Voda La Void
Max Output Level: -76 dBFS
- Total Posts : 723
- Joined: 2011/02/12 09:15:07
- Location: Broken Arrow, OK
- Status: offline
Tube Amp Load boxes and Impulse Response
Is anyone here using load boxes and impulse response to record their guitars? I ran into this great video by Pete Thorn on the subject and I'm fascinated by it, but I barely understand it. I'm a line out DI kinda guy, because I have never, ever been able to mic a guitar cabinet and even get compromised results, much less anything satisfactory and I do not live in a situation where I can drive my room with a tube amp anyway. I understand the load boxes, it's the impulse response set up that's confusing to me. Does anyone have experience with this and how do you like the results?
post edited by Voda La Void - 2016/07/05 13:37:49
Voda La Void...experiments in disturbing frequencies...
|
tlw
Max Output Level: -49.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2567
- Joined: 2008/10/11 22:06:32
- Location: West Midlands, UK
- Status: offline
Re: Tube Amp Load boxes and Impulse Response
2016/07/07 09:54:59
(permalink)
I generally use a similar sort of setup, but slightly different.
The amp's speaker output connects to a Palmer speaker emulating DI box. The XLR out from the DI goes to the interface, the speaker out to a Palmer load-box. I could use a single Palmer combination DI and load-box, but I bought them at different times so I don't.
As a setup it works pretty well, though the Palmer DI leans towards a more Celestion speaker eq curve with flat mids and a treble boost than a Jensen response - the deep mid-scoop Jensens have is missing and Palmer's "American/Mellow" setting just rolls off huge amounts of treble and is quite unlike a Jensen. Adding eq in the DAW can put in a Jensen-style mid scoop centred around 500Hz when necessary. The DI box doesn't have a flat setting that doesn't impose an eq/response curve on the XLR output, so further speaker modelling isn't an option unless the Palmer's curve is first compensated for in eq. I dont add a fake microphone in because I regard the mic as a compromise that's necessary to capture sound in moving air, but not something to add in when it's not needed just because I'd have to use a mic to record a "real" speaker.
For bass I use an MXR bass preamp, then if I find it helps, add a fake speaker in the DAW, either using impulse responses or just a speaker cab in Amplitube/whatever. Again, it works pretty well.
The big advantage of DIs that take their feed from the amp's speaker outputs rather than a line out from the pre-amp is you can crank the amp a bit to get the power-amp and its valves saturating, which is a different sound and feel to pre-amp overdrive. Just never be tempted to run a valve amp without the correct impedance load on the speaker outputs. A transistor amp is likely to survive the experience, depending on it's design, but a valve circuit will take damage, quite possibly very serious and expensive damage.
Sonar Platinum 64bit, Windows 8.1 Pro 64bit, I7 3770K Ivybridge, 16GB Ram, Gigabyte Z77-D3H m/board, ATI 7750 graphics+ 1GB RAM, 2xIntel 520 series 220GB SSDs, 1 TB Samsung F3 + 1 TB WD HDDs, Seasonic fanless 460W psu, RME Fireface UFX, Focusrite Octopre. Assorted real synths, guitars, mandolins, diatonic accordions, percussion, fx and other stuff.
|
bitflipper
01100010 01101001 01110100 01100110 01101100 01101
- Total Posts : 26036
- Joined: 2006/09/17 11:23:23
- Location: Everett, WA USA
- Status: offline
Re: Tube Amp Load boxes and Impulse Response
2016/07/07 11:42:21
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby Voda La Void 2016/07/07 15:35:42
A guitar amp generates distortion three ways: the triode preamp (odd-order harmonics), the push-pull power amp / transformer (even-order harmonics), and the speakers (odd-order and intermodulation distortion). When you take a line out signal, you're only getting the preamp distortion. When you use a microphone in front of the speakers, you get all three, which is why it's usually preferable for distorted tones.
The problem is that you have to push a power amp very hard before it starts to deliver juicy distortion, because you have to pump enough current through the transformer to saturate it. That means cranking it up, which is often impractical.
Placing a dummy load (usually a large resistor) in place of the speakers allows you to push the power amp hard, but silently. 'Now, you at least have two of the three distortion sources working for you. But you still don't have the desired speaker/cabinet distortion. You also don't get whatever the room and microphone might have added to the tone.
Using an impulse response allows you to emulate the contribution of the speakers. Because the IRs were created using real microphones in front of real speakers in a real room, the convolution processor is able to accurately reproduce the effects of a specific speaker/microphone/room combination. Best of both worlds, in theory.
The downside is that you're stuck with the IRs you have and can't do much to alter them. With microphones, you might find that the tone can be improved by moving the microphone an inch or two. But that's not an option if you're using an IR, which is a snapshot of somebody else's setup.
Pete Thorn is taking it one step further and creating his own IRs. That's a lot of work, and you may find that you can get acceptable (or even better) results using other peoples' IRs. That way, you're not limited to the equipment you own personally. Maybe you want the sound of a Marshall with a ribbon mike one day, and a Twin Reverb with an SM-58 another day.
 All else is in doubt, so this is the truth I cling to. My Stuff
|
Voda La Void
Max Output Level: -76 dBFS
- Total Posts : 723
- Joined: 2011/02/12 09:15:07
- Location: Broken Arrow, OK
- Status: offline
Re: Tube Amp Load boxes and Impulse Response
2016/07/07 15:17:15
(permalink)
Thanks Bit. That's a great explanation. I noticed Pete is using a Two Tones plugin for his IR file, in Logic as his DAW software. I'll have to do some research to see how this will work in Cakewalk. Sounds like I would really benefit from others IR's. I love the purity of doing my own, but like you say, it's a lot of work and I'm not sure that cost / benefit really justifies it and you can get a lot of variety, via from people who know what they're doing when mic'ing cabinets. I think I need to at least hear a good tube amp with a reactive load. Not so funny story....so when I got robbed a few years ago, I bought a Mesa Boogie Rectoverb 50W 1x12 tube amp with the insurance money and fell instantly, deeply in love. But all my experience had been with a Marshall Valvestate 8100 SS output to a cheapo Behringer DI box with cab sim. Since I always recorded DI, I simply set up my Mesa the same way. And because I'm a complete dumbass, I disconnected the speaker....you know where this is going. They said I didn't fry the transformer but I swear it never sounded the same. But, I have to say, that line out sound was still better than anything I've been able to accomplish with my Marshall. I'm dying now to know how that Mesa sound would improve with a reactive load. And then, with a good IR instead of that silly Behringer cab sim. I do remember being disappointed at how flat and compressed the sound was compared to what I was hearing out of the cabinet.
post edited by Voda La Void - 2016/07/07 16:09:23
Voda La Void...experiments in disturbing frequencies...
|
batsbrew
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 10037
- Joined: 2007/06/07 16:02:32
- Location: SL,UT
- Status: offline
Re: Tube Amp Load boxes and Impulse Response
2016/07/07 16:08:54
(permalink)
all of my recordings i've posted,
and the ones on my last 2 albums,
were mostly recorded using a Mesa Boogie Mark IIb 60 watt tube head...
amplifier speaker out into a palmer PDI-09 (it has a filter cab EQ, same as TLW describes).....
PDI-09 'thru' and into a WEBER MASS LITE attenuator.....
out of attenuator and into speaker cabinets....
xlr out of pdi-09 capture the full output of the amplifier, and goes directly to DAW Interface (either into a mic pre and into my soundcard, or directly into my soundcard from the pdi-09)
so, basically, i can run the amp as hard as i want, capture the tone, but after that happens, i can attenuate the level of volume thru the cabinet at any volume i want, and it does not effect the direct capture.
it also means that i can capture TWO signals at once; a direct signal, and if i want, a miced cab signal, which i can then blend in any configuration i want.
i can detail this more for you, if you like,
but the bottom line is, i'm not using modelers or IR's, tho i think pete thorn's stuff sounds AWESOME.
here is a quick little vid i did recently,
just to learn how to edit a video and pull audio from Sonar into it..
one side, is purely direct.
one side was close miced with a Shure KSM44.
|
Voda La Void
Max Output Level: -76 dBFS
- Total Posts : 723
- Joined: 2011/02/12 09:15:07
- Location: Broken Arrow, OK
- Status: offline
Re: Tube Amp Load boxes and Impulse Response
2016/07/07 18:37:38
(permalink)
batsbrew
all of my recordings i've posted,
and the ones on my last 2 albums,
were mostly recorded using a Mesa Boogie Mark IIb 60 watt tube head...
amplifier speaker out into a palmer PDI-09 (it has a filter cab EQ, same as TLW describes).....
PDI-09 'thru' and into a WEBER MASS LITE attenuator.....
out of attenuator and into speaker cabinets....
xlr out of pdi-09 capture the full output of the amplifier, and goes directly to DAW Interface (either into a mic pre and into my soundcard, or directly into my soundcard from the pdi-09)
so, basically, i can run the amp as hard as i want, capture the tone, but after that happens, i can attenuate the level of volume thru the cabinet at any volume i want, and it does not effect the direct capture.
it also means that i can capture TWO signals at once; a direct signal, and if i want, a miced cab signal, which i can then blend in any configuration i want.
Thanks, I'm pleasantly surprised at your recording chain. I just figured you mic'd everything. That's very encouraging. Loved the vid. So on your mic'd side you have a cabinet and speaker keeping IR from having a job. Your DI side won't but it still has two of the three elements Bit was talking about, mixed with your mic'd side. It's a great sound. Now, Pete says that your output from your DI is affected by the load characteristics connected to the amp. The more resistive the load, the flatter the impedance characteristic. So it sounds compressed and dull. He actually demonstrates this on the video above, around 13 or 14 minutes I think. I would think then, the more you turn up your attenuator, the more resistive the load will become, and the tone and sound should change on your DI side.
Voda La Void...experiments in disturbing frequencies...
|
batsbrew
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 10037
- Joined: 2007/06/07 16:02:32
- Location: SL,UT
- Status: offline
Re: Tube Amp Load boxes and Impulse Response
2016/07/07 18:46:06
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby tlw 2016/07/08 23:00:18
but remember..
i'm taking the palmer feed directly off the speaker out of the amp....
before it hits the attenuator.
that fact is key.
the palmer is applying a 'hardware' version of a IR..... it's a EQ circuit, that implies the tone of a miced 1x12, 2x12 or 4x12.....
|
batsbrew
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 10037
- Joined: 2007/06/07 16:02:32
- Location: SL,UT
- Status: offline
Re: Tube Amp Load boxes and Impulse Response
2016/07/07 18:47:48
(permalink)
so, the attenuator is not really doing anything until after the palmer has already gotten it's signal..
also, the mass lite, uses a speaker motor for it's load.... in addition to 'some' resistive load, it does not work like a thd hotplate, or marshall power brake, that kind of thing...
|
tlw
Max Output Level: -49.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2567
- Joined: 2008/10/11 22:06:32
- Location: West Midlands, UK
- Status: offline
Re: Tube Amp Load boxes and Impulse Response
2016/07/07 19:43:32
(permalink)
The particular impedance loading a loadbox, which completely replaces a speaker, unlike an attenuator which lowers the volume that reaches the speaker, should make no more difference to the amp's sound or volume than using an 8 Ohm speaker rather than a 16 Ohm. Assuming the speaker or loadbox is connected to the correct output on the amp, of course.
The Palmer loadboxes have an advantage over some others in that they're not simply a bank of fixed resistors an a heatsink but they present a reactive load to the amp which is much closer to the real-world load a speaker presents. They can also reliably handle pretty hefty amps, which might be useful if someone's only amp is a 100W 1960s or 70s Marshall or a Blackface Twin they like to crank to get the power stage working hard.
And while I've yet to damage a valve amp by forgetting to connect the speaker I have had a couple of solid state amps burn out in the past because of a short in the speaker cable. In one case because the lead got accidentally tripped over an pulled from the cab - no worries, it'a a solid state amp, except - the person who tripped over the lead then stood on the jack plug, squashed it and pushed the connectors inside it together. The other one was a rubbish jack plug that allowed its connectors to move enough for them to touch.
Sonar Platinum 64bit, Windows 8.1 Pro 64bit, I7 3770K Ivybridge, 16GB Ram, Gigabyte Z77-D3H m/board, ATI 7750 graphics+ 1GB RAM, 2xIntel 520 series 220GB SSDs, 1 TB Samsung F3 + 1 TB WD HDDs, Seasonic fanless 460W psu, RME Fireface UFX, Focusrite Octopre. Assorted real synths, guitars, mandolins, diatonic accordions, percussion, fx and other stuff.
|
Voda La Void
Max Output Level: -76 dBFS
- Total Posts : 723
- Joined: 2011/02/12 09:15:07
- Location: Broken Arrow, OK
- Status: offline
Re: Tube Amp Load boxes and Impulse Response
2016/07/08 08:43:53
(permalink)
batsbrew
so, the attenuator is not really doing anything until after the palmer has already gotten it's signal..
also, the mass lite, uses a speaker motor for it's load.... in addition to 'some' resistive load, it does not work like a thd hotplate, or marshall power brake, that kind of thing...
Ah, I see what you're saying. But keep in mind, these are audio 'circuits'. Outputs and inputs are just how we describe the signal flow conceptually, but inputs and outputs make a circuit together, and each effects the other. Something has to provide the load to your amp, and I believe that is your attenuator. Your Palmer is providing connection to your load speaker, or attenuator in this case, on your Thru input. So, the output of the Palmer is effected by the kind of load you have connected to its Thru input. And it would be super easy to test. Just disconnect your attenuator / speaker circuit *for a second* and listen to the sound change. With no load, it should be effected. If Pete is correct about this, the load characteristics will change the audio circuit the Palmer is getting its sample from. It's not something that was obvious to me, at first but after listening to Pete explain it and demonstrate it, and then considering electrical theory, it all makes sense now. Pete also posts in the Rig-Talk forum and he explained this amp/load relationship with respect to line-out capture, in writing to another poster: http://www.rig-talk.com/f...c.php?f=3&t=166679 "But you can't "take the load out of the equation"- just because you put the ISO line out box 1st after the head, the amp still reacts to whatever it's being loaded with, downstream, so to speak... and that affects that line out sound. Even if the line out box is right after the head's speaker out. And it makes a big difference (the load). The difference between a decent reactive load and a resistive load is quite big, your grandma could hear
it.  ok, my grandma...."
Every time I say "Pete said" I hear my little sister "Mom said!!" ha ha
post edited by Voda La Void - 2016/07/08 10:05:06
Voda La Void...experiments in disturbing frequencies...
|
Voda La Void
Max Output Level: -76 dBFS
- Total Posts : 723
- Joined: 2011/02/12 09:15:07
- Location: Broken Arrow, OK
- Status: offline
Re: Tube Amp Load boxes and Impulse Response
2016/07/08 08:52:18
(permalink)
And yeah, I see what you're saying about the Palmer providing the hardware IR, that makes total sense. So you're getting all three elements on both sides of your recording chain there, that's really cool.
Your setup really has me encouraged. I'm wondering about attenuators now, instead of full blown load boxing.
And that's a pretty cool attenuator. I thought most attenuators were resistive, by nature. Being a more reactive component for less than 200 bucks sounds like a great piece of gear. The sound is great.
Do you still manage to capture that "voice" you get from tube amps on your DI side? There were times it seemed like my Mesa was talking to me, like a subtle wah effect, for lack of a better description.
Voda La Void...experiments in disturbing frequencies...
|
Voda La Void
Max Output Level: -76 dBFS
- Total Posts : 723
- Joined: 2011/02/12 09:15:07
- Location: Broken Arrow, OK
- Status: offline
Re: Tube Amp Load boxes and Impulse Response
2016/07/08 09:16:10
(permalink)
tlw
The particular impedance loading a loadbox, which completely replaces a speaker, unlike an attenuator which lowers the volume that reaches the speaker, should make no more difference to the amp's sound or volume than using an 8 Ohm speaker rather than a 16 Ohm. Assuming the speaker or loadbox is connected to the correct output on the amp, of course.
But it does, because of the impedance curve related to the type of load, itself. A reactive load effects the impedance felt by various frequencies in the audio range, thereby changing the tone. Here's a graph showing the difference between a reactive (speaker, or reactive load box) and non-reactive (resistive load box, hot plate) load. This is the same curve Pete demonstrates in the above video - and he even includes sound samples so you can hear the difference as well. 
post edited by Voda La Void - 2016/07/08 09:42:21
Voda La Void...experiments in disturbing frequencies...
|
batsbrew
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 10037
- Joined: 2007/06/07 16:02:32
- Location: SL,UT
- Status: offline
Re: Tube Amp Load boxes and Impulse Response
2016/07/08 10:01:56
(permalink)
Voda La Void
Do you still manage to capture that "voice" you get from tube amps on your DI side? There were times it seemed like my Mesa was talking to me, like a subtle wah effect, for lack of a better description.
for PURISTS, myself included, the miced sound always trumps any other version of this.... whether it be modelers with IR's, or direct boxes like the Radial JDX or the palmer series. but, it's a good enough sound for me. i've experimented with a few modelers, used to own a pod XT, and the palmer signal, especially with clean tones, is so close, it's really not an issue. and i don't always use the weber attenuator, the master volume control on the boogie is quite good, and the design of the boogie is to have lots of headroom anyway, but, sometimes there are tones that i need the power section to bumping it on, and then i use the attenuator. the reactive quality of the weber mass lite, overcomes some of the 'load curve' issue that pete talks about. but i never A/B tones, i simply take what i have going on, and tweak it til i like it. for me, it's never been about taking my stage volume tone, and trying to duplicate it at studio and bedroom volumes.... it was always about finding a great tone, using whatever pieces i have. for the purists, putting ANYTHING in line between the guitar and amp head, and between the amp head and speakers, is pure sacrilege. LOL and on certain tracks, that's exactly what i do, and it's always better than anything else. YMMV 
|
bitflipper
01100010 01101001 01110100 01100110 01101100 01101
- Total Posts : 26036
- Joined: 2006/09/17 11:23:23
- Location: Everett, WA USA
- Status: offline
Re: Tube Amp Load boxes and Impulse Response
2016/07/08 10:47:33
(permalink)
My experience is mostly limited to resistive loads, which I used for troubleshooting amplifiers - if nobody wants to listen to high-volume guitars, you can be sure they really, really don't want to hear high-volume test tones! However, when I built my second-generation load box, I made a point of adding some inductance. My motivation wasn't an attempt to emulate the tone of a speaker, but rather to protect amplifiers from being damaged due to initial surges (not an issue with tube amps, but can be with solid-state amps). The easiest way to add some inductance to the load was to insert an iron-core inductor, the type used in power conditioners. That brought the inductance up to around 100 mH, a little high for all but the most high-powered 8-ohm speakers but fine for my purposes. You could probably use half that value. Then I figured I'd go the extra mile and take into account capacitive reactance as well. I don't remember what I ended up putting in, but it was a small value, perhaps 1000 pF or so. It's not nearly as relevant as inductance. I should point out that I never recorded this setup, so I can't say if it altered the tone significantly. [EDIT] I poked around with Google and found this excellent explanation of speaker impedance. It may be more than you really wanted to know, but includes a detailed schematic diagram of the electrical equivalent for a speaker load.
All else is in doubt, so this is the truth I cling to. My Stuff
|
batsbrew
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 10037
- Joined: 2007/06/07 16:02:32
- Location: SL,UT
- Status: offline
Re: Tube Amp Load boxes and Impulse Response
2016/07/08 12:27:55
(permalink)
FROM WEBER: "All MASS products use an actual moving speaker motor for the load and are more interactive with the output circuit of the amp" I have found this claim to be true, as i've used many resisitive attenuators, including the first one i ever heard of, the tom scholz design, the 'power soak'. FAQ: http://www.tedweber.com/attenuator-faq/ MASS LITE LINK: http://www.tedweber.com/mass-lite
|
ampfixer
Max Output Level: -20 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5508
- Joined: 2010/12/12 20:11:50
- Location: Ontario
- Status: offline
Re: Tube Amp Load boxes and Impulse Response
2016/07/08 15:08:11
(permalink)
Adding the speaker motor creates frequency dependent impedance to the load box. Different frequencies generate varying degrees of counter EMF via the voice coil, just like a speaker. I never put line outs into my amps because I find that you have to spend some time and money to get a system that sounds good. People don't want to pay for the feature to be properly implemented.
Regards, John I want to make it clear that I am an Eedjit. I have no direct, or indirect, knowledge of business, the music industry, forum threads or the meaning of life. I know about amps. WIN 10 Pro X64, I7-3770k 16 gigs, ASUS Z77 pro, AMD 7950 3 gig, Steinberg UR44, A-Pro 500, Sonar Platinum, KRK Rokit 6
|
tlw
Max Output Level: -49.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2567
- Joined: 2008/10/11 22:06:32
- Location: West Midlands, UK
- Status: offline
Re: Tube Amp Load boxes and Impulse Response
2016/07/08 23:27:22
(permalink)
Voda La VoidBut it does, because of the impedance curve related to the type of load, itself. A reactive load effects the impedance felt by various frequencies in the audio range, thereby changing the tone.
Maybe I was ambiguous, sorry. What I tried to say is that as far as the amp is concerned, there is no more difference in tone or volume if you switch an 8 Ohm loadbox for a 16 Ohm than if you switch from an 8 Ohm speaker to a 16 Ohm speaker. A good loadbox isn't simply a fixed resistive load either, but is a reactive load. That's where most of the many circuits you can find online which combine high-current resistors and heatsinks fall down. For biasing an amp they might be close enough, but a reactive loadbox is more speaker-like. "Speaker-like" because it still isn't a speaker, but used together with a DI feed from the amp's speaker outputs it can produce good enough results with the advantage of zero volume. As for the Palmer speaker emulators, the PDI09 I use has a "normal" setting which is a high pass rolling off at around 100Hz, a gentle low pass at aroung 5K and flat through the mids with a high end peak centred at around 3KHz. It looks very much like Celestion's plots for the 12" Greenback and Alnico Blue. The "Bright" setting adds more dB to the 3KHz peak and the "Mellow" setting, which Palmer say is more "American" rolls top off quite steeply from around 3KHz. The overall response is supposed to be similar to an open-back 2x12, if you want closed back just add a bit of bass eq in the DAW. "Normal" and "Bright" are fine for my use, being something like a Greenback/Blue and a Vintage 30. The "Mellow" setting is too dull, nothing like a Jensen kind of sound at all. It's like Palmer didn't spot that the "classic American Combo" tone isn't the result of a dull speaker but an amp that's not as bright as a Marshall or Vox and with a lot of mid on tap feeding a speaker with a deep mid-scoop, hefty lows and a bright top end. Even attached to a bright Fender-style circuit with the treble set high "Mellow" is still a bit too dull, while the other two settings are both quite usable. The frequency figures are the result of my own testing, done by passing white noise through it and seeing what the output frequency plot looks like, I don't think Palmer themselves actually give any figures. The Behringer speaker DI has a curve that's more like a closed 4x12 from what I've seen on-line. A bass and treble hump with a slight mid scoop between them. I've never tried one, but from reports I've seen they can apparently be quite noisy. Though some say they're fine unless you engage their on-board speaker sim or the dB pads. In the end it's all about the many ways of getting a guitar recorded. There's no one "right way" any more than there's one "right amp" or one "right speaker." As for attenuators, some of them seem to adversly affect the tone if the attenuation is set very high, so getting a powerful amp down to household volumes and miking that may or may not produce good results. I don't own one, but one attenuator I have heard that sounds very good to me is the one Cornell build into their amps.
Sonar Platinum 64bit, Windows 8.1 Pro 64bit, I7 3770K Ivybridge, 16GB Ram, Gigabyte Z77-D3H m/board, ATI 7750 graphics+ 1GB RAM, 2xIntel 520 series 220GB SSDs, 1 TB Samsung F3 + 1 TB WD HDDs, Seasonic fanless 460W psu, RME Fireface UFX, Focusrite Octopre. Assorted real synths, guitars, mandolins, diatonic accordions, percussion, fx and other stuff.
|
Voda La Void
Max Output Level: -76 dBFS
- Total Posts : 723
- Joined: 2011/02/12 09:15:07
- Location: Broken Arrow, OK
- Status: offline
Re: Tube Amp Load boxes and Impulse Response
2016/07/12 08:40:01
(permalink)
tlw
Voda La VoidBut it does, because of the impedance curve related to the type of load, itself. A reactive load effects the impedance felt by various frequencies in the audio range, thereby changing the tone.
Maybe I was ambiguous, sorry.
What I tried to say is that as far as the amp is concerned, there is no more difference in tone or volume if you switch an 8 Ohm loadbox for a 16 Ohm than if you switch from an 8 Ohm speaker to a 16 Ohm speaker.
A good loadbox isn't simply a fixed resistive load either, but is a reactive load. That's where most of the many circuits you can find online which combine high-current resistors and heatsinks fall down. For biasing an amp they might be close enough, but a reactive loadbox is more speaker-like.
Yeah that's what I'm looking for now, I think. The Weber certainly sounds good, but I need complete silence, even for a 100W if I go that way, and I would like the load to be reactive so I'm focusing on more all out load box solutions. batsbrew
Voda La Void
Do you still manage to capture that "voice" you get from tube amps on your DI side? There were times it seemed like my Mesa was talking to me, like a subtle wah effect, for lack of a better description.
the reactive quality of the weber mass lite, overcomes some of the 'load curve' issue that pete talks about.
but i never A/B tones, i simply take what i have going on, and tweak it til i like it.
for me, it's never been about taking my stage volume tone, and trying to duplicate it at studio and bedroom volumes....
it was always about finding a great tone, using whatever pieces i have.
Same here. I've never really had a "sound" anyway, rather I just go to record and get the best I can out of what I've got. I'm really burnt out on the Marshall valvestate sound though, and I want to go back to tubes and give it another go. Surely a decent tube amp into a dummy load and good DI box would sound better than my valve state line out into a cheap DI...
Voda La Void...experiments in disturbing frequencies...
|
batsbrew
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 10037
- Joined: 2007/06/07 16:02:32
- Location: SL,UT
- Status: offline
Re: Tube Amp Load boxes and Impulse Response
2016/07/12 10:39:57
(permalink)
i will say this.. no matter what attenuator you go for, the more you attenuate, the sh!!tier is will sound. if you want to capture the sound of a Marshall, but attenuate it down to nothing, to get line level, if it were me, i would build a 18 watt TMB clone, and put a PPIMV on it, and maybe a half power switch, and then run it wide open, and stick it in a closet or speakers in a box, and attenuate as little as possible. this will sound WAY better than a 100w marshall attenuated to it's knees. there are many excellent clones out there....... look at something like the Suhr corso as well... and the Victory BD1, or even something like the new Line DT25, which rides the fence between tube power and modeling tech, sounds better than most else i've heard.
post edited by batsbrew - 2016/07/12 11:16:36
|
batsbrew
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 10037
- Joined: 2007/06/07 16:02:32
- Location: SL,UT
- Status: offline
Re: Tube Amp Load boxes and Impulse Response
2016/07/12 10:59:55
(permalink)
the corso is awesome...
can be set for zero volume,
is only 5 watts to start with,
has a line level out for direct recording,
check out pete thorns demo:
listen in high def
|
Voda La Void
Max Output Level: -76 dBFS
- Total Posts : 723
- Joined: 2011/02/12 09:15:07
- Location: Broken Arrow, OK
- Status: offline
Re: Tube Amp Load boxes and Impulse Response
2016/07/12 11:06:59
(permalink)
batsbrew
i will say this..
no matter what attenuator you go for,
the more you attenuate,
the sh!!tier is will sound.
if you want to capture the sound of a Marshall, but attenuate it down to nothing, to get line level,
if it were me,
i would build a 18 watt TMB clone,
and put a PPIMV on it, and maybe a half power switch,
and then run it wide open, and attenuate as little as possible.
this will sound WAY better than a 100w marshall attenuated to it's knees.
there are many excellent clones out there.......
look at something like the Suhr corso as well...
and the Victory BD1,
or even something like the new Line DT25, which rides the fence between tube power and modeling tech,
sounds better than most else i've heard.
i may end up doing something like that. It just depends on how disappointing load boxing turns out to be...I really can't drive this room at all. I need silence, not just quiet. Solid state does that for me. I have to believe I can go tube and still pull this off.... I want to check out the Hughes and Kettner Tubemeister 5 watt today. It has a power soak switch for silent recording, and a cab sim out, so probably a very resistive load. This will be a kind of sound reference for me.
Voda La Void...experiments in disturbing frequencies...
|
tlw
Max Output Level: -49.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2567
- Joined: 2008/10/11 22:06:32
- Location: West Midlands, UK
- Status: offline
Re: Tube Amp Load boxes and Impulse Response
2016/07/12 11:14:20
(permalink)
The big advantage of a DI fed from the amp's speaker output with a loadbox replacing the speaker is that nothing is being attenuated - you're not reducing the output from the amp at all.
A better alternative to an attenuator that lowers the speaker volume is a lower powered amp. But a cranked five watt amp isn't much less loud than a 50 watt amp into the same speaker. It's half the volume, but for domestic purposes will easily carry through walls and floors. Lots of guitar speakers push out around 100dB with a 1 watt input.
The sub-one watt amps like the Blackheart, which uses a pair of 12AX7s, one in the preamp and one as the power amp for a total output of around 1/4 watt are more usable, especially with an inefficient speaker. Blackstar do a similar low-powered amp, though its drive channel seems horribly noisy. I've not tried a Z-Bex mini-amp because the high price and difficulty in obtaining replacement valves puts me off them.
Sonar Platinum 64bit, Windows 8.1 Pro 64bit, I7 3770K Ivybridge, 16GB Ram, Gigabyte Z77-D3H m/board, ATI 7750 graphics+ 1GB RAM, 2xIntel 520 series 220GB SSDs, 1 TB Samsung F3 + 1 TB WD HDDs, Seasonic fanless 460W psu, RME Fireface UFX, Focusrite Octopre. Assorted real synths, guitars, mandolins, diatonic accordions, percussion, fx and other stuff.
|
ampfixer
Max Output Level: -20 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5508
- Joined: 2010/12/12 20:11:50
- Location: Ontario
- Status: offline
Re: Tube Amp Load boxes and Impulse Response
2016/07/12 12:03:38
(permalink)
Voda La Void
batsbrew
i will say this..
no matter what attenuator you go for,
the more you attenuate,
the sh!!tier is will sound.
if you want to capture the sound of a Marshall, but attenuate it down to nothing, to get line level,
if it were me,
i would build a 18 watt TMB clone,
and put a PPIMV on it, and maybe a half power switch,
and then run it wide open, and attenuate as little as possible.
this will sound WAY better than a 100w marshall attenuated to it's knees.
there are many excellent clones out there.......
look at something like the Suhr corso as well...
and the Victory BD1,
or even something like the new Line DT25, which rides the fence between tube power and modeling tech,
sounds better than most else i've heard.
i may end up doing something like that. It just depends on how disappointing load boxing turns out to be...I really can't drive this room at all. I need silence, not just quiet. Solid state does that for me. I have to believe I can go tube and still pull this off....
I want to check out the Hughes and Kettner Tubemeister 5 watt today. It has a power soak switch for silent recording, and a cab sim out, so probably a very resistive load. This will be a kind of sound reference for me.
As I understand it, Hughes and Ketner use speaker impulse tech in their line outs. You can get info about it from their site. I know you can D/L their impulse responses to use in their gear. The tubemeister is a great little amp and quite a bargain.
Regards, John I want to make it clear that I am an Eedjit. I have no direct, or indirect, knowledge of business, the music industry, forum threads or the meaning of life. I know about amps. WIN 10 Pro X64, I7-3770k 16 gigs, ASUS Z77 pro, AMD 7950 3 gig, Steinberg UR44, A-Pro 500, Sonar Platinum, KRK Rokit 6
|
batsbrew
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 10037
- Joined: 2007/06/07 16:02:32
- Location: SL,UT
- Status: offline
Re: Tube Amp Load boxes and Impulse Response
2016/07/12 13:11:32
(permalink)
ampfixer
As I understand it, Hughes and Ketner use speaker impulse tech in their line outs. You can get info about it from their site. I know you can D/L their impulse responses to use in their gear. The tubemeister is a great little amp and quite a bargain.
you know, i tried one of those H&K meisters, was completely underwhelmed by it. don't buy ANYTHING, without trying it out first. or at least have a great return policy........! 
|