Jerry's EQ's

Chat about Equipment Info

Jerry's EQ's

Postby playingdead » Mon Apr 13, 2009 4:12 am

Came across this picture this morning ... shows that neither EQ is switched on on the pedal board. I wonder if he ever used them at all? If they are in their own loops, they would be always turned on. If they are wired inline with the pair of overdrives, he would have to turn to the rack and kick them on by hand when he wanted to use them.

Image
User avatar
playingdead
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1733
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2008 9:55 am
Location: Boston, MA

Re: Jerry's EQ's

Postby SarnoMusicSolutions » Mon Apr 13, 2009 5:57 am

I always understood it that each of those EQ pedals was linked to the overdrive pedal next to it for more control. But they only came on when that particular overdrive pedal was kicked on. Here it appears that he's choosing not to use the extra EQ with his dirt.


Brad
... and it's just like any other day that's ever been...
User avatar
SarnoMusicSolutions
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1071
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 6:15 pm
Location: St. Louis, MO - USA

Re: Jerry's EQ's

Postby Capt Rosebuddy » Mon Apr 13, 2009 8:59 am

This shot looks to be from the second half of '94, a year or so into the "in ear" monitor period. With no speaker cab's onstage and the rigs going more or less direct into the mix maybe Cutler found he didn't need the EQ boost on Garcia's overdrive but they kept them in the rig just in case. Personally the combination of the Bolt guitar and the new rig strategy I've always found Jerry's tone on those last few tours very thin, but some people liked it so what do I know. I have a really nice shot from Highgate in '95 but its daytime and I can't see if the EQ's are on or off.
Capt Rosebuddy
Phil
Phil
 
Posts: 314
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 9:23 am
Location: Philly

Re: Jerry's EQ's

Postby playingdead » Mon Apr 13, 2009 9:09 am

3-17-95 ...

Looks like he was having fun that night, though!

Image
User avatar
playingdead
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1733
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2008 9:55 am
Location: Boston, MA

Re: Jerry's EQ's

Postby jdsmodulus » Mon Apr 13, 2009 9:43 am

am I crazy but I dont see any rig in the pics. is there a way to zoom on the pics all I see is Jer and Mic
jdsmodulus
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1252
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 2:12 pm

Re: Jerry's EQ's

Postby myoung6923 » Mon Apr 13, 2009 10:29 am

jdsmodulus wrote:am I crazy but I dont see any rig in the pics. is there a way to zoom on the pics all I see is Jer and Mic

you have to stretch your browser over to the right
All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us

http://www.fennario.us
http://www.youtube.com/fennarioband
http://www.facebook.com/fennarioband
User avatar
myoung6923
Senior Member
 
Posts: 826
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 11:47 am
Location: South Shore, MA

Re: Jerry's EQ's

Postby jdsmodulus » Mon Apr 13, 2009 10:38 am

thanks Im on a notebook this morning and I cant minimize the headers on the left. I will try later on my PC thanks though
jdsmodulus
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1252
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 2:12 pm

Re: Jerry's EQ's

Postby tigerstrat » Mon Apr 13, 2009 10:41 am

Capt Rosebuddy wrote:Personally the combination of the Bolt guitar and the new rig strategy I've always found Jerry's tone on those last few tours very thin, but some people liked it so what do I know.


It's NOT Bolt... it IS the rig, the GD one that is. Listen to Jerry play Bolt at JGB shows in fall '93 (youtube it) and you get NONE of the crapped out tinfoil sound- just rich, warm electric tones, a la 80's/Tiger Jerry.
"There, in huge black letters, was 'The Grateful Dead'. It just... cancelled my mind out."-Garcia
User avatar
tigerstrat
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4632
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 1:20 pm
Location: Portland,OR

Re: Jerry's EQ's

Postby SarnoMusicSolutions » Mon Apr 13, 2009 11:55 am

In reference to the comment that some people liked that tone he got during that period, I honestly didn't know anybody liked it at all. I thought it was pretty universal that it was by far and away the worst tone in Jerry's history. Just awful. All glass and crisp, no body or warmth, no dimension, just plain shitty, and for a guy who had previously created, in my opinion, about the most beautiful guitar tone in history. It made me very sad in '94 when it went that way. The Trio was far from pretty in the treble response compared to his Twin, and the lack of miking and going direct instead is just an audio sin of indescribable proportion. Since the late '60s Jerry played thru JBL's. It was a critical and central part of the tone. I'd be fascinated to meet a real human who actually thinks Jerry's tone improved with that rig in '94. To me it was a real tragedy.


Brad
... and it's just like any other day that's ever been...
User avatar
SarnoMusicSolutions
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1071
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 6:15 pm
Location: St. Louis, MO - USA

Re: Jerry's EQ's

Postby Emoto » Mon Apr 13, 2009 12:18 pm

SarnoMusicSolutions wrote:In reference to the comment that some people liked that tone he got during that period, I honestly didn't know anybody liked it at all. I thought it was pretty universal that it was by far and away the worst tone in Jerry's history. Just awful. All glass and crisp, no body or warmth, no dimension, just plain shitty, and for a guy who had previously created, in my opinion, about the most beautiful guitar tone in history. It made me very sad in '94 when it went that way. The Trio was far from pretty in the treble response compared to his Twin, and the lack of miking and going direct instead is just an audio sin of indescribable proportion. Since the late '60s Jerry played thru JBL's. It was a critical and central part of the tone. I'd be fascinated to meet a real human who actually thinks Jerry's tone improved with that rig in '94. To me it was a real tragedy.


Brad


I am glad (and kind of sad) that I am not the only one who didn't dig his sound near the end...
Such a long, long time to be gone, and a short time to be there...
User avatar
Emoto
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1239
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 7:47 am
Location: SE Mass

Re: Jerry's EQ's

Postby playingdead » Mon Apr 13, 2009 12:39 pm

I think it's probably true that in the end, he had such hearing loss (and high frequencies are the first to go) that he probably couldn't really hear it anymore. Add to that having the full "studio type" mix of the band in your ears (like headphones) a bright, trebly guitar tone was going to cut that mix better than the tone we all loved. There couldn't have been any bottom to the bass in those earphone mixes, either, the whole thing must've been really trebly. Onstage before, you felt Phil as much as heard him.

Listen to those 1975 rehearsal/studio tapes that circulated last year, the guitars (particularly Bob's) are way brighter than they would have been in a live mix from that era.

Healy might've done something about it, but Healy was gone by then. I never thought Cutler had particularly good ears for guitar sounds, or the overall mix, truth be told. The bass was never loud enough, the whole things sounded more brittle than organic, like when Healy ran the board. And he sure wasn't a musician, judging by the later releases he did from the JGB shows that yielded that first double record, the later stuff (on "How Sweet it Is") was full of blown lyrics and less than stellar playing.
User avatar
playingdead
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1733
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2008 9:55 am
Location: Boston, MA

Re: Jerry's EQ's

Postby SarnoMusicSolutions » Mon Apr 13, 2009 9:27 pm

At the '94 St. Louis show, I had seats right by the board. During break I bugged Cutler for a few minutes. He was way cool to talk to that day. I flat out gave him shit about Jerry's horrible tone. He was light hearted about it all. He said they were still experimenting and they had all definitely been discussing the idea of putting a JBL cab, maybe even just a single 12" off stage somewhere in a box or case and miking it. He totally agreed that Jerry's direct tone was not right. But I also gather that it never proved to be a huge priority given the size of the overall monster they all had to deal with at the time. I don't believe that miked speaker idea ever came back into play with the Dead. Jerry did continue to use his Mc2300 and JBL's with JGB though.

I think another part of the direct (no speaker) problem was that there was no acoustical feedback to the guitar. Jerry played loud and always had an acoustic feedback loop happening. The speakers were blasting back into his guitar and strings, not always loud enough to cause a sustained feedback, but that relationship existed to some degree and should have something to do with the tone and sustain, me thinks.

Brad
... and it's just like any other day that's ever been...
User avatar
SarnoMusicSolutions
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1071
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 6:15 pm
Location: St. Louis, MO - USA

Re: Jerry's EQ's

Postby Rusty the Scoob » Tue Apr 14, 2009 9:52 am

These pics are making me miss Mike's Bolt.
User avatar
Rusty the Scoob
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2316
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 5:28 am
Location: Concord, MA


Return to Grateful Dead Equipment Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests