Diezel VH4 Blueface

  • Thread starter Thread starter IDDQD
  • Start date Start date

Are you interested in getting "old-script" Diezel VH4 Blueface?

  • YES

  • NO

Results are only viewable after voting.
Orvillain said:
I'm sure I read an article once that said Joe Barresi has a particular Peavey amp he loves that he tries to use on everything. Might not be a 5150. Might be a Bandit for all I know.

But the intro to Jambi for example, sounds very little like a VH4 to me. I've got a similar era VH4 and it sounds nothing like it. I could buy the Uberschall in theory. I could buy the Rivera as well. In any case, it isn't predominantly VH4 to my ears; I wouldn't even say the VH4 accounts for 70% of the tone, specifically songs like Jambi and Rosetta Stoned.

I wouldn't be surprised if there were amps used that don't get talked about.
Click to expand...
Joe referred to his Peavey as a ‘Mississippi Marshall’. From the description it’s probably an old VTM/Mace or similar as these were based on JCM800s
 
merkaba said:
Joe referred to his Peavey as a ‘Mississippi Marshall’. From the description it’s probably an old VTM/Mace or similar as these were based on JCM800s
Click to expand...
It's a Peavey Mace that he keeps in the studio.
 
Orvillain said:
I'm sure I read an article once that said Joe Barresi has a particular Peavey amp he loves that he tries to use on everything. Might not be a 5150. Might be a Bandit for all I know.

But the intro to Jambi for example, sounds very little like a VH4 to me. I've got a similar era VH4 and it sounds nothing like it. I could buy the Uberschall in theory. I could buy the Rivera as well. In any case, it isn't predominantly VH4 to my ears; I wouldn't even say the VH4 accounts for 70% of the tone, specifically songs like Jambi and Rosetta Stoned.

I wouldn't be surprised if there were amps used that don't get talked about.
Click to expand...
The VH4 accounted for at the very least 50% of the over all guitar sound. The remainder was split between Adam's Marshall SB and a third track was a blended Uber/Rivera. On certain tracks the Uber/Rivera was pushed up a bit, making a more aggressive, and more "metal" (for lack of a more creative term) sound. I believe this is what you are hearing, and I understand how this could be mistaken for a 5150.
 
angelspade said:
The VH4 accounted for at the very least 50% of the over all guitar sound. The remainder was split between Adam's Marshall SB and a third track was a blended Uber/Rivera. On certain tracks the Uber/Rivera was pushed up a bit, making a more aggressive, and more "metal" (for lack of a more creative term) sound. I believe this is what you are hearing, and I understand how this could be mistaken for a 5150.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I think you're spot on actually. That is exactly what I hear. I wouldn't mind checking out a Rivera, but getting them in the UK... ehhh... very slim chance from what I can tell!
 
IDDQD said:
Very interesting video:

How to ID a Blueface Spec “Silverface” VH4

Click to expand...

Exactly like my old 2001 VH4. Outside of it feeling a bit better to play, I do prefer the "modern" VH4 which is a bit tighter and brighter and with more range on ch2 and better rythm capability on ch4.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20201215_161850_822.jpg
    IMG_20201215_161850_822.jpg
    977.8 KB · Views: 39
MARK2C said:
I had an early 98’new. It had no where near the gain of even a 2004. A Blueface vintage spec is much different circuit.
Click to expand...
This is my experience as well. (That's also my video above, haha.)

My 2004 has way more gain and is much "jucier"/saturated than the 2002.

The 2002 is just an evil sounding amp. Voiced far darker than any other VH4 I've played and not a gain monster by any means but punchy, thick, and gnarly. Less polished; more oomph. Sounds awesome.
 
My 2001 did always feel a bit undergained. I guess I know why now. My amp has some differences to the one in your video @hellzington but nothing too significant. These were my notes from when I discussed this with a mate when you put your video out.

- Hollowed out logo.
- Power switches. Mine look different to his even. My power switch is red, with markers on it. My standby switch matches his.
- Phillips screw knobs.
- My fonts match his too.
- My bright switches are long ones, not short ones.
- Mine does say master above the master volume knob.
- My faceplate finish matches his.
- My parallel loop matches his.
- My BMTVG fonts match his too.
- My power connector matches his.
- My voltage matches his too - 115v
- My serial number writing style matches his
- Mine has the big CE as well.
- Rear fonts match his too.
- My rear logo styling matches his too.
- Mine has KT77's but that's because I had my tech put them in.
- Mine was finished 19th of April 2001.

Differences in bold.
 
IDDQD said:
Well, well, well!

When will you compare those amplifiers? I really want to hear it! :)
Click to expand...
I promise I’ll work on it.

Believe it or not videos take a LONG time to complete (unless it’s a non-playing video). There’s a lot of production that has to happen then a lot of editing. The “I Am One” video I just posted took almost a week to complete.

That said I know people are interested in it so I’ll get to work!
 
Orvillain said:
My 2001 did always feel a bit undergained. I guess I know why now. My amp has some differences to the one in your video @hellzington but nothing too significant. These were my notes from when I discussed this with a mate when you put your video out.

- Hollowed out logo.
- Power switches. Mine look different to his even. My power switch is red, with markers on it. My standby switch matches his.
- Phillips screw knobs.
- My fonts match his too.
- My bright switches are long ones, not short ones.
- Mine does say master above the master volume knob.
- My faceplate finish matches his.
- My parallel loop matches his.
- My BMTVG fonts match his too.
- My power connector matches his.
- My voltage matches his too - 115v
- My serial number writing style matches his
- Mine has the big CE as well.
- Rear fonts match his too.
- My rear logo styling matches his too.
- Mine has KT77's but that's because I had my tech put them in.
- Mine was finished 19th of April 2001.

Differences in bold.
Click to expand...
This is super cool thanks for posting it.

I’ve seen a lot of different power switches on older ones too. Some have the red one you’re describing. They’re all different than the current production though. I wonder if it’s just a supply thing? Or maybe that the amp was originally made for Europe? Would love to know if anyone from Diezel proper wants to chime in.

Interesting about the bright switches too. I noticed those changed a lot in the early days too. Maybe same issue with supply.
 
With all due respect to hellzington, that video is well-intentioned and very informative regarding the aesthetic details, but the 2002 VH4 in the video is not Blueface spec. A very good sounding amp, no doubt, but also very different than what is being claimed in the video. I even went so far as to join this message board just to try and set the record straight.
 
Higgs said:
With all due respect to hellzington, that video is well-intentioned and very informative regarding the aesthetic details, but the 2002 VH4 in the video is not Blueface spec. A very good sounding amp, no doubt, but also very different than what is being claimed in the video. I even went so far as to join this message board just to try and set the record straight.
Click to expand...

What evidence do you have?
 
I meant no disrespect with my comments, but my evidence is over 770 pics of Diezels archived over the past 20+ years and my participation in builder forums going back just as far. Here's some of the rundown in general terms.

Confirmed in a '96 BF: this amp had a tube in position V2 using both tube halves for the original version of Ch1. Also, V3B was in circuit and used for Ch3 2nd stage, which would eventually be removed in future revisions. As far as external indicators, on the front panel there was only a single 3-pos bright switch for Ch1 on this amp. The input tube was also arranged with a cathode follower, but not for all channels. Plate resistors and bypass capacitors are slightly different values than all amps from the late '90s to current. (Have not yet verified a specific year for the changeover.)

There are transition BF amps (likely late '90s, specific years unverified, again) with the original Ch1 completely redesigned (similar to current). These amps use half of V2 as an input stage parallel to the normal V1 input stage, and have two 2-pos bright switches on the front panel, but also continue to use the V3B for Ch3, keeping this channel nearly the same as above, but with slightly different part values all over the place. The input CF may or may not be in these amps.

As of '00 (and potentially earlier) V2 is no longer installed. Input CF is out of circuit from here, going forward. These amps now have V3B out of circuit, changing Ch3 from 4 to 3 gain stages in the preamp along with a TON of other small changes, especially year to year. This is confirmed in '00, '01, & '04 stock amps. The '02 in the video would be similar to these, with minor changes throughout.

And for another bit of fun, there are also amps out there with original blue faceplates that were updated, per owner request, to whatever the current spec was at the given time they were serviced. There are also relatively minor factory-modded variants of everything outlined above.
 
Higgs said:
I meant no disrespect with my comments, but my evidence is over 770 pics of Diezels archived over the past 20+ years and my participation in builder forums going back just as far. Here's some of the rundown in general terms.

Confirmed in a '96 BF: this amp had a tube in position V2 using both tube halves for the original version of Ch1. Also, V3B was in circuit and used for Ch3 2nd stage, which would eventually be removed in future revisions. As far as external indicators, on the front panel there was only a single 3-pos bright switch for Ch1 on this amp. The input tube was also arranged with a cathode follower, but not for all channels. Plate resistors and bypass capacitors are slightly different values than all amps from the late '90s to current. (Have not yet verified a specific year for the changeover.)

There are transition BF amps (likely late '90s, specific years unverified, again) with the original Ch1 completely redesigned (similar to current). These amps use half of V2 as an input stage parallel to the normal V1 input stage, and have two 2-pos bright switches on the front panel, but also continue to use the V3B for Ch3, keeping this channel nearly the same as above, but with slightly different part values all over the place. The input CF may or may not be in these amps.

As of '00 (and potentially earlier) V2 is no longer installed. Input CF is out of circuit from here, going forward. These amps now have V3B out of circuit, changing Ch3 from 4 to 3 gain stages in the preamp along with a TON of other small changes, especially year to year. This is confirmed in '00, '01, & '04 stock amps. The '02 in the video would be similar to these, with minor changes throughout.

And for another bit of fun, there are also amps out there with original blue faceplates that were updated, per owner request, to whatever the current spec was at the given time they were serviced. There are also relatively minor factory-modded variants of everything outlined above.
Click to expand...
Thanks for sharing this info, good stuff. And welcome to RT.

I will defer to you on the circuitry because I know nothing about it and I have not pulled the chassis on my 2002. All I can tell you is that it’s a completely different amp than the 2004. Less compression, less negative feedback, less gain, far darker, much punchier and less saturated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top