Ed's 1978 touring rig.

[dirtycooter]

Not to carry on to unrelated stuff here but it is actually related quite so

Fact

Think of all this true bypass, get the buffers out of the signal path of the FX, short as possible hi-fi neat cables, capacitance treble roll off worrys, and all the other 80-90's rack freak rig mojo stuff has actually been counterproductive in a way to getting this tone. All the wrong approach really when you look at it.

Doesn't sound like Ed was too overly worried about alot of it and used most of it to his advantage. I mean look at the pics-people at Huge Racks Inc scoff at the mess of cable runs he had.
The move has always been toward less noise and top fidelity-not so really if you look at the VH1 rig
Look at Eric Johnsons mess of cable-he uses that extra cable length to warm and roll off the sound and tone. Eric spends hours trying all these absurd configurations and cable lengths and goes with what just sounds best-not what should theoretically sound good.
Must be Ed did the same thing in a way then.
Curly cords any one???

[Mr. Beasty]

... and nothing point toward Ed using premium parts either. He probably just grabbed "cable" and went with it, the main guitar was made out of factory seconds, etc.

... and I don't think this is off-topic.

[dirtycooter]

... and nothing point toward Ed using premium parts either. He probably just grabbed "cable" and went with it, the main guitar was made out of factory seconds, etc.

... and I don't think this is off-topic.

Right on Beasty! It cracks me up to think how pristine our things are for gear today and freaked out alot of us get when there is some hiss or some not very optimal piece of gear and we all kinda assume its not gonna make tone.

Robin-was there any preference given to cabling brand, certain things he looked for in particular and was real fussy about? Like the speakers or anything else he fussed over? Anything he was seriously coo coo over being a certain way in his tone?

[wjamflan]

The Boss EQ replaced the MXR EQ.
Both were set for a mid boost (inverted smile).

Cool. Thanks Robin.

So if I understand correctly, the Boss 10 band replaced Ed's MXR on the board in front of him like the Day On The Green pics show. Did he leave this one (on the board) on all the time? The reason I ask is b/c I have always thought that he ran all of his effects straight into the head, before the load, and that the eq helped boost the sound of his flanger. From my own experiments, it seems to do just that and make it sound wicked.

I know it goes against conventional wisdom, but isn't that what Ed did all the time? I've found that the eq lessens my need for gain and that the flanger sounds fine in front without the massive gain. Personally, I don't like the sound of the flanger in the effects loops I've tried (too pronounced and odd sounding), but I've never done the slaving thing. Help....

Also, when did he run the Boss eqs sitting in front of his echoplexes??? All the time? Sometimes? Depending on the venue?? Please help...

Thanks.

Bill

[ROBIN L.]

The Boss EQ replaced the MXR EQ.
Both were set for a mid boost (inverted smile).

Cool. Thanks Robin.

So if I understand correctly, the Boss 10 band replaced Ed's MXR on the board in front of him like the Day On The Green pics show. Did he leave this one (on the board) on all the time? The reason I ask is b/c I have always thought that he ran all of his effects straight into the head, before the load, and that the eq helped boost the sound of his flanger. From my own experiments, it seems to do just that and make it sound wicked.

I know it goes against conventional wisdom, but isn't that what Ed did all the time? I've found that the eq lessens my need for gain and that the flanger sounds fine in front without the massive gain. Personally, I don't like the sound of the flanger in the effects loops I've tried (too pronounced and odd sounding), but I've never done the slaving thing. Help....

Also, when did he run the Boss eqs sitting in front of his echoplexes??? All the time? Sometimes? Depending on the venue?? Please help...

Thanks.

Bill

The EQ's came last in front of the main plexi.
The guitar went straight into the Flanger wich was the first effect in the chain.
The EQ's were not sitting by the Echoplexes, the MXR EQ's were located on Ed's pedalboard and were turned on and off with the loopers (boxes labeled 1 and 2).
The Boss EQ's were too big to fit the pedalboard, they'd be sitting next to it.

[ROBIN L.]

So both echoplexes were carrying the guitar signal at all times with the echo bypassed except for the short slap back echo echoplex #1 that was on all the time and at the times where Ed wanted the longer echo from echoplex #2?

Is this correct?

They were not on all the time.
Ed had both Echoplex's footswitches on the floor next to his pedalboard.

[ROBIN L.]

Thank you very much for posting this information.

What was the ohm load setting on the 1st amp and what was the ohm load setting on the 2nd amp?

I've heard he preferred the 8 ohm setting, even though a single cab would've been 16 ohms.

But as we all know, this type of mismatch is common (Eric Johnson does this).

The Marshall's speaker impedance switch was set to 8 ohms.
All of them.

[harddriver]

So both echoplexes were carrying the guitar signal at all times with the echo bypassed except for the short slap back echo echoplex #1 that was on all the time and at the times where Ed wanted the longer echo from echoplex #2?

Is this correct?

They were not on all the time.
Ed had both Echoplex's footswitches on the floor next to his pedalboard.

I will rephrase the question Robin, disregarding the echo function/use of the echoplexes both echoplexes were connected in series together to form the following signal chain...

Guitar>Flanger>Phase 90>Echoplex#1>Echoplex#2>Looper Pedal #1(MXR)EQ>Looper Pedal#2>Main 68Plexi>Load>Univox EC80>Marshall Super Lead Power amps>Marshall cabinets.

Thanks!

[ROBIN L.]

So both echoplexes were carrying the guitar signal at all times with the echo bypassed except for the short slap back echo echoplex #1 that was on all the time and at the times where Ed wanted the longer echo from echoplex #2?

Is this correct?

They were not on all the time.
Ed had both Echoplex's footswitches on the floor next to his pedalboard.

I will rephrase the question Robin, disregarding the echo function/use of the echoplexes both echoplexes were connected in series together to form the following signal chain...

Guitar>Flanger>Phase 90>Echoplex#1>Echoplex#2>Looper Pedal #1(MXR)EQ>Looper Pedal#2>Main 68Plexi>Load>Univox EC80>Marshall Super Lead Power amps>Marshall cabinets.

Thanks!

That is correct.

[harddriver]

Thank you for the clarification Robin!

[Mr. Beasty]

Guitar>Flanger>Phase 90>Echoplex#1>Echoplex#2>Looper Pedal #1(MXR)EQ>Looper Pedal#2>Main 68Plexi>Load>Univox EC80>Marshall Super Lead Power amps>Marshall cabinets.

Anyone good w/ graphic softwares?

[IloveMyMarshall]

Robin, can you please explain this setup in this picture please! You are saying Efx chain is guitar Flanger, P90, ect ect. However, the box labeled #1, she had two input looks like to me and three outs? Box Label II is not even hooked up??? Anyways thought maybe you could give in detail whats going on in this pic?? Looks like his axe is going straight in to Pedal #1 to me I could be wrong??

http://wwwc.dcns.ne.jp/~epi/pedalboard23jul1978.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thanks
ILMM

[leadguy]

The pedalboard and effects chain:

Ed used this crappy plywood pedalboard for his effects pedals.
The 2 Maestro Echoplexes were sitting next to the amps on ED's side of the stage, but their footswitches were located next to the plywood board.
The Univox was shelved in a real WWII bomb standing to the right of Ed's cabs.
It was just unbelievable you know, those were really the good 'ol days.
On the board, Ed's guitar would hit the MXR Flanger, then the MXR Phase 90.
From the ouput of the phase 90, a long cable would then reach the 2 echoplexes (wired in series).
After the echoplexes, another long cable would go back to the stage pedalboard to the input of BOX 1, then out to the input of BOX 2.
Yet another long cable would connect the ouput of BOX 2 to a "Y"-type splitter , and then hit the top left inputs of the main plexi and its smallbox backup.
BOX 1 and 2 were loopers for the MXR 6bandEQ 's Ed was using to boost his signal prior to hitting the plexi.
Most of the time, Box2 was not used, but from time to time he would have a second MXR EQ on his board.
The MXR EQ's were replaced by The Boss EQ's in the summer after the japanese leg of the tour.
Btw, Ed was not using a wireless yet in 1978.
The MXR pedals were stock script logo pedals.
In the early 80's, Ed had them overlooked by Jose to reduce unwanted noise (shielding and replacing cheap components with better ones).

The main plexi and his backup were loaded and the line level signal was fed to the univox before it was slaved to the superleads and out to the cabs.

It looks like he's bypassing the Flanger and Phase and the Franky is going straight into the 1 box where the blue MXR EQ usually goes when it's connected.



Destroyer using EQ

[Crunchboy]

Great stuff! But Mark Cameron did explain all this years ago......back when "the herd" was touting cascaded/2203 preamps and PPIMV's. Ed even said in one of his earliest interviews that he used TWO Marshalls heads on the first album. He just didn't explain that one was slaved into the other.

But what about those "sticks of dynamite"/resistors across the OT primaries? Has that been covered?

[45auto]

i still have to wonder if the "capacitors" & "sticks of dynamite" weren't his load resistors at some point. i had some wirewounds back then that looked like dynamite, i don't know if they made any one component big enough to hold a superlead though. i had like five in a vented box with an eleven way rotary switch.