NAD: Royal Atlantic

The Boogie Board

Help Support The Boogie Board:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I actually find the amp less harsh with v30s vs the c90 speaker, which was the opposite of what I had expected. I used the c90 at loud volumes at band practice and even then i just had to watch my treble/mids on vintage hi (neither past 12, at that point it got harsh).

Check the below quick speaker comparison vid i made

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZsQLCNDPg4
 
Great comments guys, thanks!

I have never really played much with speakers. I tried V30 years ago and have never run anything else since, for the most part.

I started out by using what I had - which was a 1x12 widebody ported with C90. I had tried to use one with C90 and one with V30 together with a MV:25, but it just sucked the life out of the mix. Sounded like I threw a blanket over it.

I tried the RA through the 1x12 C90 and it was MUCH better than V30. It had tons of low-end and clarity. IIRC it was still fairly tight, even though the 1x12 ported is not a very tight cab. But it didn't have any mid crunchiness and sounded kind of Hi-Fi and sterile. I added the 1x12 ported with V30 to it and got a fairly happy medium, but now too bright. The RA through V30 sounds super crisp, which I actually like, but I want way more rounded high-notes and a lot more low-end, so it just doesn't do it for me at the moment.

But that was a nice jumping-off point. I listened to tons of YT clips and decided to try a CL80 and Creamback (thanks for the advice, thumbpick). I still need to try other combinations, like CB + C90 and CB + V30, but I have rehearsal tonight and a gig Saturday, so limited time.

I have read that C90 = CL80 and also that C90 is nothing like CL80. That's the internet for you. I'll try it, but I need to get my hands on a 16-Ohm version. I will also try a couple others, as well as two creambacks in a 2x12. I also want to try a G12K85 with creamback. So many speakers...
 
thumbpick, I am playing all the channels. I use Blue for classic rock and blues and red for leads and heavy modern stuff. I think they're both great. I have the gain knob at about 1:30-2:00 which has the blue channel at reasonable gain and the red channel at a lot of gain, but not overwhelming. I run it loud, but not super power-soaked like you. Not yet, anyway :twisted:
 
OK, I rehearsed at full-volume with the new speakers (CL80 + Creamback G12H75, both used, so broken-in). Gain is set pointing at the RED mode light, about 2:00.

At moderate volume it had WAY more low-end than the V30s. I can't stress enough how this thing has so much more low end. HUGE. But a bit sterile, not much going on in the mids.

Turn it up, maybe 6-10dB below rehearsal volume and the mids really start to shimmer. There is a lot more sustain and looseness, both in the mids and lows. Way more complex mids, really starting to hear some grind.

Rehearsal volume: HOLY SMOKES. The lows are gigantic and the mid grind is full-bore, very greenback-y. There is tons of life and complexity, lots of sustain, it's downright slippery. Blue channel is more tame, but also tighter, so a great classic rock tone. I boosted the lows just a bit with EQ to even out the low-end between Blue and Red modes, as Red has TONS of low boost by comparison. I found it to have just the right amount of gain and the tone is so useable. Great channel.

Then Red winds up pretty high gain. It also has way more mid stuff going on and more lows, a lot like Mark IV mode on the Mark V. Perfect for leads, also good for modern heavy, though not really tight enough.

Overall, I want to tighten the lows, so I will try a couple more speaker combinations. But this pushed a lot more air than I've been pushing, so it really sounds and feels much bigger. I also cut everything from like 5kHz up (11kHz 2.5 Octave -6dB parametric) to make the high notes less pointy.
 
Played the RA live with this setup (Recto 2x12 with a CL80 and G12H75). I had the venue mic the G12H75.

The show went great, the guitar sounded huge. I had a blast on stage with lots of volume-compression and the sustain that goes with it.

Listened to a recorded feed from the board this morning. The G12H75 sounded great, really brown with nice crunchiness. A bit jangly with clean. That is a keeper. I will get a C90 this week to try with it. I think that two Creambacks together wouldn't give me the low-end I want, and a Creamback+V30 is certain to be too peaky in the mids.
 
OK, I have gone a different direction with cabs. I've been really struggling with the lack of low-end from the closed-back cab. I got a couple 3/4 2x12 cabs. One has C90, the other V30.

Both have WAY more low-end than the recto 2x12. The V30 cab has nice mid-grind and the lesser lew-end of the two. The C90 cab has HUGE low-end, plus the high-end scratch of the C90, with scooped mids. So the C90 sounds very clean, especially with clean tone. The V30 sounds nice and saturated in the mids but with good lows and also good for clean. Neither has the punch of the recto 2x12, but instead they have way more lows. I notice that the recto cab really trades lows for punch, even with the G12K85 speakers that are in it right now. I really liked the recto cabs with my 25W amps, but with the big amps, I seem to like the open-backs much more.

I just picked up a V30 RA 2x12 cab (thanks fjs1962!) and it splits the difference. Not as much low-end as the 3/4, but some of the punch that the 3/4 doesn't get. It also seems a bit stiff and shriek-y, so I think the V30s just need some break-in. The V30 3/4 I have has tons of hours on it, so they are really smooth.

So now my recto cabs are in the garage. Also out of favor is my 4x10. It sounded low-end heavy with the Mini Rec and the V:25, but it sounds midrange-heavy with the 90-100W amps.
 
I got the RA 2x12 running with my RA100. I didn't know what to expect with my recent V30 experience, but I am really liking it. I found these settings on the board and it just rips. It really gives my Shiva a run for the money on vintage lo, and crushes it on vintage hi.

Part of it is running the masters up and using the soaks a little. I had it SUPER LOUD. Now I am running it quieter via a Rock Crusher just to make up the difference between live and home without messing with the amp.

Lo gives good rock and 80s metal, hi is a deeper, creamier monster lead channel, but clear enough to also be a thicker rhythm channel. Paired with big reverb, this sounds huge. And no parametric EQ to get rid of screaminess. It sounds great.

Compared to my Mark V, I find that the RA and Shiva both have a more saturated, lively mid thing going on. I like it more than the V. The RA is a lot like the V in the sense that it has a great clean channel, a great crunch channel (LO) and something like a Mark IV mode, but that I like better. All the GEQ and bells and whistles on the Mark and I never got there, where the RA is just crushing it. The soaks are icing on the cake. Looks like the Mark is on the way out...



Now to get to work on setting up the clean channel...
 
Loving this amp more and more!!!

I have been using the RA 2x12 cab and it sounds amazing. For a tighter sound I switched my horizontal recto 2x12 to V30+Creamback H75 (thanks thumbpick!) and it sounds... amazing. Different, less lows, more thump, but amazing.

Adding an OD808 with just a little drive (10:30) and boost (1:30) really brings out the mid-harmonic goodness as well.

Compared to my Shiva, I am getting pretty much exactly the same clean and LO tones, plus I have HI to burn it up. This is one incredible amp. It took me a long time to figure it out, but I'm so glad I did. I just wish it had a boost...
 
I was going to suggest dropping the treble. Almost such that it points at the mid range control. The treble does not really add much but when dropped it cures the ice pick of the Lo mode. Bass, almost the same thing, point it at mid range control (or almost at it). Use the Mid to dial in your tone as it serves as mid and treble and alters the gain characteristic. The gain setting also seems to add presence to the mix. As for power tubes, that will make a huge difference in you overall sound. I prefer the SED EL34 in this amp but they are very hard to come by and if you find some they will be expensive. I found the Mesa (which are same as EH EL34) to be very bright but you can dial in a decent sound with them. Tung Sol EL34B will have a bit more bottom end and will be much louder. Mullard EL34 are very potent in the mids and top end and seem difficult to control the gain with the Hi/Lo settings. Right now I am running the Mesa EL34 and so far I am enjoying the experience. What I have not tried in this amp: 6CA7's. That would prove to be interesting when I get around to finding a good set. For a while, I was using SED 6L6GC. That is very impressive tonal bliss. I can get some similar tones from the RA100 with 6L6 as I get with the Roadster or Mark V. However, the overall tone of the RA100 is more midrange, it still sounds like I am running EL34's but with more depth on the floor. I have tried the Mesa 6L6GC-str440 and was not impressed with those tubes in the RA100. Those had that blanket over the cab tone. They are perfect for the Roadster, okay for the Mark V. I actually prefer the EL34 type tubes in the RA100. Have you tried using the clean channel as a moderate gain channel. Boost the gain control, drop the bass a bit and push up the treble. It may also help to use the multi-soak set to -4dB. If you want vintage tone that is crunchy you can get that on the clean channel. Note: does not work well with 6L6 power tubes but it is not all that bad.

I also am using a Mesa OS Recto slant 412 cab loaded with V30 and could not be happier. For a short time I did have an old Recto cab loaded with EVM12L BL but that was way too dark, especially with the clean channel. I did restore the old 412 cab back to original, so what is more exciting is running a full stack equivalent. There will be some roll off of the high frequencies and upper harmonics that cause the ice pick effect.
 
Elvis,

I have one thing to say regarding the lack of a boost. I've yet to find any amp that had a boost, that I didn't prefer a pedal to the built in boost. The reason is simple. I usually want to add some character to my boost. Depending on the base tone I'm using, I either want a mid boost, or maybe a mid/treble boost with a bass cut, etc. I don't just want a simple volume boost, which most "in amp" boost features are. Usually they add bass, which is normally the last thing I want for solos. With a pedal or two, I can add some zing, or some smooth/fat or whatever I want. I know you know all this... I know some guys just want to get away from having any pedals for gain or boost. Personally, I love to add some flavor to solo boosts.

Current favs: SHO clone, Timmy, Barber Gain Changer, Fulltone 69, and OCD.
 
So now that you've fully put it through it's paces, would you describe it as a modern high gain Marshall-ish amp?
 
Well, not having ever owned a Marshall, and not having played through one in a very long time, I'd still say yes. In this case, I am using the fact that it has a heavily saturated midrange as a guide. To me, the other Mesa amps either have a really clean/scooped midrange or a super-gravelly midrange. RA100 and Dyne fit in between those nicely.

I can get my RA100 to sound very much like my Shiva, which is supposed to be a better JCM800. It's not as brown as a DSL, but it is very complex and pleasing. Adding an OD808 with just a touch of gain really accentuates the mid complexity and tightens the lows.
 
Dreamtheaterrules said:
Elvis,

I have one thing to say regarding the lack of a boost. I've yet to find any amp that had a boost, that I didn't prefer a pedal to the built in boost. The reason is simple. I usually want to add some character to my boost. Depending on the base tone I'm using, I either want a mid boost, or maybe a mid/treble boost with a bass cut, etc. I don't just want a simple volume boost, which most "in amp" boost features are. Usually they add bass, which is normally the last thing I want for solos. With a pedal or two, I can add some zing, or some smooth/fat or whatever I want. I know you know all this... I know some guys just want to get away from having any pedals for gain or boost. Personally, I love to add some flavor to solo boosts.

Current favs: SHO clone, Timmy, Barber Gain Changer, Fulltone 69, and OCD.

Fair enough. For me, I like a perfectly clean boost, and I'll control tone via channel and pedal selection. I can kick on boost and OD808 with one button via my G System.
 
bandit2013 said:
I was going to suggest dropping the treble. Almost such that it points at the mid range control. The treble does not really add much but when dropped it cures the ice pick of the Lo mode. Bass, almost the same thing, point it at mid range control (or almost at it). Use the Mid to dial in your tone as it serves as mid and treble and alters the gain characteristic. The gain setting also seems to add presence to the mix. As for power tubes, that will make a huge difference in you overall sound. I prefer the SED EL34 in this amp but they are very hard to come by and if you find some they will be expensive. I found the Mesa (which are same as EH EL34) to be very bright but you can dial in a decent sound with them. Tung Sol EL34B will have a bit more bottom end and will be much louder. Mullard EL34 are very potent in the mids and top end and seem difficult to control the gain with the Hi/Lo settings. Right now I am running the Mesa EL34 and so far I am enjoying the experience. What I have not tried in this amp: 6CA7's. That would prove to be interesting when I get around to finding a good set. For a while, I was using SED 6L6GC. That is very impressive tonal bliss. I can get some similar tones from the RA100 with 6L6 as I get with the Roadster or Mark V. However, the overall tone of the RA100 is more midrange, it still sounds like I am running EL34's but with more depth on the floor. I have tried the Mesa 6L6GC-str440 and was not impressed with those tubes in the RA100. Those had that blanket over the cab tone. They are perfect for the Roadster, okay for the Mark V. I actually prefer the EL34 type tubes in the RA100. Have you tried using the clean channel as a moderate gain channel. Boost the gain control, drop the bass a bit and push up the treble. It may also help to use the multi-soak set to -4dB. If you want vintage tone that is crunchy you can get that on the clean channel. Note: does not work well with 6L6 power tubes but it is not all that bad.

I also am using a Mesa OS Recto slant 412 cab loaded with V30 and could not be happier. For a short time I did have an old Recto cab loaded with EVM12L BL but that was way too dark, especially with the clean channel. I did restore the old 412 cab back to original, so what is more exciting is running a full stack equivalent. There will be some roll off of the high frequencies and upper harmonics that cause the ice pick effect.

Very interesting. I kind of would like to experiment with power tubes, but if I pay for the really good ones, I will just eat them up anyway. I drive the heck out of them on this amp.

For tone controls, I agree, but I prefer the Treble at 10:30. I like to have a bit of top end. Though I may try dropping the treble and bringing up the mids a bit. If that gives me a bit more mid harmonic complexity and fills in the top, I'm sure I'll dig it.
 
I was just meaning that, while it's a nice feature, a built in boost is not a big one that I miss in the amps that don't have it because I prefer adding something to my boost anyway. If you like a flat boost in level, then it would become a really important nice and often used feature.

I have one in my PRS 2 Channel Custom 50. I thought it was going to be great and I'd use it instead of a pedal. It has adjustable level and everything, so it can be very useful. I still just prefer a pedal that I can tune to what I want. Another funny thing, it adds some bottom end, even though it's a flat level boost per PRS. I've always had the same issue with my Barber Launch Pad. It is (measurably) a FLAT boost, yet it adds bottom end on almost every amp I've tried it with. With many amps it was my "leave it on all the time" pedal because cooking V1 a little made them all sound better. And the added bottom came in handy with many. But it's always hit me funny that somehow, honest flat boost pedals add some bass and treble with many amps. I assume it has to do with the pushing of V1 or something. But, I use that more for setting a base tone, than for solos where I do not want more bass.

Anyway, just comparing notes here. No right or wrong. If you like a flat boost, the amps that have them with adjustable levels are a really nice feature.
 
Once you get some time on the amp, you may find the tubes will last much longer in this amp compared to the Mark V.
I am not quite sure how hot the tubes are biased in the RA100, but I doubt they are running as hot as they do in the Mark V.

I was considering putting the SED (aka =C=) EL34 back in as they are not as harsh as the Mesa or other tubes from New Sensor (tung sol, mallard, eh, etc...) Too bad Svetlana =C= is not producing consumer tubes any more. When the SED EL34 give up their mojo I will have to try something else. I bought a bunch of others just to give them a try, still nothing as satisfying to me as the SED EL34. The SED 6L6GC sound really great too but they were borrowed from my Mark V.
 
Dreamtheaterrules said:
I was just meaning that, while it's a nice feature, a built in boost is not a big one that I miss in the amps that don't have it because I prefer adding something to my boost anyway. If you like a flat boost in level, then it would become a really important nice and often used feature.

I have one in my PRS 2 Channel Custom 50. I thought it was going to be great and I'd use it instead of a pedal. It has adjustable level and everything, so it can be very useful. I still just prefer a pedal that I can tune to what I want. Another funny thing, it adds some bottom end, even though it's a flat level boost per PRS. I've always had the same issue with my Barber Launch Pad. It is (measurably) a FLAT boost, yet it adds bottom end on almost every amp I've tried it with. With many amps it was my "leave it on all the time" pedal because cooking V1 a little made them all sound better. And the added bottom came in handy with many. But it's always hit me funny that somehow, honest flat boost pedals add some bass and treble with many amps. I assume it has to do with the pushing of V1 or something. But, I use that more for setting a base tone, than for solos where I do not want more bass.

Anyway, just comparing notes here. No right or wrong. If you like a flat boost, the amps that have them with adjustable levels are a really nice feature.

I agree. Everyone has their preferences. I can definitely see why you would want to add EQ to a boost. I also don't really need boost per se, as I have that built into my G System. But I kind of like the boost built into some amps as well. It just seems like a great function to have if you're going sans pedals.
 
bandit2013 said:
Once you get some time on the amp, you may find the tubes will last much longer in this amp compared to the Mark V.
I am not quite sure how hot the tubes are biased in the RA100, but I doubt they are running as hot as they do in the Mark V.

I was considering putting the SED (aka =C=) EL34 back in as they are not as harsh as the Mesa or other tubes from New Sensor (tung sol, mallard, eh, etc...) Too bad Svetlana =C= is not producing consumer tubes any more. When the SED EL34 give up their mojo I will have to try something else. I bought a bunch of others just to give them a try, still nothing as satisfying to me as the SED EL34. The SED 6L6GC sound really great too but they were borrowed from my Mark V.

It will be interesting to see what you settle on.

I drive the power tubes hard, so the bias level is irrelevant. I'm sure I'll eat them.
 
I have settled on the SED EL34, problem is, they are hard to come by and considered other variants that would come close. I really do not like much of the others that are in current production. I guess the Tung Sol EL34B would be the suitable option as they are not as harsh in tone as the Mesa, EH, Mullard. At least I have plenty of EL34 type spares to use when the SED EL34 give up. It is possible to roll some preamp tubes to fix some of the harshness of the other tubes. It could be as easy as a change in PI tube.
 
I've been playing my RA100 regularly at home, rehearsals and gigs. I'm using the RA2x12 cab with one V30 and one Creamback 75. I have a G System hooked up and use it a little for post-EQ as well as effects. In the loops of the GS I have a Phase 90 EVH, Micro Vibe, OD808 and BBPre. I just added a TC Sentry. I use a G90 wireless. I play a Tom Anderson Mongrel, PRS SC245 with Cold Sweats, Stock PRS SE Navarro and a J Custom RG20127 through it.

I am happier and happier with the tone, dynamics, power, volume, etc. I am really settling in with this amp. I get a fat bottom, rich mids and lots of top. Last night I wound up dropping the treble slightly at rehearsal (it's been coming off as a bit trebly when I turn it up) and I got exactly where I wanted.

It took a lot of messing with, but the amp is fantastic. I never play my Dyne or Shiva.
 
Back
Top