Prompted by another forum member, I put EL34s into my ED. The result is a tone much more like a Marshall: more mid-range, less booming bass, less fizz, and sleazier and meaner. This is the way channels two and three were meant to sound, I think. All in all, the EL34s are a major improvement on the sound of channels two and three.
However you sacrifice your clean tone, which sounds flat and lifeless, just like a Marshall clean tone always does. Gone is the round, thick, sustaining Fenderish clean tone, that was the best thing about the amp when it had 6L6s. This is not such a problem for me: in my group we play rock and I seldom us the clean channel.
So is the answer to have both types of tube in the amp, with 6L6s assigned to channel one and EL34s assigned to channels two and three? Mesa already have this technology, which they put on the Road King. If you want true Fender and Marshall tones in one amp, don't see any way around this two tube type configuration.
What do you think?
I think it would be a big seller, if presented and marketed right. After all, how many of us bought the Dyne on the promise that it would deliver Fender cleans and Marshall dirty tones?
However you sacrifice your clean tone, which sounds flat and lifeless, just like a Marshall clean tone always does. Gone is the round, thick, sustaining Fenderish clean tone, that was the best thing about the amp when it had 6L6s. This is not such a problem for me: in my group we play rock and I seldom us the clean channel.
So is the answer to have both types of tube in the amp, with 6L6s assigned to channel one and EL34s assigned to channels two and three? Mesa already have this technology, which they put on the Road King. If you want true Fender and Marshall tones in one amp, don't see any way around this two tube type configuration.
What do you think?
I think it would be a big seller, if presented and marketed right. After all, how many of us bought the Dyne on the promise that it would deliver Fender cleans and Marshall dirty tones?