LSC/LSS owners; are you happy with channel2?Want to fix it?

The Boogie Board

Help Support The Boogie Board:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
BobL said:
After reading this thread in it's entirety I decided last night that I would apply the change to one (1) of my Lonestars. In a side by side comparison with my other Lonestar, which included recording them both it seems to me that although the channel presence is enhance, the bottom is not quite as stiff as it first was. And before it's said, that difference is noticible between the two Lonestars as well, and it is a change that was not an issue in the past.

Second, I had read here where the pots may be of a slightly different manufactures part number. That was NOT the case here, and all of the part numbers matched.

Another effect of this mod appears to be slightly thin sound with effects pedals that I currently use, although this might be attributed to my need to experiment a little more. And before I get slammed let me tell you that my effects pedals are about as good as they get. Grey Ross compressor, original TS-808, original AD-9, and so on. Tonight I'll replace them with my duplicate set and move out the TS-808 for a Fulltone OCD, Keeley Compressor and try a few other pedals as well.

Now with that said, the point I'm making, based on the ears I've used playing as a touring pro for over 45 years is this. Mesa may have gotten the 2nd channel tone characteristics correct to begin with. So we'll see what the deal is after this weekend. Until then this jury's still out, but I wish to thank you for the suggestion and your efforts.

Hey BobL;
I wouldn't dream of 'slamming' you and I certainly hope no one else does either. CB101 also tried the 'mod' and changed his amp back. He preferred it how it was before. I actually encouraged him to post his findings and opinion before he had done so.

Tone is a very subjective and personal thing...and I don't think there necessarily is a 'right' or a 'wrong' Tone...but there is a 'right and wrong' Tone for me...as well as a 'right' tone for you and for everyone else. It is an individual thing.

Your posting does help to prove that there is indeed a difference to be heard in the 'before and after'...so maybe at least we can convince the doubters that it does actually do something when the pots are switched!

There have been too few people posting their results of the 'mod' so far; so no absolute conclusions can be drawn yet...but it seems to me that those who favor the use of pedals are more likely to prefer the 2nd channel as Mesa originally made it....whereas those (like myself) who don't really care for pedals much are more likely to prefer the 2nd channel with the 'mod'.

I bought a second Lonestar after I had done the 'mod' to my first one; and like you took that opportunity to do and A/B comparison. Several hours later I was taking the chassis out of the 'new' one to do the 'mod' to it too.

Thanks for your post and keep us advised of your findings.

Viva Le Difference! Charles
 
djw said:
Ok, I guess I might should post a link to my post-Reeder clip... in case anyone's interested in a sample (this has been posted by me in a couple of other threads today, but I did this right after I did the mod).

Here's the setup:
No pedals, just straight into the amp with my Strat.
Gain: 2:00
Treble: 2:00
Mid: 9:30
Bass: 10:00
Presence: 12:00
Drive: 10:00
Normal voicing
50w, both channels
Tube rectifier
6L6s
Loop is on, output: 1:30.

10.jpg


Recorded at apartment levels... here it is.

Cool man. Thanks for doing that.

Curious what ch2 sounds like with the drive cranked. If there's still enough gain on tap, I might take another look at the LS as chan 2 put me off in a BIG way.

I wonder if there is a way to boost the Drive even further while keeping the reeder mod? If the volume level doesn't jump to insanity, this could make the LS the amp many people were looking for.
 
I have played about 10 gigs in the last 3 weeks with my stock LSC. I think it is great the way it is. I want channel two to be different. I feel like I have a country/blues channel 1---- and a classic rock channel 2.

I do find that I run the gain on channel 2 about 2 oclock and the drive below noon. but with the LSC channel 2 in conjunction with my Seymour Duncan Twin Tube and a Hermida Zendrive I have every tone I need for rock and roll.

I see the beauty of having two identical channels, but at this moment, I love the split personality of the LSC. Maybe that will change? I do find with the channel 2 drive set above noon, I don't like it as much, but that is fine with me.
 
NuSkoolTone said:
djw said:
Ok, I guess I might should post a link to my post-Reeder clip... in case anyone's interested in a sample (this has been posted by me in a couple of other threads today, but I did this right after I did the mod).

Here's the setup:
No pedals, just straight into the amp with my Strat.
Gain: 2:00
Treble: 2:00
Mid: 9:30
Bass: 10:00
Presence: 12:00
Drive: 10:00
Normal voicing
50w, both channels
Tube rectifier
6L6s
Loop is on, output: 1:30.

10.jpg


Recorded at apartment levels... here it is.

Cool man. Thanks for doing that.

Curious what ch2 sounds like with the drive cranked. If there's still enough gain on tap, I might take another look at the LS as chan 2 put me off in a BIG way.

I wonder if there is a way to boost the Drive even further while keeping the reeder mod? If the volume level doesn't jump to insanity, this could make the LS the amp many people were looking for.

Here you go: Another clip, this time with the drive cranked at the end. Same settings as before, except at the end I crank the drive and gain controls in channel 2. Strat delux, bridge pickup. I noticed there's a little level drop when I switch to Ch2, but that's because I didn't compensate for having taken the Drive out to demonstrate the "clone" effect. It kicks back up when I click the Drive on.

Personally, the amp has more gain than I'll ever have need for... but I'm not a high-gain player.

I just landed on a good setup with my OCD, which affords me to to keep Ch2 on the Normal voicing, which I love but doesn't get me my Marshall fix so much; but the OCD gives me a verrrrry nice Plexi thing by itself, especially on top of my slightly dirty Ch1. Then the Plexi + Ch2 juiced is pretty amazing too: lots of gain, but still clear and smooth. Unga! Good stuff, baby.

****, I should have done a clip of that too...

I love this amp more and more.
 
OK, so after a few hours of testing and comparing what I've found is that, as usual, the right sound is in there with this mod, you just have to work it out. Working it out in my case means choosing the right pedal.

Now to put that into perspective let it be known that I'm an old school guy. Hell, at my age I have no choice, and that obviously has played a huge factor in the music I play, and have played for 45 years. So while the long tours are over, the demand for the band still goes on. And it just so happens that music from my era is in very high demand. So let's say you like the Allman Brothers, Cream and soul. Drift back to a day when a pedal in the signal chain was pretty rare, but 50 and 100 watt tube amps were everywhere, and cranked pretty loud because there was NO FOH and covering a few thousand water bags meant the volume needed to be high. Time machine to today and almost any amp over 50 watts is to much rig for the gig, and pedals come into play. How else do you get the tone? You can't depend on being able to crank the amp to power tube saturation and compression so what do you use.

In my case I use, in this order, Peterson tuner, Vox wah, Ross compressor, TS-808, AD-9 delay. I always use channel #1 for clean tones, and channel #2 for grind and more grind Old school tone at it's finest. So when I changed the pots in channel #2 I knew I wouldn't like the sound unless I worked the channel, and I knew I would like the tone more if I could make it work, because I love the clean channel and my goal was to find the clean channel chime and top end, but not so much as to be annoying and piercing when I used the bridge pickup. Think Joe Walsh, Stones, and you'll get the idea. OK, so that sets the stage.

The tests were run using a pair of Lonestars, my pedal board, and a Gibson 1960 historic Les Paul. The tubes in the amp are Mullard NOS and GT 6L6 GEs. Nothing but the overdrive pedal was changed and all other pedals remained untouched.

I started by pulling the TS-808 and working in this $200 pedal by Nick Greer called a Black Betty. It's supposed to be a combo boost and fuzz, but I have had very little luck with it, and the gain is just to way over the top, almost uncontrollable. I gave this pedal about 30 minutes and it is what it is. And through either amp, just another suck pedal.

The next pedal I worked in was a Fulltone OCD. These are great pedals and with the pots in the stock position work very well with the Lonestar. I liked the tone, but there was just to much high end crap floating around when used on the modded LS, not so much when used with the not modded LS. In a pinch I could use it, but just not warm enough.

The third pedal was my original TS-808. It fit right in and after about an hour I had figured out the settings needed to make the modded LS really give up the goods. Just the right amount of boost, warmer but transparent tone and lot's of grind. Moving the gain to about 1pm gave up some great classic tones, sustain and incredible harmonics. This pedal was working fine now that I had learned how to work with the mod, and I actually like the tone and note to note clarity of the mod better. Moving back to the not modded LS confirmed my statements again.

The next pedal was my seldom used, very much loved Klon. The Klon is what it is and the clean boost of this pedal worked very much like the TS-808 except the amp gain had to come up some what more. The 2nd and 3rd order harmonics were outstanding as I expected, and like the TS-808 old school distortion and sustain without power tube saturation (read that as pre amp over drive) was a no brainer. So back into the box for special occasions.

The last pedal I tried was an all but forgotten pedal. I don't really want to talk about this pedal on a web site, but I think you might all find this pedal something to consider. The reason for not wanting to talk about the pedal is simple. They work great, are very inexpensive, but are discontinued and very hard to find. I just don't really want to be unable to find more, even though I own two (2) of them. I dug this puppy out of the box, plugged it in, and smiled. The tone was there, the notes were distinctive, harmonics were great and sustain as good as any pedal on the market. Now you may hear that this pedal is a Klon copy. Be assured that it is not. Like the TS-808, OCD and Klon it does not color my original signal unless I want it to, but it does have very usable high and low tone controls, usable gain unlike the Nick Greer. The pedal can be heard at the link below, and although the OP doesn't really show you all of the aspects of this great little pedal, you'll get the idea. He uses a Tele, but they sound better with a humbucker IMO.

You'll find the video at the bottom of this page.

http://www.guitarsite.com/news/guitarvideo/zoom_pd-01_power_drive_demo/

Well, that's my summation. Working with the modded channel #2 has led me to tone nirvana, and the pedals that suit my style work very well with the mod. My plan is to work with the mod for a while. If I'm happy in a month it will stay, If not it's easy enough to put back the way it was.

Have fun. :D
 
OK out of curiousity, I did the Reeder mod. So far I am pleased. I have 3 gigs this week and I will let everyone know. I find I have to turn the gain up to a higher number to acheive the old sound. So it is like the new gain structure starts on minus three without the mod. Since I feel that the best sounds in the LSC are low to mid gain, (not high gain) I could see the real advantage to this.

I liked it before, I like it now. I will see which I like better!

Greg
 
So, What would happen if I took the Presence and Mid pots out of my channel 3 from my Dual Rectifier and put them in my Lonestar Channel two?
 
fishyfishfish said:
So, What would happen if I took the Presence and Mid pots out of my channel 3 from my Dual Rectifier and put them in my Lonestar Channel two?
You'd get a Recto-Star. :wink:
 
For those who did the mod did you make any measurement in resistance and taper curve of the 2 pots?
For those who's about to mod, can you take the measurement and post them here. This will give the technical insight to this mod. Theoretically at some point, the 2 pots should have same value and thus you can dial-in the mod and non-mod settings. All in all it's just resistance we're talking about isn't it?
 
I just did the mod and I love it!!. Amp is way more dynamic and downright snarls with the volume up. Peace!
 
Just read this post for the first time today. Haven't been coming on here for long, joined last week to get advice with a grumbly valve (quickly sorted when pointed in the right direction). Saw the thread title and couldn't believe the coincidence! Only yesterday, I was crouched over my amp (Lonestar Special) fiddling with all ch2's controls wondering why I couldn't find 'that sound', when Ch1 sounds so **** good. I matched up all the pots with Ch1 the idea of starting from there and adding the extra gain sections afterwards to try to find what I was after.

I found (as everyone has) that there is a big difference between the basic sounds of the channels. I had not noticed it before as I always had the extra gain stage switched on and had not made the direct comparison between the channels. I had assumed as others have that ch2 was basically a warmed up ch1. What I actually found was ch2 was actually QUIETER than ch1??!! and at the same time sounding flatter and with less clarity. I expected at least that ch2 would have a bit more volume and grit at the same settings. Is this what other LSS owners have found or is there a problem with my amp?

My setup at the moment has ch1 with the gain at about 3.15 ish, breaking up nicely, and ideally ch2 would carry on from there with basically the same tone but more gain. This seems to make the mod the perfect solution, but my only concern would be if there is a loss of overall gain, although to be honest I never go that far and if I did I would probably just use a rat on ch1 like I do at the moment. Besides, djw's sound clips would suggest that there is still plenty of gain to be had (thanks for that djw, it really helped to hear the comparison. Nice one!)

I would really appreciate it if another LSS owner could let me know if my ch2 seems a bit more subdued than normal. If all is OK I may well go down the Reeder mod route, as that seems to tick all the boxes!

I am very interested by what people have posted after doing the mod, both pro and anti, so if anyone else has done it and just not got on with it, please post your findings as well as they are just as helpful as the 'WE LOVE IT' posts, if not more so.[/b]
 
ja22y said:
For those who did the mod did you make any measurement in resistance and taper curve of the 2 pots?
For those who's about to mod, can you take the measurement and post them here. This will give the technical insight to this mod. Theoretically at some point, the 2 pots should have same value and thus you can dial-in the mod and non-mod settings. All in all it's just resistance we're talking about isn't it?
It seems that way. However... and I am completely out of my area of any expertise whatsoever here, so I may be talking out of my least-educated orifice... but might there be another factor here?

Isn't it likely that the particular locations of each of these specific resistance and taper controls within the circuit have meaningful affects on the overall signal? It seems that the ratings of each, being the same additively, would ultimately be able to attain some sort of equivalence at certain points along their cumulative settings. But if the locations along the signal path are switched, it seems that different taper would have a different effect at settings below all-the-way-maxed for both. Particularly the pot in the Master position; if we're looking for equivalence, then we can probably find that... BUT... it might be at volume levels that are not always usable, or at least not easily manageable.

It seems like once you start varying your output level then there's more data to account for when assessing a comparison.

Does that make any sense? :?
 
I just got finished talking with Chris at Mesa about the Reeder Mod and got some significant information for anyone, like myself, who was concerned about voiding the warranty as well as those who doubt the validity of the mod itself.

Firstly, he had never heard of the mod before and after I explained to him some of the details and tone characteristics that you guys have posted here he said that he needed to check out the part numbers of the pots. After doing so he agreed completely that switching those two pots would produce a true clone of Channel 1.

He then told me that doing the mod would not void the warranty as long as the soldering job was clean and no damage was incurred while doing it.

There it is folks, from the horse's mouth. I'll be joining the Reeder mod crew here shortly.
 
thirstypirate said:
I just got finished talking with Chris at Mesa about the Reeder Mod and got some significant information for anyone, like myself, who was concerned about voiding the warranty as well as those who doubt the validity of the mod itself.

Firstly, he had never heard of the mod before and after I explained to him some of the details and tone characteristics that you guys have posted here he said that he needed to check out the part numbers of the pots. After doing so he agreed completely that switching those two pots would produce a true clone of Channel 1.

He then told me that doing the mod would not void the warranty as long as the soldering job was clean and no damage was incurred while doing it.

There it is folks, from the horse's mouth. I'll be joining the Reeder mod crew here shortly.

Dang dude. That's some precious, valuable information. And now Mesa is aware of the discussion here. Appreciate the leg work, Thirsty! Arrr!
 
No problem, I wanted to do it sooner but I haven't been home much. I'm thinking about pulling the chassis out of my combo as soon as I get done playing tonight and taking it to work tomorrow to "put some Reeds on it."
 
Spikey Si said:
I would really appreciate it if another LSS owner could let me know if my ch2 seems a bit more subdued than normal. If all is OK I may well go down the Reeder mod route, as that seems to tick all the boxes!
[/b]

The ch2 on my LSS has about 2 1/2 levels more gain than ch1. We're only talking about gain here not other factor. So w/ the same setting, ch2 should be louder and have more dirt. From what I understand from the Reeder's mod, the pot on ch2 is 'more gain' and the output pot has 'less gain'. In your situation swapping them will make ch2 even less gain which I think is not what you're after.
 
ja22y said:
Spikey Si said:
I would really appreciate it if another LSS owner could let me know if my ch2 seems a bit more subdued than normal. If all is OK I may well go down the Reeder mod route, as that seems to tick all the boxes!
[/b]

The ch2 on my LSS has about 2 1/2 levels more gain than ch1. We're only talking about gain here not other factor. So w/ the same setting, ch2 should be louder and have more dirt. From what I understand from the Reeder's mod, the pot on ch2 is 'more gain' and the output pot has 'less gain'. In your situation swapping them will make ch2 even less gain which I think is not what you're after.

Ok, so from what you say it would seem that I have a problem with my ch2.

Just done a comparison, and with ch1 gain on 3.00 and master vol on 9.00, i need to set ch2 gain down to 2.00 (which makes sense) and the master volume up to 10.00(which doesn't make sense?).

Being a bit of a novice on the tech side of things, I assume that this is a pre amp valve problem. Would that be v2?

All help gratefully received!!!!
 
Spikey Si said:
Ok, so from what you say it would seem that I have a problem with my ch2.

Its actually normal for the Master level to be higher on Channel 2 than Channel 1. I just tried your settings on my LSC and it's exactly the same thing. What the "Reeder" mod points out is that the pot tapers between the "Gain" and "Master" pots are essentially reversed, which means that in the unmodded channel 2 the Master has less effect in the lower part of it's range than the upper, while on C1 the Master has more effect in the lower part of it's range than the upper. The Masters are there to balance the channels, turn them till they match and don't worry about the relative positions. I like having them at a reasonably high level as long as they are still balanced, since pushing the efx loops tubes hotter also helps fatten things up a bit.
 
sbalderrama said:
Spikey Si said:
ja22y said:
Its actually normal for the Master level to be higher on Channel 2 than Channel 1. I just tried your settings on my LSC and it's exactly the same thing. What the "Reeder" mod points out is that the pot tapers between the "Gain" and "Master" pots are essentially reversed, which means that in the unmodded channel 2 the Master has less effect in the lower part of it's range than the upper, while on C1 the Master has more effect in the lower part of it's range than the upper. The Masters are there to balance the channels, turn them till they match and don't worry about the relative positions. I like having them at a reasonably high level as long as they are still balanced, since pushing the efx loops tubes hotter also helps fatten things up a bit.

Cheers mate, thats put my mind at rest. I just didn't want to do the mod if there was some other problem there.

I will have another fiddle with ch2 as it, but I tend to think that I will end up doing the mod as I always gravitate towards ch1 and currently use a tube screamer to boost the gain when needed rather than switch to ch2. If ch2 was identical to ch1 (a la reeder ) then the extra gain stage should do the trick without the need for pedals.

Thanks again for your help!!
 
Spikey Si said:
I will have another fiddle with ch2 as it, but I tend to think that I will end up doing the mod as I always gravitate towards ch1 and currently use a tube screamer to boost the gain when needed rather than switch to ch2. If ch2 was identical to ch1 (a la reeder ) then the extra gain stage should do the trick without the need for pedals.
Thanks again for your help!!

Try keeping the gain control quite low on C2 ( 9 oclock and below) and then use the drive control to push the channel, basically like sticking a tube overdrive in front of C1. Its possible that the Reeder mod may still have a slightly more open sound than doing it this way due to some aspect of how pots are manufactured, but for me this works really well. I usually run the gain a bit hotter since I like the extra compression for leads. Because of the pot taper, the Gain pot on C2 is very touchy in it's lower range.
 
Back
Top