Or has used one?
What do you think of them? I'm considering a Weber Mass or something similar, both for recording at home and gigs. I've heard both good and bad, but I'd like to get some opinions from this forum.
Printable View
Or has used one?
What do you think of them? I'm considering a Weber Mass or something similar, both for recording at home and gigs. I've heard both good and bad, but I'd like to get some opinions from this forum.
I have been using a Weber Mass 100 for a few years, but recently stopped, and have gone back to using my volume controls more. I have mixed feelings now. They are useful for when you just caint crank the sucker. Hurts top end tho.Quote:
Originally Posted by boobtube21
CT.
I use (and build) low watt amps.
Rather drive from the top than choke it down.
Scratch that.
Sounds obscene, and it probably is!
Yeah, I've heard it cuts a little high end too.
Other reports indicate that you lose the ability to control volume from the guitar...like you are playing on 5, then turn up the guit's vol to 10, and it doesn't get any louder. This doesn't make any sense to me, but then again I've never used one and don't know how they work, other than the fact that Weber uses a speaker motor in place of a resistor.
Anyone else ever use of these?
supposedly the "ultimate" really is the ultimate. never played one, but look on LPF, there are a ton of threads on it.
i've played the weber, it was pretty nice, but i didn't buy one. to my ears, the tone started to "smear" when used with a heavy hand. it was okay when used very sparingly, past that it tweaked the sound of the amp. it became too compressed and lifeless. no dynamics.
what i do is use a nice compressor first in line of my chain. turn the amp up to where it sounds good, and then click the comp on. turn the volume to where it attenuates your signal to a usable volume, and then make up the sag with the sustain knob. what you're going for is to NOT be able to tell the comp is on, not used as an effect. granted it isn't going to sound exactly the same, but it's always gotten me by, and i like it better than the attenuator. getcha a bbe photocomp and try it out, they're cheap and sound real nice.
I use a THD Hotplate for rehearsals and small venues.
I find it ok when using it at -4db it is only marginaly tone sucking, mainly from the speaker not pushing as much air, but it is only marginal.
But at -8db and beyond I find it no better than turning the amp down.
Bottom line is I would be better off with a low powered amp cranked, for the price I paid for it I could of bought a Blackstar HT5 or similar for home, rehearsals and small venues
I use a THD Hotplate with my Marshall JTM 45 which is really loud for 30 watts. It works great and sounds great.
Except for the lowest setting tone loss is minimal if noticed at all. There is a bright switch and a deep switch for more
options to adjust the tone to your taste. I prefer pushing the power tubes and using the Hotplate to bring down the
volume over a master volume or using pedals.The beast comes out to play at 10...{ :-{)
I would really love to have a JTM 45. It's a dream amp for me. I would definitely need an attenuator with one, though. As it is, I could use one to take just a smidgen off of my tweed Deluxe clone!
I've used an attenuator before, I have a hotplate and a Weber Mass, but I would rather install a Vari-Watt or Vari-Watt FX instead.
www.skipzcircuits.com
I've owned the Mass, Dr. Z Air Brake and Hot Plate. The Hot Plate, to me, seems to mess with the sound the least.
I've owned a Weber Load Dump which I used for my old HRDx. It was not what I wanted, so I "dumped" it, har har. Turns out the amp has to sound good cranked if you want it to sound halfway decent with an attenuator.
Right now I'm building a simple L-pad attenuator for my 5-watt Blackheart. For low-wattage amps, I think it makes sense to build rather than buy, and the mythology is that lower wattage amps lose LESS of their high-end when passing through an attenuator than do higher wattage amps.
Can anyone confirm?
Wow, I forgot I started this thread. For the record I bought a Weber Mini Mass a few months back and am quite happy with it.
I don't know the answer to your question CzarSketch, to be honest, I'm not sure that an attentuator really even messes with your amp's high end at all. And I'll tell you why: to my naked ears the treble does seem to roll off quite a bit, especially when the attenuator vol is set really low...so I can see where that concern comes from.
However, when I record the amp set up this way, it sounds almost identical to when I record it cranked. Same mic and everything. I can only conclude that this is because at really low volumes my ears don't hear what they think they're supposed to hear, but a Shure SM57 knows there isn't really a difference.
Or am I wrong?
psychoacoustics, look it up. i don't think you're wrong by the way.
Have someone who doesn't "know better" listen to it.
That's a good idea Don. Maybe I'll record both one after the other, and have the wife take a listen. Or post the clips here (not sure how to do that) and let people guess which is which.
Funny you mention psychoacoustics Chuck. I just finished a chapter on that in a book I'm reading called "Audio". VERY interesting stuff, Fletcher Munson curves, frequency masking, etc. :dude
Boobtube: that's a really good point
Back when I was in school I took an entire course on the physics of sensory perception. The ear is really, really funky about its relationship between tone and volume.
There's a reason that when you're mixing tracks you turn the vocals down further than you think you have to--because the human ear is absolutely tuned to hear words at those frequencies, with syllabic breaks and a common phrasing structure. Really cool.
The other odd phenomenon at play is something called a TOP, Threshold of Perception, which is the point where you can hear a given frequency.
Our ears have a specific response pattern, just like a microphone does, and for the most part we hear lower frequencies at higher volumes better than we do at lower volumes. High frequencies are trickier, though, and I cannot remember exactly why. It has something to do with a lack of an evolutionary need to hear them at CERTAIN volumes and in CERTAIN relationships to other frequencies.
This is all theoretical, though. If a microphone picks up the high off an attenuated amp the same as off a cranked amp, then it's the same. Period. We build these tools to be consistent, and I tell you what, my SM57 is about the most consistent tool I own.
Dude. I just dug my Boss compressor out of storage and tried it like this...it sounds pretty good! Thanks for the tip Chuck! :dudeQuote:
Originally Posted by chuckocaster
@Czarsketch yep according to the Fletcher Munson curve, at all volumes we hear the freq range from about 1k to about 5k a lot better. More dramatic at lower volumes though like you said. I believe that's the range that human speech falls into. After reading the psychoacoustics chapter in that book, and part about the FM curves in particular, my mixes got a LOT better.
The guy who serviced my Marshall warned me about the Ultimate Attenuator. More than just one of his buddies have had Marshalls emit smoke due to those gadgets. He recommended THD Hot Plates if I insisted using an attenuator. (He builds and installs power scaling circuits but adviced against that too, as my amp is a combo and hes guess was, that it'd grow way to warm.)Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckocaster
So basically he adviced me to play loud or turn down the master volume.
Admittedly: I have zero experience playing either solution, but I'm getting used to making do.
At times I am gassing for Hot Plate or a Koch Load Box, but I think a small wattage amp may be wiser...
Just get a different amp for every sized venue you play at. :smile:
You know you want 'em.
Kap'n, where you been? Yes, I would love to have many different size amps, but that could get expensive in a hurry! It could also get me a divorce. :laughing: