Tonal difference between pre/power rack amps vs heads

[JT_Marshmallow]

So there must be a difference in tone and/or response. With rack amps you have two separately powered units, not to mention perhaps some signal degradation between them if they're connected with a mediocre cable. Anyone have any input on this?

I am sticking with rack stuff from here on out because I really like mixing and matching preamps and power amps. If I ever were to build an obnoxious high-gain rig again, I'd definitely get an older Mesa 6L6 power amp like a 395 for that thunderous transformer. There's something you don't get with heads these days: massive 1980's transformers.

Racks FTWIMHOBBQ.

 

[cradleofflames]

It more comes down to what you're trying to achieve.

If you want ultra high fidelity a VHT is the only way to go. However that high fidelity means that the power amp won't respond at all compared to a head where you'd have at least a little due to power supply interaction. You could run a stereo through it and it would still sound right. It's designed for people using a lot of effects, people playing metal who want that almost solid-state like response (listen to a Pantera record and you'll know what I mean), and people tuning really low who might have problems with other power sections farting out.

If you want your rack to feel like an integrated head simul-class or class A is the only way to go. They actually respond like the real thing. In my experience I wanted the versatility of rack with the feel and tone of a head. I finally found that with the 395. I had no problem farting out with a B tuned baritone at high volumes but any lower could run into trouble.

IMO, the difference in response is apparent just listening. Compare the response of Kirk Hammet's rhythm tone on the Black Album tour to Petrucci's on Images and Words Live in Tokyo. They used essentially the same preamp (Studio and Quad) the difference is Kirk used a VHT while Petrucci used a 395.

 

[reo73]

It more comes down to what you're trying to achieve.

They used essentially the same preamp (Studio and Quad) the difference is Kirk used a VHT while Petrucci used a 395.

Fact Check Police: I don't know about Kirk but Petrucci used a Triaxis and 2:90 rig for Live in Tokyo. He also had a Heart Breaker head in there that he slaved.

As to the OP's question...I have used both rack units and head and I have never felt a difference. I sold a modded Mesa Mark III+ in favor of a Studio Pre and 50/50 set-up because ithough it was actually more repsonsive with a little better clarity.

 

[Silverwulf]

Fact Check Police: I don't know about Kirk but Petrucci used a Triaxis and 2:90 rig for Live in Tokyo. He also had a Heart Breaker head in there that he slaved.

I'll help out here. Kirk used an ADA MP-1 mostly on the Black Album tour. Only towards the beginning did he used the VHT. The majority of the tour was a Mesa Strategy 400 with it.

 

[cradleofflames]

Fact Check Police: I don't know about Kirk but Petrucci used a Triaxis and 2:90 rig for Live in Tokyo. He also had a Heart Breaker head in there that he slaved.

I'll help out here. Kirk used an ADA MP-1 mostly on the Black Album tour. Only towards the beginning did he used the VHT. The majority of the tour was a Mesa Strategy 400 with it.

You guys are right. There's a picture on the ADA Depot of his rack for the black album tour. No Mesa at all, CAE and ADA only. However I will say that Class A/B versus Simul-Class is still the discussion and whether it's a Strategy 400 or a VHT is irrelevant.
?
As for Petrucci I can't say for sure... I saw a few pictures in magazines where he was standing in front of a couple of racks with Quads and 395s around that time but it was probably earlier.

I can't think of anyone else who used the Simul-class power amps