teach me about drives

    Quote from alerich

    Having owned both amps I can assure you it was not possibly the dumbest trade ever.


    What makes it worse, he owed me a few hundred bucks so I took the Peavey head for collateral and he never paid me back. So I had to look at it for the next 2 decades until I eventually sold it for about $500

    I actually knew a guy who had a very convincing sounding 2205 back in the day. But in general there was a 2204/modifying hype specially after the this hype spilled over from the USA and a very famous (back then) german guitar player went on tour with a Baldringer modified 2204. Which sounded fantastic. REALLY fantastic.


    The issue with all these mods..they broke down a lot. Preferably during the gig. The reason I never modified my beloved 2204..I went one day to the shop to this amp guy with the amp and the money in my hands ..and there were like 6-7 plexis & 2204 standing and waiting for "repair" while an angry player just left the shop saying in an angry tone that "this is the second time" and that he would "need his amp on stage and not in the repair all the time".


    Anyway..


    Until the Rectifier and the 5150 appeared the "hunt for the grail tone" was a mess. Broken Marshall's,silly racks and expensive Mesa mk amps.. and ofcourse the epic '80s "fx-loop misery".. haha..


    And then people ask why whoever went though all that ..loves his Kemper today..

    Quote from lbieber

    The tubescreamer/tube driver with min gain and max volume works really well into an already cranked plexi, Fender, etc... This is proven to work very well. Most guitarists don't recognize that, in my experience, and put them in front of a clean platform and the result is poor.

    This is a great point - most of these drive pedals work best as a compliment to amp gain rather than as a replacement a tone shaper.


    People talk about "tightening" the sound etc. that they use it for. Again not for me but this was the "real" benefit..most on their won sound awful..

    Quote from Nikos

    I actually knew a guy who had a very convincing sounding 2205 back in the day.

    The 2205/2210 amps weren't horrible. You just had to keep them away from a 2203/2204. I gigged in a band with a guy who played a 2205 (2210 - not sure). I thought his tone sounded good. In his next band he played with a guy who had an early 80s 2204. The difference in tone was unmistakable. Life is sometimes a matter of perspective.

    Quote from alerich

    The 2205/2210 amps weren't horrible. You just had to keep them away from a 2203/2204. I gigged in a band with a guy who played a 2205 (2210 - not sure). I thought his tone sounded good. In his next band he played with a guy who had an early 80s 2204. The difference in tone was unmistakable. Life is sometimes a matter of perspective.

    oh yes..


    The same funny thing happened with many mesa guys and their caliber 50/studio preamp rack with the graphic EQ (always "V-tweak") in these two-guitar-players bands...


    Mesa guy:"Hey guys listen..this is the metallica-sound.."


    Marshall guy: graaaaang....


    Mesa guy: "I can't hear me,I can't hear me..."


    It was always the same. Hehe...

    Funny how we all have different experiences and viewpoints. I bought a Mesa Mark iii 60/100 (head and 4x12) in 1985 which I still own.


    That amp can be punishingly loud in a way that I never experienced with any Marshall or any other amp for that matter. It made every Marshall sound like crickets on a cool night. Not saying louder is better, just stating the fact.


    The Mark iii in rhythm 2 could be tweaked to sound almost exactly like a 1959, for better or worse. The 1959 was never my cup of tea, but it is a data point for tone.

    Quote from lbieber

    Funny how we all have different experiences and viewpoints. I bought a Mesa Mark iii 60/100 (head and 4x12) in 1985 which I still own.


    That amp can be punishingly loud in a way that I never experienced with any Marshall or any other amp for that matter. It made every Marshall sound like crickets on a cool night. Not saying louder is better, just stating the fact.


    The Mark iii in rhythm 2 could be tweaked to sound almost exactly like a 1959, for better or worse. The 1959 was never my cup of tea, but it is a data point for tone.

    I think the example given was more about scoping mids than volume because that was the trend with the graphic as Metallica always quoted it...


    I am not a Marshall fan myself, the only one I loved was my JCM800 and even then it might have been because it was part of my formative years and if I played one today I might feel very different...

    Quote from lbieber

    Funny how we all have different experiences and viewpoints. I bought a Mesa Mark iii 60/100 (head and 4x12) in 1985 which I still own.


    That amp can be punishingly loud in a way that I never experienced with any Marshall or any other amp for that matter. It made every Marshall sound like crickets on a cool night. Not saying louder is better, just stating the fact.


    The Mark iii in rhythm 2 could be tweaked to sound almost exactly like a 1959, for better or worse. The 1959 was never my cup of tea, but it is a data point for tone.

    The MARKIII is the John Sykes Sound 9n the 1987 album. .. some people even claim it is "very marshally "..


    I don't know I played this amp only once or twice not very loud in a music shop.

    Way underused/maybe misused by modern internet guitarists: Fuzz, EQ, Boost. (EDIT: Underused in the sense that lots of tones people chase with OD's and distortion pedals weren't created using those.)


    The Kemper added mix knobs to most stomps which is great. And they always had the Shape stomps, which are great.


    No doubt there’s something to the “mouth feel” of putting a real King of Tone or Klon or Tube Screamer or especially a Sun Face in front of the Kemper, but outside of the studio the subjective benefit vs the freedom of everything inside the box ..well I have always loved showing up with nothing but the KPA and an expression pedal. In the studio though it can be rewarding to mess with the signal chain. No doubt that a pedal that seemingly does nothing, or less, can add zip and zest and sustain and impact the the playing experience in positive ways. That goes for pedals and stomps inside the device.


    Regarding what sounds good to you, there’s so much information about what your heroes have used and how they used it, that rather than attempting to go for an overview of “how everything works” maybe chase the exact thing you love based on available documentation, do your best to replicate that inside the Kemper, and go from there.


    In general, yes stomps with zero drive and full volume, to goose what you already love about a cooking amp, but there are a million examples of heroes using pedals “wrong” on fantastic records.


    I love pedals and amps and outboard (or in the box like UAD) studio components, but the Kemper could always get real since day one. Maybe it’s easier now, but it’s always been good.

    Everything you need to know about drives, in 3 part course … brilliant sounds , amps, guitars, … enjoy the journey …


    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.