So the 50 watter is the early '70's one that is still in a small headbox, but, has the standup PT ?Strat78 wrote:Ha ha, heard that one is passing and couldn't resist. I really think we are looking at the VHI studio setup in those above pics. Plexifield mentioned that Ken Fisher said it was a 50w into a 100w. The variac is for the 100w head, no variac for the 50. One cab per head without exceeding the cones power handling. Daisy chaining with eq in front and possible between the chain. You see the mxr taped to one of the amps that is last in the chain in a later pic. The tone I get with this setup is similar to what I remember Ed's tone being like on December 2 1978 at Oakland.jnew wrote:where the hell do you come up with you quotes for your location in your profile? I need to come up with a good one.
Eds Variac Musings
Moderators: VelvetGeorge, RACKSYSTEMS
- Tone Slinger
- Senior Member
- Posts: 6520
- Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2006 10:31 am
Re: Eds Variac Musings
Rip Ben Wise (StuntDouble) & Mark Abrahamian (Rockstah)
- plexified
- Senior Member
- Posts: 857
- Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2005 12:49 pm
- Just the numbers in order: 13492
- Location: amidst the wreckage of a hot Plexi
Re: Eds Variac Musings
Tone Slinger , I cannot say one way or another . Just that as a result of Eds visit to Kens Lab so to speak , he had that fifty watter on a load into the 100 . I could not think of why a variac would be needed except to keep the voltage steady at normal voltages or to use it as a power reduction/tone shaping device to use the PA . But we do not see a mic on the cabs anywhere . So if it was used , it was to just maintain a constant voltage . The volume issue , remember, was to allow Dave to sing without blowing out his vocals . That whole theory goes out the window pretty soon . Venues , especially outdoors, need volume and tone shaping . That puts the variac out the window and lets in a 6 or 10 band eq in the scene. So If and only if he used the variac for tone shaping it would be on the 50 to get a sound . The hundred watter is just a volume control . If you read the Jimi thread ongoing now , you can hear how Jimi used the fuzz face as a tone shaper and his techs used his Marshall as an actual PA to get as loud as possible . So ironic and so parallel for the times . A lot of muddy waters , but damn that tone was awesome !
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1580
- Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 9:34 am
- Just the numbers in order: 13492
- Location: Front Row Seat From the Outer Continental Shelf
Re: Eds Variac Musings
A lot of muddy waters? Man you got that right. And we can't forget the live photo's from the back of Ed's 100 watt with two tubes pulled, right?
I've always believed Ed's tone can be had with either 50W or 100W. All in how it's set up. I think by nature, 100W's can/will sag a little more because two more Pwr tubes will draw more amperage on big demands but that's not to say that 50W's cannot be set up to behave the same way. 


________________________________
I SEE THINGS BETTER, WHEN I LISTEN
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default ... ID=1214336" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I SEE THINGS BETTER, WHEN I LISTEN
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default ... ID=1214336" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;