I use a..................

Andy Alford · Post by **Andy Alford** » 8 Feb 2002 11:35 am

Do you ever use a tube amp with your pedal steel?

Bobby Lee · Post by **Bobby Lee** » 8 Feb 2002 11:54 am

Almost all the time!

I'm moving this to 'Electronics'.

------------------
<img align=right src="http://b0b.com/b0b.gif" width="64" height="64">Bobby Lee - email: quasar@b0b.com - gigs - CDs
Sierra Session 12 (E9), Williams 400X (Emaj9, D6), Sierra Olympic 12 (F Diatonic) Sierra Laptop 8 (D13), Fender Stringmaster (E13, A6)

John Knight · Post by **John Knight** » 8 Feb 2002 11:57 am

Sweetest and truest sound for the steel guitar.

------------------
D 10 Thomas with 8&6
Nashville 400 and Profex II
Asleep at the Steel

Tony Prior · Post by **Tony Prior** » 8 Feb 2002 12:02 pm

Sure do, sure did.. I use a Fender Hot Rod Deluxe, 40 W for practice and rehearsing and I played with a Fender Twin for 20 years.

TP

Earl Foote · Post by **Earl Foote** » 8 Feb 2002 1:22 pm

On some gigs I will use a Fender Deluxe Reverb Reissue and play Tele & Steel thru it. This is my favorite set up because of the simplicity and it's easy to haul (I like the sound I get as well). When I need more power I use the NV400. The Deluxe does not have reverb in the normal channel so I'm thinking of trying one of the stand-alone Fender reverb units for that channel.

See ya,
Earl

Patrick Smith · Post by **Patrick Smith** » 8 Feb 2002 1:48 pm

Yep!....Tweed-modified SF twin...smokin'!

PMS

Chris Lucker · Post by **Chris Lucker** » 8 Feb 2002 2:12 pm

I have an Evans SE150 HV, and had a twin 12 Standel-Emmons, but there is nothing as nice to my ears as a Silverface or Blackface Twin Reverb. I prefer a Vibrolux Reverb or Pro Reverb for Tele, but Twin Reverb for pedal steel.

Brandin · Post by **Brandin** » 8 Feb 2002 2:12 pm

Only tube amps. Most gigs I'll use my 1956
Rickenbacker M-15. It's a loud 30 watts with
a JBL D-130.

Jack Stoner · Post by **Jack Stoner** » 8 Feb 2002 2:30 pm

I used Fenders when I first started playing Pedal Steel. The last one was a Fender Twin. I went to Peavey in 1981 and have never had a desire to go back to tube amps.

I recently played through two different Twin amps, one a black face, at a lead player friends house. I couldn't find a sound that I liked in either.

Joerg Hennig · Post by **Joerg Hennig** » 8 Feb 2002 2:36 pm

As my main amp - nothing but Fender tube for me. I currently have a silverface 135 watt Fender Twin w/ 2 12" JBL speakers. Someday I´d like to try an older, "Blackface" Twin or some alternative like a Dual Showman w/cabinet. That Fender tube amp sound is a big part of MY sound. For rehearsals or party gigs I sometimes use an old MusicMan 210-65, which is kind of a hybrid with solid-state pre amp and tube power amp. It´s not really a good steel amp at higher volumes. Very dirty, reminds me more of a Vox AC-30 than a Fender. Sometimes I wonder if Leo had that sound in mind when he built it. At least I kinda hope it was him!

Jim Phelps · Post by **Jim Phelps** » 8 Feb 2002 2:40 pm

Maybe I'm not up on newer Fender Twins (probably not) but all the older ones I ever heard of were rated at 100 watts, and honestly more like 85, except the infamous Super Twin...What kind of Fender Twin have you got that's 135 watts?

Dave Robbins · Post by **Dave Robbins** » 8 Feb 2002 2:46 pm

I have to "second" what Jack said. I went to the Peaveys in the middle 70's. After a breif period of bouncing back and forth between a Session 400 and a Fender Twinn, I settled on the benefits of the Peavey and have not gone back. The Fender just sounded too thin to me after that, and the Peavey seemed to project better.

Dave

Matt Steindl · Post by **Matt Steindl** » 8 Feb 2002 3:39 pm

Havent gigged w/ my PSG, but at rehearsals, it sounds nice through a silverfaced Princeton Reveb w. a little tremelo.

It is really strange for me coming from a giutar players mentality that Peavey is crap, while in PSG-land, it is reveared as a great company. Maybe I need to check one of these Nashville amps out.

Even though Peavey guitar amps are not the most coveted piece of gear, they really are work horses and have probably rocked as many bar-rooms since the mid 70's as fender and Marshall have.

Would you rather have a beer spill on your 1962 Deluxe Reverb or a $300 Peavey?

------------------
Mattman in "The Big Sleazy"-:
S-10 Dekley, Suitcase Fender Rhodes, B-bender Les Paul

Darvin Willhoite · Post by **Darvin Willhoite** » 8 Feb 2002 3:58 pm

Best sound I've heard from my steel in a while was through a '69 Fender Twin with a JBL D130, the reverb in the amp and a Boss DD5 for a little delay.

------------------
Darvin Willhoite
Riva Ridge Recording

Hamilton Barnard · Post by **Hamilton Barnard** » 8 Feb 2002 7:24 pm

I bought a Session and Nashville 400, the tone always sounded milky and cloudy compared to my old Fenders.

I've never heard a transistor that is more transparent or chimey than a tube. I can't figure out why the transistor guys can't hear that difference.

------------------
My Marshalls.

Bill Llewellyn · Post by **Bill Llewellyn** » 8 Feb 2002 8:09 pm

Transistors versus tubes.... I think this debate will outlast the pedal steel guitar!

Oh, by the way, I work for a transistor amplifier company. But I also wouldn't fault a single soul for buying a tube amp. It is a matter of taste and of the tonality each steeler feels he/she needs to express their playing best. I'm happy that both types of amps exist so folks can pick between 'em.

------------------
Bill (steel not out of the woodshed) | MSA Classic U12 | Email | My music | Steeler birthdays | Over 50?

Dave Robbins · Post by **Dave Robbins** » 8 Feb 2002 10:37 pm

The characteristics of both types of amps are very different in terms or harmonics or overtones.

Some people can't handle mids as well as others and don't want to hear them. On the other hand, other poeple understand mids better and can handle them (Buddy is one of them!). Obviously, no one would want a tone which had "no" mids anymore than someone would want an amp that was overly middy sounding.

The transistor amps are always capable of a lot of "clean" power whereas the tube amps generally have less power (at least as far as camparing Peaveys and Fenders)and to my ear, don't sound as clean to me (obviously due to the nature of the tubes). In order for me to play a tube amp where I can play a transistor amp I have to run it a lot hotter and then they want to break up (tubes?). Some poeple don't mind a little dirt in their sound, but I want mine as clean as I can get it (not to be confused with a "bright" tone however).
I also like the overtone nature of the transistor better than the tube amp.

Another thing about the Peavey is their tone circuit . I like the "active" circuitry with it's ability to cut or boost at particular frequencies as well as the "mid shift" feature. I can get about any sound from this type of circuitry whereby I feel more trapped into a particular sound from a tube amp, epecially if it only has passive circuitry.
I taylor my tone "from" the mids instead of just trying to get my tone after the mids have been "cut".I want the mids to be part of my tone. Buddy once told me that "mids are the whole ballgame!" To try to get rid of mids is to pre-determine whether your guitar is going to get out past the front row or not. To my ear the tube amp lacks in those mids neccesary to get the sound to the back of the house.

I have heard players get good tone from either type of amp. Some poeple could get good tone from a cardboard box, like Buddy Emmons for example. I've heard him on different types of amps and he always sounded great and always sounded like "him!" It's not what amp you use but how you use what you've got.

"Different strokes for different folks!" But I don't want to spill beer on any amp! And I haven't seen a $300 Peavey amp in a long time.

Just my humble opinion of course. However, I think that if I was going to play a "live and loud" gig I would rather use the Peavey and be heard cleanly than use the Fender and not be.I have used a Fender Twinn in a low session type atmosphere and it sounded wonderful with close mic'ing, but then so did an old Session 400 I had.

Dave

CrowBear Schmitt · Post by **CrowBear Schmitt** » 8 Feb 2002 11:17 pm

i use SF Twin w: JBL D120
and an Evil Twin w: JBL K120
they weigh all right.

Rex Thomas · Post by **Rex Thomas** » 8 Feb 2002 11:44 pm

Andy, you should check out the locked topic "Nashville 1000 or Vibrosonic" as well as the opinions here. The guys were a GREAT help on deciding which way to go. I used the Vibrosonic (silver face Twin /w 15") for YEARS. But after test driving the Nshvl 1000, not only were my ears happy, but so was my back. I told one of the guys if I had the option, I'd do both amps, but even if I did have the option, I just don't want to mess with the extra gear anymore, so weighing (no pun intended) the pros & cons, the Nshvl 1000 won.
Keeping in mind that (my opinion) the Twin /w 15" is a great amp for steel, I have to go with Dave Robbins & Jack Stoner on this one, & especially Dave's advice; not so much what you've got, but how you USE what you've got.
Happy trails.

Joerg Hennig · Post by **Joerg Hennig** » 9 Feb 2002 4:01 pm

Jim, the 135 watt version was stock for Fender Twins from about 1977 until they discontionued the Silverface line in the early ´80s. They are not too popular with guitar players because they don´t have a lot of natural distortion unless you turn them up really high. It has a lot of clean headroom, which makes it very suitable for steel. And believe me, that amp is LOUD. I never got the impression that there´s not enough power. That may be true with the 100 watt models, I have played through one of those also and found it a bit weak.
An update here, I just got home from a rehearsal where I had some problems with the MusicMan and borrowed a Hot Rod Deluxe from the guitar player and got a BIG FAT sound with my ShoBud. They loved it! I wonder if anyone else here has tried one, they´re amazing. Easy to carry, too.

Dave Robbins · Post by **Dave Robbins** » 10 Feb 2002 8:21 am

Joe
one of things I'm referring to in my reply was that tube amps don't seem to carry like the transistor amps do. I have worked next to lead guitar players playing through tube amps that sounded like they were taking my head off. But I would be in the back of the house later to listen (while someone else played my steel through my transistor type) and find that the guitar was just not getting back there. He would be "real loud" right at the stage but not necesarily getting out. I have really noticed this particularly with the Mesa Boogie type amps too. (yeah, I know now I'm going to hear from all you guys who use them!

Also, sometime back I did some testing and recording using the Fender Twinn (a real good one I used to have) and a Peavey Session 400 (mid '70's version, mine as well)in "live" settings and found this to be true. The Twinn just did not not get to the back of the house like the Session did. I think that was probably the deciding factor for me. I have noticed this many times since too. I have also noticed this in 'jam" situations where there would be two steel players jamming, one through a tube type and one through a transistor type. the trans' almost always "penetrates" better.

Just because it sounds really loud to you right at your amp doesn't necesarily mean you getting out there.

The best bet may still be 'close mic'ing any amp you're playing through in a loud situation (night club type environments, when they will let ya! We all know they mic' ya on concerts).

I have found that nothing gets out there like a transistor amp does and I think it all has to do with "mid range"! No matter what amp you use, if you're cutting the mids excessively, you aren't going to get out there. Period!

Dave (I guess I have just spent too many years playin' clubs! LOL)

Jerry Hedge · Post by **Jerry Hedge** » 10 Feb 2002 10:07 am

Dave, I've had the opposite experence with tubes vs. transistor amps. In fact it's one of my beefs with modeling amps (Line 6,Cyber-Twin,etc). A good tube amp (to me anyway) seems to carry in a room better than a tranny amp. The tube seems to have more apparent volume than transistor amps. I think the reason the Session 400s' seem to do it for you is the way those amps are voiced. Voicing of the tone circuit has a lot to do with the perceived volume of an amp.

Buck Dilly · Post by **Buck Dilly** » 10 Feb 2002 8:48 pm

I love my Fender Vibrosonic w/JBL. I like my Super Reverb too. One day at an outdoor gig I got to use two Supers. Yeah!

Dave Robbins · Post by **Dave Robbins** » 10 Feb 2002 9:32 pm

Jerry,
In a word "nope!"

By the way, I haven't used a Session 400 in years! My current amps are either a 1990 Nashville 400 w/o mod or my favorite which is a Vegas 400 (also w/o mod).

Your term "apparent" is right and is exactly my point. The "tube" amp can give the feeling of loudness or "apparent loudness", but it still doesn't mean you are getting "out". Of course "loud is loud" no matter what. I have heard those who played loud and sounded great and I have also heard those who played loud and sounded offencive!

The "voicing" of the Session 400 had nothing to do with it and was just simply the particular example that I was using for this topic. I don't think voicing has a lot to do with it once your sound is out in the room. Out there, you sound like you and nothing else. But, whether you are getting there or not is the issue. "Projection!" The Peaveys are generally a little stronger in the mids by nature, whereas tube amps like the Twinn are not as strong there, like I said, by nature. When I have used tube type amps I have had to play louder to get my sound to penetrate whereas with the Peavey I don't have to play quite as loud to get it to penetrate.
I have also noticed a trend in most steel players who like to use the tube amps. They don't use a lot of mids in their tone settings. They are generally cutting them (which is the only choice in the case of the Twinn, where the Peavey uses a more modern "active" type circuity with the taylorable mid "shift" control). Mid range "is" the basic sound of the instrument and all the rest is simply the overtones, temper, harmonics, etc. The "mids" can either move your sound "out" or back depending on how you handle them. Transistor amps with their mids tend to penetrate better, where as a Twinn with it's passive mid control and less mids by nature doesn't.

Of course, everyone has their preferences. But preferences don't change the characteristics of any amp. Like I said before it is what you do with it that makes the difference.

By the way, Tommy White prefers the "Web" with the cicuitry set to the "hybrid" position, which is suppose to sound like the middle ground between transistor and tube. He gets an excellent sound! So here again is my statement that it is what you do with it that matters.
And for the benefit of all the others, there is the Evans, Standells, Sho-Buds etc,....! All of them, in capable hands, sound great in their own way.

Play what type of amp tickles your ear at your guitar, but try to be aware of what you might sound like out in the room. Just being "obnoxiously loud" (regardless of type of amp) in the room doesn't mean your amp is projecting. It simply means you are just "obnoxiously loud" for the room! Just like getting that great tone that you are hearing right at your amp, may not be what those in the listening area hear.

Dave

[This message was edited by Dave Robbins on 10 February 2002 at 09:35 PM.]

Dan Tyack · Post by **Dan Tyack** » 11 Feb 2002 10:42 am

Dave, I think Jerry is right here. What I believe you are talking about in terms of tube amps not 'getting out' is the voicing that is inherent to Fender amps. They have a definite dip in upper midrange frequencies. A lot of steel players tend to accentuate this tonal characteristic when using amps like Twins. In many rooms this tends to make the steel disappear in the room with the band. Most of the transistor amps, but especially Peaveys, have a more prominant midrange, which does tend to cut through. This is what you are talking about with the Tommy White prefering the 'hybrid' position, which gives a tonal voicing that accentuates the mids, versus the 'tube' voicing, which is really nothing more than a tone voicing that tries to match a fender (no modeling going on there).

My experience has been that tube amps tend to project a lot more than transistor ones. This is especially true with modeling transistor amps. My current main amp is a THD 'BiValve', which puts out maybe 40 watts maximum, but which covers better than any amp I have ever played. I have been able to cut down on my stage volume, because it cuts through the live mix so well. This amp doesn't have a fender type voicing, and in fact there are a number of tube amps out there which don't have that built in midrange dip. I have a modified Fender Showman which cuts like a buzz saw.

------------------
www.tyacktunes.com [This message was edited by Dan Tyack on 11 February 2002 at 10:49 AM.]