Wich speaker for the best Hot Rod Deluxe upgrade? At this time i have a Weber Chicago 12" speaker but it results too dark. I play jazz-rock with clean and distorted sound (thinking John Scofield).
Best choice? G12 C, Reaper HP, ET65?
I'd say ET65 ... but it sounds like you would probably consider it too dark. So...
Go G12 for a totally vintage Jensen/CTS American sound
Go Reaper HP for a slightly Britt voiced tone
Hope this helps ... post back here w/results!
Hy Vaughn
In the Brit-sound area, why do you prefer the ET65 over the Reaper for this amp? Can you explain your reasons?
thanks
Personally, I find the HRDs to be a bit strident and overly crisp on top ... so I like the way the ET65 smooths out the top end.
Strident and overly crisp on top...i think the problem it's not the amp but the characteristics of the stock speaker.
See this modded HRDx with Reaper speaker. What's your opinion?
Thanks, Lorenzo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dzLVvCGD-c
I agree ... I've always said that the first place a manufacturer will look to when trying to cut the cost of an amp is the speaker! They will choose the cheapest thing they can find ... of Chinese origin ... then give it a cool name and put a nice sticker on it ... like "lipstick on a pig" ... or as I look at it "polishing a turd"!
The HRD is no exception ... But since your original post stated: "i have a Weber Chicago 12" speaker but it results too dark" ... I would say that you would find the ET65 too dark also!
Thanks, Vaughn
And what about the new WGS Liberator 80 for this amp?
Haven't tried it personally ... but it hit's me as a good match. The Liberator is a fairly warm speaker, but not so much as the ET65.
I made a decision and i bought the ET65!
Post back & let us know how it worked for ya :-)
Hard judgment, both are great speakers. The Weber Chicago is smoother, louder, more woody tone, bass are deep and with a lot of harmonics. The clean tone is gritty, smokey and the speaker sounds wonderful with light-medium OD. With my SG is perfect for blues-jazz but with my Strat something is missing in clean mode. Not great quack. The ET65 is more chimey and tighter, 'bass-mediums-highs' are more balanced and the speaker sounds with more clarity. Better with my Strat, more quack. With my SG sounds good but with this 'lady', perhaps, i prefer the Weber. Vaughn, something will changes after break-in? |
Hard judgment, both are great speakers. The Chicago is smoother, louder, more woody tone, bass are deep and with a lot of harmonics. The clean tone is gritty, smokey and the speaker sounds wonderful with light-medium OD. With my SG is perfect for blues-jazz but with my Strat something is missing in clean mode. Not great quack, a little dark. The ET65 is more chimey and tighter, 'bass-mediums-highs' are more balanced and the speaker sounds with more clarity. Better with my Strat, more quack. With my SG sounds good but with this 'lady' perhaps i prefer the Weber. |
Vaughn, what the ET65 changes after break-in and how long does it take?
After hour and hour of music with the ET65 my judgment is: great speaker! The Hot Rod has a fantastic tone with my Strat and with the SG too. I love its sound.
Only a doubt, Vaughn: the characteristic 'boominess' of the amp is increased. I play with bass pot at 2 and the Hot Rod it's alike boomy...
Any advice? Another speaker?
Any advice?...
Not sure. I've never considered a HRD to be "boomy"!
The ET65 is in fact the warmest model in the WGS line! It sounds to me like you are possibly looking for a tone that's more like our Retro 30 (very bright & jangly) or maybe the Invader (focused, urgent midrange).
Try picking up a graphic eq pedal and running it in your f/x loop. If you have a good sounding sonic base in your amp & speaker(s), an eq can really help to fine tune the tone...in your case dialling out the boominess. In my case I have an MXR 10 band eq that I've used very successfully in the past as I described above, however with the Mesa Stlletto I described in my question to Vaughn, the V30 is not even close to the sonic ballpark I like playing in.
Another trick you could try is cutting up one of those textured foam mattress pads to fit the bottom, top and sides of your cab. The textured foam will suck up some of the standing waves that lead to boominess. You do not need to put it on all sides of your cab, experiment to find how much damping you need.
Thanks Vaughn and .Hagarsdad. What do you think about this mod?
TONE CONTROL MODIFICATION TO BETTER CONTROL BASS RESPONSE
Why does this amp sound so flabby in the low end? Part of the reason lies in the speaker/cabinet combination. I’ve plugged this amp into other speakers to compare and found that the stock speaker/enclosure seems to really favor the bottom end, particularly for a 1-12 combo. This is great, because it means that the speaker and cabinet are very efficient for these critical lows, and if we can control the amount of bottom end the amp sends to the speaker, we can get great volume without working the amp too hard. The problem lies in the tone control section. I compared this circuit with other vintage Fenders, and the most critical difference is in the way that the Midrange control is wired. If you look at most of the older designs with a midrange control (such as a vintage Twin Reverb), the Mid control is wired with the wiper tied to the high side of the pot, just like the bass control. This effectively turns the potentiometer into a variable resistor (a variable resistor is a 2-terminal device, whereas a potentiometer is a 3-terminal device that is used as a voltage divider, as in a volume control). On these amps, you can turn the volume all the way off by turning all the tone controls to 0. This then allows you to more precisely balance the lows and highs coming through the tone circuit.
The Mid control on this amp is a 25kA pot. (“A” stands for audio taper). Thus, the stock circuit in this amp puts 25,000 ohms at all times between the bottom of the bass control and ground. On vintage Fenders without a mid control, the resistor in its place was usually only 6.8k. On models with a mid control, such as the Twin Reverb, the pot was only 10k, so even with the mid turned up all the way, it didn’t have the same low-end response as the stock circuit in this HR Deluxe. The larger the value of this midrange resistor, the more bass and low-mid the amp has, regardless of the setting of the bass control.
Have you ever seen a “Loudness” switch on an older stereo? The Loudness circuit boosts the bass and treble and is intended for low-volume situations to compensate for the fact that the human ear hears midrange frequencies (where most speech resides) more acutely at low levels than deep lows or high trebles. As volume increases, this effect reduces. If you play a stereo at high volume with the Loudness switch engaged, it can sound flabby because the bass frequencies are now over-amplified for our ears. This is precisely what’s happening with this Fender HR Deluxe. It sounds great at low levels, but the bass overwhelms the tone at higher volumes.
Fixing this takes very little effort:
Follow steps 1 and 2 above. Solder a jumper between the left and middle terminals of the mid control (when facing the amp from the rear, as you would be when working on it). That’s it. You can now reverse steps 1 and 2 and try it out. If you did it right, you should now be able to turn your volume down to 0 by turning all of your tone controls to 0. More importantly, you can now dial in just the right amount of low end with the mid and Bass controls. Remember, they’re interactive. The higher you set the mid control, the more bass you will get.
That is sound reasoning to me, and oh so easy to do ... and undo if you don't like it.
I always tend to prefer the vintage Fender style tone stack that is described here.
That looks like the "50's wiring" mod for Gibson Les Pauls and it should work. Personally, I wouldn't muck around with the amps circuitry...a baffle or eq is much easier. And less dangerous if you are a klutz like me.