The Super Champ XD club

[drdos]

The only rattle sound I get from mine seems to be coming from one or both of the 6V6's(this sound gets louder when the amp is elevated). I need to replace them but while the amp has worked fine for the past 3 yrs I probably won't change them till one or both die.

[Shardik]

Originally Posted by Gnobuddy

I agree. While I'm not as much of a fan of voice 16 as you are, my own experiments with voice 16 also worked best with P90 pickups.

Everything old is new again. I posted about this on this thread way back in June 2011: http://www.tdpri.com/forum/3377541-post1042.html

-Gnobuddy

I read the post you are linking to, and the sound didn't sound as fake to me as it obviously did to you. But it doesn't sound like and unamplified acoustic, it is closer to what I have heard from live recordings and at concerts through a PA. Sure, the bass is boosted, and so is the treble a bit to add a little definition.

I guess we agree about what voice 16 does, but disagree about the use for it.

[Gnobuddy]

Originally Posted by Shardik

I guess we agree about what voice 16 does, but disagree about the use for it.

Disagreement is the spice of life (as long as it stays civil). This would be an incredibly boring world if we all agreed on everything.

It actually makes me shudder to think of it - mass conformity, seven billion people all with exactly the same opinions on everything. Can you imagine?

So thank you for disagreeing with me on the use of voice 16, Shardik!

And some day I hope you'll tell us how you escaped from the pages of Richard Adams book, and found your way to the Telecaster forum!

It's been a very long time since I read the book, a year or two after it was first published. I remember very little of it after all this time.

-Gnobuddy

[figment]

New pickups Chevalier 67s. PLease check what you think?


http://soundcloud.com/figment-2/sets...ier-67-pickups

Thank you.

[Shardik]

Originally Posted by Gnobuddy

Disagreement is the spice of life (as long as it stays civil). This would be an incredibly boring world if we all agreed on everything.

It actually makes me shudder to think of it - mass conformity, seven billion people all with exactly the same opinions on everything. Can you imagine?

So thank you for disagreeing with me on the use of voice 16, Shardik!

And some day I hope you'll tell us how you escaped from the pages of Richard Adams book, and found your way to the Telecaster forum!

It's been a very long time since I read the book, a year or two after it was first published. I remember very little of it after all this time.

-Gnobuddy

I agree about disagreeing. As long as discussions are kept on the issue and don't get personal, such disagreements are a great way of learning and getting a more nuanced view of things.

Regarding the name, it was first brought to my attention NOT through the Richard Adams book, but through Stephen King's "Dark Tower" series. But that series is riddled with references to other literary work, so it came as no surprise to me that the Shardik name was borrowed from somewhere.

I chose the name at a time in my life where my body weight gave me a more bear like appearance. I have lost 30 kg since then, but I think the nick is cool, and is usually available, so it has stuck. :)

[Gnobuddy]

Shardik - congratulations on getting to a healthier weight. 30 kg is a lot to lose! (For those who don't speak metric, that's 66 lbs!) I have not done as well as you, I gained weight in the last year or so and I need to get serious about losing it.

I haven't touched my SCXD in the last two days. I've been working out song ideas on an acoustic guitar instead.

But the last thing I did with the SCXD was make up a speaker attenuator and a dummy 8 ohm load for it, on Tuesday. I bought a bunch of 8 ohm, 10 watt resistors at a local electronics surplus store. The day before yesterday I wired six of them up as a two-stage speaker attenuator, with 1/4" input and output jacks for speaker cables. I mounted the whole thing inside a small transparent plastic box I found at a local "99 Cents Only" store.

Each stage lets through 1/4 of the power that enters. (This can also be described as attenuating the power by 6 dB). With both stages in tandem, that means 1/16 of the input power makes it through to the speaker. (That's 12 dB of attenuation altogether.)

So with a nominal 15 watts from the SCXD (at full blast), only about 1 watt makes it to the speaker. It turns out that this is about the right amount of power for my situation - i.e., it's pretty loud for clean tones, channel 1, daytime use, in a small house (not an apartment with thin walls).

With the clean channel turned up to 7 or 8 you get nice tubey tone, and the volume is a bit loud but manageable. It would be plenty loud enough for my usual jams with 10 or 15 acoustic guitarists, and sometimes flute, violin, and electric bass as well (but no drummer).

The story is different with any of the more heavily distorted voices on channel 2. They are much too loud even with the full 12 dB of attenuation. If I had more resistors I'd add one more stage, for another 6 dB of attenuation (and a nominal 1/4 watt of power). I think that would be closer to the right level for small-room use at home.

I tried using the new 12 dB attenuator along with an L-pad. The chain goes like this: the amp's speaker-out feeds the 12 dB attenuator, and that in turn feeds the L-pad, which feeds the speaker.

This is a good combination. The L-pad lets you fine-tune the volume making it through the fixed 12 dB attenuatior. Instead of being stuck very near the zero volume end of the dial, the L-pad now gets turned up well into the middle of its range. It feels much better and you have a more linear control feel at this setting.

Combining the fixed 12 dB attenuator with the L-pad also reduces the amount of power entering the L-pad, so there are no worries about overheating it and damaging it. Inside the new fixed attenuator, the most power any one resistor has to handle is about 5 watts, so the 10 watt resistors are well within their power handling ability.

There is nothing special about the new attenuator I just built, it's a standard R/2R ladder attenuator. If anyone wants the schematic, it's attached. As you can see, it consists of two identical stages (3 resistors each). If you build only one stage (everything left of points C and D), you get 6 dB attenuation and roughly 4 watts to the speaker. If you build both stages, you get 12 dB attenuation and roughly 1 watt to the speaker.

At some point I may re-do this circuit with an additional 3-position switch so you can select 0 dB (no attenuation, 15 W), 6 dB (4 W), or 12 dB (1 W).

With 3 more resistors, you could add one more stage, and cut power to 1/4 watt to the speaker. The new resistors can be smaller, and only need to be rated at 8 ohms, 1 watt. This would be a good addition if you want to use distorted tones and/or live in an apartment with neighbours on the other side of thin walls.

One good thing about this exercise is that I now have a much better idea how little power I actually need from a guitar amp for home use. I think the guitar amp manufacturers have still failed to cater to the increasing number of people who would like a tube amp they can use in a small house or apartment. They're still marketing "small" 15 watt amps and 5 watt amps, though it seems what we need is 1 watt for clean tones and much less - maybe only 1/4 watt - for distorted tones.

What I'd really like to complement the clean tones from my SCXD is a little 1 watt tube amp that sounds like this Marshall 18 watt amp, but at a volume I can use in my living room!

-Gnobuddy

[Shardik]

I wasn't sure whether I should post this or not, due to the obvious lack of timing in the solo parts, but I think is kind of relevant for this thread.

On the following 2 minute sound test/demo track all guitar parts is done with my Blackash telecaster with Eastgrove pickups and channel 2 voicings on the SCXD with line out into the mixer. The "acoustic" guitar parts in the beginning and end is a P90 on voice 16. The rythm guitar is P90 on voicing 2, while the lead guitar is the P90 + bridge pickup in humbucker mode on voicing 13.

http://soundcloud.com/user955040/bla...-the-ash-woods

[JohnS]

Sorry if this has already been answered. Anyone know what the stock OEM speaker is based on / sounds most like? It looks like the stock 12" which I believe to be based on an Emi Legend. Thanks.

Never mind. I found the answer.

[Gnobuddy]

JohnS, if you found the answer, would you tell us what it is? I'm curious.

Thanks!

-Gnobuddy

[richey88]

Originally Posted by Shardik

I wasn't sure whether I should post this or not, due to the obvious lack of timing in the solo parts, but I think is kind of relevant for this thread.

On the following 2 minute sound test/demo track all guitar parts is done with my Blackash telecaster with Eastgrove pickups and channel 2 voicings on the SCXD with line out into the mixer. The "acoustic" guitar parts in the beginning and end is a P90 on voice 16. The rythm guitar is P90 on voicing 2, while the lead guitar is the P90 + bridge pickup in humbucker mode on voicing 13.

http://soundcloud.com/user955040/bla...-the-ash-woods

Nice demo! I really like the lead tone and will be exploring voice 13 thanks to your clip!!

[Shardik]

Originally Posted by richey88

Nice demo! I really like the lead tone and will be exploring voice 13 thanks to your clip!!

Thanks. What I found satisfying when making this clip was how nice I think it worked out without miking the amp itself, just using line out. This eliminates a lot of potential problems of recordings. If I understand it correctly, this means no tubes were actually involved. Some will think that is suboptimal, which is why I posted the recording. It speaks for itself and shows that things sound different in a mix than on its own.

All that said, these are voicings I use when I am not recording as well, so I guess the line out is not TOTALY different from the speaker sound with tube stage and all.

[Gnobuddy]

Originally Posted by Shardik

If I understand it correctly, this means no tubes were actually involved. Some will think that is suboptimal, which is why I posted the recording. It speaks for itself

I agree with what you just said - yes, no tubes involved, and yes, the recording speaks for itself and lets the listener judge, which is a good thing.

I go to monthly jams with 20 - 30 different musicians (typically 10 - 20 on any given event), and one of the things that becomes obvious after a little while is that people hear things differently. For example, one musician, Bob, can hear a chord progression once and he immediately knows every chord in the sequence, including altered chords (sus4, etc). What's more, he can instantly play it back on his guitar in any key, transposing everything in his head! If the original song was in E and the singer wants it in Ab instead, Bob won't have to think twice, he'll just grab his guitar and play the progression perfectly in Ab.

My friend Doug cannot do what Bob does, but he has rock solid timing. I don't think a metronome could do better than he does when playing rhythm or bass guitar.

I have neither of those abilities, but I have a good ear for pitch (I'm often the one who hears the one out-of-tune string on one guitar in the group of ten guitars all playing chords at the same time). I also have a pretty good ear for timbre. At one event I told one of the other guys "I'm sorry you have a cold" because the timbre of his voice told me his sinuses and nasal passages were somewhat stuffed up. He looked surprised and said "I don't have a cold!"

I apologised for my mistake. But four hours later, at the end of the jam, he came to me and said "You were right. I feel a cold coming on. How did you know?"

In the same way, we don't all have the same ear for timbre. Many musicians are entirely happy with the timbre (tone) from the current crop of digital multi-effects pedals, hear no difference from actual tube amps, and talk disparagingly about the "tube snobs" who imagine that tubes sound better. The Zoom G3, for example, has received a lot of love on the music forums.

And then there are other people who do hear a difference between a good tube amp and a typical digital amp simulation, and often these people really don't like the digital sims, which is why the other guys call them "tube snobs". Of course there are also actual "tube snobs", who won't play a tube amp unless it was made before 1957 and costs at least $8000.

There's nothing wrong with being in either group. We hear what we hear, and if it makes us happy, well, that's wonderful!

When it comes to the SCXD, I love the sound of channel 1. With the right settings on my guitar and the amp, the clean tone is gorgeous and lacks only one thing (deep bass). I find the amps timbre beautiful and inspiring, and it makes me want to play more music just to listen to that lovely sound. The sound is so good that I have no desire to go find another amp with a different clean tone. Maybe there is something out there that sounds even better, but the SCXD's clean tones already sound more than "good enough" to make me happy.

When it comes to the SCXD's channel 2 voices, I don't feel the same way. None of them is outright awful, certainly no worse than most of the other digital amp simulations out there. But none of them moves me into a happy musical haze the way the sound of channel 1 does. After a few seconds of exposure to the sound I always feel dissatisfied with the timbre, I always hear some sort of harshness, and I always wish I could get better tone.

There are times when I actually wish I was happy with these digitally simulated amp models. It would be great to have one amp (or one little pedal) that made all the sounds I wanted, particularly if it cost less than a tube amp.

But just as you can't force yourself to fall in love with the wrong person, I can't make myself love - or even like - most of the voices on channel 2 of the SCXD. I do use them on my home recordings, hoping that burying them in the mix will cover up the harshness, and they're certainly better than nothing, but I cannot really generate any fondness for them. I don't enjoy using them. They don't inspire me. They make me wish for better tone.

This demo of the Zoom G3 is an interesting example. Zoom very bravely did the demo in two segments, the first featuring an actual Marshall tube amp and speaker cab, the second the digital simulation of the same amp in the Zoom G3.

I applaud Zoom for having the courage to do such a demo, and in the process they have given all of us easy access to a listening test that will let you know - using your own ears - if the differences matter to you. Does the real Marshall sound better than the digital simulation to you, or do they sound the same, or does the digital sim sound better?

For me, the real Marshall sounds better, though of course I can never have the real thing. It's way too big, way too loud, and way too expensive. If I had a G3, I would use its simulated amps on my home recordings, buried in the mix to try to cover the harshness I hear. While YouTube demo's are not a great tool for critical listening, I also think the G3 sounds better than the SCXD's channel 2 digitally modelled voices. But just like the SCXD's channel 2 voices, I know I would not be inspired by the Zoom G3 either, not the way I am by the real Marshall's tone - or by the SCXD's clean tones.

Not that I'm complaining. Even if I never used channel 2 at all, the SCXD was a wonderful buy. I still love that clean tone.

My only wish is to find an amp that has equally inspiring distorted tones, and that I can afford, and that will fit in my home, and that will get good tone at house-friendly volume.

I don't think such a thing exists yet, unfortunately. The Valvetone Impact (2 watt amp built in Australia) may come closest, but I'll have to build my own if I want one. Some of the 18 watt Marshall clones sound pretty good to, but once again I'd probably have to build my own as the commercially available amps and kits are way too expensive for my tastes.

Valvetone Impact clip 1

Valvetone Impact clip 2. Listen from 2:56 on and you can get a taste of the amps tone despite the bad recording and sloppy playing.

A nice demo of a Marshall 18 watt kit amp doing what it does best.

-Gnobuddy

[Gnobuddy]

I was just looking at the Sam Ash website today (April 22, 2012), and among the scrolling ads on their front page was one for the Vibro Champ XD. The price was $150 (yup, only one hundred fifty bucks!), and the ad included the words "Supplies Are Limited".

The SCXD may be gone for good, but if you want it seems you can still get a VCXD, and at a bargain price too.

A screen-grab of the ad from my web browser is attached.

-Gnobuddy

[Hiker]

Originally Posted by JohnS

Sorry if this has already been answered. Anyone know what the stock OEM speaker is based on / sounds most like? It looks like the stock 12" which I believe to be based on an Emi Legend. Thanks.

Never mind. I found the answer.

The 'stock' speaker is a very good compliment for the variety of "voices" available on the SCXD!

One problem experienced by some users is failing to leave the stock speaker in long enough for actual break in. This takes hours, and hours! Someone with a mod addiction will not wait more than a few minutes, or hours of play to yank out the stock speaker. Therefore, they will not be able to give a fair assessment of 'how' it sounds, eh?

[savofenno]

Originally Posted by Hiker

The 'stock' speaker is a very good compliment for the variety of "voices" available on the SCXD!

One problem experienced by some users is failing to leave the stock speaker in long enough for actual break in. This takes hours, and hours! Someone with a mod addiction will not wait more than a few minutes, or hours of play to yank out the stock speaker. Therefore, they will not be able to give a fair assessment of 'how' it sounds, eh?

Yes, stock speaker is quite good. I had it 40-60 playing hours from mid-December to early April, and it began to sound noticeably warmer and fuller from late February on.

But i ordered despite that continuous improvement a Jensen P10R replacement, after i had studied several similar speaker model`s specifications, tone demos and frequency response charts.

With Jensen in place, despite it being brand new, i got better tone in all aspects. I have played with it 15-20 hours now, it`s ever improving tonal bliss!

[finnplayer]

Well I'm late to the party here but just bought a minty used SCXD. It replaced a Mustang II which was OK but I far prefer the SCXD. I was able to spend some time getting to know it this past week-end with my Baja Tele and it is just a terrific little amp.

As I said the used one I bought seems to be in great shape I just hope it holds up for a good long while!

[JohnS]

Originally Posted by Gnobuddy

JohnS, if you found the answer, would you tell us what it is? I'm curious.

Thanks!

-Gnobuddy

The answer is that it is a Chinese speaker and not an Eminence OEM. Apparently it is a neutral sounding speaker to allow the DSP to do its thing.

[JohnS]

Update: I just bought a used "like new" SCXD off Ebay today for $184.50. Can't wait to meet her at the UPS station on Thursday next!

[JohnS]

np

[Mr Perch]

Originally Posted by JohnS

Update: I just bought a used "like new" SCXD off Ebay today for $184.50. Can't wait to meet her at the UPS station on Thursday next!

You can usually find used ones even cheaper than that on the Guitar Center website. If you negotiate, you may persuade a GC in North Dakota or some place like that to waive shipping fees. You can also pay $20 for their "pro coverage" warranty (which you can get on used items) so that if it dies, like mine did, you can get a replacement.