hey brad in my experience that really hasn't been the case. I got a 67 twin twin that has been preamped to the specs on dozin's page. The tone on it is really thick and full, it is a super fat tone, if you know what im saying. There's been a bunch of times that I've had to run it direct into a pa. I only did it once at a gig but for practice there was a few bit that I didn't have a cab so i ran it direct. It obbiously didn't sound as good it does through a mic'd cab but it definitely did not sound like the 94-95 tone. It was for sure a little thinner, but still sounded nice and thick.SarnoMusicSolutions wrote:Thanks for bringing it back home JonnyBoy.
Indeed, on the topic of "how" to achieve that sound, to sum it up again, it really can be broken down quite simply. You can basically take your Jerry tube preamp rig, whether it's a Twin, A Trio, an SMS, etc. and instead of using JBL's (or similar), just use a PA speaker with a horn/tweeter. That's the fundamental difference. The DI sound is crispy because the signal is being delivered full-range instead of darkened and warmed and colored by a 12" JBL guitar speaker. It's that basic, really.
My other preamp is a Tubeworks real tube preamp, which I think is more like jerry's groove tube pre than the actual twin.
The problem with the TW is that its hard to make the preamp not sound like the 94 "icepick" tone no matter what its plugged into. It sounds way better through my mc2120 and some JBL's no doubt, but it still needs to be set just right or it's gonna sound like 94-95.
I don't know, those vintage twin preamps just sound fkn awesome plugged into pretty much anything. They got that fat tone that is just sick.
What is the difference between the TW and the twin? is the circuit similar at all? I've heard it is the same basic circuit just like the trio is. Is that true at all? I've used a trio once and I thought it sounded very similar to the tubeworks. what do you do to your pre to fatten up the tone so it comares to a vintage? I really really want to try one of you preamps & i'm definitely gonna buy one when I got a little more loot together.
Do you really think that jerry's tone still would have been thin like that if he kept using his twins? I think his tone would have been much thicker if he used his twin's but he didn't want that tone anymore.
Jerry was clearly going for that thin, acoustic tone. There is no way he just arrived at that tone on accident, we can debate on whether or not he acheived the tone he was going for, but he was definitely going for that tone intentionally. Listen to so many roads, lazy river road and songs like that. Those songs were clearly written for that acoustic tone and Jerry's tone sounds great in those songs. He clearly wasn't ever goin back to the twin, he was moving forward. That was one of the coolest things about Garcia, he was always pushing the envelope and doing new things. The Grateful Deal was always doing something new. He was still writing incredible songs, some of his best; So Many Roads, Black Muddy River/ These songs are just awesome and they fit his new guitar tone just perfectly.
94-95 had a lot of trainwrecks but you guys should really go back and have a listen, there are a lot of gem's in there. His icepick tone sounded kinda shitty sometimes, but there were other times that it just sounded awesome, really awesome