Guitar UP, amp DOWN versus Guitar DOWN, amp UP

[ourclarioncall]

Revisiting the thought of getting good or better tone by having the amp turned UP and the guitar volume DOWN than having an amp set on a low volume and your guitar at 10

This video gives a beautiful example of this on a strat into a 4x10 super reverb for an SRV Lenny type sound.

I’d like to know more about the who what why when how’s of this and why don’t more people do this ? Maybe they do?

I was told by a teacher of mine that old school guys used to set their amp up for a solo sound on their amp then roll back the volume on the guitar for Rytymn and chords which cleans up the sound

But that’s a slightly different thing than what I’m mentioning .

And why does the sound clean up ? Less gain in the signal so less distortion in the amp ?

Very interesting topic

[thetragichero]

certainly raises the amp's noise floor when it's cranked and guitar volume is turned down
guitar volume control naturally rolls off highs (or sounds like that) so if you set your amp up for the turned down tone full blast volume will be brighter, which can be a benefit for solos

[ourclarioncall]

I guess I don’t understand why it sounds better 

I hear them saying stuff like you’ve got to get the amp “cookin”. Get those valves hot etc. I think I understand that part

but from what I’m seeing, the genesis of the final sound start with the small  signal Coming from the guitar pickup . Then he is turning the volume pot down so a small signal is getting even smaller. 

but how can a very small weaker signal drive the amp? Or preamp?

or is it that it doesn’t matter how small the signal is , the preamp is going to make it bigger and then the power amp has something to amplify ? 

so basically it’s the power amp being opened up louder that’s adding to a better tone?

confused lol

im just think out loud

take the eq section on an amp for example , are they having an effect on the tone ?

like the difference between having a pickup hardwired to the output jack or it going through a volume pot ?

it treble middle and bass are on 3 out of 10, is this cutting tone out of the original sound? 

you don’t have to answer any of these questions, consider them rhetorical , but I’m just trying to expose my great ignorance So you can see how my mind is scrambling around trying figure things out ☺️

[ourclarioncall]

Listen closely to the harmonics he plays to hear the difference

Guitar on 7 , amp on 5
Time on video - 6:15 to 6:45

Guitar on 10, amp on approx 3.5
6:50 to 8:00

[reTrEaD]

Sept 10, 2020 7:53:24 GMT -5 ourclarioncall said:

And why does the sound clean up ? Less gain in the signal so less distortion in the amp ?

A signal does not have gain. Gain is just another term for amplification.

There are numerous reasons for distortion. The most common: Driving one or more stages of amplification beyond its linear region. In essence, the signal is too big and the top and/or bottom of the signal is 'clipped'.

If you reduce the volume at the guitar, this will lower the amplitude of the signal at the input of the stages where it is being distorted. The stage(s) of amplification that was(were) previously driven beyond its linear region is now within the linear region.

It's that simple.


Also, a Fender SR can be L.A.F. I prefer to use a DR or PR plugged into a 4-10. Still loud when you drive it to similar levels of distortion, but slightly less so. JMO.

[ashcatlt]

Yeah it’s generally accepted that for whatever reason power amp distortion (and the speaker distortion that comes with it) sounds better than preamp distortion, and there’s no control for preamp gain on this amplifier, so you have to control it from your guitar. I tend to think that much of the reason power amp distortion seems to sound better is that it comes after the tone control, so that you are controlling the tone of what gets distorted as opposed to the preamp where you just get what you get, distort that, and then try to fix whatever happened afterwards.

And for very much that same reason we should not discount the treble loss we normally get from turning down the V pot on the guitar. If you distort high frequencies you get even higher frequencies out, and we tend not to like that. Frankly the highest frequencies we get out of a guitar are just noise to begin with, and distorting them makes even more high frequency noise, and that is just ugly. I think a lot of those “magic tone” guys run their tone pots a bit below 10 most of the time, too, and that Jimi dude at least was known to use those long coily capacitor...er...cables. This all means less of the “fizz” and nasty spray of noise at the top end.

Edit - reTrEaD - A Fender Super almost can’t not be LAF even if you’re not looking for a lot of crunch. I’ve been in situations where I had a reasonably sized amp and there was no way for me to actually be heard over the other guy with the super. It’s volume knob went directly from silence to too loud. I’ve seen punk bands with a Super on one side and a Marshall stack on the other, and I still thought the Super was a little too loud.

[ourclarioncall]

The only tube amp I’ve ever owned is a 5watt laney lionheart 1x12

I had high hopes and was really disappointed . I had heard so much about valve being better. Then I borrow a 30-40 watt fender blues deluxe or something like that. I really really really wanted to like it . Like really x 10000

But not matter what I did I couldn’t get a pleasing sound out of it to my ears anyway . And I tried cranking it up and standing in a different room as the floor was shaking .

The most enjoyable experience with an amp was a marshal solid state with 4x10 cab. I liked it most because I could hear myself so well in the room which I’ve never done before with 1x12 or 2x12’s.

To me solid state excel in bedrooms but don’t sound good recorded.

Valve amps are better for stage and sound best recorded. Hence why a lot of these videos sound great.

It’s the age old quest to have a big amp (preferably Valve) at bedroom volumes that sound good.

I know you get amps with attenuation built in like “milkman amps” for example.

My thoughts were why not just play with a super reverb cranked and have your guitar volume on 1 so it’s not shattering the windows, yet you still get that cranked tone. Well, kinda . Maybe not cranked tone, but a step closer. But something niggling in the back of mind says that won’t work like I think it will.

I suppose one of the problems is the speakers make a contribution and if your attenuating or rolling the guitar volume down then there are not being driven as hard ? How much this contributes to the overall tone I’m not sure.

I saw a guy set his valve up in a cupboard and put various methods of soundproofing around it then closed the cupboard door and had the guitar lead run out to his guitar. Think he said it was quite effective

Apologies , this is supposed to be the guitar wiring section but it’s overlapping into amps , but I suppose my main point is about manipulating the original guitar signal with volume pots or whatever to get a pleasing outcome when it’s amplified

[ourclarioncall]

Just as an interesting comparison , the tone of this super reverb which is miced up with 2 mics, sounds a bit flat and two dimensional. Nothing like the Pete thorn vid above. But the amp volume may be low and it’s a reissue not an older amp like Thorns. There may other factors to do with how the video was made , edited etc. And Thorn is using 3 mics instead of 2. He has 2 mics close miced and then a room mic.

[ashcatlt]

Sept 10, 2020 17:28:03 GMT -5 ourclarioncall said:

I liked it most because I could hear myself so well in the room which I’ve never done before with 1x12 or 2x12’s.

I always point my speaker at my face, especially on stage, and I try to get other people to do the same both live and in the studio. That's the only way you can actually know what it sounds like, and also you get punished first for turning it up too loud.

To me solid state excel in bedrooms but don’t sound good recorded.

A surprising number of my favorite guitarists play solid state amps. Steve Albini, Daniel Ash, East Bay Ray, even Kurt Cobain used various brands, and just about every shoegaze band ever used a Roland JC... Most of those tones are significantly different from what most people want, but I'm not sure that's completely the fault of the amp. One of my favorite amps that I've ever played was a Crate G40C, but I've got a 60W Randall 1x12 combo at home that will liquify your eyes, ears, and your guts if I turn it up past 3.

I had a dude in the studio a while back with one of those dual channel tube amps - I want to say Bugera, but don't quote me - and he had it on the drive channel. It sounded like crap, but I don't judge. But then he was struggling to get useful feedback out of it. Like, he could get the pickups to squeal microphonically, but couldn't get the strings to sustain the way we needed them to for the piece he was working on. I was like "we don't have to worry about volume here, you know," walked over, pushed the channel button, and cranked the "clean" channel volume to 11. Sounded several tons better when he was playing, and he almost had trouble stopping it from feeding back.

[ourclarioncall]

Hypothetical question

Could I have two volume pots wired in a row ?

So the first one gets turned down to 1 (which might still be loud if the amp is cranked) , and then the second volume pot can manipulate the remaining sound up or down.

Or could you wire a volume pot into the amp itself before the preamp to reduce the guitar signal , which you could turn down to 1, then you could use the volume pot on your guitar to manipulate what’s left of the new lower cranked volume

[sumgai]

Sorry, I should've been paying closer attention and stepped in sooner.

Sept 10, 2020 11:34:39 GMT -5 ashcatlt said:

Yeah it’s generally accepted that for whatever reason power amp distortion (and the speaker distortion that comes with it) sounds better than preamp distortion

ash is 100% correct as to the general acceptance. But rather than explain all the why's and wherefore's here, in great detail, why don't I just quote this post from a thread on the very same topic, tossed around about, oh, say, 10 years ago?!  Try this: Why it's hard to qualify distortion.

While that's in the middle of the thread, you can go to the top if you wish to follow the whole thing. But if my feet were to be held to the fire, I'd have to summarize it all with this quote:

Jul 14, 2012 12:27:03 GMT -5 sumgai said:

In short, if you want the Real Meal Deal, you have to hire a roadie to haul around your back-breaker of a tube amp and speaker cabs. If you're willing to settle for 90-95% of that sound, then solid state will fill the bill, and you can save on having to buy your roadie so much beer at the gig!

HTH!





sumgai

[Yogi B]

Sept 10, 2020 17:47:50 GMT -5 ourclarioncall said:

Just as an interesting comparison, the tone of this super reverb which is mic'ed up with 2 mics, sounds a bit flat and two dimensional. Nothing like the Pete thorn vid above. But the amp volume may be low and it’s a reissue not an older amp like Thorns. There may other factors to do with how the video was made, edited etc. And Thorn is using 3 mics instead of 2. He has 2 mics close miced and then a room mic.

Using headphones the immediately obvious difference is that the second has been completely downmixed to mono, whereas the Pete Thorn vid hasn't.

So, I'd be curious to see what you make of this doctored version, which is my attempt to somewhat un-mono-ify™ the original.
(I've also cut the Thin Lizzy of the front, so there's about 10 seconds of silence at the start, in order that the time matches up with the video.)

[thetragichero]

i use both (older) solid state and tube amps and they work just fine for recording. maybe i don't do a lot of clean tone stuff but for heavy music sometimes i like a mix, sometimes i use whatever is newest to me (i feel like i sound like me regardless of what amp I'm using)
I've found the secret of sustaining feedback while recording is a Y cable and little practice amp in whatever room you're tracking guitar (with the big amp in another room). the little amp is easily cranked and put on top of a chair. I've also done stuff with a bunch of y cables recording 4 amps at once just because i could lol

[newey]

Sept 10, 2020 19:01:05 GMT -5 ourclarioncall said:

Hypothetical question

Could I have two volume pots wired in a row ?

So the first one gets turned down to 1 (which might still be loud if the amp is cranked) , and then the second volume pot can manipulate the remaining sound up or down.

Or could you wire a volume pot into the amp itself before the preamp to reduce the guitar signal , which you could turn down to 1, then you could use the volume pot on your guitar to manipulate what’s left of the new lower cranked volume

Repeat after me . . ."Peavey . . .Peavey . . .Peavey"

They've been doing exactly that for years, on both SS and tube amps.

When I bought my first Peavey (a "Studio 40" model, well-used, I've owned others as well), I thought "Great, I can turn up the Pre gain and turn down the post gain, so I can get my nice distortion at lower sound pressure levels". And it does work for that really well.

But there's much more to it than that. All kinds of sound shaping is available depending on where you put those 2 knobs. Turn down the pre, up the post for your clean sound, and varying the pre knob brings in varying levels of crunchiness.

I also have a little Peavey "Rage 158" practice amp (15 watts SS, 8" speaker) that also has the pre- and post- controls. It's a great little practice amp for the same reasons as its bigger brother. Lots of variation is possible with those two knobs.

[ashcatlt]

Sept 11, 2020 7:19:02 GMT -5 newey said:

I also have a little Peavey "Rage 158" practice amp (15 watts SS, 8" speaker) that also has the pre- and post- controls. It's a great little practice amp for the same reasons as its bigger brother. Lots of variation is possible with those two knobs.

That is an...interesting circuit. It looks to me like the Pre knob controls both the gain of the opamp stage AND the output volume of that stage. I know that seems a little weird, because of course adjusting the gain is going to adjust the output volume, but this is a bit different. In a lot of opamp based stages (really look at any drive pedal, I like Rats) the gain is controlled by a variable resistor in the (negative) feedback loop of the opamp which acts as the top of a voltage divider with a resistor to ground. The negative feedback loop is like Bizaro World, so that attenuation from this divider causes an increase of gain from the opamp. Then usually after that is another pot actually wired as a potentiometer - a voltage divider on its own - that attenuates what comes out of all that. This pot, though, seems to be BOTH at the same time, so that the gain of the stage itself increases and what comes out of that gets turned down less all at once. It's definitely a bit more complicated than that, but it's the best I can figure. Note that this is actually the second gain stage, and the first is very similar.

Long story short, no there isn't actually any kind of passive attenuator at the front of the amp the way OCC kind of said. Whichever channel you choose, the first knob is actually an active gain knob and a post gain volume knob, but there is not really a pre-pre knob anywhere. There are some amps - it's pretty common in bass amps - that have seperate High and Low inputs. Now it can be confusing as to whether it's meant to be High and Low gain or intended for High and Low level inputs. Anyway, one or the other of those will be attenuated via static voltage divider prior to any active gain stages, which is more like what I thought they were talking about.

[ourclarioncall]

Newey

Very interesting. I’ve been having a look at a few peavey amps.

I’m still a bit confused.

I’m thinking the pre-gain maybe implies the amplification of the signal , which would be different to a volume pot which as you know doesn’t amplify but just decreases what you already have.

But maybe they are just calling it that (pre-gain) but that’s not really how it’s functioning ?

Here is a link to an amp with 1.pre gain 2. Pump 3. Post gain
Trying to get my head round it.

There is no master volume I can see. Well, the post gain is the master volume or like master volume .

peavey.com/manuals/80300050.pdf

Still wondering if having two volume pots in series could work by having one pot set to 1, and then the the other pot could be used to manipulate the small signal that’s left.

But then there would be loading issues?

Might be a fun experiment if possible

[ourclarioncall]

On a normal volume pot on a strat for example

When I turn the volume pot down , what is happening to the signal ?

Is it deteriorating in any way ? Or is it just getting smaller ?

Like , say I have a bottle of Pepsi and I pour 90% down the drain , but the 10% that’s left is just as good quality , it’s just a smaller amount ?

Or has the Pepsi now gone a bit flat and warm instead of fizzy and cold.

I know y’all are loving this analogy 😉

Ok so I’m aware there is treble loss? Therefore we add treble bleed circuits .

So does a treble bleed circuit keep everything intact when the volume is turned down ?

[ourclarioncall]

Retread

“A signal does not have gain. Gain is just another term for amplification.”

Thanks for that, that makes sense to my brain. I actually told one of my guitar students that tonight

“I prefer to use a DR or PR plugged into a 4-10. Still loud when you drive it to similar levels of distortion, but slightly less so. JMO.”

Yeah I been watching loads of videos of DR’s and PR’s amongst others.
This is quite a good demo of both.



Was quite impressed with the Pro Reverb, breaks up earlier that a Twin. But prob still over the too loud for bedroom use.

[ourclarioncall]

Sept 10, 2020 22:49:40 GMT -5 Yogi B said:

Sept 10, 2020 17:47:50 GMT -5 ourclarioncall said:

Just as an interesting comparison, the tone of this super reverb which is mic'ed up with 2 mics, sounds a bit flat and two dimensional. Nothing like the Pete thorn vid above. But the amp volume may be low and it’s a reissue not an older amp like Thorns. There may other factors to do with how the video was made, edited etc. And Thorn is using 3 mics instead of 2. He has 2 mics close miced and then a room mic.

Using headphones the immediately obvious difference is that the second has been completely downmixed to mono, whereas the Pete Thorn vid hasn't.

So, I'd be curious to see what you make of this doctored version, which is my attempt to somewhat un-mono-ify™ the original.
(I've also cut the Thin Lizzy of the front, so there's about 10 seconds of silence at the start, in order that the time matches up with the video.)

Yogi, high five ✋🙂 thanks for doing that 👍

That is really helpful and opens up my understanding a bit more

I want to make really good quality audio YouTube videos but am clueless , and I often wonder why some YouTube videos sound so much better than others .

I listened a few times today but I need to go listen properly with headphones to hear the difference

[ashcatlt]

First off, I kind of ninja'd you on the Peavey thing, and I think I kind of answered those questions.

Sept 11, 2020 15:38:13 GMT -5 ourclarioncall said:

Is it deteriorating in any way ? Or is it just getting smaller ?

The whole thing gets smaller, but high frequencies get smaller faster. That is, you lose treble on top of the overall volume drop. Do you consider that deterioration? I think most people do. Course, I actually mentioned that a few posts back, too.

[ourclarioncall]

Sept 11, 2020 16:18:00 GMT -5 ashcatlt said:

First off, I kind of ninja'd you on the Peavey thing, and I think I kind of answered those questions.

Sept 11, 2020 15:38:13 GMT -5 ourclarioncall said:

Is it deteriorating in any way ? Or is it just getting smaller ?

The whole thing gets smaller, but high frequencies get smaller faster. That is, you lose treble on top of the overall volume drop. Do you consider that deterioration. I think most do.

Haha, yeah that was incredible timing lol.

I enjoyed what you wrote, that makes sense although I don’t fully understand it, I can see how’s it’s a bit different to my guitar volume pot on an amp ponderings.

Yes, any loss including treble would be flat Lukewarm Pepsi in my book

So does the treble bleed that we add to volume pots stop any deterioration?

[ashcatlt]

Sept 11, 2020 16:25:08 GMT -5 ourclarioncall said:

So does the treble bleed that we add to volume pots stop any deterioration?

Well...you kind end up losing bass instead of treble... :/

[ourclarioncall]

So what’s happening with the different inputs on amp?

Say on a fender you might have two different inputs on channel 1.

Are the adding to the signal ? or taking away (like my volume pot ideas) ?

[ourclarioncall]

Sept 11, 2020 16:32:42 GMT -5 ashcatlt said:

Sept 11, 2020 16:25:08 GMT -5 ourclarioncall said:

So does the treble bleed that we add to volume pots stop any deterioration?

Well...you kind end up losing bass instead of treble... :/

How does it get lost ? Does it go so small that is disappears ?

If I turn my volume pot down , I thought that the amp will just bring back up in volume what has been turned down ? Or is that an amp can only amplify what you put into it and the more you roll your guitar volume down the more certain parts of the signal disappear kind of thing and can’t be resurrected

Sorry for so many questions, I just need to go google all this stuff and not be lazy

[ashcatlt]

Sept 11, 2020 16:34:03 GMT -5 ourclarioncall said:

So what’s happening with the different inputs on amp?

Well like a Super Reverb has 4 holes you can plug into, two for each channel. Those two per channel are mixed together before going to the respective first gain stage. Plugging the same thing into both of them at the same time is pretty much the same as just plugging into one of them. But each channel does have its own gain stage, and those are mixed together at some point before the power amp. Plugging the same thing into each of the channels will run it through both channels. In some amps, you can leverage that to hit the power amp even harder than either channel could on its own. But many amps (and I'm not sure if the Super is one them) end up with one of the channels inverted polarity ("out of phase") compared to the other, so that it kind of does the opposite.

How does it get lost ? Does it go so small that is disappears

Well, the treble bleed arrangement on the V pot looks a lot like a shelving low-cut filter. It turns down the lower frequencies faster than the higher ones.

[sumgai]

Sept 11, 2020 17:12:32 GMT -5 ashcatlt said:

But many amps (and I'm not sure if the Super is one them) end up with one of the channels inverted polarity ("out of phase") compared to the other...

The Super is not one of them (that inverts), but the Super Reverb (FSR) does indeed invert the signal of the Vibrato channel when compared to the Normal channel.  The reverb signal goes through three additional inversions (driver tube, spring device, and recovery tube) before both channels are mixed down to one signal (via 220KΩ resistors).  This is true for all two-channel Fender amps ever made with a Reverb feature.  (Err, that is, two distinctly separate channels, not the digital units that imitate channel switching.)

Where this gets interesting, and we've discussed this mod before, is if one were to take the output of the reverb's driver tube (the "Reverb Out" phono jack on the back) and jumper it over to the input jack of the "Normal" channel - you now have a second set of tone controls on your signal.  Try it, just for giggles, and you'll learn a whole lot about various controls having differing effects on a signal's clean versus dirty sound.  Go ahead, you can't permanently harm anything.... except perhaps your hearing. 

HTH





sumgai

[sumgai]

Sept 11, 2020 15:54:58 GMT -5 ourclarioncall said:

Was quite impressed with the Pro Reverb, breaks up earlier that a Twin. But prob still over the too loud for bedroom use.

Keep in mind what's been said about the Super Reverb amp, above. The Fender Pro Reverb (FPR) is nothing more than a Super Reverb in Twin Reverb's clothing.

FTR = 100 watts into 2x12
FSR = 50 watts into 4x10
FPR = 50 watts into 2x12

IOW, you're carting around the worlds heaviest Super Reverb, with an odd speaker complement.

FTR = 66 lbs
FPR = 66 lbs
FSR = 60 lbs

Do note that these are approximate averages, and that they are not cast in stone.  For instance, Fender has variously labeled some amps as having 100 watts of output power, then then next year the same amp had only 88 watts.  And the year after, it had a mere 85 watts! These changes come from whatever internal decisions, but the basic circuit remains the same (with small changes at best).

Ditto for the weights.  Fender has, over the years, built their cabinets out of different woods, and sometimes they procured wood that was "pond dried", as the saying goes.  That means it's heavier because the moisture content was still not down to "optimum" before constructing the cab.  But the gauge of the steel chassis hasn't changed much so the fluctuations are probably no more than 5% since the first one was built.  I've weighed several amps over the years, both my  own and customers' units, and the above values are pretty close to what I've personally seen.  Also note that when you are looking at a spec sheet, you are likely seeing "Shipping weight", and not the curb weight. (OK, that's a car analogy.  I probably should call it "stage weight". )

Final note: In just about any tube-based combo amp that can put out more than 30 or 40 watts, casters are going to be your best friend!   This is yet another reason why the FDR is probably the all-time best seller.  Just ask any senior citizen who hasn't already gone deaf!


HTH




sumgai

[ashcatlt]

Sept 11, 2020 20:44:50 GMT -5 sumgai said:

The Super is not one of them (that inverts), but the Super Reverb (FSR) does indeed invert the signal of the Vibrato channel when compared to the Normal channel.

I was hoping SUMbody or other would come along and help with that. And yeah, I started talking about the FSR, and I meant to keep talking about the FSR. Looking back at the schematic, it looks like two of the stages you mentioned (the ones around the spring tank) are kind of a parallel path, but then yeah that gets mixed back with the dry signal and that mix hits another (half) tube which is I guess where the flipping that matters in this context really happens?

[sumgai]

ash, you nailed it in one!    But I never had any doubt, as you already explained it pretty clearly, despite your doubt about which model.






sumgai

[ashcatlt]

My first amp was a Montgomery Ward Airline brand which I (choose to) believe was one of the models that Danelectro built. I always thought it was lame, and after I got the Crates, it quickly got relegated to vocals and drum machine duty until I got a PA when it kind of just sat there for a while. But then I heard about the trick with the jumpering the two channels, and found out it was a really decent frickin amp.