Hoot Owl

 Good luck finding a mate, mate. 😉

Speaking of Dumble, I have the hots for one of these...someday. Leaning toward the Overdrive Reverb, at this point.

Shop – Amplified Nation

You can order them in various trims. I'm thinking black gator. But check out their custom jobs. Okay, what the hey, I'll put one below.

There are a lot of amps nowadays that have a Master control that is so good you don't need an attenuator. Friedman's are known for that, for example, but it depends on how much power tube saturation you like.

On 6/3/2022 at 8:48 AM, badpenguin said:

I can't for the life of me see a reason to do that. You want stereo? Two amps, two SEPERATE speakers.

I ran a stereo rig for a while. (Roland blues Cube right channel, Roland Bolt 60 left, and a Roland BN60 bass amp for guitar synth monitor, and the outs to the house mains.) And... it was just too much for live applications. I spent more time going "WTF is wrong NOW?" then actually playing and enjoying. K.I.S.S.

^ The bold.

For sure! Every single connection, every cable, every stomp box, every little thing is yet another thing to go wrong. KISS, and I don't mean the band.

And after playing for a while, I came to agree with others that simple sounds better. Guitar, cable, amp, cable, speaker. But if you play dirty, you need a killer amp to make that fly (to be pedal-less).

On 6/29/2022 at 10:51 AM, daddymack said:

Also, some amps are 'self-biasing' [cathode biased] like AC30s, and 5E3 Deluxe...most [not all] amps under ~35 watts are self-biased. When you get into the four power tube zone, then it gets important.

I don't know if I would say that it is only for the high gain crowd or tone connoiseurs...anyone who wants their tubes in their 40-100W amp to last more than a few gigs will benefit from understanding the need to bias the power tubes...my Marshall SL 100 was a PITA to get the bias right...and I did fry some EL34 tubes very quickly when I did it too hot...that was the first amp I actually had to bias myself, and it was a learning curve. Back then there was no internet [1977] and few manuals available. I was fortunate that I worked with a lot of techs and engineers [computer/test equipment industry] who were helpful to a point...tube tech was out of vogue, but the basics still applied.

I still have one amp, my Vibrolux Reverb, that needs to be biased. The rest of my amps are 20W or lower and self biasing...thankfully.

I hear you, it's nice to not have to worry about biasing. But for some people, they might want to be able to fine tune their bias. As you know, fixed bias amps can be adjusted hot to cold. But I have a MESA Lonestar, fixed bias, with no bias pot (which is why you are supposed to buy your tubes from MESA - they are all speced to work at one bias setting). Some guys don't like that. They say MESA biases their amps too cold, so they put in a pot so they can run the tubes warmer. The warmer you run them, the shorter their life, however.

Oh, him, Mr. Marshall Aussie. He's brilliant. For a tech, he can really play too.

Cathode has slightly more character, IMO, especially at lower volumes. No need to rebias after replacing tubes too.

I don't know what your ohm calculation would be, but a lot of different options can be had with one of these:

Z-Matcher 100w Impedance Matcher – Weber Speakers (tedweber.com)

For more simple matching, I use one of these:

Cab-Link - Radial Engineering

Edit: I just noticed how old this thread is. Man, this place is dead (haven't I heard that before?). 😅

On 10/12/2022 at 10:35 PM, daddymack said:

 

Why not have 2 2x12 cabs you can stack or separate?

That's my new rig, stacked. I have a closed back ENGL 2x12 on the bottom, with a Vintage 30 and a WGS12L. On top I have a semi-open back MESA, with a WGS12C/S and a Weber Chicago. I'm still breaking them in, but so far, I like. I may sell my trusty Marshall 4x12, which is not something I ever expected to do.

In the future, I hope to buy a Magnatone Panoramic Stereo and have two more cabs that I can spread out, 1x12's or 2x12's - not sure which yet.

On 10/12/2022 at 10:35 PM, daddymack said:

Let me get this right....

 

Exactly. Good luck trying to figure out what he wants from the OP. 😉

...

"Three-power tube" doesn't make sense. Do you realize that?

On 6/23/2006 at 3:52 PM, jimlp said:

 

Originally posted by Paul VanJohnson   I've had an Astroverb for a few years though I rarely get to play it anymore. I think the biggest misconception about this amp is that it is a miniature SLO.   Desciption single channel 12ax7 preamp section (4 I think) EL84 based power section presence control in addition to the usual B-M-T controls Accutronics 3 spring reverb (pretty sure it's 3) Don't recall the speaker (I'm at work so I can't look)   It has a very nice and tweakable clean sound that's very open and more glassy. Closer to a blackface Fender than a Marshall or a Mesa but not as much bass as a Fender. The downside is that there just isn't enough headroom to use even in a small club.   The crunch tones are where this amp shines. I would not call this a "high gain" amp and I've heard that it's based on the "crunch" channel of the SLO. It also doesn't have a lot of low end. If you boost the front end with a TS9, spike the mids and turn up the reverb you can nail DLR era Van Halen sounds. You can also get some good SRV tones with a TS9 in front (or better TS808), crank the power amp volume to 10 and adjust the gain to taste. The cork-sniffers will point out that this is an EL84-based power section and SRV preferred 6L6 power amps. They would be right but this is close enough for government work and you won't go deaf.   Overall it is great for just about any kind of classic rock crunch and the tone controls are very effective for tweaking the sound. It's also pretty transparent (a strat sounds like a strat through it, etc). If you're looking to play high-gain, bass-heavy, cookie-monster vocal style metal then this is definitely not the right amp for you.   Hope this helps.

 

 

I was hoping for a JCM 800 style crunch/gain sound with the ability to use a boost to push it over the edge. I don't gig and my 50 watt combo is overkill at home, I have played a few class A amps though and they are far from underpowered regardless of the wattage rating.

If that's what you want, then I think you might want to check out a Friedman Little Sister, or a JEL-20 if you like the higher gain side of Marshall, both 20-watts.

I got just about everything crammed into one corner, and here it is.

On 2/23/2024 at 6:12 AM, badgersghost said:

Bogner Helios and Carr Rambler.

I'm interested in a Helios, probably a 50-watter. But I recently caught wind of this. The touch sensitivity is supposed to be off the charts. Too bad they labelled the front panel like a first-grader.

PHIL X SIGNATURE - Friedman Amplification

On 1/23/2024 at 4:27 PM, daddymack said:

be careful...in those days, there really was lead in those pencils....

You should have told me that before I reached my tongue all the way in there to lick it. 

On 1/23/2024 at 3:38 PM, panhandler said:

I've always believed "18" signifies mahogany.  

No. It means you won't get arrested if you do. 😜

55 minutes ago, daddymack said:

I doubt the 'C' was for 'circa'. More likely a builder or final inspector's mark.

I layed in bed this morning wondering about that.

And I'm still not sure what 18 means.

Well, I'll be darned. Handwritten in pencil it says C 1882. 'C' I assume to mean circa.

Bingo.

Vintage Guitars Info - Martin collecting vintage martin guitars (guitarhq.com)

• Older 1800s Martins are a challange to date (since they don't have a serial number like 1898 and later Martins). A "New York" stamp does not immediately suggest that the Martin guitar is from the 1830s for example. To accurately date pre-1898 Martins you must be familiar design and ornamentation appointments and the changes that took place in each model throughout the 1800s. Most useful though is the stamp, but you can only use the stamp on the INSIDE of the body on it's center backstrip (visible through the soundhole) to date a guitar. And even then you can only date to a period (and not to an exact date). For example if it says on the center back strip, "C.F. Martin, New York", then the guitar is pre-1867. If it says, "C.F. Martin & Co., New York", it is between 1867 and 1897. Note 1860-1890s Martins have a date (year of manufacture) penciled on the underside of the top. Check with a mirror, looking just below the soundhole and between the braces.

   

  • 1833-1840s: Paper label "Christian Frederick Martin" or "C.F. Martin".
  • 1836: Some with paper label "Martin & Schatz".
  • 1838: Some with paper label "C.F. Martin and Bruno".
  • 1838: Martin manufacturing moved from New York to Nazareth PA.
  • 1840s: Some with paper label "Martin & Coupa".
  • 1833-1866: Stamp "C.F. Martin, New York" on inside backstrip.
  • 1867-1897: Stamp "C.F. Martin & Co., New York" on incide center backstrip.

Yep. No serial number means produced before 1898. Mine has "C.F. Martin & Co., New York" on the inside center backstrip, so its 1867-1897. It also has the same stamp on the neck joint inside the body. I haven't checked for the pencil mark on the underside of the top.

This was easier than I thought. I should have known there'd be plenty of data on the internet. Hope y'all learned something here. Thanks for no help. 😉

Understanding Martin Model Designations | One Man's Guitar (onemanz.com)

After reading this, now I'm confused. He may be talking about more-modern Martins. In the early 1900's 18 may have meant something different. Anyone?

A 000-18 stands for Size “Triple Oh” in Style 18 (or as some older Martin factory workers put it, “Triple Naught”,) which includes mahogany back and sides, and a top of spruce, with dark bindings on the body, an unbound neck and white dots on the fingerboard, etc.

Well, guess what, I think I found it. Just like that.

Identifying Martin Guitars (vintagemartin.com)

Before 1898, when Martin models were consolidated, it was more common for a specific trim level to be available only in certain sizes.  These combinations of size and trim level dated to about 1852, when the model names were first developed.  At the time, the number of the trim level was derived from the price of the guitar.  Thus, in 1852, a Style 2-27 was a size 2 Martin with a trim level costing $27.  This can lead to some confusion, since a style 27 is fancier than a style 28.  This is because a style 27 was offered as a size 2, while a style 28 was offered as a larger size 0, which was more expensive to build.

So, I guess it's a size 2 guitar that cost $18. Technically designated as 2-18.

There is no serial number on the guitar. I guess this one can only be dated to a range of years. Does that make sense?

Google is my friend. 😁

What does the 18 mean? It appears to be a quality grade.

This is an early 1900's parlor. Any other info appreciated as well.

Edit: I forgot to mention, the image below is on a piece of paper affixed to the inside of the coffin case.

20 hours ago, daddymack said:

Dude...I been doin' dope for years...I don't need to read up on it....

Amen, to that. 

...