How about "Resurrecting" the Session 2000 / Transfex Pro 212, with a different memory card (CompactFlash, SD, XD, etc., etc.). AND "break them down" into head and speaker unit(s)...

[This message was edited by Roger Maude on 14 March 2006 at 11:25 AM.]

------------------
So many stringed instruments, so little time...

Gordy Hall
Fairfax, CA.

Some of the new ideas were great and can be considered for future use and some of the "been there/done that" ideas will be reconsidered as new production methods and technology may allow these ideas to be "rethought" and reused.

First of all, a tube amp can definitely be designed for steel. How much are you willing to pay and what is the maximum weight for a tube amp?

Tilt back legs.............can be done.

Building in the response curve of a microphone such as the SM-57 can be done.

Building two separate cabinets, ie; head and speaker can be done, but again how much should such a product cost?

A tuner out can be done with no problem. Two different channels is easy. However, this will add to the final cost of the product. Is it worth this when only a few multi-instrumentalists might use both?

Built in effects is very subjective and may make or break the sales of a product such as this. Worth it?

A one-space rack with separate power amp and speakers are possible. But...............this increases the amount of gear that is carried. This is a hard decision versus a single amp. Been there, done that.

I don't really see the purpose of a "much higher impedance, and increase the im pedance of the pre-eq patch return". Have there been problems with this? Not to my knowledge.

Would a memory stick be preferred for saving presets? Some "already used" technology has gone by the wayside and new technology has replaced it. This is what we prefer.

A wireless remote is possible, but I'm not so sure it is economical, that is if digital effects are installed.

Higher power in a Nashville 112 sized cab is possible.

A vintage look is possible.

A modeling amp is possible, but will be costly. What is a ceiling price that you would pay for any steel amp?

Built in wheels and an extendable handle is a good idea that can be done.

Separate channels with separate effects controls can be done, but it would be expensive, but it can be done.

Is there any new features that you would like to see on a Peavey amp. Just about all of the previous suggestions have already been done, but some are worth repeating.

• Roger Francis,
• Jim Peters,
• Al Terhune,
• Eric West,
• Ray Uhl,.
• basilh,
• Eric West again,
• Tyler Hall,
• Tony Rankin,
• Drew Howard,
• James Shelton,
• Sonny Priddy,

Presumably all satisfied owners, with the exception of the 'Knob' issue of course!
The present owners quite valid input should be regarded as the results of "Field Tests" whilst the other comments would appear to be more in the line of a "Wish List".

Notwithstanding the valuable input that may transpire from this discourse, a survey in the form of a circular to all registered users would also be productive, methinks !!

------------------

quote:

---

Steel players do it without fretting

---

[This message was edited by basilh on 16 March 2006 at 04:35 PM.]

One solution is a high powered all-tube amp head. My 180 watt Super Twin Reverb (six 6L6s) in a head cab weighs 50 lbs. (8 lbs more than a NV112), which is about the limit for portable weight of a single component, and has the volume of a NV1000, with warm but clean tube tone. In addition, a separate head cabinet gives the flexibility to place the amp next to the player, with the speaker(s) placed wherever needed. And obviously with a head cab the speaker options are completely felexible.

However, an update of this type amp would be expensive, and maybe it's a dinosaur. But lightweight, inexpensive solid state amps have not to-date been able to model tube amp tone well enough to replace it (witness the thriving tube amp market for regular guitar). We can always hope, but at the moment, my POD XT (possibly the best of the modelers) just does not sound as good as my all-tube amps.

That brings us to hybrids. I am aware of two hybrids that far surpass all the solid-state modelers, and come close to filling the bill. The old Music Man amps had a solid-state preamp with a tube power amp. My conservatively rated 100 watt MM 112RD weighs 44 lbs (2 lbs more than the NV112) and is very compact. It is almost there in tone, but not quite. The highs are too piercing, and the tube preamp warmth is missing. So I say it's close, but no cigar - but it shows the great unfulfilled promise of hybrids. The other example is the modern Vox Valvetronix line. These use a single small tube, combined with solid-state modeling for both the preamp, and a mini tube power amp that gets a solid-state boost. These things easily beat all the solid-state modelers, and truly rival all-tube tone. They are very inexpensive (okay, they are European engineering and Korean production, but I have faith in Peavey to accomplish the same thing somehow). The power-to-weight ratio is in line with solid-state expectations, and could probably be improved by using neodymium speakers and voicing the amps accordingly. The tone, volume, multiple models, and effects that come from these small inexpensive amps are unbelievable. I'm thinking this may be the wave of the future. I'd love to see what Peavey could do with this.

Finally, let's address the two-channel two-instrument issue. It's true that a lot of steelers don't play a second instrument. But virtually all steelers started on regular guitar; and I think more play regular guitar on the bandstand and at home than Mike seems to think. But I think there is much more to this issue than that. Even when many of us play only steel, more and more, we have songs where we depart from the traditional-country clean-steel sound and go to a blues-rock tube sound. If you have a second channel (or amp models) that gives you regular guitar tube sounds, you take care of both the guys who double on Tele or slide-guitar, and the steelers who need a blues-rock tone on steel.

The beauty of this from the product design standpoint is that you can have one amp (or line of amps) that covers those who only play guitar, those who play steel and guitar, and those who play steel with multiple tones. So instead of thinking of separate amp lines for regular guitar and steel, all you have to do is have a high powered hybrid modeler, with one of the models being a clean steel sound (which probably also would be a good clean jazz model).

So here's the picture I am getting. A compact, light, inexpensive 200 watt tube-ss hybrid with dirty and clean models, and multiple digital effects. Like the Vox Valvetronixs, there is an attenuator for the final solid-state boost. So guitar players can dial the final volume down to the 10-50 watt level they need, while still maintaining the sweet spot of the driven mini-tube power amp. The steeler can max out the attenuator for lots of clean headroom and choose a clean tube model, or can choose a dirtier model for blues-rock. Everybody is happy with one amp. I see a line with a 200 watt head, and one or more smaller combos. The only difference would be the final solid-state power boost - the preamp, models and mini-tube power amp would be the same in all fo them, saving production costs. Beyond that, the only think steelers might want is the mid-point selector. But guitar players might discover how useful that is too. Or you could just put in a 5- or 6-band EQ and make everybody really happy.

I think built-in effects are worth it, if you choose the right ones. The Session 500 effects were not very useful. The phase shifter was OK, but rarely used for steel.

On a current small job, I have been using a Roland Cube 60 that is plenty loud for that setting, but I am still trying to get warm enough tone without too much mud. The effects are built in and so is the amp modeling. It weighs only 32 lbs. The main flaw is that the only "clean" channel is their Jazz Chorus model. The black face model is on the dirty channel and gotta watch that gain or it distorts. It is great for lead.

The point is that I am trying to find and use that affordable, light-weight amp that has built-in modeling and effects.

The cube 60 costs $345. The nashville 112 is $500 or so.

Dave Doggett offered some excellent ideas and good possible solutions. I will take them seriously.

Frank Estes says, "if you choose the right ones". That's the dilemma..............choosing what everyone wants, but you guys have given me enough info on the most common effects being used.

The key words when compiling input about improvements is "lightweight" and "cost". In the past, we have included many features that probably were not necessary to the majority of players, so finding the "happy medium" is our goal here.

------------------
1975 Sho~Bud Pro III Custom (8-7)
1981 Peavey Session 500

The whole discussion about built-in effects is just way, too subjective. Just talking about a simple delay unit will bring up a dozen different choices. I'd much rather have an amp system design that would give me the maximum flexibility to choose from a variety of system components that would serve my needs the best...then I can choose which add-on effects I like best. If the amp system is designed to provide many practical, desirable options, then it can satisfy the most people and be successful at the same time.

Peavey has a great rep among steelers for quality equipment and great sound. If these traits could be retained in a modularized an amp line, I think more of us could have setups that meet our specific needs...from the bedroom picker, to the concert performer.

Sooooo……I'd like to see a separate head unit chassis into which I could install as many as 3 "preamp" modules of my choice (or as few as 1). The chassis would contain the power supply and wiring to accommodate all the modules. Each of the modules would be designed for a particular purpose, i.e., steel guitar, rock guitar, blues, jazz, or whatever. It could be based on tubes or solid state as needed, depending on the intended style of music. The player could then choose which module(s) is/are best suited to his needs...1 steel module only, or 1 steel module plus 1 rock module, etc. All the modules could feed their output thru a single output jack, but each module would have it’s own separate preamp output jack so that it’s signal can isolated from the rest and fed to it’s own separate cabinet. How ‘bout if we could plug in an extra guitar module for those gigs where we need to cover Tele and steel?

The key concept here is that each different module would be designed in conjunction with the rest of the system so that the end result is a desirable and effective tool. In other words, the Tele module gives the Tele player exactly what a Tele player needs. The Blues module gives the Blues player exactly what a Blues player needs. So, the designers have to do their homework to get the correct results…..no “good enough” allowed!!

Beyond the module concept, you should have a range of powered speaker cabs with a choice of tube power amps…a range like, for instance, 8”/20 wt. to 12”/50 wt. to 2-12”/100 wt. to 15”/135 wt. in cabinets that provide the characteristics necessary for the intended style of music. Wouldn’t it be nice to feed the steel module out to a 15”/135wt.cab and the Tele module out to an 8”/20wt cab? Get the idea?

Along with the above, we need plenty of options for effect loops, headphones, XLR-1/4" outputs, tuner hookups, extra A/C outlets, tilt-back legs, and so on.

There's just no such thing as “one amp that meets everyone’s needs”. The Twin Reverb may have come closest, but the weight puts it out of the question for more and more players every day. The Nashville 112 provides great sound in a light package, but wouldn’t it be great if we could add a matching external 85wt. cabinet for the larger gigs instead of another 112?

I DO NOT like the "all-in-one" concept that many designers use today where a very complex digital system is created to fill all possible needs from amp modeling to exotic effects. They never do it all really well. I don’t want the system to sound “pretty much like” a Session 400 or a Marshal stack. I want the actual sound of a Session 400 or a Marshal stack. Just make these amp systems do what we most need them to do...reproduce our instrument in whatever musical style we need, with the versatility to change the system by simply adding or changing components…”plug ‘n’ play” for the musician. How many of us wish our steels had the versatility of the Sierra modular pickup system? I know I do!….and I’d like that in an amp also!!

If you design one great amp and try to fulfill everyone's needs, at best it will only be partially successful. If you take a successful amp and modify it to provide a different sound style, again you’ll be partially successful. Why not carefully design a system that comprises components that are specially designed for specific musical styles, modularize them, and allow the player to combine them in any way he chooses? I think it would sell big time.

http://steelguitarforum.com/Forum11/HTML/007805-2.html

Thanks for your time and thoughts in starting this thread.

Yet another obs from the "smoke test" division.

Although I did break a knob, it's the reverb knob which I don't use anyhow, I noticed the following again last night:

When I pick up and carry my amps I typically carry them with the face to my leg. With the Session500 and the Nashville to top lip of the case protrudes far enough to protect the knobs. On other words eliminating the recess would offer more protection at no cost that I can see.

With the 112 the knobs immediately contact my leg, and without fail when I set it up after carrying it any distance, they are all pegged to one end or the other. I still think that lower profile knobs or ones with a skirt that is closer to the face plate would still offer a ton more protection. Even with plastic pot stems.

I used it yet again last night, and miked it instead of the 400, and it worked great.

As always I taped over the top heat vent, and I don't think it hurt anything. Nothing fell into it anyhow..

EJL

It's possible that here on the "Forum" there are steel guitars around every corner, and in the 'real world' it's not quite thataway, making it pretty unlikely. Probably they will barely sell enough Larry O Omniacs to justify the setup and production. JUst the nature of manufacturing I think.

I'm looking for the "Tom Bakers" to leave us with enough quality rigs.

Then there's that logo..

JUST KIDDING.

I must say, this is the first time I put this little 112 to the test in a crowded, noisy club. The lead player was using a Tele and old Sessions 400. I was amazed at how the low notes on C6 came through without any distortion. The louder I played the better the amp sounded. (I was using a Carter with XR-16 pickups).

Ken

[This message was edited by Ken Williams on 20 March 2006 at 06:19 PM.]

I like the rear AC outlet, but it really should be an IEC female rather than a US 110v outlet to be world-compatible. Also, it would be REALLY cool to have the PSU for the amp auto-switch 110v/240v, but have the "accessory" outlet manually switchable. Lots of Euro players who use US accessories... Yes, it's another transformer I guess.

Regarding knobs etc., I always put my amps "face down" in the car, so I can put other cases on top without risking the speakers and grille cloth. I'd live the front of the amp to be flat, preferably with a metal grille rather than cloth. OK, that's more weight..

How about making the cabinet out of some kind of plastic like PA speakers?

Wouldn't that go a long way in protecting those rather vulnerable knobs?

I, too, tend to carry the amp with the front against my leg so I don't catch the knobs on a door-frame - but then they hurt my leg!

quote:

---

The louder I played the better the amp sounded.

---

The amp sounds very nice soft, but play it louder and it really just sounds fantastic. A lot of people, like myself, use a pair of them. Just stack 'em and slave one to the other, and they kick a**, with a HUGE sound, bottom end to top end, and absolutely never shrill nor harsh. And so light and compact, you can carry one in each hand and run with them. My only minor suggestion, as some others have pointed out, is to protect the knobs better. But the great thing with the Peavey service is that you can send it to Mike B., and have it back in no time in perfect condition. So basically, improving something this perfect will be hard to do.

------------------
Jeff's Jazz

[This message was edited by Jeff Lampert on 22 March 2006 at 11:54 AM.]