freestompboxes.org

excellent points! but just don't forget Traynor. my YBA-III has massive iron.



and topics merged. please search first.

Malcolm Moore explains why limitations are not preferable

"For a guitar, the audio spectrum needs are wide. ...The lower open E string has a fundamental of about 128 Hz, and significant harmonics are the second, fourth, sixth and eighth meaning the spectrum here extends to 1024 Hz. On the twelfth fret on the upper E string the fundamental is about 1,024 Hz, and the spectrum extends to about 8.192 kHz. On the 21st fret the fundamental at C# is about 1,722 Hz, and the spectrum extends to almost 14 kHz! The...frequency response needs to be virtually flat from less than 100 Hz to greater than 14 kHz to faithfully reproduce the vibrations from the guitar strings - before anybody starts to play with the audio spectrum, develop distortion, or introduce echo and / or reverberation."

http://www.moore.org.au/pick/01/01_strt.htm


At the same time, a 12-inch speaker is probably not reproducing anything over 5 kHz.

At the same time, the "bright" switches common on many amps significantly boost the high frequency response, apparently in attempt to bring-up the highs in the final output - and undo the loss from the speaker and even perhaps the amp...which most likely leads to all kinds of zany weird distortions in the higher frequencies. Some people love that, some don't, and there's so many different kinds of speakers, perhaps thousands. And maybe that many amps. And tubes. And guitars. And strings. And pickups! And players.

So I think it's fairly impossible to make any kind of sweeping statement regarding 'limited bandwidth' other than to explain that one purpose of GAGA is purity and clarity of tone, and we feel that begins with more faithfully amplifying whatever signal is put in, not in creating some kind of subjective-to-us, inescapable bandwidth-limiting filter/amp. There apparently are plenty of those already, and just because that's been done for decades (a) doesn't make it right or better, and (b) definitely means we don't want to 'me-too' that. (I can't recall a single GAGA player who's ever complained about too much high-end.) Meanwhile, so many guitar books and mavens advise to start with the best possible clean tone - it's the only sane starting point. Everything and anything else can then be added and/or taken away from the final tone.

When we say "high-end" we don't say (or mean) "hi-fi" as in a dry, 2D, direct-into-mixing-board, lifeless tone. Instead, we refer more to the quality of build, design considerations, etc.

They say the proof of the pudding is in the eating. So dish up and let's have a big mouthful. Only then will we know if we like it or not. We can speculate all we like, but until we try the thing, we'll never really know.

I love old technology (old Fender amps being a prime example), but I've always tried to be open minded and tried new stuff when I could.

'Purists' have argued that a Variax guitar cannot beat a 'real' guitar - but I've played both, and (apart from the strange, pickup-less appearance of the Variax) found the 'digital' models to be fantastic. "But it doesn't sound like MY Strat" whines one punk - but every Strat is different, every Les Paul is different - so which sound is the true Strat sound, and which is the true Les Paul sound ? The Variax sounds like A Strat, and sounds like A Les Paul, etc.

I also love Tech21 amps - I have a Trademark 10 and a Trademark 60 - and they are fantastic. While I love valve/tube amps, I've never found the Trademark amps lacking in 'tube' warmth. They are also much lighter to lug around, and less likely to fail on stage. And let's not forget that the MAN himself - Les Paul - played a Trademark 60 at all his gigs at the Iridium Club in New York in his later years. If they're good enough for the man, they sure ought to be good enough for us mere mortals.

So what I'm saying, in my round-about way, is let's give Milbert a chance - it may turn out to be a crock (which I very much doubt), but it may also be the answer to our prayers.
[PS - if Mr Milbert would like to give me one of his amps as a reward for my support above, I would be more than willing to accept it - and sing its praises to all who would listen ]

MilbertCom wrote:Malcolm Moore explains why limitations are not preferable

"For a guitar, the audio spectrum needs are wide. ...The lower open E string has a fundamental of about 128 Hz, and significant harmonics are the second, fourth, sixth and eighth meaning the spectrum here extends to 1024 Hz. On the twelfth fret on the upper E string the fundamental is about 1,024 Hz, and the spectrum extends to about 8.192 kHz. On the 21st fret the fundamental at C# is about 1,722 Hz, and the spectrum extends to almost 14 kHz! The...frequency response needs to be virtually flat from less than 100 Hz to greater than 14 kHz to faithfully reproduce the vibrations from the guitar strings - before anybody starts to play with the audio spectrum, develop distortion, or introduce echo and / or reverberation."

http://www.moore.org.au/pick/01/01_strt.htm

Just because the pickup puts out those frequencies does not mean that it is desirable to reproduce them.

If you believe it does then you are clearly not an experienced (electric) guitarist.

If you played guitar in my band and started putting out significant amounts of bottom E fundamental (128Hz) you would very soon get told to get out of my sonic space as I am the bass player and that is my territory thank you very much.

At the same time, a 12-inch speaker is probably not reproducing anything over 5 kHz.

As before just because the harmonics are there it is not essential or even desirable to reproduce them.

At the same time, the "bright" switches common on many amps significantly boost the high frequency response, apparently in attempt to bring-up the highs in the final output - and undo the loss from the speaker and even perhaps the amp...which most likely leads to all kinds of zany weird distortions in the higher frequencies. Some people love that, some don't, and there's so many different kinds of speakers, perhaps thousands. And maybe that many amps. And tubes. And guitars. And strings. And pickups! And players.

This reminds me of a friend of mine, a top notch EE who built himself an electric guitar (not bad for a first attempt), and amp (30W solid state, why mess about with valves with all their inherent distortion - 20Hz to 20KHz =/- 3db) and a speaker cab that would not have been out of place in a hifi system. It sounded like ass and he couldn't understand why and he found it difficult to believe that even what he perceived as clean guitar on recorded tracks actually had quite a lot of distortion.

So I think it's fairly impossible to make any kind of sweeping statement regarding 'limited bandwidth' other than to explain that one purpose of GAGA is purity and clarity of tone, and we feel that begins with more faithfully amplifying whatever signal is put in, not in creating some kind of subjective-to-us, inescapable bandwidth-limiting filter/amp. There apparently are plenty of those already, and just because that's been done for decades (a) doesn't make it right or better, and (b) definitely means we don't want to 'me-too' that. (I can't recall a single GAGA player who's ever complained about too much high-end.) Meanwhile, so many guitar books and mavens advise to start with the best possible clean tone - it's the only sane starting point. Everything and anything else can then be added and/or taken away from the final tone.

When we say "high-end" we don't say (or mean) "hi-fi" as in a dry, 2D, direct-into-mixing-board, lifeless tone. Instead, we refer more to the quality of build, design considerations, etc.

And off we go into advertising speak.

P.S. I am not knocking your amp as I have never heard one so will reserve judgement until I do.

As I recall from reading somwhere in a book, traditional guitar amps weren't actually designed for Hi-Fi reproduction, they were actually designed to work with the guitar as part of an instrument to create a musical tone or sound, traditional Valve/Tube type guitar amps actually produce higher THD (Total Harmonic Distortion) figures when running clean compared to Hi-Fi amplifiers, one famous Valve/Tube based Hi Fi Amplifier, The Williamson Amp as designed by D.T.N. Williamson was capable of 0.1 % THD and had an almost dead-flat freqency response from 10Hz to 1Mhz +/- 1dB, if you used it to amplify an electric guitar plugged straight into it, I'm guessing that the guitar would probably sound very clinical and thin.....

DrNomis wrote:... dead-flat freqency response from 10Hz to 1Mhz +/- 1dB, if you used it to amplify an electric guitar plugged straight into it, I'm guessing that the guitar would probably sound very clinical and thin.....

+1

As virtually any guitarist of my age will know hifi amps and guitars just don't mix. Back when I was learning I don't recall ever seeing a practice amp, they may have been available but I never saw one. You usually started out on a nylon strung "Spanish" guitar and if you saved your paper/pocket/holiday job money for long enough (or had rich parents) you would eventually get an electric guitar, no amp just the guitar (unless rich parents of course).

Back in 1966/7 a school friend, and later our lead guitarist, plugged his newly acquired Watkins/Wilson/WEM guitar into his parents brand new solid state "Radio-gramme" and it sounded just as you describe, thin and weedy. He saved up his holiday job money and bought an AC30!

(I was on bass so no matter what I plugged mine into it hardly gave out any volume, time to get saving.)

You know, I'm all for paradigm shifts and diversity. So I think there's plenty room for linear FRFR amps in guitar amplification, regardless of what is "traditional", "musical", "interactive" etc.. One question though: why not use a basic chipamp? Or a class D amp for that matter.

MilbertCom wrote:Malcolm Moore explains why limitations are not preferable

"For a guitar, the audio spectrum needs are wide. ...The lower open E string has a fundamental of about 128 Hz, and significant harmonics are the second, fourth, sixth and eighth meaning the spectrum here extends to 1024 Hz. On the twelfth fret on the upper E string the fundamental is about 1,024 Hz, and the spectrum extends to about 8.192 kHz. On the 21st fret the fundamental at C# is about 1,722 Hz, and the spectrum extends to almost 14 kHz! The...frequency response needs to be virtually flat from less than 100 Hz to greater than 14 kHz to faithfully reproduce the vibrations from the guitar strings - before anybody starts to play with the audio spectrum, develop distortion, or introduce echo and / or reverberation."

http://www.moore.org.au/pick/01/01_strt.htm

Errr..not quite correct. Low E fundamental on a bass guitar (E1) is 41.2 Hz, 82.4 Hz (E2) on a conventional 6 string guitar tuned to concert pitch (A4=440Hz). The fundamental of the (E5) note on the 12th fret on the upper E string is approx. 659.2 Hz. Obviously, there are harmonics generated up to >14 kHz, but ...

MilbertCom wrote:At the same time, a 12-inch speaker is probably not reproducing anything over 5 kHz.

A 12-inch guitar amp speaker has a frequency response designed to attenuate (roll off) the upper harmonics of an electric guitar, because they seem to sound harsh and disturbing to our ears.
In the real world, the guitar sounds we love are carefully shaped to sound strong in the midrange frequencies, with low and high frequencies rolled off.

Extreme metal guitar sounds have more highs and lows than "vintage" or "bluesy" or "jazzy" guitar styles and are perceived as harsh and disturbing by older listeners. This is deliberate!

MilbertCom wrote:At the same time, the "bright" switches common on many amps significantly boost the high frequency response, apparently in attempt to bring-up the highs in the final output - and undo the loss from the speaker and even perhaps the amp...which most likely leads to all kinds of zany weird distortions in the higher frequencies. Some people love that, some don't, and there's so many different kinds of speakers, perhaps thousands. And maybe that many amps. And tubes. And guitars. And strings. And pickups! And players.

So I think it's fairly impossible to make any kind of sweeping statement regarding 'limited bandwidth' other than to explain that one purpose of GAGA is purity and clarity of tone, and we feel that begins with more faithfully amplifying whatever signal is put in, not in creating some kind of subjective-to-us, inescapable bandwidth-limiting filter/amp. There apparently are plenty of those already, and just because that's been done for decades (a) doesn't make it right or better, and (b) definitely means we don't want to 'me-too' that. (I can't recall a single GAGA player who's ever complained about too much high-end.)

It's going to be very interesting to follow the development of the GAGA amp. Modern recorded music has more high and low frequency content than ever before, so younger guitarists and their fans may be ready for guitar tones with wider frequency bandwidths. Metal has definitely led the way towards this.

The final ingredient is probably tone controls. If you download the Duncan Tonestack frequency response curve utility, you can see the frequency response curves of the most famous (and most imitated) "classic" guitar amp tonestacks. These would include Fender tweed Bassman and Blackface models, Vox AC30, HiWatt DR series, Marshall JMP and JCM series, Mesa Recto and Mark series.

All of them have highly interactive controls, and the response curves always have some degree (usually quite a lot) of cut somewhere in the midrange.
Is this part of the reason why the HF response is usually rolled off from 4 or 5 kHz?
So far at least, guitar amps have not had a flat / even frequency response, so Milbert / GAGA is trying something different here.

Lots of big name guitarists use racks of wide-bandwidth, hi-fidelity, high-power, PA amps in their rigs. How many times have you seen rigs where it's some old tube amp into a Palmer Speaker Simulator dummy load and then into a bunch of PA amps? Lots of times. At that point, the funky old tube amp is basically just a fancy overdrive pedal and the clean clean PA amps are doing all the amplifying work. That's basically the argument here, and I see no problem with approaching it that way. Of course, the typical guitar sound is bandwidth limited and dirty, but you do that filtering with your pedals and speakers, the amp can be super clean/hi-fi and it will still sound fine, in fact, it will probably sound very good if you know how to turn the dials.

Well I would be happy to plug my guitar in a gaga, and I would like to give a look at a schematic. Just to see if a solder jokey like me can make something similar.

soulsonic wrote:Lots of big name guitarists use racks of wide-bandwidth, hi-fidelity, high-power, PA amps in their rigs. How many times have you seen rigs where it's some old tube amp into a Palmer Speaker Simulator dummy load and then into a bunch of PA amps? Lots of times. At that point, the funky old tube amp is basically just a fancy overdrive pedal and the clean clean PA amps are doing all the amplifying work. That's basically the argument here, and I see no problem with approaching it that way. Of course, the typical guitar sound is bandwidth limited and dirty, but you do that filtering with your pedals and speakers, the amp can be super clean/hi-fi and it will still sound fine, in fact, it will probably sound very good if you know how to turn the dials.

A Big PLUS 1 from me mate .

FWIW

I often get asked how I create my sound, My answer is mostly this,
I spend a lot of time reducing bandwidth in most modern Amps , both glass and sandy ones.
If you want my sound loose all the gimmicks that add way too much bandwidth.


Even spring reverb circuitry in modern gear have the wrong frequency response and they sound horrible.
Most modern gear Claims MORE of whatever is in fashion yet they still keep searching for the missing bit?
Amp makers only use High SPL speakers cause it makes a 10 Watt Amp sound like a 30 Watt Amp. A big sell point.
Problem is that the extra energy is often only at a very narrow freq (around 4~5kHz) which of course is easy to do but it makes for a very harsh sound and no amount of circuit tweaking will smooth it over.

I've found it so much easier to work with limited Bwidth
Phil.