Tom Schotz Power Soak

[reclavea]

Running a Marshall thru a Power Soak definitely was a big part of that Boston sound. Cranking the amp and turning down the soak allowed the tubes to glow hot and create that distinct power amp overdriven somewhat compressed yet pleasing tone.........and not blow out your eardrums.

Not sure if this is attainable via the advance parameters in the amp block.

If not, .......sure would like this option.......in particular to experiment with other amps!

 

[Brian G]

That's one of the benefits of the Axe. You can run the MV very high and still regulate the volume to your preferences irrespective of how high setting such as the master volume are set.

So yes, you should be able to get that character, no problem. And you can do it with any number of amps, not just a particular model of Marshall.

 

[reclavea]

I wonder if it is the same thing.........
If cranking the master beyond normal settings and just lowering the level results in the same (or even near the same) effect then you're correct.

However is it really?......the physical connection of running the Marshall speaker out to the soak and to the speaker may impart some aspect to overall tone that results.

Not sure......

I admit I have not attempted to do this yet with the axe and just assumed totally it be a different feature.

 

[Matt_B]

I wonder if it is the same thing.........

It's "exactly" the same thing. All the Power Soak essentially does is attenuate the signal. Crank the Master Volume in the amp block and control the level (volume) being fed to the next block in the chain with the amp block's Level parameter.

 

[raz]

I wonder if it is the same thing.........

It's "exactly" the same thing. All the Power Soak essentially does is attenuate the signal. Crank the Master Volume in the amp block and control the level (volume) being fed to the next block in the chain with the amp block's Level parameter.

And in any case, an MXR EQ was a far bigger factor in the Boston sound than the soaks.

 

[JKos]

> It's "exactly" the same thing.

Well... The Power Soak certainly causes an amp to act/react differently then directly driving a speaker. The electrical characteristics of the Power Soak as "seen" by the amp will change the amps tonal characterstics vice a pure attenuation.

Not saying it can't be closely emulated with the Axe-Fx, but physically there is a difference going on.

- John

 

[reclavea]

> It's "exactly" the same thing.

Well... The Power Soak certainly causes an amp to act/react differently then directly driving a speaker. The electrical characteristics of the Power Soak as "seen" by the amp will change the amps tonal characterstics vice a pure attenuation.

Not saying it can't be closely emulated with the Axe-Fx, but physically there is a difference going on.

- John

Exactly what I'm alluding to. I have a Power Soak which I haven't used in 26 years or so. I do remember one time running it on a Duncan amp and boy the tubes lit up so hot it blew the fuse. Never happened on my Fender Super Reverb or the Marshall. I ran a drive in front of the super reverb and definitely approached that Boston characteristics. Compression is evident unlike using a compressor imho.

Another thing is that with the soak the speakers aren't driven as much which again affects the overall tone.

 

[Smilzo]

Not saying it can't be closely emulated with the Axe-Fx, but physically there is a difference going on.

Yeah, Axefx is way better.
It does not suck your tone.

"Another thing is that with the soak the speakers aren't driven as much which again affects the overall tone"

Same with Axefx. It depends on poweramp level (real poweramp).

 

[reclavea]

[/quote]
Yeah, Axefx is way better.
It does not suck your tone.

I hear that!

"Another thing is that with the soak the speakers aren't driven as much which again affects the overall tone"

Same with Axefx. It depends on poweramp level (real poweramp).[/quote]

So.....are you saying that the poweramp level functions the same way as the Power Soak (which is a bunch of resistors and attenuator) in the real world, and results in the same sound produced?

I'm not so sure. It may be close.......
I can see the advantage being able to crank the master in the Axe and balance with the poweramp level, .........just wondering if the amp sims go as far as simulating the actual amp(s) measurements with extreme master settings. I would think that a plexi with master super cranked straight to speaker(s) would sound really different with the Power Soak in the setup.

 

[Smilzo]

......just wondering if the amp sims go as far as simulating the actual amp(s) measurements with extreme master settings. I would think that a plexi with master super cranked straight to speaker(s) would sound really different with the Power Soak in the setup.

The plexi is close to real plexi. The problem is separate the "sound" from perceived level. Try it yourself. I slam a plexi at about 6, and it hurts. Every powersoak do a "blacket job". I do not know if it is done by electrical means or it is my head (fletcher-munson). Or a combination of both.

Try to crank axefx master. Give your ears a chanche. :!:

 

[Matt_B]

At the abstract level, the purpose of the Power Soak is to attenuate the output level of a guitar amp. It allows you to drive the power section as hard as you want at manageable volumes.

As far as I know, the Level control in the Amp block acts just like any other level control - it's resistive by nature. In other worlds, it's not reactive because it doesn't need to be.

If you want to "drive" the Speaker block, you can attenuate the overall output level at any point in the signal chain. You can send any level of signal (before clipping) to the Speaker block and just the Speaker block's Level control to attenuate the signal. You can also tweak the Drive parameter in the Speaker block to simulate how hard the speakers are being driven.

All that said, I have used a Power Soak in the past and I feel that by using all the available tools in the Axe-FX you can replicate what a Power Soak does and then some. Read the manual, vist the Axe-FX Wiki and experiment to find out what sounds good to you.

 

[reclavea]

Thanks for all the feedback!
Will follow through.

Again.....Love my axe!

 

[Jay Mitchell]

I wonder if it is the same thing.........

It is. That is precisely the purpose of a power soak: to drive the power amp to maximum output - and therefore to get the compression and saturation assciated with that operation - while keeping volume to a reasonable level.

The general concensus re: power soak devices is that they cause unwanted tonal changes due to imperfect reflection of the speaker load back to the power amp. The Axe-Fx does not have this problem.

If cranking the master beyond normal settings and just lowering the level results in the same (or even near the same) effect

It does.

However is it really?......the physical connection of running the Marshall speaker out to the soak and to the speaker may impart some aspect to overall tone that results.

See above. I have never before seen anyone request the effect on tone that a power soak produces.

I admit I have not attempted to do this yet with the axe and just assumed totally it be a different feature.

It would be a good idea to determine whether what you want is already possible before asking for a new "feature."

 

[Brian G]

To follow on Jay's comments, the Axe is able to produce the desirable characteristics that the power soak is used to achieve, e.g. compression, saturation of the output tubes, etc. without the undesirable effects that an attenuator has on tone.

So you should be able to get the same "good stuff", but with better clarity than a similar real amp with an attenuator attached.

As to the benefits / detriments of using DRIVE in the speaker block, I have no idea, never felt any desire to use it. IMO, it just reduces clarity. But that is my opinion of actual speaker cone breakup as well, and you may feel differently. I regard this type of thing as a limitation of the real thing, not a positive.

And I doubt that speaker overdrive played any role in the Boston recordings, but you may know stuff that I don't.

 

[JKos]

> without the undesirable effects that an attenuator has on tone.

Who gets to say that the tonal affects of an attenuator are undesirable? If it's how you get YOUR sound, it's how you get your sound. It's just another piece of the puzzle. I've heard some damn good tones with an attenuator being used.

- John

 

[Jay Mitchell]

Who gets to say that the tonal affects of an attenuator are undesirable?

Almost every guitar player who has ever been forced to resort to one. :lol:

 

[reclavea]

> without the undesirable effects that an attenuator has on tone.

Who gets to say that the tonal affects of an attenuator are undesirable? If it's how you get YOUR sound, it's how you get your sound. It's just another piece of the puzzle. I've heard some damn good tones with an attenuator being used.

- John

Like Tom Scholtz!! The power soak is a huge part of his sound!

btw........what undesirable effects?

 

[Smilzo]

Who gets to say that the tonal affects of an attenuator are undesirable? If it's how you get YOUR sound, it's how you get your sound. It's just another piece of the puzzle. I've heard some damn good tones with an attenuator being used.

- John

Everyone. Bypass the attenuator and every musicians I've played with will enjoy the tone. Attenuator=good tones, without=heaven tone.
The loss in high is unwanted, but unavoidable. There's also a phase problem, and most of all an "impedance" problem Jay told you about.
If anyone want to simulate a powerload (not ME), here's some hint... put master as high as needed... set transformer match at a "duller" value... set level at proper level. You may want to lower B+ cap (cause older caps lower capacity, and this affects power amp stage), also add a little bit of sag.

The whole Axefx is tonally a giant power soak. Tweakeable, in a way no one could in the real world. You can put two amp is series, like put a real amp into DI and send it into the second amp, without loss, heat, impedance issue.

Find your own way to your sound as Tom Sholtz has made.

 

[reclavea]

Re: Tom Scholtz Power Soak

- John[/quote]
.......
If anyone want to simulate a powerload (not ME), here's some hint... put master as high as needed... set transformer match at a "duller" value... set level at proper level. You may want to lower B+ cap (cause older caps lower capacity, and this affects power amp stage), also add a little bit of sag.
[/quote]

Will check that out.......thanks.

Tom's work in the studio on the Boston albums was intense. Not sure how it sounds live as I've never been to a Boston concert, but that sound on tape sure as hell is sweet and totally spacious and pleasing. Aside from VH "Running with the Devil" guitar sound, that first Boston album blew me away (guitar tones).

I'm now enjoying the Bogner Uberschall sound!..........
and all this coming from an avid Mesa Boogie man.