Ed's 1978 touring rig.

[leadguy]

[Tone Slinger]

Yeah, I got that Guitar World issue too. The other magazine I was referencing is a little older. The Guitar Worl issue used just about the same info (lifted ?) as the 'Musician' mag.

Only thing I'm confused about is that if Ed DIDNT use a loadbox on the '84 tour, but, was using a dimed head and H&H poweramps, HOW did he manage to 'tame' the volume on the DLM show ?

I guess he took to using the 'line out to load' by the end of the '84 tour, and used it on the Letterman, Namm, etc stuff in '85 ?

[leadguy]

I think what happened is that Rudy must have cottoned on to what Bradshaw and others were doing and Rudy and Ed tried slaving with a CABINET as the load in 1984.

Some of Ed's friends were already slaving I think, like Steve Lukather who I think was using a Bob Bradshaw slaving system before Ed did.

I suppose Ed just didn't want to leave Rudy for Bob Bradshaw, so maybe they worked out their own take on slaving in 1984 with some help from others, but it didn't matter because Ed and Rudy went their separate ways around 1985 or so and Ed followed Steve Lukather to the Bob Bradshaw slaving system.

Slaving setups were being increasingly used for live gigs because of reliability and effects integration etc.

The Bob Bradshaw slaving system used a LOAD RESISTOR that Bob Bradshaw made (Jose did not make it).

Then heading into the late 80s, Bob Bradshaw went off the idea of a resistor load and wanted Ed to use a cabinet as a load and Ed took a bit of convincing to change from the load resistor to the cabinet load which is detailed here http://forum.metroamp.com/viewtopic.php ... 6&p=284854" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

All of this slaving stuff is for LIVE RIGS ONLY.

In the studio other more regular setups are used and can be high volume with the amp put in a iso booth and miced, no big deal and many did it, even Keith Richards who dimed a Fender Twin in a iso booth for Brown Sugar.

The slaving is not to reduce volume levels as anyone can realize because VH live were just as loud as always, when Ed began using slaving rigs, maybe louder.

Rock dudes that grew up in the 60s/ 70s and played clubs/outdoor gigs, are not scared of a some volume and are not scared now as in VH now and AC/DC now and Aerosmith now and etc etc who are loud now in 2012.

The slaving rigs are for convenience and reliability that makes live work easier.

btw Joe Perry was slaving as well for a while.

Ed's Bob Bradshaw slaving rig details were published in a guitar mag around 1986 or so, so it was never a big secret or a secret tone thing like some want to infer.

If Ed is on the stage with H&H amps, then he is slaving, otherwise if there are no H&H amps on the stage then he's not slaving, as in the pre 1984 years for example.

[Good Guest]

Sounds like the whole slaving idea may of been a bone of contention for Rudy and EVH ....from resistors hanging out the amp too jose load boxs with line outs well before Luk and Bradshaw..and with Rudy leaving a year after the switch to Brad shaw systems....

Something funny going on because EVH preferred the load resistor method after Bradshaw introduced him to the speaker emulating method..indicating EVH used another method in the past ...so I'm not buying this ..Never slaved till 84 line at all ...maybe never slaved with a cab emulator load before 84 ..

[leadguy]

Well, maybe Ed wanted to go to Bradshaw because he had sophisticated effect/slaving systems ready to go and Steve Lukather was already with Bradshaw and Ed probably played his rig and might have been impressed.

Rudy was a bit of a hack compared to Bradshaw in regards to switching systems etc.

Anybody that has slaved will probably realize that a wide range clean amp is the way to go for the power amp, hence the use of H&H's and other power amps that don't mess too much with the amps overdriven tone.

Ed's amps before 1984 were not obviously setup for slaving, they were daisy chained together as needed and then later they were switched on and off as needed and he could have just bought power amps if he was slaving but no power amps are really visible until the 1984 H&H's.

[Tone Slinger]

Agreed. And the possible reason Ed sounded, imo, BAD from like '80 through '83 live, was that he was using ALOT of tops that just didnt sound as good as the earlier era super leads ('67-'73). Its funny, but you would of thought that Ed would have brought out 'comparable' heads to his #1 12xxx to use live, yet, pics show pre jcm 800 jmp's.

I also think that the speakers being used on those early '80's tours werent all 25 watters. That combined with that AWEFULL Nady wireless system. I loved the '77 -'78 live tone the Best (simple daisy chaining), cause Ed predominantly used his #1 head and obviously miked the cab that it was powering. The '84 tone is a fairly close second.

[Marshall SL12301]

Agreed. And the possible reason Ed sounded, imo, BAD from like '80 through '83 live, was that he was using ALOT of tops that just didnt sound as good as the earlier era super leads ('67-'73). Its funny, but you would of thought that Ed would have brought out 'comparable' heads to his #1 12xxx to use live, yet, pics show pre jcm 800 jmp's.

I also think that the speakers being used on those early '80's tours werent all 25 watters. That combined with that AWEFULL Nady wireless system. I loved the '77 -'78 live tone the Best (simple daisy chaining), cause Ed predominantly used his #1 head and obviously miked the cab that it was powering. The '84 tone is a fairly close second.

that broken pickup did not help!

[dnatronic]

Agreed. And the possible reason Ed sounded, imo, BAD from like '80 through '83 live, was that he was using ALOT of tops that just didnt sound as good as the earlier era super leads ('67-'73). Its funny, but you would of thought that Ed would have brought out 'comparable' heads to his #1 12xxx to use live, yet, pics show pre jcm 800 jmp's.

I also think that the speakers being used on those early '80's tours werent all 25 watters. That combined with that AWEFULL Nady wireless system. I loved the '77 -'78 live tone the Best (simple daisy chaining), cause Ed predominantly used his #1 head and obviously miked the cab that it was powering. The '84 tone is a fairly close second.

I think Ed's live tone from Oakland in 1981 sounded really good, much better than the 1984 tour. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvK0AA5QR_c" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Any idea what his setup was for this tour? Was he using his #1 head?

[Good Guest]

To me from what I gathered and see in pics is EVH used a 3 output load box Jose type ....the main marshall was the brain amp that is referanced many times and the 3 other amps were modified as power amps ..mentioned many times ...It looks like a daisy chain setup to the untrained eye but is really a slave setup....replaced later by Brain amp into bradshaw loads then to H&H power amps...nothing really amazing there except the brain amp is used in both cases...definitely where the tone develops.

So the tone is not a result of slaving but is in the brain amp....and that shakes things up a bit as one of the big advantages of slaving is the use of lineouts and time fx after the tone is processed...it kind of throws a monkey wrench into everything when you drink the brain amp kool aid...but I'm willing to drink that as opposed to daisy chaining and sucking out yer tone at every preamp input...3 amps would be like turning yer guitar volume to 25% in loading effect..that is serious tone sucking...unless he used a buffer a la mxr 6 band..in between amps to reduce the tone sucking loading effect...but that's just a half measure...a resistor load with lineout would be the best and utilizing a 6 band for some fancy tone shaping in one of the power amps for some dynamic eqing would be even better. and there are pics of that too.

[leadguy]

All of those things like the resistor hanging out of the back of the amp etc etc, are just from dudes talking through their ass with no real proof of anything.

Rumours etc.

The things that go around about someone like Ed are mostly BS, like his recent illness which was supposed to be uncontrollable hiccups and band hate or something, when it turns out it was something else entirely.


In that 1985 Rudy interview, Rudy is saying the same things that he told Dave Friedman just a couple of years ago.

So Rudy's story hasn't changed and Rudy is discussing H&H slaving in 1985, so it's no secret and around 1986, Ed's Bradshaw slaving H&H details were published in a guitar mag and once again no big secret.

Rudy and Ed did it the old school way before 1984, by just using multiple heads either daisy chained or switched on/off.

Bands used to do it old school and those bands had old school tone which was often never perfect and it was sometimes dicey to control but it was organic and analog.

Bob Bradshaws slaving system for example, integrates effects and switching etc etc into the slaving system, making it easier for live gigs, and digital effects were coming in in the early 80s with more switching effect capabilities etc and all these switching effects etc got integrated into the slaving systems and the slaving systems could sound somewhat like the studio where multiple effect overdubs might have been made on recordings.

So Ed and others started to not use Echoplexes and other analog stuff that had a habit of breaking down and Brian May dropped is Echoplexes as well.

Rudy and Ed tried a new H&H slaving setup for the 1984 tour and then Ed goes to Bob Bradshaw's H&H slaving system just as Dave Friedman said.

Bradshaw had a load resistor system and Rudy had a cabinet load system, either way it doesn't make that much difference.

Bradshaw got some Bee in his bonnet about the load resistor and changed to a cabinet load around the late 80s and if someone reads the Bob Bradshaw interview, they will see that Bob Bradshaw was using speaker loads in his very early systems but then changed to a resistor load and then changed to cabinet loads.

Designing dudes do fuk around with setups nd have different preferences at different times, no big deal.

I'll interpret some quotes from the 1985 Rudy interview.

"In the past , multiple Marshall heads performed the job" (ie Daisy Chained Heads and Head Switching)

"There is an upstage 4x12 cabinet right behind Edward which is powered directly by the Marshall" (Marshall 100 brain) (ie this upstage cabinet is the load)

Marshall 100 -> (Upstage) Cabinet Load -> 2 H&H Power Amps -> (Downstage Cabinets)

[Marshall SL12301]

Hey leadguy going OT here but what do you think of the marshall 3005 lead 12's? I just bought a old single socket on the right( just the line out,no headphone jack) micro stack. It is a very early 80's and many say it can get in JCM 800 tone territory?

[leadguy]

Hmmm!

I've never played through a marshall 3005 lead 12.

I did pick up a marshall 3005 lead 12 mini cabinet with one 16 ohm Celestion 10 inch speaker though, and what I did was I built a Champ amp into the cabinet, so it's a Champ/Marshall mini cabinet.

[Marshall SL12301]

Hmmm!

I've never played through a marshall 3005 lead 12.

I did pick up a marshall 3005 lead 12 mini cabinet with one 16 ohm Celestion 10 inch speaker though, and what I did was I built a Champ amp into the cabinet, so it's a Champ/Marshall mini cabinet.

I thought for sure you would have not even played through one of these micro stacks? no prob,i will find out

[EJSLPlexi]

Dave friedman said "Ed did not ever slave his amp until 5150 tour" and this was confirmed by one of his techs.
I guess he just put up with the volume....

sorry but this is not true, EVH used a 50 watter as a preamp into the main 100 watter on the first record,
how else would you explain that amount of drive he gets?(please dont say a dimarzio super distortion EVH had said many times he HATED those, at least in their stock form, he may have used them rewound and modded)
then on VH II he dropped that idea which is why you hear a drastically cleaner tone.
it is just the 100 watter hs main one on that record.

[efraser68]

Dave friedman said "Ed did not ever slave his amp until 5150 tour" and this was confirmed by one of his techs.
I guess he just put up with the volume....

sorry but this is not true, EVH used a 50 watter as a preamp into the main 100 watter on the first record,
how else would you explain that amount of drive he gets?(please dont say a dimarzio super distortion EVH had said many times he HATED those, at least in their stock form, he may have used them rewound and modded)
then on VH II he dropped that idea which is why you hear a drastically cleaner tone.
it is just the 100 watter hs main one on that record.

You're a little late to the game...look up Ralle. Strat78, Rgalpin, YMI5150?, and others who have gotten VH1 tone and gain level with the right pup and a EQ slamming the front of a 100 watt Marshall circuit.