echoplexi1974 wrote:What ever happened to Ed that said he didn't want more gain/distortion but more sustain. It's amazing that he is doing so many things these days that he was so opposed to in the early years. But people change, I get that... But he had such a good thing going with that Marshall of his.
True. Ed had such a good thing going earlier on. The sustain and dynamic response from the output stage of a tube Marshall is tops. Granted, depending on the specific circuit (era) or the guitar being used or speakers, etc, the distortion/clipping (level) may not be where many would want (like say where NITRO would want for ex.). I feel it is not for everyone to hear or understand the difference between Ed's early tone as oppossed to a hi gain amp. If people cant hear THAT difference (Nitro/Pittbull same person

), then the first step of the Journey (to BROWNSOUNDville) will never happen. The thing is the sustain, like mentioned. Its a natural sound that is inherently more DYNAMIC than the FLAT response of several cascaded stages of preamp gain. Ed was able to introduce more NUANCE and DETAIL into his earlier tone/playing. The two go hand in hand (amp/playing).
Thats why its very important to get a 1987/1959 amp that is stock circuit and sounds good CRANKED. Its then when you realize the importance of the transformers being used (and other components to a lesser degree). The old originals (Dagnalls) were the SHIT

. Running additional cascaded gain stages in a 1987/1959 'hide' what the amp would sound like cranked, so in that application, ANY transformers within reason, would do the job. Straight up ran hard is when a 4 holer stands or falls.