Soundclip Ultimate Attenuator w/ Marshall 2061x

[Ulysses]

If you aren't familiar with the Ultimate Attenuator, the name is a bit of a misnomer. It is more of a reamping device than attenuator and the effect is nothing short of remarkable. Now that I'm off the road after 34 years of playing live and loud, I've missed the tone from my old AC30, 50w plexi, etc. because they are just too loud for home use. I'm sure the same thing everyone is going through and I just cannot be satisfied with the compromise of the puny sound of lo-watt boutique amps and especially the mush and fizz from standard attenuators when reduced to "bedroom level".

I've bought boutique amps with power scaling, tried almost all the popular attenuators currently out, master volume amps, etc., no less than five 5-7 watt amps, and nothing feels like my old Marshalls or AC30 and keeps the original characteristics in tact when you attenuate down low enough to play with the family in the house.... until I got this thing. If anyone is used to playing loud for years and frustrated with the feel you get attenuated down to low levels this will change your entire outlook at what amps are available for low volume application. I'm sure this sounds like and ad for this thing but I'm not affiliated nor do I even know the guy that builds these.

You are listening to an Marshall 2061x through a 2x12 Divided By 13 cab loaded with Celestion Golds attenuated down to actual speaking voice level. I made this recording with my entire family asleep in the house. Yes, I could have used a modeling device but listen to the natural room ambience, the muscular mid range, dynamics of pick and finger attack, defined top end, and overall natural sounding live amp signal.

I've made a lot of clips and knowing the characteristics of what happens when, I find it amazing. I also chose a pair of Shure SM-81 small diaphragm condenser mics, usually an absolute no-no for recording guitar. The SM-81's are known for their ice-pick-in-the-ear quality combined with the fact that they are small diaphragm condensers. I wanted to capture the detail of the quick pick attack and finger touch more so than getting a sweet tone. Still, the tone is quite acceptable IMO and surprisingly smooth. Another testament to the UA's amazing ability to maintain an amps character under heavily attenuated circumstances, no fizz and buzz like you would normally get with master volumes, power scaling, and any other attenuator. The sound in the room was big, but very quiet. Not a little bitty sound from a little bitty amp. The notes are firm, muscular, and have well defined top, mids, and lows which you just don't normally hear with an amp attenuated down to bedroom level. I didn't get the gain up too high because I wanted to show how much punch and dynamic range was apparent in the room. It sounds just as phenomenal with an amp in full overdrive.

For the music, you get me on drums, bass, and guitar. I'm not too sure about this riff but I wanted something up-tempo to force the articulation quality of the UA as well. My 1964 Firebird V starts the clip, my 1959 Tele comes in next. The track fades out with the Firebird coming back in on another modern amp with the UA but I didn't like the amp so I faded it out and just let the demo stop there.

Once again, keep in mind that the guitar tracks you hear are at speaking voice level or lower, easily well below what would be considered "bedroom level".


Track time:

0:00 - 0:50 - 1964 Firebird V
0:50 - 1-38 - 1959 Telecaster
1:38 - fade n/a

http://soundclick.com/share?songid=6633726 (http://soundclick.com/share?songid=6633726) (http://www.soundclick.com/player/single_player.cfm?songid=6633726&q=hi)

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y127/swlabr/UAclip1.jpg
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y127/swlabr/UAclip5.jpg
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y127/swlabr/UAClip4.jpg
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y127/swlabr/UAclip6.jpg


http://www.soundclick.com/player/sin...d=6633726&q=hi (http://www.soundclick.com/player/single_player.cfm?songid=6633726&q=hi)

[sinasl1]

sounds great! Nice playing

[dumbell78]

Great track! I love my UA too, everything you say is spot on. It does a great job of taming my 2555.

[JimH]

Sounds fantastic. I've got a similar amp - wish it sounded that good at low levels.
Great playing too, but there's more to it than that. Very impressive.

[HeeHaw]

I really liked that clip and the way that Marshall sounds.:cool:

[Mondoslug]

and with a SM81? Who woulda thunk.

I'd like to check out the UA. Work with any size ohm amp?

[carbz]

I had one when I had my Naylor amp and though it sounded real good from what I remember. To me it wasn't really transparent despite the builders claim though it kind of changed the tone/feel in a good way. The reason I sold it was I was hearing what sounded the sound was coming either through the tubes or tranny at low volumes. It was way annoying and sounded to me like it was damaging the amp. I called the builder and he swore it was safe. I am happy with my hotplate even at highley attenuated levels.

[coolhand78]

sounds great...!

[presence]

I love that playing and that tone...soooo tasty! Thanks! :JAM

(Reminds me of Scofield but even cooler.)

[photios]

Clip sounds great.

I don's use my UA with any of my rigs anymore, but I still can't bring myself to sell it...it works so perfectly with a loud (100 watt) NMV amp (something that I don't own anymore) Now the insides of it looks like spaghetti...really not pretty, but it works so much better than all the other attenuators I've tried that I'm just keeping hold of it in case I add a loud amp to my stable at some future point. Additionally, mine has dual volume setttings option so that I can switch between for a true lead boost that is really cool. I don't even remember how many clean boost pedals I went thru that didnt work...but the dual volume settings on the UA is perfect for boosts and its purely clean. Its a great design that works as close to perfect as you can get in this world...my only complaint is the build quality which I find a bit sloppy....still, in spite of its sloppy build quality, it hasnt ever given me any trouble (knock on wood) and for preserving the tone and feel of your amp at lower volumes, the UA rules IMO.

I've tried the Weber Mass, THD hotplate, Dr Z Airbrake, Marshall Powerbrake and I've also tried PPI-MV's on amps and I think the UA is best.

[mtlin]

I use a couple of Ho's Attenuators. (I've heard that the UA is a rebranded Ho, but I'm not certain.) They work as well as you say. Power scaling is just as good until you get to bedroom volumes. Then Ho's/UA works the best. Perfectly transparent to my ears.

[AnthonyL]

I use a couple of Ho's Attenuators. (I've heard that the UA is a rebranded Ho, but I'm not certain.) They work as well as you say. Power scaling is just as good until you get to bedroom volumes. Then Ho's/UA works the best. Perfectly transparent to my ears.


Mr. Ho is the inventor/designer/builder of the Ultimate Attenuator. I've been to his shop in Vancouver - I lived there for 2yrs. He sells them to the guy here in the states who simply puts an "Ultimate" sticker on the front and re-sells them. You can buy them direclty from Ho, just no sticker, but a lot cheaper...

[donbarzini]

They are all made by Ho and the one I had looked like a bowl of angel hair pasta inside too. They do make your transformer buzz, Ho said it was normal because you can now hear what your transformer sounds like when your amp is cranked, normally you can't hear that. I didn't feel comfortable using it. If I owned a NMV amp again, I'd probably give it another go around as long as I had a spare transformer on hand.

[Ulysses]

They are all made by Ho and the one I had looked like a bowl of angel hair pasta inside too. They do make your transformer buzz, Ho said it was normal.....



Well, you got that wrong. A little excess wire length that is tie-wrapped but far from a bowl of spaghetti. The build is beautiful and they aren't a Ho product. He (Magus Inc.) does hide a circuit ala Howard Dumble with some rock-hard resin as you can see. Very nice, clean build, though. This is not the HO version and I think has been much improved from the older versions.


I've read the doom and gloom threads here before about the UA. I'm going to be enjoying my amps instead of keeping them nice and safe in the closet, regardless. I spoke at length with my tech whom everyone here knows and he explained the UA to me like this. (He uses one at home). Your amp does get hot but it's the same as using it on the gig at the level you are attenuating down from. If you are using a vintage amp, you do increase the wear and tear because you are increasing usage. Much like using your old Jaquar coupe as a daily driver. The deal is this. My amps are unusable as they are at home. I can keep them nice and cool sitting in my closet or get them out and enjoy them with the UA until they are used up, then get them repaired and play them again. If I wanted to keep them in my closet I can do it after they blow. I've been playing my 1963 AC30 daily for about 6 weeks now for hours a day w/ the UA and not a peep or trannies buzzing out of the ordinary. That's more enjoyment than I would have gotten out of it in the next 10 years without the UA.

The point is is that it makes your amps that are normally not usable, usable. I'm just not concerned about wearing them out from use. That's why I bought them. I don't want to call out other brands, they are wonderful amps but the the ones I've had with power scaling just have not been acceptable for my tastes at low volumes. I also don't want to be restricted to what amp I play. I've owned and tried, the Hot Plate, Power Soak, Komet Airbrake (my favorite and traveled with it for years), Mini Mass, and a few others that have passed through my studio and none were even close once you get below the first couple of settings. I've used AC30's and Marshalls for 34 years, 150-200 one-nighters a year and I'm very used to the subtleties and delicate, complex harmonics that I get when using them live. This is the first time I've been able to come even close to getting what I'm used to without the the tone turning to mush when brought down to "bedroom levels". Believe me, I've been trying to find something like this for many years and tries just about everything someone has mentioned. Just thought I would share my experience if there are others who have found themselves in a similar situation.

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y127/swlabr/ua1.jpg

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y127/swlabr/ua4.jpg

[hogy]

They do make your transformer buzz, Ho said it was normal because you can now hear what your transformer sounds like when your amp is cranked, normally you can't hear that.

Mr. Ho is correct. The UA does NOT make your transformer buzz. It always buzzes when the amp distorts, you just can't hear it because the volume of the amp drowns it out.

[jzucker]

This sounds fantastic. It's the first attenuator-recording I've heard that doesn't sound nasally. How does it work for clean tones?

[Ulysses]

This sounds fantastic. It's the first attenuator-recording I've heard that doesn't sound nasally. How does it work for clean tones?


Hi, thanks. I know you have a lot of hands on experience with this. Yes, this it what I was trying to capture... that the midrange content is not mushed out like with every other device I've tried to get my big amps down to volume acceptable at home with the family. It really is as stellar clean. I am very critical with my '63 AC30 especially and don't even like the way a pedal in the signal chain sounds. For the first time I've been able to get a more organic, live sound while recording quietly... taking advantage of things like room ambience and depth of field that I just can't get with a modeler or direct signal. I could have gone either way with the clip, more towards clean or wound uo the gain and it would been just as good. I thought that fine line where it just starts to break up is the hardest to keep natural sounding with a mic and shows off the UA's ability best.

There are obviously some things out of the UA's control that you do lose, like the energy of the speakers moving volumes of air when cranked but it maintains the integrity of the amps inherent sound so well that you don't miss it as bad.

You also need to make sure your amp truly does sound good. High volumes can cover a multitude of your amp's bad qualities. Just the natural compression of our ears tends to make many loud sounds better than they are. If your sound is a little buzzy when loud, you'll be much more aware of it when it is under the microscope so to speak. It will reveal flaws as well. If you rely on lots of effects or super high-gain for your sound the UA won't be of as much value if any. If you rely on delicate harmonics, touch sensitivty, and the dynamic range of your amp for your playing style the UA is priceless IMO.

[jzucker]

Do you have the pro or the regular model? Have you tried the direct line out option? If so, how does that compare to the mic'd sound? Thanks again for demoing this. I emailed them. Maybe I can borrow one and do a video demo of it.

[Ulysses]

Do you have the pro or the regular model? Have you tried the direct line out option? If so, how does that compare to the mic'd sound? Thanks again for demoing this. I emailed them. Maybe I can borrow one and do a video demo of it.


Mine is the regular base model with no additional features. I did have the power handling increased to 200w so I can use my 100w Marshalls but that is it. I've talked to several others about this and most feel like the "plexi" switch and "bedroom" switch aren't really necessary and more natural without. I think it is a little over $400 as the version I have. Not dirt cheap but I don't think you will be disappointed if you just bite the bullet. I've also noticed re-sale is very good. I tried to pick up a used one on Ebay and each time bidding went too close to retail to make it worth while so I just bought a new one.

He does build per order since each is tailored to individual needs. The good news is turnaround from order to delivery was only around 10-12 days. I sent an e-mail describing exactly what I wanted to use mine with and how I wanted to use it. He sent his reccommendation so I went for it. It's been in use over 2 months now and still amazed every tiime I turn it on.

Like everything else you do need to tweak for the sweet spot depending on each sound you are trying to acheive. Pretty simple though and just a matter of finding the optimum spot for your amp's volume knob with the UA's knob where as much natural tone is on tap at that particular volume.

[AnthonyL]

Well said. My understanding of the UA compared to the Ho is that the UA is built in the U.S. by Magus, to the specs they've developed, using Ho's circuit as the starting point. There's some sort of licensing (if that's even the correct term) arrangement with Ho.


That must be a recent change then...

I was in Ho's shop about 1.5yrs ago and he showed me the personal check from the guy at Ultimate ( it was sitting on his desk), as well as the work order detailing the specs/options of each unit, (I think he thought I doubted him). He then pointed to a rack on the wall with units in various stages of completion and said, "those are for him." It was 100% Ho...

[jzucker]

does it have switchable impedance settings?

[AnthonyL]

does it have switchable impedance settings?


Doesn't need one the way he designed it. Works with any setting...

[skhan007]

Great playing!! Man, that was really entertaining- makes me want to go practice right now!

I have recently purchased the UA and use it with my 18 watt Marshall clone and my Divided By 13 JRT 9/15. The UA is perhaps the most useful piece of gear I've purchased in a long long time. Mine is a 200 watter with 2 speaker outs (as opposed to the standard one output) and the bedroom switch. I'm so impressed with how my amps sound when dialed down to reasonable home-playing levels. I was a chunk of change to purchase, but no other attenuator that I've owned/tried sounds nearly as nice.

[Ulysses]

does it have switchable impedance settings?


Hogy has written before on this subject concerning the UA, application with various impedences, and how this works. Maybe he can chime back in. It seems to work equally as well with any 4-8-16 configuration and probably just about anything else. I'd rather someone like Hogy answer.

[hogy]

It's the same basic principle as something like the Airbrake. The UA uses a fixed resistor load that is close to the average of the actual impedance of the speaker in use.

A 16 Ohm speaker offers a 16 Ohm resistance only at a given frequency. At other frequencies this number can be lower or much higher. You measure the actual impedance at different guitar frequencies and calculate the average. That's the value fixed resistor you use.

This is safe within a range. I would not use an UA, or an Airbrake for that matter, at 2 Ohm. Personally, I wouldn't use it at 4 Ohm either, although it is probably safe.

At 8 and 16 Ohm it is safe and I wouldn't worry about it.

Do keep in mind that you are putting a lot of stress on your vintage amp by running it full tilt for extended periods of time. The lacquer insulation on your OT's windings is 40+ years old and has seen thousands of heating and cooling cycles. Eventually it will break down and short out, and then the party's over.

As Ulysses alluded, it's entirely a matter of personal perspective how one deals with that fact, but a fact it remains. When the OT goes, it is not the attenuator that killed it, it's the extended use.

I have an Ultimate Attenuator myself. In fact, I loaned mine to Ulysses, and the rest is history. It is a great device. When I use it with my vintage amps I use common sense and don't run them for hours.

With new amps and stuff I built I run it sometimes for half a day when I'm in the mood. Either way, I have not experienced any problems so far. I've had mine for a few years now.


My advice would be to use the UA at 16 Ohms ideally, with 8 Ohms being safe as well.


The UA is a re-amping device. That is nothing new, people have been running their Plexis into a resistor and re-amping it for decades, at least going back to early Van Halen.

The UA's appeal is that it is a small, self contained unit that makes this easy. You can do the same thing in other ways, with better results even, but it's more of a hassle.
One of my setups that does the same thing better goes like this:

Main amp into resistive load > line level signal into reverb unit (LXP-1) > parametric EQ > 100W Marshall Plexi power amp > two 4X12 cabs. Sounds stupendous at TV level.

Hogy

[jackaroo]

It's the Ho unit with a sticker. No big deal but that's what it is.

I just bought one from Ho.

Keeping it positive, not Ho vs. UA this clip sounds great- the playing is really nice too, but the tone is right on. I'll know more in a week or so.

Thanks for the clip! Great stuff.

Jack

[JDavisNJ]

Sounds excellent! I recently bought an Ultimate Attenuator too. I love it.

-Joe

[JDavisNJ]

Also, which pickups were used? thanks

-Joe

[JDavisNJ]

Sorry to be a pest, but could you also elaborate on the recording chain? Mic position, preamps, etc. Thanks a lot!

-Joe

[Ulysses]

It's the Ho unit with a sticker. No big deal but that's what it is.

I just bought one from Ho.

Keeping it positive, not Ho vs. UA this clip sounds great- the playing is really nice too, but the tone is right on. I'll know more in a week or so.

Thanks for the clip! Great stuff.

Jack


Cool. I could care less who built mine I don't know either of these guys and like Hogy said, he was the one that turned me on to it. I've also read discussions in the past about it and seems like there are always the gloom and doomers. To repeat Hogy, if you burn out your amp it won't be because of the UA, it will be because of the extended use while the gain is wound up, just like if you were actually using your amp as intended. If they do shorten the life of your vintage amp it's only because you are actually putting into more regular use. We should all be so fortunate to actually play our amps enough to wear them out.

So the trade off that it is no different than choosing to gig with your amp on a regular basis. If I want to keep my trannies nice and cool, safely tucked away on the shelf in my closet, it will look just as good on the shelf with the trannies blown. What does it matter if an amp works or not if I'm going to keep it safe in the closet and not use it? In the mean time, I'll be enjoying the hell out of my amps.

Even though it's not an issue for me, I'm still a little confused by the large amount of conflicting information on who actually builds the Magus Ultimate Attenuator. I read that the original design Ho units were problematic and have been greatly improved on. Also that the company Magus Inc., which I got mine from has perfected the design and in fact builds them as a separate enterprise. I've also spoken with someone who actually owns both and said the Magus Ultimate Attenuator is superior. When I ordered mine it was done by e-mail and there were a couple of things that happened as far as minor changes made right before it was shipped that seemed to indicate that this was in fact built by Magus Inc. and not Ho. Is there information somewhere that confirms that they all come from Ho? Just curious and would like to know also because I plan to get another to keep with my working gear.

[Ulysses]

Sorry to be a pest, but could you also elaborate on the recording chain? Mic position, preamps, etc. Thanks a lot!

-Joe


Sure, the chain was simple. Two SM-81's straight to a Roland VS-2480 and phantom powered by the the Roland. The mics were about a foot or so outside of the 2x12 Div By 13 cab then about three feet out. No close mics and they are hard panned L-R in the mix.. I chose not to use any pre's other than the onboard pre in the Roland which is el cheapo at best. There was nothing hi-end about it. I EQ'd the bass (recorded through the same set up and the drums also using only the two SM-81's out 4' from the kit) slightly to pull out a little mud and all else is dead flat. You can actually see the exact position of the mics in the photo I took while doing the clip:

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y127/swlabr/UAclip1.jpg

[jackaroo]

Well, I'm not looking to get off topic or into a beef with anyone.

I'm with you as far as using the amps you have and I congratulate you on finding a solution to the volume issues. I'm looking too.

The UA sounds great and so does your playing. I appreciate the time you've taken to do the demo, and I liked it enough to pull the trigger on one of these today after hearing your clip.

As to their origins, However, I think you're misinformed.

I spent 30 minutes on the phone with both of them today. After my discussions... I bought the Ho.

Ho builds the units for them. Mark said so. Ho said so- with the exception of a bunch made in China. That was enough for me.

Bottom line: Who cares?

I got the cheaper unit to save a few bucks. In the end it's not a lot of difference. I know Mark could certainly clear things up with a word or two on his website if he was inclined. So could Ho. I think they're just in business together and both seem happy about their respective ends of the deal. I didn't sense any hard feelings at all, and both guys were nice and straight ahead with me. Good for them.

I wanted to have a unit that did 2 levels controlled by footswitch. Mark told me that unit was not in stock and would be made by Ho. So I went to the source. Also UA charges 200 bucks for that feature so I went straight to Ho and got the 100 watter version with a line out, dual master w/footswitch, and the 100 volt A/C for the same price as the basic UA. So I went for it.

I hope things don't get nutty on this thread, but that's just what I've been told, today, by both of them.

Peace,

Jack

[Ulysses]

I don't have any interest with either builder and other than my e-mail to place an order, have never as much as even spoken with either as well. I'm curious for the reason you say you bought yours. It would be very cool if you or someone with a Ho version could post an internal shot like the one I took to show that they are in fact built the same. That would settle it for good in my mind.

With old threads here saying that people had serious issues with the Ho's and then two posts already in this thread by guys who said their Ho version was poorly wired, I just want to make sure I'm getting a good one at the best price if I buy another. I know the Magus Ultimate Attenuator version is great because I've used it daily for a couple of months and I opened it up to see the workmanship. A pic of the Ho version would put it to rest without all the second (or even first) hand stories.

[jackaroo]

Upon receipt of mine it shall be... oh great Ulysses. ;-)

[jackaroo]

BTW that Marshal cab in the background looks pretty damn nice. Is that "pinstripe"?


And the leslie, tele etc....

[Ulysses]

Yeah that's one of the last of the pinstripes, has metal handles instead of the straps. Fine sound. I have a pair of Leslie's that I push with old Marshall small box 50 watters. I play them with a Memory Man and spread about eight feet apart... sitting out front in the middle the random swirling of the different horns and rotors throws a kaleidoscope of sound patterns at you, never the same thing twice. I swear it's like beams of sound swirling right in front of your eyes and whizzing past your head. And then with the slight modulation and warble of the Memory man's dreamy, lo-fi delay it turns into full blown trip. Sometimes I go in to play around 1am and I don't come out of my room until the sun is up with drool all over the front of my shirt. It's the closest thing I've found to a mind altering experience without chemicals.

[mightysteve]

The Ultimate Attenuator/Ho Attenuator has a 30 ohm resistive load. I bought one, and it sounded fine (*way* better on my amp - a 1956 Deluxe - than the Marshall SE 100), but I was "ultimately" too concerned about the impedance mismatch so I returned it. (Ho charged a modest and reasonable restocking fee.)

I believe Ho will also make a model with a 16 ohm load, but I'm not entirely sure.

- Steve

[Ulysses]

but I was "ultimately" too concerned about the impedance mismatch so I returned it.



Read post #26. I think you'll have some solid, reliable information to go on considering the source. If you do damage the amp, it's only because it is now getting use as opposed to sitting quiet.

[papa taco]

Love my "Ho Attenuator" with my Hayseed 15. I run from the hayseed's 16 ohm output. I don't feel there's much if any risk running from the 16 ohm tap. It sounds awesome. I usually run the hayseed at a mild clip, cleaning right up with the guitar volume. The Ho sounds transparent even at low volumes.

[AnthonyL]

I don't have any interest with either builder and other than my e-mail to place an order, have never as much as even spoken with either as well. I'm curious for the reason you say you bought yours. It would be very cool if you or someone with a Ho version could post an internal shot like the one I took to show that they are in fact built the same. That would settle it for good in my mind.

With old threads here saying that people had serious issues with the Ho's and then two posts already in this thread by guys who said their Ho version was poorly wired, I just want to make sure I'm getting a good one at the best price if I buy another. I know the Magus Ultimate Attenuator version is great because I've used it daily for a couple of months and I opened it up to see the workmanship. A pic of the Ho version would put it to rest without all the second (or even first) hand stories.





Call Mr. Ho and ask him.

3483 Kingsway
Vancouver, B.C
604-432-6009

If it's still the same as when I visited his shop, there's only ONE version. Created, designed, built by Ho. All of them. You CAN pay $150-$200 more if you want it to say Ultimate on the front. They're identical other than the word ULTIMATE, b/c HO builds them all.

Again, I saw the work order from Magus while I was at the shop. It stated exactly what customers ordered from Magus (specs/options) for each unit, and then Ho showed me the units. It's that simple or at least it was then. Ho builds them, ships them to Magus whereupon they add the ULTIMATE name on the front and re-sell. He even joked about it.

I never had any issues at all with several different amps - JCM 800, /13, VHT, and the workmanship was very neat on the inside.

[Ulysses]

Call Mr. Ho and ask him.

3483 Kingsway
Vancouver, B.C
604-432-6009

If it's still the same as when I visited his shop, there's only ONE version. Created, designed, built by Ho. All of them. You CAN pay $150-$200 more if you want it to say Ultimate on the front. They're identical other than the word ULTIMATE, b/c HO builds them all.

Again, I saw the work order from Magus while I was at the shop. It stated exactly what customers ordered from Magus (specs/options) for each unit, and then Ho showed me the units. It's that simple or at least it was then. Ho builds them, ships them to Magus whereupon they add the ULTIMATE name on the front and re-sell. He even joked about it.

I never had any issues at all with several different amps - JCM 800, /13, VHT, and the workmanship was very neat on the inside.


There's actually quite a few "versions" if you visit the website. I'm sure that's the case. I just have to wonder about the problems reported from the Ho models. I did a search here before buying mine and read a lot of negative comments about the Ho model. Already got a couple on this thread. Do you have internal pics of any? Once again, I could give a flying rat's a$$ who built mine. I just see a lot of conflicting info like this:

quote:

"
Magus Innovations, LLC was created in 2004 to manufacture and sell the highly regarded Ultimate Attenuator.
Since then, we have devoloped the Ultimate Tube amplifier and many tube amp management products.
We pride ourselves on the best customer service possible and are always available to answer questions or offer advice.
We are professional players, builders and repair persons and can offer powerful and simple solutions to your guitar amplification needs. "


Also, does Ho build all these versions and other products shown on this site?

http://www.ultimateattenuator.com/

even this Tonequest Report says Mark Gregg designed the Ultimate Attenuator. No big deal but if it's not true seems like Ho would want that straight:

http://www.ultimateattenuator.com/press.html

http://www.ultimateattenuator.com/home.html

http://www.ultimateattenuator.com/ua-pro/ua-pro.html

[Ed DeGenaro]

Nice tones...amazing playing!

[JDavisNJ]

Thanks for the recording info! It sounds amazing...both the playing and recording.

Any chance of sharing that backing track??

Also, were your pickups stock?

-Joe

[Paul86]

Great playing + Lots of useful info! = everybody wins

[jlagrassa]

The tone was excellent also love the playing style....sounds like Scott Henderson riffing away!

[BPlexico]

That was a great demo - thank you. I have had my UA for several years and have been quite happy. Jack - if you want a loaner I would be happy to send mine to you - all you have to pay is return shipping. I am in California.

Barr

[jackaroo]

That's cool, I bought one from Ho today so I'll see what's up in 10 days.

J

[Ulysses]

Thanks for the recording info! It sounds amazing...both the playing and recording.

Any chance of sharing that backing track??

Also, were your pickups stock?

-Joe

The pickups are dead stock in both guitars. I certainly have no problem with giving out the backing track, it's just bass and drums.

[AnthonyL]

There's actually quite a few "versions" if you visit the website. I'm sure that's the case. I just have to wonder about the problems reported from the Ho models. I did a search here before buying mine and read a lot of negative comments about the Ho model. Already got a couple on this thread. Do you have internal pics of any? Once again, I could give a flying rat's a$$ who built mine. I just see a lot of conflicting info like this:

quote:

"
Magus Innovations, LLC was created in 2004 to manufacture and sell the highly regarded Ultimate Attenuator.
Since then, we have devoloped the Ultimate Tube amplifier and many tube amp management products.
We pride ourselves on the best customer service possible and are always available to answer questions or offer advice.
We are professional players, builders and repair persons and can offer powerful and simple solutions to your guitar amplification needs. "


Also, does Ho build all these versions and other products shown on this site?

http://www.ultimateattenuator.com/

even this Tonequest Report says Mark Gregg designed the Ultimate Attenuator. No big deal but if it's not true seems like Ho would want that straight:

http://www.ultimateattenuator.com/press.html

http://www.ultimateattenuator.com/home.html

http://www.ultimateattenuator.com/ua-pro/ua-pro.html

I've got no dog in this hunt other than to help my fellow TGP brethren save some $$$.

I was in Ho's shop having my amp serviced when I saw the very Tonequest report you sited, hanging on the wall. I asked Ho what did he think of those attenuators and he burst into laughter. He said, "that's me!" He's generally very soft spoken and speaks in a kind of Korean/broken-English accent. So, when he laughs, it kind of takes you by surprise.

Anyway, as I stated earlier, he obviously could tell I had a look of disbelief on my face. So he took me over to his desk where he showed me a check, for a couple of grand, signed by "Mark Gregg." He then showed me the work order and the units in various stages of completion (yes, this included the various "versions"). He also explained that it had taken him several years/prototypes before he was fully satisfied. He proceeded to open one up and gave me a tutorial in all of its inner workings (the guy's def an electronic savant of sorts). Additionally, he was very familiar with all the attenuators on the market and their design/engineering as well.

But as far as setting the record straight, I did, at several points, inquire about the Ulitmate guys and he simple would just laugh and shake his head. It seemed as though he kind of didn't care. He knew the truth and that was okay, I guess. He just kind of strikes you as this sweet, older gentleman that works in his small shop doing what he loves to do. He could care less about the rest...

All I know is what I saw with my own eyes and simply want to pass on the info. If you choose to pay a couple hundred bucks more for one that says, "Ultimate" on the front, that's up to you. If I do recall, Mark did come on here once and reluctantly agree, albeit a caveat or two, about Ho.

Again, call Ho and ASK him. Be prepared for an interesting conversation and wait for the laugh. You won't forget it...

This all, of course, could have changed since then. Although, the Ultimate website still had a lot of the same verbiage back then. Only one way to find out.

Best of luck

[Ulysses]

That's the strangest story I've heard. So this guy is laughing and shaking his head at a company advertising that they are licensed to manufacture the UA but yet he is the one supplying them for them to sell.

I did find an announcement for the launching of HoElectronics website from over a year ago but it is still largely under construction. With Magus Inc. running a full retail, customer service, and warranty website with licensing for his entire product line complete with all relevant details, specifications, reviews, press, etc., while Ho has nothing posted on his, not even an e-mail contact address he must have more to tell. I would think there is quite a bit more to his involvement with Magus Inc. than just a good laugh and a shaking of the head at something he could care less about....while proudly displaying a Tonequest Report about Magus Inc. on his shop wall? So you are saying I can get a UA the same as mine from Ho for $239?

[AnthonyL]

That's the strangest story I've heard. So this guy is laughing and shaking his head at a company advertising that they are licensed to manufacture the UA but yet he is the one supplying them for them to sell.

I did find an announcement for the launching of HoElectronics website from over a year ago but it is still largely under construction. With Magus Inc. running a full retail, customer service, and warranty website with licensing for his entire product line complete with all relevant details while Ho has nothing posted on his, I would think there is quite a bit more to his involvement than just a laugh and a shaking of the head about something he could care less about. So you are saying I can get a UA from Ho for $239?


I'm surprised he even has any type of website at all... When I first went to his shop, I swear I must of passed the place a dozen times before I found it. It's small, old, loaded with amps and has signed pictures hanging on the wall, mostly famous Canadian bands/artist, of course. He's just this older, humble, Korean gentleman tucked away in a small Korean neighborhood. It's a 1950's era, small, electronics repair store in Vancouver, Canada. Who knows... I know when I walked in I never would have suspected it. I believe I was the first to ever mention him on the board back then. So, up until that point no one knew. So, go figure... I would guess that Ho simply worked a deal with Ultimate to sell/market his attenuators. I could totally see how he would have zero interest or time to set-up a website, market, promote, legal issues, warranties, etc... It's just not him. If someone happens to hear about him or walk into the store, he sells one without the Ultimate logo, that's all.

I think I paid around $300 for mine and I had two options added. For each additional option, he charges half of what's listed on the Ultimate site. At least he did back then.

Call Ho, call Ultimate. Ask them both and then decide...

[Deuce007]

From a couple of latest reviews on HC it looks like Hos Atts. are goin for around 440 USD.

http://reviews.harmony-central.com/reviews/Effects/product/Ho%27s+Electronics/Perfect+Attenuator/10/1

[mitch236]

I called Ho today and ordered one as well. It is interesting talking to him, he is a wealth of information. And the description of him being an unassuming man is very true. Call him. Save some money.

[Ulysses]

I called Ho today and ordered one as well. It is interesting talking to him, he is a wealth of information. And the description of him being an unassuming man is very true. Call him. Save some money.

How much was it and when is projected delivery date? I'd gladly order one from Ho, I need another for my work gear. The main reason I chose The Ultimate Attenuator is they have full tech support, warranty center, and liscensing in the US for the product. Ho didn't even have an e-mail address and long distance international phone call to Canada can be quite expensive. Also, what kind of import and customs duties will you end up getting hit with? Every time I've bought something out of Canada, I receive an invoice a few weeks later from the Customs declaration clearing house. Once I had to pay $150 on a $350 item. I refused to pay the cost because it was not mentioned in the sale and they turned me over to a collection agancy that filed against my credit report.

[jackaroo]

7-10 business days.

Mine was 450 with a bunch of options 2 levels, footswitch, line out, & 100v tap. The UA was quoted to me 30 minutes before for 440 with none of that stuff, but it's got the sticker. The options alone, if purchased at UA would have been another 300 dollars... @ Ho they cost me less than half of that.

Ironically the tech support and repair that you mention is Ho.

The price of my conversation with Ho was certainly less than the upcharge at UA.

As for the duties... I'm not sure. I'm going to call Ho now and find out. I'll post with an answer in a few.


Uly, maybe just wait a week or so, and let's figure out if the insides are the same as yours, all nice and clean etc. before you order one from Ho direct?


Just a thought.

Jack

[Ulysses]

Hey Jack, unfortunately the seller is usually not aware nor do they have control over what happens at Customs. I bought an AC30 from Canada as well as '60 Strat and even though NEITHER was from country of origin Canada, the clearing house went after me for quite a lot of money. I didn't end up paying it but it was a long fight with a ton of red-tape to get free from the hounding. They turn it over to collection agencies and they are relentless. I did end up having to pay $150 on a $350 item I bought from Canada. The seller assuered my import taxes would be no more than $20. The biggest surprise was the customs clearing house didn't send me a bill until nearly 3 months after the purchase. I don't know on how consistent of basis they enforce import taxes. It's happened to me enough to avoid buying from Canada. I ran up an $82 phone bill once talking to a seller from Canada so that's another reason I chose domestic. Ho should get an e-mail address.

I paid $439 for mine but was told I really didn't need any additional features for the use I had described. My tech's are the guys here locally at Komet Amps and he told me he could add anything I need for a few dollars for parts anyway. Not that I plan on selling mine but I've noticed the used Ultimate Attenuators sell very close to retail on Ebay. I think the name recognition is much greater due to the amount of press in guitar mags.

[troykennedy]

I just ordered a 50 watt standard version from Ho for $300. This is for an AC30.
He suggested I add a 100 watt tap for $25. Said it would take two weeks. Seems like a sweet guy. Very kind on the phone. Not web savvy. Said he would have his son email me when it was going to ship. I'll let you know when I get it and get to gig with it. Pretty cool. We'll see if customs tries to bill me.

[troykennedy]

I have bought a couple of things from Canada before and never got that customs charge. One was a Tokai Les Paul copy for $500. Not a word from customs though. This was about 3 1/2 years ago.

I guess we'll see if it matters.

[jackaroo]

Yeah man... Hogy's the man for sure. Those Komets are something else. I just hope he doesn't get pissed and leave the board like so many other builders and players. A great resource. That puts you near Baton Rougue then I suppose?

As for the taxes thing- I just got off the phone with Ho, and he said he's never had a customer talk to him about it, and that Mark told him there were no duties or surcharges on the shipments he sends to UA.

Given your past Canadian customs experiences, your excitement about the UA and your affiliation/relationship with Hogy another UA might still be best for you.

BTW- That 20 watter in the clip...vintage too I suppose? I like those little guys, but still like the big bottles like KT66 and el34s the most in Marshalls.

J

[AnthonyL]

Hey Jack, unfortunately the seller is usually not aware nor do they have control over what happens at Customs. I bought an AC30 from Canada as well as '60 Strat and even though NEITHER was from country of origin Canada, the clearing house went after me for quite a lot of money. I didn't end up paying it but it was a long fight with a ton of red-tape to get free from the hounding. They turn it over to collection agencies and they are relentless. I did end up having to pay $150 on a $350 item I bought from Canada. The seller assuered my import taxes would be no more than $20. The biggest surprise was the customs clearing house didn't send me a bill until nearly 3 months after the purchase. I don't know on how consistent of basis they enforce import taxes. It's happened to me enough to avoid buying from Canada. I ran up an $82 phone bill once talking to a seller from Canada so that's another reason I chose domestic. Ho should get an e-mail address.

I paid $439 for mine but was told I really didn't need any additional features for the use I had described. My tech's are the guys here locally at Komet Amps and he told me he could add anything I need for a few dollars for parts anyway. Not that I plan on selling mine but I've noticed the used Ultimate Attenuators sell very close to retail on Ebay. I think the name recognition is much greater due to the amount of press in guitar mags.

You're from Red Stick?

I'm an LSU grad...

Anyway, I've never had any duties/fees when I've purchased from Canada. The Canadian guys have to pay. I know this from living there as well as when I've shipped guitars.

I know several other members have purchased from Ho before, so maybe they can chime in...

[Ulysses]

You're from Red Stick?

I'm an LSU grad...

Anyway, I've never had any duties/fees when I've purchased from Canada. The Canadian guys have to pay. I know this from living there as well as when I've shipped guitars.

I know several other members have purchased from Ho before, so maybe they can chime in...

Very cool, what part of town were you in when you were here and what year?

I'm not imagining this, it's a fact. I've gotten nailed no less than a half dozen times over the the last few years with import fees...ESPECIALLY with UPS who submits all receipts to the clearing house. I had a year and a half long fight trying to get out of paying some serious import fees in a vintage Strat, country of origin USA but they still tried and fought until the end and even hit my credit report with it. I bought a new AC30TBX about 5 years ago from a dealer up there and was hit with substantial fees again. I just had to pay a $45 customs fee on a pedal I bought and also $150 on a $350 item that I frefused to pay and ended going on my credit repost whan they turned over to a US collection agancy. There are some cases where I bought the same type of item and avoided anything, it seems random but it happens as much as not.

In EVERY one of these cases the seller swore I would not have to pay anything. Two or three times they said IF I did, it wouldn't be more than $20 so the seller has little control or knowledge of what customs decides to do. I don't care what anybody comes on here and says, it happens all the time and it happens to a lot of people. Do a google search about surprise charges from Canadian customs that sometimes show up months later.

Also, both UPS and DHL have brokerage houses that attach significant surcharges to clear the border. Not sure about Fedex.

here's an Ebay warning to use Canada Post or USPS to avoid additional brokerage (not import duty or taxes which still apply) like I said UPS charged me $150 brokerage fees on a $350 pedal, this was in ADDITION to customs:

http://rover.ebay.com/ar/1/711-53200-19255-0/1?mpt=[CacheBuster]&adtype=1&size=1x1&type=4&campid=5335828753&toolid=10001&mpre=http%3A%2F%2Freviews.ebay.com%2FBEWARE-HIDDEN-UPS-amp-FEDEX-SHIPPING-BROKERAGE-FEES_W0QQugidZ10000000004607819http://reviews.ebay.com/BEWARE-HIDDEN-UPS-amp-FEDEX-SHIPPING-BROKERAGE-FEES_W0QQugidZ10000000004607819 (http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-53200-19255-0/1?type=3&campid=5335828753&toolid=10001&mpre=http%3A%2F%2Freviews.ebay.com%2FBEWARE-HIDDEN-UPS-amp-FEDEX-SHIPPING-BROKERAGE-FEES_W0QQugidZ10000000004607819)

[Ulysses]

More confusing (and sometimes conflicting) Canada customs info if anyone wants to try and make sense:

http://www.redflagdeals.com/forums/showthread.php?t=411633

[troykennedy]

Yikes!

[papa taco]

I like Ho. He reminds me of Yoda. And his attenuator is awesome.

[jackaroo]

Mmmmm.

[* velcro-fly *]

If you aren't familiar with the Ultimate Attenuator, the name is a bit of a misnomer. It is more of a reamping device than attenuator and the effect is nothing short of remarkable. Now that I'm off the road after 34 years of playing live and loud, I've missed the tone from my old AC30, 50w plexi, etc. because they are just too loud for home use. I'm sure the same thing everyone is going through and I just cannot be satisfied with the compromise of the puny sound of lo-watt boutique amps and especially the mush and fizz from standard attenuators when reduced to "bedroom level".



Are you "J45" from the LPF ? Nice to finally hear some examples of your playing...very good indeed and a great demo of the UA.

Steve E

[mj07]

My SLP is a whole new animal with my UA. I got it to handle my Major a bit. It handles the 200 watts great. I was blowing fuses with the airbrake, then realized it was not really suited to anything over 100 watts.Not a problem with the UA.

[Freedom]

Thanks for posting Ulysses...i have already ordered my UA (200W ver) and your clip is a nice demo of what to expect from it (although i ll use it with my Super Lead)...

Great tone and playing bro...:AOK

[Ulysses]

Are you "J45" from the LPF ? Nice to finally hear some examples of your playing...very good indeed and a great demo of the UA.

Steve E


Yes, that's me. I actually have posted quite a few clips over there. I have a lot of interest in the tiny, primitive, amps with just 3 tubes from the 1950's and early 60's. Most have 8" speakers. I find they have more widespread character and different voices than all the new boutiques and really even most of the vintage classics. I do have my AC30, blackface Fender, and 1970 50w small box that are the bread and butter sounds I use but if I'm doing tracks on a record I really want to find a voice that stands out, not just the same old Les paul/Marshall tone that has been used to death. I appreciate the Trainwreck and Dumble sounds (I've owned one and had opportunties to play the other on occassion) but tire easily of them and prefer voices that are less refined and have lots of unique character and are also unpredictable from note to note. To me it's a lot like singing voices. I'd much rather hear something on the quirky side that might break up or squeek, or do something unpredictable every now and then, same with amps. I find these tones more often in the small vintage amps and I love to make sound clips with groups of them at once just to show there are a lot more unique flavors out there than the Fender/Marshall/Vox schools or Trainwreck/Dumbles, etc.

[jackaroo]

I totally agree about the little amps w/big character thing. They also record great! Somehow, the lower amp volumes allow different mics and a little more detail/gain out of the pre-amp. However sometimes you just need the classics... AC30 this or Fender BF that for a track.

[hogy]

My SLP is a whole new animal with my UA. I got it to handle my Major a bit. It handles the 200 watts great. I was blowing fuses with the airbrake, then realized it was not really suited to anything over 100 watts.Not a problem with the UA.

I would absolutely not use any type of attenuator with a Major, including the UA.
The Major is prone to blowing OTs as is.

[ukslinger]

So if I'm using one of these to tame a germino lv55 mostly for home use, do I need any of the various options like the plexi and bedroom switch? I play out some, so gig level attenuation would be nice too. But mostly to get good overdrive at low volumes.

[jackaroo]

I'm told the plexi switch just brings in a bunch of highs. The bedroom switch brings it down even lower...how that's possible I don't know. I'm sure some folks like the options, but I skipped them and was encouraged subtly to do so by both Mark and Ho.

I want the amp at least louder than the strings...who doesn't?

[Ulysses]

, but I skipped them and was encouraged subtly to do so by both Mark and Ho.


+1. In so many words I was also led to believe that I would be just as well off without either plexi or bedroom switch when I inquired about the options.

[Ed DeGenaro]

I would absolutely not use any type of attenuator with a Major, including the UA.
The Major is prone to blowing OTs as is.
Plus I can't think of any attenuator that can take the wattage...

[Belmont]

hi guys and girls,my first time here,looks like a great forum.I saw this thread and had to jump in.I have known Yukong Ho for about 20 years now he's fixed dozens of amps for me and my bandmates over the years.I'm lucky because I live blocks away from his shop and he's always had my stuff ready in a couple of days,and charged less than seemed possible,he would bias for free when you bought tubes from him.You'd walk into his shop and there would be Hiwatts, Fenders and Marshalls stacked everywhere.I remember years ago when he showed me early attenuators when he started making them.He made me a load box/variac years ago and has always designed numerous devices.He is a very humble and egoless man and he doesn't even put stickers or labels on anything he builds,very unassuming guy.The truth is he's the inventor and maker of the UA as Mangus Innovations calls it,Ho does just laugh and calls it simply his attenuator,we all know its a re-amp device and that's why it works better than actual attenuators.I bought one recently from a pawnshop and took it to Yukong and had him upgrade it to a 200w load.When I was in his shop there were a couple UA Magnus stickered ones in for upgrades and a couple of his amps.Magnus simply markets them for the USA.As far as the neatness of the wiring and such you have to remember that he is not a boutique amp "soldering artiste" he is an amp repair tech (40yrs)who just happens to design devices for guitarists.I'm glad he doesn't have that "boutique" attitude because he'd charge a lot more,word is getting out and I think we'll see some changes in the future.Well sorry for the long winded post I just hope people know who really makes these incredible devices.

[Belmont]

I'm told the plexi switch just brings in a bunch of highs. The bedroom switch brings it down even lower...how that's possible I don't know. I'm sure some folks like the options, but I skipped them and was encouraged subtly to do so by both Mark and Ho.

I want the amp at least louder than the strings...who doesn't?
I asked him about this, he just adds a resistor to the level control, making its range go from 0 to 5watts total.I find on mine I don't need it as I can get really low volume as is.It's only a $25.00 upgrade though.

[WurstBurst]

I have the Ho Attenuator. It works exactly as advertised (well, there's no actual advertisements, but whatever).

Highly recommended.

[mitch236]

+1. In so many words I was also led to believe that I would be just as well off without either plexi or bedroom switch when I inquired about the options.

That's funny. When I spoke with Ho he suggested I get the Plexi switch. I guess he listened to what I have and the sound I like. Who knows. Maybe he had a bunch of the parts laying around and decided to sell some. Either way, I wouldn't buy one without the Plexi option because you can always turn it off but can't turn it on unless you have it.

[767400]

I'm a big attenuator fan also. Your tone is fantastic!

[Jack71]

Still no gut shots of the Ho version? I'm with Ulysses on this one. I would need to see the inside.

It's about more than just looking neat and tidy. Bad solder joints and other workmanship issues can lead to bigger problems. I'm not saying that any of that is true with Ho's version. But if it really is a case of Ho building the complete unit and Mangus just slapping a sticker on it, then pics of the inside would certainly support or refute that assertion.

[Belmont]

I really don't want to insult anyone here but,there really is no mystery at all as to who makes,and has always made these units(Ho).I'll post a pic as soon as I can.I think Mark has even publicly stated such and changed his website info.:BEER

[rhythmeister]

Hey all,

Was looking at the UA site and some language there seems to be saying that the UA is good for impedence mismatch. Here's the language:

"The basic unit can be used with 2, 4, 8 and 16 ohm amps or impedance taps and can be used with 4,8 or 16 ohm cabinets in any impedance combination..."

Does that mean I can run off my amp's 16 ohm tap through the UA into a 4 ohm cab safely?

Cheers,
Blair

[vendo]

I just bought a unit from Mr. Ho yesterday while I was in Vancouver. I called him in the morning asking for an attenuator to meet my needs. I wanted a 200w unit with the plexi switch. He told me his turnaround time was a week, and that there was no need to pay him in advance. I explained that I was not going to be back intown for at leats a month so I would drop by, pay him for it and return for it in a month or so time. He paused briefly and told me he would have one ready for me by the end of his business day! No prepayment necessary, didn't ask for a credit card, etc. He took me at my word over the phone that I would be there to pick it up and pay him.

When I went to his shop on Kingsway, all of the descriptors I have heard were obviously true. Very small shop, amps everywhere, etc. Mr. Ho himself is a very genuine and gracious man. I chatted with him for a while and he explained to me how his unit works. I know nothing about electronics but he did mention that it uses a dummy load and reamplifies. Other attenuators according to him just use a bunch of resistors. Anyway, he had several of his units lying around in various stages of build and all of them were build very neatly. There was no mess of spaghetti wiring in anything I saw.

I mentioned to him about how his work in well known on discussion pages like TGP and he just chuckled. After talking a while I totally get the "electronic savant" and "Yoda" comment. He seems simply to be a master technician who sells his product and gets satisfaction from providing his service/products. He has worked for musicians of far greater skill and fame than me (a basement hack wannabe) but he treated me like I imagine he'd treat anybody. He probably knows he could market them heavily and make a fortune, etc but I get the impression he doesn't care about stuff like that.

Anyhow, the "Ho box" I bought is awesome like everyone says. Mr. Ho is a very nice individual. If you're in Vancouver, stop by his shop and pick one up from him. I'm sure you'll have as good an experience as I did.

[mitch236]

My "Ho" should be here this week. Can you imagine my suprise when Mr. Ho calls me personally to tell me that my unit has shipped and wants me to call him back when I get it to tell him what my impressions are. If it is easy, I will take some guts shots but I have to believe that this is the real deal.

[markom89]

Please forgive me if this has already been asked, but is the Marshall a reissue or a real vintage one? Sounds great! Thanks.

[jzucker]

I have one coming tomorrow. It's a 200w version with plexi, variable line out, 100v tap and bedroom switch. I'll be posting clips this weekend using it. I won't get to the full (exclusive) review of it for a week or two since I have about 8 pedals in the queue for review but I'll be using it right away!

[jackaroo]

Ho's awesome...pretty funny guy and I have some pretty great news...at least to me it's a great development in this technology...

Ho called me last week to tell me that my attenuator was done early and would be shipping the next day- Unfortunately for him, I started talking about a concept and we actually decided to build something new. So the gut shot of the attenuator for a Ho vs. UA comparison will be delayed.

Here's what he's building for me:

I, like most folks, love the tone of driving an amp by cranking it not by using pedals. But most of the amps I like are more old school in design. Great tone, but I always miss the echo, reverb FX that get mushy whe front loaded- yes, you can get that with a loop (newer amp) or a wet/dry rig just not with these amps and I wont do the whole W/D thing for live...just too much stuff to lug around.

So, Ho's building my attenuator with a buffered adjustable line out (send) that can be sent to my FX, and then returned (buffered and adjustable again) to the same attenuator box where the FX are fed into their own separate SS power amp...just like the one used to handle the attenuated tone from the amp. The level of the FX return is chained to the output of the 2 level attenuator, so everything rises and falls in level simultaneously. There's a wet out and a dry out and all you need is a single 4x12 or 2x12 wired in stereo to have a wet/dry rig without hauling or buying an extra amp or cab! r you can get the blend from just the wet side a la an amp with a regular loop.

Long winded explanation (sorry) and not for everyone I'm sure...but this is a dream come true for me, as I love my delays on dirty/saturated tones...but don't want to bring the whole w/d rig everywhere.
BTW- for the loop mod was an extra 200 bucks.

I'll give a full review soon.

[blueschild]

Hello guys!
Thanks a lot for info about Mr`Ho craft, you’ve been very helpful ! I’m first time one this forum and I would appreciate a lot if somebody would give me some extra info about HO'S HEAD SWITCHER and maybe custom options for it.
thanks again!

[alivegy]

So, Ho's building my attenuator with a buffered adjustable line out (send) that can be sent to my FX, and then returned (buffered and adjustable again) to the same attenuator box where the FX are fed into their own separate SS power amp...just like the one used to handle the attenuated tone from the amp. The level of the FX return is chained to the output of the 2 level attenuator, so everything rises and falls in level simultaneously. There's a wet out and a dry out and all you need is a single 4x12 or 2x12 wired in stereo to have a wet/dry rig without hauling or buying an extra amp or cab! r you can get the blend from just the wet side a la an amp with a regular loop.

Long winded explanation (sorry) and not for everyone I'm sure...but this is a dream come true for me, as I love my delays on dirty/saturated tones...but don't want to bring the whole w/d rig everywhere.
BTW- for the loop mod was an extra 200 bucks.

I'll give a full review soon.

Wow, I wondered why they didn't build it that way in the first place. If it works that will have to be an option he adds in the future. I bought mine without any options but I would ship it back to have that integrated.

[jackaroo]

Yes indeed...

He said mine would be the first he's built so we'll see how it works.

I don't think it can fit in the same box. The extra power amp, jacks and wiring take up some more room. The new enclosure is a few inches wider and longer- still small enough to sit on a small box size head- and has rubber feet that are tall enough to fit over an amp handle (3/4") So it would take some doing to add the circuitry I'd imagine.

I'll post some clips and pix when it's here!

J

[AbbeSauniere]

Hey all,

Was looking at the UA site and some language there seems to be saying that the UA is good for impedence mismatch. Here's the language:

"The basic unit can be used with 2, 4, 8 and 16 ohm amps or impedance taps and can be used with 4,8 or 16 ohm cabinets in any impedance combination..."

Does that mean I can run off my amp's 16 ohm tap through the UA into a 4 ohm cab safely?

Cheers,
BlairThey are claiming that the UA can be used as a impedance matcher. This is straight from the Tech section of the Ultimate site. I was wondering the same thing since I currently use a Weber Z Matcher and was wondering how I was going to patch everything together...

A word about impedance and load.
With the UA you don't need to worry about different impedances, mismatches or even plugging in your speakers at all. In other words, you can use any amp with any impedance, 4, 8 or 16 (we even have a 2 ohm option). You can run a 4 ohm amp into a 16 ohm cabinet or any combination you want. You can also use an A\B box to switch cabinets as well making the UA a true impedance matching device."

[donbarzini]

You know, this is something I thought about for a while, I spoke with Randall Aiken about this once. I would have to agree with cochese. Couldn't the signal just go through a built in buffered loop before it gets reamped?

[jzucker]

You know, this is something I thought about for a while, I spoke with Randall Aiken about this once. I would have to agree with cochese. Couldn't the signal just go through a built in buffered loop before it gets reamped?

or even a dumbleator?

[jackaroo]

Cochese-

The loop's power amp is very small, and weighs a few ounces...so no big deal.

BTW why add more distortion at the re-amp stage? I want what I have...just quiet enough to not shake my whole house. I think this is one application where the cleanliness of SS is best actaully. Light loud and clean power. Perfect.

I'm sure that there are refinements that could be made to this new design- and arguments for having be a loop on the main poweramp that reamps the dry signal rathyer than a separate one makes sense...basically a loop. I asked if we could have a separate one for the FX so that would be a real wet/dry rig- but in one box. I'll just be bringing the 100% wet output back to the second amp and that way nothing gets messed with too much, and I can control the blend at the attenuator.

I guess one could just take the blend on the unit themselves and set the FX levels there and just have the one SS amp doing the whole thing. I like the thought of separating them...but what do I know- this is all new to me. Seems like it could be done...Ho just went with my idea and made it happen.

Yes, this is like having a FOH guy that knows all my FX moves and puts them through the PA- thing is...

I DON'T HAVE THAT LUXURY 99.9% of the time!

What about when I'm rehearsing or just having fun at home.

So anyway, with this one being the first to try this kind of thing I'm sure it will get better from here, but I'm happy to be the guinea pig. I just am so sick of not hearing what I want out of my rig all the time. I think this will really help me get closer to that goal.


Peace-

j

[Belmont]

Sorry but this is a bit of a wasted step. While having the effects routed to a secondary amp is fine in and of itself there is really no need. The way this device works is to run the output of your tube amp into a load and then reamplify the signal through a solid state power section that does not produce distortion of it's own. This is akin to mic'ing an amp in the studio or stage and playing it through the board and applying effects post mic and then it is sent through studio monitors or house speakers. I'm not quite sure why he just doesn't install a buffered parallel loop. You would not need the weight or space of another solid state amp and you could run the attenuated signal to a single speaker. As for using an amp with it's own effects loop with Ho's attenuator once you crank up the amp and start getting output stage distortion the loop will sound just as bad as if you were running effects in front of the amp. I spoke with Ho a few weeks ago and was a little surprised that he was only offering a line out and no loop. This is a step in the right direction but the execution could be better.
this is not a wasted step if you want to monitor your dry and wet signals separately,physically through speakers,which is a far better method than a blended signal through the same cabinet.he's simply eliminating the need to carry another power amp that's all.I don't see this as a waste at all.

[traynor_garnet]

I sold a couple of pedals so I just ordered my Ho attenuator; I cannot wait to hear it!!!!! :P

In terms of options I went for the plexi switch, bedroom switch, 100v regulated AC tap, and the dual volume footswitch.

Ho is also a great guy and really took the time to explain the unit to me. He even talked me out of the 200 watt version because he said I simply don't need it (loudest amp is 50 watts).

Now an agonizing two week wait; of course, my fiancee's reaction may be more painful . . .

TG

[jackaroo]

Well I'm not really looking to make smaller amps louder...but that is a cool option.

Yes indeed, the Guytron does this same trick with the tube power amp w/el34s after the whole el 84 amp that act as the "pre" Great Idea and it sounds very very good...I think the head weighs north of 75 pounds too! I just like the Ho option because any amp can now become more flexible...a D13 with a loop and a Master volume and 2 levels for live use ? Comin' right up...how about a Mashall? Ding! So While the Guytron is an awesome amp and very well engineered...I just though why not have that ability with basically any head?

As for a Bradshaw rig...yep same idea except I don't have to haul a huge rack with a mixer etc and be out 1000's of $$$ for the rig itself...though I'd love to have the ability to do so!

BTW- No one said that a parallel loop would add more distortion. It was a tube power amp that was in question there.

I think Ho just followed my lead in terms of using a second amp for the wet signal. But, as stated in each of my post re: the send to wet- My assumption is that one could get the blend right on the effect itself and send the signal (wet and dry blended) from the second power amp only...just like a loop- into any old regular cabinet. No?

Funny enough- I feel like I've had more trouble explaining this whole thing here than I had describing it to Ho...He understood me perfectly. Ironic that the communication gap is between two dudes that speak English as their first language!

;-)

Just the same...I'm excited.

Peace-
J

[Belmont]

Ho's english is fine,I've never had a problem.You're right I still don't get the "waste" point,nope not gettin it.the guy wants to monitor with two cabs.

[alivegy]

It also seems weird that they just don't make it so you can use a smaller amp louder as a standard feature. According to the Magnus site this feature works with a "second" cab and I found that a bit confusing. Maybe I should speak with Ho again. While I like my Guytron (by the way the head weighs 50 lbs and a Bogner Ecstasy weighs 53 lbs) I would like to be able to use my smaller amps like my Top Hat Club Deluxe and modified Fender Deluxe at home and with my band. Both of those amps are too loud for home use and not loud enough for band use.

It can make a lower power amp louder. The wattage rating of the Ultimate/Ho attenuator is not it's maximum load handling, but rather the power of the reamping circuit. So if you plugged a 5 watt amp into a 200 watt model. I'm sure you would find an increase in volume.

[Belmont]

here's my wet dry rig with a regular Ho Att. the JCM900 is used as a power amp only for the effects signal coming from the line out of the Ho Att. it works extremely well.I love how the line out level is not affected by the main attenuator level,easy to match levels.http://www.meshripples.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/wet31.jpg

[jzucker]

Here's a clip I just did with mine:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlHUNn_YZ6Y

[Belmont]

nice tone and playing,so is Ulysses clip at the beginning of the thread.

[Ulysses]

Here's a clip I just did with mine:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlHUNn_YZ6Y

Sounds very good if that is attenuated down to bedroom. Very fat and throaty with no thinned out, mushy mids from attenuating. I think your guitar level is a little soft and boomy in the clip for my taste and I would like more hi's to here some of that killer playing. The backbeat on the drum track is also killing me on my little computer speakers but please don't mind my two cents....may be just the way my speakers play it..

What are your initial impressions? I find there's a three way tweak to find the sweetspot for each tone you go for. I start by getting my amp in the ballpark of the sound I'm going for then attenuate down to the level I want. Then it takes me a little time to find the sweet spot by raising and lowering both UA and amp to fine tune to get the optimum reproduction of my amps sound, then slightly tweak my guitar. As a general rule, I find I end up raising the UA level to give back a little input then lowering the amp a good bit from where I initially start my sound and still maintain the same overdrive at low level. At least for me it's not been a device you just plug in, dime your amp then crank down on the attenuator. There's a balance in there to be found for each sound you go for.

[hogy]

It can make a lower power amp louder. The wattage rating of the Ultimate/Ho attenuator is not it's maximum load handling, but rather the power of the reamping circuit. So if you plugged a 5 watt amp into a 200 watt model. I'm sure you would find an increase in volume.

That's definitely not true. I have the 200W version and that does indicate the handling. The UA also does NOT make a smaller amp louder, If I run a 15 Watter into my 200W UA, it never gets louder than the amp unattenuated, even with the UA's volume at max.

[Ulysses]

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y127/swlabr/ua1.jpg

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y127/swlabr/ua4.jpg


If anyone can add internal pics of various versions in this thread it would be appreciated. -Uly

[traynor_garnet]

The "200 Watt" option refers to the unit's ability to handle/attenuate high volume amps (100 watt amps need this option). This has nothing to do with boosting an amp's volume.

The "Wattage Doubler" option does allow you to make an amp louder. Since the UA is a reamping system, the wattage doubler allows you to reamp the attenuated signal at a louder volume than your amp can do on its own.

TG



That's definitely not true. I have the 200W version and that does indicate the handling. The UA also does NOT make a smaller amp louder, If I run a 15 Watter into my 200W UA, it never gets louder than the amp unattenuated, even with the UA's volume at max.

[WurstBurst]

If anyone can add internal pics of various versions in this thread it would be appreciated. -Uly

Here are pics of the internals of my Ho Attenuator.

I'm not an expert, so I won't comment on whether this is the same or different from the UA build.

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l274/windsleeper/hoattenuator001.jpg

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l274/windsleeper/hoattenuator002.jpg

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l274/windsleeper/hoattenuator003.jpg

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l274/windsleeper/hoattenuator004.jpg

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l274/windsleeper/hoattenuator005.jpg

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l274/windsleeper/hoattenuator006.jpg

[hogy]

Wow.

These things are all over the place.

[shuie]

Wow. Not a lot to it. I really hope one of these guys has a patent on this device. The $50 Chinese version will probably hit eBay before the holiday weekend starts at close of business this Thursday. The cloners should have a kit available within the next two weeks. Marshall and Fender are probably in a race to steal the design, patent it, market it as their own, and have it in production within the year.

[okie]

Here's my Ho built attenuator that I got here on the TGP emporium:

http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p136/okiegibson/Guitars/IMG_0582.jpg

http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p136/okiegibson/Guitars/IMG_0581.jpg

[troykennedy]

Good grief! Is anyone making sense of these things? Does it look like the HO version is a rip-off? Are they just nuances of the same design? Cheaper parts or more advanced parts etc....

I ordered the 50 watter from HO a little while ago at not much of a discount from the UA version. I will try and give him a call tomorrow so he knows this is a topic of discussion. That a bunch of guys are comparing the guts to the Magus versions and asking questions. If something is squirrely it needs to get cleared up.

[Ulysses]

I don't think there is any rip-off going on here whatsoever. Just looks like two different builds from two different people which is what I was told in the beginning. Everybody that comments says they love their respective attenuator and they seem to sound identical. They are both an excellent units, we all know Ho is the original designer and Magus Inc. is lisenced to build and distribute the "Ultimate Attenuator" version in the US.. It really does appear there are two distinct builds here. The UA's seem consistent with parts and build technique and the Ho's likewise. Each even has a distinctly different substance hiding the values of components on the PC board. At this point and from what I've seen, I do NOT believe these are both built by the same person as many here have insisted. Now let's go play them....

[Mickey_C]

The toroidal transformer in the UA is a big upgrade. Not being too critical, but I don't think the HO is built to the same standards; it doesn't appear so judging by layout and wiring. I'd be pretty surprised if that unit passed CE inspection. The UA just appears better executed across the board.

No offense intended to HO, just an observation.

[Macaroni]

:munch

[mtlin]

The toroidal transformer in the UA is a big upgrade. Not being too critical, but I don't think the HO is built to the same standards; it doesn't appear so judging by layout and wiring. I'd be pretty surprised if that unit passed CE inspection. The UA just appears better executed across the board.

No offense intended to HO, just an observation.

What's the benefit of a toroidial transformer?

[mitch236]

I'd be pretty surprised if that unit passed CE inspection.


Where is this comment coming from? Are you implying that the "Ho" is unsafe?

[jzucker]

What's the benefit of a toroidial transformer?

lower weight, higher efficiency, lower noise.

I couldn't be happier with my UA . It's going to save my marriage. ;)

[clarkydaz]

for those with a ho version would it be worthwhile swapping out for a toroidal transformer?

[Mickey_C]

The UA unit does not have parts hanging off of the power transformer mounting. Kludges like that will not muster pass a CE inspection. UA has got them properly mounted. The Ho also has a very thrown together look, which is eyebrow raising to say the least. It's not very re-assuring.

The circuit itself is simple enough - a complimentary BJT emitter follower running from split rails (a pos and neg power supply)forming a type of buffered variable power supply using the speaker as a load and the amplifier output as the power source (though obviously there will still be an AC Mains connection for the split rail supply). Your amplifier's output drives a resistive load, NOT REACTIVE, which drops the signal down to a level which is tapped into the emitter follower circuit. In a nutshell - it's a re-amplifier with the simplest possible 2nd amp. I have heard that Ho designed it, and he deserves serious Kudos for that. But the UA is executed professionaly.

I would be seriuosly surprised if either version didn't color the sound somewhat - however, that can be good or bad, and from Kerry's clips I would say it's a good re-amplifier.

What effect the resistive load has on your own particular amp would be dependent upon how well the feedback loop is designed; it may or may not cause your amplifier to oscillate at high-frequencies (beyond hearing) that could damage an OT. Or not... I haven't benched one yet, so I don't know.

Either way, it's very clever... hats off to all folks involved in this one.

[Mickey_C]

One other thing:

I am surprised neither Ho or UA added a buffered FX loop to that circuit. It would've been trivial, and incredibly useful. You could then apply your effects to the whole amplifier chain, including the sound of the OT!

Maybe somebody could feed that back to them for a V2 model?

[mitch236]

I'm not a expert so could you explain this. What parts are hanging off of the power transformer mounting? I just want to know, because I could tell Mr. Ho what feedback his product is getting and I'm certain he would consider all input.

I will mention the buffered effects loop. I'm sure he would add it if it's possible.

[Mickey_C]

The load resistors. They connect to the input on that 12ga copper wire (or so it appears in the picture).

By the way - on the circuit details, I didn't divulge any secrets there - Kevin has published the bulk of the circuit in TUT4 - a worthwhile tome, to say the least.

[alivegy]

One other thing:

I am surprised neither Ho or UA added a buffered FX loop to that circuit. It would've been trivial, and incredibly useful. You could then apply your effects to the whole amplifier chain, including the sound of the OT!

Maybe somebody could feed that back to them for a V2 model?

I was surprised by this too, it seems like with the way it is designed that would be a really easy addition and you could add all of your reverbs and modulation effects post powertube distortion. I'm hoping to ask if mine can be modded in a little bit.

[mitch236]

I talked to Mr Ho today and he came up with a better idea. He is building me an attenuator that has a wet/dry setup. There will be one dry channel that is the attenuator and another channel that is also attenuated but has a loop. That way, if you just want to use the loop, you can but if you want a wet/dry setup with only one amp head, you can. You still need two speaker inputs but that could be done by wiring your cab to be stereo.

[mitch236]

Are you saying that having an amp with negative feedback is a bad thing when using a re-amping product like the UA?

Man, I'm really learning alot about these products!

[hasserl]

A purely resistive load *COULD* cause an issue for an amp design with an inherently unstable NFB loop. It depends on the resistive load and the amp. Obviously an amp like the OP uses doesn't have an NFB anyway. So now it's just the case that the load isn't reacting like a speaker (differing impedance to frequency).

FWIW - nearly every amp tech in the world uses a resistive dummy load for amp testing, so it's not the end of the world (though that's not prolonged usage - and all amps would be better if builders did this with every amp they ship, for sure... reducing the likelihood of the problem). It's still not as good as a reactive load though - bottom line however, if it's not causing damage - WHAT SOUNDS GOOD IS GOOD.

We have other threads on resistive loads here on TGP - search for ATTENUATORS and MERCURY MAGNETICS WARRANTY.

Yeah well, most amp techs use a resistive dummy load of the correct impedance for the amp, not twice, three or four times what the amp should see. But what the heck, let's not quibble about details.

If the OT blows or the tube sockets arc don't blame the UA, the guys right here say so. The problem must be with the amp.

[Belmont]

the "negative feedback loop" seems to be surrounding Ho's reputation.it's too bad word got out about his invention and now I have to read about his good name being called into question,sad.

[traynor_garnet]

Yes, it does seem that some users want to find a difference between Ho and the UA.

What's funny is that despite all the theoretical arguments about why this thing isn't safe/good, we don't really have any actual cases of bad things happening to people's amps. I'm not disputing anyone's technical claims, but how many of these things are being used everyday without problem?

TG


the "negative feedback loop" seems to be surrounding Ho's reputation.it's too bad word got out about his invention and now I have to read about his good name being called into question,sad.

[Belmont]

criticizing his work is fine,but people are questioning his honesty and integrity,not cool.If you don't know the facts,shut yer face. p.s. not you Mickey C

[Dave_C]

I had one when I had my Naylor amp and though it sounded real good from what I remember. To me it wasn't really transparent despite the builders claim though it kind of changed the tone/feel in a good way. The reason I sold it was I was hearing what sounded the sound was coming either through the tubes or tranny at low volumes. It was way annoying and sounded to me like it was damaging the amp. I called the builder and he swore it was safe. I am happy with my hotplate even at highley attenuated levels.

I had one too, but sent it back for the same reasons, plus my amp was getting incredibly hot when using it. That said, it made every amp I used sound smoother and darker than the original amp tone, which I kinda' liked. But, it was very far from transparent. I did a little shootout with the UA, Air Brake, MASS, Hot-Plate and Power Brake. I thought the Air Brake was most transparent, but didn't attenuate down low enough before getting into the 2nd rate "Bedroom" setting. The UA was great for taming bright amps and getting a super creamy lead tone. The MASS did the same kind of thing. Overall, I'm still waiting for someone to make the real ultimate attenuator. Anyone try The Leash yet?

Anyways, that all said, the Marshall clip with the UA does sound! I really love the tone! But, I'd bet the unattenuated amp, with a bright Tele and those bright Celestion golds would not sound as warm and fat. I'd bet the UA, with its 30+ ohm input load is warming up and smoothing out that tone quite a bit.

[Dave_C]

I just have to wonder about the problems reported from the Ho models.

There were also lots of problems reported with the early Magus models. But, it's pretty clear they're one and the same and whatever problems were occuring have been cleared up by Ho, who obviously builds them both.

[zerocharisma]

What would be really interesting (if at all possible) would be to ask if you, Ulysses could make recording of the clip using the same backing track, except without the UA...perhaps when you have some time with the family out of the house. Like others, I really love the tone you got with it. But it would be an interesting comparison. For a long time, I've resisted going without an attenuator for my Marshall, however, your clips have really piqued my interest.:phones

[mitch236]

So if I have an amp that can be set for 4,8 or 16 ohm, I would be better off setting the amp at 16 ohm when using the UA or the "Ho"?

[jzucker]

What would be really interesting (if at all possible) would be to ask if you, Ulysses could make recording of the clip using the same backing track, except without the UA...perhaps when you have some time with the family out of the house. Like others, I really love the tone you got with it. But it would be an interesting comparison. For a long time, I've resisted going without an attenuator for my Marshall, however, your clips have really piqued my interest.:phones

I'm going to be doing a video demo this weekend demonstrating some of the capabilities of the unit including bypassed vs attenuated tone. I have several clips on my product demos page utilizing the UA unit.

[hogy]

I have no idea why he chose a 30-ohm load, as opposed to a more easily matched impedance.

I tried to explain that earlier in the thread. A 16 Ohm speaker only represents a 16 Ohm load to an amp at one specific frequency. In actual use at higher frequencies the load goes way up. So you look at the actual load line across the guitar's frequency spectrum and calculate the median value and you're going to come out very near 30 Ohms.

[Ulysses]

Quote:
Originally Posted by carbz http://img.thegearpage.net/board/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.thegearpage.net/board/showthread.php?p=4290014#post4290014)
I had one when I had my Naylor amp and though it sounded real good from what I remember. To me it wasn't really transparent despite the builders claim though it kind of changed the tone/feel in a good way. The reason I sold it was I was hearing what sounded the sound was coming either through the tubes or tranny at low volumes. It was way annoying and sounded to me like it was damaging the amp. I called the builder and he swore it was safe. I am happy with my hotplate even at highley attenuated levels.


I had one too, but sent it back for the same reasons, plus my amp was getting incredibly hot when using it. That said, it made every amp I used sound smoother and darker than the original amp tone, which I kinda' liked.
.



I think Hogy has already stated that the Ultimate Attunuator is not the cause the noise you are hearing from your trannies and tubes and neither the heat. Your transformers will always make that noise when you have the amp that wound up, you just can't hear it without attenuating the level down this low. Same with the heat. The heat represents the same heat you would get operating the amp at the gain level you choose.

I've been slamming my vintage 1963 AC30 several hours every day for almost three months now with the UA and no issues whatsoever. Same with my vintage 50w Marshall. You do decrease the life of your amp but only because you are actually using it. It's the same wear and tear you would get if you gigged it with the amp at the same settings. Yes I am giving it extra wear and tear. It is much like using your garaged vintage Jaguar E-Type for a daily driver. The positive side is you actually get to use and enjoy. I'd rather use my amp than look at it. If my AC30 flames tomorrow, I will have already got to enjoy it at home more than I would have in the next ten years without the UA. I'm a career player that spent the last 34 years on the road, 150-200 one nighters per year... I'm so used to getting the sound I like and know the touch sensitivity, dynamic range, give and take, etc., of my amps very well. The master volume, power scaling, and standard attenuator otions I've tried just have not been acceptable to my ears. I can honestly say I've bought no less than 20 amps, attenuators, and iso cabs recommended for volume reduction in the past two years trying the type of sound and feel I like at low volume and have not been satisfied until now.

Yes, there is coloring I find in a kind of good, warm, way, but no fizziness or mushy mids like with other options as you can hear in the clip. But.... I find if I set my amp at the desired level of overdrive, attenuate it down with the UA, THEN.. restructure the stages by lowering the amp and raising the UA to find the sweet spot it pretty much comes back. It does take some tweaking.

Last, the Ho is an excellent unit and he is the designer of the device. He DOES NOT build the UA as stated in an above post. He is in partnership with Magus and receives payment for each UA sold but has sold licensing for manufactring and distribution in the USA to the "Ultimate Attenuator" brand name owned by Magus Inc. Magus then standardized the build, increased tolerances on certain parts, then like many manufacturers, sub out the construction overseas. Ho does not build it and you can look at the two and see the UA is very standardized and the Ho model varies quite a bit from unit to unit. He does build some of the special order designs that aren't standard UA models for Magus. After all the speculation I wanted to get to the bottom of this myself.

The main thing is that the Ultimate Attenuator is not the cause of heat and extra trannie noise, it's because you are using the amp at high levels attenuated down to a volume you generally don't associate over-heating
with. The amp is still being driven extremely hard but it's not because of the UA, it's because you are turning it up. If you like to baby your amp and keep it nice and cool in the closet it's probably not for everyone. My amps are now getting heavy use at home but I'm enjoying them like never before. They will look just as good in my closet once I burn them up. If I burn them up it's only because I'm using them at levels I haven't been able to use at home, no different than if I were gigging them live. I am actually enjoying them rather than keeping them nice and cool in the closet. After all, this seems to be the whole point for owning cool amps to me.

[Belmont]

Quote:
Originally Posted by carbz http://img.thegearpage.net/board/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.thegearpage.net/board/showthread.php?p=4290014#post4290014)
I had one when I had my Naylor amp and though it sounded real good from what I remember. To me it wasn't really transparent despite the builders claim though it kind of changed the tone/feel in a good way. The reason I sold it was I was hearing what sounded the sound was coming either through the tubes or tranny at low volumes. It was way annoying and sounded to me like it was damaging the amp. I called the builder and he swore it was safe. I am happy with my hotplate even at highley attenuated levels.





I think Hogy has already stated that the Ultimate Attunuator is not the cause the noise you are hearing from your trannies and tubes and neither the heat. Your transformers will always make that noise when you have the amp that wound up, you just can't hear it without attenuating the level down this low. Same with the heat. The heat represents the same heat you would get operating the amp at the gain level you choose.

I've been slamming my vintage 1963 AC30 several hours every day for almost three months now with the UA and no issues whatsoever. Same with my vintage 50w Marshall. You do decrease the life of your amp but only because you are actually using it. It's the same wear and tear you would get if you gigged it with the amp at the same settings. Yes I am giving it extra wear and tear. It is much like using your garaged vintage Jaguar E-Type for a daily driver. The positive side is you actually get to use and enjoy. I'd rather use my amp than look at it. If my AC30 flames tomorrow, I will have already got to enjoy it at home more than I would have in the next ten years without the UA. I'm a career player that spent the last 34 years on the road, 150-200 one nighters per year... I'm so used to getting the sound I like and know the touch sensitivity, dynamic range, give and take, etc., of my amps very well. The master volume, power scaling, and standard attenuator otions I've tried just have not been acceptable to my ears. I can honestly say I've bought no less than 20 amps, attenuators, and iso cabs recommended for volume reduction in the past two years trying the type of sound and feel I like at low volume and have not been satisfied until now.

Yes, there is coloring I find in a kind of good, warm, way, but no fizziness or mushy mids like with other options as you can hear in the clip. But.... I find if I set my amp at the desired level of overdrive, attenuate it down with the UA, THEN.. restructure the stages by lowering the amp and raising the UA to find the sweet spot it pretty much comes back. It does take some tweaking.

Last, the Ho is an excellent unit and he is the designer of the device. He DOES NOT build the UA as stated in an above post. He is in partnership with Magus and receives payment for each UA sold but has sold licensing for manufactring and distribution in the USA to the "Ultimate Attenuator" brand name owned by Magus Inc. Magus then standardized the build, increased tolerances on certain parts, then like many manufacturers, sub out the construction overseas. Ho does not build it and you can look at the two and see the UA is very standardized and the Ho model varies quite a bit from unit to unit. He does build some of the special order designs that aren't standard UA models for Magus. After all the speculation I wanted to get to the bottom of this myself.

The main thing is that the Ultimate Attenuator is not the cause of heat and extra trannie noise, it's because you are using the amp at high levels attenuated down to a volume you generally don't associate over-heating
with. The amp is still being driven extremely hard but it's not because of the UA, it's because you are turning it up. If you like to baby your amp and keep it nice and cool in the closet it's probably not for everyone. My amps are now getting heavy use at home but I'm enjoying them like never before. They will look just as good in my closet once I burn them up. If I burn them up it's only because I'm using them at levels I haven't been able to use at home, no different than if I were gigging them live. I am actually enjoying them rather than keeping them nice and cool in the closet. After all, this seems to be the whole point for owning cool amps to me.
I agree 100% with everything you've said except the part about him not building the UA.I was in his shop last week and he showed me a cheap prototype UA that is going to be made for Magnus in China.I'm going to call him today and see if I can get some better answers.

[hasserl]

Regarding the impedance (resistance), As mentioned before, speakers have frequency dependent impedance. A 16 ohm speaker will only present a 16 ohm load for a portion of its frequency bandwidth. Check this pdf on an Eminence 16 ohm speaker: http://eminence.com/pdf/manowar-16.pdf The dark line in the graph is the efficiency of the speaker at the specific frequency noted along the bottom of the graph. The light gray line is the impedance of the speaker at those frequencies. The impedance legend is along the right hand side of the graph. Looking at that 30 ohms doesn't seem so bad, does it?

Now look at an 8 ohm speaker: http://eminence.com/pdf/commonwealth-12.pdf That's a little different, ain't it?

With the 16 ohm speaker, it is showing 30 ohms impedance at around 2500hz, you might spend a fair amount of time up there when you're noodling. It comes back up there around 150hz then spikes way above. But the 8 ohm speaker is showing 30 ohms where? About 15kHz? How often do you hit those frequencies with your guitar? And it comes back up around 70hz, which unless you're drop tuned seven stringer you're not going to be getting down to. So 30 ohms really isn't well suited for an 8 ohm setting on your amp. I didn't find the impedance curve for a four ohm speaker, but consider the difference between 16 & 8 and project what it would look like, a 30 ohm load wouldn't be good at all there. And a 2 ohm amp, forget it, just don't even go there.

But with all of that considered, if you put a 30 ohm load on an amp designed to see a 16 ohm load, the power produced will drop considerably, that's probably why they get away with using such skimpy power resistors. Those gold colored power resistors in those boxes look like about 25 watt rated resistors. There is no way they'd survive under the full rated load of a 50 watt amp, and I wouldn't trust them with a 30 watt amp either. A hundred watt amp, forget it. So why do they work in these things? Think about it, you're running an amp capable of putting out well over the rated output (which is the rated clean output, not distorted), into those little power resistors, and they don't burn up. Why not? Because the impedance mismatch is so great that the power production is hampered, and the amp is not running as it was designed to. So your not only running your amp against a load it's not designed for, one that effects the power production, and your running it cranked up full bore. That doesn't seem a little odd to you? Do you really want to be doing that with a vintage or collectible amp? Think about it.

You pay your money and you take your chances.

[Dave_C]

lower weight, higher efficiency, lower noise.

I couldn't be happier with my UA . It's going to save my marriage. ;)

It's gonna' take more than that, Jay. You need to quit playing too.

;)

[Dave_C]

The UA unit does not have parts hanging off of the power transformer mounting. Kludges like that will not muster pass a CE inspection. UA has got them properly mounted. The Ho also has a very thrown together look, which is eyebrow raising to say the least. It's not very re-assuring.

The circuit itself is simple enough - a complimentary BJT emitter follower running from split rails (a pos and neg power supply)forming a type of buffered variable power supply using the speaker as a load and the amplifier output as the power source (though obviously there will still be an AC Mains connection for the split rail supply). Your amplifier's output drives a resistive load, NOT REACTIVE, which drops the signal down to a level which is tapped into the emitter follower circuit. In a nutshell - it's a re-amplifier with the simplest possible 2nd amp. I have heard that Ho designed it, and he deserves serious Kudos for that. But the UA is executed professionaly.

I would be seriuosly surprised if either version didn't color the sound somewhat - however, that can be good or bad, and from Kerry's clips I would say it's a good re-amplifier.

What effect the resistive load has on your own particular amp would be dependent upon how well the feedback loop is designed; it may or may not cause your amplifier to oscillate at high-frequencies (beyond hearing) that could damage an OT. Or not... I haven't benched one yet, so I don't know.

Either way, it's very clever... hats off to all folks involved in this one.

The high resistive load also causes large voltage spikes in the OT (since it is a current source) and, I am told, with cheaper OTs can eventually experience dielectric breakdown and short out. A small mismatch, like 8 into 16, is probably OK with most OTs, but I'd be very nervous about 4 or 8 into 30. Also, In my attenuator shootout mentioneed earlier, the UA itself made weird vibrating noises and my OT got much, much hotter than with the other attenuators tested. This puzzles me to this day because the OT should NOT be getting hotter with a low-into-high mismatch, only with high-into-low. So, something else was going on.

The high resistive load also causes a power reduction in the amp because you no longer have matched source and load impedances. Fender used this attribute in their Fender Tone-Master (which I owned in the late '90s) and had a switch on the back labeled "H M L Power" (or something like that). It was actually the OT tap switch for 4-8-16 ohms. They also recommended a 16 ohm cab for this amp so that you could purposely mismatch impedance and get a variable power reduction. I did a LOT of experimentation with this rig and other amps as well. Mismatching impedance low-into-high definitely causes exactly the same tonal change I heard in my UA. It makes the tone softer, darker, smoother and, in some cases, muddier and mushier. The UA will do exactly the same thing. But, I think HO also implements EQ correction as an option..."Plexi" option, maybe? I dunno'.

Lastly, like Hogy said, this re-amping concept has been around, and practiced, for many decades. Guy Hedrick did the same thing in the Guytron, which I also owned. I think he applied for patents. Difference is, Guy matched impedances, so his implementation is definitely more robust.

[mitch236]

Regarding the impedance (resistance), As mentioned before, speakers have frequency dependent impedance. A 16 ohm speaker will only present a 16 ohm load for a portion of its frequency bandwidth. Check this pdf on an Eminence 16 ohm speaker: http://eminence.com/pdf/manowar-16.pdf The dark line in the graph is the efficiency of the speaker at the specific frequency noted along the bottom of the graph. The light gray line is the impedance of the speaker at those frequencies. The impedance legend is along the right hand side of the graph. Looking at that 30 ohms doesn't seem so bad, does it?

Now look at an 8 ohm speaker: http://eminence.com/pdf/commonwealth-12.pdf That's a little different, ain't it?

With the 16 ohm speaker, it is showing 30 ohms impedance at around 2500hz, you might spend a fair amount of time up there when you're noodling. It comes back up there around 150hz then spikes way above. But the 8 ohm speaker is showing 30 ohms where? About 15kHz? How often do you hit those frequencies with your guitar? And it comes back up around 70hz, which unless you're drop tuned seven stringer you're not going to be getting down to. So 30 ohms really isn't well suited for an 8 ohm setting on your amp. I didn't find the impedance curve for a four ohm speaker, but consider the difference between 16 & 8 and project what it would look like, a 30 ohm load wouldn't be good at all there. And a 2 ohm amp, forget it, just don't even go there.

But with all of that considered, if you put a 30 ohm load on an amp designed to see a 16 ohm load, the power produced will drop considerably, that's probably why they get away with using such skimpy power resistors. Those gold colored power resistors in those boxes look like about 25 watt rated resistors. There is no way they'd survive under the full rated load of a 50 watt amp, and I wouldn't trust them with a 30 watt amp either. A hundred watt amp, forget it. So why do they work in these things? Think about it, you're running an amp capable of putting out well over the rated output (which is the rated clean output, not distorted), into those little power resistors, and they don't burn up. Why not? Because the impedance mismatch is so great that the power production is hampered, and the amp is not running as it was designed to. So your not only running your amp against a load it's not designed for, one that effects the power production, and your running it cranked up full bore. That doesn't seem a little odd to you? Do you really want to be doing that with a vintage or collectible amp? Think about it.

You pay your money and you take your chances.

But the load the UA sees is what the amp puts out right? From what I understand, if you have an amp that can be set for 16ohm, isn't that the load the UA see's? The speakers are not affecting the load on the amp any longer since the UA is acting like a buffer between the amp and the speakers.

I don't claim to know what I am talking about, this was based on my limited understanding of how this thing works. Please correct me if I am wrong.


BTW, I don't think most people will be using a UA on a highly collectable amp. For the most part, it allows people to use a high powered head on a regular basis. Even on stage, most soundmen would ask the guitarist to turn down if he was playing a 100w head.

[mtlin]

Regarding the impedance (resistance), As mentioned before, speakers have frequency dependent impedance. A 16 ohm speaker will only present a 16 ohm load for a portion of its frequency bandwidth. Check this pdf on an Eminence 16 ohm speaker: http://eminence.com/pdf/manowar-16.pdf The dark line in the graph is the efficiency of the speaker at the specific frequency noted along the bottom of the graph. The light gray line is the impedance of the speaker at those frequencies. The impedance legend is along the right hand side of the graph. Looking at that 30 ohms doesn't seem so bad, does it?

Now look at an 8 ohm speaker: http://eminence.com/pdf/commonwealth-12.pdf That's a little different, ain't it?

With the 16 ohm speaker, it is showing 30 ohms impedance at around 2500hz, you might spend a fair amount of time up there when you're noodling. It comes back up there around 150hz then spikes way above. But the 8 ohm speaker is showing 30 ohms where? About 15kHz? How often do you hit those frequencies with your guitar? And it comes back up around 70hz, which unless you're drop tuned seven stringer you're not going to be getting down to. So 30 ohms really isn't well suited for an 8 ohm setting on your amp. I didn't find the impedance curve for a four ohm speaker, but consider the difference between 16 & 8 and project what it would look like, a 30 ohm load wouldn't be good at all there. And a 2 ohm amp, forget it, just don't even go there.

But with all of that considered, if you put a 30 ohm load on an amp designed to see a 16 ohm load, the power produced will drop considerably, that's probably why they get away with using such skimpy power resistors. Those gold colored power resistors in those boxes look like about 25 watt rated resistors. There is no way they'd survive under the full rated load of a 50 watt amp, and I wouldn't trust them with a 30 watt amp either. A hundred watt amp, forget it. So why do they work in these things? Think about it, you're running an amp capable of putting out well over the rated output (which is the rated clean output, not distorted), into those little power resistors, and they don't burn up. Why not? Because the impedance mismatch is so great that the power production is hampered, and the amp is not running as it was designed to. So your not only running your amp against a load it's not designed for, one that effects the power production, and your running it cranked up full bore. That doesn't seem a little odd to you? Do you really want to be doing that with a vintage or collectible amp? Think about it.

You pay your money and you take your chances.

Oddly enough, Ho's attenuator doesn't affect the tone and feel of my amps the way running into 16 ohm cab from the 8 ohm tap does (which I've done by accident). In fact, it doesn't affect the tone and feel at all that I've noticed.

[hogy]

hasserl, et al:

You can overanalyze this stuff until you're blue in the face. Let me offer this for consideration. The Airbrake attenuator is a 25 Ohm fixed load. Pretty close to the UA.

It has been around since the early 1980s, when Ken Fischer came up with it. It has been used with all kinds of different amps, in all kinds of different applications. I spoke to the late Ken Fischer about this, and he reported zero amp failures due to Airbrake use that he was aware of. In fact, Ken was of the opinion that it is actually easier on the amp than running a speaker.

Then we at Komet started making and selling them. From my end, I have never had an Airbrake customer complain that his amp got damaged.

Now Dr. Z has been making them in mass quantities for years and I have never seen any posts claiming "my Z-Airbrake killed my amp". Have you?

All of this empirical evidence clearly shows to me that using a fixed, resistive load between 25 and 30 Ohms is safe with 8 and 16 Ohm outputs on amps. Personally, I wouldn't use it with a 4 Ohm or much less 2 Ohm OT, although Z thinks 4 Ohm is fine as well.


Hogy

P.S. You're mistaken about the resistors in the UA. They are 4 25W types in parallel for a total power handling of 100W, my 200W version has 4 50W resistors in parallel.

[Dave_C]

Quote:
Originally Posted by carbz http://img.thegearpage.net/board/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.thegearpage.net/board/showthread.php?p=4290014#post4290014)
I had one when I had my Naylor amp and though it sounded real good from what I remember. To me it wasn't really transparent despite the builders claim though it kind of changed the tone/feel in a good way. The reason I sold it was I was hearing what sounded the sound was coming either through the tubes or tranny at low volumes. It was way annoying and sounded to me like it was damaging the amp. I called the builder and he swore it was safe. I am happy with my hotplate even at highley attenuated levels.

I think Hogy has already stated that the Ultimate Attunuator is not the cause the noise you are hearing from your trannies and tubes and neither the heat. Your transformers will always make that noise when you have the amp that wound up, you just can't hear it without attenuating the level down this low. Same with the heat. The heat represents the same heat you would get operating the amp at the gain level you choose.

Not true. I had four other attenuators sitting next to the UA, as mentioned earlier. NONE of them caused my OT to heat up as much as the UA did. Also, you misunderstood my comment about the buzzing. It was the UA itself that was buzzing/rattling, not the OT. No other attenuator in my shootout causes any buzzing/rattling noises whatsoever.

I've been slamming my vintage 1963 AC30 several hours every day for almost three months now with the UA and no issues whatsoever. Same with my vintage 50w Marshall. You do decrease the life of your amp but only because you are actually using it. It's the same wear and tear you would get if you gigged it with the amp at the same settings. Yes I am giving it extra wear and tear. It is much like using your garaged vintage Jaguar E-Type for a daily driver. The positive side is you actually get to use and enjoy. I'd rather use my amp than look at it. If my AC30 flames tomorrow, I will have already got to enjoy it at home more than I would have in the next ten years without the UA. I'm a career player that spent the last 34 years on the road, 150-200 one nighters per year... I'm so used to getting the sound I like and know the touch sensitivity, dynamic range, give and take, etc., of my amps very well. The master volume, power scaling, and standard attenuator otions I've tried just have not been acceptable to my ears. I can honestly say I've bought no less than 20 amps, attenuators, and iso cabs recommended for volume reduction in the past two years trying the type of sound and feel I like at low volume and have not been satisfied until now.

Yes, there is coloring I find in a kind of good, warm, way, but no fizziness or mushy mids like with other options as you can hear in the clip. But.... I find if I set my amp at the desired level of overdrive, attenuate it down with the UA, THEN.. restructure the stages by lowering the amp and raising the UA to find the sweet spot it pretty much comes back. It does take some tweaking.

Last, the Ho is an excellent unit and he is the designer of the device. He DOES NOT build the UA as stated in an above post. He is in partnership with Magus and receives payment for each UA sold but has sold licensing for manufactring and distribution in the USA to the "Ultimate Attenuator" brand name owned by Magus Inc. Magus then standardized the build, increased tolerances on certain parts, then like many manufacturers, sub out the construction overseas. Ho does not build it and you can look at the two and see the UA is very standardized and the Ho model varies quite a bit from unit to unit. He does build some of the special order designs that aren't standard UA models for Magus. After all the speculation I wanted to get to the bottom of this myself.

The main thing is that the Ultimate Attenuator is not the cause of heat and extra trannie noise, it's because you are using the amp at high levels attenuated down to a volume you generally don't associate over-heating
with. The amp is still being driven extremely hard but it's not because of the UA, it's because you are turning it up. If you like to baby your amp and keep it nice and cool in the closet it's probably not for everyone. My amps are now getting heavy use at home but I'm enjoying them like never before. They will look just as good in my closet once I burn them up. If I burn them up it's only because I'm using them at levels I haven't been able to use at home, no different than if I were gigging them live. I am actually enjoying them rather than keeping them nice and cool in the closet. After all, this seems to be the whole point for owning cool amps to me.

Points well taken. I agree, for the most part. Been gigging steadily myself since '71 (despite branching into electrical engineering at Kodak in 1982 as my "day gig") and have always driven the crap out of my gear. Unlike many, who fear taking boutique stuff out to dives, I live for taking my stuff out to dives and actually performing with it! If I had to baby it, I would not own it. This stuff is designed to be used in a band for the entertainment and enjoyment of a live audience.

In 1972, my Dad (also an EE) and I added a master volume to my Sears Silvertone. I built my own resistive attenuator out of Radio Shack parts (L-Pad, etc) in early 80's and have experimented with all kinds of solutions for great tone at lower volumes. At times throughout the years, this has been an obsession. I have owned all the "best" attenuators on the market, except the Bad Cat Leash. Just bought a Grendel Dead Room and Yamaha powered monitor. Still experimenting with that. Also own a Badger with Power Scaling. So far, the Badger and Grendel have been the best solutions, but I'm still hopeful that somebody will get the attenuator thing right.

I bought my UA shortly after it first became available. I'm guessing it was sometime between 2000-2003, but can't remember exactly. Maybe the problems I had have been fixed.

[hogy]

My UA (only a few months old) has 2 100 watt resistors wired in series.

That seems to be the newest version. Ulysses' is like that as well. The older ones have for four resistors which (to be precise) are series/parallel connected (two in series, then paralleled).

[hasserl]

But the load the UA sees is what the amp puts out right? From what I understand, if you have an amp that can be set for 16ohm, isn't that the load the UA see's? The speakers are not affecting the load on the amp any longer since the UA is acting like a buffer between the amp and the speakers.

The issue is not what the attenuator see, it is what the amp sees. The amp isn't putting out a load, it isn't putting out 16 ohms, it is designed to work AGAINST a 16 ohm load. The amp produces an electrical alternating current. In the case of a tube amp, it conducts this current thru a transformer. The transformer needs to be connected to a load, some kind of motor that will conduct the transformed current. That motor constitutes a load. In the case of the UA it is a resistor(s) of a fixed value (about 30 ohms). The output transformer transforms the impedance of the load from a low impedance to a high impedance. In the case of a 2 x EL34 fifty watt amp that would be around 3600 ohms (depends on the specific amp). If the amp is designed to work against a 16 ohm load and you instead connect a 30 ohm load to it, that 30 ohm load will be transformed into about 7200 to 8000 ohms. If it is an 8 ohm amp that load will be transformed to about 14,400 to 16,000 ohms. Getting the idea? if it is a 4 ohm amp that 30 ohm load will be transformed into about 28,800 to 32,000 ohms. Think that might be dangerous? You would be right.


BTW, I don't think most people will be using a UA on a highly collectable amp. For the most part, it allows people to use a high powered head on a regular basis. Even on stage, most soundmen would ask the guitarist to turn down if he was playing a 100w head.

Even the OP of this thread has stated several times that he uses it with his vintage Vox and Marshall amps.

hasserl, et al:
Now Dr. Z has been making them in mass quantities for years and I have never seen any posts claiming "my Z-Airbrake killed my amp". Have you?

Yes we have, here on this bbs. People using those attenuators on 4 ohm and 2 ohm Fender amps that have had issues such as failed transformers or arcing at the tubes/sockets. When they are told the truth they are usually shocked, and pissed off that Z never said a word about it, or told them it would be fine.

All of this empirical evidence clearly shows to me that using a fixed, resistive load between 25 and 30 Ohms is safe with 8 and 16 Ohm outputs on amps. Personally, I wouldn't use it with a 4 Ohm or much less 2 Ohm OT, although Z thinks 4 Ohm is fine as well.


Hogy

P.S. You're mistaken about the resistors in the UA. They are 4 25W types in parallel for a total power handling of 100W, my 200W version has 4 50W resistors in parallel.

And your free to think what you want to about empirical evidence. I'm giving people actual technical information. I think the right thing to do is to at least inform people about what they are doing, let them make an informed decision. The attitude I've seen in this thread (even though you've posted several times to the contrary) is that using these attenuators is harmless, and if the amp fails it was bound to anyway, this may have sped up the process, but it was doomed anyway. So plug in, throw caution to the wind, and go for it. Crank that bad boy up and blast away, content in the knowledge that somebody on the internet said it was OK to do so.

Re the resistors, looking at the gut shots of these there does not appear to be multiple resistors. Take a look:

http://i127.photobucket.com/albums/p136/okiegibson/Guitars/IMG_0582.jpg


There are two resistors in series, each MAYBE 25 watts.

In the one below here there is only one resistor:
http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l274/windsleeper/hoattenuator004.jpg

In this one there appears to be two:

http://i187.photobucket.com/albums/x318/ss1976/UA1.jpg

None with four resistors and none shown are 50 or 100 watt capacity.

Just for sh!ts and giggles, let's see a gut shot of your 200 watt unit.

[jzucker]

In the case of the UA it is a resistor(s) of a fixed value (about 30 ohms).

Isn't the speaker part of the load?

[Gasp100]

Wow, super impressed. That thing is really "breathing" in that room. That is what my AxeFX tweaking needs to aspire too.
That might be the best Tele tone I've ever heard, really. Great playing also, real cool <even the drums & bass> :D

[hasserl]

Isn't the speaker part of the load?

No, not in this case. The speaker and the amp are separated by the load resistors and the re-amp.

[jzucker]

No, not in this case. The speaker and the amp are separated by the load resistors and the re-amp.

then why does the resistance measurement change when the speaker is plugged in?

[hasserl]

then why does the resistance measurement change when the speaker is plugged in?

Just lucky I guess! :D

If the resistance changes with the speakers plugged in than the speakers are part of the load. I don't have one of the UA's here. Tell me, what does the resistance change to when you plug speakers in? Just curious.

[mwm523]

That's funny. When I spoke with Ho he suggested I get the Plexi switch. I guess he listened to what I have and the sound I like. Who knows. Maybe he had a bunch of the parts laying around and decided to sell some. Either way, I wouldn't buy one without the Plexi option because you can always turn it off but can't turn it on unless you have it.

This is inaccurate. You actually can't turn it OFF unless you have it. The plexi switch is a simple SPST switch that allows you to bypass the inductor coil, which is the reactive part of the circuit. When you turn the plexi switch off, it bypasses the coil and takes much of the presence out of the signal. Units without a plexi switch effectively have the plexi switch turned ON, because the coil is in the circuit.

Mark Gregg actually gave me quick instructions for adding the plexi switch, which I did.

[hogy]

http://i187.photobucket.com/albums/x318/ss1976/UA1.jpg

None with four resistors and none shown are 50 or 100 watt capacity.

Just for sh!ts and giggles, let's see a gut shot of your 200 watt unit.


Not sure just how I ended up in this position of having to defend a competitor's product, but here it goes.

The above picture you quoted does show two 100W resistors. Take my word for it, I've seen that unit in person.

My (older) 200W UA does have four series/parallel wired 50W resistors. Here's the picture you requested. Since I didn't feel like taking the resistor block apart to show you the actual wattage rating printed on them, I placed a 25W resistor of the same type I had lying around on top of the load resistors. I trust you can see that the UA load resistors are about twice the size of the 25W resistor:

http://pic18.picturetrail.com/VOL921/489579/5923483/323943878.jpg

As for the Z-Airbrake damaging amps with 4 Ohm or 2 Ohm output transformers, all I can say is this: The Trainwreck/Komet Airbrake and the Z-Airbrake utilize the same circuitry based on a 25 Ohm resistive load. The Komet Airbrake owner's manual specifically states that the unit is intended for use with 8 and 16 Ohm output transformers ONLY. In that application I have never seen an amp fail because of Airbrake use.


And with this, I'm out of this thread.


Hogy

[hasserl]

That last pic is a 200 watt unit. 2 100 watt resistors.

Well maybe they are, but IME a 100 watt wirewound resistor of that type would be larger than that, typically about 4" overall, the body about 3.5".

Check this datasheet for Vishay resistors: http://www.vishay.com/docs/30201/rhnh.pdf

[Ulysses]

And your free to think what you want to about empirical evidence. I'm giving people actual technical information. I think the right thing to do is to at least inform people about what they are doing, let them make an informed decision. The attitude I've seen in this thread (even though you've posted several times to the contrary) is that using these attenuators is harmless, and if the amp fails it was bound to anyway, this may have sped up the process, but it was doomed anyway. So plug in, throw caution to the wind, and go for it. Crank that bad boy up and blast away, content in the knowledge that somebody on the internet said it was OK to do so.


I'm the OP and do run the piss out of my vintage Marshall and 1963 AC-30 with the UA... for several months now, several hours daily. As much use as many would give an amp over several years period if not a daily player at hi-volume.

So you are telling me my UA will cause damage to my amp that would have not normally been incurred using daily, cranked for hours, without the UA?

Not to be inflammatory but sincere in asking... We all know who Hogy is and that he is unquestionably one of the most knowledgeable, most respected, builders and designers of tube guitar amps (and attenuators) in the world today. Almost two decades of hands on experience designing and building some of the most successful and desirable circuits on the market. What are your qualifications and long term, hands on experience that would give you credibility for us to take your word over someone like Hogy's? No disrespect, just would like to know for my "own informed decision".

[jackaroo]

I'd have to agree with that.

[jzucker]

but I know for a fact that nothing sounds great at conversation level through a guitar cab.

Fact? Are you in my basement with me now? :D Sorry but I know just as emphatically that you're wrong. My UA sounds great at conversational levels. Does it sound even better louder? Sure. But it sounds wonderful at very low levels too.

[Ulysses]

I'm not sure how they are arriving at how loud a speaking level really is. This just isn't so. I'm not trying to knock the UA or anyone who uses it. It seems like a very cool idea and I'm debating getting one myself. The thing is if you set up a microphone and have someone speak into it and use that as a baseline level after it is recorded. Then you turn your amp up to a volume that will match that level of input in your recording software you will find the amp will be at an extremely low level. Now as great as the UA is supposed to be it cannot defy the laws of physics or the Fletcher Munson effect. The amp will sound really wimpy. I'm saying this only so people won't think that the sound they hear on these clips will really happen at speaking levels. Perhaps it might sound good recorded but I can tell you it won't sound good while you're playing it even if you are sitting in front of the speaker. Also you will not get the same amount of sustain you would get playing louder because the amp is not driving the speakers enough to excite the strings on your guitar or make it resonate. Once the string stops vibrating it's over. The other thing that I've found over the years when trying to track this softly is that the mics need to be so hot to pickup up a low level signal they amplify all kinds of background noise as well as the sound of your picking if you are in close proximity to your amp. This is why studios use vocal booths to avoid all that noise.....

.....but I know for a fact that nothing sounds great at conversation level through a guitar cab. Not an attenuated amp, modeling amp or a reamp. My guess is that these tracks are being recorded a bit louder than the posters realize or some people just have conversations at 95db....


It is very incredible and I understand your incredulous stance. I will say that my wife is a light sleeper extraordinaire and I catch absolute hell if I wake her up at 3 am. Both of my clips were done with one room between our bedroom and the amp with my wife and kids asleep in the house. The results are phenomenal. I will be witness to the distinguished Mr. Zucker in saying the UA will allow you to get exceptional dynamics and well preserved midrange content at average conversation level, or quiet enough to use with a family of four sleeping in near proximity.

And yes, it does sound better louder but the reason I took the time to post these clips is that I was completely pie-faced when I heard the results and the way the mic perceived the sound at such low level. I have a career's worth of experience recording guitars and know all too well what normally happens at this level. This clip was recorded no louder than the average speaking voice, honest.

It's also a re-amping device and even though not the same principal, this is how I hear and feel it work: It is much like listening to ______ (insert Page, Hendrix,Clapton, or your favorite tone god) on your home stereo and turning it down to speaking level. It is soft but the dynamics stay the same on the recording while not relying on the added enegy from your stereo speakers. My amps dynamics stay the same and although my speakers are not as much a factor, enough of the amps dynamics are retained to give the effect you hear in this clip. To me, turning the knob up and down on my UA reacts feels much like turning up and down the knob on my stereo with a recording of a guitar playing....if that makes any sense.


I can also add that all amps do not work as favorably as my vintage Marshalls and AC30. some sound downright poor with the UA. In this case, the sound when cranked just isn't as refined and becomes more evident when throttled down to this low of level. It may be that the Guytron just doesn't have the wealth of dynamics and complexity of harmonics of a vintage AC30. I know this has been the case with a few "boutique" amps I've tried.

[OccTone]

First off, let me say thank you for posting your sound clip, both your playing and tone sound great!!

I think with your post there are a good many interesting points that come up, at least for me. I have spent a good many years here in NYC recording and gigging, and I have always been into recording my own stuff, and in NYC apartments which has presented me with the same problem you have, getting great guitar tones at super low levels.

When I got to NYC i became friends with Harry Kolbe, many of you know him as the chief design engineer for Atomic Amps, I have learned most everything I know about amp circuits from my conversations with Harry. From about 1994 till about 2000 I used a variety of different tube amps with a Load Box Harry makes called the Silent Speaker. I would run my Marshall JTM-45 modded by Harry or a stock Fender Vibroverb re-issue into the silent speaker, thru a Rocktron Intellifex for Delay/verb then into a rocktron velocity 120 power amp and 2 1-12" fender cabs. The sense I get is that the UA is a similar concept only with the power amp built into the box.
I have also experimented with tons of different microphones/types in my quest for great recorded guitar tone. I recently borrowed a friends THD hotplate to try with a fender champ I had as well as a Pro Jr., after using the THD on a variety of settings I have come to a couple conclusions:

1. I think there is a big difference in tone when using an Attenuator on a tube amp when the tube amp is also powering the speaker vs. the tube amp being converted to line level and then run through a seperate power amp.
2. The MOST OVERLOOKED part of the equation- the microphone, both TYPE and model, I have found I get the best results with Condensor microphones, though much less forgiving, in the end a well placed condensor always sounds more natural and bigger to me than an SM57, I think the SM57 is like the NS-10 of mics, everyone has always used them so everyone always starts out using them because everyone uses them. I have heard tons of great guitars recorded using SM57's and many people get great sounds with them, but for me nothing beats a WELL PLACED CONDENSOR, and by well placed I don't mean placed right on the speaker.


Do we listen to guitars with our ear placed right against the speaker? No, when we are playing in a room and we are jazzed by our tone our ear is usually not right on the speaker and the natural acoustics of the room(Early Reflections) are smoothing out the EQ of the tone, by the time the sound reaches our ears it has had the benefit of this.

I think the UA on your recording sounds great, but I also think that using the Condensors has a big impact of the sound, they are way more sensitive than a 57 so you can turn the amp down and still get a good amount of level, though it takes the speaker out of the equation to an extent.

I just purchased a THD Univalve from a fellow TGP'r and I am interested in trying the hotplate function both through another power amp and directly into the speaker cabinet, I'll keep you posted with the results:-)

Great Work again,

[Belmont]

I agree with Ulysses on this because I have the same unit.His clips sound awesome and I play at quiet levels with very satisfying tone.cochese how can you knock it till you've tried it? lots of peeps on this board have been playing and recording for decades.this attenuator does seem to defy convention in a lot of ways,and as far as the the Fletcher Munson curves are concerned,that applies more to a signal that contains a lot of bass and high frequency content,not so much with a midrange focused sound,such as guitar.I'm not questioning your knowledge because you obviously know what your talking about but this attenuator does seem to defy logic.

[jzucker]

This would be much easier to debate in a studio where I've already proved this to myself. Since we cannot do this we must just agree to disagree. All the best.

I've also proven to myself that it *DOES* work as I've specified.

[hasserl]

No maybe about it, they're 100 watt resistors. I'm with Hogy at this point. Adios.

Uhm, okay, thanks for letting us know so we won't be sitting up waiting for you to come back. Have fun.

[jzucker]

i'm sorry but stuff like this is why there are so many fights and arguments on TGP. Folks who have not seen a unit commenting on the specific components and what the unit sounds like when they haven't played through one or seen one in person. If you haven't played through one or seen one, speculate in another thread. Have a nice day.

[hasserl]

I'm the OP and do run the piss out of my vintage Marshall and 1963 AC-30 with the UA... for several months now, several hours daily. As much use as many would give an amp over several years period if not a daily player at hi-volume.

So you are telling me my UA will cause damage to my amp that would have not normally been incurred using daily, cranked for hours, without the UA?

Not to be inflammatory but sincere in asking... We all know who Hogy is and that he is unquestionably one of the most knowledgeable, most respected, builders and designers of tube guitar amps (and attenuators) in the world today. Almost two decades of hands on experience designing and building some of the most successful and desirable circuits on the market. What are your qualifications and long term, hands on experience that would give you credibility for us to take your word over someone like Hogy's? No disrespect, just would like to know for my "own informed decision".

I didn't tell you it would cause damage, I gave you technical information that you could use to make in informed decision based on facts, not opinions. The fact is the UA does place a higher impedance load on the amp than it was designed to work with. It is also fact that the applied load from the UA would be best used with a 16 ohm amp, it would be worse for 8 ohm amps, and the lower impedance the amp is the worse it gets. That is fact, not opinion.

A higher load places stress on components between the load and the power tubes, mostly the output transformer and the tube sockets, where high voltage spikes reflected back from the load can cause arcing. In the OT it can start as breakdown of the insulation leading eventually to arcing and a destroyed OT. The effect is cumulative, it may take awhile, or it may happen quickly. You really don't know until it happens. Also fact is that in a vintage amp the insulation on the windings of the OT is several decades old, has gone through multiple heating and cooling cycles and is more vulnerable to breakdown. Hogy even mentioned this back a couple of pages ago. It appears to me that you tend to ignore things that don't fit what you want to hear, and only latch onto things that do fit. At the tube sockets arcing between pins will leave a carbon trail that is conductive, damaging the sockets which will need to be replaced as the deposits cannot be cleaned off and will continue to conduct and cause arcing even when the mismatched load is removed.

It's one thing for Hogy to use these with his amps, if he looses an OT or a socket he can replace them easily. If it happens to the average player it's not so easy. But if the tone your getting is worth the risk to you, that's your decision to make.

As far as Hogy's reputation, I'm not going to bad mouth him or try to influence you one way or another about him; or try to compare myself to him, sheesh, I'm not that narcissistic. But note that he did not argue with anything I wrote about the UA, other than the wattage rating of the load resistors, which was a secondary observation I made. Hogy knows that what I've written is accurate. He may have the opinion that the concern is overblown (at the risk here of putting words into his mouth, but I think that represents what he's posted here), but he knows the concern is real.

[Ulysses]

Here is the information given to us by Hogy:

QUOTE:
[A 16 Ohm speaker only represents a 16 Ohm load to an amp at one specific frequency. In actual use at higher frequencies the load goes way up. So you look at the actual load line across the guitar's frequency spectrum and calculate the median value and you're going to come out very near 30 Ohms.

Do keep in mind that you are putting a lot of stress on your vintage amp by running it full tilt for extended periods of time. The lacquer insulation on your OT's windings is 40+ years old and has seen thousands of heating and cooling cycles. Eventually it will break down and short out, and then the party's over.... .....When the OT goes, it is not the attenuator that killed it, it's the extended use. ] END QUOTE



If you are going to give information contrary I'd like to know what your actual hands on experience is with this in practical use. Larger strings would probably wear out our frets faster than smaller strings. It's not something that would qualify as vital infirmation that should be spread on the internet as a legitimate concern. Yes, I'm going to play my guitar with whatever guage strings I like until someone with proper credibility comes along and shows me why this is a legitimate concern when choosing strings.

Until you can give us references to your expertise along with legitimate reason that we should heed your warning over a bonafide expert, I think it's best considered just another unwarranted interenet splitting of hairs with no real validity in practical matters. On the internet it seems you can find a diametrically opposed opinion or information to anything you'd like. That's why we have to consider the credibility of the source.

[Belmont]

if you drive your car the tires will wear out and so will the tranny and eventually the engine and so on,so don't drive it? I personally don't care if I blow an output tranny,or wear out tubes etc. just replace them and rock on.I'm not concerned one bit about blowing a transformer I've got lots of amps and haven't done it yet.I play my superlead and DR103 turned up through mine and they don't even get hot (I don't crank them wide open),nor does the attenuator.Guys were predicting horrific consequences when these came out years ago and that just hasn't happened.These attenuators don't hurt my amps,and if they do I'll get them fixed by the guy who made it,not gonna happen though.

[hasserl]

If you are going to give information contrary I'd like to know what your actual hands on experience is with this in practical use.

My actual hands on experience is many years of building, repairing and modifying amps for fun and profit. It is NOT my main source of income. I support my family as a specialist in other technical fields not associated with building amps or with music industry. In that technical field I work very much engineering reliability, which you may recognize as having SOMETHING to do with the discussion at hand. You want to know about me? Do a little research, I'm not invisible. I may not do this for a living, but I am not a neophyte. What I've written in this thread stands on its own. FWIW I have researched the topic at hand and have designed and built my own attenuators, not for sale to the public. What I have learned from that research is how I am able to speak knowledgeably on the topic. (something I don't do is build and sell attenuators designed by someone else, which wouldn't make me much of an expert now, would it?)

I'm not stating opinion, I'm stating fact. Hogy posted no fact that disagrees with what I've posted, only his OPINION. His statement about what kills the OT is his opinion, not fact.

FWIW, bigger experts than those of us who have weighed in on this thread have kicked this around before. Several years ago there was a public disagreement on another internet bbs between the late Ken Fisher (God rest his soul) on one side and Ted Weber and Andy Marshall on the other (actually, IIRC someone else did the entries for Ken as he didn't use a computer). Note that both Weber and THD attenuators are impedance specific, you can guess which side of the argument they were on.

At the end of the day, you're going to use what you want to use. It's your gear, use it or abuse it how you will; makes no difference to me. I may not influence your habits at all, but maybe the information I've provided will help someone else make an informed decision. And that's all this is about.

[OccTone]

FWIW, bigger experts than those of us who have weighed in on this thread have kicked this around before. Several years ago there was a public disagreement on another internet bbs between the late Ken Fisher (God rest his soul) on one side and Ted Weber and Andy Marshall on the other (actually, IIRC someone else did the entries for Ken as he didn't use a computer). Note that both Weber and THD attenuators are impedance specific, you can guess which side of the argument they were on.



I am by no means adding fuel to the unfortunate fire that this thread has become, but I spoke with Ed DeGenaro at THD awhile back about using an 8 ohm hotplate with a 4 ohm amp and he said that it would load the amp differently but not harm the amp in any way, that the different impedance models had more to do with the stepped attenuation adjustment and the eq points on the switches. I have run my 4 ohm amps through 8 ohm cabs for most of my adult life and never had a tranny blow, that being said I have always mainly played Fenders and I think the Schumacher trannys they used are pretty robust and overated power and stress wise. Just more info,

[jackaroo]

I'm not a tech.

Not at all, but I did ask a lot of ?s and do a bunch of research on the UA before picking one up. I think it's silly to slam something before you try it. But I did that...I had a prejudice about the re-amp into a SS system. I had read about the flyback possibilities. i was turned off. I thought my opinions wer fact.

Then I heard these clips. I got more interested and started looking for other points of view...

But basically after hearing the clips I'd already "drank the cool aid" so to speak.

After asking Ho about it, he said there's no risk of those flyback voltages until the load is 50 or 60 Ohms. At that point the possibility is for real as opposed to a theoretical possibility. From what I've heard and read, the 16 Ohms we're holding on too here is only 16 at a particular frequency. So unless you're just playing Ab over and over again...you're getting way above 16.

Basically this is what Hogy said as well as Ho and Mark Gregg. I've heard and read posts from John Phillips that ragged on the UA when it first came out...and frankly I was inclined to agree with him.

Until I heard the clips- That's what sold me. You guys can argue all day long, you're not going to change someone's mind- you couldn't have changed mine. I had to do that.

I've enjoyed these threads, a healthy examination of a product that clearly is needed in our collective area of interest. But thinking that by saying over and over again what you think is going to change anyone...you need to examine human nature.

[Ulysses]

First I have not tried the UA. I've stated that......


The only point I was making is this. Many of of the sound clips "claim" the amp was recorded at "Conversation" levels. That is what my issue is with.....

So when I heard the claim "conversation level" I decided to put it to the test.....


....You don't have to take my word for it. If you have recording software you can test this claim for yourself. Make a couple of recordings of someone speaking into a microphone and measure the distance the microphone was from the persons mouth. That is your sound source. Now take that same microphone and put your guitar speaker the exact same distance in front of the microphone and record a clip and keep turning down your amp until you get the same amount of amplitude on the waveform in your software. Unless your "conversation level" was an Austrian yodeler you will find your amp is uselessly quiet....




All I can say is it's nice to know about something that other people just aren't aware of. At least for once, you really don't know what you are talking about. I just set my mics for the correct level of my calm speaking voice from the distance of the cab. Rolled the "tape" and the tone/dynamics is EXACTLY as in my clip. If you'd like to get a neutral party involved, this could be the "Ultimate hi-stakes Challenge" for a TGP piss-match. I'm in my corner with the UA, ready-to-go!!. :BOUNCE


:AOK

[The Pup]

I must get a UA sometime....brilliant!

[shuie]

Im not a professional musician. I have zero experience recording anything. Honestly, I wouldn't no which end of a mic to speak into if someone didn't tell me. I wasn't in the room when this clip was recorded, but I've stood no more than 6 ft away from the speaker cabinet in Ulysses studio having a normal conversation with him while he played the 2061x through the UA. IMO, it was actually quieter through the vintage 4x12 than he 2x12 w/golds, but either way, we both could talk over it normally and it sounded great. The End.

[jzucker]

Can we get back to the discussion about the UA now? :D I'm loving the versatility of this unit. It really allows you to dial the amp into its clean or dirty "sweet spot" and then get that tone at any volume. On my plexi, for clean stuff that seems to be with the preamp vol on about 9 O'Clock. it gets that Jimi Hendrix semi-clean sound.

[Ulysses]

Can we get back to the discussion about the UA now? :D

What is it about the UA that triggers the responses? I find I use most of my amps at the cusp of full overdrive, then when I bring volume down with the UA I tend to lower my amp a little more then raise the UA. I also like to play with my volume knob a lot with the UA, some great sounds when backed off with the guitar, too. I always have to restructure the amp and UA levels when raising or lowering the volume or overdrive amount.

I just recorded a Komet 18w prototype using the neck p/u on my ES-345 at about mild Princeton volume with the Komet on 4 and the UA a little more than half way down. It's an unusual or awkward sound combination to demo, you wouldn't think there would be a ton of clarity, but I thought both were impressive. On "tape" it sounds a lot like a big fat Twin Reverb pushing hard. A ton of dynamics with a humbucker neck p/u at relatively low level.

[jzucker]

This was also done with the UA at loud talking level. Guitar level is a bit soft on the clean section...

http://soundclick.com/share?songid=6696383

[mitch236]

I don't get this discussion at all! First of all, while the OP did mention that he used his UA to lower his spl to talking levels, most of us (at least that's what I think) would be using their amps at a higher spl than that. Unless you are a bedroom player, you are using the UA to get your spl to a level that the band can deal with on stage. For most recordings, nobody cares how loud you play.

Second, as I've stated before, most people will be using this device on a newer amp, not a vintage amp like the OP.

I love this product (either the Ho or the UA). It allows me to crank my amp and not get flack from the band or the soundman. I play at realistic small stage volumes and this product really performs.

If this technology is really destroying amps, why don't we hear about it more often? There wasn't one post from someone claiming that their amp was fried by a UA or Ho.

[Brian Scherzer]

I have just deleted the last batch of posts and now ask everyone involved to lay off the personal stuff. It would be easier to delete the thread, which would be a shame, than to have to read every post and selectively delete. If you care about the community, just stick to the OP's original intent.

Thanks!

[telemoxy]

I have just deleted the last batch of posts and now ask everyone involved to lay off the personal stuff. It would be easier to delete the thread, which would be a shame, than to have to read every post and selectively delete. If you care about the community, just stick to the OP's original intent.

Thanks!

Hoorah! I can't thank you enough.

[Ulysses]

Here's a link to Jack Zucker's comprehensive demonstartion. Follow his attenuating by adjusting your computer monitors to compensate for the level loss each time he turns down to recover the relative tonal response, just amazing! You just can't argue with the video clip.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJmUMshxE2o

[troykennedy]

That is money! Thanks Jack, pretty sweet. Hard to argue with those results.

My 50 watt Ho came in just the other day. I have tried it on the AC30. Sounds pretty great. I have been using the Leash. But the HO definitely retains that sweet top end the Leash was lopping off. It feels a bit more natural as well.

The Leash did a god job. But the HO has so far been a much more natural, transparent solution.

[Suproman77]

Here's a link to Jack Zucker's comprehensive demonstartion. Follow his attenuating by adjusting your computer monitors to compensate for the level loss each time he turns down to recover the relative tonal response, just amazing! You just can't argue with the video clip.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJmUMshxE2o

No, you definitely cannot argue with this demo. The tone is just there no matter the volume and he proves that he's using no studio trickery whatsoever to achieve it since, like you said, you have to adjust the levels yourself to make the comparisons. Brilliant demonstration all around and I'm convinced that the UA is the goods.

[jackaroo]

Finally got some gut shots of mine with the loop.


Sounds great.

Thanks to Kerry for making these clips- you are 100% responsible ( in a good way) for me finally getting an attenuator and letting me hear all of my amp again.

Peace!



http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v234/jack_devine/IMG_3849.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v234/jack_devine/IMG_3852.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v234/jack_devine/IMG_3858.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v234/jack_devine/IMG_3864.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v234/jack_devine/IMG_3865.jpg

[Ulysses]

Man, that's the real super king size version...snazzy!!

[57special]

I've also jumped on the UA bandwagon, after using and mainly hating a Weber Mass for years. After putting my Marshalls and a couple of other amps through it I give it a thumb's up. It does sound good down to speaking levels. One thing that I found, and isn't so evident on Jack Zucker's demo is that the sound of the amp when the unit is bypassed and the sound of the amp when the unit is on but at full volume is different. Not a massive difference, but discernable. There are more highs when going through the unit, and the bass is jumbled (not sure how else to put it).
Not a biggie for me, as i use the thing to play quietly.

[Suproman77]

I've also jumped on the UA bandwagon, after using and mainly hating a Weber Mass for years. After putting my Marshalls and a couple of other amps through it I give it a thumb's up. It does sound good down to speaking levels. One thing that I found, and isn't so evident on Jack Zucker's demo is that the sound of the amp when the unit is bypassed and the sound of the amp when the unit is on but at full volume is different. Not a massive difference, but discernable. There are more highs when going through the unit, and the bass is jumbled (not sure how else to put it).
Not a biggie for me, as i use the thing to play quietly.

I've noticed that as well, but you quickly realize why it's not a big deal...if you want full volume, why would you want the UA activated, right? Just bypass it...Problem solved.

[johan]

Hi Ulysses!
Went through all your Soundclips and they are awesome. Very old scool Marshall tone! Whao! "309" is rockin'!
Recently got my first Marshall -a baby 2061X (Soultone kit) with separate cathode resistors and caps for power tubes. Sweet amp with a great tone using humbuckers. I'm using a 212 w G12-65 (Dumble type cab and speakers). What speakers do you all recommend for a 2061X? I've never been a big fan of the blues - makes everything sound "country". Is the Gold a good match for the 2061X?

[Ulysses]

Hi, The golds are what you hear in the clip. I'll tell you what I tried and what I thought was best... Celestion Blues, 25w greenbacks, Jensen bluebell reissue, V30's, Bassman cab with C12n's, pre-rolas in 4x12 basketweave, late 70's blackbacks, and pre-Rola 30w's in a 4x12, Mojotone British Vintage Series 25w and few other I can't recall right now. My favorites are the golds with the 30w's greenbacks a close second. Honorable mention to the Mojotone British Vintage Series which are the best lower priced speaker for general purpose I've tried. When broken in it's scary how much they sound like my pre-Rolas.

I have a Soultone 50w here that i'm doing clips with power scaling. It took me a little tweaking to get the power scaling and drive control in the sweet spot but very impressed. I'd love to hear the 2061x clone. I'm a big fan of blues but they are NOT good with this particular 2061x. The golds in a 2x12 open back rule but I can't guarantee the Soultone will respond the same. I have a gut feeling the Heritage 30 watts would be dynamite with a 2061x for a more traditional vfintage Marshall tone. I just haven't had a chance to plug this one into a piar.

[Freedom]

One thing that I found, and isn't so evident on Jack Zucker's demo is that the sound of the amp when the unit is bypassed and the sound of the amp when the unit is on but at full volume is different. Not a massive difference, but discernable. There are more highs when going through the unit, and the bass is jumbled (not sure how else to put it).

I got mine 2-3 weeks ago, i noticed the same thing...apart from that i like it a lot, feels very natural...

[reverendfrankie]

:AOKJust thought i'd chime in about Ho as well. Yes - he is the 'UA' maker and inventor. And if you're living in Vancouver he's one of the 2 top shops that people take their amps to for repair/tweaking.
Like many - my first thought on seeing his design was - "Why don't you copyright/patent some of your designs". So i asked him...and he just chuckled and pointed to the dumble-like 'goop' that he pours over some of the circuit. Not much of a deterrent methinks. Especially since he is having a few of them built in China. But he just doesn't worry. He seems to love what he is doing and loves to talk amps and circuits. You sort of have to pinch yourself and realize that in a few years you'll say "i used to drop in on Ho and chat with him." And that conversation will be up there with people who used to visit Ken Fischer of Trainwreck fame. An unassuming genius who has opened up new sounds for those of us who live in close quarters/have tinnitus.
Anyways - like many have said Yukong Ho is the real "Ultimate" deal. Come to our city (probably the most beautiful in North America - but i'm biased) and drop in on Yukong - you'll walk away smiling.
Frank

[Ulysses]

For all those who PM'd I did fix the link to the clip in the first post. I don't know what happened. My apologies but it should work now.

I also fixed the ones in the other thread:

http://www.thegearpage.net/board/showthread.php?t=410085

[Lashing]

Ho is a genious. I've had one of his 50 watt attenuators for at least 7 years now and its still my fav. I had him build one that handles 200 watts as well.

I have tried weber and the hotplate as well. Neither came close. The Ho unit truly sounds great at bedroom levels. The hotplate is OK for gig levels but turns to pure crap at bedroom levels.

Ho has a bunch of stuff. He is a great guy too. Dealt with him for years when I lived in Vancouver and miss him now that I've moved. He was one guy I never had to worry about. If I had an electronics problem I know he'd find the source and fix it without issues of inflated expenses. His other tone shapers and amps are great too. The stuff always looks like a metal shop project, but works.

I wouldnt sell my Ho units. They are nessesary parts to enjoy my Marshalls.

[dewman]

got mine in January from Ho. It has the 200W option, dual attenuation volumes with footswitch, and Ho threw in a Plexi switch for free. Sounds great..

http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n252/blivetgun/DSC04475.jpg

http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n252/blivetgun/DSC04477.jpg

http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n252/blivetgun/DSC04476.jpg

[jackaroo]

I love mine.

Actually, this thread was the one that convinced me to try one out. Best move ever.



http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v234/jack_devine/Rack.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v234/jack_devine/2Marshalls.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v234/jack_devine/Basementfurniture.jpg

[dewman]

well I have a 100 watter incoming so I'll put it to good use!

I love the idea of the effects send /return and the wet/dry setup. I've already been experimenting with a dual amp setup and if we ever move from the weekend jam to regular gigging- which could easily happen this year since we've woodshedded it for long enough I think- then I'll bring out two amps. The wet/dry rig would be fantastic as I generally run a rotosphere pedal. That pedal sounds killer in stereo or in a wet/dry rig. Closest to a Leslie I've heard. I probably will send it back to Ho for some mods once I see what works for me. Not in need of a bedroom switch or a 100V outlet sicne my amps arent vintage and have been overbuilt w/ quality components. I generally run the amp on 8 (out of 10) and ride the guitar volume and intend to use the Ho attenuator live to bring the 100W amp down to deluxe reverb volume levels (well actually I'll be running only 2 power tubes so more like 50W, so it will not be THAT bad.)

Jack, that's a fairly spacious pad for NYC!!! My sister in law had a place so small in the VIllage you could barely fit a full sized bed between the walls.....

[johan]

Ulysses, your clips haunts me almost every day. You did have an album coming out, didn't you?

What options on the UA or Ho unit are necessary? You think a "no-option" unit is ok?

[dewman]

I think the 100V tap is not necessary if you have a modern amp. If you are a gigger or planning on using this live then the bedroom switch isnt necessary. I think the two volume is also unnecessary really, but I'll probably use mine.

I think the 200W upgrade is essential, even with a 50 watt non MV amp. The plexi switch didnt do much for me live but if I was recording maybe...so to me that was optional. I can readjust my EQ easily to compensate for the ever so slight high roll off.

The line out is optional as well.

[Ulysses]

Ulysses, your clips haunts me almost every day. You did have an album coming out, didn't you?

What options on the UA or Ho unit are necessary? You think a "no-option" unit is ok?

Thanks for the nice comments but no, I've had no ambitions of doing my own record. I've made my career as a journeyman/sideman and feel that is where my strength is. In the past ten years of the "check-out-my-new-CD" epidemic I've come to the conclusion that everybody *doesn't* actually have something to say after all.

I think the UA is a near perfect tool in its basic form. If you plan on using 100 watt amps at any time I would upgrade to a 200 watt capability for headroom. Other than that I find no need for any of the extra "options".

[Relicula]

Thanks for the nice comments but no, I've had no ambitions of doing my own record. I've made my career as a journeyman/sideman and feel that is where my strength is. In the past ten years of the "check-out-my-new-CD" epidemic I've come to the conclusion that everybody *doesn't* actually have something to say after all.

I think the UA is a near perfect tool in its basic form. If you plan on using 100 watt amps at any time I would upgrade to a 200 watt capability for headroom. Other than that I find no need for any of the extra "options".


Kerry you may think you do not have something to say, but a lot of us sure like to listen to what you do. You have contributed to this board, and the LPF, with class, and knowledge that is appreciated.

The ultimate attenuator sales have risen because of your unselfish posting of a product you thought was worth noting, maybe they should give you a freebie, or a t-shirt :)

[BPlexico]

Hey! Quick question - call me too lazy to try and look it up - can I use my Ultimate without the speaker cabinet hooked up (only using line out into Apogee Duet).

Want to try a recording technique I saw in a separate thread regarding Line out into Logic and then using the speaker simulations in Logic.

Merci.

Barr

[Ulysses]

Hey! Quick question - call me too lazy to try and look it up - can I use my Ultimate without the speaker cabinet hooked up (only using line out into Apogee Duet).

Want to try a recording technique I saw in a separate thread regarding Line out into Logic and then using the speaker simulations in Logic.

Merci.

Barr

Remember that the UA is really not an "attenuator" like when we think of a Hot Plate, Mini Mass, Power Soak, Airbrake, etc, but a re-amping device. Even so, it is still sending wattage from the output to drive a speaker cab. The question may be better asked to the Apogee people to see if the Duet can absorb power from a guitar amp and still work properly. Wouldn't seem like it to me but don't know for sure.

[BPlexico]

Good point - I will check with Mark at UA as well. I am speaking of using the Line output - not the speaker output - and there is a control for it on the back of the unit. I had read here of someone doing a similar thing with the line out of a Hot Plate.

Barr

[Ulysses]

Good point - I will check with Mark at UA as well. I am speaking of using the Line output - not the speaker output - and there is a control for it on the back of the unit. I had read here of someone doing a similar thing with the line out of a Hot Plate.

Barr
I see, I don't have the line out. Let us know...

[BPlexico]

Well I heard back from Mark rather quickly, and the short answer is yes, I can use the line out directly into my Apogee Duet without having a speaker cabinet connected.

"The line out is independent of the UA volume. You don't have to have a cabinet plugged in but the UA must be powered up to use the line out. Set the front switch to on so your amp is properly loaded. "

Barr

[Ulysses]

Thanks.

[Mickey_C]

Thanks for the nice comments but no, I've had no ambitions of doing my own record. I've made my career as a journeyman/sideman and feel that is where my strength is. In the past ten years of the "check-out-my-new-CD" epidemic I've come to the conclusion that everybody *doesn't* actually have something to say after all.


There's a good portion of the 44,000 of us here that would strongly disagree, if you would reconsider!

[johan]

There's a good portion of the 44,000 of us here that would strongly disagree, if you would reconsider!

:agree

[presence]

There's a good portion of the 44,000 of us here that would strongly disagree, if you would reconsider!

:agree

[highway11]

Thats an amazing sound you're getting Ulysses! Awesome playing too. I'm really interested in getting one of these. My amp is an AC30CC (the new one with master volume). I find the amp sounds pretty lifeless without turning the master up, though.

Have you tried the UA through your AC30? Does it sound as good as the marshall running under attenuation?

[stu2]

"I have a pair of Leslie's that I push with old Marshall small box 50 watters. I play them with a Memory Man and spread about eight feet apart... sitting out front in the middle the random swirling of the different horns and rotors throws a kaleidoscope of sound patterns at you, never the same thing twice. I swear it's like beams of sound swirling right in front of your eyes and whizzing past your head. And then with the slight modulation and warble of the Memory man's dreamy, lo-fi delay it turns into full blown trip. Sometimes I go in to play around 1am and I don't come out of my room until the sun is up with drool all over the front of my shirt. It's the closest thing I've found to a mind altering experience without chemicals."

Do you have any clips?

[Fred Farkus]

I'm late to the party but great clips and nice demos. What a nice product! Appears to be a "self-contained re-amp" device. Looks like it has a chip amp or something for providing amplification to the speakers. I've used my homebrewed attenuator/line-out for reamping to a separate amp and it does sound very good. Much more usable than a passive attenuator IMO.

[KissTone]

The Soundclick link no longer works. That makes me sad. Can it be revived?

[Ulysses]

I got the messages but I checked the link and seems to be working fine now. Who knows...?

[KissTone]

Thanks!!

[impactblue]

I had one too, but sent it back for the same reasons, plus my amp was getting incredibly hot when using it. That said, it made every amp I used sound smoother and darker than the original amp tone, which I kinda' liked. But, it was very far from transparent. I did a little shootout with the UA, Air Brake, MASS, Hot-Plate and Power Brake. I thought the Air Brake was most transparent, but didn't attenuate down low enough before getting into the 2nd rate "Bedroom" setting. The UA was great for taming bright amps and getting a super creamy lead tone. The MASS did the same kind of thing. Overall, I'm still waiting for someone to make the real ultimate attenuator. Anyone try The Leash yet?

Anyways, that all said, the Marshall clip with the UA does sound! I really love the tone! But, I'd bet the unattenuated amp, with a bright Tele and those bright Celestion golds would not sound as warm and fat. I'd bet the UA, with its 30+ ohm input load is warming up and smoothing out that tone quite a bit.

Anyone else feel the same way? Moving having used the airbrake for ages...the Ho/Ultimate sounds a hell of a lot smoother with much less high end than I'm used to

[johan]

This thread has a page 10 but I can't reach it. If I click the 10 I'm going back to page 9 :messedup:messedup

[impactblue]

Here's gut shots of my Ho Attenuator...

240V tranny, 50W, Plexi Bedroom and Ohm switches

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3401/3486186514_020b2f5986_b.jpg

[johan]

How did you get hold of a Ho unit in Australia? Any email addresss to Ho?

[impactblue]

No I had to call him internationally and pay via credit card.

[TubeStack]

Now I'm getting excited. :)

My Ho Attenuator should be here in a week or so. 100W unit with 2 volumes and footswitch, plexi-switch, and 100V tap. (Didn't go for the 200W upgrade, as my JCM 800 is 50W, Mr. Ho says I'll be okay with 100.)

Don't know if I'll need the plexi option, or the 100V tap, but with my personality it's better just to shell out a few extra bucks now, and forever have the choices available, than spend a lifetime obsessively wondering if I should have gotten them. LOL

[TubeStack]

And yes, dealing with Mr. Ho has been fantastic. I've called him several times with questions, changed my order (due to buying a new, different head than the one I was using at the time of ordering), and he's been great and a pleasure to talk to.