What amps did Jimi use on his 1970 Tour?

[theactor19]

Do you think Jimi was using any Superleads made in 1970? or were they his '69s or older? I ask because you can hear the change in tone from 1969 to 1970.. a little less fatness/mids and more gain by the time he reached 1970.

thanks!

[Tone Slinger]

So much speculation regarding Hendrix's gear, in any era,that it is just speculation on most peoples part (myself for instance). This is what 'I' think though.

Hendrix really DID have his Marshalls retubed with 6550's in the earlier part of '69. Most of the '69 recordings and boots have the 'cleaner, spankier' tone, as compared to '68. Remember, Hendrix had a tab at Manny's and was in and out of there alot. He picked up amps, guitars, pedals, etc, WHENEVER the urge hit him. These same amps,imo,where used up through the '70 tour. So basically,amps no older than late '68/early '69 and amps no newer than early '70. I'm saying the age of production (England),taking into account shipping time. I think Hendrix ALWAYS picked up a few amps before a tour, so that meant Spring of '69 (if 'new' in Manny's they were probably produced in late '68 to early '69) and Spring of '70 (If 'New' in Manny's then those would have been made in late '69 to early '70 imo).I could be off base though.

As it turns out, it seems that the 'BOG' recordings were bone 'stock' Marshalls from that era (EL-34). There is some evidence to support that. The 'BOG's did sound different to sound Hendrix got before or after (like Spring/Summer '69 and spring/summer '70).

Anyways I hear a different speaker (no more of the 25 watters of '67/'68)from spring '69 on. I also think that the stock fuzz faces Hendrix used in '69 (though he did use the 'modded' red one with strat knobs alot in '69) were better sounding than the ones he was using in '70.
Hendrix's sound evolved into a louder cleaner sound, and his fuzz faces were having to 'do thier thing' on a cleaner tone with more headroom (6550 equipped heads),which made his sound (with fuzz face on) harsher and more synthetic. Output tube distortion + fuzz face is a better tone, and the el-34's were great for that, but single coil pu's arent really able to push those 6550's into that realm, which exposed the shitty sound of those 1970's fuzz faces.

[Xplorer]

i love Hendrix gear's speculation. but for bog, for what my opinion is Worth, maybe 2 cents but ... i have absolutely no doubt that it was his 45/100 singing, kt66. the 69sl el34 sounds nothing like it, totaly different saturation and dynamics.
it sounded different from before, and after, just because of the g12h30 75hz on it , and this time the volume was set quite low ( and it makes sense, since you can hear some quiet drum actions along hendrix's playing ... into this medium theater ... ) the simple silicon fuzz very high, and the strat vol quite down ( or higher for Wilder parts ) . this is that simple, all stock. i'm still amazed. and ... some superleads in the chain, 45/100 mic'ed.

the 45/100 in the experience era sounded different, just thanks to different settings. this amp is predictable but it opens to so many completely different tones. great great amp.
guess what ! from the same settings, i get from bog, to little wing tone !!! although it's super different : just changing from the neck pu to the medium pu.

it couldn't have been a superlead , sounding cleaner, spankier, with a different kind of distortion.

playing it, it sounds more than dead on, so if ears tell how close it is, it'd be hard for another kind of amp to get exactly there too i guess ...

[Tone seaker]

i love Hendrix gear's speculation. but for bog, for what my opinion is Worth, maybe 2 cents but ... i have absolutely no doubt that it was his 45/100 singing, kt66. the 69sl el34 sounds nothing like it, totaly different saturation and dynamics.
it sounded different from before, and after, just because of the g12h30 75hz on it , and this time the volume was set quite low ( and it makes sense, since you can hear some quiet drum actions along hendrix's playing ... into this medium theater ... ) the simple silicon fuzz very high, and the strat vol quite down ( or higher for Wilder parts ) . this is that simple, all stock. i'm still amazed. and ... some superleads in the chain, 45/100 mic'ed.

the 45/100 in the experience era sounded different, just thanks to different settings. this amp is predictable but it opens to so many completely different tones. great great amp.
guess what ! from the same settings, i get from bog, to little wing tone !!! although it's super different : just changing from the neck pu to the medium pu.

it couldn't have been a superlead , sounding cleaner, spankier, with a different kind of distortion.

playing it, it sounds more than dead on, so if ears tell how close it is, it'd be hard for another kind of amp to get exactly there too i guess ...

Gota disagree. I have a super JH100 amp which is a 45/100KT66 amp and sounds great but its not a band of Gypsys its a montery

[Xplorer]

this amp doesn't lead only to monterey, it goes in many directions. Hendrix studio, Hendrix Woodstock, acddc , little wing, bog ....
maybe the super 100 JH can't lead you there ? it's based on noel redding's modified 45/100, supposeddly Hendrix amp. well, that's storys .... i heard. we can't count on it totaly. the super 100JH is a modern marshall, not totaly cloning the original. but im sure you couldd get there anyway.
i didn't say it's only the 45/100 in any speakers, strat straight in. i explaained how to get there. you may want to try exactly like i explaained to see what i mean.
a superlead, i have one, it can cheat and get close, but there's something totaly missing, that is into the 45/100, for bog.
it dépends how you set your amp.

a little attempt, but i can get much closer with my real speakers, less mids. anyway, i don't think i'm out of the ball park , for bog. closer than randy hansen, even though my playing and recording is crap. i'll make some other recordings, later.


https://soundcloud.com/xplorer80/machin ... one-45-100" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Tone Slinger]

I believe that MOST guy's, who can play Hendrix fairly well, can get at the BOG's tone/s with a stock '68-'73 era 1959 , 4/12 cab and a decent strat. The essence of that sound is there, regardless of a wha wha, univibe, octavio or fuzz face.

[Xplorer]

that's my point : the essence isn't there if you listen closer. it's only something that makes you think bog, but it isn't, only a spirit of it.
if you listen to randy hansen's machine gun, it's fantastic, but it isn't the bog tone. much different !
we're maybe not talking about the same thing.

but anyway, back to the subject, jimi certainly had some superleads, on his 70' tour.

[Tone Slinger]

Eddie Kramer ALWAYS got great tones out of the artists he recorded/engineered. Hendrix was no exception. Although 5 yrs apart the BOG stuff and Kiss 'Alive'! share a certain similarity (that is Eddie Kramer). Its that big, bold round sound. Almost bassy. Every note on either album sounded HUGE !

I'm not saying or implying that the actual guitars/amps sound identical,only that thier is a similarity in the OVERALL production (drums, bass,guitar). Eddie Kramer deserves a little more credit imo.

[Xplorer]

yes for sure. for example, just the way he recorded the guitar on little wing is a studio Wonder. to mic it this way, set the gears this way .... wow, very impressive.

a friend told me that americans love mediums, and forget trebles and basses. he told me that when he saw Hendrix several times and met him in europe, France, jimi was playing a very trebly sound, with lot of power, and it's really hard for him to give me examples of this sound, in studios and most lives. he adapted his tone to more mediums, for the public, but it wasn't his favourite stuff. for him, most thing we hear about Hendrix isn't the Hendrix sound, at least not the Hendrix of the beginning, in Europe, before england, and also after. surprising, and interesting, for me. and i'm pretty sure i can believe him.
but ... i love these thick tones too, eddie just captured that nicely.

i love some pre experience stuffs too, wonderful. this one particularly, pre eddie, fantastic raw tone, no need to think long to realise how Hendrix was a natural, what a solo !!!!!!! hear it. it really has balls, soul naked, not hidding behind an instrument. fuck the technic, it has to be adapted to soul and music, not the opposite like in so many cases today, for example, i appreciate eric johnson a lot but so many times, and a good example is his last album : i can almost hear him think !!! to me this isn't knowing how to play a guitar and make music paradoxaly.


[youtube] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyhLjCwJFGA" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;[/youtube]

[Tone Slinger]

Loved it, great soul and energy. I understand what you were saying about Eric Johnson. Alot of what he does (as well as many nowadays) is TOO cerebral and premeditated. I think that there is one guitarist that comes to mind,who really 'improvises' to the best of thier ability, without being so cerebral and premeditated, and that is George Lynch. He is often 'off' because of his sincerity (lets face it, not EVERY time you play is INSPIRED), BUT,I'd rather hear him 'off' a little than 'on' all the time (like Eric Johnson) just using his memory playing that premeditated TOTALLY thought out stuff. When Lynch is 'ON" he reminds me,in many ways, of a moden Hendrix,in that there is that, 'Anything can happen' spirit involved.

[Tone seaker]

Woodstock was deffently 69 super leads. The super JH100 is a great amp and sounds just like montery so I think it is capable of getting any Hendrix tone where he used that particular amp. As far as it being Knowls amp. That is a rumor but there are pictures of Hendrix standing in front of the Dickenson amp (same plexi chips around the input jack) adjusting it. Also if you look closely at the montery footage you can see the chiped plexi around the input jack on Jimi's amp. This has been discussed here before and posted with links and times in the video where you can see its Jimi's amp. Also you have to remember the BOG was a album released and so it was mixed down and will not sound like it did in the Filmore if you were sitting there

[Xplorer]

this taken in consideration, this isn't the mix that will give you the bog tone. i know. amps react differently from a 45/100 to a superlead, etc etc ...
and there's definitely something missing into the sl, that won't be brought thanks to the mix.
but, the 45/100 definitely has it !

the Dickinson amp ... it's the 7026. there's actualy the 7027 out there, said too, to be Hendrix amp. and it sounds definitely monterey ! cracking, super wilde thing stuff. it's also said to be the one used for monterey, etc. and marshall wanted to clone this 7027 first, to make the 100jh, but the owner didn't want to.

i don't know, for the 100JH. but the 45/100 isn't just monterey at first.
the 45/100, to me, is definitely the bog amp, even if we saw superleads etc. because superleads can't sound this way, while 45/100 totaly can ! but with the right fuzz with it ..
and this is why machine gun at the isle of Wight sounded SL, and not Fillmore machine gun. totaly different.

[theactor19]

Which Superlead do you guys think he is using at Berkeley? Trying to decide between a '68, '69, '70 Superlead. Here's Voodoo Child at Berkeley:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKfEqznTiM8" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The solo is unreal!

[Xplorer]

i'd simply suggest an SL69, since i get there with mine, no problem. this really has the dynamics of a superlead like that, not a 45/100 ( or BOG would have sounded a lot different ) , good example i mean, of a superlead tone. 69
i have to be honnest, i couldn't tell about the 68 or the 70. maybe

but also, i'd suggest to get a nice fuzz, put an inpuit bias, and a great wah in front of it. you'll certainly get there, not mentioning the rest of the setup.
and roll down a little your strat volume.