I'm looking for suggestions on EQ/gain/dampening settings for a starting block for tone, I know tone is all individual, but a reference point for some things could prove useful for me, especially since we're playing a show on Sat night, and I don't have all the time in the world to spend building my sound at the moment.

any help at all would be appreciated. this is primarily for the 'Crunch' & 'Ultra' channels, as I've nailed down my clean tone pretty much the way I want it.

Thanks in advance!

Sell that hunk of junk and get Behringer amps. Pretty much no matter what setting it's on will sound like gold and the solid state technology will never let you down. Tubes sound stupid and overly loud and will do nothing for you but break. i've tried out the triple xxx at guitar center and wished I hadn't. Then I found my Behringer. I hope you at least try it out. Are you guys having your first show this weekend? Where are you playing?

Sell that hunk of junk and get Behringer amps. Pretty much no matter what setting it's on will sound like gold and the solid state technology will never let you down. Tubes sound stupid and overly loud and will do nothing for you but break. i've tried out the triple xxx at guitar center and wished I hadn't. Then I found my Behringer. I hope you at least try it out. Are you guys having your first show this weekend? Where are you playing?

Sell that hunk of junk and get Behringer amps. Pretty much no matter what setting it's on will sound like gold and the solid state technology will never let you down. Tubes sound stupid and overly loud and will do nothing for you but break. i've tried out the triple xxx at guitar center and wished I hadn't. Then I found my Behringer. I hope you at least try it out. Are you guys having your first show this weekend? Where are you playing?

Sorry about that. My computer sucks.

Yup. We use the solid state equevalent of the XXX. The XXL. Sounds sick. We also use a Supreme head which we are happy with.

passerby‘er said:

HAHAHAHA, this kid cracks me up!

First show? no, that was ages ago, probably back when you were a stain in your daddys underwear.

Behringer sucks, I just got rid of my behringer crap, forget solid state, it's not for me.

enough said there, Im hitting the ignore button on this kid

EDIT: Damnit! I can't ignore anonymous tools! Rev, you need to reimplement that!

bump for insight!

cant go wrong with starting everything at 5 and working from there.

passerby‘er said:

ok, I was always skeptical about if Passerby was a real person or not, but this just put the nail in the coffin. This HAS to be someone who posts regularly on this board if they're going to make a statement about Behringer like that!

blue said:


True, this is always good.


I know Cav's settings are all pretty middle of the road. Not going much higher than 6 or lower than 4 (speaking on a 0-10 measure). I forget where he has his gain...also not too high.


It blows my mind that there is no presence control on these amps.

yeah, I was pretty shocked at the lack of a presence control as well. Blue's advice (as always) is good, I'm really stumped on the 'ultra' channel on this amp, as it's got soooo much low end (not really a bad thing, but I'm not into tons of low end, that's the bassists territory)

I guess I'll head down to my jamspace tonight and start futzing with eq knobs until I find what I'm looking for tone wise... I just want to try to eliminate the "boomyness" of the 'ultra' channel.

DreamingInExile said:

honestly, you're not going to find too much to use in the ultra channel.

aaron_michael said:

I've been thinking the same thing, I'm guessing it's someone with nice equipment as well, since we all know (especially me, first hand) how behringer amps really are:

I can't believe it took me so long to get rid of that damned thing too... well, I still have it, but it's no longer a part of my setup (it's for recording at my house now).

Next on the chopping block is my POS Peavey 412, I'm still looking into replacement options, and I'm kinda leaning towards Vader since they're in the same pricerange as Marshalls, and I'll never be able to afford VHT cabnets without ending up divorced over it HAHAHA!

Go with the Ultra for leads, and that's about it, I'm guessing.

blue said:

yeah, ideally I'd like to use it for lead work, since it's got that bottom end to it, I should be able to round out the sound and get a nice fluid tone for sweeping and fast notey stuff. I know I'm gong to need to add some reverb to help things flow together, but for now, I'm just limited to what the head can do.

Shoulda gotten a matching JSX there ;)

HAHA, I wish, I didn't have that kind of cash, or else I would have. I bought my Triple X used, because its the only way I would ever be able to afford it

I think people buy the triple xxx because all the nu-metalers say its cool and they don't know what they are talking about. That's why i go Behringer. It flies below the radar and never lets me down except for the time I couldn't control the feedback or the time I couldn't turn it on, but other than that, its never failed me once. Even you said you had one and said it wasn;t for you, except for the fact it was for you and you were using it. If I didn't use Behringer the only other amp I'd ever consider using would be the ibanez tone blaster(great amp) or crate digital solid state(Whoa!!!) Nuff said

passerby‘er said:

you've just listed 2 failures

you amuse me, post more of your in depth reviews of behringer garbage!

i loves me my Mesa Quad.

mmm hmmm

Behringer doesn't korn use that amp?

how much did you pay for your xxx mark?

i use the lower gain channel...with the low on 6 mids on 4-5 his on 6 gain on 5-6 with the back damping switch on loose, that tends to change the tone quite a bit.

also, it's important to point out that Cav uses a guitar with EMG's. Those things make it sound a whole lot different. My guitar has Duncans and sounds completely different through his amp.

i don't have one anymore, but i used a XXX with the Nightmare Continues...i did use the ultra channel. massive feedback was part of our set, so i did always run the gain at about 3 o'clock (beyond that is just fizz). but regardless of that, it always sounded best to me keeping all the eq's at halfway. also, you'll get your best tone by pushing the power tubes. i always ran my volume at ten, which isn't everyone's thing, but it definitely needs to be loud to realize its full potential (as with any tube amp).

I agree with The JSX comment lol, I love the thing, all I need is reverb. I bought that pedal and instant feedback!!!!!!! I will not buy 4 pedals just to get fucking reverb, that's for sure.


Mark You sounded pretty rad tonight, a little more tweaks and you are on you way. To Sat!!!!
Early tomorrow, so we can get the 3 guitars leveled off and sounding good together overall. If I didn't get stuck playing drums tonight and our drummer was there, we would have had all that shit done already!

i'm wondering about experimenting with various pickups now that i've got that sensual machine... mesa quad!

Sorry for being late to this. I was busy watching my child be born haha.


ok, first thing you need to know about these amps is the fact they are one of the very few amps ever made with a true legit 100% active EQ. Basically that EQ has so much tone shaping control it is unreal. If you pay close attention the slightest movement of the EQ knobs can make a drastic difference in tone. This is also why it does not have a prescence control.

For me (even though it id 3 channels) this amp is a one trick pony. I am not too big on the cleans, and to my ears the ultra channel sounds like ass. Now if you take that crunch channel, clean boost it, and EQ it so it really brings out the pickups and guitar tone, this amp pulls some KILLER tones.

As I am sure you know 90% of the tone on this amp comes from the preamp, and you are pretty much shit out of luck trying to change the sound with the pwoer amp. Becuase of that stay far away from power amp distortion, it is not where this amp shines. Keep the channel volume pretty damn high and the master as low as you can for your music (which with this amp will still be incredibly loud)

CHANGE THE TUBES!!!!! Stockers are garbage. Bias that bitch nice and warm and she will sing. It makes the clean more tolerable, and keeps the ultra just as rediculous haha.


Congrats man, cool amps!

congrats, josh!

was it a he or a she?

how many tubes did it have?

blue said:

I paid about $400 wth my trade ins (power conditioner, sonic maximizer, velocity 100 & rack case)

Joshtruction said:

CONGRATS MAN!!!!!

Joshtruction said:

yeah, I noticed just moving the knobs a c-hair last night made huge differences, I'm pretty close to finding my tone, just a little more tweaking. I wasn't aware that it was a 100% active EQ, I thought it was just once of those passive/active deals like most amps, that's really cool to know.

Joshtruction said:

any recommendations on a preferred method of clean boosting it?

Joshtruction said:

this is very typical of peavey amps, every peavey I've owned in the past has been the same way.

Joshtruction said:

again, recommendations would be a huge help, I'm not going to go the groove tubes route, as I've never been partial to the way they sound.

Joshtruction said:

and thank you sir, for your very intelligent and well phrased insight/input! !!!

GoatCatalyst said:

my guess is 6 power and 12 preamp, running a full 2400 watts of sheer decimating gain, able to run non-stop for days on end! HAHAHA

My kid definitly had 6 12ax7's, and 6 6L6GC's. He was biased cold from the factory though haha. If the he didn't give it away, it's a boy! His name is Trenton.

Preamp tubes are easy to change and make a big difference in that amp. I'd say buy quite a few and mix and match them until you get a soun d you like. If it were mine I'd probably try a mix of 9th gen chinese tubes, Sovteks, maybe a JJ in the loop to take away some fizz, and maybe a tungsol or two. I say mix and maych and find what you like. http://va.eftsecure.net/eftcart/products.asp?M_id=069443081828 go there and check some out. If you got any questions jsut ask doug there, he knows his shit. dougstubes.com will bring you to his main page.

awsome, thanks for the insight, and congrats once again on becoming a dad!

Joshtruction said:

wow, amen!

yeah, that was my exact thought as well...

by the way has anyone who owned this amp ever had any problems with rediculous noise at certain venues?? im assuming due to lights and electronics??

well, my first gig out with it is this saturday, so I'll let you know, I've got a hush super c running in the fx loop so I'll probably be able to kill any unwanted noise

DreamingInExile said:

are you serious? we just had a massive thread about this like 2 weeks ago.

Peavey cab=Highlander
http://massholes.org/mp3/balls.mp3

No tips on noise other than get a top of the line power conditioner so you always have clean power. I think thats a must with any high gain tube amp that is being gigged at random clubs.


clean boosting... take a tube screamer or something (I custom build these btw) turn the volume all the way up, distortion (gain/drive) all the way down, and set the tone to your liking. Thats pretty much all there is to it.

blue said:

blue, you'll have to forgive my stupidity. I honestly wasn't aware that boost and clean boost were basically the same thing.

so, to continue the topic in a new direction...

Cabnets, eventually I'm going to get rid of my POS Peavey 412, and I'm bouncing back and forth between a Marshall 1960A (and maybe a 1960B as well) and Vader cabnets (seeing that they're both around the same price)

I've always liked the sound of Marshalls, and I've heard a TON of great things about Vader.

I need a cabnet that will have a tight low end, while still sounding crisp through the mids & highs.

I used to have a Marshall 1960A. It had no where the low end I needed. I would lean towards something else. Not sure how the 1960B sounds in comparison.

the 1960A & B are both the same cabnet, the A is the slant and the B is the straight.

I don't need a ton of low end, but I need a bit of oomph, Shroud's tuned to B, so a cabnet with too much low end will start to sound muddy.

Earcandy cabs

maybe it was the 1950 I was thinking of. They have different celstion speakers between the two different models. The 1960's have the GT12s (I think) and other ones will have Greenbacks or some other model which have lower frequency response.

http://www.avatarspeakers.com/

Avatar is for the gays. EARCANDY.

All this talk about shitty amps is making me itch to go buy another Behringer. You guys are all fools and do not know what you're missing.

LOL. Behringer's rule.

Do you have an endorsement?

I wish. I don't think they're so quick to hand them out like gibson and mesa.

Keep working on them. I'll sure you'll get your Behringer endorsement.

I'll sure you'll get your Behringer endorsement.
What language are you speaking? Seriously. Let me guess, you're in junior high. Wow. Stupid fucker.

I can hardly wait.

GoatOfCatalyst said:
Do they even offer a 4x12 cabinet? I looked at their site and didn't see anything with more than 2 speakers.

Earcandy only makes 2x12. Some people swear by them, other people just say that they're incredibly overpriced. I like my Avatar and Mesa cabs.

5150 cab here.

Peavy cabs are pretty meh.

I like the 5150 better than the Marshall 1960A (when I compared them back in the day.)

But then again, I don't have all the money in the world and it does the trick for me. Compared to otehr peavey cabs, the 5150s are made of a different type of wood and speakers (different magnets and wiring included.) Shitty casters, but I put the cab in a hard shell case for gigging.

I never had money for a mesa cab, and I know people have preferred them over Marshall cabs for better low end.

There are tons of choices for decent cabs. earcandy, avatar, marshall, orange, mesa, bogner, B52 (yeah I said it, thier cabs are nice) framus, engl, vader, Genz Benz, VHT, splawn, and a whole ton more. Sometimes you need to step back and see what YOU are looking for. Tuning to B sometimes does not agree with certain cabs. Especially with something like a XXXXXXXXX. a lot of them cabs will fart out and sound muddy.

Cabs I would personally recomend... VADER, VHT, Bogner, GENZ BENZ. Anyone of them cabs would be an absolute animal. For the price and quality it is almost impossible to beat the vader cabs. Especially for metal. They can handle lows without breaking up and getting muddy, they project nice, they are built like tanks (also take that into consideration with thier weight) and like I already said priced right.





For the record 1960 cabs came with 3 different speakers. Greenbacks, v30's, and gt12's depending on what series the cab came from. Most common is the GT12's which uually come standard in most 1960a/b cabs. Slant cabs have less bottom end than straight cabs.

Joshtruction said:

yeah, this is exactly my point. I have an idea of waht I'm looking for, I just need to start trying stuff. I'd like to get my hands on a Vader cab to try out, along with a 1960A (or B).

I'd love to look into VHT, but they're out of my price range, and I've heard a bunch of good things about Avatar, but I'm skeptical first off because they're so inexpensive, and secondly, I don't personally know anyone that has one that would be willing to bring it up to my practice space to try out (I drive a piece of shit car, that barely makes it to and from work on a daily basis)

I'm looking for something specifically that has a tight yet resonant low end, but not boomy, but still retains crunchy mids and clear highs. I know the 1960s don't have a ton of low end, but I've always been partial to the sound of them.

mark, you want a vader cab. super tight and punchy. honorable mention to avatar though, cant beat the price for their quality.

I know right now I can get you a showroom mint VHT d412 cab for 820 shipped to your door. It's for sale on another forum I post on.

I'd say grab the vader. I cant see you being disapointed with them. I love the ones I had. I want more. I am in full support of them.

Avatar does do great FOR THIER PRICE.

dudes never even touched an earcandy 2x12... crazy honkies, just writing it off and shit.

pish posh.

I just have no need for a 2x12. I only posted the two completely polar opinions of them that I've heard. Don't have an opinion of my own other than that I don't need a 2x12 and I'm pretty sure D.I.E. is looking for a 4x12

GoatCatalyst said:

cmon man, its cus its a 2x12 and you totally know it. im sure if he wanted a cab he could jam at home and at practice with, im sure he'd go for it. christ, id like one very much. ive heard them in person and i know theyre the balls. but he needs a cab that can project for shows, and a 2x12 just isnt going to cut it for 75% of the places he's playing.

OK, so, who's got a Vader cab that I can try out? after reading up on them, and listening to people here, I'm seriously considering them, I'd just like to try one out first. I try just about everything before I buy it. the only thin I've never tried out before I bought it was my Winter guitar (which I play exclusively now, I love it that much)

I appreciate all of the input from all of you on everything, from boost pedals to cabnets.

I'm not going to disagree with G.C. about the 212's from earcandy being good, but blue hit the nail on the head about needing something to project at shitty 'lack of PA' venues. a 212 wouldn't cut it in OBriens, since there's no instrument micing through PA, and no monitors.

where do you live?

Haverhill MA, same town I practice in.

put everything up to 10 on the ultra channel

YES!

except the mids. Keep them at 0

HAHAHA, I did that just for a laugh the other night

everything at 10 with the EQ them things have must have sounded like pure bliss..........

i assure you my 2x12 will DEVOUR your marshall, mesa or just about any other brand 4x12 you could put it up against.

and when i complete my dastardly plans and procure my SECOND 2x12... world domination will be MINE

seriously - its portability combined with the fact that it will simply outperform most 4x12s just makes it a no-brainer... for me, at least