, Alan Holdsworth wont use speakers
    with aluminum *dust caps* for God's sakes!~
    
    	Joe Jasniewski

        I guess this note will calm down now that Mark made his decision!
    Gee - If I posted this note, how do I know? (1103.MEGA)
	
    							_/B@@M\_
    

    Joe,
    
    	I agree that the best recording preamps have a speaker emulator
    or simulator circuit of some sort, but in reality, Rockmans don't
    and they work great for recording,  Perhaps this is accidental. 
    Most people claim they make everyone sound like Boston, though.
    
    	You gotta admit, a Big Muff pi is pretty archaic, and quite
    noisy whether your using it live or in a studio. Anything would be
    better than one of these old dinasours. I have connected my Porta-one 
    to the line out on my Fender "The Twin" and the result was quite 
    pleasing. Most of the tone on the Twin is generated in the preamp
    stage anyways. On many amps the power amp and speakers contributes
    greatly to the sound (ie Marshall), but on some amps the power amp
    and speakers operate so cleanly that they really don't color the
    sound much. This may be the case with the Twin.
    
    	I just ordered a Kitty Hawk Quattro preamp. I was leaning towards
    the Mesa Boogie Studio preamp, but the price on the Quattro was just
    irresistable. I read a product profile on the Quattro in Guitar Player 
    (By Dave Hicks) and he claimed he got good results connecting it directly 
    into a recording mixer. If the Quattro doesn't work out for recording, 
    I'm sure I won't have any problem finding a buyer for it. Just post it 
    in 1103 for 1/2 an hour and it'll be gone for what I paid. If this
    turns out to be the case, I will make sure next time to get something
    with a speaker simulator like the studio preamp. If the Quattro does
    work out, I've saved myself about $300.00.
    
    Mark
    

    
    Mark,
    
    	No, Rockman's dont have a speaker emulator. But they do have
    something that Mr Sholtz discovered which makes "the wall of marshalls
    sound like a wall of marshalls". I think it's in their delay circuit
    - they way it takes the sound and makes some delayed copies and
    then add 'em together for the final "fat sounding" output.
    
    	Joe

    I still can tell a marshall from a wannabe marshall ,
    well pretty much alot if not all the time. 
    Alot of people say Marshall sound, it ain't. 
    The depth and sudden current of 100 watts thru the least resonable
    number of wires comes the closest.
    Sorry to stray from the topic, dudes..
    BTW are there any females who read guitar notes? 
    Should it be dudes and dudettes?

    Anybody ever try one of the L.C. (L.C. right?) Labs headphone preamps? 
    One is called the Pocket Rocket (a little tiny thing) and there's
    another one like a Rockman.
    
    I've got a birthday coming up and my wife is tired of that good ole
    Boogie sound. (know what I mean?)
    
    Will  looking forward to new toize...

	Haven't tried one.

	ccb

Will,

    I tried a Pocket Rocket in my local music store -- I don't think they
    carry them anymore, if that's any indication.  I tired plugging one into
    a Strat with little satisfaction. If you don't hold yer mouth just right,
    the little bugger squeals and hums somethin' fierce. I think the shape of
    the PR is incompatible with the recessed jack on a Strat. You may have
    better luck with other guitars.  Don't take my word for it, though; get
    out there and rummage around your local music store(s) and see what you
    can find, then either leave subtle hints or state your preference openly
    as appropriate for communicating such information to your spouse.

--Chuck

    As mentioned a couple of notes back, Sholz R&D just came out with 
    a low budget series of Rockmans for guitar and bass. These would 
    probably be a better choice over the pocket rocket.
    
    Anyways, I'm keepin' my fingers crossed that the Kitty Hawk quattro
    will work out good for direct recording. If I have to amplify it 
    through a speaker to get good sound, I might as well use my Fender
    "The Twin" and an SM57. It's just that in my basement where my studio
    is located, I have my oil-fired furnace nearby, a de-humidifier, 
    a box freezer, all of which kick in at the worst possible time and 
    make a racket, not to mention the pitter-patter of "little feat" 
    upstairs. 
    
    Mark

    >If I have to amplify it through a speaker to get good sound, I might as 
    >well use my Fender "The Twin" and an SM57. 
    
    NOt nec.  I happen to like the Quattro's "Twin" sound BETTER than a
    real Twin...I donno, you figure it out!   

    re .-2 et al,
    
    Thanks guys.  I'll take my strat up there and try it out.  I tried one
    out with an couple Ibenez' and I liked it (and the Performer, the $100
    one) a lot.  I'll see how it works out and let you know.
    
    Will

    RE: .40 wjb...
    
    	Yeah, but everyone in here knows that you have weird taste ;^)
    	Quattro's "Twin" sound [is] BETTER than a real Twin HA!! ;^)
    
    	Of course "The Twin" is *not* a real Twin Reverb.
    
    	joe (diehard Fender Twin lover)
    
    	P.S. Like a Quattro can do a Fender, but NOTHING can do a Marshall.
    	well escuuuuuuse me. 

I knew that'd get your dander up.  Agagagagaaaa..  Good job Buck.

jc (With *the* twin patch ;)

    Hey Coop, go buy another toy weeya :-)
    
    	joe. (actually soon to be Marshall-owner)

    Joe,
    	
	Your gettin' a Marshall ?
        You didn't mention that to me the other day. 
    
    	Mark
    
    

    Twin reverbs are known for their reverb, (among other things) hence 
    the name.  Of course we won't mention the fact that the Quattro doesn't 
    have a reverb unit built into it. To get a good clean Twin sound out of 
    a Quattro, you have to use an outboard reverb.
    
    Gotta run, I think I hear the UPS man coming :^)
    
    Mark
    
    

    Yeah, Mr. Buckley and I are gonna go shopping for a 2X12 combo
    for me one of these days.  I tried one in Wurli's the other day --
    JCM 800 combo.  Cranked the channel volume with the Master at about
    3 and my gosh, it actually distorted (kids don't try this on a Fender
    Twin, it don't work quite the same way).
    
    Anyway, I tried it with a Tele (just like what I'd be using) and I
    have become convinced that I'm Chrissy Hynde's alter-personality.
    The only thing is...$700+ used (choke, cough, sputter).  But, I
    suppose it'll be worth it to achieve "the definitive" rhythm guitar
    sound.
    
    	joe.

Or you could buy my Marshall for half the money, Joe...

;)

(Plug, plug, plug...)

    RE: Coop, yeah, but then I'd still have to buy a half-stack to go with
    it.  'Sides wasn't it you that told me to, "never buy a Marshall
    without seeing and trying it first!"???
    
    	joe.

See Joe...

I told you MONTHS ago that you needed a Marshall!

8^)

    I've always known that I needed a Marshall, I just haven't had the
    money to buy one...
    
    	joe (soon to have the best of both worlds)

RE: Joe

Yeah, but I'm coming up north.  If you were really interested, I'd bring it.
jc

    Has anyone seen the new Groove tube *AMPLIFIER* that is advertised
    in the latest Guitar Player magazine. It has two discreet tube amps
    in one unit, and when you channel switch, you are not just switching
    preamp channels but power amps as well. You can configure each
    channel with EL34's or 6L6's depending on what tones you want.
    
    I would expect this unit to work great, but I would also expect a
    pricetag out of this world. Most of the products that Groove tube has
    come out with in the past have been very good products, but the cost
    is almost always prohibitive. Because of this, they are not real
    popular items. For example their guitar and bass preamps which sell
    for ~$1000, and their speaker emulating direct box which sells for
    ~$450.
    
    Mark

re: that price

No way!  Surely you left off a zero or something?

Greg

    Yeah Nick, ol' chap. Coo blimey, 'ow much is 149 quid in 'merican
    dollahs 'ese daize, eh mai'e?
    
    "sakman" ('ho lived in Kingsbury N.W.9 - next to Wembly - as a boy) 

    Well Pilgrims, here's a slick device that I figured I'd share with you.
    For those of you who are major Fender dudes like me take note. There's
    a device made by MIZER(?) that you plug into the
    12ax7 sockets of your Fender amp. You then plug your 12ax7 tubes into this
    device. What this device does is use the Normal channel as a preamp
    overdrive for the tremolo channel. You use the amps footswitch to turn
    it  on or off.
    
    I heard this device yesterday on a vintage (like about a '60) Vibrolux.
    What a tone! If you play blues, you gotta have this. Its such a sweet
    singing distortion. the salesman said it was like a tube screamer, but
    not having heard one, I can't really say. I was really impressed. If
    you need a Hi tech superturbo hyperoverdriven blastboost sound, one
    that turns a fart into roaring hurricane, then maybe a stomp box is
    better for you. But as I said - da blooze = this is you, really warm.
    Convenient too with no extra boxes and cables to fool with. Goes for
    about $140. I highly recommend that you check it out if you've half an
    interest. 

    
    Sakman, is the MIZER device for all 12ax7 tube amps or just Fender?
    
    -pat

	That's a David Hicks special. As far as I know they're for
	Fender amps only. David Hicks can be seen in GP doing product
	reviews & I think this is the first product out of his company

    The mender was discussed in an earlier note. If I find it, I'll
    post a pointer to it.
    
    It basically cascades the normal channel into the reverb channel,
    and turns an older (non-channel switcher) amp into a channel-switching
    amp. The down-side is that you lose the use of your reverb when
    using the Mender. The only reason I can see that it would only
    work with a Fender is because of the physical dimensions it was
    designed around. It is a box which plugs into two adjacent tube
    sockets in the pre-amp section. It probably wouldn't fit into other
    amps, but if it did, I don't see why you couldn't use it.
    
    Mark
     

    
    I don't believe the Mender disables the reverb....you must be thinking
    of the old Ice Cubes.
    
    							Brian

    re: .60+  Yeah I think the Device is named Mender and not Mizer, makes
    sense anyway. It's only for Fender for the reasons as explained by
    Mark. I'm not sure about sacrificing the Reverb though. I use reverb
    and  I think I would have noticed if it was missing, but then again it
    was a rainy day and after a month of so much rain and not enough golf,
    maybe I had sh*t between my ears for a day (oh yessuh, just for the day).
    
    "sakman"

A friend that knows I'm looking for a power amp to use with my MP-1 dropped 
an ad for a place called Kasha Amplifiers on my desk today.  They are offering
a device which allows you to use an external preamp with any tube amp, 
disabling the amps preamp.  It does this without modifications to the amp!

It has a jack that replaces one of the preamp tubes allowing you to run a 
direct line in.  Seems like a good idea and it only costs $99.

Anyone tried one of these or have any comments on the concept?

Greg

    
    I like the word "any"...I'm wondering if things like this will work on
    my '61 Bassman since it's preamp is a little different than later Fenders.
    
    						Brian

Ok, well, "any" was my word...

The ad reads:

" NOW YOU DON'T HAVE TO BUY ANOTHER POWER AMP.  The QUIKMOD LINE IN 
  allows you to bypass the pre-amp circuit in your existing tube amp
  and use ony the power amp portion in combination with the ROCKMOD II 
  or III or your PRE-AMP.  there is no permanent alteration to your 
  amplifier. QUIKMOD LINE IN simply plugs into a tube socket in the 
  back of your amp and your pre-amp plugs into the LINE IN.

   For more information call or write: Kasha Amplifiers
   19441 Business Center Dr. #137  Northridge, CA 91324 818-772-4912"


Greg

    Let's get back to the discussion of the Marshall preamp. This unit
    is selling for ~$500 in the U.S. There is definately a discrepency 
    in the price as quoted in .54
    
    If these were really available for $225, there would be a run on
    all the stores that carry them, and no one elses' preamps would
    be selling.
    
    What's da scoop ??
    
    Mark
    

In my opinion, the trick with tube amps is it's versatility.

Things that are a MUST are:
(IMHO)

- Sep channels (at least two)
- Sep EQ (for each channel)
- F/X Loop (Stereo ?)
- Channel master volume, and a overall master

Does the Marshall have these ?  I think it does....But I'm not sure.

jc

    I am trying to clear up a discrepancy with the quoted price.
    The guys on the other side of the pond claim the Marshall
    9004 preamp is available for the equiv. of $225 (U.S. $).
    What gives ??
    
    Mark
    

    
    
    Mark,
    
    	If the price is indeed 149.00 (U.K. Pounds) then the equivalent
    dollars is around $250, depending on what exchange rate you get. 
    
    	I don't know what the mark-up is when you consider that it's
    got to be shipped from England to the U.S.
    
    	-Tom
    

    I doubt shipping adds that much to the cost.  Isn't the same also true
    of Fender and Gibson guitars sold in the U.K.?  I mean what's a Les
    Paul go for here v.s. in London?
    
    	joe.

    
    There's also tariffs to consider.  When I was in the service overseas I
    was not too surprised to find that cameras and stereo gear from Japan
    listed for about half of what they cost in the US.  This is strictly
    due to tariffs and other types of import duties.
    
    							Brian

      Well, having lived in the U.K. for the last five years, and in
      Canada before that, I think it's about time something was cheaper
      on this side of the pond. You guys in the U.S. have no idea how
      frustrating it is to see the prices you list, then wander into a
      store and find out the cost here is 30-40% more. If not double!
      Anyways, sorry to sound spiteful, but it does bother me. Again, I
      have never understood why these large price differentials build up.
      I would assume much of it is due to various taxes placed at the
      time of importing. Oh for a world-wide economy.

I have to agree.  I've marveled many times at the (incredibly high) prices 
our UK noters often post for common items.  Just the cost of strings over
there would render me penniless!  I really feel sorry for you guys having
to spend so much on equipment and accessories.

Greg

    
    Thank you Greg, now send me your SGE 8^)

    
    	Its true about the price of the 9004 Marshall pre-amp. 
    
    	I was up at Marshalls about 2 months ago when the guy there 
    	showed me one of the samples they had. Didn't get a chance to hear
    	it though. 
    
    	Its not got the same capabilities as the 9001 stereo valve pre-amp 
    	though which is exellent. (and more expensive!!!)
    
    	This brings me on to asking a slightly embarrassing question....
    
    
    	Is it best to use the output/level control on the pre-amp or the 
    	gain/volume control on the power amp to get the desired volume
    	levels ?
    
    	I have created some superb 'bedroom' sounds but still have problems
    	live with feedback and 'kick in' noise from the lead channel.
    
    	I say its an embarrassing question because despite having played
    	for quite a few years and being reasonably familiar with my gear,
    	I still find discussions around sound/electronics etc. confusing.
    
    	Thanks for any help,
    
    		Nick 'the thicko'.
    

    Since I started this note I purchased one preamp (A kitty Hawk
    Quattro), which I sold about a month later, and bought another
    preamp (Mesa Boogie Studio Preamp). 
    
    I knew going into the Kitty Hawk purchase that it was probably not
    exactly what I wanted, but the price was so attractive, I figured
    I would give it a shot. I did not have the benefit of a demo before
    I bought it, because it was a mail-order deal. This preamp has many
    strong points, and many of the people that own them swear by 'em.
    It allows you to setup four differant sounds...Clean rhythm, crunch
    rhythm, lead, and hot lead. The Hot lead mode has as much if not
    more gain than I have heard from any amp or preamp on the market.
    The main reason I sold my Quattro was because it is not designed 
    for recording directly without using an amp and speakers. It does
    not have a speaker emmulator output. Driving the line level signal
    directly into the tape deck did not provide a pleasing sound, and
    this was the main reason I wanted a preamp to begin with.
    
    	The Mesa Boogie Studio Preamp, on the other hand, does have
    recording outputs with speaker emmulator circuitry, and it provides
    a recording signal which sounds very satisfactory on tape, at least
    to my ear. The Studio preamp does not allow four sounds like the
    Quattro (2-3 sounds depending on how you use the Auto-EQ), and does
    not have quite as much gain. The tone of the Quattro really lends
    itself to Metal, but IMHO it is not as well suited to playing Blues
    as the Mesa Boogie. I really enjoy having things like built-in reverb,
    an efx loop with stereo returns, and two sets of stereo outs (mains 
    and recording outs). After just a few days with the Mesa Boogie, I
    am quite convinced that I will be keeping the Mesa, and I may even
    assemble an entire Mesa-Boogie rack system eventually including a
    50/50 power amp and some 1x12 speaker enclosures.
    
    After having surveyed the entire guitar preamp market, and having 
    owned two differant models, I still endorse the Mesa Boogie Studio
    preamp as having one of the best tones, the best price/performance
    ratio, and being one of the most road-worthy packages available.
    
    Check em out !!
    
    Mark Jacques
    

    Just picked up a Boss Gl-100 Guitar Line Driver the other day, and
    I thought I'd do a quick review here for anyone interested in a
    rack mount guitar pre-amp. I first got interested in the GL100
    when I noticed Daddy's had them on sale for $189. Went to look at
    one there, but the Boston store was out-of-stock, and then went to
    Wurlitzers (Boston). The best they could do on price was $199, but
    that was close enough for me.

    I've been mostly playing direct into a mixing console recently,
    and the GL100 really fit a lot of my needs. It's a solid state,
    two channel (foot switchable) pre-amp in a single rack space. Each
    channel has pre-volume, master volume, EQ and "mode". Also has a
    master monitor volume. Ins/outs include effects send, stereo
    effects return, stereo monitor out, 1/4" stereo line outs, and
    stereo balanced cannon outs. Guitar input both front and back.
    Also includes speaker emulation, which can be turned off with a
    little switch in the back (if you use a power amp/guitar cab
    setup)

    The "mode" switches between 4 or 5 different flavors of
    drive/distortion/EQ. In channel 1 you get a choice of DRIVE 1, 2 & 3,
    and DISTORTION 1 & 2. Channel 2 has FLAT, CUTTING, DRIVE 1, and
    DISTORTION 1. Seems to be set up so that channel 1 is meant to be
    "lead" and 2 for "rhythm", although the tones are flexible using
    different pre/master volume combinations. The overdrives and
    distortions sound pretty nice to me, although I have to admit I'm not a
    real tube afficionado and other opinions on what's a "great tone" might
    be different. FLAT and CUTTING bypass the speaker emulation, and
    CUTTING gives an interesting simulation of a real clean, clear, almost
    "acoustic" sound. EQ includes LOW and HIGH on each channels. Channel 1
    has LOW MID and HIGH MID parametric, channel 2 just MID parametric.

    Overall a real nice package at the price, and maybe a good starter
    for those rack-puke-wannabes, like me, who can't afford that ADA-MP1
    just yet.

    Rob

    I agree Rob, that the GL100 is an awesome unit for the price.
    I played one thru a power amp at a store a year or two ago when
    they were new, but really *had to have* (it's one of those phrases ;)
    MIDI.  They've really come down in price too.  Welcome to the
    Rack World !!
    
    jc

    There was an implication that the Gl-100 can be MIDI controlled.
    Is that actually the case?
    
    - Ram

    Hmmmmm, thats news to me.  Tell me it's true !!!!
    
    ???

    I played a GL-100 awhile back as well.  I thought I put a review in
    this notesfile somewhere. It's not midi controllable, but is a nice
    sounding unit.  I like the speaker emulation, stereo effects loop
    returns, and balanced line outputs.
    
    For a solid state unit, I thought it had very nice sounding
    distortion/overdrive.  I also thought it was terribly expensive at the
    time (like $350 or something).  For under $200 I think it's a good buy.
    
    They have one over at Rice, Coop.  It's been there for about a year and
    a half. 
    
    Greg

    Maybe Walter will make me a deal on it, then I'll have a
    triple-preamped MIDI rack !   PUUUUUUKKKKKEEEEEE !   ;)
    
    Speaking of triple-preamping....
    
    Can I run line out of my Kitty into the Mp1 into my FX/poweramp thing ?
    Seems like I could run one clean and one dirty and get some intense 
    sounds without all the switching headaches...
    
    Ideas ?

>    Can I run line out of my Kitty into the Mp1 into my FX/poweramp thing ?
    
    I would think you could, the MP-1 has a line level input on it.  Give
    it a try!
    
    Greg

    
    RE: last few
    
    The GL100 is definitely not MIDI controlled. But the way the mode
    switch works makes it pretty easy to change sounds on the fly, and
    having two channels gives you switching options in the middle of tunes.
    The more I play with it the more I really like it.
    
    Rob
    

    I also betcha could use a MIDI octopus or a Kitty PatchBayette affair
    to switch it...  Save on excess boxes on the floor...
    
    jc

    Very interesting...
    
    I was at Rice today and I looked at the GL-100.  Walter saw me lookin'
    at it and said for a $100 it was mine to keep !  With built in speaker
    emulation, the may beat the H&K RedBox all to hell!
    
    Has anyone had experience using the Speaker Emulation circuit in this
    beast ??
    
    jc (Who gets to bring it home and try it first...But values YOUR
        opinion!!!)
        

    I stopped in a store yesterday and tried out a GL-100. This store, by
    the way, had them "discounted" at $199, so $100 seems like a very good
    price. Overall, however, I wasn't that impressed. It does have a fairly
    wide range of sounds, but lacks a couple of things that are important
    to me, namely tube-like distortion and reverb. If what you want is a
    rack mount pre-amp with channels switching, very good eq, and a
    variety of digital distortion effects, this is probably very cost
    effective. I didn't check out the speaker emulation. By the way, there
    is no MIDI control.
    
    - Ram

    Good review Ram...And I agree that $100 is a steal-type-price.
    I'm also concerned with how it's gonna sound when I plug it 
    into my four track...Not so much the FX, as I have outboard units
    for that (the GL includes a stereo FX loop) but just your basic
    growl.  I pick this pup up for an in-home trial over the weekend.
    Reviews to follow.
    
    jc

>    The Mp1 certainly ain't perfect, but there is a definate reason it's
>    the hottest preamp on the market.
    
    We'll see.  ART and one other company had a MIDI tube preamp at NAMM.
    
    Mike

ART?    ...The people that brought us the SGE ?

Wagagagagagagagagaaaa...
Agagagagagagagagagaaaa...
TitterTitterTitterTitterTitterTitterTitter...

Ahem.

Actually, they already have an entry-level preamp called the "Power Plant"
that I heard live once...  Sounded pretty good.  A little 'buzzy' for my
tastes, but... To each his own.

>    -< no competition right now >-                                  
    
    This is not true.  Both BBE and at least one other company have had
    MIDI controllable preamps on the market for well over a year.  I don't
    think they got the press/advertizing push that ADA got, but there have 
    been competing products.
    
>    We'll see.  ART and one other company had a MIDI tube preamp at NAMM.
    
    I see ART as no competation for ADA.  They aim for different markets.
    ADA tends to put out professional quality equipment (and prices it
    accordingly) and ART tends to aim at the amateur equipment market (and
    also prices accordingly).  Seems like half the hard rock/metal players
    have an ADA somewhere in their rig, when was the last time you heard of
    one of a big name artist with a piece of ART stuff in their rack?
    
    ART stuff, IMO, is good quality for the money, but it's not targeted at
    the pro market.  I think all they'll draw with their midi controlled
    preamp is people that want an Mp-1 but can't afford one.
    
    Naturally this is all JMHO from past experience, I have not played or
    heard the ART preamp and I don't know how it'll be priced.  For
    something that was introduced at NAMM a couple of months ago, I'm sure
    not *hearing* any buzz on the street or in the press about it.  If it
    were really hot I would have expected to hear something.
    
    Greg (who owns equipment by both companies)

    I'm talkin' MIDI tube preamps though.  Isn't the BBE solid state?  
    The other companies that had them at NAMM were Hughes & Kettner and 
    Soldano.  It's in the NAMM note.
    
    Mike

    It's been awhile since I saw the ad, but I thought that the BBE midi
    preamp was a tube unit.  I'm pretty sure there was at least one other
    one that's been available for awhile and never caught on.
    
    I have yet to hear a seperate preamp/amp setup that didn't sound thin
    to me.  Has anyone else noticed this or is it just me?  
    
    Greg

    I haven't noticed it.

>    I have yet to hear a seperate preamp/amp setup that didn't sound thin
>    to me.  Has anyone else noticed this or is it just me?  

That's something I never had a problem with! I know that with the Quattro, 
Buck and Coop tend to crank up the high end, and keep the bass down around 
1 or 2. On the other hand, I keep the treble around 7, and the bass and
midrange around 5. That, combined with my Les Paul, seems to have a nice 
full classic-rock sound. 

I think a lot of the guitarist who use the preamp/amp setup tend to play a 
lot of metal-oriented music, and they *try* and get that George Lynch-like
tone (which always sounds thin to me).

alan

    Alan,
    
    I did no such thing!  My lead channel EQ went pres-6, treb-5, mid-8, 
    bass-8-10.  Just fyi.

    I know I had to back off the highs, and turn up the bass on Coop's Quattro 
    when playing my 550 thru it. 
    
    Mike

> I did no such thing!  My lead channel EQ went pres-6, treb-5, mid-8, 
> bass-8-10.  Just fyi.

Oh, I thought I remembered a note in here somewhere, talking about settings. I 
thought both you and Coop mentioned that you couldn't turn up the bass - that
even a 1-2 or setting was more than enough........maybe it was Greg, with
his M3????

alan

    That sounds like an M3 to me.  I run my Quattro bass control on 10 
    (I wish there was an 11)...Its a little lacking in Bass response...
    Exactly the opposite from my old M3, which had WAY too much bass.
    
    FWIW, I picked up my Boss GL100 Line Driver (preamp) last night.
    I got me a triple preamped rig now.  Gnarly dudes.  If I ever lose a
    patch cord now, I'm doomed.  :)
    
    jc

    Has anyone tried the Hafler preamps yet? The T2 (which is a 2-channel
    tube preamp) got a good review in Guitarist, which is a UK guitar mag,
    but I haven't been able to track one down yet to try it.
    
    And in GP recently (the Feb, March edition?) Hafler had an advert which
    talked about the T3, which has an extra channel, MIDI, and (get this)
    lets you use its (non-MIDI) footpedal as a MIDI control to other
    devices. Sounds too good to be true. Of course, there's no price
    listed, either. And I'm pretty sure this one doesn't even get IMPORTED
    in to the UK yet...
    
    Nick

      I got to check out the ART Power Plant preamp yesterday. Oh course 
    I said "What do I want with another preamp?". Anyway I wasn't under any
    obligation since they asked me to put it through its paces. 
      I used a G&L ASAT guitar into the Power plant (with a SGE Mach II in
    the effects loop, but I bypassed it!) out into a MOSvalve power amp and
    a 2X12 EV speaker cab. I'll admit that this preamp has some nice
    sounds. I was really impressed with the tonal flexibility after
    getting used to the weird knob titles (like thrust). If I didn't
    already have my rig established I might've considered one of these.
    Oh Yeah - Ugly graphics in the usual ART kind of way.
    
    						-B()()M-

    Re: .127
    
    Do you mean Hafler, the hi-fi company?  
    
    							Brian

    re: ART Power Plant
    
    What does it sound like to you, Boom?  Thick/Thin?  Lots of gain? 
    Compression?  Channel switching?
    
    BTW does it have a "Bendover" control to go with that "Thrust" one? ;^)
    
    Greg (just curious, I'm *not* buying one)

    I think its kind of thin sounding

    Hey Buck,  Who was that gal that had one of these ?  The Dumpster
    Bunnies opened for them in Waltham.  I thought her tone was HOT
    (but the rig looked like it'd be a nightmare to troubleshoot).
    In fact, I thought the whole band was pretty cool...  But thats
    the first time I'd heard a PowerPlant.
    
    jc

    RObin frmo Tempa Tempa uses a PowerPlant.  She goes for that whole
    Vai tone (aka heavily processed), which is cool, I guess...not for
    me!

    RE: .129
    
    Brian,
    
    Well, yes and no. It is Hafler as in David Hafler of hi-fi fame. But it
    turns out it isn't made by Hafler's company - apparently he's sold his
    name to Rockford corp (really!).
    
    As it happens, I got to try out one of these babies (the T3) last week.
    A good friend of mine works for the people who import some Hafler gear
    into the UK, so after I'd bullied him, he ordered one of these :^) It
    was the fourth off the production line, and first in the UK.
    
    I was going to type in a review, but it's nearly going-home time here
    in the UK, so I'll try and remember to do it tomorrow.
    
    Nick
    
    ps Selling your name... hmmm... wonder if there'd be a demand for a
    "Creasy" range of amps? Probably not...

As I mentioned in my previous note, I recently had a chance to
try out the Hafler T3 preamp for a weekend. First, two caveats:

1) I really wanted to like this preamp. After it's been round the
magazines for review, I may have chance to buy it at A Good Price.
You guys in the US don't have a monopoly on GTS!

2) I didn't really have the equipment to test the T3 out properly.
I don't have a pre/power setup currently, so the setup I used was
rather Heath Robinson. The fact that I could give it a good test
at all was a tribute to the T3, as I'll explain.

So what are the main features of this preamp? It's a 3-channel preamp
(one clean, two dirty) containing two 12AX7 valves (you can see them
through little air holes in the housing). It has a basic MIDI
implementation, which lets you send patch change information to other
MIDI devices using the T3's footswitch, or which lets you change
channels on the T3 by sending it MIDI patch change information.

Open the box, and there's the preamp AND THE FOOTSWITCH. Score 1
point (in fact, you can't change channels on the T3 without the
footswitch, except over MIDI). The footswitch and attached cable look
good and rugged.  The "manual" is sparse, to say the least (1
fold-out page), but the back page shows some suggested settings,
including two called "Cliffs of Eric" and "Surfing with the T3".
Oh-ho!

The front panel is well laid out, with the controls for each channel
boxed with a blue line, and each channel having an LED that lights
when it's on (green for clean, yellow for channel B and red for
channel C).  The clean channel lets you set brightness and output
level, each dirty channel has its own drive, bass, treble and output
level controls.  Each channel is completely independent (I selected
each channel in turn, and then messed with the settings on the
other channels - it had no effect on the sound).

For a 3-channel preamp, the footswitch is odd, as it only has 2
buttons (and 2 LEDs). Switch on the preamp, and you're on the clean
channel - there are no LEDs lit on the footswitch. Press the left-hand
button, and you're on channel B, the yellow LED on the footswitch
lights. Press the right-hand button and you're on channel C, the
red LED lights. To get back to the clean channel, select the channel
you're already on (ie if the red LED is on, press the right-hand
button again to get you back to clean). It takes some getting used
to, but at least it's logical.

The sounds:

As I said, I don't have the equipment to test this properly. I
was originally just going to try it direct into my 4-track, but
the T3 doesn't have speaker emulation, so direct the sound left
a lot to be desired. However, there's a switch on the back which
lets you choose line level output or instrument level (the manual
just calls them high and low output, confusingly), so I was able
to run the T3 through a couple of my amps: I used a bass amp with 15"
speaker, and a little Peavey Decade practice amp (which has got about
a 6" or 8" speaker). This is less than satisfactory, as the T3 tends
to accentuate characteristics of the amp - through the bass amp it
sounded boomy and bass-heavy, while through the Peavey it sounded
too trebly.

Channel A (the clean channel) is great. It sounded good through both
amps - it's not as good a clean sound as on my Twin, but it's a warm,
quite full sound. I kept coming back to it.  It took a while to get a
good sound on the dirty channels. This was probably due to the
less-than perfect power amplification - I ended up playing through
the Peavey with its eq flat and ALL the treble rolled off the T3.
This is a very "American-sounding" preamp - it doesn't have that
balls-to-the-wall quality of a Marshall. However, I'd say it is
definitely for rockers - I couldn't get a warm, mildly distorted
blues tone out of it. Lose 1 point. However, distorted sounds are
such personal things that I'm not going to pass judgement on them
here, particularly as they vary so much with the amplification.

Where the T3 really scores is with MIDI. Though it is limited, it's
very useful. I hooked a Midiverb II into the effects loop, and
connected the T3's MIDI out to its MIDI in. Now, when I select
channel A on the T3 I get patch #1 on the Midiverb, select channel B
and I get patch #2, select channel C and I get patch #3. As an
experiment, I set patch #1 to chorus, patch #2 to reverb and patch #3
to delay. No more tap-dances as you change channels on the amp and
simultaneously want to change effects - the preamp does it for you
when you change channels. With a more sophisticated multi-effects
unit than the Midiverb, of course, this feature would be even more
powerful. That said, though, whenever you select channel A you
get patch #1 etc, so unless you can reset patches quickly between
numbers, you're stuck with a single sound for each channel for
the whole night. The T3 also has MIDI in and thru, but I didn't
use these facilities.

What's my verdict? Well, as I said at the beginning, I wanted to like
this unit. I tried it on Saturday morning, with a Strat and no
effects into the 2 amps mentioned and into the 4-track, and I hated
it. I tried it on Sunday, with a Les Paul, and with the effects loop
linked through MIDI, into the Peavey, and I loved it! I found I
could get a good, recordable, sound at low volumes (something I've
been unable to do so far with my existing gear). I'm now hoping
I get a chance to buy it...

Nick
    

Simple question:  I'd like to find a simple preamp for my Strat, just 
something to, say, double the output voltage.  Make it as loud as humbuckers.
I don't need tone controls, or anything like that.

I've seen (not played with) a DOD Bi-FET Preamp.  It's a little stomp box
for about $50-$60 dollars.  Anybody use one?

Do you know of other comparable units?

Thanks,

Will

    I'd recommmend talking to Kevin McDonough about the onboard preamp
    he has in his guitar.  Hubba Hubba; thing screamed.
    
    jc (Who thinks Kevins guitar was a Hagstrom, but...)

    
    
    	Will, I used one for a while.. and they do provide a little boost
    (or a lot depending on the level that you set) I was looking for a
    little more distortion and bought my beloved "rat" as a result.  If you
    want a Bi-Fet preamp to try/buy... don't buy one at a store.. I'll give
    you a wicked deal on the one I have.  BTW these things are supposed to
    be for amplifying acoustic guitars (must be for folks who don't have
    57s hee hee)
    
    Gree Vee (so howcum my axe plays better since BB signed it?)
    

    I received my Alesis propaganda newsletter today.  They have a new
    Quadraverb GT that is the same as a Quadraverb+, except it is also a
    guitar preamp with onboard distortion, et al.
    
    Mike

    How much ???
    
    How much for the BBE preamp ??
    
    jc

    Cooper, YOU DON"T NEED ANOTHER STEEKIN (pre)AMP!!!

    Well, I can ASK can't I ??                                ;) ;)
     
    ;)
    jc (Triple preamped - Anyone wanna buy a Kitty-Quattro ??)

    Hmmm, me and Buck agree on something ..  8^)
    
    Yeah Coop, as a favor to the host system, are you deleting "old"
    equipment lists when you enter a new one ?  Sure would save some
    blocks !   8^)
    
    So what's up with the Quattro ... I thought it rooled, or was that just
    'cuz it was new ?
    
    
    Scary (who might as well buy a Marshall - everybody else be doin' it
    ...)

    The Quattro DOES rule.  So don't my two marshalls, my Boss GL100,
    my Mp1 etc...etc...  It's just that (as y'all so elloquently pointed
    out to me) I don't need a Quattro, as I feel the Mp1 and Boss meet
    my needs more accurately.  Some old fart who likes a slushy vintage
    tone needs that Kittyhawk more than I do...  I be likin' that high
    tech clean soundin' OD.  ;)  ;)
    
    jc (Who needs a fork truck for his rack)

>    jc (Who needs a fork truck for his rack)
    
    I guess the days of the 4 space rack from hell are over ;-)

    Hey Coop, you and your "slushy" tone...just what IS a slushy tone?!?
    
    Buck, an old fart who likes slushy tones

    Whats a "slushy" tone ??  It's when you strike a chord (other than a
    fifth) and you can't hear all the notes ringing.  Or as I might say,
    Impure overdrive.  Now there is nothing wrong with that vintage tone,
    in fact, I have the marshall for just that reason (See Bad Co., Free,
    BTO, Cream etc..etc..).
    
    Like I said, no flame here...  I like that tone.  I also really prefer
    that purified overdrive (call it metal if ya want) that the Mp1 does.
    I need both.
    
    jc

>    Whats a "slushy" tone ??  It's when you strike a chord (other than a
>    fifth) and you can't hear all the notes ringing.  Or as I might say,
>    Impure overdrive. 
    
    What you're describing is *less* power amp induced overdrive/distortion
    and more preamp gain/distortion.  So what you *really* want is an amp
    with more gain in the preamp and more headroom in the power amp.  Given
    this,  I think you would have liked the sound of a 100 watt Marshall a
    lot better then the 50 watt ones you keep buying.
    
    Personally, I prefer the sound of the power section distortion then
    purely the preamp section.  I think that preamp only distortion
    typically sounds thin and sterile.
    
    Greg

    Re: Alesis Quadraverb GT
    
    List is $599.  There are a ton of tube preamps out now.
    
    Mike

    Cooper,
    
    I agree with the Housemeister...you need an old 100wt head.  Yes, those
    who like 50wt amps like them for what they do in the output stage (ie,
    compress).  Why do you think players like Malmsteen, Allman, Schenker
    all like 50 watters?  In comparison, why do you think players like 
    Angus Young like 100 watters?
    
    That is why you like 6550s, they are a very hard tube, with a high
    headroom, that doesn't distort til a very high saturdation point.  Even
    when they do saturate, the sound is one of a clean, buzzy fuzz.  EL34s
    have a lower headroom, and go into saturation much quicker.  Also,
    being a softer tube, the saturation is more intense, thus adding to the
    total gain charateristics (read compression).
    
    The issue is really apples and oranges...I like EL34s for the same
    reason that Malmsteen does...you crank em up, and the amp goes into
    this nice compression, with a singing sustain.  6550s give you that
    AC/DC sound...hard, rough, edgy.

    I agree with you both that I would like the sound of a 100wt 
    Marshall better than a 50wt'r.  And because of the reasons Buck
    listed (I nominate Bucks reply for NOTE OF THE WEEK !).
    
    The thing is, the Mp1 does better (for what I want) than a 100wt
    Marshall even if it does have 6550's.   It's not what I "liked"
    but more "what I can use to make my rig more versatile".  I needed
    vintage.
    
    >The issue is really apples and oranges...I like EL34s for the same
    >reason that Malmsteen does...you crank em up, and the amp goes into
    >this nice compression, with a singing sustain.
    
    Bingo !  Thats why I bought the 2550.  It gets "that sound".  The 
    Mp1 doesn't.  
    
    The Mp1 is virgin.  Pure as the driven snow.  There is nothing
    "vintage" about it.  I love it for that crystal - clean  distortion. 
    It's a monster.  The Marshall is no Monster, per-se, but it certainly
    has "character".
    
    Hows this:
    
    o Mp1's cut you right down the middle like a surgeons scalpel.
    
    o Marshalls punches you in the chest until you can't breath,
      and finally asphixiate your self (smiling of course).
    
    o A/B box on "both" punches you in the chest while making incisions
      on your insides till your heart is in plain view for the cute little
      gutter snipes in the audience.  ;)  ;)
    
    :)
    

    re: .136 - Will Collum
    
    Stewart-MacDonalds has a Mid/Booster designed to go in a Strat that
    might just be the ticket for what you're looking for.  It looks like an
    onboard preamp/mid-boost circuit that I bet would make a Strat really
    scream.  Here's the description from the most recent catalog:
    
    "Musitech Mid/Booster for Strat
     o Hi/Lo midrange control
     o Variable 3:1 volume boost
     o No routing required
     o 9v battery powered
    
    An onboard preamp with mini circuitboard, push-pull control pot and
    battery terminal with clip. The pot replaces a tone control; when
    installed, push the pot shaft down for up to 25db variable volume gain.
    The other tone control then acts as a hi/lo midrange control pot, with
    the third (original) pot for master volume. Installation instructions
    included."
    
    No. 1621  $84.63 ea    (2 or more, $76.14 ea)
    
    Sounds interesting, might be worth looking into!  My Strat with EMGs
    has something similar and it simply wails!
    
    Greg
                                              

Cool.  Of course I just bought Gree Vee's BiFet Preamp, but I'd like to look 
at it anyway.

Thanks, Greg,

Will

    
    
    
    	Will, if you like Stew-Mac's better you can send back my unit....
    
    C'mawn weekend!

    I love deals like that !!
    
    I got a similar unit recently where "Try it, if you like it send $$$"
    I truned around and sold another unit like that.  All was cool.  :)
    
    jc

    I gotta put a plug in here for the Boss GL100 Guitar Line Driver.
    
    It's a rack mountable (1 space) preamp with a speaker emulation
    circuit, stereo FX loop, balanced and unbalanced outs, channel
    switching etc...
    
    We've been working on our demo tape recording some covers with my 
    4 track.  Both Tom (other guitarist) and I used the GL100 with GREAT
    sucess recording direct.  The speaker emulation circuit works great,
    and the EQ on this thing is OUTSTANDING.  If GUITARNOTES vIII ever gets
    rolling, I'll submit some stuff we did with it.  We're both pretty
    excited about how good the thing sounded.
    
    If you're looking for something to record direct with, this is THE box
    to use (IMHO).
    
    jc
                 

I tried a DIGItech "Twin Tube" preamp the other day.

Made me thing of an SGE (I stole that from Greg - He said it, but I agree).
A fancy distortion box is all...  In the same rack (and i'd tried 'em before)
was a Seymour Duncan preamp and a ART Power Plant. IMHO, thumbs down to both 
of 'em.

jc (who thinks QT's and MP1's rule the market)

    As far as the Digitech went, I listened while Jeff played it and messed
    with the controls a little.  Basically, I wasn't impressed with it. 
    Maybe if we'd taken a lot of time to play with it we would have liked
    it better but my initial reaction was that it sounded like a solid
    state distortion box, it didn't react right to playing technique.  I
    didn't hear anything special about the distortions I heard.  It's very
    compressed in it's tube distortion mode even with the compression
    effect turned off.  
    
    As far as the Digitech went, I listened while Jeff
    played it and basically wasn't all that impressed with it.  Maybe if
    we'd taken a lot of time to play with it we would have liked it better
    but my initial reaction was that it didn't sound like real tubes to me,
    it didn't react right to playing.  Had a decent clean sound, but didn't
    seem to have the searing gain that the Mp-1 does wide open.  For my
    money, I'd rather have an Mp-1.
    
    
    Distortion is basically what I listen to when I try out amps/preamps,  
    because most of them can get a decent clean sound. What I'm interested
    in is how it breaks up as it starts to distort and what it sounds like
    set up for maximum distortion.  True to form, this one had a decent
    clean sound.  Surprisingly it had a pretty fair "slight distortion"
    sound as well.  
    
    What it didn't seem to have was the really searing gain that the Mp-1
    or a Marshall JCM900 (MV) has.  As Jeff related, the presets sounded
    like my SGE (factory presets) to me.  I liked the SGE a lot better
    after dumping the factory crap and programming it myself, perhaps
    that's also true of this one...
    
    For my money, I'd rather have an Mp-1 (were I into the preamp thing). 
    It doesn't have the effects, but I'm not interested in anything except
    chorus which it does have.  The Mp-1 has a characteristic sound in it's
    tube distortion mode that I like and the Digitech one doesn't seem to.
    
>    In the same rack (and i'd tried 'em before) was a Seymour Duncan preamp
>    and a ART Power Plant. IMHO, thumbs down to both  of 'em.                           
    
    I've never messed with the Power Plant (never saw one before that day
    and didn't try that one), but I didn't mind the SD preamp when I tried
    it awhile back.  I mean it's not the ultimate of anything, but I liked
    the sounds it made.  Kind of vintage, rather Fenderish if you ask me. 
    If you're interested in that kind of sound it might be worth looking
    into.  Not what I was looking for, but not a bad sound!
    
    My problem trying stuff like this out anymore is that I end up
    comparing it to my Marshall JCM900 and...well...nothing I've heard even
    remotely compares (to my ear).
    
    Greg

    
      Just when you thought the MIDI rack puke craze was winding down
    a couple new products come out and slap you in the face. Here's
    some of the new goodies in the 19" format:
    
      1) Mesa/Boogie TriAxis preamp. Too cool for words. Numeric LED
    displays for all the parameters. Underneath the parameters are 
    two up/down buttons for adjustment. No scrolling through menus
    to get where you want to go. Five 12AX7's in a open air compartment 
    that is recessed into the rear of the unit. That should keep it cool.
    The power transformer is a Toroidal type (good stuff). The M/B
    engineers managed to get all these goodies in a single space unit.
    There are lots of voicing options (I think there are eight) that 
    give each preset its primary character. Serious stuff, probably big $.
    
      2) Rolls MP-45 tube preamp. Uses knobs and graphic EQ sliders for
    setting parameters, then you store it. Seems real user friendly and
    is probably one of the better buys in the MIDI preamp market. It also
    has a learn mode and a headphone output. It is also single space and
    uses two 12AX7's. This company started from a ex-employee of Digitech.
    
      3) Rocktron ProQ - A programmable EQ designed for guitar enhancement.
    All of the frequency centers are guitar oriented. THere is also a built 
    in hush (of course). Seems like a nice addition to the big money racks.
    
      4) Mesa/Boogie Switchtrack tube Power amp. Check it out - a power amp
    that will switch for clean and nasty sounds. I'd have to check into it
    more, but I think this is a twin setting per stereo side arrangement.
    Again - this is for people with money to burn (but I bet a new M/B
    equipped rig sounds nice).
    
      5) Zoom is supposedly announcing a lot of new products at the winter
    NAMM show in January. Some of their present stuff look interesting. 
    We'll have to see what they come up with.
    
    							-B()()M-

    re. -1
    
    Guess who just got their latest vesion of guitar player ?
    
    I saw all those ads also. I was definitely curious about the MESA
    Boogie and the Rolls.  The Boogie looks WAY COOL....I'll bet it costs
    some big bucks. I'd love to hear it. May be some stiff competetion for
    the ADA... but I bet it costs twice as much.

    It seems to me that having more midi controllable preamps on the market
    will start reducing the popularity of the Mp-1, provided that they
    sound good.  I always thought the appeal of the Mp-1 was it's
    flexability, but it's noisy and the distortion sounds buzzy to me. 
    Plus you can't name your patches and it takes several keystrokes to
    edit anything and you can't see all the parameters at the same time. 
    Minor inconveniences, yah, but if someone else made one that did the
    same things with an easier user interface, I'm sure it would compete.
    
    I kind of doubt the Boogie will be a lot of competation because of the
    price their gear typically goes for...
    
    Greg

Yepper, Boogies new preamp will be BIG bucks (easily over a grand ??).

I think ADA is in a different class.  Of course, I'm curious about the
Booger.

I wonder how the SGX will impact ADA's sales figures.
Seems like everyone has an ADA in their rack these days, but DIGItech
is hounding the market with their Twin Boob.  :)

jc 

    I don't know if the Digitech or ART offerings are really direct
    competation.  They try and do a lot more in terms of making it a real
    package with preamp, effects, and everything.
    
    I personally think the Twin Toob is one of the worst sounding preamps
    I've ever heard.  I like the ADA a lot better.  Wonder what the ART and
    Boogie beasties will sound like?
    
    Greg

I'm sure the new boogies will sound great, but like everyone else, I think
they'll be way expensive.  Imagine a new TriAxis and Strategy 500 in your
rack. (time for me to dream)

One thing from boogie that I thought was reasonably priced that I have is
their 8 space shock mount rack.  The way they do the shock mounting got
my attention and the price was somewhere in the $200 - $300 range.  (I forget
the actual price).  I thought that was great compared to other shock mount
racks.

What I'd like in a new preamp if I got one (I have the MP1) is a true stereo
effects loop.  I'd like the master volume to come after the effects loop in
the signal path - so when I kick in a lead patch, I can have that patch's
master volume boosted a little (ok, ALOT) but it won't effect the input
level of my effects.  If you want stereo effects without a stereo effects
loop you have to place the effects between your preamp and power amp which
causes input level problems for me.  Not sure if the TriAxis features this.

/marc

      re: -.1
    
        Oh yeah. Having a post effects loop master would be a big plus!!!
      That's one thing you could do with the switching power amp from
      M/B is have it set for rhythm/lead with the appropriate vols.
        When I used the GSP-21 in my main rack the biggest problem was
      controller that overload indicator between my mopde changes from the
      Testarossa. A lot of the "too much here, too little there" type of
      tweaking.
        As far as effects goes for a multi-channel preamp (like the MB's,
      KH's) I would stick with just a quality Digital effects unit such as
      the Digitech DSP-256XL (great for the price!), the Rocktron
      Intellifex, and the TC2290 (drool). Stay away from the GSP-21, SGE,
      multieffects type.  I know, I've got a GSP-21, it works better as a
      preamp than something in an effects loop!
    
    							-B()()M-

    I posted some info on the TriAxis in one of the many M/B notes in here.
    It's basically a MIDIoted Quad.
    
    Mike

	The Halfer preamps (T2, T3) have stereo loops.

DAMN good point Marc.  

FWIW - When I wrote to ADA for my 2.1 upgrade prom, I sent a nice letter along
asking for a stereo FX loop in their next release.  I suppose I was pushing 
my luck (how do you get a stereo FX loop on a prom ! :).  

I betcha ADA is engineering a Mp1+ as we speak.

jc (Who wants a stereo effects loop)

    The KH stuff was the best preamps I ever jammed thru

      re: -.1 -- was that some kind of endorsement???
    
      (not bad coming from a M-word devotee!)
    
      FWIW - Buck may get a chance to test drive the biggest assortment of
    KH gear in the known universe!
    
      I betcha ADA and Marshall have got something new in their trick bag
    for next year. I also wouldn't be too surprised if one of the new
    ZOOM toys for next year has tubes. It seems more and more that preamps
    are getting away from solid state. At least now I have a SS unit with
    the Rexx 1602, it isn't a slouch.
    
    							-B()()M-

>    I posted some info on the TriAxis in one of the many M/B notes in here.
>    It's basically a MIDIoted Quad.
    
    It looks vastly different from the Quad to me! (if this is the preamp I
    saw an ad for) It's got seven or eight voicings, Quad has something
    like three or four.  Sounds like a much more flexable unit in terms of
    sound (providing the controls work as the hype would lead you to
    believe) then the Quad.
    
    Greg

    Looks have nothing to do with it ;-)
    
    I'm talking basic circuitry.  

I think Greg was too Mike.  I saw the Boogie pic, and it didn't describe
the unit to sound like a quad...  Quad = 4...  This one mentioned more
voices than 4...

cj

Hi folks !

Re: post-fx master

Yeah, that's what I want too (and also somehow get thru my SPX), but that's
what one would get from the ART SGX too. And combined in ONE box and patches
can be named and....

Re: MP-1 stereo effects loop

As far as I remember the bass version of the MP-1 has a stereo effects loop, so
it shouldn't be unlikely that a "MP1+" has this feature too. But again, the SGX
has 2 programmable (!!) stereo effect loops.......

	best regards

		Richard

Well, this may be against whats on the market, but a LONG time
ago - a friend (and fellow noter) said "It's against my principles
to have hi-gain-generating stuff in the same box as Digital stuff"
(Or something to that effect).

I didn't listen. Bought an SGE and...  Well, I shoulda listened.  :)

I wonder what an Mp1+ might have in it ??

jc

>I didn't listen. Bought an SGE and...  Well, I shoulda listened.  :)
    
    I disagree.  I thought the SGE's distortion and other effects were good
    (still do), provided you let it do everything for you.  It's only when
    you want to start adding other effects units or preamps that do
    distortion or things like that that the SGE doesn't work that well.
    
    gh

The SGE is a glorified stomp box if you ask me.
It's a low budget attempt at dethrowning real MultiFX 
units... Badly designed and implemented...

(IMHO, naturally)

re .176

>    I disagree.  I thought the SGE's distortion and other effects were good
>    (still do), provided you let it do everything for you.  It's only when
>    you want to start adding other effects units or preamps that do
>    distortion or things like that that the SGE doesn't work that well.

I never liked the distortion in the SGE but I bought it anyway - for the 
multi effects abilities only.  I ran it in the effects loop of my MP1 and
never had level problems (but my MP1's patches had the same output level).


re .177

>    The SGE is a glorified stomp box if you ask me.
>    It's a low budget attempt at dethrowning real MultiFX 
>    units... Badly designed and implemented...

Aren't they all.  There's only a few out there that aren't (and they're not
digitechs) but the price of these elit units is way out of my range.
What I'm saying is that if the SGEs with a 20bit processor, 90db s/to/n ratio,
and 20 - 20k bandwidth is what the above comment says, then all the rest are
too.

/marc

I guess my trouble with the SGE was that I didn't run it in
the FX loop, I ran it in-line between the MP1 and my power amp.
The Mp1 doesn't have a stereo loop.

The one time I went live with it, it sucked so bad I ended up using my 
old GK.  I sold the SGE the next day and got a Digitech unit which I've
used sucessfully ever since.  

I don't mean to slam the SGE, it just left a really bad taste in my mouth.
Since then, I've also added a Quadraverb which does well also.

For my application, it didn't work.

jc

    
    re: .179
    
    >I don't mean to slam the SGE, it just really left a bad taste in
     my mouth.
    
    
    Quick question:  What was it doing in your mouth?   :)
    
    
    Brian

    No wonder it sounded muffled ...
    
    Scary .........

    re: .177
    
>The SGE is a glorified stomp box if you ask me.
>It's a low budget attempt at dethrowning real MultiFX 
>units... Badly designed and implemented...

    All these comments are completely unjustified, in my book.  First off,
    it was one of the first full function multieffects units on the market. 
    At the time the SGE came out, it had no competation.  The only thing
    remotely similar that I recall was the GP-8, which cost twice as much
    and didn't have reverb.  There weren't any others to "dethrone"!  Can
    you really expect a first generation of a new style of unit to be
    absolutely the best of everything around four years later?
    
    I hesitate to call anything that costs $550 "low budget".  Unless
    you're comparing it to a GP-8.  It sounded worlds better then the
    Digitech units that came out AFTER it did that tried to compete in the
    same marketplace (at a lower cost), such as the GSP-5.
    
    I don't think it's very fair to call a unit with a plathoria of sound
    possibilities, a superior midi implementation, a simple easy user
    interface, and a 20-20K bandwidth "low budget" and  "a glorified stomp
    box", just because it didn't fit your needs.
    
    Seems to me that the only reasons you didn't like the SGE was because
    it didn't (first off) act as the preamp you thought it would, and
    (slightly later) didn't do true stereo processing (ie, it summed the
    two inputs and then "stereoized" the two outputs from that, negating
    the chorus from your Mp-1).  
    
    The unit was obviously designed with one use in mind.  Sitting between
    a guitar and an amp set up for a clean sound and doing all the effects
    processing.  I still think the SGE is one of the best units around for
    doing this.  It had some really nice features for that, like being to
    move the EQ and the exciter either before or after the gain inducing
    effects.
    
    I still have mine and I think the delays and reverbs are wonderful.  I
    like the way it sounds for vocals too.  No, I don't use it too much for
    guitar, because I'm not into the effects soaked sound like I was when I
    bought the thing.
    
re: .179
                          
>I don't mean to slam the SGE,
    
    Yeah, .177 certainly gives it a glowing reference...
    
    Greg

>>The SGE is a glorified stomp box if you ask me.
>>It's a low budget attempt at dethrowning real MultiFX 
>>units... Badly designed and implemented...
>
>    All these comments are completely unjustified, in my book.  First off,
>    it was one of the first full function multieffects units on the market. 
>    At the time the SGE came out, it had no competation.  The only thing
>    remotely similar that I recall was the GP-8, which cost twice as much
>    and didn't have reverb.  There weren't any others to "dethrone"!  Can
>    you really expect a first generation of a new style of unit to be
>    absolutely the best of everything around four years later?

I wouldn't say unjustified.  I call the unit low-budget, because at the time, 
it was low budget compared to its competition - (The GP8/16 etel).  The adds 
touted it as being the end-all FX processor at a affordable price.
    
>    I don't think it's very fair to call a unit with a plathoria of sound
>    possibilities, a superior midi implementation, a simple easy user
>    interface, and a 20-20K bandwidth "low budget" and  "a glorified stomp
>    box", just because it didn't fit your needs.

>    The unit was obviously designed with one use in mind.  Sitting between
>    a guitar and an amp set up for a clean sound and doing all the effects
>    processing.     
 
Like I said, a glorified stompbox

>   Seems to me that the only reasons you didn't like the SGE was because
>    it didn't (first off) act as the preamp you thought it would, and
>    (slightly later) didn't do true stereo processing (ie, it summed the
>    two inputs and then "stereoized" the two outputs from that, negating
>    the chorus from your Mp-1).  

The chorus thing is exactly what I mean about poor implementation...
    
>    Yeah, .177 certainly gives it a glowing reference...

Well, I guess its obvious that I didn't care for the SGE much.  I even played
around with the "SGE II" recently, and while I agree that it's got a cool
delay(s), I think the verbs are kinda noisy, and there is *still* no master 
volume parameter.

Oh well.  In my humble opinion, ART blew it.  The worst of it is, it left the 
sour taste that will be around until the SGX comes along and makes me feel 
better. 

BTW - I'm not brawling - and I think it is useful to have these discussions
for people to see different points of view.  I don't feel my opinions are
unjust, they are just my opinions...  I mean I did in fact own one...  And
you still do; Two points of view.

FWIW - I think the unit would be good in a PA rack for it's twin delays and 
exciter...

jc

    I picked up a  GL100 the other day. Pretty nice preamp. Gets lots of
    very good clean sounds and does that insane gain thing very well. For
    the inbetween overdrive settings it sounds a lot like a blackface Fender
    as opposed to a tweed Fender or old Marshall, ala Ry Cooder. For that
    stuff I still haven't found anything as good as the preamp in my stupid
    little Fender Sidekick 25R.

    So I've got the GL100 driving my 1965 Blackface Bandmaster w/ JBLs
    and the Sidekick preamp driving the input of my Marshall 1987T and
    another Bandmaster cab with original Oxfords. Each preamp runs thru 1/2
    of a Microverb befdore the tube amps. I put my chorus in the effects
    loop of the GL100.

    When I stood about 6 feet in front of these speakers and it sounded like
    a $10000 stereo rig. I almost wet my pants. Had to have my Strat
    surgically removed.

    --Ron

    I had one of those Ron - Sold it to a fellow noter, so I bet it's 
    still around.  I thought it was a great unit, especially for the
    $$!!.  check out the direct, recording compensated outputs on 
    your tape machine!  It's pretty neat!
    
    jc (Who wishes he still had it now...)

    JC,

    Your notes convinced me to check it out. And, yeah, its rear panel
    facilities are second to none, almost. For the money, anyway. Blew my
    mind to open it and find not a single IC in it. All discrete
    transistors. FETs probably. The EQ is tremendously versatile. I paid a
    little more than I would have preferred, $135 in exc condition with
    manual. Haven't tried taping from it yet.

    --Ron

    re: Coop
    
    For the money?  Maybe for what *you* paid (for that one that sat at
    Rice Music until they dropped their Roland dealership and dumped the
    thing for less then it cost them), but not for most people, since
    Roland had the list price on the thing around $600-$700!  They sold for
    around $400 new at most places.
    
    Yeah, I liked it myself and considered buying one, but I sure couldn't
    justify the outrageous price!
    
    Greg

    Okay - for the price that they are going for now.  :)
    
    Yeah - wicked strong EQ sections, and a whole host of "overdrives".
    It takes some tinkering to get the right sound from it, but a
    definately value at $135!
    
    jc

    What in God's name was the list suggested on these things??? I thought
    that they were $200+. They were WWWHHHATTTT?

    Tinkering, yeah. With +/-20dB on the EQ levels, the controls are
    sensitive.

    They were real expensive back when they were new.  Amazing what time
    does isn't it ??

    You know what they say about high tech?

    


    
    You can always tell the pioneers from the arrows in their backs.

Saw this awhile back, thought some of you might be interested...
    
    
Article 33367 of rec.music.makers:
Xref: nntpd2.cxo.dec.com rec.music.makers.guitar:3634 rec.music.makers:33367
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.music.makers
Path: nntpd2.cxo.dec.com!pa.dec.com!decwrl!wupost!howland.reston.ans.net!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!icd.ab.com!icd.ab.com!jaz
From: jaz@icd.ab.com (Jack A. Zucker)
Subject: Marshall JMP-1 Preamp
Message-ID: <1993Apr12.132543.19872@icd.ab.com>
Sender: usenet@icd.ab.com (Usenet News Administrator)
Nntp-Posting-Host: pheasant.icd.ab.com
Organization: Allen-Bradley Company, Inc.
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1993 13:25:43 GMT
Lines: 124

Well Gang,

I just bought a Marshall JMP-1 preamp. It's the best preamp I've ever
played through. I currently play through a Mesa Boogie Studio Preamp.
I also use a Real Tube II Preamp for certain gigs.

Marshall claims that this preamp gets all of the classic Marshall sounds
from the last 30 years. Are they exagerating ? Maybe, but they are damn
close to the truth. (I am using this preamp with an Alesis RA-100
solid state amp. The preamp sounds even better with a nice tube or
guitar oriented power amp)

This amp features 100 user presets, 4 voicings, master, gain, bass,
mid, treble, presence, effect mix, bass shift, Recording outs, headphone
jack, and other misc. midi specific stuff. 

Unlike traditional Marshalls, the tone controls are active
from -6 to +6 db. 

I don't know how they do it, but the distorted sounds this preamp produces
sound like real Power-tube stuff. There is a dynamic give and take that
has to be heard to be believed. Nothing artificial in the tone at all.
There are no digital enhancements to the sound. Supposedly, the entire
signal path is analog. The thing that sold me was I was getting these
incredible tube sounds through a dry, solid state power amp. Many preamps
blossom when played through a nice dynamic tube power amp but most
including my Boogie and Real Tube sound dry and sterile through a 
solid state Marshall.

The effect mix control is neat because it allows you to control just
how much of the signal to route through the effect loop. This is great
since many of the Digital effects seem to rob your dynamics and tone.

All of the parameters including volume, effect mix, etc., are stored
in memory with the patch !

The following is a short description of the voicings.

  Clean 1
  -------
Fender Twin / Vintage Marshall sound. Hyper clean, great for
jazz stuff. I normally use a PRS with Seymour Duncan '59 pickups and
it sounds nice and round with no bass or mid heavyness. When I plugged
an Ibanez George Benson guitar into this It was incredible. Absolutely
the best jazz guitar sound I've ever gotton. The sound was a combination
of Tuck Andress and George Benson ! If you crank the gain all the way up
in this voicing, you start to get just a hair of distortion which is
very nice !

  Clean 2
  -------
More traditional Marshall clean sound. Very "glassy" or "jangly" type of
sound than clean 1. Slightly higher gain structure than Clean 1 also.
Sounds like Eric Johnson's clean sound with a Strat. With my PRS, it
sounded very sweet and similar to Clean 1 but voiced slightly brighter.
Sounds similar to the clean channel of the JCM 900 dual reverb but with
more control since the tone controls are active and less gain.

  Overdrive 1
  -----------
This voicing makes the preamp in my opinion. With the gain down around
5 (Yes, it goes to 20 !), it has the grudgy classic rock (slightly 
distorted) tone. Increasing the gain takes you through Eric Clapton
Bluesbreakers to Robin Ford to Larry Carlton to Allen Holdsworth !!
This channel reminds me of a lower gain version of the JCM 900 dual
reverb lead channel.

  Overdrive 2
  -----------
This voicing takes up where OD 1 leaves off. I get a really sweet fusion
guitar sound (sort of a cross between Frank Gambale and Scott Henderson).
For you metal-heads, this channel also gets the super compressed
"in-your-face" metal sound that is really awesome to behold.


A few drawbacks:

  Tone controls - I'd like -12 and +12. 

  Country Twang - The one sound I couldn't get was an Albert Lee like tone.
  Note that I was using humbucking pickups so this might not be fair.

  No in-between settings. - All the parameters are stored as integer. I
  would like to be able to set an effect mix to 7.5 for example.

  Optical knob - The data knob is not as responsive as I'd like. The
  optical knobs on my Korg A2 are much more responsive than in the
  Marshall.

  Strange Midi translation - The Marshall's Midi Mapping facility allows
  you to translate an incoming program change number and map it to any
  internal program and then map the midi out program number to yet again
  any other program number. For some reason, when in this mode, the marshall
  adds 1 to the original program number sent from my pedal. For example,
  if I want to map incoming program number 1 to internal program 2 and
  external number 3, I have to set the Midi map to map incoming 0 to
  internal 2 and external 2. This seems strange to me. The manual does
  not say anything about it either.

  Inconsistant limits - The volume and gain go 0-20, the treble, mid,
  bass go -6 + 6, the effect mix goes 0 - 12, etc.

Other than that, I'd say buy it. I paid $700 for mine. I don't see many
affordable alternatives. The Mesa Tri-Axis is $1200 or something so I
didn't even take a listen to it. Besides, guitar player magazine apparently
trashed it. (I didn't see the article).

-Jaz

-- 

     
          ----|\----------------- **------------------------------
          ----|/-----------------**---****---*****----------------
          ---/|-----------------**---**--**----**-----------------
          --/-|_-------------****---******---**-------------------
          -|--|-\------------****---**--**--*****-----------------
            \_|_/

| Jack A Zucker                              {uunet}!jaz@icd.ab.com |
| Allen-Bradley Company, Inc.                    or  ICCGCC::ZUCKER |
| 747 Alpha Drive                                                   |
| Highland Hts., OH 44143 Phone(216) 646-4668   FAX: (216) 646-4484 |