In reptrospect, that sounds perfectly reasonable—different channels on the same amp, likely using much of the same circuitry. But I wouldn't have known if you hadn't labbed it. Thanks.
now you mention it.. I'm kinda surprised that I was surprised... lmao
but then, it does make sense that there is essentially a 'tonal crossover' between the different channels...
cos then you can cover all your bases from clean through to hi-gain yet retain a sort of tonal continuity..
if I only needed to riff, I'd have opted for the Blue cos it's a touch thicker sounding...
but for live usage, I need to riff and solo.. and this is where the Red wins..
I can tame a Red into a "90% of Blue" tone..
but I can't fire up the Blue to get close to a hot Red without it developing a bad case of the
IMO, that's one of the best ways to a boost. I usually use a PEQ instead of a Vol block, dialed up with a broad, soft bump at 800 Hz. BUt then, I don't go as deep as you in massaging my pedal-borne tweaks, so that lets me kill two birds with one stone.
the Red with the Boost off starts getting close to a 'hot Blue'
so solo, I usually have the Red boosted and with a huge dose of extra level entering from a volume block
the only difference here with my original approach is adding the modifier to the Boost switch to allow me to make that transition to full-on hotness..
I use my PEQ differently to you [post amp] to replace the low's and highs that get sucked out during the cleaning process
which is why it's in parallel with the direct signal and they both hit the mixer [which crossfades between them]
it's a crude solution, but it seems to work..