Myths, Legends and the Mojo of the Dallas Rangemaster

Post by **modman** » 19 Feb 2008, 08:48

JHS wrote:Eric said, he used an OC75 equipped RM, a borrowd LP Std. and a JTM45 with KT66 tubes, normal input, for most of the recordings and IMHO it sounds very good on the Beano album, considering it was 1965 and compared to the crappy sound on Beatles record from this time.
JHS

JHS · Post by **JHS** » 19 Feb 2008, 10:13

Every guitarplayer knows what type of equipment he used for a recording session or in his career.

If somebody ask you and you don't want to talk 12 hours about your equipment (you've done it at least a thousand times before), the best answer is "I can't remember" or "I'don't know".

JHS

analogguru · Post by **analogguru** » 19 Feb 2008, 11:24

Every guitarplayer knows what type of equipment he used for a recording session or in his career.

And does he also know which trensistors were used inside ?:

Eric said, he used an OC75 equipped RM,...

I doubt that...

analogguru

vanessa · Post by **vanessa** » 19 Feb 2008, 16:56

JHS wrote:A lot of European guitar players used the Rangemaster with succes and RM equipped with OC75, NKT275 or OC44 can sound quite different.

I've never seen a original RM photo with an NKT275 in it stock anyway. Anyone have a photo with?

JofZ wrote: The book states a guitar into the amp, no pedals at all!

I've heard that he made this statement, and was the inspiration for this thread. For most the album he's not using anything. In fact maybe the most memorable track, "Hideaway" sounds just like a LP into a Marshall.
It does sound like he used something on a couple of tracks, but it's very possible he used a small practice amp for those tracks in question. It is very much that tone, not the tone of a mid size combo pushed into overdrive by a RM.

vanessa · Post by **vanessa** » 19 Feb 2008, 17:02

analogguru wrote:
Eric said, he used an OC75 equipped RM,...
I doubt that...

analogguru

+1, I highly doubt Eric even knew what kind of tubes were in the amp going into the session. I would guess it needed to be re-tubed and the 66's were just a set on hand. That might even account for the fuzz like tone on those few tracks. The stock tubes failing.

This actually makes sense, the volume level on those tracks is a bit low. But then at the very least you would think he would have remembered that the amp was having issues, unless he was in love with the crappy tone and someone like the producer pulled a switch on him? EC: "Wow this amp sounds so much better today! What changed? Producer: "We thought you might like the sound of it with KT66's in it".

teleman · Post by **teleman** » 22 Feb 2008, 03:03

Yeah, Clapton doesn't seem to be much of a gearhead. I just read his autobiography and he talks about guitars a little but not a word about effects or amps. I think a great number of good players just use whatever works for them. Tone is in the fingers, not in the feet right?

analogguru · Post by **analogguru** » 22 Feb 2008, 06:11

Tone is in the fingers, not in the feet right?

+1

playon · Post by **playon** » 28 Feb 2008, 08:57

Here ya go...

https://cgi.ebay.com/Dallas-Rangemaster ... otohosting

analogguru · Post by **analogguru** » 28 Feb 2008, 09:17

$5.000,-- for this noisy piece of shit....

...but still no NKT275. What is shown is an OC71, the "audio"-transistor of the OC-series. Interesting that it is in a metal case and should be from the first series. (OC71 normally came in the black glass-case.) This means, that Dallas started with the "right" audio-part (OC71) and switched later to the RF-part (OC44) which he could get cheaper, cause nobody wanted to use them anymore. In the early 60´s everybody in the industry switched to the AF-series or even silicon-transistors for RF-use.

It is possible, that the OC71 gave a slightly "smoother" result.

analogguru

MoreCowbell · Post by **MoreCowbell** » 28 Feb 2008, 18:06

analogguru wrote: $5.000,-- for this noisy piece of shit....

...but still no NKT275. What is shown is an OC71, the "audio"-transistor of the OC-series. Interesting that it is in a metal case and should be from the first series. (OC71 normally came in the black glass-case.) This means, that Dallas started with the "right" audio-part (OC71) and switched later to the RF-part (OC44) which he could get cheaper, cause nobody wanted to use them anymore. In the early 60´s everybody in the industry switched to the AF-series or even silicon-transistors for RF-use.

It is possible, that the OC71 gave a slightly "smoother" result.

analogguru

Yep, its freaking nuts !

Someone paid $4,000 a few months back though, so I don't doubt that this guy will get $5k ...

If I had one I'd sell it too...

Electric Warrior · Post by **Electric Warrior** » 09 Apr 2009, 13:38

https://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?V ... 0370497532
Rangemaster prices are out of control

but nice photos. inspired me to draw up a layout. hope I got it all right..

soulsonic · Post by **soulsonic** » 10 Apr 2009, 08:54

The schematic in the auction makes me laugh. Someone thinks those brown things are resistors!

SirElwood · Post by **SirElwood** » 10 Apr 2009, 09:57

What is with that transistor? I taught that oc44 trannies are black whitout "heatshrink".

svstee · Post by **svstee** » 12 Apr 2009, 02:18

OK, stupid question I know, but since the PNP RM has the positive ground, can I power it from a daisy chain with all the other pedals on my board?

svstee · Post by **svstee** » 12 Apr 2009, 03:43

No, just a simple daisy chain from a VS 1spot.

soulsonic · Post by **soulsonic** » 12 Apr 2009, 05:26

You can use a simple voltage inverter chip to make a negative voltage from the positive supply, then it can be powered from a daisy chain.

blanik · Post by **blanik** » 12 Apr 2009, 13:54

JHS wrote:Every guitarplayer knows what type of equipment he used for a recording session or in his career.

If somebody ask you and you don't want to talk 12 hours about your equipment (you've done it at least a thousand times before), the best answer is "I can't remember" or "I'don't know".

JHS

i have to disagree with that, i did lots of recording in the last 20 year, most of it a lot more sober than those guys used to do it and i can't remember what i used, studios are filled with gear and you usually bring all your guitars, amps and effects and the thing that's important is to get a performance on tape (yes i started on tape...lol) finding a sound is more a matter of quickly trying amps and pedals until a sound clicks, record the part then it's on to the next part... i listened to some old recording made a while ago and wondered what was the weird sound on a part until i remembered that there was a Leslie in the studio and i used it... imagine if i'd lived in the 60s

ST. 1162 · Post by **ST. 1162** » 13 Apr 2009, 10:44

JHS wrote:A few years ago I bought a venyl Mayall sampler on a flea market. It has an inlet with lots of photos and infos about the Beano recording session.

On one photo, Eric used a RM and sat with the LP in front of the amp, the RM was placed on the amp.

Do you you still have this lp? If so can you give us details about the album?

Someone posted pics elsewhere from an album they have which sounds like it might be the same one you found, but none of them showed a Rangemaster on top of the amp.

Electric Warrior · Post by **Electric Warrior** » 13 Apr 2009, 19:23

biffa wrote:Tell 'em about the yellow jacket tone,e.warrior!

Thick, complex tone but still has an amazing clarity. I'm loving it!

Electric Warrior · Post by **Electric Warrior** » 13 Apr 2009, 19:58

soulsonic wrote:The schematic in the auction makes me laugh. Someone thinks those brown things are resistors!

but it's obvious why he made that mistake..