Explaining Eddie Van Halen's Rig - By Cristopher Michael

For all things to build the brown sound

Moderators: VelvetGeorge, RACKSYSTEMS

budubum
Senior Member
Posts: 429
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 2:39 pm

Re: Explaining Eddie Van Halen's Rig - By Cristopher Michael

Post by budubum » Fri Nov 28, 2008 6:31 am

Kapo_Polenton wrote:I don't get the re-amp idea of using a 100 watt preamp section and then using the output stage of other 100 watters? Does this mean you take teh equivalent of a line out from a load box for your crnked plexi and run it through the input of another amp that is set clean? What is the advantage of that.. the fact that it breaks up more running through the clean gain stages of the other Marshalls?

i think what they meant is what youve just read from them.

taking a fisrt marshall, blast it on 10 and into a load box. from load box into a power amp or another marshall turned loud as clean as possible or even a lil break up would do.

thing is, now where do i get a load box.. can someone here help me?

Guitarjb
Senior Member
Posts: 599
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 3:35 am

Re: Explaining Eddie Van Halen's Rig - By Cristopher Michael

Post by Guitarjb » Sun Nov 30, 2008 11:38 pm

Guitarjb wrote:
Mr Crumb wrote:
rgalpin wrote:
i believe this is a great key to getting the correct delay effect and you describe it perfectly. however, i have 2 questions about your assumptions.

1. if he is using a marshall as a power amp he would get the ducking effect heard in the ISO clips even if he places that echo after the first amp. i've done it and it works just like what you hear in the ISO tracks. if you put it in front of the first amp the ducking effect is more dramatic and in my opinion TOO dramatic.
The second marshall is used for it's clean power. It's not overdeiven, or if it is, only a slight bit to where it isnt noticeable. You are correct, if the second marshall were overdriven, and the echoplexes before it, the echoplexes would duck... BUT, the already overdriven, compressed guitar from the first marshall would render this ducking effect useless due to the complete lack of dynamics from the overdriven guitar/effects/1st marshall. The key to getting a good ducked echo is running a dynamic signal(from a guitar) into an echo, THEN compressing/overdriving it.
rgalpin wrote: 2. the univox was used for that 350-ish ms delay that ed always uses? is there a reason why you assume it is not the echoplex?
I think it's the univox because Eddie said he used the univox to get the echo dive at the end of eruption. We know Eddie ran the phase 90 before the first marshall. And if you listen to the echo dive at the end of eruption. At the end when it stops descending and is just looping, the loop is phasing. In order for the loop to be phasing, the echo HAS TO BE before the phaser. So if eddie said that the echo dive is done with the univox echo, the echo before the 1st marshall should be the Univox echo.


This explains my frustration with failing to get a decent echo sound when plugging into the front of the. Thanks for these details.

Which Racksystems clips are you referring to, and what does "ISO" refer to?

Joe

User avatar
StuntDouble
Senior Member
Posts: 1589
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2007 6:26 pm
Just the numbers in order: 7
Location: the left coast

Re: Explaining Eddie Van Halen's Rig - By Cristopher Michael

Post by StuntDouble » Mon Dec 01, 2008 1:33 am

budubum wrote:
Kapo_Polenton wrote:I don't get the re-amp idea of using a 100 watt preamp section and then using the output stage of other 100 watters? Does this mean you take teh equivalent of a line out from a load box for your crnked plexi and run it through the input of another amp that is set clean? What is the advantage of that.. the fact that it breaks up more running through the clean gain stages of the other Marshalls?

i think what they meant is what youve just read from them.

taking a fisrt marshall, blast it on 10 and into a load box. from load box into a power amp or another marshall turned loud as clean as possible or even a lil break up would do.

thing is, now where do i get a load box.. can someone here help me?
there's a lot of info in the archives, but nothing absolutely definitive about the "stepdown" transformer or whatever it is that converts the line out signal to the appropriate level. Mark C. and a few others have given a lot of good info, but this little tid bit, no one knows or just doesn't wanna discuss, and it seems to be the missing link b/w a slave setup sounding crappy or really good...you'ld think you were trying to break inside Ft. Knox on this one. lol...good luck.

Rockstah found a way around it by going straight from V1 to the PI on the second amp and it sounds just killer, best clip I've heard on the forum by far. You could try that.

leadguy
Senior Member
Posts: 2740
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 10:37 am

Re: Explaining Eddie Van Halen's Rig - By Cristopher Michael

Post by leadguy » Tue Dec 23, 2008 9:17 am

He DOESN'T ATTENUATE THE AMP AND RE-AMP IT WITH THE H&H's.

the H&H amps are for the WET SIGNAL ONLY. The 5153 head feeds a center dry cab. a tap (line out) is taken off the head, that feeds his effects, then the H&H, then the WET cabs only. Understand? I have a very similar rig, also built by Dave Friedman.

the basic tone- the dry center cab tone- is just head straight into cab.


http://acapella.harmony-central.com/for ... 892&page=7" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"When your swinging, Swing some MORE" ~Monk

pfrischmann
Senior Member
Posts: 445
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 6:45 am

Re: Explaining Eddie Van Halen's Rig - By Cristopher Michael

Post by pfrischmann » Sat Jan 03, 2009 10:09 am

Hmmmm,
Chris ****** sure knows his stuff BUT
I've tried running into another amp, preamp section and all and it sounds lousy.
Plus the signal would have to be brought to an instrument level signal not line level to go through the flanger and the EP. If you use a line level signal, it mushes them out.

If you do use a -10 signal, it will be hard to push a power amp H&H or modified guitar amp ala Rockstah.

Although....I haven't tried converting the signal to a low impedance signal. I wonder if that's why there was a transformer in the load box?

If this was really Chris ******, This is worth checking out. Chis is way too technical to use a term like Low impedance incorrectly or lightly....

leadguy
Senior Member
Posts: 2740
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 10:37 am

Re: Explaining Eddie Van Halen's Rig - By Cristopher Michael

Post by leadguy » Sun Jan 04, 2009 8:40 am

C e r r e m has quite a few versions of Ed's rig and some have cabinet loads and some have dummy loads and whatever. Whether some of it is right, who knows because he contradicts himself.

Image

Transformer is a 4:1 step down transformer. 10k secondary on amp 1's side and 600 ohms primary on amp 2's side
P1 is a 250k voltage divider pot (from Jose load box)
R1 is optional and is around 680 ohms
R1 stops the P1 pot value ever going to 0 ohms.

Basically the Jose load box transformer steps down the voltage from speaker level and the pot fine tunes the voltage to line or instrument level. The output impedance is the pots resistance value either side of the wiper in parallel which is around 62.5K for a 250k pot at a middle setting. So 62.5k goes into a 500k-1M amp input and hardly any signal voltage loss occurs.

http://sound.westhost.com/vda.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://gaussmarkov.net/wordpress/though ... impedance/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The output impedance of a load resistor is basically whatever value it is, so running a long cable from a load resistor is ok for both the Jose load box and a resistive dummy load because the impedance is low like 8 ohms and then it goes into a voltage divider pot or the Jose stepdown transformer with a voltage divider pot and as long as the pot's value is designed ok then the output impedance of a 250k pot is the same (62.5K) as above and this 62.5K goes to a 500k-1M amp input.

The pot can divide down the speaker voltage to any level including line and instrument level.
"When your swinging, Swing some MORE" ~Monk

User avatar
wdelaney72
Senior Member
Posts: 1619
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 9:04 pm
Location: Chicago Suburbs

Re: Explaining Eddie Van Halen's Rig - By Cristopher Michael

Post by wdelaney72 » Mon Jan 05, 2009 10:45 am

I don't know Chris, but I have been around the discussion's of Ed's tone on this forum for quite a few years. Long enough to know he's been around longer than I have and I find it very strange that he would finally decide to share this level of detail now... after all these years of a bunch of people chasing Ed's VH1 tone.

Taking nothing away from his technical knowledge, I can't help but take any of his accounts with a grain of salt... I simply can't trust he's being completely honest.
Walter

"There's no great thing in being a soloist. I think the hardest thing is to play together with a lot of people, and do it right." - Angus Young, 1984

budubum
Senior Member
Posts: 429
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 2:39 pm

Re: Explaining Eddie Van Halen's Rig - By Cristopher Michael

Post by budubum » Mon Jan 05, 2009 3:01 pm

wdelaney72 wrote:I don't know Chris, but I have been around the discussion's of Ed's tone on this forum for quite a few years. Long enough to know he's been around longer than I have and I find it very strange that he would finally decide to share this level of detail now... after all these years of a bunch of people chasing Ed's VH1 tone.

Taking nothing away from his technical knowledge, I can't help but take any of his accounts with a grain of salt... I simply can't trust he's being completely honest.


man i feel you but he will never ever give away his secrets no matter what. i mean the tone is TO DIE FOR, for some/most atleast and it difficult for it to let go to the public.

see it this way. if ppl here get the 110% tone of the VH1, would they realy realy put it into their own CD when they release it? i mean. ppl are going to ssay that yourCD sounds like VH but can you really get credit for it? are you really satistfied?

im not attacking you or anybody here so please dont take me wrong. i myself wouldnt mind to get the 110% authentic VH1 tone at my feet begging for me to play it but its real difficult to feel for making somebody famous for their tone than actually chasing my own and one day mae it the tone of the century.

sinasl1
Senior Member
Posts: 154
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 3:30 pm

Re: Explaining Eddie Van Halen's Rig - By Cristopher Michael

Post by sinasl1 » Mon Jan 05, 2009 3:07 pm

leadguy wrote:He DOESN'T ATTENUATE THE AMP AND RE-AMP IT WITH THE H&H's.

the H&H amps are for the WET SIGNAL ONLY. The 5153 head feeds a center dry cab. a tap (line out) is taken off the head, that feeds his effects, then the H&H, then the WET cabs only. Understand? I have a very similar rig, also built by Dave Friedman.

the basic tone- the dry center cab tone- is just head straight into cab.


http://acapella.harmony-central.com/for ... 892&page=7" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This was my post on HC, but I wasn't referring to Ed's old rig at all, only to his new touring 5153 rig.

Mats A
Senior Member
Posts: 407
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 5:32 pm
Location: Västerås Sweden

Re: Explaining Eddie Van Halen's Rig - By Cristopher Michael

Post by Mats A » Wed Jan 07, 2009 11:52 am

Rockstah found a way around it by going straight from V1 to the PI on the second amp and it sounds just killer, best clip I've heard on the forum by far. You could try that.[/quote]

Sorry but what does V1 and PI stand for?

User avatar
guitar007
Senior Member
Posts: 1154
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2005 8:28 pm
Contact:

Re: Explaining Eddie Van Halen's Rig - By Cristopher Michael

Post by guitar007 » Wed Jan 07, 2009 12:11 pm

V1: Valve number 1, a.k.a first preamp tube

PI: Phase Inverter

:)
~guitar007

budubum
Senior Member
Posts: 429
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 2:39 pm

Re: Explaining Eddie Van Halen's Rig - By Cristopher Michael

Post by budubum » Wed Jan 07, 2009 1:15 pm

noob question thihihi :lol:



just kidding 8)

Post Reply