Will there ever be a 2-Channel VM?

[hunter]

Hija,

I was a happy VM owner until about a year ago. I had to let her go as I needed more switchable versatility for my cover band.

I tried many things, 4CM, pedals and all, but then I always lost "that" tone the amp gave me in its purity.
I do miss the searing overdrive a lot, it was just great.

So... will there ever be a 2 Channel 2466? Cleans à la Plexi or JTM and Channel 2 like the current one?
And a remote switchable loop would be nice as well.

[Bailz]

I very much doubt it.

The fundamental principle of the VM is that it is a one channel amp and the volume/gain is controlled using your guitar's controls.

[MKB]

Agreed, there probably won't be a channel switcher version. However, it's a very simple thing to add a second amp and use a amp switcher. Good quality tube amps with good cleans are relatively affordable these days.

[ClubAndCountry]

This is one of the things I was interested in when I considered buying a Vintage Modern to modify to my own preferences. The 'Marshall I always wanted' is a two-channel amp with one as a JMP non-MV and one as a JMP MV model - and the Vintage Modern circuit is not *too* different from being able to do that (admittedly with a fair amount of component value changes as well).

The simplest way to give two-channel operation would be to switch the master volume out of the circuit in Low dynamic range - which would be relatively easy to do with another relay, since the switching control circuit is there already. That would give you essentially the Low mode with the master all the way up, and the High mode with it set to wherever the knob is. Or, if you want to have the stock MV operating in the Low mode as well, you could add a relay-switched master volume control in the 2203/2204 position immediately after the tone stack, and operating only in the High mode.

Either of those things would be possible without altering the basic tone of the amp - with the first scheme, not at all (since you're only switching between two settings it already has), and with the second only in the High mode, since there would be an extra MV in the circuit - and obviously adding a second volume control would mean drilling a hole somewhere.

I do actually find it odd that the Vintage Modern was *not* designed with any way of controlling the volumes of the two modes separately, since they are footswitchable and so it *is* intended to be used on the fly... but SteveD presumably has his reasons.

And it's certainly easy to use a second amp, but it's very expensive, heavy and awkward to transport compared to one switchable amp.

[hunter]

The simplest way to give two-channel operation would be to switch the master volume out of the circuit in Low dynamic range - which would be relatively easy to do with another relay, since the switching control circuit is there already. That would give you essentially the Low mode with the master all the way up, and the High mode with it set to wherever the knob is.

This sounds like a cool idea.

Wonder if it would balance out, as in fact the controls for clean volume would be the same as overdrive gain.

If I remember the VM correctly that would mean it should be run pretty loud to get a good balance...?

[ironlung40]

this is the principle that the Orange OR50 operates under. You can bypass the master volume with a footpedal, but when you do this you can not get a good balance between the non-master side and master side, so you cannot really use it as a 2 channel amp. It is cool though to be able to get all of the tones this allows, just not with the on the fly switchablity unfortunately.

[SteveD]

I do actually find it odd that the Vintage Modern was *not* designed with any way of controlling the volumes of the two modes separately, since they are footswitchable and so it *is* intended to be used on the fly... but SteveD presumably has his reasons.

The volume for controling the two ranges (in the way they were meant to be controlled) is on the guitar.

[ClubAndCountry]

But the guitar volume is a *distortion* control, more than a *volume* control, once either of the modes are overdriving, so you can't use it to balance the levels of the two modes... in fact if you back off the guitar volume to clean up the Low mode, the volume boost when you switch the High mode gets even bigger!

By the way, why are the modes labeled that way round? The "low" mode is actually *high* dynamic range since it accepts a wide range of signal level and produces a fairly wide range of output level; the "high" mode is actually *low* dynamic range since it takes a wide range of input signal and produces essentially the same output level, just with varying degrees of distortion. They're really High and Low *gain* modes. Or did you want to keep the words "high gain" well away from this amp... :-)

[DeanM]

By the way, why are the modes labeled that way round? The "low" mode is actually *high* dynamic range since it accepts a wide range of signal level and produces a fairly wide range of output level; the "high" mode is actually *low* dynamic range since it takes a wide range of input signal and produces essentially the same output level, just with varying degrees of distortion. They're really High and Low *gain* modes. Or did you want to keep the words "high gain" well away from this amp... :-)

no there not! there is only ONE dynamic range in this amp. the high and low settings are part of the SAME dynamic range.they are just diff extremes of that scale. high and low just determine what scale of guitar volume your at. i.e high range is like rollin the volume up! and low range is like havin the volume from 0-3. but obviously controling it between 0 and 3 is awkward so that scale part of the range is extended to fit the whole volume knob.

here is a quick paint job (see pic). you still get the same drive levels. i.e. between clean and fully driven. (say 0 and 100) and on high range the vol knob takes you to 100. but on low it only takes you to around 30% and to get back to 100 you need boost. so its called low range cos you can only access a small portion of the dynamic range and its called high range cos you have full access!!

i know ya prob get know all that already but i just wanted to "paint a picture"!! lol

[hunter]

Thanks Steve.

As a matter of fact, without additional drive or boost pedals, you cannot get a clean rhythm and fully overdriven lead tone at equal volumes.

This is why I was asking.

I like the 1 Channel concept if your band go from raunchy cleans to overdrive, but it don't work in the Top 40 band. Is it a big deal to get another set of gain/volume and some extra switch relais?

[ClubAndCountry]

DeanM - no, you're wrong about the dynamic range, sorry. Dynamic range is an expression of the difference between the quietest and loudest signals a device can handle without distortion, and the "high" mode goes into distortion and hence *limits* the output signal level over a far smaller range of input signal level than the "low" does. Hence it is actually *low dynamic range*. They are not at all part of the same dynamic range - the High mode adds a whole extra gain stage (I'm not sure exactly how many dB, I didn't measure it, but "substantial" would describe it) which most certainly affects the relationship between input volume range and output volume range, ie the dynamic range.

[Kongels]

I am so confused, there are a few different types of dynamic range? Interesting. I believe what Dean is talking about is how Steve has explained the difference in ranges, regardless of definitions of dynamic range. Low at full equals High at about 3-4 on your guitars volume. Anyways, interesting topic. C&C I am getting what your saying but I think to alot of us, High equals more and the high range having a wider sweep of gain and volume than low makes it seem more dynamic, hence high range. Doesn't mean it's right, i.e. Fender Tremolo and Vibrato.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_range

[ClubAndCountry]

No, there is one type of dynamic range and the Wiki link you posted explains it clearly.

quote: "the ratio of a specified maximum level of a parameter, such as power, current, voltage or frequency, to the minimum detectable value of that parameter."

or: "In a transmission system, the ratio of the overload level (the maximum signal power that the system can tolerate without distortion of the signal) to the noise level of the system."

By either of those requirements, the modes on the Vintage Modern are labeled the wrong way round - the "high" mode has a lot less available range between the level of input signal and the level of output signal than the "low" does, because it goes into distortion a lot sooner.

I'm sure SteveD knows what it really means too, which is why I was joking (but seriously) about not wanting to call the true function of the mode switch low and high *gain*, since that would involve the words "high" and "gain" together on an amp which is designed to be the opposite of what a "high gain" amp has come to mean.

Unfortunately a lot of terms used in guitar amplification are incorrect, and although most people understand what they "do", and sometimes get annoyed with people who insist on using the right terms, naming things wrongly does cause a lot of confusion as to how things operate for people who don't know the proper technical explanation!

[Angus]

No, there is one type of dynamic range and the Wiki link you posted explains it clearly.

quote: "the ratio of a specified maximum level of a parameter, such as power, current, voltage or frequency, to the minimum detectable value of that parameter."

or: "In a transmission system, the ratio of the overload level (the maximum signal power that the system can tolerate without distortion of the signal) to the noise level of the system."

By either of those requirements, the modes on the Vintage Modern are labeled the wrong way round - the "high" mode has a lot less available range between the level of input signal and the level of output signal than the "low" does, because it goes into distortion a lot sooner.

I would quibble with that because the first quote that you used doesn't mention distortion, and it seems to me that in photography for example, if you were talking about dynamic range, you would be including the areas of shadow and highlight where there was still discernible detail.

And can't we just read it as "Low (gain part of) dynamic range" and High (gain part of) dynamic range" and call it quits? :)

But anyway, are we not getting a bit too much into wordplay - I'm more interested into in hearing you guys discuss the validity of the original posters suggested mods and how they square against Steve's design philosophy. Wodger reckon?

[MKB]

I'm sure SteveD knows what it really means too, which is why I was joking (but seriously) about not wanting to call the true function of the mode switch low and high *gain*, since that would involve the words "high" and "gain" together on an amp which is designed to be the opposite of what a "high gain" amp has come to mean.

Unfortunately a lot of terms used in guitar amplification are incorrect, and although most people understand what they "do", and sometimes get annoyed with people who insist on using the right terms, naming things wrongly does cause a lot of confusion as to how things operate for people who don't know the proper technical explanation!

I'd bet a beer that Steve didn't name that button, some marketing guy did. Marketeers don't care too much about the accuracy of terms they use. There must be a Dilbert cartoon about this somewhere.