The Tone Thread

[JD01]

@rayc and anyone else that might give shit.

This is the difference between PRE phase inverter master volume, and POST phase inverter master volume on Plexi/Bassman type amps that don't have their own master volumes.

Gibson Les Paul Traditional - Muttbucker PAF bridge
Marshall 1987 50w Plexi
Presence - 4
Bass - 5
Mid - 6
Treb - 4
Bright channel 1 vol - 5
High input only
Marshall 1960B 4x12 - Celestion G12-65
MXL R144 on axis, 3" off grill, dead center - Shure SM57 on axis, 3" off grill, just outside dustcap
50/50 mic blend
No FX or EQ

First up, the amp in it's natural state. No master volume.
1987 full.mp3


Turned down 50% with POST phase inverter master volume.
1987 POST PIMV 50%.mp3


Turned down 50% with PRE phase inverter master volume
1987 PRE PIMV 50%.mp3


This is without adjusting the mic preamps. Full loud is the baseline, and the others are relative to full loud. As you can tell, the amount of volume reduction between pre and post master volumes is different. And so is what it does to the tone. By cutting the signal before the phase inverter, it loses a lot of grind. The phase inverter, as part of the power section, obviously plays a big part in the tone. If I cut it back even further/quieter, the tone thins out even more. The preamp section alone is not enough to get the goods from this amp. Putting the master volume as POST phase inverter, we still get that goodness from the phase inverter being overdriven by the preamp, and the sound is closer to stock.....just at a lower volume.

Just got around to listening to these.
Really like the no master vol. clip. This one is by far the best for me.
The 2nd one isn't that different to the first but I found it a bit too bright/harsh - similar to the first one, but harder on the ear!
The 3rd one - much lower gain and well bright! I didn't like listening to that one much - but then I do have a bit of a headache.

[Greg_L]

Just got around to listening to these.
Really like the no master vol. clip. This one is by far the best for me.
The 2nd one isn't that different to the first but I found it a bit too bright/harsh - similar to the first one, but harder on the ear!
The 3rd one - much lower gain and well bright! I didn't like listening to that one much - but then I do have a bit of a headache.

The one drawback of the Post PIMV is it collapses the negative feedback circuit and the presence control goes out the window....if you turn it down too much. Some people like the extra hair and gain you get from that. It's fine for turning one of these things down to bedroom levels where the tone purity doesn't matter that much anyway. But it's really best for just knocking the top off a little so you can use the amp live - like an attenuator. My "50%" clips would be too quiet for live/practice use against bass and a drummer. It might be okay with a great sound man running a great sound system with great monitoring.

[Greg_L]

Here's the pre vs post with the amp's preamp cascaded.

Gibson Les Paul Traditional - Muttpup PAF bridge
Marshall 1987 50W Plexi - cascaded gain mod
Presence - 4
Bass - 4
Mid - 6
Treb - 5
Gain - 10
Marshall 1960B 4x12 Celestion Vintage 30
MXL R144 on axis, 3" off grill, center + Shure SM57 on axis, 3" off grill, just outside dustcap
50/50 mic blend
No FX or EQ

Pre-PIMV at 50%

1987 cascaded pre pimv.mp3

Post-PIMV at 50%

1987 cascaded post pimv.mp3

As you can hear, the PRE version is almost purely preamp gain. The POST version is more wild due to the inclusion of the overdriving phase inverter. It's like another gain stage almost. Turned down, the POST works pretty well. But at higher volume it's just way too much. The ideal scenario is balancing both master volumes for the perfect sensitivity and saturation....if you want all that.

[Minerman]

Here's the pre vs post with the amp's preamp cascaded.

Gibson Les Paul Traditional - Muttpup PAF bridge
Marshall 1987 50W Plexi - cascaded gain mod
Presence - 4
Bass - 4
Mid - 6
Treb - 5
Gain - 10
Marshall 1960B 4x12 Celestion Vintage 30
MXL R144 on axis, 3" off grill, center + Shure SM57 on axis, 3" off grill, just outside dustcap
50/50 mic blend
No FX or EQ

Pre-PIMV at 50%
1987 cascaded pre pimv.mp3


Post-PIMV at 50%
1987 cascaded post pimv.mp3

As you can hear, the PRE version is almost purely preamp gain. The POST version is more wild due to the inclusion of the overdriving phase inverter. It's like another gain stage almost. Turned down, the POST works pretty well. But at higher volume it's just way too much. The ideal scenario is balancing both master volumes for the perfect sensitivity and saturation....if you want all that.

Cool man, nice comparison clips, they sound great IMO...Hard to beat the old school Marshall thing ain't it???

[Greg_L]

Cool man, nice comparison clips, they sound great IMO...Hard to beat the old school Marshall thing ain't it???

Impossible. That's why I got six of them.

[Minerman]

Ok, new string on all my guitars, here's a clip with the SG...

SG bridge > Mini 800 > GB >SM57

• 20w Mode
  Presence:............1
  Bass:................2.3
  Middle:...............3
  Treble:...............3
  Master:..............6
  Gain:................10

SG-Mini 800-GB-SM57 11-13-2019.mp3

Sloppy-ass playing here, but I can't believe what a difference a string change & a setup make...It's like I've re-discovered the SG again, especially through the Mini 800, I like it, a lot....

[Greg_L]

Ok, new string on all my guitars, here's a clip with the SG...

SG bridge > Mini 800 > GB >SM57

• 20w Mode
  Presence:............1
  Bass:................2.3
  Middle:...............3
  Treble:...............3
  Master:..............6
  Gain:................10

SG-Mini 800-GB-SM57 11-13-2019.mp3

Sloppy-ass playing here, but I can't believe what a difference a string change & a setup make...It's like I've re-discovered the SG again, especially through the Mini 800, I like it, a lot....

That one's not my favorite. It sounds a little choked, too dialed back. Little fizzy. Just how I hear it.

[TripleM]

Here's the pre vs post with the amp's preamp cascaded.

Gibson Les Paul Traditional - Muttpup PAF bridge
Marshall 1987 50W Plexi - cascaded gain mod
Presence - 4
Bass - 4
Mid - 6
Treb - 5
Gain - 10
Marshall 1960B 4x12 Celestion Vintage 30
MXL R144 on axis, 3" off grill, center + Shure SM57 on axis, 3" off grill, just outside dustcap
50/50 mic blend
No FX or EQ

Pre-PIMV at 50%
1987 cascaded pre pimv.mp3


Post-PIMV at 50%
1987 cascaded post pimv.mp3

As you can hear, the PRE version is almost purely preamp gain. The POST version is more wild due to the inclusion of the overdriving phase inverter. It's like another gain stage almost. Turned down, the POST works pretty well. But at higher volume it's just way too much. The ideal scenario is balancing both master volumes for the perfect sensitivity and saturation....if you want all that.

Really interesting. The post clip has a definite "chug level" that the pre does not. The character of the distortion is quite different between the two.

[TripleM]

Ok, new string on all my guitars, here's a clip with the SG...

SG bridge > Mini 800 > GB >SM57

• 20w Mode
  Presence:............1
  Bass:................2.3
  Middle:...............3
  Treble:...............3
  Master:..............6
  Gain:................10

SG-Mini 800-GB-SM57 11-13-2019.mp3

Sloppy-ass playing here, but I can't believe what a difference a string change & a setup make...It's like I've re-discovered the SG again, especially through the Mini 800, I like it, a lot....

A ton of gain on that sucker. Sounded nice.

[rayc]

[mention]Greg_L[/mention] ,
Again - very instructive. post is the most though.
[mention]Minerman[/mention] ,
I like it - could be a bit fizzy but I don't really know - it has the top end mine lacks. Cool.

[JD01]

Here's the pre vs post with the amp's preamp cascaded.

Gibson Les Paul Traditional - Muttpup PAF bridge
Marshall 1987 50W Plexi - cascaded gain mod
Presence - 4
Bass - 4
Mid - 6
Treb - 5
Gain - 10
Marshall 1960B 4x12 Celestion Vintage 30
MXL R144 on axis, 3" off grill, center + Shure SM57 on axis, 3" off grill, just outside dustcap
50/50 mic blend
No FX or EQ

Pre-PIMV at 50%
1987 cascaded pre pimv.mp3


Post-PIMV at 50%
1987 cascaded post pimv.mp3

As you can hear, the PRE version is almost purely preamp gain. The POST version is more wild due to the inclusion of the overdriving phase inverter. It's like another gain stage almost. Turned down, the POST works pretty well. But at higher volume it's just way too much. The ideal scenario is balancing both master volumes for the perfect sensitivity and saturation....if you want all that.

Wow, huge difference in those!
Can't believe how much gain there is on the post version - that's way more gain that you ever use, probably one of the gainiest clips I've heard you do.

The pre-version is much better this scenario though - much clearer and more defined. There's too much "noise" on the post version - I can't help quite liking it though, dunno why, just sounds quite OTT. I imagine it would be fairly difficult to mix when compared to the other one though.

[JD01]

Ok, new string on all my guitars, here's a clip with the SG...

SG bridge > Mini 800 > GB >SM57

• 20w Mode
  Presence:............1
  Bass:................2.3
  Middle:...............3
  Treble:...............3
  Master:..............6
  Gain:................10

SG-Mini 800-GB-SM57 11-13-2019.mp3

Sloppy-ass playing here, but I can't believe what a difference a string change & a setup make...It's like I've re-discovered the SG again, especially through the Mini 800, I like it, a lot....

I think this sounds pretty good in isolation, too much gain though I think - if you double tracked this and plonked it in a mix you'd want to dial the gain back.

Curious - your EQ settings - you have everything on 3... how is this different to having everything on 5? Just quieter?

[Minerman]

[mention]Greg_L[/mention]
Thanks man, this was just a spur of the moment thing that didn't quite turn out how I hoped...The tone is in the amp, I just need to get it "on tape"...

[mention]TripleM[/mention]
Thanks dude, pretty sure this amp does have more gain than a 2203/2204, but that's fine with me, I just have enough restraint to dial it back...

[mention]rayc[/mention]
Thanks Ray, it is a bit fizzy, the mic placement is the culprit...The amp can be overly bright, but every amp I've had here could too...Thanks again...

[mention]JD01[/mention]
Honestly I'd watched the AC/DC "Rig Rundown" again, & thought I'd try Angus' amp settings...lol...The mic position is the culprit for this clip...
The amp isn't any quieter like this, it just sounds dialed back like Greg mentioned...


6 on the volume knob seems to be the "tipping point", I don't think it gets much louder (this is already pretty damn loud), it just saturates a little more...

I still love this little thing & I'm still learning how to get the best out of it...

[Greg_L]

Really interesting. The post clip has a definite "chug level" that the pre does not. The character of the distortion is quite different between the two.

Wow, huge difference in those!
Can't believe how much gain there is on the post version - that's way more gain that you ever use, probably one of the gainiest clips I've heard you do.

The pre-version is much better this scenario though - much clearer and more defined. There's too much "noise" on the post version - I can't help quite liking it though, dunno why, just sounds quite OTT. I imagine it would be fairly difficult to mix when compared to the other one though.

Thanks guys. The Post is definitely wild and crazy. More gain than I'd ever use, but it holds up pretty well. The phase inverter adds a little "hotness" to it that the preamp alone can't do.

[rayc]

Here's an update on my BOOST adventure:
1st is the amp set up for loud n aggressive
Next we have the same settings with the DS1 LEVEL only into it
THEN the XP into the DS1 level only
and FINALLY XP into DS1, a smidgen less level & a smidgen, (same up as level down), of drive.

XP into SD1 2.mp3

[TripleM]

Here's an update on my BOOST adventure:
1st is the amp set up for loud n aggressive
Next we have the same settings with the DS1 LEVEL only into it
THEN the XP into the DS1 level only
and FINALLY XP into DS1, a smidgen less level & a smidgen, (same up as level down), of drive.
XP into SD1 2.mp3

I thought the clips got progressively better sounding. They all a little dark though. Just a tiny bit muddy.

Also is the guitar intonated right? You might want to check it out.

[rayc]

I thought the clips got progressively better sounding. They all a little dark though. Just a tiny bit muddy.
Also is the guitar intonated right? You might want to check it out.

[mention]TripleM[/mention] ,
Something about my recording chain causes the darkness - the amp's rather bright in the room.
The guitar had a set up about a year ago. The intonation is pretty right though the worm screw sometimes touches the bottom E string at the bridge.
The most likely cause would be my bear claw, neck breaking grip.
Being power chords/5th on the bottom E & A they weren't going to be too bright and the XP seems to add a little mid mud I'll rectify next opportunity. Thanks.

[Greg_L]

Here's an update on my BOOST adventure:
1st is the amp set up for loud n aggressive
Next we have the same settings with the DS1 LEVEL only into it
THEN the XP into the DS1 level only
and FINALLY XP into DS1, a smidgen less level & a smidgen, (same up as level down), of drive.
XP into SD1 2.mp3

I think any one of those could work in the right context or mix. As the pedals stack up, it gets a little scratchy to me, but it's not bad.

[JD01]

Here's an update on my BOOST adventure:
1st is the amp set up for loud n aggressive
Next we have the same settings with the DS1 LEVEL only into it
THEN the XP into the DS1 level only
and FINALLY XP into DS1, a smidgen less level & a smidgen, (same up as level down), of drive.
XP into SD1 2.mp3

I think these sound tidy enough, but there's a certain scratchiness to them.
Is your mic really close to, or partly on, the dustcap?

[rayc]

I think these sound tidy enough, but there's a certain scratchiness to them.
Is your mic really close to, or partly on, the dustcap?

One's on the edge of it and the other at it - in an effort to get a brighter signal.