It is currently Mon Mar 16, 2020 4:17 pm

All times are UTC - 7 hours



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
Post subject: Re: Help! clean channel on a Mustang II
Posted: Mon Jun 13, 2011 11:33 am
Offline
Aspiring Musician
Aspiring Musician

Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 4:43 pm
Posts: 318
The only thing that any and all amps add to a signal (discounting effects) is distortion.

In the tube amp models, it is the distortion characteristics that are being modeled (plus the tone stack).

In the cab models, it's the distortion characteristics of a given cabinet, the frequency response of the speaker(s) characteristics and possibly the efficiency of the speaker that are being modeled.

Cleaner amp models are clean because the distortion characteristics are low. Solid state amps are better suited for acoustic guitar amplification because they produce less distortion at higher volume. But the 'Twin Reverb' model is fairly clean and, except for it's tone stack, is very usable as an acoustic amplifier (either real or modeled).

The only thing any amplifier can do is amplify the signal that it receives. Sure, you can use the tone stack to boost/cut certain frequencies that already exist in the signal. But if it's not in the signal, it can't pull it out of thin air. But this is exactly what many people expect an acoustic amplifier to do.

No amplifier, not even one that costs $10,000 can do anything but amplify the signal that it is recieving. The only thing that it can and will add to that signal (by it's self) is distortion.

The trouble is that the sound you want is not in that signal. It's not there because a pieizo or sound hole mic can only capture what's going on in the instrument. They can't capture the sound of the air being moved around the instrument. This is why recording engineers will always mic acoustic instruments, typically using mid-side technique in a good room. The output of a pickup might be added to to this on a separate channel so as to thicken the sound but that is never the primary/predominant sound in the mix.

Playing an acoustic live on a small stage, using microphones presents the problem of picking up crowd noise as well as the guitar. That's why many musicians use a pickup system and run it to an amp. Yes they have so called 'acoustic amps', but an acoustic amp is just a 'clean' (low distortion) amp with a specially designed speaker/cab. Nothing more. Yes they have tone stack better suited for the range of tones to be tweaked. But there is nothing special about the amplifier it's self other than being low distortion.

If Fender made an 'Acoustic' amp model, all that it could provide is a low distortion amp with a tone stack better suited for frequency tweaking an acoustic - period.

Users would find fault with it and say it was no good. They wouldn't realize that the fault wasn't in the amp model but in the signal it was receiving.

The only thing Fender could do, if it chooses to, is provide a cab sim for 'acoustic'.

---

If your not getting a good sound from your acoustic using the Twin Reverb model with cab simulation off, then try throwing a graphic EQ pedal between the guitar and the amp to tweak the sound.

If you still can't get the sound you want, then a special cab sim might help a little. But other than that, it isn't the fault of the amp model that your not getting the sound you want. It's the fault of the signal being sent to the amp.

If you want the amp to add the sound of the air moving around the instrument, it would have to synthesize it - which would be an effect and it would sound like an effect.

And that is why I think adding an Acoustic Amp model would be completely pointless. - we already have a 'clean' amp model. Adding an EQ effect would eliminate the need for an outboard EQ in dialing in the sound you want from the signal you have coming from an acoustic and would be very helpful in other situations as well.

Adding an 'Acoustic' cab would be good too.


Top
Profile
Fender Play Winter Sale 2020
Post subject: Re: Help! clean channel on a Mustang II
Posted: Mon Jun 13, 2011 1:41 pm
Offline
Aspiring Musician
Aspiring Musician
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 11:22 pm
Posts: 797
p90sdude,

If what you say is true, then if you connected two Fender Twins to two home stereo speakers and plug in a CD player or iPod, it would sound, timbrally speaking and ignoring the THD specs, as good or the same as using an actual home receiver. Or that if you connected the output of another clean amp say, a Roland JC-120, to the twin's speakers they would sound exactly the same.
That would mean an assumption that any "clean" amp has a flat frequency response.

The fact is, they definitely do not. The Roland might be a bit flatter than the twin but the twin especially, was designed for a particular sound that Leo Fender was after. Thus, it has its own sound that it imparts to whatever is plugged into it.

What you fail to recognize is that it is absolutely not just about the distortion or the speakers and the cab it's in. Every amplifier, especially guitar amplifiers has its own innate tonality even before the speakers and cab come into play. High fidelity systems like P.A.s, studio monitors and high end home stereos are designed not to have a "sound" or tonality when all the tone controls are set flat. In fact, the really high end systems manufacturers work really hard at making this so.

The twin may be clean but it's frequency response is nowhere near flat enough and its tone stack is nowhere near capable of dealing with the demands of an acoustic guitar. It may work well enough for you and that's great. Some of us are a fair bit more persnickety about our amplified acoustic guitar sound and the twin just doesn't cut it. Glad it works for you though.

While I wouldn't mind an Acoustasonic model included in a future firmware upgrade, I would much prefer a more generic and clean "Flat Response" preamp with a reasonably effective semi-parametric EQ and compressor. A preamp with a response curve designed to, as best it can, compensate for the bumps and dips in a guitar speaker's frequency response curve. I'm not sure how tall an order that is for Fender's R&D team, but that's what an amplified acoustic guitar needs. It's so, so, so much more than just a lack of distortion. With acoustic guitar, it's about timbral control that is definitely beyond what any "clean" electric guitar amp can provide.

O.


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Help! clean channel on a Mustang II
Posted: Mon Jun 13, 2011 3:19 pm
Offline
Aspiring Musician
Aspiring Musician

Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 4:43 pm
Posts: 318
Well no that is not what I intended that people would get out of it. I just sold a JC 120 that I had for many years and I have a nice home theater system so, I know that frequency response is a factor.

More to the point that I was trying to convey had to do with my reference to mid-side miking and what is present in the signal coming from the acoustic guitar's pickup.

All the clearity/freqency response/ yada-yada isn't going to account for the sound of the moving air all around the instrument. And that's not present in the pickup's signal.

If you take a look at an Acoustasonic amp, you'll notice it has a separate channel for a microphone. This is no trivial after though. Without a mike to pickup the sound coming from around the guitar <edited>, all you have is a clean amp with some special tweaking.

Where is the microphone input on a Mustang?

Without that... an 'acoustic model' even if it were cleaner and had better frequency response than the Twin and all that, it would still be just another clean amp model.

You won't get the sound you desire because all of the sound isn't there...

Might as well go for a soda. Or in this case, a Twin Reverb.


Last edited by p90sdude on Tue Jun 14, 2011 9:53 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Help! clean channel on a Mustang II
Posted: Mon Jun 13, 2011 8:43 pm
Offline
Aspiring Musician
Aspiring Musician
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 11:22 pm
Posts: 797
p90sdude wrote:
Well no that is not what I intended that people would get out of it. I just sold a JC 120 that I had for many years and I have a nice home theater system so, I know that frequency response is a factor.

More to the point that I was trying to convey had to do with my reference to mid-side miking and what is present in the signal coming from the acoustic guitar's pickup.

All the clearity/freqency response/ yada-yada isn't going to account for the sound of the moving air all around the instrument. And that's not present in the pickup's signal.

If you take a look at an Acoustasonic amp, you'll notice it has a separate channel for a microphone. This is no trivial after though. Without a mike to pickup the sound coming from around the amp, all you have is a clean amp with some special tweaking.

Where is the microphone input on a Mustang?

Without that... an 'acoustic model' even if it were cleaner and had better frequency response than the Twin and all that, it would still be just another clean amp model.

You won't get the sound you desire because all of the sound isn't there...

Might as well go for a soda. Or in this case, a Twin Reverb.


You may not get "all" the sound, but having a flatter preamp makes a HUGE difference in tone shaping because you're not having to fight the overall characteristics of the Twin. To me, the EQ on the twin does not work well enough to use on an acoustic/electric - that's not what it's voiced for. It sounds like an acoustic/electric played through a Twin. Blech!

How can you say that the Acoustasonic is just a clean amp just like the twin with some tweaks when there's a gigantic difference not only in what they do to an incoming signal, but how they sound? They sound completely different to each other. One of them sounds much better on an Acoustic/electric than the other and it ain't the Twin. Conversely, if you plug an electric into the Acoustasonic would you actually say it sounds just like a Twin?

As for the Mic input on the Acoustasonic, most off the shelf acoustic electrics only have a piezo saddle pickup so most people wouldn't have any use for that channel. But even without using the Mic channel, if you plug an acoustic/electric into it, it does not sound like an acoustic/electric played through a Twin. It sounds waaay better. BTW, you do not want "a mike to pickup the sound coming from around the amp" as that would give you feedback. You want a mic to pick up sound at the guitar's vicinity.

As I said, while I'm not opposed to an Acoustasonic Model, I'd rather just have a flat response preamp with semi-parametric EQs and a compressor. I don't expect it to sound like a well mic'ed acoustic or to even be as good as one plugged into the Mic channel of an Acoustasonic amp, but I'll bet it won't sound like an acoustic/electric played through a Twin. It'll sound a lot better. Not perfect, but better than playing through a Twin or any other "clean" electric guitar amp.

O.


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Help! clean channel on a Mustang II
Posted: Tue Jun 14, 2011 10:14 am
Offline
Aspiring Musician
Aspiring Musician

Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 4:43 pm
Posts: 318
Orcatraz wrote:
... BTW, you do not want "a mike to pickup the sound coming from around the amp" as that would give you feedback. You want a mic to pick up sound at the guitar's vicinity....

O.

Thanks for pointing out that was a typo, I edited it in my post to say 'guitar' as that is what I meant.

Respectfully,

I'm not saying a Twin sounds like an Acoustisonic or vice versa. I'm saying that piezos all by themselves - through any amp are not satisfactory in my experience. And if your satisfied with that sound, IMO you throw all that 'quality sound' stuff out the window.

I won't deny that a flatter response amp would give better results to an ac guitar piezo played all by it's self. But in my experience, once you add other instruments into the mix the difference becomes minimal.

I don't gig any more but back in the day, here is what we did... We (a quartet: drums, bass, 2 guitars/keyboards) mounted 2 Crown PZM mics on 2'x2'x.25" plexiglass panels and put those on pole stands to record the performances in stereo (on 1/4" tape). Acoustic guitar was used on some songs or parts of songs. The acoustic (a Takamine with a piezo) was pluged into various amps and even into the FOH board. After many recordings and experiments trying to get a good sound from the acoustic here is what we found... You could hear a difference - until the rest of the band kicked in, then it became obscured in the mix. Between the amps and FOH board, the FOH board sounded better. But still the differences weren't all that great. Enough for the discerning ear - not so much for the casual listener.

Only when the ac guitar was mic'ed was there any great goobly gobs of difference - and I mean great goobly gobs!

Admittedly, all of the amps tried were solid state (including the JC-120), as was the FOH board and power amps - and no one had a Twin Reverb so that wasn't tried. In fact, we didn't attempt to send it to a tube amp at all because of distortion issues.

All I can say is that if your in a band and your trying to get a great sound from an acoustic by just running the piezo to an amp - good luck with that. It just doesn't pan out in my experience.

The only way to get a great acoustic guitar sound is by capturing it with a microphone - plain and simple. Piezo's are great to thicken the sound up on a mic'ed guitar. But as the primary sound source, bah! I can't imagine anyone concerned with getting a great sound from an ac guitar being satisfied with a piezo all by it's self, it's just a half cocked idea.

If your alone at home trying to record a great acoustic guitar sound - use mid-side micing technique.

If your a single or duo acoustic guitar act and your trying to jerry-rig a Mustang into giving you a great acoustic sound without micing the guitar(s) - you need your head examined. Get the right equipment for the job and stop messing around.

No offense intended towards anybody named Jerry.

What your expecting of Fender is to support a solid state amp model for acoustic guitar in an amp designed to model tube amps made for electric guitar - is that right ?!?! <blink>

I can't speak for Fender, but personally I find that outcome unlikely. But you never know... Still, I think most will be disappointed with the results of running an acoustic guitar piezo through the new model if it were to be come a reality. And, IMO, they wouldn't label it with anything to do with 'acoustic' because that would raise the expectations of the uninitiated beyond reason.

---

If your still bound and determine to use an acoustic guitar with a Mustang at this point...

As I said above, the Twin's tone stack is not ideal for acoustic guitar - so put a graphic EQ pedal between the guitar and the Mustang. You can do this now and even a cheap Behringer will do.

Better yet, get yourself a small unpowered mixer with tone controls, channel inserts (for FX), XLR inputs and master volume. Plug the guitar's piezo into an instrument input and run the mixer's line out into the AUX input on the Mustang. That way, when the sound you get is less than expected, you can put a mic in front of the guitar and plug it in the mixer. 8)

This setup won't go to the Mustang's USB out so you can't record this way, but as I said before, if your trying to record a great acoustic guitar - use mid-side micing technique and knock off the half measures.


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Help! clean channel on a Mustang II
Posted: Tue Jun 14, 2011 2:57 pm
Offline
Aspiring Musician
Aspiring Musician
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 11:22 pm
Posts: 797
p90sdude,

I absolutely agree that piezos leave a lot to be desired sound-wise. Yes, I mic and use the piezos in combination whenever possible (if the sound guy knows what he's doing) and if the room doesn't work against the idea - our local performance theater has been atrocious with acoustic guitars mainly because of speaker placement. Thankfully there exists a device that is the Fishman Aura Spectrum. It saves the day for the lowly piezo saddle every time! No, it's not as nice as mic'ing but it's a huge improvement in sound quality and the "woodiness" of the sound. I never ever even consider using a piezo equipped guitar without it.

Basically, it is the Spectrum that makes me want the flat response preamp model on the Mustang even though I know I'll miss the high frequency shimmer from actual acoustic amps. Hmmm... that switchable tweeter idea I had is sounding better and better.

I don't know if you've ever tried the Spectrum. If you haven't, it's worth a go and I think worth every penny. It's far from perfect but nothing except a real microphone sounds better than the Spectrum. I can't stand the sound of those so-called "acoustic guitar simulators" and I was highly skeptical that these Fishman devices were just another attempt at one. I was happy to be completely and utterly wrong.

Look, I ran the Spectrum into the Mustang's Aux input and had some success. The only problem was the general tonality of the speaker and the lack of a high frequency driver. I don't currently have an EQ that's not in a rack unit in my studio so I can't do much about the speaker's response. But from what I could hear, most of what I needed to do was to cut down a few specific frequency centers - and not by much at that. I might try my GT-8's parametric in conjunction with the Spectrum and see how that fares. If it works, great but I'd rather not have to pack along the GT-8 too. That's why I want a flat response preamp.

BTW, who said anything about recording? We're just talking about the amp here - for convenience during live use and to minimize the amount of crap we gotta pack around. If I'm recording any acoustic instrument, I'll be darned if I'll use anything but mics and a decent mic pre. Who in his right mind would record an acoustic guitar played through a Mustang?

O.


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Help! clean channel on a Mustang II
Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2011 9:34 am
Offline
Aspiring Musician
Aspiring Musician

Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 4:43 pm
Posts: 318
Hmmm, that Fishman Aura sounds interesting. I can't say I'm not skeptical, but then being a tube amp snob for so many years I was skeptical about the Mustang amps too.

I read this review about it, which by the way explains the situation and problem a lot clearer than my clumsy ramblings that were full of misunderstandings.

That switchable tweeter sounds like an excellent idea. Depending on the freq's that your having trouble with, it might negate the need for an additional EQ to the Aura all together.

Then again, every venue (where feedback and crowd noise make micing impossible) is going to have it's unique set of aural problems and it can't be simplified with just adding the Fishman and a tweeter - or can it?... You've got some experimenting to do. Let us know.


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Help! clean channel on a Mustang II
Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2011 10:04 pm
Offline
Aspiring Musician
Aspiring Musician
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 11:22 pm
Posts: 797
p90sdude wrote:
Hmmm, that Fishman Aura sounds interesting. I can't say I'm not skeptical, but then being a tube amp snob for so many years I was skeptical about the Mustang amps too.

I read this review about it, which by the way explains the situation and problem a lot clearer than my clumsy ramblings that were full of misunderstandings.

That switchable tweeter sounds like an excellent idea. Depending on the freq's that your having trouble with, it might negate the need for an additional EQ to the Aura all together.

Then again, every venue (where feedback and crowd noise make micing impossible) is going to have it's unique set of aural problems and it can't be simplified with just adding the Fishman and a tweeter - or can it?... You've got some experimenting to do. Let us know.


Be skeptical. It's a good thing as the Spectrum is not a Panacea, but it is very very good at what it does. Much better than anything else out there. The review is a little too glowing but not by much. It really does help reduce the pingy-ness of piezo saddle pickups and adds a warmer, woodier sound to the amplified guitar signal. As I said in my previous post, it is not perfect nor is it a "magic bullet". A discerning ear will still be able to hear the little bit of the Piezo in the albeit much improved sound of the guitar.

One completely amazing thing that it does do is its ability to make an electric guitar that has Piezo saddles in the bridge (like one of my guitars) leagues better! Not exactly like an acoustic but most definitely better and more acoustic like. I corresponded at length with Fishman's Frank Padellaro and he said he does the same thing with his Piezo equipped electrics.

The Spectrum or any of the Aura models need a flat response amplification system for the best effectiveness so the Mustang will need it's frequency response to be tweaked and flattened in the lower and higher midrange area. The tweeter would simply be there to allow the amplifier to reproduce the high frequencies that are beyond the range of the original speaker. A tweeter alone cannot alleviate the frequency response unevenness inherent in most guitar speakers. I will not be doing any physical mods to my M2 unless Fender releases an acoustic or flat response amp model. Only then would it be worth the effort. But when I get some time, I may plug an RTA into the AUX input and see exactly what the Mustang's frequency response is like.

O.


Top
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 7 hours

Fender Play Winter Sale 2020

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: