Hoot Owl

1959 LP with the first Trainwreck. Came for the gear, stayed for the playing. The playing starts at 6:20.

Trainwreck history:

An original Trainwreck:

BTW, a tip: I phone-ordered some things from Musician's Friend this week and they were going to give me 10% off the internet price. Bonus! But we discovered my credit card had a hold placed on it. So, I straightened that out and called back after making a change to the order. One of the changes didn't get the discount so the rep took 15% off one of the other items to make up the difference. So cool. I usually go with Sweetwater when doing internet buys. No one can beat Sweetwater's customer relations. Seems like MF is trying, though. In this case, MF happened to carry something Sweetwater didn't.

Opinions vary. From what I've seen, I'd say they are about 3/4 positive. The other 1/4 is mostly indifference. Occasionally someone rips their transformer quality. You can order them without transformers and put your own in. That saves shipping costs too when they are shipped direct from Malaysia. Check out one review that was in Guitar Player. This particular model is more intended for mass production and doesn't have the old-school hand wired turret board: 2202 Guitar Player Review (guitarampsusa.com) The internal views is why I started this thread. It's not often amp companies show you the inside of their products. I think they aren't too proud of them. Ceriatone is, for good reason.

I just did. On a Trainwreck Express clone, with EL34's. I added a master volume and bias points, without cab and tubes = $819. Ordered it off their U.S. website (Guitar Amps USA). I think shipping is included...I'd better check that. Also ordered (separately) a Metropoulos silent loop kit for this amp. If I like that one I'm thinking of getting a C-Wreck, which is a clone of the Dr. Z Z-Wreck. I feel a little guilty ordering something copied from a business that's still up and running, but I don't expect the component quality to be up there with Dr. Z, so it's sort of a different beast, and I doubt it's an exact copy. Sure looks like the wiring is tops, though. Also have a Bluguitar Amp1 Iridium arriving in two days. Selling six old amps and coming out ahead.

I've been perusing the amps at Ceriatone. Each amp has a "View more pictures". That's where the porn is, like this: British Style : Plexi51 All Access | Flickr Unfortunately, you can't copy the photos. Home | Ceriatone Pronounced Chair-e-uh-tone, I believe.

Another knob topic: What are the best, what are the worst? Absolutely the worst, IMO, are the ones MESA uses. How in hell does anyone see the little dot against the chrome without getting right up close? And yes, I've had two MESA's.

Who has the most? BTW, that thing is $8,000!

Update: I finally took a serious look at the BluGuitar Amp 1 boxes. Awesome! They have the Amp X coming out soon too. So, I've decided to change course. Am selling six tube amps. The only one I'm keeping is the Bedrock. I cancelled an order for a Marshall that I made a big deal over . I'm that blown away by BluGuitar. So small, so portable, so affordable, no tube biasing, sounds so damned good, AND feels like a tube amp. Kemper and Axe FX never quite did it for me. Helix's are $1,600 and not exactly what I want. I'm pretty sure Blu is IT, for me, the goal being to downsize, simplify, and focus a bunch of gear into one rig that is easy to move. I'll admit a REVV Dynamis is intriguing too, though. Edit note: Just found out the Amp X may not be ready this year, or possibly toward the end of the year. I'm probably going with the Amp 1 Iridium for now.

Apartments suck. What else can I say?

Mind your own business. You don't want to be friends with someone like that, and you certainly don't want to get on his bad side (which is actually all his sides, sounds like).

Thanks. I already contacted Brad via email. He said he's "moved on" and "I really can't help you". Left me wondering if his Bedrock experience was less than rewarding. They were in biz 13 years, I believe - enough time to lose a lot of money or not make any. But who knows? The other guys I couldn't track down. I think I'm moving on too, though I haven't given up on reinterpreting the PCB design into a hand wired one.

Here's another type. Amazon.com: Radial Cab-Link Speaker Cabinet Combiner: Musical Instruments $100

Eureka, I've found it. None of you peeps had a clue and I'm back to give you a heads up. This thing can combine two cabinets in either series or parallel. Problem solved. Palmer CAB M | Signal Splitter & Switcher | Palmer (palmer-germany.com) $50

This pertains to a 'boutique' company out of New Hampshire which operated in the mid-80's through late 90's. I have a 1200 head, but it's the second generation - which means it's wired on PCB. The first generation was hand wired. So, I'm looking to convert mine to hand wired. I have a schematic for my head (2nd gen) but I don't have one for the hand wired version. Anyone who can help would be appreciated. A question: Since I have a schematic for the PCB type what would be the possibility of interpreting that into a hand wired schematic? My neighbor is an electrical engineer, though he knows nothing about amplifiers. He does owe me for work I've done for him, however, so... Does that plan of action seem plausible? Doesn't seem like rocket science, to me.

Yeah but, what does "correct" mean? 100% correct may not be possible, since it would be running through a different power section. But the modules are adjusted for that in their design process, so I don't know. All I know is that the comparisons I've seen are pretty darned close. I doubt anyone would tell the difference unless you're sitting there A-B them. Consider too that all amps coming out of a company can vary in consistency. Marshalls are notorious for that - at least the older ones were. The main point is, you get very nearly the same tone for a lot less money - as compared to buying several very expensive amps. There's the space issue too. They definitely have significant use for some people.

Here's what I have: One 2x12 with two 16-ohm speakers, wired parallel for 8 ohms. Two 1x12's, each with 16 ohm speakers. How do I hook these up for 16 ohms out at the amp? 8 ohms total out would be a second choice. The two 1x12's I'd like to link together via plug-in cable, so there is just one cable coming to them from the amp. This would require one cab to have an In-Out jack plate that I'm not familiar with. Do they exist? Amp has two speaker outs and 4-8-16 ohm selector. To get to 16 ohms out at the amp (since the 2x12 is 8 ohms), the total of the 1x12's would also have to be 8 (so, wired parallel), then the 2x12 and 1x12 combination would have to be series. Is that possible? How do you cable in series? Can you? Or, any better ideas? I want the whole setup to be like a 16 ohm 4x12. The reason is, recently I heard a amp company rep (I want to say Dr. Z himself, but don't quote me on that) say it was best to use the highest ohm tap of your transformer, so you're using the whole transformer - not sure what that means exactly, but I figured, hey, if I'm doing this I might as well do it per that. I think it's because transformers using all the windings at full ohms while progressively less for less ohms. I got this off the Celestion site, not that it answers my question: There are two ways you can wire a 4×12 (or 4×10 for that matter), the main one is Series/Parallel: 4 X 8 Ohm Speaker = 8 Ohm Load; 4 X 16 Ohm Speaker = 16 Ohm Load Let me simplify: One 8 ohm 2x12 AND two 16 ohm 1x12's, all coming out of two jacks on the amp - one to the 2x12, one to the 1x12's - with amp set for 16 ohms.

The new ones are the tits. They use mil-spec tubes, too. I think they're supposed to last something like three times longer. Sell yours and get a new one. They aren't cheap, though. That kind of put me off, but hey, they are hand wired and from a good company.

"Sort of" is the key. The ones I've heard, however, have been very close to the real thing. Simulation pedals never did it for me. These modules are in between pedals and the true amp, but I think closer to the amp itself, maybe very close to. Those four modules, for $400 each, plus two rack-mounts for $800 each, a rack mounting box for $200, that's $3,400. Those four amps, I don't know, $13,000? Is it really worth spending all that money and taking up all that space? Everyone has to move some day too.

I just found out about these, though I believe they've been around for about three years (and they are an improved version of the older Randall and Egnater module idea - the are all compatible). They produce two amp heads and a stereo rack power amp. Both forms are intended to be used with their main deal - removable preamp modules designed and authorized by several high-end amp companies, like Bogner, Friedman, etc. Every YouTube I've watched about them spews rave reviews. In a limited amount of space you can have the equivalent of several-to-numerous high end preamp sounds running through one power amp. You can also run them into your own amp's loop return, using your amps power section. But I did read somewhere that the Synergy amps are designed to automatically adjust biasing depending on which module is being run. I don't think that's critical, though, since good results seem to come from running through any amp's power section. They currently have ten preamp modules available, each with two channels, so theoretically you could have one amp and a rack of nine or ten modules with up to twenty channels, ranging from Fender to Diezel, with many steps in between. Just think about how much space you'd save, not to mention the fun you'd have. It can add up to a lot of money, though - this is quality gear assembled in SoCal. Still, it would be a lot cheaper than buying ten individual amps. A single Kemper could do similar but then you have menus - junk that I don't like. These things have simple in-your-face knobs, the way I like it, with real tubes. I'm planning on changes to my stable and this is one of the things I've been looking into - along with the fairly new Marshall SV20H Plexi and Dr. Z Maz 18 Mark II. Currently I have a Fender Princeton 12" combo, Bedrock 50-watt head, Benson Monarch, Mesa Lonestar, Yamaha THR10, Vox AC10. All but the Yamaha and Bedrock are on the way out. They all rock in their own way but it's just time for changes. Pretty sure I'll be adding a Fryette Power Station too for playing at any volume. Home - synergyamps.com Check out this guys rack scenario at 29:00.

I don't know, but the best one I ever played was a hot rodded Twin Reverb. You had to be in the next room but it still sounded great. The only Fender I have now is a Princeton reissue. I'm planning on selling because my Benson is better.

I haven't tried all the harmonics. I know seven and twelve work, though. The bridge I'm measuring as an average of the string fulcrum points (each being slightly different). None of them are close to making 12 to bridge the same as nut to 12. I'm satisfied with the intel I've received. As long as it works, I'm good, and it works. I've learned some things, however, from you learned souls.

Thanks. That makes sense.

It works, so I guess I shouldn't worry about it, but I still don't understand why guitars are designed so the two measurements are the same if intonation works when they aren't the same. I would guess that it's best if they are equal. And at some point of different lengths intonation would become impossible. I must be within a reasonable difference that still allows intonation. But still, they aren't the same and it does intonate. WTF? And I don't understand what you mean about string thickness relative to length. Strings are the same thickness over their entire length. The BIG QUESTION I had, which nether of you answered, is: Is intonation the reason guitars are designed with the two measurements equal (nut to 12th fret and 12th fret to bridge)? That's what I always thought. Yet mine intonates even thought there is a 3/8-inch difference.