Pro's and Con's of Attenuators

rze99

I've used Mainly Hotplate and Weber attenuators also for 20 years or so.

Marshal stacks, old VoxAC30s and Fender amps of all hues, mostly Deluxe Reverbs also tweeds.

All contexts, live, recording, home use. I use them literally all the time when I use these amps.

I don't use many pedals except some compressor, EQ, boost.

I use breaking up sounds and wind back the guitar volume and boost from cleanish to pretty dirty. The amp has to be at breaking up point for me to be happy.

MY NOTES IN CAPS


They can bugger amps up and don't aid their smooth running- I believe they stress the internals of amps and cause issues NOT MY EXPERIENCE BUT I DON'T FULLY CRANK TYPICALLY.The sound is nowhere near as good and whatever you do you lose parts of the high and mids. YOU LOSE TYPICALLY A LITTLE HIGH AND LOW WHICH YOU CAN EQ FOR, BUT THE WHOLE EXPERIENCE FROM CRANKED TO ATTENUATED IS PHYSICALLY VERY DIFFERENT BECAUSE YOUR BODY AND THE ROOM ALL ACT DIFFERENTLY AT LOWER VOLUMES AND CERTAINLY PERCEIVE IT DIFFERENTLY. I'VE FOUND THAT YOU DON'T NOTICE THIS MUCH WHEN CLOSE MIC'D FOR RECORDING AND FOR GIGGING THE DGREE OF ATTENUATION IS LESS ANY HOW, YOU ARE JUST TAKING AWAY THE EXCESSIVE VOLUME TO GET THE TONE.You can use certain drive pedals (e.g. Kingsley Page) as a sort of reactive load/attenuation of input signal (my terminology is probably wrong here) that actually works far better. I USE BOOST PEDALS ONLY. CURRENTLY A UNIT 67 WHICH IS TERRIFIC - THE BEST I'VE USED.Re 1 above, the natural thing to do is crank the amp and fully attenuate rather than do it subtly, which surely must cause more stress on valves and OTs etc?  I SET THE AMP AT BREAKING UP CRUNCH POINT AND GO FROM THERE. THE AMPS ARE NEVER FULLY CRANKED FOR MY TONE. NATUALLY FULLY CRANKED ALL THE TIME A LA BRIAN MAY IS GOING TO GO HARDER ON THE TUBES AND CIRCUITS.

 

Gassage

GoldenEraGuitars said:

My last experience with an attenuated amp was a Marshall 2061 and Rivera Rockcrusher. No loss of tone, sounded incredible. 

So much so I’m going back to that type of setup. 

Scott, I do acknowledge that Marshalls tend to work better than Fender styles in the way they react....or so it seems

Winny_Pooh

Limited experience with a Z Airbrake.

Sounds good with low attenuation. High attenuation makes the distortion more fizzy on the high end.

With a Suhr reactive loads the tonal effects of attenuation are less but you don't have the options to just lower the volume. It's all or nothing.

What you miss either way is the compression effect of speakers and cab at higher volumes especially alnico speakers where the highs are smoother too. 

digitalkettle

Slash'N'burn said:

Modulus_Amps said:

I think the best options for cranking amps at quite volumes are currently the Fryette power stations type device, i.e. a reactive load that then re-amps the signal to drive a guitar cab or a reactive load that you then apply IR's to and then put through studio monitors or headphones.

That sounds hellishly complicated, and how is it going to sound anything like the real thing if it's re-amped?

As @Modulus_Amps said, it's pretty simple...besides a mains supply for the Power Station, you just need one extra speaker cable. You don't even need mains power if you're using it as a load for silent recording!

However, I like to make things complicated so here's how I run it:

• guitar -> pedalboard 'pre amp' section
• pedalboard 'pre amp' section -> amp input
• amp speaker output -> Power Station input
• Power Station send -> pedalboard 'post amp' section
• pedalboard 'post amp' section -> Power Station return
• Power Station output -> Suhr ACE input (send emulated DI to PA)
• Suhr ACE output -> speaker cab

Sounds awesome: total control over gain level and volume...'post amp' effects completely downstream of the amp (no interaction with power valve overdrive)...one less microphone on stage.

It has to be said that I don't like rushing a setup

Modulus_Amps

digitalkettle said:

Slash'N'burn said:

Modulus_Amps said:

I think the best options for cranking amps at quite volumes are currently the Fryette power stations type device, i.e. a reactive load that then re-amps the signal to drive a guitar cab or a reactive load that you then apply IR's to and then put through studio monitors or headphones.

That sounds hellishly complicated, and how is it going to sound anything like the real thing if it's re-amped?

As @Modulus_Amps said, it's pretty simple...besides a mains supply for the Power Station, you just need one extra speaker cable. You don't even need mains power if you're using it as a load for silent recording!

However, I like to make things complicated so here's how I run it:

• guitar -> pedalboard 'pre amp' section
• pedalboard 'pre amp' section -> amp input
• amp speaker output -> Power Station input
• Power Station send -> pedalboard 'post amp' section
• pedalboard 'post amp' section -> Power Station return
• Power Station output -> Suhr ACE input (send emulated DI to PA)
• Suhr ACE output -> speaker cab

Sounds awesome: total control over gain level and volume...'post amp' effects completely downstream of the amp (no interaction with power valve overdrive)...one less microphone on stage.

It has to be said that I don't like rushing a setup

ha ha you just made it hellishly complicated, bet it sounds ace though

Jonathanthomas83

It's not complicated at all, genuinely. If anything, the outlay spend on something you're not going to know works for you until you've tried it, is the worst part of it all.

CHrisP86

I did a nerdy test and compared the same amp attenuated and just turned down (keeping actual volume the same by monitoring with a db meter).

They sounded very similar to me and I couldn’t say one was better than the other.

russpm

Modulus_Amps said:

Gassage said:

Modulus_Amps said:

I think the best options for cranking amps at quite volumes are currently the Fryette power stations type device, i.e. a reactive load that then re-amps the signal to drive a guitar cab or a reactive load that you then apply IR's to and then put through studio monitors or headphones.

Most of the old resistive loads just don't work well for what most guitarists want, volumes at home levels. 

@Gassage Have you tried the Fryette Power Station?

No and you're not the first person to suggest it...it appears to be excellent.

I would check it out, I have been messing with reactive loads lately and think they are a huge step forward from the old attenuator options. Its just how you re-amp them that is different. But if you want it to work like an attenuator then the Power Station appears to be the ticket.

Only thing to watch out for is the power station can put out a lot more power than a lot of amps, so you need to watch the speaker power.

Yes indeed, The Fryette PS2 works brilliantly.

TimmyO

I've had 2 very good experiences with Attenuators:

1) Marshall Power Brake - was being used with a Marshall so was well matched and made for a genuinely great home-friendly sound - far better than any small amp trying to sound like a JCM800 . Fully passive and foolproof. 

2) Two-Notes Torpedo Reload - this is actually a full-on load that dumps ALL the volume - but then feeds the signal into its own digital power amp that you send to your cab - so you now have very fine control over the volume of what's heard, as well as a low level signal to feed into recording devices. The power section also has a couple of controls for fine tuning the frequency response to 'correct' things and worked well. Requires mains power. 

wellsyboy

Boss Tube Amp Expander - first impressions are pretty good 

AndyJP

Point 3, using pedals as an attenuator. I know Marcus king uses a ts9 with his super reverb like this. 

I used a Providence sov 2 with a Supro thunderbolt (65w) and got some good results this way. Dunno if that's the best sort of pedal for it. But it's mid rangey.