Amp settings for "The Edge"

So, anyway.... I think the OP asked if anyone could help him with getting the "cleanish/chimey core sound of the amp". Anyone got anything useful here for him? :roll

The clean, chimey tone, is a result of a few things;

i) The vintage AC30 Edge has had from almost day one...although, as Dallas has mentioned, most of the the parts have been replaced more than once over the years. The Top Boost channel and the speakers play a big part. If you watch the start of the Elevation concert, from Slane Castle, you can clearly see there was a blue and silver speaker in there at the time. I can't remember what the silver speaker is, but Dallas said that one time they blew a speaker and that's all they had. Apparently Edge really liked it and they left it in. I have a Chinese made CC2, that was modified to original 1963 specs. (ie. transformer, caps, resistors, etc.) with a Weber Blue Dog and Silver Bell and it's very clean and chimey. I have JJ tubes in it with matched, medium distortion power amp. tubes. Of course a big part of the AC30's tone comes from cranking it, which I can't do because of my Tinnitus, but what really helps in my case, is the power scaling I had installed. Edge prefers to run his main AC30 fairly clean, just on the verge of breaking up, then he'll push it with the pre-amp and OD pedals...most notably the TS-9. He's used the SD-1, OD-2 in the past as well. I think the SD-1 might be back in the new rack.

2) The SDD-3000 pre-amp/delay. I have an original rack-mounted SDD-3000 and there is definitely something magical about the warmth it gives the amp. and the delays themselves are very unique..clear, crisp and warm. The modulation is also very important. It gives that chorus quiver to the delay and in some cases, when set higher, gives that de-tuned tone you hear. I also have the SDD-3000 pedal, which Edge now uses and although it does come close to the original, it's not 100%. It does have MIDI control though, which is one of the reasons Edge probably started using it. The older rack mounts are becoming far and few between and do require maintenance...ie. the battery and leaky caps. Also, no MIDI control.

3) Strings...I would say this a big one for the chime your hear. You need to use at least .010's or .011's. If you're used to using .009's, they'll take some getting used to and your calluses will definitely get bigger! :)

4) It's already been mentioned, but the Herdim pick. No one showed Edge how to hold a pick, so when he first started using the Herdim, he held it sideways. So the part that has the dimples, which is for getting a better grip, that's the part he uses to rasp against the strings. Edge loves to play 'within the chord', as Dallas would say, so when he's picking a string, because of the dimple on the pick, it's likes he's plucking the strings. You'll be amazed at how significant the Herdim is to his sound.

5) Yes, his hands. Not saying his hands are the reason for the clean, chimey tone, but they are a big reason why he sounds the way he does. Edge has an incredible sense of rhythm and timing (Streets goes from 6/8 to 4/4...not easy). Playing with a delay set to the tempo of the song...dotted-eighth usually...is not easy. Try it and you'll see what I mean. It becomes a mess in a hurry if you don't play with the delay and instead, let it play you. If you want to appreciate how good he is, try playing with the delay set to four strong repeats and you'll see what I mean. He also plays by using very staccato movements when strumming and picking and he's also very good at palm muting, the song Bad comes to mind. Not a lot of notes in the song Bad, so you think it's simple to play...but it's not. Try it, you'll see it's not easy at all. He's also masterful at using drone notes as well.

Just watch video of him playing and watch his hands closely, it's very impressive.
 
Last edited:
Got to be something said for those hands playing...

I've loaded up a few of Tyler Grund's patches tonight, using a vintage strat, and while I'm pretty sure I have the exact same patch/gear as him, he sure makes it sing way better than I can. His blues bends scream more than mine, his chimey parts chime more than mine, his overall dynamics vary more than mine etc.

Simply sounds better than my playing.

Does his mere touch produce a better tone ? No, we'd probably have the same plugged open E tone, but his skilled hands certainly let the Axe/Guitar shine more than it does when I'm playing it.

Hands aka overall skill, plays a big part in getting a tone


Great players can sound more like themselves through crappy gear than crappy players can sound like a famous artist even if they use the same gear
 
Ok, switch off your amp and lets hear your version of Pride.. or plug a Danelectro into a Pignose and lets hear some Meshuggah riffs ;)

Of course no two players will sound the same plugged into the same rig with the same guitar, but 90% ? I think that's way off.

Ever hear of Reductio ad absurdum? Here's an example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytWGiOuzpe4
Basically, extending something to absurdity to prove or disprove a point or position.

This argument always pops up on internet guitar forums. It's akin to saying, "Well if tone is in the hands, you should be able to make a cinder block sound like a Grand Piano. Oh, you can't? Then tone isn't in the hands"

Thats not the point that anyone in the "tone is in hands" camp believes or is trying to prove. The point is, given the same set of equipment, two players will sound different due to a million factors.
 
Funny how it only seems to be guitarists who have this "tone in the hands" hangup. I've never heard a pianist talk about what great tone some other pianist has in his hands.

There is an issue with this, guitarists physically manipulate the strings throughout the timbre's envelope (attack/sustain/release) - a pianist is (once) removed from this plethora of variables through the hammer mechanism (and dampers if one wishes to belabor the point). So, how a guitarist plays affects what is fed into the dumb/simple machines (rough fretboards + rubbing is ever-so-slightly different tone than just holding the string as still as possible, for example).
 
Ever hear of Reductio ad absurdum? Here's an example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytWGiOuzpe4
Basically, extending something to absurdity to prove or disprove a point or position.

This argument always pops up on internet guitar forums. It's akin to saying, "Well if tone is in the hands, you should be able to make a cinder block sound like a Grand Piano. Oh, you can't? Then tone isn't in the hands"

Thats not the point that anyone in the "tone is in hands" camp believes or is trying to prove. The point is, given the same set of equipment, two players will sound different due to a million factors.
That doesn't make the argument false.

The problem here is trying to convince a group of people notorious for believing voodoo witchcraft nonsense that guitars are tangible and thus must obey the known laws of physics.

If you're playing anyone's rig in the same conditions, and you fret and attack in such an identical way, you WILL sound exactly the same. That's not the same as saying you'd sound the same if you lightly brushed the strings and the other guy slammed a power chord with vibrato.

About as close as you get to "in the hands" being a legitimate stance is in terms of fingertip density, since it is matter that makes contact with strings. But even then, with the most extreme differences possible, I highly doubt that one factor alone would be enough for anyone to differentiate between two players.

Or, maybe we should go back to burning the heretics at the stake. Haunting mids Clay Jones digital sheen klon klon klon.
 
Wow, threads do derail a lot these days... Check out post #42 by Toopy14, and everything Edo said. I think I even Dallas learnt something here ;)
 
EVERYTHING obeys the laws of Physics. There is no 'breaking' these laws.

Having performed acoustical analysis of the varied responses of guitars and amplifiers as part of a physics-based Acoustics course - quite a lot of issues were settled for me (such as, tonewoods actually do play a role in timbre which was not settled among physicists at that time as one example).

As has been touched upon (no pun intended), one may look at the guitar as a simple spring-mass system with damping, and guess what? The player can damp the spring system - ergo: change in tone/timbre. Also, the player may damp the spring system dynamically (meaning, how he alters his mechanics subtly alters the tone/timbre). Since tone-chasing is inherently an exercise in picking nits, it simply isn't all in the gear. To wit, an 'identifiable tone' is inherent to the player and not so much his gear. Yes, a 'Marshall tone' is simply a Marshall tone, but 'THAT Marshall tone' is not.
 
U2 on Fallon again playing Angel of Harlem

[video]http://www.nbc.com/the-tonight-show/video/u2-angel-of-harlem/2864883[/video]
 
Back
Top Bottom