guitar amp evolution

[dinamanu]

hi all

I found this ,a lot interesting

http://www.harmony-central.com/Guitar/g ... ution.html

manu

[Moose]

hi all

I found this ,a lot interesting

http://www.harmony-central.com/Guitar/g ... ution.html

manu

Is "interesting" the new word for "full of crap?"

I applaud the author's attempt, but it shows a very simplistic view of things. Statements like

"Fender repositioned the EQ to just after the first gain stage, where it "ate" a lot of the signal. This made Fender's 1960's amps somewhat cleaner sounding than the 1950's tweed covered Fenders"

Are, at worst, false and, at best, completely ignorant of the complex differences between tweed circuits and their blackface counterparts. A 5E3 Deluxe has a low gain stage followed immediately by a tonestack, yet is significantly more distorted at volume than a blackface Deluxe. Blame it on the lower voltage the cathode PI, the tone control vs. a full tonestack, and the lower overall wattage of the amp.

The "Early fenders had a true vibrato, not just a tremelo" crap is an absolute flasehood.

I could delve into the "more gain means more distortion" bit, but then I'd start sounding pissy. As though I don't already.

The point is, don't believe anything this tool wrote. He is nearly as wrong as he could be.