My Opinion: Three things did in the Electra Dyne

[primal]

Been away for a while. Sad to see the news of the ED being discontinued. But not surprised by it.

I was one of the first (on this forum anyway) to pickup an Electra Dyne. Bought it new from GC a couple months after it came out. Was floored by it when I first played it.

I ended up trading my Electra Dyne for a JCM 800 2204 half stack. My Mesa progression went RoadKing -> Mark IV -> Electra Dyne. I found that the sound I was really after was more of the classic Marshall tone which is probably why the ED was my favorite Mesa (and still is). So I just went out and got an old Marshall.

I now use the JCM 800 and a Splawn QuickRod (ED fans would absolutely love the Splawn IMHO even though the clean channel can't be spoken of in the same breath as the ED clean channel). However I still intend to pickup another ED once the funds become available. Preferably a medium head though.

Anyway, I really think three major things have contributed to the Electra Dyne not being a huge success even though it's tone is truly incredible (in my opinion).

1. Shared Controls: As much as many of us, myself included thought it was cool to have one set of controls, it really turned a large portion of the market off to the amp. I know people (myself included) like to bring up the success of amps like the old school Marshalls that didn't have all the bells and whistles, but those amps also didn't have to compete with many multichannel amps during there time (or at least as many). Multi channel amps with seperate controls were more the exception then the rule. And in todays "I want three channels, all seperate controls in a lunchbox size and weighted amp", single set of controls for arguably three seperate channels was going to be a tough sell.

2. Being released at the same time as the Mark V: The Mark series is truly the flagship line for Mesa. Any Mesa amp coming out at the same time as a new Mark series amp (that encompassed all the previous versions of the Mark series line no less) was sure fighting an up hill battle getting noticed. All the marketting went into the Mark V. The buildup for the Mark V and the anticipation was through the roof. So I think it really made it hard for people to really notice the Electra Dyne.

3. Lack of "Sex-Appeal" (for lack of a better term). Sorry, but the name Electra Dyne really sounds like the winning submission in a "who can come up with the lamest name for a new Mesa Amp" contest. I mean when the other amps have names like "Dual Rectifier", "Stiletto", "Mark V", "Lone Star", then you come in with Electra Dyne???? I think a cool name would have went a long way in giving it more marketability. I think the "Atlantic" series amps have a similar but not quite as severe problem with the name. Plus it never really got the big name endorsements, I think in part due to the fact that Mesa was really pushing the Mark V.


Anyway, just my opinion. It might be (and probably is) all BS.

But what isn't BS is that the ED is a freaking awesome sounding amp.

I say redo the layout and split the controls for dedicated clean and drive. Give it a cool name, add a solo boost and fwapow, you'll have a winner. And of course market it well. But that is easy for me to say.

 

[tonejam]

Thanks, that was a thoughtful assessment, and I think you may be right.

 

[MBJunkie]

Welcome Back Primal!
FWIW, I agree with most of your points.
Anyway, nice to have you back!

 

[YellowJacket]

1. Shared Controls: As much as many of us, myself included thought it was cool to have one set of controls, it really turned a large portion of the market off to the amp. I know people (myself included) like to bring up the success of amps like the old school Marshalls that didn't have all the bells and whistles, but those amps didn't have to compete with many multichannel amps during there time (or atleast as many). Multi channel amps with seperate controls were more the exception then the rule. And in todays "I want three channels, all seperate controls in a lunchbox size and weighted amp", single set of controls for arguably three seperate channels was going to be a tough sell.

2. Being released at the same time as the Mark V: The Mark series is truly the flagship line for Mesa. Any Mesa amp coming out at the same time as a new Mark series amp (that encompassed all the previous versions of the Mark series line no less) was sure fighting an up hill battle getting noticed. All the marketting went into the Mark V. The buildup for the Mark V and the anticipation was through the roof. So I think it really made it hard for people to really notice the Electra Dyne.

3. Lack of "Sex-Appeal" (for lack of a better term). Sorry, but the name Electra Dyne really sounds like the winning submission in "who can come up with the lamest name for a new Mesa Amp" contest. I mean when the other amps have names like "Dual Rectifies", "Stiletto", "Mark V", "Lone Star", then you come in with Electra Dyne???? I think a cool name would have went a long way in giving it more marketability. I think the "Atlantic" series amps have a similar but not quite as severe problem with the name. Plus it never really got the big name endorsements, I think in part due to the fact that Mesa was really pushing the Mark V.


Anyway, just my opinion. It might be (and probably is) all BS.

But what isn't BS is that the ED is a freaking awesome sounding amp.

I say redo the layout and split the controls for dedicated clean and drive. Give it a cool name, add a solo boost and fwapow, you'll have a winner. And of course market it well. But that is easy for me to say.

I have to totally agree. I don't want to diminish the sheer brilliance that is required to make shared controls actually work; to see a fully functional amp with such a simple layout is an accomplishment that Mesa should be proud of. That being said, I have to agree that separating out the controls is a preferable option. After all, it IS a 3 channel amp masquerading as a single channel one.

Having three fully EQ-able channels would do away with the confusing clean level trim pot and gain trim switch, both of which are fussy and difficult to understand for the same crowd that would get annoyed with more than one set of EQ and Gain controls. I can think of at least a half a dozen people on the forum here who wouldn't have sold this amp if there was separate EQs and personally, I almost didn't buy it because of the shared EQ. BUT, I managed to find a workaround and I'm pleased to say that this amp is going nowhere! It's amaaazing!

I personally think part of the problem is a brand image issue. You don't go to Domino's Pizza if you want a Grade A angus beef steak and I think that is what Mesa has done here. High gain put them on the map and lets face it, most of their customers play metal. The guys who are into vintage / old school tones would never bother to try a Mesa and believe me, when I suggest this amp to other guitarists they are prejudiced against it because of the name on it. The problem is that the market they are targeting traditionally do not like or play Mesas.

 

[MBJunkie]

I agree with most of your points as well YJ.

Yes, the shared EQ, difficulty in balancing "the modes" were issues for me that made me realize the ED wasn't right for me. I do agree that what Mesa was able to accomplish with "shared EQ" for 3 very different and nice sounds is amazing.

However, the other "problem" that I had with the ED is that the 3 modes were not distinctly footswitchable. I was always "guessing" whether I would be going to "lo or hi" when footswitching to "ch2"? For me....this was not acceptable....but that is just me.

Apparently, Mesa didn't provide a dedicated footswitch button for all 3 modes in the RA either. Why not? IMO, this is a crucial feature for gigging guitarists that really want/need to use either the ED or RA for 3 nice footswitchable sounds.

Lastly, I do understand why many people love the sound of the ED. I did too when dialing in sounds of a given mode. Trouble for me with the ED is that I needed to dial in different settings for each mode to give me that "Ahhhh...this is it moment" which didn't work for my needs.

I am happy for those that love their ED. The fact it has now been discontinued is probably a "good thing" for those that currently own them in the long run. Who knows?

My .02

 

[Anonymous]

Post removed.

 

[ryjan]

3. Lack of "Sex-Appeal" (for lack of a better term). Sorry, but the name Electra Dyne really sounds like the winning submission in a "who can come up with the lamest name for a new Mesa Amp" contest.

I disagree! I love that 50's atomic and space age theme. Atomic Rooster, Swart Space Tone etc.

Me too. I really liked the atomic theme as well.

 

[danyeo1]

I think most people get turned off by the master volume that goes from off to LOUD And a lack of preamp gain.

 

[ryjan]

Mesa should stick to what they do best. Modern high gain amps with 3 or more channels and pull shifts on every knob.

 

[primal]

3. Lack of "Sex-Appeal" (for lack of a better term). Sorry, but the name Electra Dyne really sounds like the winning submission in a "who can come up with the lamest name for a new Mesa Amp" contest.

I disagree! I love that 50's atomic and space age theme. Atomic Rooster, Swart Space Tone etc.

Maybe you're right.

I mean come on, what has more sex appeal then Electra woman and Dyna girl

 

[Analog Kid]

Heh, you just flipped my standby switch!

I admit all those reasons it flopped are reasons I love the amp. After all I like to collect the Mesas with the fewest knobs...Subway Blues, Blue Angel, Simul Satellite and the Electradyne. Also, I think we are all very glad it doesn't sound like a Mark, no matter how good that line has been.

As for sex appeal... Hmmn, am I the only one who loves that oval slit in the head?

On a serious note, and to slightly digress- I originally turned to my Dr Z Air Brake for the master volume issue, but now days I find I amp much more satisfied pairing the ED with a variac. This amp loves brown and it can also be very useful for volume management in those fiddly apartment levels.

 

[Anonymous]

Post removed.

 

[primal]

Remake, please!

But to stick to the topic - Electra Dyne owners shouldn't despair. Make it your own extra special limited run amp. If there's one thing I believe is true about all these fantastic Boogies that were discontinued shortly after their introductions, it's that they do something that is completely unique to them. So embrace that, and be proud! 8)

I'm hoping by the end of the year I might pick one up.

 

[screamingdaisy]

The problem with the Electra-Dyne is that the people who are most likely to like it are also the least likely to ever try it.

I think that if they ever re-released it as a three channel head with tube rectifiers and a variac it'd be more successful. I always thought it odd that Mesa decided their "British" amp shouldn't be browned out.

 

[ifailedshapes]

Yes, the shared EQ, difficulty in balancing "the modes" were issues for me that made me realize the ED wasn't right for me. I do agree that what Mesa was able to accomplish with "shared EQ" for 3 very different and nice sounds is amazing.

However, the other "problem" that I had with the ED is that the 3 modes were not distinctly footswitchable. I was always "guessing" whether I would be going to "lo or hi" when footswitching to "ch2"? For me....this was not acceptable....but that is just me.

Apparently, Mesa didn't provide a dedicated footswitch button for all 3 modes in the RA either. Why not? IMO, this is a crucial feature for gigging guitarists that really want/need to use either the ED or RA for 3 nice footswitchable sounds.

This is perhaps the main reason why my Electra Dyne is en route to KY. Another feature that they missed was the ability to have the reverb auto-assigned to only the clean channel. I'm pretty sure they fixed that one on the RA, though.

I eventually tamed the touch master knob for home use, but the stupid gain trim knob (on the back of the amp, no less) combined with the asinine foot switch was enough for me to say goodbye to the ED. It's a shame, too, because I've never played through an amp with better tone. As much as we talk about tone, sometimes practicality has to win.

Oh, regarding the shared controls, I think they nailed the EQ settings. My ideal Electra Dyne would just have separate Gain and Volume controls for Hi and Lo.

 

[YellowJacket]

Yes, the shared EQ, difficulty in balancing "the modes" were issues for me that made me realize the ED wasn't right for me. I do agree that what Mesa was able to accomplish with "shared EQ" for 3 very different and nice sounds is amazing.

However, the other "problem" that I had with the ED is that the 3 modes were not distinctly footswitchable. I was always "guessing" whether I would be going to "lo or hi" when footswitching to "ch2"? For me....this was not acceptable....but that is just me.

Apparently, Mesa didn't provide a dedicated footswitch button for all 3 modes in the RA either. Why not? IMO, this is a crucial feature for gigging guitarists that really want/need to use either the ED or RA for 3 nice footswitchable sounds.

This is perhaps the main reason why my Electra Dyne is en route to KY. Another feature that they missed was the ability to have the reverb auto-assigned to only the clean channel. I'm pretty sure they fixed that one on the RA, though.

I eventually tamed the touch master knob for home use, but the stupid gain trim knob (on the back of the amp, no less) combined with the asinine foot switch was enough for me to say goodbye to the ED. It's a shame, too, because I've never played through an amp with better tone. As much as we talk about tone, sometimes practicality has to win.

Oh, regarding the shared controls, I think they nailed the EQ settings. My ideal Electra Dyne would just have separate Gain and Volume controls for Hi and Lo.

Ha, so basically the reason that boogie customers are frustrated with the Electra Dyne is because it lacks the user friendly functionality of most boogies.
I agree, the footswitch is absolutely terrible and the reverb options are useless. BUT I simply like the amp too much so I plug my mono footswitch from my recto into the optional reverb switch jack and it solves the issue nicely for me. The amp just sounds so great that I deal with the limitations because I can't imagine myself playing anything else. They may be annoyances but they are not dealbreakers.

BUT, as you all know, these problems are all issues and from the conversations had in this forum here, I can say that at least 75% of users have moved on from the amp because of them. As someone who is willing to tough things out, I am in the minority here.

 

[Hollis]

I'm pretty much a set it and forget it kind of guy when it comes to my amp, so if I can get my 3 amp tones set and then just adjust the master volume I'm happy. I don't yet own an ED, but I have played a 2x12 combo and I loved the tone. When I enough $ saved I'm gonna snag me one. Honestly I'm not too keen on the oval shape cut out on the head. I like the looks of the combo better. I do like the aesthetics of the RA-100 head though. That's a sexy amp as well. Everyone I've talked to likes the ED better than the RA-100 though. That seems to be the general concensus.

 

[ifailedshapes]

I used to agree with you about the looks of the head, but after owning one for a while, it's really grown on me.

My buyer backed out at the last minute. Literally. My amp is neatly and securely packed, and the box is in my car. I'm pissed, but whatever. Maybe it's a sign from God to keep it for its godly tone! My issues with the amp are solvable, but they require patience and money.

The volume balancing/gain trim knob (still think it's in a stupid place) really only takes a minute to get balanced. ==> Patience

The educated-guess of channel switching can be solved with a simple MIDI setup. ==> Money

The lack of clean-only reverb can also be implemented into the above-mentioned MIDI setup. Now I'm thinking about keeping it. Lol.

My other gripes are size/weight and volume. The taper on the Master is absurd. It's crap. It's useless. I can work with it, though. Just have to use a magnifying glass and a tweezer to adjust the thing. I have the long head because I got a great deal on it used, but I'd much rather have the short head, or even the 23" combo. I've love to find a trade similar to what Birdy found.

Hmmmmm.... food for thought. The ED really is a great sounding amp, and nothing in life is perfect...

 

[YellowJacket]

The master is far less twitchy with the amp set to 45 watts. Man, I'd LOVE a midi setup to control the modes and reverb!!!

 

[screamingdaisy]

The amp just sounds so great that I deal with the limitations because I can't imagine myself playing anything else. They may be annoyances but they are not dealbreakers.

You know, I actually like the amp for it's limitations. It's refreshing to plug into an amp that I can set close to what I want and simply accept the results.

It helps that the imperfections sound outstanding.