The MLP ATTENUATION PROJECT !!!

[homenote]

Howa bought these thingys?

guitar amp isolation enclosure - Bing Images

 

[dspelman]

I don't agree with this at all. The single most important element in the design of a speaker system, be it hifi or guitar, is the driver. I believe guitar amp manufacturers put great thought into the drivers(s) that will be used.

It's for this very reason a company like Weber offers over 170 different speakers.

Granted the cabs are not designed at Lincoln Labs, but they don't need to be for a guitar speaker system. But despite this there are many guitar speaker cabs designed for specific a voicing and/or purpose.

I'm afraid I'll just agree to disagree on this one for a thread focused on attenuation.

I'm aware of the various driver manufacturers and their offerings. Ditto most of the cabinet manufacturers. In the main, I think that most offerings from most manufacturers are simply duplications of traditional cabinets with a generally-custom-accepted set of speakers tossed in. I believe that most of the effort has been in the carpentry and covering department and not for "voicing." Manufacturers mostly use brands and specific speakers (Vintage 30's, greenbacks, G12-75s) because customers recognize them and are comfortable with them. They'll occasionally use others (Rocket 50's, for example) because they're far cheaper. Specs tend to duplicate each other; a 4x12 is usually around 30 x 30 x 14, give or take. It's not because it's the best possible configuration for four 12" speakers, but because it's a familiar and traditional shape.

 

[homenote]

/\/\/\/\

Yes this makes sense, to me anyway. I would believe that to be the case. I would agree that when these types of speakers/cabs were in there infancy that there "design" had more to do with what materials were available for the cheapest price points. I was just talking, not to long ago to a friend of mine that is still in the business of building amps, speakers and many other world wide endeavors in the buz and this was exactly his take on the stuff that was manufactured then, and he was a very close friend to Jim Marshall and Leo Fender. He was telling me that he has hired many top notch amp designers only to disagree with there ideas to perfect designs.

He told me one story on how he got into it with EV on a recent project "design" and how that heated debate ended with a Fxxx Yxx , and hanging up the phone on Mr Halen.

The artist/rock guys, at the time, that made this stuff so desirable today, were pushing every boundary, breaking every rule, pushing all there equipment WAY beyond what they were made to do. I mean the tones I chase weren't usually created by people that were very well grounded in musical theory, lets be honest .

Trying to recreate what was created, many times by accident, at lower comfortable volume levels, is a challenge but at least management is starting to finally pay attention to our (99% of the market)needs.

Why not a six incher?

 

[homenote]

I'm afraid I'll just agree to disagree on this one for a thread focused on attenuation.

I'm aware of the various driver manufacturers and their offerings. Ditto most of the cabinet manufacturers. In the main, I think that most offerings from most manufacturers are simply duplications of traditional cabinets with a generally-custom-accepted set of speakers tossed in. I believe that most of the effort has been in the carpentry and covering department and not for "voicing." Manufacturers mostly use brands and specific speakers (Vintage 30's, greenbacks, G12-75s) because customers recognize them and are comfortable with them. They'll occasionally use others (Rocket 50's, for example) because they're far cheaper. Specs tend to duplicate each other; a 4x12 is usually around 30 x 30 x 14, give or take. It's not because it's the best possible configuration for four 12" speakers, but because it's a familiar and traditional shape.

No man, this is one way or another is ALWAYS where this topic winds up, the speakers.
As far as the OP, I am ok with any direction this thread goes because it's a riddle that hasn't been solved yet. By all means, BREAK ALL THE RULES!

 

[homenote]

Looks like this guy had the right idea's in 2006.

http://www.amptone.com/index.html

"Objectives of Amptone.com for 2006
The overarching objective of this website for Fall 2006 is to break-through the guitar industry slumber and get everyone to understand distortion voicing, power attenuation including Power Scaling, speaker isolation cabinets, and re-amping. These need to stop remaining "new" and "esoteric subjects"; they need to become routinely familiar concepts for everyone, including gear designers, columnists and gear reviewers, guitarists, and book authors.
I am dissatisfied with the take-up speed of the ideas at this site – we need to accelerate and get on with spreading this information that so many individuals have found useful. I'm also disappointed to see Amptone.com rarely mentioned in print, where these "esoteric" subjects are being discussed and this site has by far the greatest concentration of information – and in various cases is the only concentration of systematic information on the subject, including techniques and products available so far; it would've been so much more helpful for the reader had the author pointed to Amptone.com.
It's safe to mention Amptone.com in print media; my information has been developing online since 1998 and this particular domain name has been going since early 2000 – Amptone.com has been a stable and very popular online resource for 6 to 8 years – I just wish this website were more explicitly influential across the industry, rather than just giving individuals ideas to use in isolation.
This is why I wrote encyclopedia entries about these should-be basic topics. So if you find this information useful, please mention Amptone.com so other people learn this information and it becomes standard basic knowledge throughout the industry.
Citing Amptone.com will result in the following, the end of the Dark Ages for guitar gear. This change will include the end of the half-baked "Master Volume/Power Soak" era and the beginning of the integrated "Power Scaling" era.
Power attenuation will become a standard feature on guitar amps, demanded by guitarists just like preamp distortion has been demanded ever since Marshall's master volume amps. For example, the Mad Professor amp with PowerSuck switch, and especially amps with integrated power-supply-based power attenuation, which avoids burning-out the tubes and OT, such as amps with London Power's Power Scale and Sustain controls or Maven Peal's equivalent (but loud) Wattage and Sag controls.
Guitarists will quit buying amps lacking power scaling. Reeves amps describes this feature as "extras that will be useful to the bedroom player as well as the pro-player. Power Scaling...the ultimate master volume control ..." and finally eliminate the fundamental reason for the deeply entrenched product category distinction of "bedroom vs. pro". Clips of Power Scaling demonstrating that it works: Vintage Vibe, Bruce Clement: installing a kit in a Plexi
Power tubes and dummy loads will be integrated into preamp/processors
Isocab products, isobox kits, and isolation booth construction will be common knowledge and truly common practice; it will be routinely discussed in all books on amp tone how to use an isocab or construct a cab isolation box.
The grandma amp: finally, a small, $175 combo guitar amp with power tube (not 12AX7) and power attenuation allowing volume-independent power-tube distortion, as well as headphone jack, suitable for staying at grandma's house or for at work, yet also with jacks to be scalable to pro live performance. There is no reason for the existence of solid-state "beginner" amps or "kids' amps".
Modelling amps will be properly built around actual power-tube distortion, not just preamp distortion or preamp tube misuse.
Pre-distortion EQ voicing (pickup voicing) will no longer be considered an "advanced trick" that's understood only by Eddie Van Halen and Slash. Books will finally start talking *systematically* about eq *placement* and how it affects and enables *distortion voicing*.
Libraries of dry guitar playing will be available and routinely used to help dial-in tone, and will help prove that digital amp modelling by itself or a 12AX7 misused as a power tube fails to sound like power tube distortion. The reamp technique will be used to find and attain the limits of all the approaches and types of setup, as well as comparing power tube distortion character; it will so speed up exploration and experimentation, alternative power tube types and circuits will be found.
In general, the entire guitar-gear industry must undergo a revolutionary paradigm change along the lines of this site, that will eliminate the entire category of solid-state kids' amps/beginners' amps; essentially, solid-state guitar amps will stop being made, replaced by properly feature-configured power tubes with power scaling/built-in attenuation down to the 1mW level.
-- Michael Hoffman, BSEE, Amptone.com -- a revolutionary activist designer out to change not only product design, but the entire paradigm of "good tone is hard to obtain".

To do (really):
Create dry-guitar files with Sustainiac Acoustic Sustainer B, then C. Upload to Reamp page.
Write manufacturers asking them to make Power Scaling a new industry-wide standard like Master Volume has been.
Write guitarists to email me dry-guitar mp3 files for the Amptone Reamp Project.
Update pages per 3 years of manufacturer request emails and new product notification emails (around 50 emails).
To do (don't hold your breath):
Upload photos: double-layer isobox, Paul Frank tshirt of halfstack soundwave danger zone, swirlpainted large stompbox case for a power-tube saturation pedal, EQ pedal collection, amp tone book collection, tiny mp3 player feeding dry-guitar tracks to reamp through a guitar rig, Marshall Capri small combo tube amp, Jim Marshall autographed Power Brake, stock Ibanez Blazer guitar held by Bill Webb as the Clockwork Orange guy in October 1982, lamps that look like power tubes and the clear 60W halogen bulbs, "woman's waist/hips/thighs" power-tube envelope shape.
Write a new, condensed amp tone summary article: state of the art; what everyone needs to know about using today's gear; what's wrong with today's gear paradigm; what changes in gear and common knowledge are needed.
Finish my list of what exactly I want in the industry.
When have a Reamp library, create mp3 demo of how the distortion sounds from 12AX7 as power tube in the VOX Valvetronix AD120VT combo amp.
Write-up my planned isobooth design such as a 4' isocage that can fit a 4x12 cab and 4 mics.
For each isobox product, list the number of layers and their materials, speaker size, innermost damping material, access hinge design, and whether it integrates a power attenuator or hits the speaker with the full input wattage, and number of mics supported.
Make a local page for each product, not just an external hyperlink"

 

[homenote]

.

 

[homenote]

Sort of yes, sort of no.

No (lemme repeat that...NO) attenuator in any of the lists above allows the interaction between output transformer and speaker voice coil to happen unobstructed. No attenuator in any of the lists above maintains the tone of the amp/speaker combination; they all change things. If you LIKE what they do, you're in good shape. If you don't, then you're off and running trying various attenuators and various EQ setups to try to adjust things to get back to what you like. And the amount of tone change varies according to the amount of attenuation necessary, so you're constantly chasing EQ.

The Fluxtone is the only system that puts nothing between the output transformer and the voice coil of the speaker.

The first time I heard the fluxtone was at the LA Amp Show several years ago. They had two cabinets set up, one with a standard speaker, the other with the same speaker, but with the Fluxtone setup on the back. They switched back and forth for a bit, and it was obvious that the two speakers sounded identical. They cranked things up (it gets LOUD in those airport hotel rooms, but the additional sound proofing in each room necessary to allow people to sleep under an airport flight path is why the amp show is held there). And then the fluxtone rep began to dial the thing down.

The tone stayed the same, but things eventually got to the point where you could hear the sound of jaws bouncing off the carpet and the occasional "no WAY!" It's 25 dB of difference (roughly the equivalent of taking your 100W amp down to 1/2W).

The ONLY real problem with this approach is its expense. It's prohibitive to put a quartet of these speakers in a 4x12 or a 2x12, no question. But if you're recording or practicing, or even doing a gig where stage volume is a serious issue, why would you be working with those larger speaker cabinets anyway? I have, for example, one of the loudest four EL34 amps I've ever heard. It's a 1x12 combo that usually houses an EV and between the bigass Mercury Magnetics transformers and the magnet on the back of that EV, it's insanely heavy for a combo. It's run pairs of 4x12s to ear-melting levels for gigs, but it's crazy loud just on the efficient internal speaker as well. I tried it, cranked, with a Fluxtone speaker based on the EV in an open-backed cabinet. Then dialed it down as far as it would go. Fletcher-Munson aside, there was all the good stuff but at a volume that would allow a muted conversation. We put it in a room and put a mike on it (try this with your attenuators) loud, dialed down, and then on the internal combo speaker. The obvious differences were between the Fluxtone and the internal speaker (this speaker was the original from 1988), but between the cranked Fluxtone and the dialed-back Fluxtone, very little, approaching nothing. Try that with an attenuator and see what you get.

So can you still do this with them at lower volume levels?

(No Pedals, No MV, Amp Dimed)

Komet Concorde fast mode - YouTube

Komet Concorde gradual mode - YouTube