Maybe Ed IS telling the truth !

[Tone Slinger]

I have really been listening to alot of clips recently, and I think that maybe Ed really did what he said he did back in '77, which is, cranked his amp up with no reamping/slaving. Leadguy has me thinking this may be the case.

I hear a tighter tracking in cranked lone heads as compared to reamping with 2. I hear this in stans youtube vid's as well as other clips.

What does everyone think ?

[leadguy]

My 2 cents.

On the VH1 GH iso's I hear a very loud amp with the speakers really working overtime and being pushed combined with delays and reverb and Ed's playing which is Ed at the top of his game after years of playing in the clubs getting all the licks and ideas down.
Very bright edgy tone, like it's near it's maximum limits, like the speakers are just handling the power.
Also very edgy playing but with a swing and with a don't give a xxxx attitude and with balls and with great feel and they weren't sober either.

[spaceace76]

i've always thought the "headroom" that VH1 has comes solely from the way the reverb was produced. listening to the GH iso's and the short clips Dave Friedman posted the headroom isn't really there without the reverb. Again, people are forgetting the studio end of the equation. The production used on VH1 gives me the impression that Templeton and Landee wanted to capture the band's live sound, but with the benefits of studio magic. There are very few overdubs, the band is playing very tight, and you can kinda hear a lack of sobriety too, like leadguy mentioned. Sounds like any great rock show to me.

I would not be surprised if Ed was telling the truth, save for a few tricks that he used during live shows for swapping guitars, or subbing in certain cables to shave off highs here and there. There doesn't seem to be any magic behind Ed's setup, except for Ed's playing.

I find it weird that he never used a Rangemaster though. Iommi and Blackmore did, and he was clearly into treble. Kinda seems like a nice fit if you ask me

[Tone Slinger]

Yeah, I alway's thought Ed should have dabbled with a treble booster too. I liked Glenn Tipton's , and KK Downing's sound alot. They had custom 'Cornish' (forgot his first name) boards. They had distortion +, and eq pushing the front of already clipping 1987's and 1959's. Add to that, they plugged into the bass channels because of the extreme treble boost they were getting from thier treble booster's.

I remember reading an old '86 or '87 Guitar World back in the day (I'm sure I still have it). Steve Steven's had a column and was discussing different effects. He mentioned Ed's use of the phase 90 on VH1. I didnt really get it at first, but later I did. The phase 90 is really incredible add adding that spongy high end, along with that great sorta vowelly sound. Great for player's who have great bends and vibrato, like Eddie.

Schenker would have killed with one back in the day.



I really think Ed was cranking instead of reamping back then though. I also think that he either had that Jose one wire mod giving a little more juice to this 'dimed' tone as well. I think either that or he definately had that 10 band on alot.

[Grosh_Guitars]

Spaceace76 said it best. There is no magic Marshall, just magic hands. and of course post production!!

[vanhalen5150]

I ponder this very thing. I don't think Ed lied about anything really. "I turn the variac up to 140 and watch the tubes melt". Again he didn't say that's how he recorded or played, just thats what happened, if you do. Many get the big liar from this statement.

Ed said he recorded with one cab. 25 watt speakers, with a 100 watt dimed plexi? Nope. Your cones would be shredded in no time. Did he use a 50 watter then? Possible. 2 cabs on stage with a 100 watter maxed. Possible. But, the howling feedback would be almost impossible to control. I've never heard that in the boots, and the decibel levels would be insane. For me its the big missing link. Not the amp, guitar, pickup. The simple amp setup. No real visual evidence for slaving. But a maxed 100 watter, in a small club, 15 feet away from you? Interesting to say the least.

[ROCK€]

I don't think Ed lied about anything really. "I turn the variac up to 140 and watch the tubes melt". Again he didn't say that's how he recorded or played, just thats what happened, if you do. Many get the big liar from this statement.

That's what I think too. Sometimes he describes his amp and and it seems like he doesn't really know what had been done to it. Maybe José did some mods (or maybe not) but Ed is not able to explain how those mods work, and he doesn't know every little detail that might have been done. It seems like he was happy as long as the amp worked. He tries to be open when he is explaining some things about the amp, but we can notice right away that he is not an amp expert.

Imagine, you are a young guitar player and you have a friend, José, who takes care of your amp. You take your amp to José, and go get it back. Will he always explain to you every detail of the amp, and are you, a young dude, able to understand what's been done to your amp? I doubt it. I think you plug your guitar in, play it and go "hey, that sounds good, thanks a lot!", and you take your amp and go to your next concert.

I bet, José knew everything about Ed's amp but Ed didn't really know much about it in his early years. Anyhow, Ed first took his amp to José's place in the beginning of seventies and there have been a lot of time to do different kind of things to Ed's amp, or just service it and leave it stock, who knows, and I think even Ed doesn't know those things today.

[Tone Slinger]

Well I agree about the sheer volume thing. The variac wouldnt really drop the volume much at all. Ed possibly did use the 50 watter on the first album and in many of the club gigs. That is, if he simply cranked the amp.

Another idea of his tone is "HOW DID THAT FLANGER SOUND SO HUGE". I've heard, but never tried, that a flanger will get all eaten up if run through the front of a maxed Marshall plexi. If this is the case, then thats a definate nod toward the reamping/loadbox theory, as running the flange AFTER the loadbox, would be like a really good effects loop.

[vanhalen5150]

The other thing I think that is also misunderstood about the way Ed talks is when people refer to the Franky as being a "second". Ed asked what these are in this pile? The guy(Wayne?) said they are seconds. Which means they have a knot or something wrong with them. This later got misprinted as, the Franky was a second because it had a knot in it. Ed even has said since that it was second because it had a knot or "something" wrong with it, and he didnt care. All the photos taken of Frankie clearly show why it was a second. It was cut wrong. The neck pocket was cut too wide. Even the Fender replicas show this flaw. Ed's words over the years get added to or colorized as truth/lie.

[Tone Slinger]

Help me out here guy's, what info or facts is there proving or disclaiming Ed's reamping or lone cranked head. Has anyone posted a clip of a dimed or attenuated Marshall with a flanger in front. I think this lone detail is the breaker on this "Did he crank or Reamp" theory.

[vanhalen5150]

I dont think Ive heard a clip here with a cab/head maxed and then being pushed further with an effect.

At 3:25 Curt Mitchell talks about Ed's amps. Again you hear the truth/lie/myth being spread. Interesting that the maxed cab had to be in an isolated booth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3I6AfKJ ... re=related" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Tone Slinger]

Considering that Ed did seem to solely use the 25 watter's on that first tour, it seems odd that he would have been able to crank as he did, if that is in fact what he was doing. Then again, 2 cabs per 100 watt head lessens the beating those speakers were seeing. I definatly hear the speakers 'giving it up' on those '78 tour boots. Same with old UFO era Michael Schenker. Volume was definatly used.

My main problem with the attenuated thing at this point, is , Ed would have to have modded some of his heads to bypass the preamp (on the second head) as we all know the second amp needs a shorter simpler circuit path, as not to deteriorate the tone from the line out from the loadbox.

Man, I sure wish I had the proper equipment to try this all out with.

Some here do, ala Stan, Mark, rgalpin, and VHaxman to name a few.

[vanhalen5150]

Well, if you believe any of the Robin L posts that is exactly what was done with some of the amps. Turned into power amps, from what I understood.

Robin L. could be Alfred E. Newman for all we know however.

[leadguy]

The Flanger is in front of the amp and so are all the effects, phase echoplex http://forum.metroamp.com/viewtopic.php ... 70&start=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

All these theories about not having effects in front of the amp make no sense to me. I saw countless guitarists with everything but the kitchen sink in front of the amps in my 70s playing days.

There were so many guitarists playing clubs in the 70s with Marshalls and about 0.0005 % of them would have slaved and run effects after the amp.

The variac might make the amp break up at a lower volume but at the Whiskey a dimed 50 watt would be ok. Ed said that the variac was to stop feedback and if that's the reason then it's a low tech solution to it. Maybe Ed was getting feedback from his particular pickups and he had not yet discovered potting off Wayne Charvel so the reason for the variac. Clapton and Page played at the Whiskey with their gear which wasn't quiet. Townsend and Clapton and even local players used to overload their speakers.
Ed would have turned up as loud as he could in the situation.

There are pubs (what we call clubs here in Australia). like Chequers and the Esplanade and in the 70s I was either playing at them or going to see bands at them.
AC/DC at Chequers was very loud and so were all the bands even new wave ones in the late 70s.
Angus is still playing at 130 db now.

Theories are ok but rock bands were loud rock bands in the 70s and the audience just accepted volume, it wasn't a bedroom player sort of deal. I don't know what it's like now.
I've played in clubs with a 50 watt Marshall at 10 going through the PA with the dance floor right in front with crowd abuse thrown in for good measure.
I saw one guy drunk out of his mind with his head up against the PA speakers.

[vanhalen5150]

He was drunk and dumb. Now he's just deaf. And probably still drunk.

I know bands use to play very loud. I'm not sure if they were running heads full out to get an overdriven sound. Many guys reduced volume and used overdrive/distortion pedals because replacing sets of speakers just didnt add up after a while.

I saw Motorhead about 6 months ago. It was painfully load. mic'd 4/12's on stage but the power was from a monster P.A.

How long does a maxed 25 watt speaker last? According to Scumback you need a max of twice the handling power of your output. 100 W cab with a maxed 50 watter. 2 100 watt cabs with a 100 watter. Dimed every night plus hours of practice. What would one expect? Ed borrowed heads but I'll bet they were not lending him cabs if thats what he was doing.