kudzurunner
2425 posts
Apr 10, 2011
8:09 PM
|
I bought a PA system on Wednesday. The head is a Yamaha EMX312SC Powered Mixer, which has 300 watts per channel. The speaker is a Yamaha C112V 12" 2-Way Club Concert Series Speaker. About $900 total for the two units.
I miked my Kay 703, which has one 8" speaker and about 4-5 watts, using a Sennheiser evolution e906 Dynamic Guitar Amp mic, which gets an exceptionally full sound out of small amps.
I blew harp through my old standby Shure PE5-H mic, which has good bottom-end response.
I believe I've found the better mousetrap. I set the Kay on top of the speaker cabinet and put the PA head on a chair right next to it. The sound was incredible--and the volume, with gorgeous tone, was way beyond the normal 4 x 10" Bassman standard. I was floored by the bass response from the little speaker. This was full-spectrum sound, overdriven, with absurd volume and projection.
The key thing is, simply by dialing the PA up or down, I could set the range at which I wanted my volume. Then, within that, I had a beautifully modulated tone. And--this is what separates this system from every large tube amp--I could get precisely the same crunch tone at whatever volume I wanted simply by setting the PA volume. So if I was playing a very large room, I could crank those 300 watts up and get a massive sound out of the 12" heavy duty PA cone and tweeter. If I was playing a small club, I could dial it down but still have the same gorgeous tone.
As we know, big tube amps (Bassman-sized) have a harder time delivering a good, manageable, easy-to-work-with tone in a small room, where the player is forced to dial the volume back.
And quite frankly, there's no comparison between a 40-50 watt tube amp cranked up, on the one hand, and a 5 watt amp miked through a 300 watt PA on the other. I realize that it's heresy to suggest that 1 x !2" can trounce 4 x 10", but hey: You learn something new every day. 300 watts and an extremely heavy magnet with a big heavy (60+ pound) cabinet make a difference. Key thing: ALL the distortion through the PA is coming from tubes and the small 8" speaker of the lil' ol' tube amp. The PA speaker and amp don't need to distort. All they need to do is do what ANY PA does with the most pedigreed old tube amp sound: make it louder. And they do. The difference is, you're not dependent on the soundman. You've got that power right at your fingeritps.
It seems crazy: bringing along your own PA head and speaker, setting it up on stage, and miking a small amp through that. But why not?
I'll make a video soon. Only problem is, a video can't capture just how mind-blowing the sound is. It's like driving a Bugatti Veyron. Put the pedal down and the power is seemingly infinite, with effortlessly smooth response.
Last Edited by on Apr 10, 2011 8:19 PM
|
bonedog569
315 posts
Apr 10, 2011
8:56 PM
|
Aint it nice when you findf something that really works? I don't know how your'e gonna like shlepping this rig around - but at least you know you can get power with the tone you want - when you need it.
----------
|
LIP RIPPER
414 posts
Apr 11, 2011
5:12 AM
|
That's a nice little mixer. And you can add a boom with a vocal mic, an SM57 for the foot drum, a JBL speaker in place of the Yahmmy,and the Mrs. to pack it in and set it up. Looking forward to hearing it. Bring it on down to St, Pete sometime.
LR
|
5F6H
602 posts
Apr 11, 2011
7:52 AM
|
It's not really a "new" way of doing things, guys have been doing this for years, either via micing the harp amp, or by lining out. It's certainly a valid approach and if you love the tone of a specific amp that's not loud enough from the backline, then it's the most practical way of getting "that sound" front of house.
On a big stage you generally need to mic the amp anyway, be it 4W, 40W, or more. You can drive 50W tube amps past their sweet spot in many circumstances. in fact going by recorded tone alone, it can be very hard indeed to tell the difference between a 50W amp and a small single ended amp of <5W.
"And quite frankly, there's no comparison between a 40-50 watt tube amp cranked up, on the one hand, and a 5 watt amp miked through a 300 watt PA on the other." Well, you don't seem to have done that comparison in this case? Basically in this scenario, the amp is just becoming a signal source, amplified by the PA, as long as the PA & the situation demand that the PA itself is the primary FOH sound source and you can get decent on stage monitoring, the amp is really moot in terms of Wattage. I'm not trying to rain on your parade, I'm glad you have found a way to get the sound of your preferred amp accross. You're a frontman & need the PA, but when you add up the cost of the PA, speakers, PA mic, Kay amp, etc, you see you are already in the same price range as a used 4x10" Fender, which for a sideman will make just as much sense (no more, no less). It's also worth noting that I know players, raised on large, tight stage amps, that simply hammer most cathode biased amps into mush...there can be quite a different discipline in getting the best out of either method. I also know guys who ALWAYS mic up their 50W amps, for a smoother, less driven tone & to spread it better around the room...I have sat less than 10' away, listening to a bassman miced up through a PA and at a perfect volume for a small bar.
Personally, my favourite sounding amps both use preamp tubes as power tubes and make <1W...they would be the only amps I'd ever use if there was always a PA laid on, sound check & trustworthy sound engineer. But what I'm basically saying is that this "50W amp sound vs 5W amp sound", purely in terms of the tone produced, isn't as easy to define, once you take away the significance of dB at the speaker. The fact that you see them as being so different in that respect is more down to your personal bias/preference.
Last Edited by on Apr 11, 2011 8:16 AM
|
MP
1592 posts
Apr 11, 2011
8:00 AM
|
jesus adam,
you just figured this out? well, cool. works great,doesn't it?
long ago a soundman- not just any soundman, but mr. soundman, told me "that's what PAs are for".
just keep the kay away from bassists and guitarists whose amps will bleed and crush you.
----------
MP
doctor of semiotics and reed replacement.
"making the world a better place, one harmonica at a time"
|
waltertore
1274 posts
Apr 11, 2011
8:52 AM
|
Congragulations Adam! I play guitar through a princeton reverb and it goes to all my gigs. Festivals and big clubs mic it. The small clubs I just run it straight and use my own PA for vocals. I don't like micing anything live if I don't have too because it can turn into an never ending mix problem.... I once did a big festival in Belguim with Bo Diddly and we did it all through mouse battery powered amps. Walter
----------
walter tore's spontobeat - a real one man band and over 1 million spontaneously created songs and growing. I record about 300 full length cds a year.
" life is a daring adventure or nothing at all" - helen keller
2,800+ of my songs
continuous streaming - 200 most current songs
my videos
|
Jim Rumbaugh
475 posts
Apr 11, 2011
10:13 AM
|
Though I have never done this technique, It has crossed my mind several times. I would think a real advantage would be less feedback.
Adam, can you you confirm or comment on feedback?
----------
intermediate level (+) player per the Adam Gussow Scale, Started playing 2001
|
MP
1596 posts
Apr 11, 2011
10:42 AM
|
zero feed problems. find the sweet spot on the amp and leave it. then mic the amp.
just don't run harp through the monitors or set up the amp in front of the mains. no noise makers should ever be aimed in the miced amps direction. it'll pick it up and......bummer.
i played arena shows more than once useing fender vibro-champs. 5 watt/1/8" .
----------
MP
doctor of semiotics and reed replacement.
"making the world a better place, one harmonica at a time"
|
joshnat
125 posts
Apr 11, 2011
10:49 AM
|
Adam,
I understand where you're coming from. I HATE depending on someone else for my volume. Professional soundman, or even whoever is closest to the mixer. I've sometimes used a keyboard amp to amplify the sound of a smaller tube amp or preamp. Then you've got your own little system right there. What's also nice is that that you can put the keyboard amp (which is essentially a PA "combo" in front of you and use your small tube amp as a monitor behind you. It helps to manage the feedback. My keyboard amp is an older Roland Cube, 60W, with 12" woofer plus tweeter. Very portable and a good size for most venues we play.
----------
|
kudzurunner
2426 posts
Apr 11, 2011
11:32 AM
|
@5F6H: I don't know about you, but in 25 years' worth of gigs and concert-going, I've never once seen a harp player bring along his own 300 watt PA head and PA speaker so he can mic up his own (small) amp and control everything onstage. I've seen pretty much everything else; I haven't seen that. I doubt that you have, too.
Your comment strongly implies that you've seen what I've seen: soundmen miking up harp amps and running that signal through the house PA.
That's different. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about using any small amp you want and getting a huge, controllable sound onstage where the player retains all the control.
As for cost: again, I don't know about you, but I'm more concerned with finding and taking possession of the Holy Grail than with what the expedition costs. Still, in an age when some people think nothing of dropping up to $2K on a boutique amp, or twice that on an OE Bassman, I'm talking about $900 + the cost of the Kay--another $200--and the Sennheiser (about $175). Call it an even $1300.
About the comparison: I most certainly did make the comparison. I pulled my '56 Bassman (original not reissue) out of the closet and tried it side by side with the rig I describe above. The Bassman sounds damned nice, to be sure, but the Kay has just as rich a sound, was much louder when I cranked it hard, AND was a much easier sound to work with: more evenness of crunch up and down the harp, without sounding overly compressed. Most remarkable of all, considering the size of the Kay, was the amount of low-end response. That was the biggest surprise. I chalk it up to the Sennheiser's response and the bass response of a $350 PA speaker, plus all those PA watts working to support bass transients.
It sounds like I need to bring this little setup to HCH and demonstrate it as part of Greg Heumann's amp/mic workshop. :)
Last Edited by on Apr 11, 2011 11:45 AM
|
HarpNinja
1320 posts
Apr 11, 2011
12:05 PM
|
I often run my VHT Special 6 miked right to a QSC K10 and then take a lineout from that to FOH. The QSC is a 1000 watt powered speaker...less gear to haul.
----------
Mike
Quicksilver Custom Harmonicas
|
joshnat
128 posts
Apr 11, 2011
12:11 PM
|
Mike, why do you go from the QSC to FOH? For the monitor mix?
----------
|
RT123
147 posts
Apr 11, 2011
12:18 PM
|
I am confused.....
it seems kudzurunner & @5F6H are saying the same thing. This is a common way of doing it. I am sure I am missing something here.
|
528hemi
202 posts
Apr 11, 2011
12:25 PM
|
Adam,
Did you also try your little Masco with the PA? How did you like it compared to the kay?
|
HarpNinja
1321 posts
Apr 11, 2011
12:26 PM
|
I control 100% of my own monitor and send a line level of that EXACT sound to the input of the board so it can be ran FOH. I'd say recently 50% of the time I run my own sound and do it more traditionally. I tried going straight into the QSC to the board, but the signal level isn't hot enough at the monitor.
Hence adding the amp/cable back to the equation.
----------
Mike
Quicksilver Custom Harmonicas
|
Kingley
1485 posts
Apr 11, 2011
12:31 PM
|
RT123 - It's quite simple really.
Mark (5F6H) is talking about micing up an amp into the main stage PA system (front of house). Which is indeed common practice.
Adam is talking about using a small PA system to mic up his Kay amp. Which he is then using as part of his backline (onstage sound). This has been done before but is not as commonly in use as the method described by Mark.
|
RT123
148 posts
Apr 11, 2011
12:34 PM
|
So its the same, just on a smaller scale. you use your own PA instead of a shared PA. Am I udnerstanding correctly now?
|
joshnat
129 posts
Apr 11, 2011
12:37 PM
|
@123: The big difference is who and where the control of the stage volume is. Adam has control of his own volume. Mark's solution gives control of the volume to whomever is running the sound board. The pro's and cons will vary according to the venue, the audience and the number of musicians on stage (IMHO!).
@Mike: I don't get why you need to go to FOH if you've got 1000 watts right there with the QSC?
----------
Last Edited by on Apr 11, 2011 12:40 PM
|
Kingley
1486 posts
Apr 11, 2011
12:41 PM
|
Yes kind of. Adam is using an amp and a PA in the same way that say Kim Wilson (for example)uses two amps onstage. It's purely to get his sound onstage.
In theory Adam's rig could then be miced up into the main PA if he wanted it to be. However in reality that wouldn't really be neccesary (or at least shouldn't be). I hope that explains it a little better.
Last Edited by on Apr 11, 2011 12:41 PM
|
RT123
149 posts
Apr 11, 2011
12:41 PM
|
isn't this a moot point as it is a one man band? i guess i am just thinking too much into it.
|
Kingley
1487 posts
Apr 11, 2011
12:45 PM
|
Yes it could be a moot point. Well that is if Adam is using the same PA to mic his vocals and/or other instruments. In which case it then becomes the main PA and is purely being used in the context described by Mark (5F6H).
|
kudzurunner
2427 posts
Apr 11, 2011
2:11 PM
|
Kingley has explained it well. And I should clarify: I haven't actually used this rig onstage. But the next time I play a band gig--as opposed to a one-man-band gig--where I need to be heard over loud guitars, I'm dang sure gonna try it.
I will make a video this week and demo what I'm doing. All will become clear.
|
5F6H
604 posts
Apr 11, 2011
2:47 PM
|
Kudzurunner - I have seen harp players micing up amps lots of times, so have you...you are arguing over semantics (size of amp, who owns the PA). Years ago, before there was so much useful info on the internet, I like many other folks bought Pete Sheridan's paper on harp amplification...he described Mark Wenner doing what you do, Helge Talqvist also does it, I have lined out 5W amps into PAs myself, also into big clean slave amps like Fender twins, it's great idea but the difference seems to depend on what else is or isn't plugged into the PA in question. If you as a harp player are also the bandleader then you still have control over the harp sound. If the venue is large & the FOH sound still need to be piped around the venue, then your set up will still be subject to the same pros & cons as any amp mic'd through the FOH system. I'm not knocking it, it's a great idea, use the amp you like the sound of best and bump up the volume, where necessary, by slaving through a PA/bigger tube amp.
We used to see Big Boy Bloater a lot when he used a tweed Princeton, (or a 4W Valco) for guitar with his 7 piece band...it sounded outrageous...but eventualy he ended up using a 40W back line amp just for better on stage monitoring.
The Kay mic'd up was louder than the bassman mic'd up in the same fashion?
Last Edited by on Apr 11, 2011 3:05 PM
|
Bb
259 posts
Apr 11, 2011
3:02 PM
|
Yep, I've done this. Slightly different stuff, though. A '57 Tweed Champ, miked by a Sennheiser e609 into a Harbinger APS15. The Harbinger is simply a powered speaker – like Mike's QSC but not nearly as nice as his QSC. :^) But it gives me slightly over 200 watts of power to play with and has a 15" speaker and a built-in EQ which does help give that Champ some big low-end. I can even run a line out to the room's PA from that speaker. The APS15 runs as low as $199.
|
HarpNinja
1322 posts
Apr 11, 2011
3:12 PM
|
The max
Spl is 129dB and I use it as a traditional monitor. 1000w means it has headroom but that isn't the measure of volume. Plus having it foh spreads the sound better.
----------
Mike
Quicksilver Custom Harmonicas
|
RT123
150 posts
Apr 11, 2011
5:13 PM
|
So in essence he wants to have total control over the sound by cranking the small amp to desired distortion and then take that sound a just make it louder with the PA. Couldn't you just eliminate the tube amp and play straight through the PA and add effects if needed.
|
Jim Rumbaugh
477 posts
Apr 11, 2011
7:04 PM
|
I would like to put some light on a detail and a phrase I have read above a few times: "lined out amps into PAs"
I would think that a "lined out" amp would be much more prone to feedback than a small amp miced through a 2nd amp. Can anyone confirm or deny this??
I would believe that the acoustic break between the 1st speaker and second mic would prevent most feedback
----------
intermediate level (+) player per the Adam Gussow Scale, Started playing 2001
|
5F6H
605 posts
Apr 12, 2011
1:24 AM
|
RT123 - What's desirable about using a tube amp with a power section is that when driven you get compression & enriched harmonics...if you went straight to the PA you can get a great cleanish, cupped sound but driven sounds can be on the harsh side. Even if you used a tube preamp, with no power section, distortion will be on the fuzzy side. You could eliminate the speaker in the source amp, ideally replace it with an inductive load & then line out...your volume on stage would just then be limited by the slave/PA's susceptability to feedback, the source amp wouldn't contribute to feedback. In small amps a resistive load (big resistor in place of the speaker) can be used, but you don't quite get the dynamics of an inductive load (like a speaker). Alternatively you could try micing the source amp's speaker but angle the speaker at 90 deg to the slave amp/any monitoring to reduce the chances of setting up a feedback loop.
Jim, a lined out amp with a speaker can be just as feedback resistant as the slave amp that it is lined out into. It can be a bit of a balancing act, typically the lined out amp's volume can be set somewhat lower that you need when just using the on-board speaker & then volume controlled from the slave system. As above, if you eliminate the speaker altogether in the lined out amp, your potential volume increases to untold levels.
NEVER turn on a tube amp without a speaker, or equivalent resistive, or inductive load attached. Resistive loads should be rated at more than twice the amp's W RMS output.
Last Edited by on Apr 12, 2011 1:34 AM
|
apskarp
446 posts
Apr 12, 2011
1:47 AM
|
I wonder when the technology & electronics of today reach a point when there are no amps / PA's needed at all.
Everyone in the live audience have their own little ear monitoring with a total control to mix the band as they wish. The sound is played raw and perhaps some default mix with effects (all done with software) is provided but each individual has the opportunity to mix it with their own taste. And then there are of course possibilities to buy (or just downloead for free) some predefined mix set-up's from "mix artists".
Until that happens we will see all these grazy things happening on the stage.. :D
----------
Youtube
Hoodoo Sauna
Blog
|
Jim Rumbaugh
479 posts
Apr 12, 2011
5:52 AM
|
@6F6H This may be the ramblings from my inexperience, but....
First, I want to make sure we are using the same terms. When I read "line out", I assume there is a hard wired electrical conection between the first and second amp. In that configuration, I see the first amp as an overgrown effects box, with the sound of the the second amp's speaker directly electronicaly coupled to the microphone, therefore chances of feedback increase as the volume goes up.
If the the sound of the first amp is sent to the second amp via a mic in front of the first amp, there is a brake in the feedback loop. Pointing your mic at the speaker of the second amp is not as dangerous as pointing your mic at the first amp's speaker.
I admit, I'm talking off the top of my head and have not tried it, but I think that is part of the advantage Adam is talking about.
Has somebody tried BOTH methods and can report the differences.
Change subject. For electonic nerds only....,
on nother note, I was also under the assumption that a purely inductive load was also bad for an tube amp since a pure inductive load would not absorb power but feed it back into the output. (disclaimer) I have only had experience with resistive loads. The old rule in circuit designs was the resistors should have 5 times the wattage rating of the anticipated power to be dispersed. That being said, the ouptut of most music amps is NOT CONTINUOUS. therefore a lower wattage of 2 times may be OK,
----------
intermediate level (+) player per the Adam Gussow Scale, Started playing 2001
|
6SN7
160 posts
Apr 12, 2011
6:09 AM
|
I hear what Adam is saying. Sounds very logical.
I would tell this, my band would shit their pants if I wheeled in my own personal 300 watt PA w/ matching 12" speakers and small amp a la Adam and set it up next to the similar PA setup that we run vocals and other instruments through!
And just imagine if you wheeled that rig into the local blues jam! Lol!
Last Edited by on Apr 12, 2011 6:12 AM
|
7LimitJI
464 posts
Apr 12, 2011
6:09 AM
|
@ Jim.
I often use a small tube amp at rehearsals to save lugging my Bassman.
Its not loud enough to be used as a monitor, so I am relying solely on the PA for volume.
I used to mic it up into the PA. It would feedback at relatively low levels and I had no headroom.
The small amp now has a line out fitted, that I use via a DI box, to match the low impedance of the PA.
I can turn up to ear damaging levels now!
Downside is, using it like this can make the sound a little stiff. But careful use of the Tone controls can almost make it as good as what is coming out of the speaker. (The audience will not hear any difference!)
Eliminating as many mics as possible from the stage, reduces the likely hood of feedback.
----------
The Pentatonics Myspace
Youtube
"Why don't you leave some holes when you play, and maybe some music will fall out".
"It's music,not just complicated noise".
Last Edited by on Apr 12, 2011 6:11 AM
|
5F6H
607 posts
Apr 12, 2011
6:31 AM
|
Hi Jim, for the purposes of this discussion "lined out" means a voltage divider made up of a dropping resistor and a load resistor, wired to the OT secondary, as practiced by Fender, Kendrick, Marble, Meteor ...countless other builders. The source amp's speaker may, or may not remain in situ (might be replaced by a resistive/inductive load). With both speakers working, both are likely to feedback, whichever does so first is your limiting factor. It depends how hard you drive the source amp.
The first/source amp is pretty much a preamp in this instance, just generating tone rather than dB FOH, but with the advandtage of power stage dynamics & kick back voltages from the speaker/inductive load (which is what a speaker is) that you won't get from a SE preamp running into a resistive load. This voltage divider method, off the OT secondary can be very transparent, indistinguishable from the first amp's speaker (at least whilst the line out is being used, the line out tends to sap a little signal compared to when it is not being utilised).
I have tried both/all permutations that I have commented on...& probably a whole bunch of things on top of that, which may/may not be relevant to the OP...in short if you can think it up, I have probably tried it.
Musical instrument amps do not typically operate into resistive loads as resistive loads don't make sound, only heat ;-) The formula for determining a safe wattage for a resistor is to square the voltage dropped accross the resistor (at "real world", as opposed to clean W RMS, output), then divide by resistor value in ohms. Double the result for safety. So let's say a 6.25W Champ makes 5VAC at the speaker, 5x5 = 25, 25/4ohms = 6.25. 6.25x2 = 12.5W. But yes, the bigger on the W rating the better.
Last Edited by on Apr 12, 2011 7:03 AM
|
KCBLUES
38 posts
Apr 12, 2011
7:12 AM
|
Interesting thread...
Like Adam, I have found a new "Setup" for certain gigs... Although I can appreciate Adam's desire to control his own sound, I cannot imagine carrying a PA that sits onstage next to a similar setup for vocals - perhaps I am misunderstanding and Adam is using the PA for vocals AND his harp rig - to me, that makes a lot of sense!
I have been playing a lot of smaller venues which necessitate a lot of volume control... To accommodate low volume level I have started singing through my 4x10 VERO AMP and also playing "off mic" through it... To get a raunchy tone AND for CHROMATIC harp I have a 2x10 cabinet next to me w/ a 1950's Stromberg Carlson PA head using a bullet mic (MC 151 element)... I just love this setup! I am able to mix- up the tone and texture of the sounds throughout the night - plus it is really old school...which works well for my style...
|
kudzurunner
2429 posts
Apr 12, 2011
9:09 AM
|
Here's a video that gives some idea of what happens to a "small amp sound" in the context I'm talking about. At about 1:20 or so, I turn off the PA and the small amp sound returns. Then I turn it back on and the PA kicks in at 1:32.
The difference between the two sounds is not trivial, and it's not just a volume thing. The volume difference, in fact, isn't particularly noticeable in this clip, because the videocam has a self-adjusting mic that dials itself down when confronted with beastly-big amped-harp sounds.
The tonal difference is what happens when you capture the sound of a small harp amp with an expensive mic and a reasonably powerful PA.
When you take one PA cabinet and a solid-state PA head, put them on the ground behind you, use them ONLY to mic up your harp amp, and work the controls yourself, I don't call it a PA system. I call it a hybrid harp amping system. Or just an intriguing and uncommon way of amping the harp. It's a great way of using a small amp to get a loud and full-spectrum sound ON STAGE, without relying on a soundman to throw harp back at you through the monitors. As such, it strikes me as a nice way to go when you're playing medium sized clubs that have sub-par PA systems--i.e., many old-school blues clubs--where miking the harp amp through the house PA isn't a good option. Many of us have played such gigs.
Anyway, please take a listen to this video, especially to the second minute.
|
toddlgreene
2884 posts
Apr 12, 2011
9:19 AM
|
Wow, that was a big difference in 'fullness', if that's the right word. Now, instead of lugging the head and PA cab, did you consider a keyboard amp with built-in EQ? It might possibly be a more portable option, with the same result.
----------
Todd
Eudora and Deep Soul
|
kudzurunner
2430 posts
Apr 12, 2011
9:19 AM
|
@6SN7: I've never suggested that anybody use two PA speakers as part of this approach. I'm not sure where you got that idea from, but it's not mine. I'm talking about one PA speaker. It's narrower than the standard 4 x 10 cabinet, a bit deeper, and roughly the same weight. But yes, even that would probably unnerve most guitar players, since it means that they can no longer dominate you. :)
|
boris_plotnikov
507 posts
Apr 12, 2011
9:20 AM
|
I think it'll be even cooler to get two amps. One is small harpamp, while the second is clean key amp with mic input. It'll be perfect to switch between clean and overdriven tone if you want, with the same mic and let small amp to sonds twice louder without feedback.
----------
Excuse my bad English. Click on my photo or my username for my music.
|
kudzurunner
2431 posts
Apr 12, 2011
9:20 AM
|
@Todd: Great idea! I'm all for experimentation.
|
toddlgreene
2885 posts
Apr 12, 2011
9:24 AM
|
I considered buying a Peavy KB-somethingorother a few years back when I was doing a fusion-harp project, lots of digital effects, and I desired a clean sound(project fizzled out, so I never made the purchase). I played on a borrowed one, and it was excellent. I never considered actually mic'ing another amp thru it as my own personal PA(didn't own a small amp at the time). You can sometimes score them cheap on Craigslist(Behringer, Peavy, etc.).
EDIT:
One of these
----------
Todd
Eudora and Deep Soul
Last Edited by on Apr 12, 2011 9:32 AM
|
5F6H
608 posts
Apr 12, 2011
9:29 AM
|
Sounds better with the PA & cab in the chain, the video isn't clear enough for me to see properly, but is the mic on the Kay hanging vertically over the grill? If so, this could be having a significant effect with the Kay being picked up "off axis" & the harsher hi frequency that we can hear directly from the amp in the "Kay alone" sections being somewhat muted.
I can see why you are excited Kudzurunner, pros & cons aside, it's a heavy sound.
|
RT123
151 posts
Apr 12, 2011
9:52 AM
|
The irony of this is we are spending a ton of time and money to achieve a sound that the original blues greats had no choice but to accept.
They had shitty equipment because of technology at the time was just not advanced. And any of the top end equipment they couldnt afford.
If they could afford it and used it for recordings, it was recorded with more shitty equipment and the sound degraded even more. I can almost guarantee NOBODY on this site saw any live blues shows from the 30's.
I think we are trying to make live music in the year 2011 that sounds like RECORDED music from the 30's, 40's, 50's.
|
kudzurunner
2432 posts
Apr 12, 2011
10:14 AM
|
RT123: Re: your comment: "I think we are trying to make live music in the year 2011 that sounds like RECORDED music from the 30's, 40's, 50": Some of us are, but I definitely ain't. I'm a fan of ceaseless experimentation, and I very much like modern sounds, including Sugar Blue's and Jason Ricci's. I like Hakan Ehn's experiments. I used solid state amps for years. So I'll agree with you: some players are certainly trying to make music that sounds like that. But I'm not.
On the other hand, when I demo a new rig, as I do in the video above, I try to make reference-standard sounds that will transmit knowledge effectively to the widest array of players here. That's called knowing your audience.
As for what "the original blues greats had no choice but to accept": are you suggesting that they always played through the oldest, crappiest stuff? What "top end" equipment are you talking about? I don't believe that you have the on-the-ground knowledge base to make these sorts of generalizations stick. It's just as likely that Little Walter and the harp guys in Muddy's working bands had recent-vintage Fender stuff, since they were gigging regularly and could afford it. Prove me wrong about that, if you can, and footnote your references.
@5F6H: The Kay 703 has an offset speaker. As you look at the amp, the speaker cone is displaced to the R and slightly down towards the bottom, rather than in dead center. The speaker is partially blocked by a cross-shaped baffle--left to right, up and down. I carefully placed the mic over the bottom L-hand portion of the speaker.
Last Edited by on Apr 12, 2011 10:16 AM
|
HarpNinja
1326 posts
Apr 12, 2011
10:27 AM
|
I couldn't hear it on the video, but are you able to get the PA speaker to push a volume significantly louder than the Kay with the same effect?
Meaning, does it still sound huge when it is drowning out the Kay?
I noticed the same tonal effect running two champs at once for a while BUT, it couldn't get me 1.) a louder stage volume or 2) the kind of cut that comes from using a push-pull amp.
With my current options, the ideal for me would be a small amp that was loud enough for stage volume on small to medium stages plus PA speaker. Then on large stages, I could just turn up the PA speaker.
I did A/B my VHT and HG50 this morning trying to match volumes. The VHT only got as loud as the HG50 on about 2.5 BUT the HG50 still sounded great. The two speakers and 50w make it sound enorumous in comparsion even at that low volume.
----------
Mike
Quicksilver Custom Harmonicas
|
tomaxe
9 posts
Apr 12, 2011
10:31 AM
|
@RT123: In the 1930's there was very little amplified music at all, just a PA mic set up in front of a live acoustic band, but I'm not sure what you are saying RT123...that Little Walter and Snooky Pryor did not want to closely cup a mic in their hand and distort their harmonica sound, that it was just a function of crummy equipment? I think that's clearly incorrect, and there is a lot of written info to dispute that.
By the 1950's there were some very fine recordings made in all genres of music. In fact, much of the basic equipment used today to record popular music has changed little since the 1950's..it has merely become cheaper/smaller/more convenient. That's perhaps a simplification, but I think it's basically true.
My favorite live harp sound in a small bar/club is when the amp'd (NOT AMP'd to PA or line out) harp is part of the backline with the rest of the guitar amps...I personally don't like the screaming small harp amp lined out or mic'd through the PA along with the vocals in the front of the house system...it's very hard to get a good mix in a small club. Adam's set up seems to be one way to guarantee you won't have to battle the guitar amps in a pure backline/vocals in PA only set up for a small/medium club. Very cool!
|
RT123
152 posts
Apr 12, 2011
10:33 AM
|
@kudzrunner -
Ummm, no I am not suggesting they all played through the worst equipment available at the time. I am saying that even the best equipment at the time is not even close to what is available now in modern amps including modeling amps and PA's AND recordings.
My comments were not meant as a negative at all. I was saying it is ironic that modern players are spending time and money with modern equipment to make it sound like older equipment. my footnote for this would be almost every post on this site that has a question about gear and uses the words tone, cruch, grit, dirty, distortion, full, warm, etc...
I think its great to be on a quest for different sound, classic sounds, old sounds, new sounds. yes i do understand the concept of knowing your audience. But it is ironic when you need to add as much modern gear as possible to achieve a sound that was accomplished with far inferior technology.
Last Edited by on Apr 12, 2011 10:35 AM
|
RT123
153 posts
Apr 12, 2011
10:42 AM
|
It looks like Little Walter didn;t have all the equipment of Muddy's working band all the time
Little Walter Mic/PA
There are also several performance photos of Little Walter that show the microphones he used on various live gigs in Chicago in the 1960s. (It should be noted here that although there are also a good number of photos of Little Walter performing in Europe in '64 and '67 that show the microphones he's singing and playing through, he did not bring his own equipment along on those tours; he ended up playing and singing through whatever vocal microphone was supplied with the house P.A. system at each local venue he played. Since he had no choice in the matter, none of these can really be considered a "Little Walter mic".)
|
JTThirty
118 posts
Apr 12, 2011
10:49 AM
|
Ooh, yeah, that Kay does the fat bottomed tone thang really well with that rig.I have seen small amps lined out to keyboard type amps and larger amps, but this p.a. scenario that Adam speaks of seems to add more control at the finger tips.
----------
Ricky B
www.bushdogblues.blogspot.com
|
tomaxe
10 posts
Apr 12, 2011
10:56 AM
|
The Little Walter thing: Little Walter may never have had his own mic, but he had his own sound, which was cupping the mic(whoever supplied it) 90% of the time. In the Little Walter bio, which I do not have here but is extensively footnoted, it tells of how Walter was disgusted on those European tours about how the engineers/producers would not let him cup the mic and "make his sound"...he often had to play standing away from the mic, Sonny Terry style. So he wasn't pleased with the clean sound in those cases. RT123 makes it appear as if every old recording's characteristics are purely the function of bad equipment that distorts...I don't think that is true. The musicians made choices.
|
RT123
154 posts
Apr 12, 2011
11:05 AM
|
@tomaxe- Please read my post before responding. I think you missed my point.
I was saying a lot of people are useing modern equipment to get a sound that was produced in the 30's, 40's, 50's. A lot had to do with the equipment and a lot had to do with the performers.
The only reason I added the Little Walter link was because Adam brought it up, not me.
Why do people have to take one persons opinion as attack on them.
I love the sound on Adams video above. I think it sounds great.
But i also stand by my comment that "it is ironic when you need to add as much modern gear as possible to achieve a sound that was accomplished with far inferior technology."
|
