Help me spot check some recorded tones? (Heavy MESA content)

So @NineShallDie had some recommended settings for the IIC++ I want to try. Here's what he said from a FB thread. Better to move the conversation here I think.

"This might not sound good under the mic, but sounded great in the room. And I’m also running an Aphex parametric in the loop, so keep that in mind also.
Settings are something like:
Vol 1 - 9-9,5
Treble - 5
Bass - 2,5
Middle - 0
Master 1 - 4
Lead drive - 7
Lead master - 3,5
Presence - 3
Limit - 2,5
Everything pulled except bass. I usually don’t pull the brights, but for these settings it sounded great.
When pushing the power amp a bit more it adds more low end, so I’ll keep the bass and mids knobs down low or it gets too much.
Curious to hear your thoughts about this. Might sound like shit recorded though
😂
But I’m really of the opinion that the power amp should be pushed to get the best tones."

Tobias, I will say that I just remembered one reason I set the volumes like I have been is so I can balance the two channels when switching between them playing live. With your suggestions, if I switch back to the rhythm channel it's crazy loud. No good for gigging! That being said, for recording I can see your point.

I set your settings up. First impressions in the room, it is a little thicker & looser, and a touch less pissed off. Now on to the mic! The volume set like this was around 110 dB- about 5 higher than where I've been running the others, but let's go with it. This is the track called IIC++ Tobias mixtest.

After hearing this I did a second version, where the only change I made was to dime the presence. This track is IIC++ Tobias P10 mixtest. These files are now in my cloud folder linked in post #1.

Thoughts?
 
Racerxrated said:
The 57 clip was more aggressive; a bit brighter but maybe at the cost of a tiny bit of clarity. I personally preferred it best though. Kinda raunchy so to speak.
Click to expand...
Yeah, while I tend to prefer the 609 balance, I can see how the 57 balance could shine in the right song. Think I'll hand onto that one.

Overall I do believe blending mics in the mixing console is generally a winner.
 
GJgo said:
So @NineShallDie had some recommended settings for the IIC++ I want to try. Here's what he said from a FB thread. Better to move the conversation here I think.

"This might not sound good under the mic, but sounded great in the room. And I’m also running an Aphex parametric in the loop, so keep that in mind also.
Settings are something like:
Vol 1 - 9-9,5
Treble - 5
Bass - 2,5
Middle - 0
Master 1 - 4
Lead drive - 7
Lead master - 3,5
Presence - 3
Limit - 2,5
Everything pulled except bass. I usually don’t pull the brights, but for these settings it sounded great.
When pushing the power amp a bit more it adds more low end, so I’ll keep the bass and mids knobs down low or it gets too much.
Curious to hear your thoughts about this. Might sound like shit recorded though
😂
But I’m really of the opinion that the power amp should be pushed to get the best tones."

Tobias, I will say that I just remembered one reason I set the volumes like I have been is so I can balance the two channels when switching between them playing live. With your suggestions, if I switch back to the rhythm channel it's crazy loud. No good for gigging! That being said, for recording I can see your point.

I set your settings up. First impressions in the room, it is a little thicker & looser, and a touch less pissed off. Now on to the mic! The volume set like this was around 110 dB- about 5 higher than where I've been running the others, but let's go with it. This is the track called IIC++ Tobias mixtest.

After hearing this I did a second version, where the only change I made was to dime the presence. This track is IIC++ Tobias P10 mixtest. These files are now in my cloud folder linked in post #1.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
The volume settings make sense for live use. Although, if you only have a few clean passages (as I suspect) I would rather just lower the neck pickup volume and switch to that for the clean parts. To me it actually sounds pretty decent with EMG 81 on C++. Instead of sacrificing the distorted rhythm tone.

As expected those settings didn’t sound great recorded. And less pissed off in the room. I can see a couple of reasons for this. I was using a traditional Recto cab and a JCM800 cab with vented 75’s. The 800 cab is more pissed off with more presence and less mids than the Mesa cab. And I’m boosting high shelf around 5K on the parametric.

Also when I’ve been recording (which I suck at) I’ve found that running the treble knob that low sounds kinda dull. But for a room tone it works great for tightening up the tone.

If you want to, it would be interesting to hear what it would sound like if you put the treble knob at 7, push in the brights, and lower the lead drive to 6. Perhaps even a bit lower on the lead master volume. And adjust the GEQ and presence to taste.
 
Last edited:
@NineShallDie good point on rolling the volume back, that would work great if you remember before you hit the switch! Even though Mark IIs aren't ideal for gigging if you need more than one sound, I do it anyway. :)

Remember I am using a 2002 Mesa traditional straight Recto 4x12 with stock V30s. Agreed, T75s would need to be EQd differently. I've had every generation of T75 EXCEPT the vented magnets, would like to try them someday.

Alright here's the redo with your new suggestions, sort of. they're uploaded to the folder. First I did just as you said and I ended up with the presence on 7 and the lead master on 3.25. It does seem a bit thicker than my original and from here some of that seems to be due to the lower treble & higher bass knobs. IT's still a bit dark for me. So let's test more! This is C++ Tobias #3.

Next is a take with your suggested power amp settings, and with everything else set like I had it for mine, so we can compare my original vs your power amp settings with no other tone changes. Here I left the settings as the one above & simply moved my preamp settings back to my original. Doing this, the fundamental tone sits where I like it similar to my settings however to my ear it does seem thicker and a touch darker on this version. Whether you like it thicker or not in the mix is the big question- what do you guys think? This is C++ Tobias #4.

Related, on both my Colis the Limit circuit, when in use, darkens the amp quite a bit. On the IIB this is welcome. On the IIC+ it can make it too dark if I'm not careful.

As a side note to the power section thing, in the past I've tested volume matched reamps on the Recto where I've toggled between all 4 potential choices of bold/spongy & tube/diode. While I swear it makes a difference to how it feel in the room, on the mic there's honestly no functional difference.
 
@NineShallDie I've thought about this a little more. I think you're on to something with the power section but it needs some fine tuning. Now we're really getting into the weeds..

With the limit at 0 and Master 1 on volume duty, I think you're right that it is a bit thin. However, if I run Master 1 & lead master both at 5 & use the limit for volume control it gets too dark for my taste on the C+.

Running the limit on 2.5 on your settings & using Lead Master for volume control was more balanced, however IMO just a tad thick still for triple tracking rhythms. So, I did a couple more passes with the limit on 2 & then 1 (files names as you'd expect), using lead master for volume control, to see if I can find a sweet spot. Those files are now posted to the folder. I think Limit 1 or Limit 2 might be my favorite one yet.
 
Last edited:
Racerxrated said:
So, long ago (10-11 yrs) when I got my first SLO I was lukewarm on it; I did a deep dive into the SLO forum and found a thread about the EVH settings. Dime the presence, and start the treble on 0 and work your way up until you like it. Really liked that approach since it gave the amp 'bite' that I really dug; ever since, that's how I dial any and every amp. Sometimes I have to dial it back but mostly, that's what sounds best to me.
Try diming the P and put the T at 10-1pm, mids at 9-11 and give it a shot.
Click to expand...
Jeremy these are basically the Recto settings I would’ve recommended and how I always run them. Definitely brings out the most aggression, tightness and punch.
Similar move in the way that you dime presence on Marks.
 
GJgo said:
Thanks @Bxlxaxkxe. I was never really able to dial tones in to this degree until I started reamping.

Like I've said for years, the late IIB Colis with the Limit circuit are the GOAT. @Beyond Black has played the B+ and the C++ at my house, he can attest. :)
Click to expand...
I played both Colis at Jeremy’s and both are absolute beasts, the IIB being more raw and barbaric. That amp is fucking horrifying.
 
The new RacerRecto Mor57 clip is my fav Recto clip now, it’s got more cut, punch and aggression.
It is slightly nasal in the mids though imo, I’d try bumping them up gradually and find the sweet spot.
 
Last edited:
Beyond Black said:
The new Racerrecto Mor57 clip is my fav Recto clip now, it’s got more cut, punch and aggression
.
Click to expand...
Cool. I dig it, and I think it could benefit from some more secondary mic blending. Possibly even a Fredman setup, if I picked up another 57. I have the 55° clips..
 
So the improvements in the power section on the C+ got me thinking about trying this on the IIB+. Unfortunately, playing with the various post-loop masters made no difference here so I just set it back to how I had it which is all volumes on 5, and the Limit is the actual volume control. This amp is so bright that this works.

However, while I had the amp hot I decided to try diming the presence & adjusting 6600 to taste. I remembered how Mike B. told me that on the IIB & IIC Colis, the presence is a cut- not a boost- where 10 is no cut. Check out the file IIB+ P10. This seems just a bit more full, I think I prefer it to IIB mixtest 2 (the previous try).
 
GJgo said:
So the improvements in the power section on the C+ got me thinking about trying this on the IIB+. Unfortunately, playing with the various post-loop masters made no difference here so I just set it back to how I had it which is all volumes on 5, and the Limit is the actual volume control. This amp is so bright that this works.

However, while I had the amp hot I decided to try diming the presence & adjusting 6600 to taste. I remembered how Mike B. told me that on the IIB & IIC Colis, the presence is a cut- not a boost- where 10 is no cut. Check out the file IIB+ P10. This seems just a bit more full, I think I prefer it to IIB mixtest 2 (the previous try).
Click to expand...
This stuff amazes me . You getting it down to a science .
 
GJgo said:
So the improvements in the power section on the C+ got me thinking about trying this on the IIB+. Unfortunately, playing with the various post-loop masters made no difference here so I just set it back to how I had it which is all volumes on 5, and the Limit is the actual volume control. This amp is so bright that this works.

However, while I had the amp hot I decided to try diming the presence & adjusting 6600 to taste. I remembered how Mike B. told me that on the IIB & IIC Colis, the presence is a cut- not a boost- where 10 is no cut. Check out the file IIB+ P10. This seems just a bit more full, I think I prefer it to IIB mixtest 2 (the previous try).
Click to expand...
Thinking of this now I'm wanting to revisit diming the presence on the C++ with the revised power amp settings. See file C++ P10 in the folder for this.

To my ear diming the presence does seem to be filling it out a bit, at the expense of just a little tightness on the chugs. While I liked the B+ with the Pres @ 10, I'm not so sure on the C++. What do you hear?
 
GJgo said:
Thanks man, I get a lot of enjoyment out of diving deep.
Click to expand...
Once my Larry comes I’m going to be to like you and go to town . Mixing heads and slaving . What you do is inspiring me to quit being lazy . But I will start then lol
 
GJgo said:
Hey guys. So I've been practicing my recording technique a lot, hoping to learn & get better at it. We sorted out the album tone and of course I can never leave well enough alone so I've been messing around trying all kinds of things to see if I can improve on it..?

Here are some reamps of a clip from one of our songs done with all my amps. I'm pretty happy with each tone on its own. If you have a minute to listen, can you weigh in with ANY critiques if there's something that stands out to you as could be better, or hey that's killer? Of course I'm still fine tuning!

First I spent a ton of time dialing in a cab / mic setup. I'm using a 2002 recto trad straight cab with an E609 primary, SM7B secondary & SM57 tertiary on 3 different speakers all blended with my mixer. I'm pretty happy with all of this and I've locked the isolation setup in.

Next I brought in my amps to see what it looks like to dial each in to showcase what they bring to the table. The MKIIB+, MKIIC++, MKIV and Recto have the Griffin Schaffer pedal in front as it adds some dynamics, and the Recto also has the Griffin Chiron klone as a boost.

The "album tone" is the one different one- it's the C+ Chiron boosted with just the E609 & SM7B. I did this a couple months ago and it's been my "reference" as I dial in the others. To me I'm happy with the aggression of this one but I think it could use more mids. The boosted tone also isn't quite as squishy as without it, for better or worse.

Anyway, here's a link to WAV files in my cloud.

What did I get right? What needs work and how so? Thanks!
Click to expand...
I just got my ++ mod back from mesa last week. I didnt really like the ++ mod until I tried your settings from the one drive. Oh my fuck that sounds crushing in the room. Just wanted to say thanks for sharing and I like all those clips.
 
creep66 said:
I just got my ++ mod back from mesa last week. I didnt really like the ++ mod until I tried your settings from the one drive. Oh my fuck that sounds crushing in the room. Just wanted to say thanks for sharing and I like all those clips.
Click to expand...
Thanks man, glad it's working out! Yeah, I've always been able to dial heavy AF room tones, but getting that to translate to the mic has been a big challenge. Reamping is required & feedback here definitely helps as I'll just get ear fatigue after a while.

I actually haven't updated the settings pics since the beginning of the thread. I just updated that folder to my current favorites.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top