Must have gear?

Strange, according to the Mesa Boogie website, the nomad 45 is supposed to be a 2x12, yet the one from chrisguitar.com is clearly a 1x12! See for yourself.

So is it an older model from Chris?

A 4x10? Didn't know that!

Still, the combo from chris is certainly a good deal, so I won't turn my nose up at it whatsoever!

Hold your horses, bucko! I'll see what I can do, looks like it could be a sure thing, provided its not sold by the time I get around to ordering it.

Eoin Madsen wrote:

Okay, so it's a bit of a crazy idea, but I'm more surprised by how quickly it's dismissed. Are you all so brainwashed by branding that you really think a Mesa cab is all that good? They're not hi-tech, they're not highly researched. Cab designs and materials haven't changed AT ALL in 30 years. Most of the speakers are being designed to emulate speakers from the 60's or 70's, and they can't even get that right. Guitar amp making is not on the forefront of the music tech industry (with a few notable exceptions, such as THD). All valves manufactured today are measurably inferior in tonal qualiy, build quality, and lifespan, to quality valves made in the 60's. The technology has regressed for the love of god! Won't somebody please think of the children??

Any suggestions for next week's rant?

I tottally disagree with you an almost all the points you make here. The fact of the matter is that guitar desgn in general, as wel as amp and cab design, has come along SO much in the last, say, fifty years. Admittedly the basic structure of a speaker cabinet is the same as it was at its conception but you cant really call that a lack of progress, no point in reinventing the wheel. If you look at innovative amplification companies like Barber Electronics, Toneking, Matamp, Zinky, Mojave, Dr. Z and SWR, Bag End and Ashdown it is plain to see that they really have developed the concept of guitar and bass amplification and are continuing to do so all the time. These amp makers really put effort into their designes. They deliberate heavily over materials, construction techniques and even the type of glue that is to be used in their cabs. What you are saying doesnt make sense really. For instance, there was no such thing as variable bias control meters, instant power amp valve selection, slectable rectification controls for both valve and silicon based rectifier use, Pentode/Triode switching or instantly switchable Calss A/AB running modes on amps of old. These are all modern innovations. I'm not even touching the leaps and bounds that have been made in the digital modelling department. Stuff like Line 6 stuff could not have even been imagined years ago! I think you are seriously underestimating the progress that has been made in the guitar industry. You cant take brands like Marshall as a microcosm of the entire guitar industry. Just because Marshall arent innovative doesn't mean the industry is. Plus, the majority of expensive Marshall amps are re-issues. They are designed NOT to be innovative! I have no idea how you can claim that Mesa cabs are not "highly researched", I cant image this at all. They are very well constructed cabs that perform superbly in very demanding live situations. Don't get me wrong I'm not an avid Mesa fan, I dont own one, but this seems a little presumptious to be honest. The cascading gain stages of the origion "Mark" amps by Mesa were innovative in that they took a Fender idea and ran with it. One of the main reasons that there is a lot of reissue-type guitar products is because of the market's demand for them (that's you ad me). It makes good business sense to offer reissue products as well as some more innovative stuff. Fender amplification is a prime example of this, you've got everything from the Cyber series to the Custom Shop Vintage Reissues. If you are talking only about cab development and not amplification I still belive you are incorrect. I'll post some links at the end that show reall innovative modern amp cabs.

I cannot believe your comments about modern valve production. The notion that every modern production valve is unilatteraly inferior to the equivilent N.O.S. ones is baffling. There are so many myths involving guitar tone. Why is it that people still think that N.O.S. is seemingly better. What the hell is going to make a modern production Sovtek 6L6 any less durable than a N.O.S. General Electric one? As far as tone goes, I prefer the tone of many N.O.S. valves over their modern counterpart but in some cases I dont hear a difference and at time even prefer the newer ones. You do get more of a choice in N.O.S. valves in terms of selection though. Saying that valves made in the 60's are just better than modern ones is just like saying that guitars built in 60's are somehow better than modern guitars. I'd buy a nice Tyler, Anderson, Suhr, Grosh or even Fender Custom shop over some vintage 60's Fender strat anyday. Please dont mention the "V" word to me! There is no piece of vintage equipment that has not been bettered currently. I can get a much nicer "Blackface" tone from a Fargen amp than I can from a 60's Fender BF Deluxe. The way I see it, the only reason to buy vintage is to get the authenticity and history of a piece of equipment, which is of course a perfectly justifiable reason to buy something. Ultimately people arew going to have differences of oppion on this, your comments were a little bewildering though!

I would disagree with you on the notion that technology has regressed in recent years in Valve construction. It has not. Supply has decreases. Before the advent of the transistor much of the military, industrial, audio and telecommunication equipment was utilising valves in its opperation. The only people that continued to use valves after the advent of the of the invention of the transisitor were the military (valves will still keep functioning even after a nuclear fallout whereas transistors wouldn't) and audio consumers (thats guitarists). The demand suddenly evaporated. You cant really "hand make" a valve is what I'm saying. They have to be mass produced in order to be economically viable for a company. The number of valve producer dramatically declined. Many valve companies are now located in eastern europe and the far east now so that they can produce them cheap enough to get a profit. Admittedly, in the majority of cases the quality isnt as great as it used to be. But this is by no means always the case. E.H., Sovtek, T.A.D. and JJ all produce some brilliant valces at very good money. What I'm saying is, the technology hasnt declined, the market has. If the American Joint Amy and Navy were to design a vavle in 2005 I would suspect that it would out-perform its 1965 rivals!

You are right in saying that a lot of modern speaker trying to emulate the old desgnes are crap, because they are. However, some brands like Weber are producing brilliant, innovative guitar loudspeker desings that I would prefer to many vintage models.

Phew!


Innovative cabs:

Really good concept.

These are also finely tuned cabs and great amps by the way

Modern bass amp cabs with clarity.

Good luck getting one of these back in '65


[EDIT] Sorry, I forgot to mention that I think it actually doesnt sound too crazy to make your own cab when you present the figures like you have done. It might even be a skill that you could get really good at. Good fun I'd say if you had the free time.

feylya wrote:

€50 for a tech to install them

:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

Do not pay anywhere near this ammount. All you have to do is unclip the old ones and shove these in! As far as I know, that amp is fixed bias. You don't need to go to a tech at all. Thats like paying €50 for someone to change a lightbulb for you. Those valves will be perfect anyway, he'd mention it otherwise. No need to get them replaced really.

Should have the cash next week, all going to plan!

If all goes to plan and I get my nomad I'll be shouting the praises of Chris for many a moon to come.

Eoin Madsen wrote:

Repy to HusseinSarhan:

The companies you mention are not mainstream, well-publicised brands, like Mesa, Marhsall, or Fender (except Ashdown and SWR to an extent) which was part of the point I was making. Even with that said, I challenge you to find anything in any of those guitar cabs that couldn't be reproduced by a regular carpenter or a semi-serious hobbiest with materials available in Woodies or B&Q. You're right, Weber make great speaker designs - but you won't find Weber's in a Mesa 4x12, unless you put them there yourself.

You seem to contradict yourself in your comments about valve production. I'm not speculating as to the reason why valves are no longer of the same quality. All I'm saying is that they aren't. And it is a fact. You cannot presently get a modern valve which will handle the same plate voltage as a decent NOS of the same type. And I guess the fact that it's really because quality is not profitable says a lot really!

Personally, I don't go into the whole vintage thing, but I've recorded a lot of amps and I've opened quite a few cabs. Digital amp technology is coming on very slowly, and it's most certainly not at the point where it can genuinely reproduce the sound of any given valve amp. Don't look at the guitar industry in and of itself, look at it as part of the music tech industry. Compared to everyone else, the guitar market is slow to embrace new technology. And I think there's a misconception that a company like Mesa are on the cutting edge, just because they don't suck like Marshall do.

There's €500 in the difference between a Mesa Single Rectifier and a Dual Rectifier. A soldering iron, solder, 8-pin valve socket, 5AR4 valve or Weber Copper Cap, SPDT switch and some wire will cost you €60. I seriously hope there's €440 worth of something else going into the Dual Recto head as well.

Sorry about the slow reply, I didnt see your post until now.

Fristly, you can get modern valves that will tolerate the same plate voltages as their NOS rivals. Just not from all brands. On the whole I agree with your points that old valves are better, but you say they ALL are. Not true in my opinion. In about 65% of cases I'd say that NOS beat their modern competitors. They are not expensive because of quality... just rarity! I don't think I said that modern production valves weren't good quality nowadays. I said they had to cut costs by moving operations to the east, labour costs etc. I think they are of the same quality really as in the construction etc., you just get nicer varieties in NOS. Some stuff just isnt made. And in many cases a NOS valve of the same type as a modern equiveleant will sound nicer because of some extra part or spec in it. They last just as long and have just as low noise. Its more about a difference in tone than quality of construction. But yeah, NOS are not the be all and end all by any stretch.

I never said the digital technology is going to sound like a valve amp but I can't tell whats valve and whats not on most pro records to be honest. A lot of the time its digital. I can tell the difference when in the room though. I just meant its progress is noteworthy, not amazingly fast. Although in the last 8 years it really has been quite quick. I don't think the whole point of digital **** is to emulate valve gear, but rather to have a slection of varied usable tones instantly of good quality. Sounds good, but I feel like that they are mistaken when they say it sounds "Just like valves!!" in some adds. On record maybe.. in real life not really. The point you make about the guitar industry not accepting new stuff id kind of what I was getting at there, maybe I went off track.

All those parts you mentioned will only add another valve rectifier if you have lots of experience time and money to spend on the neccesary equipment. It would also not really have any benefits. The Mesa Dual rectifier has 50 watts extra (the same with the tripple rect). The preamps are the same but you have to change the output end and other major components to accomodate the extra wattage. This costs the extra cash. They have to market and distribute the other thing. Mesa are at the forefront of valve amplification in te mainstream as it stands. I don't think Marshall really are trying too much for that ... well the Mode 4 did I suppose and didn't do too well for what I heard.



I dont think that a semi-serious hoppyist could reproduce a 1X18 cab for the same cost as the SWR and it be better than it really... they are proffesionals for a reason. They could have a good bash at it, it would proably take severla attempts and cost way more until they got it the same or better. Anyway you are probably right that a carpenter with a bit of skill could make most cabs but how many could design them? You never find cutting edge stuff in the mainstream to the same extent as in lower production stuff. Just look at HiFi really. All the lower output european stuff is, in alot of ways, at the forefront.

Well thats the way I se it anyway.