Note, if you are an electronic type person , I suspect this can be built cheap.
I haven’t messed around with clean tones yet, but for my use that really isn’t a big deal. Between the little modeler, Amplitube and standard effects I can get a nicfe clean tone without an amp.
I will note Carls quality control kinda sucks. The little rubber feet for the box are on the top…
Slee
And that $20 box can do what my $200 Weber can do? I won’t trust it as it is a passive model rather than an active model as mine.
If you’re referring to the Weber MASS attenuators, SigMan, they’re not an active device. They’re entirely passive [note: no power cord or batteries = passive] and designed to emulate the load that a speaker presents to the amplifier’s output transformer. As such, they allow the preamp and output section to be driven into saturation while maintaining reasonable volume levels in the room. And they do a good job of it, but remember that you’re still missing out on the contribution that an overdriven speaker makes to the amp’s overall tone.
sleestak’s device is also passive, but operates more like a master volume control, in that it allows you to overdrive the preamp, then dial down the signal to the power amp. It’s a different sound - since you’re now missing out on the overdriven contributions of both the speaker and the output section - but a lot of people won’t mind that, and there’s no reason that you shouldn’t be able to trust it.
I’d suggest caution. Watch the plates on the output tubes in the amp. They start glowing cherry red then they are probably getting too hot.
You can easily drive your amp too hard. The extreme volume would force you to turn it down. But the attenuator is masking just how hard you’re pushing the amp.
It’s ok to use attenuators. Just pay attention to your amp setting. Don’t get too extreme. Unless it’s a amp you don’t mind burning out.
So I finally got the latest little thing I recorded with the power soak uploaded. The playing isn’t all that good, I did about straight through 4 takes and the recording is the best two but it works for getting an idea of the tone. The mix is also off, the hithats seem to have disappeared but for a test take it is workable.
Anyway, hereit is.
Slee
Yeah, it does seem to squash the low end, hot plates usually have the same effect, but I think it works for that kind of riff.
I need to fiddle with my eq a bit. I recorded it and added my standard eq/compression/reverb and went with that. I need to pump up the mids a bit, some notes are getting lost in the third riffy part.
But for having the amp at a tolerable level it works well enough. I can record without deafening my children or convincing my wife that she needs to kill me…
Slee
I have just ordered the parts to build a footswitch for my Roland Cube 80XL. The footswitch has 6 momentary switches wired to three stereo 1/4" phone plugs to switch various special effects, channels, etc.
Even by ordering my own parts this is going to cost something like $80. I am getting:
1 Slanted-top black plastic project box
3 stereo phone jacks
6 stereo phone plugs
36’ of cable
6 momentary switches
I could wire the cable right to the switches and save a few bucks but I’m going to build three stereo cables instead, because I think it will be easier to move the box around if the cables are not permanently attached.
More news as it happens.
Sounds fun and thrashy! Your playing sounds good to me, but I know you like precision. Thanks for sharing.
CWGas what are momentary switches and why do you need six? What will this pedal switch between?
One of my tubes in my Tweed Deluxe replica amp is getting wonky. I have to jiggle it sometimes to get the circuit to work. Argh. I stink at tubes so I would have to get it serviced.
A *momentary *switch is a switch that leaves the circuit open and closes it only while you are pressing the switch. Think of a door buzzer. (They can also leave the circuit closed, and open it when pressed, which is the kind I am using.) A *latch *switch changes from closed to open when you click it, and stays open until you click it again, like most guitar effects pedals. (This amp has a configuration switch on the back so you can use either type of switch. The default is momentary, which is what I prefer; there is no click.)
The functions that can be operated with the switches are:
Switch from JC Clean channel to Lead (amp modeling) channel
Switch to Solo settings
Turn on Reverb
Turn on special effects
Two switches to control delay and looping
There are six altogether. Each plug is connected to two switches; that’s why the plugs are stereo plugs, so they have two hot connectors and one ground.
Roland (Boss) makes the FS-6 pedal for this amp that has two switches for $50. So you would need three to access all six functions.
So if you want reverb, you step on that switch and it provides reverb until you lift your foot? I could see where that would be really useful if you rarely use effects in an always-on sort of way.
Good luck with the project - saves money and organizes the footswitches better vs. 3 separate boxes.
Since that amp can take either type of switch, and for the most part foot switches are usually universal, why not just by a non-boss foot switch?
This 2-button Fender switch is $24.
But…dude - he’s building his own with six switches!!!
You’re looking to disrupt that awesomeness!? 
No, you tap the switch and it turns the reverb on, then tap again and it turns it off. The switch itself just temporarily opens the circuit, but the amp interprets that as a toggle.
Ah, cool. Thanks. Like I have stated, I stink at electronics.
Guitar sage quote! Love his vids. Love guitar (been playing for 10 years or so) and love that there is a guitar thread here.
I saw a youtube review for a vintage Fender Santa Rosa. It’s a acoustic/electric. They were only made two or three years. 89-91? I think.
Supposed to be nice instrument, if one can be found. They are rare.
Anybody played one? Are they really that special?
Photo,. Has a small body
I may get one if it comes up for sale on eBay.
“Vintage.” Sigh. I am old.
As for the guitar itself - I have not heard of them touted for their collectability, but what do I know.
The design is not new - Danny Ferrington began making semi-acoustic Tele-shaped (and Explorers, V’s ,etc) guitars years ago. Kramer licensed the design for a bit. Fender was no dummy and jumped on the bandwagon originally inspired by their own designs. No different than Fender finally coming out with an “Offset Waist Tele” i.e., a Tele layout on a Jazzmaster body, or a Tele-master.
Back to the semi-acoustic Tele’s, here’s my bit of personal wisdom: They appear to be super versatile, because they are a mash-up of two different designs. In my experience, for 95% of players, they end up being Neither/Nor - not sufficiently good doing either job to be satisfying. Having said that, for that 5% remaining, they can be great: either they just fit your needs, or you gig and need a non-feedback acoustic that can do some minor electric stuff, etc.
That is why Chet Atkins loved his model - playing onstage, having a thinline electric classical was a very practical tool for him. Would he play it at home over a real, great sounding classical? I wouldn’t
Always worth a try to check for fit, but it is a specialized tool in my experience.
I feel the same way about vintage. I was barely out of college when the Santa Rosas were made.
I thought the compact size would make them quite useful. The sound is so rich with tone.
I wouldn’t go crazy and pay a lot. I might consider $700 at the most. They were selling for that a few years ago. Have to wait and see if another one pops up for sale.
Question about guitar necks: have the manufacturers flattened their fretboards and beefed up the necks over the decades, or have I just been playing a Rickenbacker for too long?
I used to play a Ventura hollowbody and a Tele, but they were stolen around 1990, leaving me playing a Rick 360 whenever I picked it up. I went to a Guitar Center today to see what was out there, and it seemed that all of the guitars had the same fairly flat radius fretboard and the same thick neck. Fenders always seemed to have necks that felt like a log, but I seem to remember Gibsons having thinner necks than what was at the store. It did seem that every guitar had the same scale length and the same string spacing. Did everything get standardized, or am I misremembering?