I don't think I like the Mesa Traditional/Stiletto Cab

[Ermz]

So, after having used these year after year in various recording situations I find other cabs, namely the Rectifier Standard/Oversize cab to be vastly superior.

I was using a Mesa Traditional with a Triple Rectifier today, fantastic world-class quality recording gear and quite honestly none of the tones were to my liking. This cab seems to accentuate the 2 things I hate most about guitar tones. Namely:

1) Fizz.
2) Muddy/boxy low mids.

It is so hard to pull a good raw sound with these things as they require so much post processing to get right after the fact. I spent a good 2 hours or so pulling tones, but was never 100% satisfied, whereas my last exploit with a Mark IV and Mesa Oversize was a verrrry different story....

Anyone with me?

 

[Kazrog]

I will say that for metal rhythm guitars, nothing I've ever tried has beaten the Mesa Oversize cab.

 

[Nebulous]

I'm starting to really get those 2 traits coming from my Framus cab, Ermz. I must admit, the fizz is abit better now that my 400F has arrived (TODAY!).
Clips soon I hope.

I'm honestly starting to look towards an Engl cab or the Mesa OS. Something that will never leave home and I won't have to lug around.

 

[cobhc]

Marcus will be in here soon agreeing with you Ermin. I know he hates the "wooly" low mids as he terms them, that he gets from his Stiletto cab.

 

[mr.L.]

Although I love mesa boogie amps I'm generally not a fan of their cabs. They're mostly either too woolly or too bassy for me. Almost all of my favorite tones are either Marshall or ENGL cabs.

 

[Metaltastic]

Marcus will be in here soon agreeing with you Ermin. I know he hates the "wooly" low mids as he terms them, that he gets from his Stiletto cab.

Hahaha, you got that right Stee - no argument here Ermz, as you know! The fizz never bothered me too much, but that was probably because I tended to shy away pretty substantially from the dustcap, which of course only hightened the low (wooly ) mids issue. Still, I'm pretty damn proud of the tone I posted in this thread (though it still has the wooly mids issue). Can't wait to ditch it and buy a Recto cab for less money than I'll sell this one for! (cuz awesomely, Stiletto cabs go for more on the used market here since they're rarer).

However, this brings up another question that isn't too relevant to me, but I'm still curious about - I originally bought the Stiletto cab because I wanted a "standard" sized 4x12 (like Bogner, Marshall 1960v, Framus, etc.), and the Stiletto seemed the best constructed option (for the best price). So I wonder if the wooly midz problem is unique to it for some reason, or if all cabs with the similar specs (30" tall, rear-mounted V30s, birch plywood construction, no sound deadending in the inside back panel) share this ailment.

And as for Engl cabs, I'm definitely sure from all the clips I've heard that they're not for me; front-mounting speakers gives this boxiness to the tone that I don't dig (this is judging by Poidaobi and Lasse's clips, which are definitely good and work in a mix, but aren't what I'm after).

 

[DevilJaw]

yeah my line 6 spider valve 4x12 shares this problem as well, its built to the same specs as the bogner and mesa cabs, in terms of size and materials.

but i still prefer the mesa OS cab for most things.

 

[GuitarHack]

........I must admit, the fizz is abit better now that my 400F has arrived (TODAY!).
Clips soon I hope.

......

What was your previous interface? Is it possible to do a quick comparo recording a single track (maybe even some of the test DI's floating around here) with each interface with same amp settings, mic pos'n? I am interested in the difference since I am assuming that part of my fizz problem is the Firepod. From Black Neon Bob's M-Audio to FF400 comparo clips there is fefinitely a massive difference there. I am leaning toward a FF400. Worst case I will have great (from what I read here) converters to use on a dedicated pre (API 512) later on. Does the FF400 have the same converters as the FF800?.

Ermz, I agree. That's why I made the switch 6 months ago. The OS sound in the room slays the Trad. I just wish I could capture it nicely (fizzless) with a mic.

 

[Ermz]

I'm actually using the API 512c on Vox and Rhythm guitars right now and it absolutely slays. There is a collection of great pres on hand in the studio, but the APIs always seem to be my go-to for crunchier tones.

I'm pulling what I can out of the Trad, so hopefully it comes up somewhat usable. If not, there's always the Mark IV and OS cab to fix things up with.

 

[GuitarHack]

Is this at Hallam ermz? I could make the trek with my amps and Cab if you like. I would like to check out the gear.

 

[Ermz]

If only you made the offer when we started guitars yesterday . Actually it's a little too late at the moment since we've committed to tracking with what we have, but if the idea of reamping comes around I'll definitely give you a buzz. I'll be heading out for our 2nd guitars session in about 10 mins.

 

[GuitarHack]

Man. Why didn't you ask. I am free today.

 

[Nebulous]

What was your previous interface? Is it possible to do a quick comparo recording a single track (maybe even some of the test DI's floating around here) with each interface with same amp settings, mic pos'n? I am interested in the difference since I am assuming that part of my fizz problem is the Firepod. From Black Neon Bob's M-Audio to FF400 comparo clips there is fefinitely a massive difference there. I am leaning toward a FF400. Worst case I will have great (from what I read here) converters to use on a dedicated pre (API 512) later on. Does the FF400 have the same converters as the FF800?.

Ermz, I agree. That's why I made the switch 6 months ago. The OS sound in the room slays the Trad. I just wish I could capture it nicely (fizzless) with a mic.

I'll get clips up as soon as I can, though no reamping here.

Having said that, here's a run down I posted on the LORD forum yesterday when a similar topic was raised:
I recently ordered a Mackie Onyx 400F. It arrived today, so I spent the better part of the day recording a final track with the oldsetup, setting up the 400F, installing, troubleshooting and starting some recording with it. It got too late to be blasting the amp, so the final touches will have to wait untill tomorrow.
My old setup was an M-audio Delta 44 and a Presonus TubePre. Honestly, the difference between the two is not as night/ day as I expected. Having said that, the 400F is tonns better. Sure, the initial difference when comparing isn't as big as I was expecting, but it is there, and the difference is nice none the less. What I think really will make the difference is that the subtle difference is enough for me to be hearing a more clearer, transparent sound that I can make a better judgement on. Case in point, I always felt that when recording my amp, the mids were being captured as the really are, but the lows were lacking and highs were really shrill, yet dull.
Now, the low end is being captured as it appears in the room, the mids are more balanced as well as the highs, which have a new found clarity and reveal that I could even turn them up abit on the amp now without fearing Fizz-ville.

Definately not as huge of a difference as Bob had.

 

[Metaltastic]

What's the LORD forum?

And Hack, I REALLY would not get your hopes up for a noticeable difference in interfaces, since something was obviously screwed up with Bob's M-Audio (in that same thread he made a clip comparing the FF400 to the Podxt running USB, and those sounded pretty much identical, as they should). I thought we had established around here by now that preamps and especially converters make an extremely subtle difference (and will NEVER make a bad tone good, just a good tone better), cuz all the problems with my tone I can tell are from the cab and not the interface!)

 

[Nebulous]

Australian band:
http://www.ultimatemetal.com/forum/lord-38/
http://www.myspace.com/lordaus

 

[Ermz]

Yeah the recording gear doesn't make a mammoth difference, but it does subtly improve the presence and dimensionality of a sound. Essentially just renders your snapshot through a clearer lense. Better recording gear doesn't solve fizz issues - it merely represents the fizz more clearly.

I still dislike this cab. It really isn't voiced to work well with rectifiers. Triple Recs especially are too sterile/harsh for this thing. It's almost impossible to get some nice clean high-end from the tone without the wooly low mids. Get this, I'm tracking with the mids close to minimized on Chan 3, Modern Mode.

 

[Metaltastic]

Yeah the recording gear doesn't make a mammoth difference, but it does subtly improve the presence and dimensionality of a sound. Essentially just renders your snapshot through a clearer lense. Better recording gear doesn't solve fizz issues - it merely represents the fizz more clearly.

Well said!

I still dislike this cab. It really isn't voiced to work well with rectifiers. Triple Recs especially are too sterile/harsh for this thing. It's almost impossible to get some nice clean high-end from the tone without the wooly low mids. Get this, I'm tracking with the mids close to minimized on Chan 3, Modern Mode.

Nah, I had the same problems when I used my Tiny Terror with it, so it's not just the Rectifiers, though since they're such low-middy amps it exacerbates it. However, my experience is that lowering the mid control on the amp really doesn't help at all, since to my ears it sounds like it works at around 1k, far above doing any good to tame the 300-500 wool range (and I also found that the bass/low knob was beneath it, like 150-250, so lowering that didn't help either). What're you doing using Channel 3 though dude? Everything I've heard about those amps says Orange is the way to go! (identical except for a much more reasonable presence knob according to the manual)

 

[Ermz]

By 'those amps' do you mean Triple Recs or Recs in general?

 

[GuitarHack]

Yeah the recording gear doesn't make a mammoth difference, but it does subtly improve the presence and dimensionality of a sound. Essentially just renders your snapshot through a clearer lense. Better recording gear doesn't solve fizz issues - it merely represents the fizz more clearly.

I understand this.....


I am wondering if there is anything wrong with my Firepod, as in "FAULTY". With both the Trad and now the OS cab I have had fizz problems.

After all I am mic'ng a 6505 through a Mesa OS cab with a 57. Pretty standard stuff. Others with the same equipment don't seem to have the same fizz issues and strange/undefined mids. So I have tried 2 cabs, I have 2 57's and 2 different heads. All combinations yield similar results (to varying degrees). The thing I haven't ruled out is the Firepod. Maybe it is faulty?

If I was to replace the Firepod (I wouldn't buy another one) so that's why I mentioned the FF400. Understand where I am coming from now?

 

[Ermz]

I was directing my post more in a general direction, as much at Dan as you or anyone else. I understand that you think there's something more substantially wrong with your Firepod, and it's certainly worth diagnosing. Heck, even if you could get someone over to your place with a portable recording rig you might have some luck diagnosing the issue.