FENDER TWIN REVERB / DRIVE LOW LOW LOW but STILL BREAKING UP / ANY ADVICES ?

franklantern said:
Master at 9 and Drive at 4 and its clean. Perhaps it is the humbuckers.. they might require more headroom because of their output. Maybe Input Trim?
Click to expand...

Thx man, i thought about lowering the trim, but i loose some higher frequencies with lower trim....for crunch sound i even use trim instead of drive....to me it sounds better than higher drive. But i will play around with trim again.
 
Semih Yanyali said:
what guitar are u playing? can write me some details about ur vox ac-30 setting...my problem with ac-30 is about low frequencies...no way i can play with the neck pickup...
allways to bassy / not tight or cool...i use 1*12 self mixed vox alnico blue IR. and ofcorse that breaks up also right away....but probably thats the way they are ?!
Click to expand...

I'm playing through a Carvin Allan Holdsworth Fatboy, which is a semi-hollow with humbuckers. It's not an extremely bottom heavy guitar, like my Gibson ES-35, which I have yet to try through the AxeFX, but I don't imagine it would sound terrible through this Vox setup. Here's the patch I'm currently using:

View attachment voxac30.syx


Also, here's my stable of clean Fender amps, all dialed in to be super clean and as authentic to the originals as I've so far been able to get:

View attachment deluxereverb.syx
View attachment princeton.syx
View attachment superreverb.syx
View attachment twinreverb.syx
View attachment vibroverb.syx
 
Poparad said:
I'm playing through a Carvin Allan Holdsworth Fatboy, which is a semi-hollow with humbuckers. It's not an extremely bottom heavy guitar, like my Gibson ES-35, which I have yet to try through the AxeFX, but I don't imagine it would sound terrible through this Vox setup.....
View attachment 14621
Click to expand...

Man thanks a lot, i will check them tomorrow.
 
FractalAudio said:
Twins break up, especially the '67 used as the reference amp. That's why people like them.
Click to expand...

I was going to point out that this might be the case, although I didn't know what year was used as the reference amp. The older Twins really break up (think Keith Richards). They didn't become the super clean machines probably until the '70s. Of course, I'm old so I vaguely remember these thing. *LOL*
 
SarasotaSwing said:
I was going to point out that this might be the case, although I didn't know what year was used as the reference amp. The older Twins really break up (think Keith Richards). They didn't become the super clean machines probably until the '70s. Of course, I'm old so I vaguely remember these thing. *LOL*
Click to expand...

Yes, after CBS bought Fender the new engineers set out to "fix" those lousy designs with all that nasty distortion. The first of these amps were late '68 or early ''69 IIRC. They increased the negative feedback, changed bias points, added MV, etc. The new designs were much cleaner and much less desirable IMO. Blackface Fenders from the mid '60s are the most desirable because they have that nice breakup. Silverface Fenders are not particularly prized and are often modded to turn them into Blackface circuits.
 
FractalAudio said:
Yes, after CBS bought Fender the new engineers set out to "fix" those lousy designs with all that nasty distortion. The first of these amps were late '68 or early ''69 IIRC. They increased the negative feedback, changed bias points, added MV, etc. The new designs were much cleaner and much less desirable IMO. Blackface Fenders from the mid '60s are the most desirable because they have that nice breakup. Silverface Fenders are not particularly prized and are often modded to turn them into Blackface circuits.
Click to expand...

Interesting, that explains perhaps why different people are expecting such different things from the fenders. Any chance then of e.g. a nice clean silver face twin reverb? It seems to be a common clean amp in modern rock. Thanks!

Cheers.
 
It definitely explains it. When I was a kid just starting to play in the early '70s, everyone avoided the Silverfaces. Of course, there were plenty of used Blackfaces around back then which could be bought quite cheaply, as there was no such thing as a "vintage market." *LOL*
 
I have a SF twin and had a `65 RI also, none of them was very clean with humbuckers. Even at low volumes.
You have to roll the volume back on your guitar and use the low input.

On the axe, lower the input trim or/and roll back the volume.
 
Poparad said:
I'm playing through a Carvin Allan Holdsworth Fatboy, which is a semi-hollow with humbuckers. It's not an extremely bottom heavy guitar, like my Gibson ES-35, which I have yet to try through the AxeFX, but I don't imagine it would sound terrible through this Vox setup. Here's the patch I'm currently using:

View attachment 14616


Also, here's my stable of clean Fender amps, all dialed in to be super clean and as authentic to the originals as I've so far been able to get:

View attachment 14617
View attachment 14618
View attachment 14619
View attachment 14620
View attachment 14621
Click to expand...

May I ask on which firmware you are ?

Thanks

Roland
 
Soma said:
Interesting, that explains perhaps why different people are expecting such different things from the fenders. Any chance then of e.g. a nice clean silver face twin reverb? It seems to be a common clean amp in modern rock. Thanks!

Cheers.
Click to expand...
I was just thinking the same thing. even if the SFs aren't as desirable, they still have their own (clean) thing going on. think late 70s Johnny Winter (before he changed to MM). it might also be useful to have some "clean" designed Fenders in the box as this topic (why do the Fender models break up so early) seems to come up over and over...
 
Try this

Lower the master volume to 8
take the damp up to 7.5
take the triode hardness up to 7.5
take preamp comp up to 20%
I had my drive at ~2.5-3

perhaps:
increase the bias a bit


I like to add a little depth to give some more beef
 
Also remember that all the models use the "High" input (Input '1' on Fenders). If you want to mimic the "Low" input set Input Trim to 0.5.
 
FractalAudio said:
Twins break up, especially the '67 used as the reference amp. That's why people like them.
Click to expand...

I'd always heard replacing the speakers with JBL120's tames the early break up but I've never done that to mine.

I've got a late 70's master volume silverface. It's got decent headroom before breakup. I would say it is generic in quality. Not a holy grail amp. Just a workhorse.

I've got a silverface 70's dual showman head that is the same. Just a workhorse Fender.

My blonde bassman head, brownface from the 60's, does have that pre-cbs breakup. But it seems to my ears it is a little less "tweed'ish" than the AxeFx Twin model, if that makes any sense.

Richard
 
Last edited:
Semih Yanyali said:
input trim 1 (not touched), drive 1.2, master 9 or even lower (8,75) and it still breaks up when i hit the strings hard. it doesnt sound bad but its not the way it should be, isnt it? shouldt be there more headroom? any advices?

i play frfr, adam a5x, fw 9.02. I am playing with Framus Diablo (jeff beck humbuckers) or Guild Starfire 1973 (humbuckers).

thx,

semih

Semih Yanyali OFFICIAL WEBSITE | NEWS
Click to expand...

I've had to lower the Input Trim in my Double Verb using presets to .5 in order to get anything like the break-up characteristics of any real Twin I've ever played through.
I've not noticed any loss of highs when I do this but I'm playing mostly jazz with a dark tone with this amp sim.
 
FractalAudio said:
Also remember that all the models use the "High" input (Input '1' on Fenders). If you want to mimic the "Low" input set Input Trim to 0.5.
Click to expand...
yeah... I did some tests with Java some time ago, to mimic the low input of a JCM 800. and it turned out, that turning input trim all the way down on the Axe equaled the 800s low input. different beast of course, but sounds pretty good.
 
I like that twins break up, but my experience is that all the Fenders on my Axe II do indeed breakup more readily than the two physical amps I own (pre cbs princeton, 1970's twin). If I set the tonestack and input/output the same on the Axe as the physical amps, the Axe is quite a bit less clean. A lot less clean. However, tweaking input and output levels has worked for me. Doing it with sag messes the tone up too much.
 
VegaBaby said:
yeah... I did some tests with Java some time ago, to mimic the low input of a JCM 800. and it turned out, that turning input trim all the way down on the Axe equaled the 800s low input. different beast of course, but sounds pretty good.
Click to expand...


yep, turning the input trim to .1 seemed to capture the low input of my jcm800 best.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom