--- In
Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com, "john barrick" <astroboy@...>
wrote:
>
> I assumed that since all that great stuff seemed to have been
played
> through Marshalls and Hiwatts and such, that a tube guitar amp was
> desirable.
>
> If the consensus is a solid state keyboard type of amp (a Roland,
> maybe?), then I get a lot more for my dollar and really don't have
to
> spend as much.
>
> Thanks Norm, Bernie, Lee, and David - any more opinions out there?
> I'd love to hear from all sides on this.
> inquiringly,
> john b
> 1407
>
>
>
>
>Hi John, In theory, we all would like to have the ideal audio
device handling our signals, but think first of your question, you
wand to run a signal from a solid state preamp into a tube amp. In
a way it's like putting the cart before the horse.
IMO you would want to match closely the frequency range of the
output device to the amp you will use. At home I run EVERYTHING
thru a Mackie mixer(they really are quiet) into a Dynaco 400 and JBL
studio monitors. Earlier this year I went shopping for power amps
for the live stuff. After some checking decided on either the Roland
KC 500 OR A Peavey KBA 300. I took a cd of stuff recorded on the
M400 to a local music shop and tried it thru the Roland, and the
sound just did not seem natural or what I expected to hear or not
hear. Was deficient in the mid range and heavy in the highs. Also
tried a comparable Behringer with same results. About a week later
stopped into local Sam Ash and they had a used Peavey KBA 300 but I
did not have my cd with me. The sales person knew what I needed and
said this would fare better for my use over the Roland or Behringer,
and made me an offer I couldn't refuse, so I took it home for a
hundred and tax. Now it may not be the best, but it handled the mid
range well and although somewhat heavy, worth the investment and
then some. In short look for whatever will reproduce what you are
feeding it without changing the original overall sound. Happy
Hunting, Doug #703