gypsymoth

eight 6550's - it can't not sound brutally good.

"could have been improved by employing the services"

well, yes, but realistically that ain't gonna happen, so I'll stick to preparing it all myself, and rely on the liberal application of Nuoc Mam Nhi (Vietnamese fish sauce), which I have available.

"full of mistakes and wonderful"

couldn't agree more - one of the wonderful things about music is that there is no injury or harm caused by mistakes, and often a benefit. pretty risk free compared to structural engineering, medicine, skateboarding, or paiting the eaves on your house.

Cheap Thrills, Big Brother and the Holding Company. the record that made Janis Joplin, and it wouldn't have happened without that band and record, which has been torn to pieces by those favoring technical proficiency.

those quaint english expressions are sometimes confusing.

"more", as in greater numbers, or a larger one , or the entire fish ...

hmm, never saw this thread til now.

my version of King of Angels has, well, magnificent (but simple) bass.

tune six on the link below, for a limited time only.

for those of us incapable of googling any info on this beast - is there a link to specs or something?
curious as to how it might compare to an old hiwatt 400.

there are doublenecks out there with a bass neck and a guitar neck, which would be your somplest solution. you would only have to break two of the guitar strings.

nothing quite like a quad of 88's - or a head as big as the cab.

new version with prominent tatty bass, ratty 2nd guitar, and rump a pum pum drums.

on the link below.
edit, redone without the tatty bass and ratty 2nd guitar.

four

791

the why is probably because I like amps.
if run together, my total amps and cabs is comparable to what the who, cream, or zep were running when I saw them - and running biamped or tri-amped is fun and sounds good. one can wish for the opportunity to utilize it all one day.

but what I've really got is versatility - tube amps with 34's, 6550's and 88's, and SS. the biggest is a 200, and I could run that through one 10, or pull a pair of 34's and have 50 watts in the 10, or run 16 ohms with the SS.

the Sound City 200 (kt88's) through one or two 15's is my standard/favorite as for most stuff I prefer that sound, for guitar or bass. but I switch it all around for variety.

I have a 2x10 cab with eminence gamma pro and a 2x15, which I often run as a single, with a kappa pro.

I'd go with the 15. design trade offs really hit 10's, if they are loud they don't have a wide frequency response.
but you should be able to find out what 10's are being used and compare the specs with the gamma at www.eminence.com.

a SS head rated x @ 4 ohms makes about half that power at 8 ohms.
adding a cabinet brings the load down to 4, so the power goes up to where it should. this is FAR more effective than just subbing in a 4 ohm cabinet - because you get a bigger volume benefit from more speakers than you do from more power.
with two cabs you get both (unless the outputs are wired weird).

+ 1 on more speakers.

an amp makes power - it's kinda like an engine. if you attach a 500hp Aston Martin engine to a transmission and clutch from an Austin anything, it will work. as long as you don't actually step on the gas and create power - in which case things would start breaking.
the difference is that you are likely to smoke your head if you first smoke your speakers.
but if you never step on the gas, the Aston engine isn't putting out those 500 horsies anyway, so you could get away with it.

you have my opinion backwards.
if I had a 500 watt amp, I would want a cab capable of 1000 or more watts. my biggest head is 200 watts, my cabs range from 300 to 800 watts, depending on the number of speakers I use.

if you are running an amp with double the power of your speakers ratings, and not smoking those speakers, all it means is that you are not turning it up, and are not putting out (utilizing) much of that amps power. maybe you don't need anywhere near a thousand watts - you aren't using them

if your 450 watts is rms (ss @ 4 ohms) and your two cabs (combined 4 ohms) are rated for 400 watts - I sure wouldn't turn the volume up very high.
I prefer double or quadruple speaker ratings to amp output - some people do get away with a lot less, it depends on how you play.

I think that article is quite misleading on a number of levels - it appears to be written with a home stereo in mind, with a "given" level of volume. yes, for a particular volume level a smaller amp will have to be run higher on the dial.

after that, sorry, it makes rather absurd assumptions on speaker sensitivity vs power handling, with no basis for it because there is no basis for it. my 500 watt 15" is a far more sensitive "loud" speaker than my 300 watt 10", and will be far louder with virtually ANY wattage amp. all things being equal - which they never are - I'd rather have my speakers rated waaay higher than my amps rated output, the higher the better, as long as they have sufficeient frequency response and sensitivity.

haven't got a cab like that, but have an SC200, 100, & 120. and cabs woth 10's, 12's & 15's.
so my vote is two 8 ohm jacks, so you can run with one head with either or both speaker sets - or bi-amp it

if I stumbled onto an amp called a Rockette, I'd probably grab it just for the name.

even if Rockette Morton is unaware of their existence.

space in my studio keeps me from putting amps somewhere else completely, but I put them on the cabs they are not plugged into.
maybe I'm paranoid, maybe I'm microphonic.

I recently got a couple very nice (supposedly the best version) of mullard 82/at7 and was quite underwhelmed. not that they were bad - but I don't hear why anyone would get excited about them. perhaps it is different with 83/ax7's, but I'm less prone to spend the bucks to find out now.
but as noted, the at7's are cheap enough that it's no big deal - and it's certainly not a waste.

"wanting wanton you", on the link below

added "chicken little's crying wolf"

it's certainly the intention to have them my own.
as I've never taken the time to actually learn anybody else's stuff, any coincidence is purely similarity.