NAD: Cameron CCV

[jcj]

Try this-

Voicing and Dark set to middle positions
Punch at 10 o'clock
Presence at 1 or 2 o'clock
Gain Style to the left
Bright 2 far left/Bright 1 far right
Drop the Bass to 10 o'clock
Mids and Treble up at 2 o'clock
Gains at about 11 o'clock

Using the loop as the master or no?

Shouldn't matter with a bit of volume; how low are you playing?

What about the drive switch, in the center? Right now I'm in my apartment. So not that loud. Without the loop, master at 9:00.

Can't remember where I set the drive switch on the production models, my old ones don't have them..sorry

 

[FourT6and2]

With the drive switch in the center (off) the amp doesn't have enough gain with the settings you suggested. It's almost like a pushed JCM800. With the drive switch engaged the gain is there. But it's too bright with what you suggested. So I threw the dark and voicing switches to the right. Sounds pretty good. Bumped up the mids to full and that's closer to a sound I like. Thanks.

 

[50MkII]

Looking at the amp I seem to prefer the drive switch to the far right on the production CCV. Mark does like the 65's with the CCV and you should try the G12H30 Anniv speakers with that amp too. I would stay clear of V30's with that amp.

 

[FourT6and2]

Looking at the amp I seem to prefer the drive switch to the far right on the production CCV. Mark does like the 65's with the CCV and you should try the G12H30 Anniv speakers with that amp too. I would stay clear of V30's with that amp.

Yeah, I didn't like it with V30s. Very harsh. I think I've found some settings I like. And that's with my 65s. Sounds pretty good now. It's still a smooth amp. But that trick with the FX loop really helped.

 

[se7en]

Any chance for a clip? Always dug your VH4 and Chupacabra clips. In any case, enjoy!

 

[Heritage Softail]

Looking at the amp I seem to prefer the drive switch to the far right on the production CCV. Mark does like the 65's with the CCV and you should try the G12H30 Anniv speakers with that amp too. I would stay clear of V30's with that amp.

Yeah, I didn't like it with V30s. Very harsh. I think I've found some settings I like. And that's with my 65s. Sounds pretty good now. It's still a smooth amp. But that trick with the FX loop really helped.

If ya don't mind, how does it compare to your Chup on good old hair metal Dokken, Ratt, Megadeth?

The Chup and Yeti seem like two killer amps. A guy could get both for less $.

Unless the CCV does it all and then some.

 

[FourT6and2]

Looking at the amp I seem to prefer the drive switch to the far right on the production CCV. Mark does like the 65's with the CCV and you should try the G12H30 Anniv speakers with that amp too. I would stay clear of V30's with that amp.

Yeah, I didn't like it with V30s. Very harsh. I think I've found some settings I like. And that's with my 65s. Sounds pretty good now. It's still a smooth amp. But that trick with the FX loop really helped.

If ya don't mind, how does it compare to your Chup on good old hair metal Dokken, Ratt, Megadeth?

The Chup and Yeti seem like two killer amps. A guy could get both for less $.

Unless the CCV does it all and then some.

No idea. I've never listened to a Dokken, Ratt, or Megadeth song in my life. I grew up with 90's music. And the kind of stuff I play is like a mix of Tool and Muse.

 

[USN_Ag06]

Congrats!

 

[guitarmike]

If you really want to get the CCV in the "oh shit" mode -- jump the FX loop, crank the channel master up to around 2:00 and use the loop level return as an overall master.

Stand back.....

Only problem with that is it has tone suck with the loop on.

That is what a hated about my CCV big time...Could not use the loop!!

It's amazing that some people can't hear the difference.

I guess I got lucky The loop on mine is without question the best I have had on anything that came through Friedman. I had a jcm800 modded by Dave and it had a great loop too but not as good as this one.

 

[LP Freak]

Well Friedman agrees there's an issue with tone loss and said it'll be corrected on the next run of CCV's.

 

[Heritage Softail]

Looking at the amp I seem to prefer the drive switch to the far right on the production CCV. Mark does like the 65's with the CCV and you should try the G12H30 Anniv speakers with that amp too. I would stay clear of V30's with that amp.

Yeah, I didn't like it with V30s. Very harsh. I think I've found some settings I like. And that's with my 65s. Sounds pretty good now. It's still a smooth amp. But that trick with the FX loop really helped.

If ya don't mind, how does it compare to your Chup on good old hair metal Dokken, Ratt, Megadeth?

The Chup and Yeti seem like two killer amps. A guy could get both for less $.

Unless the CCV does it all and then some.

No idea. I've never listened to a Dokken, Ratt, or Megadeth song in my life. I grew up with 90's music. And the kind of stuff I play is like a mix of Tool and Muse.

Combine Muse and Tool.

Mule

I just had to, it was right there

If you hit it half as big as either of those to you would have it made.

 

[EXPcustom]

I find it weird, and I'm sure it's just me, but my old CCV had screws through the name plate. Yours does not. Is this one of the very first few that came out before the actual first run?

Parts like the chassis and faceplates were much thicker and robust on the Chris Schmidt era CCVs. To me they sound totally different, I prefer the Schmidt-era sound wise but a lot of them varied in build quality/sound. The Barrang/King era CCVs just did not sound the same to me or as angry as the original CCVs. I know a few members here preferred the King/Barrang era CCVs or they thought they sounded the same so I am not knocking them just pointing out what I personally noticed.

This is a Barrang production model.

Yeah I know, its always easy to tell them apart from the pre-pro's visually because they did the row of knobs too low and it partially obstructed the writing.

 

[metalmaniac93]

Well Friedman agrees there's an issue with tone loss and said it'll be corrected on the next run of CCV's.

Awesome!!!

 

[FourT6and2]

Looking at the amp I seem to prefer the drive switch to the far right on the production CCV. Mark does like the 65's with the CCV and you should try the G12H30 Anniv speakers with that amp too. I would stay clear of V30's with that amp.

Yeah, I didn't like it with V30s. Very harsh. I think I've found some settings I like. And that's with my 65s. Sounds pretty good now. It's still a smooth amp. But that trick with the FX loop really helped.

If ya don't mind, how does it compare to your Chup on good old hair metal Dokken, Ratt, Megadeth?

The Chup and Yeti seem like two killer amps. A guy could get both for less $.

Unless the CCV does it all and then some.

No idea. I've never listened to a Dokken, Ratt, or Megadeth song in my life. I grew up with 90's music. And the kind of stuff I play is like a mix of Tool and Muse.

Combine Muse and Tool.

Mule

I just had to, it was right there

If you hit it half as big as either of those to you would have it made.

I find it weird, and I'm sure it's just me, but my old CCV had screws through the name plate. Yours does not. Is this one of the very first few that came out before the actual first run?

Parts like the chassis and faceplates were much thicker and robust on the Chris Schmidt era CCVs. To me they sound totally different, I prefer the Schmidt-era sound wise but a lot of them varied in build quality/sound. The Barrang/King era CCVs just did not sound the same to me or as angry as the original CCVs. I know a few members here preferred the King/Barrang era CCVs or they thought they sounded the same so I am not knocking them just pointing out what I personally noticed.

This is a Barrang production model.

Yeah I know, its always easy to tell them apart from the pre-pro's visually because they did the row of knobs too low and it partially obstructed the writing.

Yeah... the build quality on this thing is pretty bad. I can see why they switched to Metro. Good thing, too. This thing has some really bad lead dress, soldering, and zero attention to detail (like the knob issue you mentioned). There was a zip tie holding some wires on the board and the person who built it accidentally caught the body of a cap with the zip tie and almost bent it right off the board. I saw it when I went to bias the amp. Had to cut the zip tie, replace it, and fix the cap. Should never have left the shop that way. And there are leads that don't even go through the eyelets on the pots. They're just laid on top and held in place with gobs of solder instead of done properly. The layout is a pain in the ass, too. You have to take the entire chassis out of the head shell to get to the V1 and V2 preamp tubes. Good thing it sounds halfway decent...

 

[metalmaniac93]

Looking at the amp I seem to prefer the drive switch to the far right on the production CCV. Mark does like the 65's with the CCV and you should try the G12H30 Anniv speakers with that amp too. I would stay clear of V30's with that amp.

Yeah, I didn't like it with V30s. Very harsh. I think I've found some settings I like. And that's with my 65s. Sounds pretty good now. It's still a smooth amp. But that trick with the FX loop really helped.

If ya don't mind, how does it compare to your Chup on good old hair metal Dokken, Ratt, Megadeth?

The Chup and Yeti seem like two killer amps. A guy could get both for less $.

Unless the CCV does it all and then some.

No idea. I've never listened to a Dokken, Ratt, or Megadeth song in my life. I grew up with 90's music. And the kind of stuff I play is like a mix of Tool and Muse.

Combine Muse and Tool.

Mule

I just had to, it was right there

If you hit it half as big as either of those to you would have it made.

I find it weird, and I'm sure it's just me, but my old CCV had screws through the name plate. Yours does not. Is this one of the very first few that came out before the actual first run?

Parts like the chassis and faceplates were much thicker and robust on the Chris Schmidt era CCVs. To me they sound totally different, I prefer the Schmidt-era sound wise but a lot of them varied in build quality/sound. The Barrang/King era CCVs just did not sound the same to me or as angry as the original CCVs. I know a few members here preferred the King/Barrang era CCVs or they thought they sounded the same so I am not knocking them just pointing out what I personally noticed.

This is a Barrang production model.

Yeah I know, its always easy to tell them apart from the pre-pro's visually because they did the row of knobs too low and it partially obstructed the writing.

Yeah... the build quality on this thing is pretty bad. I can see why they switched to Metro. Good thing, too. This thing has some really bad lead dress, soldering, and zero attention to detail (like the knob issue you mentioned). There was a zip tie holding some wires on the board and the person who built it accidentally caught the body of a cap with the zip tie and almost bent it right off the board. I saw it when I went to bias the amp. Had to cut the zip tie, replace it, and fix the cap. Should never have left the shop that way. And there are leads that don't even go through the eyelets on the pots. They're just laid on top and held in place with gobs of solder instead of done properly. The layout is a pain in the ass, too. You have to take the entire chassis out of the head shell to get to the V1 and V2 preamp tubes. Good thing it sounds halfway decent...

Hence the reason for the Metro redesign!!!

 

[FourT6and2]

Looking at the amp I seem to prefer the drive switch to the far right on the production CCV. Mark does like the 65's with the CCV and you should try the G12H30 Anniv speakers with that amp too. I would stay clear of V30's with that amp.

Yeah, I didn't like it with V30s. Very harsh. I think I've found some settings I like. And that's with my 65s. Sounds pretty good now. It's still a smooth amp. But that trick with the FX loop really helped.

If ya don't mind, how does it compare to your Chup on good old hair metal Dokken, Ratt, Megadeth?

The Chup and Yeti seem like two killer amps. A guy could get both for less $.

Unless the CCV does it all and then some.

No idea. I've never listened to a Dokken, Ratt, or Megadeth song in my life. I grew up with 90's music. And the kind of stuff I play is like a mix of Tool and Muse.

Combine Muse and Tool.

Mule

I just had to, it was right there

If you hit it half as big as either of those to you would have it made.

I find it weird, and I'm sure it's just me, but my old CCV had screws through the name plate. Yours does not. Is this one of the very first few that came out before the actual first run?

Parts like the chassis and faceplates were much thicker and robust on the Chris Schmidt era CCVs. To me they sound totally different, I prefer the Schmidt-era sound wise but a lot of them varied in build quality/sound. The Barrang/King era CCVs just did not sound the same to me or as angry as the original CCVs. I know a few members here preferred the King/Barrang era CCVs or they thought they sounded the same so I am not knocking them just pointing out what I personally noticed.

This is a Barrang production model.

Yeah I know, its always easy to tell them apart from the pre-pro's visually because they did the row of knobs too low and it partially obstructed the writing.

Yeah... the build quality on this thing is pretty bad. I can see why they switched to Metro. Good thing, too. This thing has some really bad lead dress, soldering, and zero attention to detail (like the knob issue you mentioned). There was a zip tie holding some wires on the board and the person who built it accidentally caught the body of a cap with the zip tie and almost bent it right off the board. I saw it when I went to bias the amp. Had to cut the zip tie, replace it, and fix the cap. Should never have left the shop that way. And there are leads that don't even go through the eyelets on the pots. They're just laid on top and held in place with gobs of solder instead of done properly. The layout is a pain in the ass, too. You have to take the entire chassis out of the head shell to get to the V1 and V2 preamp tubes. Good thing it sounds halfway decent...

Hence the reason for the Metro redesign!!!

Absolutely. And I can't believe there are people upset that they're redesigning the layout and trying to build them better.

 

[metalmaniac93]

Looking at the amp I seem to prefer the drive switch to the far right on the production CCV. Mark does like the 65's with the CCV and you should try the G12H30 Anniv speakers with that amp too. I would stay clear of V30's with that amp.

Yeah, I didn't like it with V30s. Very harsh. I think I've found some settings I like. And that's with my 65s. Sounds pretty good now. It's still a smooth amp. But that trick with the FX loop really helped.

If ya don't mind, how does it compare to your Chup on good old hair metal Dokken, Ratt, Megadeth?

The Chup and Yeti seem like two killer amps. A guy could get both for less $.

Unless the CCV does it all and then some.

No idea. I've never listened to a Dokken, Ratt, or Megadeth song in my life. I grew up with 90's music. And the kind of stuff I play is like a mix of Tool and Muse.

Combine Muse and Tool.

Mule

I just had to, it was right there

If you hit it half as big as either of those to you would have it made.

I find it weird, and I'm sure it's just me, but my old CCV had screws through the name plate. Yours does not. Is this one of the very first few that came out before the actual first run?

Parts like the chassis and faceplates were much thicker and robust on the Chris Schmidt era CCVs. To me they sound totally different, I prefer the Schmidt-era sound wise but a lot of them varied in build quality/sound. The Barrang/King era CCVs just did not sound the same to me or as angry as the original CCVs. I know a few members here preferred the King/Barrang era CCVs or they thought they sounded the same so I am not knocking them just pointing out what I personally noticed.

This is a Barrang production model.

Yeah I know, its always easy to tell them apart from the pre-pro's visually because they did the row of knobs too low and it partially obstructed the writing.

Yeah... the build quality on this thing is pretty bad. I can see why they switched to Metro. Good thing, too. This thing has some really bad lead dress, soldering, and zero attention to detail (like the knob issue you mentioned). There was a zip tie holding some wires on the board and the person who built it accidentally caught the body of a cap with the zip tie and almost bent it right off the board. I saw it when I went to bias the amp. Had to cut the zip tie, replace it, and fix the cap. Should never have left the shop that way. And there are leads that don't even go through the eyelets on the pots. They're just laid on top and held in place with gobs of solder instead of done properly. The layout is a pain in the ass, too. You have to take the entire chassis out of the head shell to get to the V1 and V2 preamp tubes. Good thing it sounds halfway decent...

Hence the reason for the Metro redesign!!!

Absolutely. And I can't believe there are people upset that they're redesigning the layout and trying to build them better.

I agree and I am one of the patient 2nd run buyers!!

 

[guitarmike]

Well Friedman agrees there's an issue with tone loss and said it'll be corrected on the next run of CCV's.

If we ever get a chance to get together, you can play through it. Perhaps mine was an accident

 

[LP Freak]

Well Friedman agrees there's an issue with tone loss and said it'll be corrected on the next run of CCV's.

If we ever get a chance to get together, you can play through it. Perhaps mine was an accident

I'm certain that if you even turn the loop switch on, even with nothing plugged into it, you'll hear a difference. It looses a touch of highs and the feel of the amp changes on the bottom end. Ask Splawner or Steve K, or 232cap.

 

[232cap]

Yes the loop zaps some of the mid snarl and the top end off when on no matter where you set the master. Still a great amp just not as aggressive as a hg jose Marshall plus it has a Bogner vibe about it too.