Help me decide!!! Accomplice vs. Old Flame

Hucklebilly · January 5th, 2005, 06:40 PM

I've been saving my pennies for a couple of years for an Allen Accomplice (at least that was the plan). I have a Twin and want a smaller, lighter, lower powered amp to play small clubs. I've been playing a friends 64 BF Deluxe, which is a nice amp, but I want something with a little more "oomph." I'm primarily after a big fat round clean tone, but with the option of adding a little hair if needed. I started thinking about getting an Accomplice with a 15'' speaker and maybe even upgrading the transformer to 40 watts, which David Allen offers as an option. But then it occured to me that I'd basically have an Old Flame. So then I started considering the Old Flame, which is a little more money, but has a switchable pre-amp to 25 watts, and a reverb with dwell and tone controls. Pretty neat. But then I started to wonder if I'm getting to close to the Twin and away from the original idea of a small low-powered amp. OK. Now return to the beginning of this cycle of reasoning and repeat ad infinitum...

Is this what they mean by "paralysis through analysis." Help!

KBR · January 5th, 2005, 07:38 PM

Yo Huck,

I have 2 Old Flames and a Brown Sugar (30 Watts, cathode biased w/ Verb) and I really like the Old Flames best.
40 watts, but w the Raw control, you can dial in awesome breakup w/o killing anyone in the club.

I use all Heads w 2 2x12 Weber Alnico's and a 4x10
alnico's.
(One Amp per Gig, unless Outdoor Fests)
You may want the accomplice w 1x15 and 30 watt option.

?
Can't lose w/ either Amp. Imho.
Best Amps I have ever used, Tone For Days & reliable.

8)

Jim Collins · January 5th, 2005, 08:16 PM

I have an Old Flame and an Accomplice (and a TONESavor, as well). The newest of these is the Old Flame, which is a 2000 model, so these amps don't have all of the features the new ones have.

My Old Flame has a Vibrolux Reverb sized output transformer, which may be smaller than David is offering in the Old Flame, right now. I happen to prefer the smaller OT, in this amp. It gives the amp more of a Vibrolux Reverb type of feel, which is what I was going after, when I built it. The larger OT will give you a stronger, cleaner bottom and top, with later breakup.

With a 40 watt Old Flame, you are still far enough away from Twin Reverb territory. It is closer to Pro Reverb territory than Twin.

My Accomplice is one of the very first ones. This was back when it was 6V6 only, with no raw mode. It has a larger output transformer -- a Vibrolux Reverb sized OT, rather than a Deluxe Reverb, so, even at 18 watts, it has more oomph than a BF Deluxe Reverb has. Depending upon the speaker you put in it, it could have even more. For instance, a Weber California would give an 18 watt Accomplice all kinds of bottom end. (I had a California in my Accomplice, for a while. It actually had too much bottom end -- all clean -- for me.)

I did play small clubs with the Accomplice, and it hung in there very well, as long as I got the amp up off the floor. Still, I got more club use out of my Old Flame.

The Accomplice is one of my favorite Tele amps, especially if I want the Tele to scream, a la Roy Buchanan, but without causing bleeding from the eardrums.

Hucklebilly · January 5th, 2005, 09:41 PM

I definitely want the strong clean bottom.

Just don't get me started about whether to go for the combo or the head....

RWB · January 5th, 2005, 11:27 PM

My Old Flame is a 2x10 that I built in the summer of 2003. I love this amp. Lately I've had it in low power mode with a pair of NOS 6V6's and it sounds wonderful. I really appreciate all the little touches like the 3-knob reverb, hi/lo preamp voltage setting, even the dual input jacks with the different sensitivity. This is definitely my recommendation.

I'm looking at a slightly different question, that is which one to go for next. I really enjoy the kit experience which helps (and saves some money), so I'm looking at the Brown Sugar single 15 combo vs a 1x12 Accomplice. I really don't think you can go far wrong with any choice. And come to think of it, a head version does provide lots of other options.

Rick Towne · January 6th, 2005, 01:08 AM

I have two early narrow chassis 6L6 Old Flames, and three combo cabis: 1x12 (currently reassessing speaker), 2x10
(Weber alnico blue dogs), and 4x10 (Weber P10Q's), both gotten used as 2x10's for $800. They are quire different in each cabinet. One is a great quasi Super Reverb/Tweed Bassman (depending on the master/raw/EQ settings), one a quasi EL84/Brad Paisley style, and the 1x12 is currently undetermined (maybe a California on the way). These are the best all purpose reasonably priced amps I've seen, heard or played through.

Jim L · January 6th, 2005, 12:07 PM

I'll try the Allen amps first. What I like about my Holland is that it gives me great BF Super tone in a small package, is boutique-ish in that it's not PCB, and offers a great 2-knob reverb.

I've been on the fence about a DR, but I think an Allen Accomplice would make more since, considering the prices of even the SF DRs. Plus, the "added features" like being able to drop in 6L6 tubes with rebiasing, the raw switch, master volume, etc make the amp much more versatile, I think. And folks who own them seem extremely happy with both the quality and the service David Allen provides.

sshan25 · January 6th, 2005, 01:40 PM

Both amps are great. I had an Accomplice once (a very early one with a smaller cab). It had great tone but not a lot of headroom. I've been finding that my best results in maxing bottom & top end in 6L6 amps comes from matching single coil equipped guitars to 1 x 15" amps and humbuckers to 2 x 10"'s. Of course this could just be my specific gear. If I need to use both types of guitars, I'll default to a 1 X12" as the best compromise.

Hucklebilly · January 6th, 2005, 04:15 PM

Thanks for all the input. I'm leaning more and more toward an Old Flame with a 15.

KBR · January 6th, 2005, 04:21 PM

Then if you go 1x15 Huck, what speaker a Killer Weber P15N (50 watt) or a California 15, clean and mean?

8) 8)

I have owned both and usually I like the Alnico P15N, BUT since the Old Flame or you could maybe get my Brown Sugar Head, They both have the raw control
so you can dial in some good usuable distortion!
In that case go with a CA 15, and use the raw on 1-2
range.
OR if you have a Job, (other than Music) you can get an Alnico CA 15...
decisions, dude

KBR
Tone Dog

freddieking · January 6th, 2005, 05:20 PM

Go for the Old Flame. I am using one with a 2x12 cab or a 4x10 cab. Have probably played 20 gigs with it now and have been asked by several other players what kind of amp it is. They want one. Our drummer has also commented on what a full sounding amp it is said it blows my 66 Super out of the water.

Hucklebilly · January 6th, 2005, 05:24 PM

You're killin me here!!! Now I'm gonna start obsessing over speakers!

My inclination is to go for something pretty hefty and let what ever distortion I get come from the tubes rather than the speaker. I've heard nothing but good things about the Weber California. I think David Allen includes that as an option with the Old Flame. I didn't realize they made and alnico version. Is it really a big difference?

Tom P. · January 6th, 2005, 07:32 PM

The Old Flame is a great "mid-size" option. I'd take the Sweet Spot over the Accomplice for a smaller amp.
Don't sweat the speaker. The stock Allen 10's are excellent. Used Webers are easily available and swapping different flavors is easy to do.

sshan25 · January 7th, 2005, 09:46 AM

I put one in my Peavey Delta Blues and it changed my whole opinion of that amp from ok to "wow". Still, as was said above, the stock Allen speakers are great too.

Jim L · January 7th, 2005, 10:41 AM

sshan25,
I had a chance to pick up a slightly used Cali 15 for my Delta Blues but just got too caught up with other stuff at the time and it never happened. I find the PV DB stock speaker is fine until I crank the amp. Play with it outdoors in the fall and was able to open it up, but I got some ugly speaker distortion...

Sounds like the Weber Cali really IS the one to try in there...

dwdyer · January 7th, 2005, 05:26 PM

I think it does depend on what you're after. For a loud tone with little speaker breakup, the higher-powered speakers like the California are the way to go. If you're looking for speaker breakup as part of your tone, then lower-powered speakers are generally the choice. For something like the Old Flame, if you're going with 6L6s, and if your previous setup experienced speaker breakup that you didn't like, I'd probably lean towards the ceramic, high-rated speakers like the California.

Basically the speaker headroom lineup goes:

alnico --> low-power ceramic --> high power ceramic

I haven't played a high-power alnico, but it's going to fit somewhere in there. :) I'm pretty sure it's going to be above the low-power ceramic, though.

-W-

Doug T. · January 7th, 2005, 11:28 PM

i was pondering over the same thing myself about 6 months ago ..... I went with the Old Flame 2x10 with 6V6s in it.

I liked the "extra" features the Old Flame had ... like the BF (Hi) / Tweed (Lo) voltage switch and aluminum chassis (no rust!).

Haven't regretted it one bit so far!! :-)

I don't think you could go wrong with either amp, though ...

Jim Collins · January 8th, 2005, 12:46 AM

Do not make the mistake of thinking that a high powered speaker is automatically a clean speaker at higher volumes. The speaker's power rating is really a measure of its ability to dissipate heat, not a measure of its sonic characteristics.

The Weber California is a very clean speaker, and an efficient one. I have also used a Weber Chicago, another high powered speaker. This was not a clean speaker, by any means. It had surprisingly early breakup, which is what it was designed to do. It could handle 80 watts, though.

KBR · January 8th, 2005, 01:16 AM

Jim,
Is a Chicago alnico?
Have you heard a CA alnico?

thx,
KBR

stevieboy · January 8th, 2005, 02:01 AM

I have an Accomplice with 1 12 and it's a great little amp. I take it to blues jams (can you say "LOUD"?) and with the 6L6's it holds its own even when things start to get out of hand volume wise. With the master volume, the volume, and the raw controls, as well as the reverb tone control, not to mention the ability to use 6v6's or 6l6's, you can get a wide range of tones out of it. it's good with every guitar I've played through it--tele, strat, P90 Gibsons, and ES-335. Not that it's a better choice for you than an Old Flame, it has all that stuff too. Heck, I'd like to have an Old Flame myself. But I got the Accomplice and I'm not the least bit sorry.

Jim Collins · January 8th, 2005, 12:59 PM

The Chicago is ceramic. If I recall correctly, I ordered the Chicago with a Q cone. It had an interesting sound, but it had cone cry like crazy, so I couldn't use it. At the time, I was playing humbucker guitars, a lot. For me, if the speaker had any tendency toward cone cry, a humbucker guitar would reveal that tendency, right away. A single coil guitar might not have revealed it. These days, I rarely play humbuckers, so I might never have noticed the tendency toward cone cry, in that speaker.

I have not heard a CA alnico. It would be interesting. The CA12 that I have tried in a couple of 1x12 amps has a paper dustcap. I bought it with the paper dustcap because I was concerned that the stock aluminum dustcap might cause the speaker to have too much high end. This speaker is a good sounding speaker, with a huge bottom end, but it didn't have enough on top for either of the two 1x12 amps in which I tried it -- Accomplice (early, 18 watt, 6V6 only version) and Victoria tweed Deluxe.

One of the things I've recently discovered, for myself, is mixing alnico and ceramic speakers in the same combo. I recently built a tweed Super (2x10), and tried a few different speakers in it. I tried a pair of Allen C1045 speakers (ceramic), and I tried a pair of Eminence L102 speakers (alnico). The Allens sounded huge, with a big bottom. (I had these speakers in my Old Flame, and in a seperate 2x10 cab.) They were quite loud, in the tweed Super, with rather late breakup. The L012 speakers, on the other hand, were not loud, at all, and sounded very compressed, with rather early breakup. (I made sure that all speakers were sufficiently broken in before making any judgements.) Then, I decided to try one C1045 and one L102 in the tweed Super. That woke up the beast. The C1045 gave a strong, clean bottom end, and the L102 gave the nicest, smooth breakup on the top end. This was the sound I was looking for. It sounded so good that I tried the same combination of speakers in my Old Flame. The results were more of the same.

I'm sold on the potential of mixing alnico and ceramic speakers in the same cab. Of course, if you mike your amps, you might be better off putting some distance between the amp and mike, in order to get the mixture.

Jim Collins · January 8th, 2005, 01:02 PM

About my Accomplice... It is an early one -- 6V6 only, with no option for 6L6 tubes. As such, it is an 18 watt, 1x12 fire breather. My old band used to host a blues jam session at a small club, and I would frequently bring the Accomplice. I got off stage, once, and a patron asked me how powerful that amp was. When I told him 18 watts, his jaw hit the floor. I use no pedals, and the speaker in the amp is a Reverend Alltone 1250. With a Telecaster, this amp is huge.

January 5th, 2005, 06:40 PM	#1 (permalink)
Hucklebilly Tele-Holic Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 821 2 Photos	Help me decide!!! Accomplice vs. Old Flame I've been saving my pennies for a couple of years for an Allen Accomplice (at least that was the plan). I have a Twin and want a smaller, lighter, lower powered amp to play small clubs. I've been playing a friends 64 BF Deluxe, which is a nice amp, but I want something with a little more "oomph." I'm primarily after a big fat round clean tone, but with the option of adding a little hair if needed. I started thinking about getting an Accomplice with a 15'' speaker and maybe even upgrading the transformer to 40 watts, which David Allen offers as an option. But then it occured to me that I'd basically have an Old Flame. So then I started considering the Old Flame, which is a little more money, but has a switchable pre-amp to 25 watts, and a reverb with dwell and tone controls. Pretty neat. But then I started to wonder if I'm getting to close to the Twin and away from the original idea of a small low-powered amp. OK. Now return to the beginning of this cycle of reasoning and repeat ad infinitum... Is this what they mean by "paralysis through analysis." Help!

January 5th, 2005, 07:38 PM	#2 (permalink)
KBR Tele-Holic Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 662 10 Photos	either one! Yo Huck, I have 2 Old Flames and a Brown Sugar (30 Watts, cathode biased w/ Verb) and I really like the Old Flames best. 40 watts, but w the Raw control, you can dial in awesome breakup w/o killing anyone in the club. I use all Heads w 2 2x12 Weber Alnico's and a 4x10 alnico's. (One Amp per Gig, unless Outdoor Fests) You may want the accomplice w 1x15 and 30 watt option. ? Can't lose w/ either Amp. Imho. Best Amps I have ever used, Tone For Days & reliable. 8) __________________ KBR http://home.earthlink.net/~blueray/

January 5th, 2005, 09:41 PM	#4 (permalink)
Hucklebilly Tele-Holic Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 821 2 Photos	Big Bottom I definitely want the strong clean bottom. Just don't get me started about whether to go for the combo or the head....

January 5th, 2005, 11:27 PM	#5 (permalink)
RWB TDPRI Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: Canada Posts: 19	Old Flame is a great amp... My Old Flame is a 2x10 that I built in the summer of 2003. I love this amp. Lately I've had it in low power mode with a pair of NOS 6V6's and it sounds wonderful. I really appreciate all the little touches like the 3-knob reverb, hi/lo preamp voltage setting, even the dual input jacks with the different sensitivity. This is definitely my recommendation. I'm looking at a slightly different question, that is which one to go for next. I really enjoy the kit experience which helps (and saves some money), so I'm looking at the Brown Sugar single 15 combo vs a 1x12 Accomplice. I really don't think you can go far wrong with any choice. And come to think of it, a head version does provide lots of other options.

January 6th, 2005, 01:08 AM	#6 (permalink)
Rick Towne Tele-Holic Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Woodland Hills, CA Posts: 825	Old Flame all the way.... I have two early narrow chassis 6L6 Old Flames, and three combo cabis: 1x12 (currently reassessing speaker), 2x10 (Weber alnico blue dogs), and 4x10 (Weber P10Q's), both gotten used as 2x10's for $800. They are quire different in each cabinet. One is a great quasi Super Reverb/Tweed Bassman (depending on the master/raw/EQ settings), one a quasi EL84/Brad Paisley style, and the 1x12 is currently undetermined (maybe a California on the way). These are the best all purpose reasonably priced amps I've seen, heard or played through.

January 5th, 2005, 08:16 PM	#3 (permalink)
Jim Collins Tele-Meister Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 309	I have an Old Flame and an Accomplice (and a TONESavor, as well). The newest of these is the Old Flame, which is a 2000 model, so these amps don't have all of the features the new ones have. My Old Flame has a Vibrolux Reverb sized output transformer, which may be smaller than David is offering in the Old Flame, right now. I happen to prefer the smaller OT, in this amp. It gives the amp more of a Vibrolux Reverb type of feel, which is what I was going after, when I built it. The larger OT will give you a stronger, cleaner bottom and top, with later breakup. With a 40 watt Old Flame, you are still far enough away from Twin Reverb territory. It is closer to Pro Reverb territory than Twin. My Accomplice is one of the very first ones. This was back when it was 6V6 only, with no raw mode. It has a larger output transformer -- a Vibrolux Reverb sized OT, rather than a Deluxe Reverb, so, even at 18 watts, it has more oomph than a BF Deluxe Reverb has. Depending upon the speaker you put in it, it could have even more. For instance, a Weber California would give an 18 watt Accomplice all kinds of bottom end. (I had a California in my Accomplice, for a while. It actually had too much bottom end -- all clean -- for me.) I did play small clubs with the Accomplice, and it hung in there very well, as long as I got the amp up off the floor. Still, I got more club use out of my Old Flame. The Accomplice is one of my favorite Tele amps, especially if I want the Tele to scream, a la Roy Buchanan, but without causing bleeding from the eardrums.

January 6th, 2005, 12:07 PM	#7 (permalink)
Jim L Tele-Meister Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Merrimac, MA Posts: 378 13 Photos	I think if I ever get a BF style amp again... I'll try the Allen amps first. What I like about my Holland is that it gives me great BF Super tone in a small package, is boutique-ish in that it's not PCB, and offers a great 2-knob reverb. I've been on the fence about a DR, but I think an Allen Accomplice would make more since, considering the prices of even the SF DRs. Plus, the "added features" like being able to drop in 6L6 tubes with rebiasing, the raw switch, master volume, etc make the amp much more versatile, I think. And folks who own them seem extremely happy with both the quality and the service David Allen provides.

January 6th, 2005, 01:40 PM	#8 (permalink)
sshan25 Tele-Meister Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albion, RI Posts: 125	Maybe it comes down to the speaker (s) Both amps are great. I had an Accomplice once (a very early one with a smaller cab). It had great tone but not a lot of headroom. I've been finding that my best results in maxing bottom & top end in 6L6 amps comes from matching single coil equipped guitars to 1 x 15" amps and humbuckers to 2 x 10"'s. Of course this could just be my specific gear. If I need to use both types of guitars, I'll default to a 1 X12" as the best compromise. __________________ There's no such thing as too many guitars

January 6th, 2005, 04:15 PM	#9 (permalink)
Hucklebilly Tele-Holic Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 821 2 Photos	Thanks Thanks for all the input. I'm leaning more and more toward an Old Flame with a 15.

January 6th, 2005, 04:21 PM	#10 (permalink)
KBR Tele-Holic Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 662 10 Photos	Allen Amps Then if you go 1x15 Huck, what speaker a Killer Weber P15N (50 watt) or a California 15, clean and mean? 8) 8) I have owned both and usually I like the Alnico P15N, BUT since the Old Flame or you could maybe get my Brown Sugar Head, They both have the raw control so you can dial in some good usuable distortion! In that case go with a CA 15, and use the raw on 1-2 range. OR if you have a Job, (other than Music) you can get an Alnico CA 15... decisions, dude KBR Tone Dog __________________ KBR http://home.earthlink.net/~blueray/

January 6th, 2005, 05:20 PM	#11 (permalink)
freddieking TDPRI Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 24	Go for the Old Flame. I am using one with a 2x12 cab or a 4x10 cab. Have probably played 20 gigs with it now and have been asked by several other players what kind of amp it is. They want one. Our drummer has also commented on what a full sounding amp it is said it blows my 66 Super out of the water.

January 6th, 2005, 05:24 PM	#12 (permalink)
Hucklebilly Tele-Holic Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 821 2 Photos	More choices? You're killin me here!!! Now I'm gonna start obsessing over speakers! My inclination is to go for something pretty hefty and let what ever distortion I get come from the tubes rather than the speaker. I've heard nothing but good things about the Weber California. I think David Allen includes that as an option with the Old Flame. I didn't realize they made and alnico version. Is it really a big difference?

January 6th, 2005, 07:32 PM	#13 (permalink)
Tom P. Tele-Holic Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Eastern Ct. Posts: 909	My $.02..... The Old Flame is a great "mid-size" option. I'd take the Sweet Spot over the Accomplice for a smaller amp. Don't sweat the speaker. The stock Allen 10's are excellent. Used Webers are easily available and swapping different flavors is easy to do. __________________ Just Pickin'

January 7th, 2005, 09:46 AM	#14 (permalink)
sshan25 Tele-Meister Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albion, RI Posts: 125	I'll 2'nd the California I put one in my Peavey Delta Blues and it changed my whole opinion of that amp from ok to "wow". Still, as was said above, the stock Allen speakers are great too. __________________ There's no such thing as too many guitars

January 7th, 2005, 10:41 AM	#15 (permalink)
Jim L Tele-Meister Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Merrimac, MA Posts: 378 13 Photos	Weber Cali sshan25, I had a chance to pick up a slightly used Cali 15 for my Delta Blues but just got too caught up with other stuff at the time and it never happened. I find the PV DB stock speaker is fine until I crank the amp. Play with it outdoors in the fall and was able to open it up, but I got some ugly speaker distortion... Sounds like the Weber Cali really IS the one to try in there...

January 7th, 2005, 05:26 PM	#16 (permalink)
dwdyer Tele-Meister Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 148 2 Photos	Speaker preference I think it does depend on what you're after. For a loud tone with little speaker breakup, the higher-powered speakers like the California are the way to go. If you're looking for speaker breakup as part of your tone, then lower-powered speakers are generally the choice. For something like the Old Flame, if you're going with 6L6s, and if your previous setup experienced speaker breakup that you didn't like, I'd probably lean towards the ceramic, high-rated speakers like the California. Basically the speaker headroom lineup goes: alnico --> low-power ceramic --> high power ceramic I haven't played a high-power alnico, but it's going to fit somewhere in there. :) I'm pretty sure it's going to be above the low-power ceramic, though. -W-

January 7th, 2005, 11:28 PM	#17 (permalink)
Doug T. Tele-Meister Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 118	i was pondering over the same thing myself about 6 months ago ..... I went with the Old Flame 2x10 with 6V6s in it. I liked the "extra" features the Old Flame had ... like the BF (Hi) / Tweed (Lo) voltage switch and aluminum chassis (no rust!). Haven't regretted it one bit so far!! :-) I don't think you could go wrong with either amp, though ...

January 8th, 2005, 12:46 AM	#18 (permalink)
Jim Collins Tele-Meister Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 309	Do not make the mistake of thinking that a high powered speaker is automatically a clean speaker at higher volumes. The speaker's power rating is really a measure of its ability to dissipate heat, not a measure of its sonic characteristics. The Weber California is a very clean speaker, and an efficient one. I have also used a Weber Chicago, another high powered speaker. This was not a clean speaker, by any means. It had surprisingly early breakup, which is what it was designed to do. It could handle 80 watts, though.

January 8th, 2005, 01:16 AM	#19 (permalink)
KBR Tele-Holic Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 662 10 Photos	Chicago Jim, Is a Chicago alnico? Have you heard a CA alnico? thx, KBR __________________ KBR http://home.earthlink.net/~blueray/

January 8th, 2005, 02:01 AM	#20 (permalink)
stevieboy Friend of Leo's Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: the valley Age: 57 Posts: 2,503 6 Photos	I have an Accomplice with 1 12 and it's a great little amp. I take it to blues jams (can you say "LOUD"?) and with the 6L6's it holds its own even when things start to get out of hand volume wise. With the master volume, the volume, and the raw controls, as well as the reverb tone control, not to mention the ability to use 6v6's or 6l6's, you can get a wide range of tones out of it. it's good with every guitar I've played through it--tele, strat, P90 Gibsons, and ES-335. Not that it's a better choice for you than an Old Flame, it has all that stuff too. Heck, I'd like to have an Old Flame myself. But I got the Accomplice and I'm not the least bit sorry. __________________ "One of the best bands ever. These guys were such perfectionist"--Youtube user comment

January 8th, 2005, 12:59 PM	#21 (permalink)
Jim Collins Tele-Meister Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 309	The Chicago is ceramic. If I recall correctly, I ordered the Chicago with a Q cone. It had an interesting sound, but it had cone cry like crazy, so I couldn't use it. At the time, I was playing humbucker guitars, a lot. For me, if the speaker had any tendency toward cone cry, a humbucker guitar would reveal that tendency, right away. A single coil guitar might not have revealed it. These days, I rarely play humbuckers, so I might never have noticed the tendency toward cone cry, in that speaker. I have not heard a CA alnico. It would be interesting. The CA12 that I have tried in a couple of 1x12 amps has a paper dustcap. I bought it with the paper dustcap because I was concerned that the stock aluminum dustcap might cause the speaker to have too much high end. This speaker is a good sounding speaker, with a huge bottom end, but it didn't have enough on top for either of the two 1x12 amps in which I tried it -- Accomplice (early, 18 watt, 6V6 only version) and Victoria tweed Deluxe. One of the things I've recently discovered, for myself, is mixing alnico and ceramic speakers in the same combo. I recently built a tweed Super (2x10), and tried a few different speakers in it. I tried a pair of Allen C1045 speakers (ceramic), and I tried a pair of Eminence L102 speakers (alnico). The Allens sounded huge, with a big bottom. (I had these speakers in my Old Flame, and in a seperate 2x10 cab.) They were quite loud, in the tweed Super, with rather late breakup. The L012 speakers, on the other hand, were not loud, at all, and sounded very compressed, with rather early breakup. (I made sure that all speakers were sufficiently broken in before making any judgements.) Then, I decided to try one C1045 and one L102 in the tweed Super. That woke up the beast. The C1045 gave a strong, clean bottom end, and the L102 gave the nicest, smooth breakup on the top end. This was the sound I was looking for. It sounded so good that I tried the same combination of speakers in my Old Flame. The results were more of the same. I'm sold on the potential of mixing alnico and ceramic speakers in the same cab. Of course, if you mike your amps, you might be better off putting some distance between the amp and mike, in order to get the mixture.

January 8th, 2005, 01:02 PM	#22 (permalink)
Jim Collins Tele-Meister Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 309	About my Accomplice... It is an early one -- 6V6 only, with no option for 6L6 tubes. As such, it is an 18 watt, 1x12 fire breather. My old band used to host a blues jam session at a small club, and I would frequently bring the Accomplice. I got off stage, once, and a patron asked me how powerful that amp was. When I told him 18 watts, his jaw hit the floor. I use no pedals, and the speaker in the amp is a Reverend Alltone 1250. With a Telecaster, this amp is huge.