The "Feel"

[suphuckers]

So every so often I read something like this...

Perhaps most importantly would be to address that "feel" that most people complain or have issues with when dwelling into the MTS world, which we all know stems from the gain staging variables inherent in the design of the MTS platform.
If this problem is addressed and corrected (or perhaps simplified so people with less experience in the at of gain staging are less prone to ruin the tone/feel of the system - My guess is that the RM12 has less of this issue, if any at all) and your MTS system "feels as good as your ideal amp" then that MTS system with your particular and favorite modules will be your ideal amp.

So the 1st week I had my RM100 I had several issues. It squealed like crazy at me all the time. When I cut it back to get rid of the squealing it sounded flat and dead. etc. It was a real mess. I remember thinking... what a great idea to make an amp like this, but what a piece of **** this thing is.

After a couple of weeks of messing around with it, it's much quieter, and it has gobs of whatever you want from an amp. I think it has great feel. (Unless I'm confused about what you guys are referring to as feel)

It just makes no sense to me...

Very interested to have some of you guys explain exactly what the complaint is here.

Thanks!

 

[scary groove]

I am not sure exactly. But there are two things that I feel are a necessity to make the MTS amps sound better:

1. The Foglifter/MDA board

2. Modded modules

I see these guys that like stockers, and some are decent. But the custom ones are far and above better IMO. And the Foglifter/MDA? Wow it's like lifting off a blanket that was covering your cab. There are other things (transformers, etc.) that I believe could make it as best as can be. But for me the shipping and cash involved is quite steep considering the prices the amps are selling for.

 

[kc2eeb]

I think the "problem" with the MTS line is that the gain control on the modules
can be turned way past the point of tube saturation so it doesn't really react much to the player's soft or light attack on the strings because ANY signal from the guitar will flat top the signal and it all sounds the same i.e. "no feel."
Couple that with the tendency to leave the level control relatively low and not
raise the power amp master much it can sound like a big "fuzz box."
Backing off the module gain, raising the module level AND the power amp master allows the player to "dial in" the point of break up and response to a soft or heavy attack on the strings. A lot of amps set the limits by design so the player can't make it "sound bad." Personally, I prefer to make the choices myself.

 

[j4q0]

Well, being this based on my last post what I meant to say was that when you want to buy a new amp, you try it and then decide cool or not cool for you. This is usually a "plug and play" situation.

For me and for many in this forum this wasn't the case with the MTS (you just stated you had issues the first week or so), I bought the RM4 and a couple of modules and the very first time I played them I had the same issue as you had, I was expecting something different and better.
It wasn't until I had the opportunity to try some other modules and spent some time tweaking knobs and reading countless posts in this forums that I managed to make the system feel and sound quite good.

I'm far from being an expert in electronics and I thought I understood how guitar amplifiers work but after getting into the MTS and having experienced how easy is to make the system sound not good or feel "weird" (for lack of a better word) I ventured to say what I said about the simplified version of the gain staging of the system.

I mean for example, I come from years of playing with an MP1, Marshall JMP-1, Mesa Quad, Triaxis, Rocktron Piranha, and even emulators a la Line 6 POD and I wonder why is it that with those preamps you can set your individual gain, volume and levels per preset/channel and they will not give that "is that it" feeling you had the very first time you played an MTS?
As of now I'm of the understanding that for the MTS to sound like one feels or thinks it should sound you need to have your levels within a certain range, outside of this range you're left with the "is that it" feeling.

I've read several posts about people that love the MTS for several years until they decided to buy the amp that was used to model their favorite module because it's just better for them (because of feel most of the time for what I remember) That's the rationale behind saying what I said about the gain staging, or perhaps I'm misusing gain staging vs setting levels.

 

[j4q0]

A lot of amps set the limits by design so the player can't make it "sound bad." Personally, I prefer to make the choices myself.

I guess that's what I meant. If one is no well versed in making these choices you end up with a system that is not enjoyable to play with.

Some people don't care about the inner works of gear and prefer to have a system that is plug an play so they can focus more on their performance, some not, some may be well comfortable with their performance level and still not care about tweaking gear, some because of being comfortable with their performance level start to focus more on how to tweak their gear to achieve a particular sound, hence all the options that modern guitar gear has, right?

Again, in my case it seems I still need to learn more about the levels/gain staging of the signal all the way through the speaker. Nothing wrong with that, not all of us are born knowing everything nor have all the answers to everything.

 

[suphuckers]

Well here's what I ended up doing (...and it sounds like we're all talking about the same thing, which is why I created this thread, because I wanted to make sure) 1st like most of us I'm using all moded modules. I placed an EQ and an BBE in the series loop. I have a compression pedal in front of the amp. I put my reverb etc in the series loop. I changed out the PI tube for a JAN5751. I use the EQ to lower the volume a bit which allows me to turn the amp up. In the end I have the same volume Id have w/o the EQ but it allows me to turn the knob up more on the amp. I'm not sure what this is doing but it seems to work. I have great sustain and it "feels" pretty great to me. I still get a little feedback, but I just roll off the volume a bit when I need to and it seems to resolve it. I usually have all my tone knobs between noon and 3 my gain at noon and my volumes at about 1-2. The amp master volume varies depending on how much I wanna piss off my neighbors.

 

[kc2eeb]

With the amps and Line 6 items you mention, even thought you think you can set the gain and levels, the actual range of adjustment is "pre-set" especially with the Line 6. One thing to keep in mind, and this is a generalization, is that the more a pre-amp tube is driven into distortion i.e. saturation, the NARROWER the band width becomes, meaning you lose the "highs" first and the "lows" soon after, plus, the lower actual volume you play at, the less lows and highs you perceive. Of course, this does not take into account the individual's hearing ability, the speaker response and at what SPL output. Some speakers need to be driven a little more than others for the sound to "fill out."

 

[j4q0]

Completely agree with you kc2eeb. My point is that this doesn't change the end result in those cases, meaning that in the case of the MP1 and Quad (my main experiences) you can set your gains and levels anywhere between 1-10 which is not necessarily true for all MTS modules, amps or RM4/M4.

So if the MTS modules/amps don't sound particularly well on low level settings or high level settings why leaving that option of range in the signal? Just curious.

 

[suphuckers]

Completely agree with you kc2eeb. My point is that this doesn't change the end result in those cases, meaning that in the case of the MP1 and Quad (my main experiences) you can set your gains and levels anywhere between 1-10 which is not necessarily true for all MTS modules, amps or RM4/M4.

So if the MTS modules/amps don't sound particularly well on low level settings or high level settings why leaving that option of range in the signal? Just curious.

There is definitely a certain range that my amp sounds best but I think if I wanted to tune it to a different volume I probably could do that. I don't feel like it's stuck at a certain volume. I do think unless the module volumes are at least at noon the amp sounds really flat though.

 

[suphuckers]

I am not sure exactly. But there are two things that I feel are a necessity to make the MTS amps sound better:

1. The Foglifter/MDA board

2. Modded modules

I wonder if the Foglifter is having a similar effect as the compression pedal and BBE (I don't have a Foglifter in my amp) I need those two things turned on for the amp to sound good though. I'm not sure exactly how the Foglifter works.

 

[suphuckers]

Anyways, I posted how I got around it. What are you guys doing? Anyone running anything similar to what I'm running? or completely different?

 

[suphuckers]

Backing off the module gain, raising the module level AND the power amp master allows the player to "dial in" the point of break up and response to a soft or heavy attack on the strings. A lot of amps set the limits by design so the player can't make it "sound bad." Personally, I prefer to make the choices myself.

Sounds a lot like what I came up with myself, and I agree with you 100% kc2eeb about wanting to have the ability to set myself and not limited.

Sorry for the multiple posts.

 

[kc2eeb]

Two things:
1, Foglifter: The density and presence control are a band pass and bypass filter on the negative feedback loop. My educated guess is that Rob changed those frequencies.
2, The reason leaving the option available in the range of adjustment "to sound bad" is because of the huge variation of signal level among all the different modules. The mods are still being connected to the same PI drive circuit which is getting hit by a wide variation of levels when you go from a clean mod to a high gain. I've never measured the relative db levels between the modules but I'm sure it's more than 5 or 10db, probably more like 20-25db. (just a guess) That's a wide range to try to make the amp "happy" with.

 

[j4q0]

Everyday one learns something new.
Not sure if this still fits the topic but, Would there be a way to standardize the rage of levels of modules as to make this simpler? Or would that be counterproductive to having highgain low gain modules?
Also, is there a PI in the RM4/M4? I know one is input, the other one for the loops and my assumption was that the third one is for the output?

 

[suphuckers]

Two things:
1, Foglifter: The density and presence control are a band pass and bypass filter on the negative feedback loop. My educated guess is that Rob changed those frequencies.
2, The reason leaving the option available in the range of adjustment "to sound bad" is because of the huge variation of signal level among all the different modules. The mods are still being connected to the same PI drive circuit which is getting hit by a wide variation of levels when you go from a clean mod to a high gain. I've never measured the relative db levels between the modules but I'm sure it's more than 5 or 10db, probably more like 20-25db. (just a guess) That's a wide range to try to make the amp "happy" with.

yeah kc2eeb, you seem to have it figured out. I think I pretty much found the same thing (although you may understand it a little clearer). I just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something. This issue just seemed to keep coming up.

I'd still be interested in what people have done differently than me to get around this "issue" if you can call it an issue.

I don't really have a problem with it but it did force me to set the system up a particular way. I think every piece of equipment does the same thing to an extent though.

Thanks for all your inputs.

 

[MarcoR]

I agree 100% with all of kc2eeb remarks.

You have to dial in the amp to fit the room you're playing in and the volume you're playing at. If you're gigging, make notes about the various rooms and the settings that worked. You might be surprised how drastically different they need to be.

 

[suphuckers]

Marco whats your signal chain look like? You use any EQ's or effects or anything like the BBE? You told me some stuff about how you record but how do you run your setup live?

 

[suphuckers]

...and does the same condition exist with something like the RM4?

 

[MarcoR]

Marco whats your signal chain look like?

https://scontent-a-lga.xx.fbcdn.net...=c7c8335aeaf565b7b6ad46dc3d9788c8&oe=54F3F87A

You use any EQ's or effects or anything like the BBE?

No.

You told me some stuff about how you record but how do you run your setup live?

I go out the M4 back to the pedalboard into an Eventide Pitchfactor using the relay setting for true bypass, then to a splitter that splits the left signal three ways; one signal to an Eventide Space, one to Eventide Timefactor and the last pure dry signal directly to the mini mixer. The Timefactor and Space are outputted in stereo with killdry enabled back to the mini mixer in parallel to each other and the dry signal. The right output of the Pitchfactor also returns to the mini mixer but isn't fed into the other effects; this allows for some interesting series/parallel effect combinations. There is also the effects in front of the amp as well but they're all in a rjm mini effect gizmo in true bypass. With everything bypassed, the signal is strait guitar > preamp > power amp. For live where stereo just isn't practical, I can easily switch to mono.

That?s the simple explanation but to get the full picture, I?d have to draw a diagram?

...and does the same condition exist with something like the RM4?

With the M4/RM4, there is another master volume. So even another gain staging challenge. The benefit is you can run the modules hot and set the overall volume with the master on the M4 to get the right level to the effects. I don't feel like the the master volume on the M4 has as much of a tonal impact compared to where the volume is set on a module.[/url]

 

[suphuckers]

...and I thought my effects loop was complex