Dumb Question, Mine Often Are?

[Firestorm]

A friend of mine had the opportunity to record Eric Clapton once, years ago. Clapton came into the studio with a Tweed Twin, set it down, walked around the room and said "Put your mikes here." I guess years of horrifying audio engineers teaches you something. The best attenuation for some amps is distance. And good mikes.

[The Ballzz]

Reeltarded,
WOW, from the description, that "deceiver" seems like just the ticket! But I'll wager it ain't cheap! Also, it's a little bit of an overkill, given I only really need two outputs. It's interesting and informative that at least someone has addressed this exact issue and it's promising that there actually seems to be a real solution.
Thanx 4 The Link,
Gene

[Reeltarded]

It's something to think about. It's not easy to make it do what it does. It's the opposite of easy!

Another thing that kinda works great is a wireless rig with an output control. You are low-Z on the out and you can makeup globally for the loss. Each line needs to be isolated to the inputs.. you can do that pretty cheapish.

[pdf64]

The only thing needed to make this amp perfect for my use is a way to add a little reverb and or delay and I wanted to add this in the "loop" created by channel jumpering. The unfortunate consequence is that taking just that little bit of gain/signal away darkens the tone and response in a way that isn't able to be made up by volume increase on either the guitar or the amp. This loss is "just enough" to take away the real magic of the feedback and clarity available in this amp.

I'm also trying to avoid putting any kind of solid state, foot/stomp/pedal/thingie between the guitar and the amp, as this destroys that glorious push/pull, symbiotic relationship of magnetic pickups to the input tube.

I think that feeding the FX using 'channel jumpering' may well load things down a bit, and tend to roll of some highs, due to the 138k series grid resistors added in the signal path coupling with the 'send' cable capacitence.
However, a basic Y splitter to feed the raw guitar signal to the amp and fx should avoid most of the problems with that, especially if careful to keep the cables short and high spec/low capacitance, eg George L.
A buffered splitter, or just a buffer on the fx side of the Y splitter, immediately after it, should eliminate any loss.

I've never noticed that a good buffer between guitar and amp (eg a Boss tuner pedal) has any affect on the response? So I don't perceive that there's any significant interaction between instrument and input tube.

[The Ballzz]

Oh Boy,
I think I got lucky! I decided to try one of my cheap little ART direct box/DI's and it seems to give minimal or no loss of signal. I plug guitar into 1/4" input and 1/4" "Thru" output into the bright "Hi" of the amp. For the initial testing, I used the XLR output into the XLR input of my Lexicon MX300 and the 1/4" output to the normal ""Hi" input of the amp. I've not yet decided on what brand/model of reverb/delay/multi-effect I may actually want to use, but if I choose one with only an unbalanced (tip/sleeve) 1/4" input, I can use a simple balanced XLR to unbalanced 1/4" adaptoid type cable! One benefit of using as balanced is the option of phase correction via a switch on the DI, but if I need to go unbalanced, I'll need to test for proper phasing and choose whether to use pin #3 or #2 as the positive for the adaptoid cable. Being a long time sound guy, I have any/and all types of such adapters!

Who'd have thunk it could be this easy/simple!

Link to cheesy DI:

http://www.musiciansfriend.com/pro-audi ... direct-box

Thanx 4 All The Thoughts,
Gene