Magazine Archive

Home -> Magazines -> Issues -> Articles in this issue -> View

Combo Test (Part 1)

Article from Sound International, June 1979

20 guitar combos of 100 Watts get a good going over by five fine guitar players: in this first part Acoustic to Lab receive the ole SI ear ole test.


Starting with this issue and continuing next month, five guitarists take a long, hard perceptive look and listen to 20 Hundred-Watt combos.

Collated and researched by Tony Bacon, Ralph Denyer and Mel Lambert. This month: Acoustic to Lab.

Regular readers of Sound International (that means you) will recall our Copy Guitar Test way back in the November and December issues of last year which, all things considered, was a resounding success. Lots of letters came in telling us that this is the way it should be done; readers backed our presumption that here was a good and useful way to present information on products. Even the occasional manufacturer gave the affirmative nod of the head (mind you, some looked the other way). All in all the realisation seems to be dawning that SI is the magazine that does it properly.

Tucked in at the end of all the praise and panning in the Copy Guitar Test was the prediction: 'Hopefully our next subject will be combos'. So here she is.

Obviously, listening to a bunch of guitar combos is different to herding up a couple of dozen guitars and basses. Obvious, obvious — but first things first. And the first thing was about a million phone calls to get the combos together at one time and in one place; eventually we had a guitar combo of roughly 100 watts from each of Acoustic, Ampeg, Custom Sound, Darburn, Fender, H/H, Hiwatt, Intermusic, JHS, Lab, Maine, Marshall, Music Man, Orange, Peavey, Randall, Redmere, Roland, Roost and Yamaha. Various amps couldn't make it for one reason or another: Burman were going to let us have a 2000 combo, but had 'production problems' at the time of the test; Carlsboro were unfortunately caught between the phasing out of the Stingray Super and the introduction of the Stingray Professional combo (but see News for details); Bird Brothers' Spirit Of '56 combo decided to blow a valve just after we'd turned it on and there was no time to fit a replacement — however a review of the amp by Gary Cooper can be found in Music World of April '79; Laney's K100 didn't show up; and we couldn't find a Mesa Boogie anywhere — this may have something to do with the fact that Mike Oldfield was apparently using all the Boogies in the country at the time of the test to fire the onstage sound for his tour. The Who's ML Executive company are said to handle the amps in the UK, but we couldn't find one. Never mind — this survey is aimed to assess combos that are generally available in the UK and the Mesa, whatever its other attributes, cannot be said to be generally available.

From here on in we followed the successful Copy Guitar Test formula pretty closely — next thing was to assemble a panel of working guitarists, details of whom you can find opposite. What we've aimed for, once again, is a good cross section of abilities, types of music and personalities, so that the results give as wide an indication as possible of musicians' reactions to the collected combos. The panel brought their own guitars to the test, and these present a range of the sort of axes that would normally find themselves amplified through the combos — guitars used are also listed over on the right.

So off we trog to Gateway studio (see News this month) in wet and dreary Clapham Junction, south London, for two days, aided and abetted by friendly Gateway persons Dave Ward and Lisa Jackson. Finding a place like Gateway in which to do the tests was a godsend; friendly, understanding people, a nice atmosphere and a spacious studio. You should hear the tapes!

The great enemy of combo testers everywhere is time. Let me just tease your mind with a very brief mathematical construction: We had five musicians to test the combos. We had 20 combos. We had two days of studio time. See what I mean? All that adds up to us having to limit each guitar player to five minutes on each combo, although of course the accumulated time (ie listening while the other guys are playing) was longer than this. But five minutes is a long time (try timing yourself on an amp) — with the lack of time this restriction was necessary. After their five minutes on each combo panelists were asked to fill in a questionnaire on each — just like the Copy Guitar Test, only the questions were different (natch).

The questionnaire sheet was separated into four sections: SOUND; CONTROL PANEL; BUILT-IN EFFECTS; and OVERALL ASSESSMENT. Within each section there were different questions, as follows. SOUND: How would the combo suit your musical requirements — 0 to 10 rating from 0, 'not at all', to 10, 'totally'; Does the amplifier produce a wide range of sounds; Does it have a bias in a particular direction; Tonal response — bass, middle or presence, treble, with a 0 to 10 rating from 0, 'not effective', to 10, 'extremely effective'; Amplifier's effectiveness at low volume and high volume — each with a 0 to 10 rating as for tonal response; Background noise — with a 0 to 10 rating from 0, 'not noticeable', to 10, 'very noisy'; CONTROL PANEL: Is overall design and layout practical — with a 0 to 10 rating from 0, 'not practical', to 10, 'very practical'; BUILT-IN EFFECTS: Where applicable, each effect was given a 0 to 10 rating in three areas: Usefulness — from 0, 'not useful', to 10 'very useful', Sound — from 0, 'Bad', to 10, 'Good', and Ease Of Operation — from 0, 'Bad', to 10, 'Good'; OVERALL ASSESSMENT: Written answers to three questions — 1 To achieve satisfactory sound, did you at any time have to 'stretch' the amp (ie full bass, full treble, etc); 2 What do you like about this combo; and 3 What criticisms do you have of this combo. Lastly, How do you rate the combo's value for money — 0 to 10 rating from 0, 'Bad', to 10, 'Good'.

Collated 0 to 10 ratings appear within the listings for each combo; the five panelists' individual ratings are printed in normal type and in alphabetical order of panelist's name. After these five figures is an oblique, followed by a figure printed in bold type — this is the average score (rounded up or down to the nearest whole number). This bold figure should provide a quick reference guide to the panelists' overall views. Also in the listings are printed the panelists' written comments, verbatim, and in alphabetical order of name, too.

In the end we decided not to include the info from a couple of the questions — the second and third from the SOUND section, those on the 'wide range of sounds' and the 'bias in a particular direction', because it was felt that these didn't particularly add any information. Also, unfortunately, we had to drop the data gained from the Background Noise question, due to a misunderstanding on the part of some of the panelists as to whether 0 or 10 was the 'good' end of the rating. It's a hard life being a number. We also left out panelists' numerical ratings of Reverb and other special effects because these are adequately covered in the physical description of each combo.

It is to be hoped that in this way we provided the panel guitarists with a method of taking a good look at all the gathered combos, and of noting their comments in a way that will be useful to others. It's unlikely that the opportunity to look at this number of combos together would present itself in the normal scheme of things; even given that a shop did have them all in stock (unlikely) they probably would be... shall we say 'unwilling'... to let you blast away as loud as you like for an hour and a half checking them all out. We did, but then we're nice like that.

It was also planned to carry out some 'technical' measurements to balance this subjective side of the test, but I'll let Mel Lambert tell you all about that...

THE PANELISTS

ROGER ADAMS, ex-Krakatoa, now plays with High Profile. Guild S6O was used for test: has added Strat rhythm and Super Distortion treble pickups, pickup selector, phase switch and Schaller machines. Amp normally used is Peavey Backstage 30. Likes a good solid rock sound with a degree of distortion and sustain.


GEOFF COOPER plays with Local Operator, currently negotiating with a couple of record companies. Fender Stratocaster was used for test: has added 5-way pickup selector switch and new machines. Amp used normally is Marshall 50 combo. Uses a degree of distortion and sustain; characteristic 'Marshall' sound.


MITCH DALTON works mainly on sessions; also Guitar Lecturer at North East London Polytechnic. Gibson 175 was used for test. Amps normally used are Peavey Pacer and Fender Champ; currently trying out Roland Cube. Likes clean and punchy sound — jazz influenced.


BOB McGINNES plays with the Sunday Band. Gibson Firebird was used for test: added two Les Paul Deluxe humbuckers. Amp normally used is Marshall 100 Master Volume. Valve sound is important to him.


ROBIN MILLAR plays with The Blue Max. Gibson Les Paul Custom was used for the test. Amps normally used are Vox AC30 and Roland Chorus. Likes a full, natural, valve sound without distortion.


Access to 20 or so of the currently available 100W guitar combos should have provided us with a unique opportunity to do some comparative specification checking. I say 'should.' because I hadn't reckoned on the perverseness of most of them. Perhaps I should explain. What I had originally intended to do was check the frequency response, noise and distortion performance of each combo — these being considered the three most important parameters by which an amplifier/speaker combination can be judged — and hopefully draw up some sort of Top Twenty listing (numbers can't lie, can they?).

Ideally such measurements should be carried out in an anechoic chamber to reduce the effects of room acoustics and extraneous background noise — the idea being to feed the combo with signals of varying frequency and level, and then listen with an accurately calibrated microphone to the output from the speaker. (I had toyed briefly with the idea of just testing the combo's amplifier by disconnecting the loudspeaker and measuring voltages appearing across the amp's output terminals. But since it is well known that loudspeakers vary enormously in their frequency response and power handling capabilities, it was considered necessary to test the amplifier and speaker as a composite unit.)

But the hiring of an anechoic chamber, even for just a few hours, proved to be prohibitively expensive, and so it was decided instead to measure the output wattage with (what else) a Watt Meter. By varying the input level to the amplifier it would be possible to measure the sensitivity of the amplifier — so many millivolts of a 1 kHz reference signal produce so many watts output, and so on. Also the input level could be fixed at an optimum setting and the frequency varied to give some idea of the flatness (or otherwise) of the combo's frequency response.

The first amplifier was selected at random and connected up to a signal generator and Watt Meter. And the result? A 200mV input signal of 440Hz produced an output of 6W, while the same level of 1kHz tone gave 2.1W and 5kHz 0.32W. Something odd was obviously happening. Since all the tone controls were scaled 1 to 10 they had been set to midway (5) which, by normal conventions anyway, should have been their off position (no tone cut or boost). It seems I was horribly wrong to assume that this particular manufacturer had followed the same convention, because turning the bass control to zero resulted in a reduced output wattage at low frequencies. I then spent the next half hour trying to find a combination of tone control settings that gave, to within a watt at least, a similar output for varying input frequencies.

It was at this point that it suddenly dawned on me that I was wasting my time. Why bother to find a combination of setting that gave a flat response, when any response can be fudged to become reasonably flat by altering the appropriate bass, midrange or treble tone control? What it boils down to is that none of the manufacturers whose combos we had borrowed for evaluation carried any indication of what particular arrangement of tone and effects controls gave a flat (or within a watt or, to be more conventional, a dB of flat) response from useful low frequencies to high frequencies (say 40Hz to around 12kHz). So it's anybody's guess whether combo A has a flatter frequency response than combo B. And docs it matter anyway if, subjectively, the playing of an instrument through it results in a pleasing sound?

As for noise and distortion measurements, the story was one of more frustration. Most of the combos produced an inordinate amount of high-frequency hiss, which became even more noticeable when those equipped with built-in reverb springs were cranked up. No point in looking for meaningful signal-to-noise ratios when, even to the uncalibrated ear, it's more a matter of noise-to-signal that needs to be investigated. Add to this the fact that most guitar combos need to be driven hard (ie into the upper realms of distortion) to produce a halfway decent sound — also that most loudspeakers will be adding large amounts of their own kind of 'brittle' distortion due to their often specially selected inflexible cone material — and it all becomes more meaningless.

So the moral is this: Technical specifications may be all very well for studio monitor amps (plus one or two reference loudspeakers), where inputs and outputs are carefully defined and all concerned know what they should be capable of. But when it comes to a device that produces its own 'characteristic' sound (who can argue that a Fender Twin Reverb sounds at all like a Music Man, even though both are claimed to offer similar rates of amplification and have two fairly similar speakers?) we get into deep trouble, because it's the differences, not the similarities, that musicians look for.



ACOUSTIC 125

NB photos throughout are not to scale with one another.

Acoustic Control Corporation, (Contact Details).
UK: Dealer network.

rrp: £412/$799

Description:
Two inputs (0dB, -10dB) with 'brilliance' on/off pushbutton, volume, treble, midrange and bass controls, plus master volume and reverb with associated overload lamps. 5-band graphic eq offering ±20dB cut or boost from 70 to 2k Hz. Power on/off switch. All control knobs have unmarked scales.

Rear panel: Captive, heavy duty (for 120 volt operation) mains lead, about 15ft with built-in cable winder. Single, spring-loaded 3A fuse, clearly marked. External speaker output on ¼in socket; spade speaker connections. Output jack sockets for power amp 'input' and pre-amp output, plus 6-pin, square pattern footswitch socket.

Metal cap corners; single surface-mounted top handle; 23¾in x 26⅝in x 11⅝in; one person can carry.

Panelists numerical ratings:
Tonal response — Bass: 7; 8; 9; 7; 10/8. Midrange: 7; 8; 9; 7; 10/8. Treble: 7; 8; 9; 7; 10/8.
Amplifier's effectiveness — Low volume: 5; 8; 10; 7; 8/8. High volume: 7; 8; 10; 8; 8/8.
Control panel: 7; 9; 10; 7; 7/8.
Value for money: 5; 5; 8; 7; 6/6.
How would the combo suit your musical requirements: 4; 5; 10; 7; 7/7.

Panelists comments:
Did you have to stretch the amp to achieve satisfactory sound?
'No.' 'No.' 'No.' 'No.' 'Difficult as master volume was stuck, but it probably has good range.'

Likes:
'Appearance. Good rock sound for transistor.' 'The graphic is good.' 'Everything.' 'Generally a nice sound and visual design.' 'Plenty of eq range, plenty of power etc, but no better than the Intermusic which is £200 less.'

Criticisms:
'Nasty breakup on high graphic settings.' 'Expensive. The sound too artificial (though master volume was not working when tested).' 'Slightly cheap looking for such a professional job.' 'Sound breaks up as 2000Hz graphic fader is fully up.' 'Not my favourite basic sound of the day, but if you like its sound it performs well.'

NB This model kindly supplied by Unisound, (Contact Details). Unfortunately the model was of 120 volt mains rating, and this was not discovered until we attempted to plug the combo into the mains. A 120 volt stepdown transformer had to be used eventually. Also the master volume switch was not operating.



AMPEG VT22

Vincent Bach International, (Contact Details).
UK: Musicaid, (Contact Details).

rrp: £485.76/$765

Description:
Single inputs for channels I and II, with separate volume controls and 3-way sensitivity selection switches (-9, -6 or 0dB) for each channel. Master volume, midrange (300, 1k or 3k Hz centre frequency selection), treble (with 'Ultra-High' switch), bass and reverb controls. Power amp standby on/off switches and associated lamps. All control knobs have unmarked scales, except midrange with ±20dB range.

Rear panel: Captive mains lead; about 15ft. Single slot-type 3.15A fuse, clearly marked. 'Hum' balance preset control. Internal speaker on ¼in jack, plus separate extension socket; total power 100 watts RMS. 2-, 4- or 8-ohm speaker impedance selection; spade speaker connections. Output sockets for pre-amplifier, power amp 'input' and reverb footswitch.

Metal cap corners; single surface-mounted top handle; 23½in x 26¾in x 11⅛in; one person can carry.

Panelists numerical ratings:
Tonal response — Bass: 4; 9; 7; 4; 9/7. Midrange: 10; 9; 7; 7; 9/8. Treble: 7; 8; 6; 7; 8/7.
Amplifier's effectiveness — Low volume: 7; 10; 5; 6; 10/8. High volume: 7; 10; 7; 7; 10/8.
Control panel layout: 3; 10; 6; 6; 10/7.
Value for money: 4; 8; 4; 7; 8/6.
How would the combo suit your musical requirements: 5; 9; 5; 7; 9/7.

Panelists comments:
Did you have to stretch the amp to achieve satisfactory sound?
'No.' 'No.' 'Yes.' 'No.' 'No problem.'

Likes:
'Midrange versatility offers good sustain potential.' 'Superb sound. Effective controls. The best.' 'OK for heavy metal.' 'It's well made, amp floats inside (suspension), nice warm valve sound.' 'Sheer class. The only amp that really brought out the best in my Les Paul. Incredible power and clean raunch. An all-rounder.'

Criticisms:
'A bit fiddly, but versatile. Probably capable of good results once individual has acclimatised.' 'None.' 'Too noisy, extremely heavy. Also very cheap looking controls and finish, at the price. Not warm enough for jazz/funk.' 'Very hard to see presets when amp on floor.' 'I suppose a couple of extra effects would have been even nicer.'



CUSTOM SOUND CS705

Custom Sound, (Contact Details).

rrp: £263.50

Description:
Two inputs (high- and low-level) for channel I, with volume, bass and treble controls plus reverb on/off, two inputs ('normal' and 'bright') for channel II with volume, bass, mid-low, mid-high, treble and 'overtone' controls. Sockets for reverb and volume footswitches. Power on/off switch and lamp. Gain controls scaled 1-7, tone -3, 0, +3.

Rear panel: Separate mains lead, about 6ft. Two slot-type fuses: 3A mains and 5A speaker output, both clearly marked. Two speaker outputs on ¼in sockets, marked 4-ohm (minimum) operation. Auxiliary outputs for slave amp and direct injection, plus two footswitches. Soldered speaker connections.

Metal cap corners (not top front); single surface-mounted top handle plus two recessed side-grips; 24in (including castors) x 28¾in x 11⅞in; one or two persons to carry.

Panelists numerical ratings:
Tonal response — Bass: 4; 6; 9; 4; 6/6. Mid-low, Mid-high: 10; 7; 9; 4; 9/8. Treble: 8; 7; 9; 5; 8/7.
Amplifier's effectiveness — Low volume: 4; 5; 9; 5; 6/6. High volume: 7; 5; 8; 6; 3/6.
Control panel layout: 7; 8; 9; 6; 10/8.
Value for money: 7; 4; 9; 8; 4/6.
How would the combo suit your musical requirements: 7; 2; 9; 6; 2/5.

Panelists comments:
Did you have to stretch the amp to achieve satisfactory sound?
'Yes — boosting low-mid gave great control over feedback sustain. Bass needed pushing up — could operate on a slightly lower frequency.' '' 'No.' 'No.' 'The bass end is not possible to crank up. The rest is easy.'

Likes:
'Sustain effects, mid boost.' 'Good control panel, Overtone a useful feature.' 'Light, good jazz amp (a lot of warmth for a transistor amp).' 'Quite good value for money.' 'Best control panel of the day — easy to read and set. Probably OK in a studio if it wasn't for one rather loud Radio 2 feature.'

Criticisms:
'Visual design not too nice.' 'Poor reverb, lot of noise. Amp or speakers can't handle too much bass.' 'Some functions look cheap and nasty. Bulky (compare Fender Twin).' 'Not very well made visually.' 'No bottom — bass actually cuts when turned up, therefore useless live. Very poor reverb — made Gibson and Fender sound identical.'



DARBURN 100M

Darburn Ltd, (Contact Details).

Description:
Two inputs (first and second) for channel I, with 'brilliance' on/off switch, 'Shape', volume, treble, bass, middle, speed, depth, and reverb controls, and channel II with volume, treble, bass and middle controls. Master volume control and power on/off switch and lamp. All control knobs scaled 1-10.

Rear panel: Captive mains lead, about 12ft. Switch for 110/120 or 240 volt operation, with metal switch shield. Two slot-type fuses: 4A for 110/120 volt or 2A for 240 volt, both clearly marked. External speaker on ¼in socket marked for 15-ohm operation; soldered speaker leads. Output for slave amp plus preset control for sustain, noisegate sensitivity. Captive lead to footswitch for vibrato, sustain and reverb on/off.

Metal cap corners; single surface-mounted top handle: 24in x 28⅛in x 10in; one person can carry.

Panelists numerical ratings:
Tonal response — Bass: 8; 1; 7; 6; 7/6. Middle: 8; 4; 7; 6; 7/6. Treble: 8; 3; 7; 6; 4/6.
Amplifier's effectiveness — Low volume: 8; 2; 8; 6; 5/6. High volume: 6; 3; 7; 6; 5/5.
Control panel layout: 0; 0; 5; 6; 2/3.
Value for money: 5; 0; 4; 4; 0/3.
How would the combo suit your musical requirements: 6; 0; 2; 6; 3/3.

Panelists comments:
Did you have to stretch the amp to achieve satisfactory sound?
'No.' 'I couldn't achieve a satisfactory sound.' 'No.' 'No.' 'I think this amp would snarl at you unplugged — fearsome.'

Likes:
'Infinite sustain effect quite nice.' 'Nothing.' 'Nothing.' 'Nothing.' 'It means I can actually choose to avoid it at any price.'

Criticisms:
'Looks revolting — like a cheap portable disco console.' 'Nasty cheap sound, lousy value.' 'Typical mark one transistor sound. Horrible sound, revolting appearance.' 'The general sound is very average and visual design is distasteful.' 'Absolutely impossible to obtain anything but a scream like a castrated lemur underwater.'



FENDER TWIN REVERB

CBS Musical Instruments, (Contact Details).
UK: CBS/Arbiter Ltd, (Contact Details).

rrp: £496.48/$725

Description:
Two inputs for 'normal' channel I, with volume, treble, middle and bass controls, and 'vibrato' channel II with volume, treble, middle, bass, vibrato, speed and intensity controls. 'Bright' on/off switches for each channel. Master volume control with pull on/off distortion switch. Power on/off lamp. All control knobs scaled 1-10.

Rear panel: Captive mains lead, about 10ft. Full range of mains voltage selection from 110 to 240 volts. Power on/off and standby switches; single screw-in 5A fuse clearly marked. Internal speakers on ¼in jack, plus separate extension socket, marked for 4-ohm/135 watt combined operation; spade speaker connections. Preset adjustment for 'output tube (valve) matching'. Outputs for vibrato footswitch and recording (direct injection). Phono sockets for Hammond reverb send and return.

Metal cap corners (bottom only); single surface-mounted top handle; 22⅝in (including castors) x 26⅛in x 10½in; one person can carry.

Numerical ratings are explained in the the introduction on page 36.

Panelists numerical ratings:
Tonal response — Bass: 9; 8; 10; 4; 7/8. Middle: 10; 8; 10; 5; 7/8. Treble: 10: 8: 10: 7; 5/8.
Amplifier's effectiveness — Low volume: 8; 8; 10; 5; 6/7. High volume: 8; 8; 10; 6; 6/8.
Control panel layout: 6; 10; 10; 7; 10/9.
Value for money: 3; 3; 3; 8; 3/4.
How would the combo suit your musical requirements: 8; 3; 10; 6; 0/5.

Panelists comments:
Did you have to stretch the amp to achieve satisfactory sound?
'No.' 'No.' 'No.' 'No.' 'Straight Twin sound readily available at all levels.'

Likes:
'It tingles! Very musical tone, perfect rhythm amp but can be made to cook on lead as well.' 'One of the best if you want a clean sound.' 'Everything. It is the "reference" amp for me (but does it fall apart these days?).' 'Very well made (Hammond reverb).' 'Well, it's well made and laid out — if you do want that sound it's fine.'

Criticisms:
'Looks dated, overpriced in this country. This one had a hum.' 'Too expensive. The vibrato didn't work. The "distortion" is useless.' 'Very heavy. Otherwise excellent.' 'Too much top for solid guitar.' 'I don't like these amps, never have. It's like running a bath on the 10th floor dribbles. Getting very pricey.'

NB: This model kindly supplied by the Fender Soundhouse, (Contact Details).



H/H VS MUSICIAN

H/H Electronic, (Contact Details).

rrp: £259.63

Description:
Single input for 'effects' channel I, plus two inputs for auxiliary channel II (suitable for microphone, with volume, bass and treble controls). Volume, bass, middle and presence controls on main channel, plus light/heavy 'voice' selection. 'Valve sound' on/off switch and associated 7-pin DIN socket for foot-switch. Second DIN socket connects to reverb and/or flanger effects module. Reverb on/off switches for both channels. Master volume and reverb controls, plus illuminated mains switch. Gain controls scaled 0-10, tone -5, 0, +5.

Rear panel: Separate mains lead, about 8ft with IEC-style connector. Simple screw-in 2A mains fuse, clearly marked. Two speaker outputs on ¼in sockets, marked for 4- to 15-ohm operation at 100 watt rated output power. Jack sockets for echo send/return and mixer/slave outputs. Rear of cabinet totally enclosed.

Superior moulded-section corners; single surface-mounted top handle plus two recessed side-grips; 24¼in (including castors) x 26¾in x 13⅞in; one can carry.

Panelists numerical ratings:
Tonal response — Bass: 5; 4; 5; 5; —/— . Middle/Presence: 7; 4; 5; 5; -/-. Treble: 7; 4; 7; 5; —/—.
Amplifier's effectiveness — Low volume: 8; 5; 2; 5; —/— . High volume: 6; 5; 7; 6; —/—.
Control panel layout: 8; 9; 10; 6; 6/8.
Value for money: 8; — ; 10; 8; —/—.
How would the combo suit your musical requirements: 5; 0; 2; 5; 0/2.

Panelists comments:
Did you have to stretch the amp to achieve satisfactory sound?
'Yes. Full on all tones, otherwise it sounds dull and lifeless.' '—' 'Yes.' 'Amp sounds better at high volume.' 'The amp gave up, so who knows.'

Likes:
'Valve sound plus reverb gives good flexible rock lead sound. Good studio potential, would flatter cheap guitars. Very roadworthy.' 'The green lights on the control panel.' 'Lightweight. "Quality" appearance. Probably a superb keyboard amp.' 'The price, illuminated panel.' 'That it's been taken away.'

Criticisms: 'Overloads with high output pickups, but nastily (ie when it's supposed to be clean!). Footswitches absurdly overpriced.' 'The main channel was unusable — terrible noise when I plugged in. Using the other channel I found the reverb wasn't working. When I removed the guitar lead a huge flash came out.' 'Weird — at standard settings "dead" sound. If you fiddle around long enough you can get a fair rock lead sound. I couldn't get any other decent sound from it. Horrible "macho" styling.' 'The valve sound doesn't sound like valve sound. It looks ugly.'



HIWATT CUSTOM 100

Hiwatt Ltd, (Contact Details).

rrp: £217

Description:
Single input for 'normal' channel I, with volume control and 'brilliant' channel II with separate volume control. Master volume, presence, middle, treble and bass controls. Power and standby on/off switches, with power lamp. All control knobs have unmarked scales.

Rear panel: separate mains lead, about 8ft with IEC-style connector. Full range of mains voltage selection, from 105 to 245 volts. Two screw-in 3A fuses, both unmarked. Internal speaker on ¼in socket plus separate extension socket; both unmarked. Switch for 4-, 8- or 16-ohm speaker impedances; soldered speaker connections.

No corner protection; single surface-mounted top handle; 21in x 21¾in x 11½in; one person can carry easily.

Panelists numerical ratings:
Tonal response — Bass: 0; 7; 3; 1; 8/4. Middle/presence: 3; 8; 3; 3; 8/5. Treble: 0; 9; 0; 0; 1/2.
Amplifier's effectiveness — Low volume: 0; 6; 2; 4; 8/4. High volume: 1; 8; 4; 4; 8/5.
Control panel layout: 5; 8; 5; 5; 8/6.
Value for money: 2; 9; 3; 3; 8/5.
How would the combo suit your musical requirements: 0; 5; 0; 3; 7/3.

Panelists comments:
Did you have to stretch the amp to achieve satisfactory sound?
'Full bass still gave no depth.' 'No.' 'No — pointless exercise, tone controls hardly function.' '—' 'One sound, easily achieved.'

Likes:
'Nothing... sorry, the colour.' 'Very powerful. Good value for someone looking for a real screamer.' 'Nothing. Cheap and nasty.' 'It's fairly small.' 'Really very like an AC30 in sound. If you want straight power at a very good price then this is a better buy than the Marshall.'

Criticisms:
'No depth. Uncontrollable. Does nothing. No tone quality. Tone controls don't work. Bright and normal channels sound the same.' 'Too fierce and trebly. Only one sound.' '1. Ugly. 2. Cheap looking. 3. No Reverb. 4. Horrible sound unless you require mark one "hooligan noise". No versatility.' 'The tone controls are practically non-effective. It rattles at high volume.' 'Very toppy, no range of sound. Lacks low bass.'



INTERMUSIC 100 2x12

MM Electronics, (Contact Details).

rrp: £237

Description:
Two inputs for 'normal' channel I with 'brilliant' on/off for both inputs, volume, treble, middle and bass controls, and 'lead' channel II with 'phase' on/off, volume, middle and bass controls. Master volume, speed, reverb and presence control. Power on/off switch with lamp. All control knobs scaled 0-10.

Rear panel (behind lockable cover): Captive mains lead, about 8ft. Single screw-in 3A fuse, clearly marked. Internal speaker on ¼in jack, plus separate extension socket. Auxiliary input and slave output sockets, plus socket for phaser and reverb f/switches. Cabinet rear enclosed.

Built into flightcase; two recessed side handles; 25⅜in x 27¾in x 14in.

Panelists numerical ratings:
Tonal response - Bass: 6; 8; 4; 6; 9/7. Middle: 4; 8; 4; 6; 9/6. Treble: 4; 8; 4; 6; 4/5.
Amplifier's effectiveness — Low volume: 5; 9; 4; 6; 9/7. High volume: 3; 9; 6; 5; 10/7.
Control panel layout: 5; 3; 6; 7; 8/6.
Value for money: 9; 9; 8; 7; 10/9.
How would the combo suit your musical requirements: 6; 4; 2; 5; 9/5.

Panelists comments
Did you have to stretch the amp to achieve satisfactory sound?
'Presence needed boosting — depends on room.' 'No.' 'Yes, for "heavy" sound.' 'No.' 'No, responded normally.'

Likes:
'Idea of phaser, flightcase, etc. Not very musical amp.' 'Good value, well built.' 'Looks well made, belies its price (miles ahead of Hiwatt, JHS).' 'The front-loading speakers.' 'At this price it's got to be by far the best around — plus flightcase included. I'll probably buy one.'

Criticisms:
'Dull basic sound. Speaker grill idea.' 'Too clinical and clean for me.' 'It doesn't do anything particularly well, very average; full of goodies but basic amp poor.' 'It rattles at high volume.' 'It looks homemade and it lacks extra top — you'd have to use a treble boost.'



JHS 100

John Hornby Skewes Ltd, (Contact Details).

rrp: £226.86

Description:
Two inputs ('bright' and 'normal') with volume, presence, treble, middle and bass controls. Master volume control, plus reverb, volume and tone controls. Sockets for reverb and 'distortion' footswitches. Power on/off switch and lamp plus screw-in 1A fuse, clearly marked. All control knobs scaled 1-10.

Rear panel: Separate mains lead, about 6ft with IEC-style connector. Rear of cabinet enclosed.

Metal cap corners; two recessed side handles; 25in x 26in x 10⅝in; one person can carry.

Panelists numerical ratings;
Tonal response — Bass: 0; 7; 3; 7; 1/4. Middle/presence: 0; 7; 3; 9; 3/4. Treble: 0; 4; 3; 7; 1/3.
Amplifier's effectiveness — Low volume: 0; 8; 1; 8; 3/4. High volume: 0; 8; 2; 8; 3/4.
Control panel layout: 0; 5; 3; 4; 4/3.
Value for money: 0; 10; 0; 10; 4/5.
How would the combo suit your musical requirements: 0; 8; 0; 7; 3/4.

Panelists comments:
Did you have to stretch the amp to achieve satisfactory sound?
'No satisfactory sound achieved.' 'Needs cranking up.' 'Little point in bothering.' 'Only really works with full everything, but never much.' 'Full everything.'

Likes:
'Nothing (except the colour). The worst amp I've ever used.' 'Superb value. Solidly built, very warm sound.' 'Nothing (I wouldn't consider it at all).' 'A good, gutsy, full sound at a really excellent price. You could buy this amp and then spend £200 on a graphic and pedals and have a great set-up for less than the cost of many of its competitors.' 'Although the components are bad, the visual side of the amp is quite good.'

Criticisms:
'Looks like a bigger Woolworths amp. Control functions baffling, it's a con, right down to the "picture" of a "graphic" to make it look "technical".' 'Very little treble available. Very cheap looking.' 'To be succinct — like the Hiwatt this is not a professional quality amp — price is irrelevant.' 'Hideous to look at and tone controls were negative rather than positive.' 'It's badly made, the tone controls are practically non-effective (reverb sounds cheap).'



LAB L5

Norlin Music, (Contact Details).
UK: Norlin UK, (Contact Details).

rrp: £387.96/$695

Description:
Two inputs (high and low-level) for channel I, with 'brilliance' on/off switch, volume, bass, treble, midrange and treble controls, and channel II, with 'brilliance' on/off switch, volume, bass, 'frequency' (100 to 6.4k Hz, continuously variable) and associated midrange control, treble, multifilter ('re-arranges upper harmonics') and reverb. Master volume and compressor controls (three threshold settings plus off). All control knobs scaled 1-9, except midrange 4,0,4.

Rear panel: captive mains lead, about 10 feet. Power on/off switch with slot-type 2A fuse, clearly marked. External speaker output on ¼in socket, marked for 100W/8-ohm minimum load operation; spade speaker connections. Output jack sockets for pre-amp and power amplifier 'input', plus reverb footswitch.

Metal cap corners; single surface-mounted top handle; 23¼in (including castors) x 26⅛in x 10in; one person can carry.

Numerical ratings are explained in the the introduction on page 36.

Panelists numerical ratings:
Tonal response — Bass: 8; 9; 10; 6; 10/9. Middle: 10; 9; 10; 6; 10/9. Treble: 9; 7; 10; 7; 10/9.
Amplifier's effectiveness — Low: volume: 8; 5; 9; 7; 8/7. High volume: 7; 8; 7; 7; 4/7. Control panel layout: 8; 8; 10; 7; 8/8.
Value for money: 8; 6; 8; 7; 8/7.
How would the combo suit your musical requirements? 7; 4; 7; 7; 7/6.

Panelists comments:
Did you have to stretch the amp to achieve satisfactory sound?
'No.' ' — ' 'No.' 'No.' 'I had difficulty getting a lot of volume — perhaps I needed more time.'

Likes:
'Idea of compression to match picking strength. Finish, layout, midrange control.' 'Frequency control very useful. Given time you can coax a good range of tones from it.' 'Building quality, lightness, appearance.' 'It's well finished and compact. Compression interesting for live (use).' 'I'd like more time. Some great ideas. Inspired rotary "frequency" control giving astonishing range of fundamental colour. Good value. I like it.'

Criticisms:
'Basic sound too flat. Multifilter ineffective.' 'Not loud enough — very little punch. Don't like the cheap look of the control panel.' 'To summarise: a typical "transistorised" amp sound, beautifully built, nice looks. Compression etc are all gimmicks. No use for rock (would do as a jazz amp).' 'Not as rich a sound as a valve amp.' 'Not loud enough for backline.'

NEXT MONTH: MAINE TO YAMAHA and overall conclusions


Series - "Combo Test"

All parts in this series:

This is the only part of this series active so far.


More with this topic


Browse by Topic:

Buyer's Guide



Previous Article in this issue

The Compleat Recordist

Next article in this issue

Music


Publisher: Sound International - Link House Publications

The current copyright owner/s of this content may differ from the originally published copyright notice.
More details on copyright ownership...

 

Sound International - Jun 1979

Donated & scanned by: David Thompson

Topic:

Buyer's Guide


Series:

Combo Test

This is the only part of this series active so far.


Previous article in this issue:

> The Compleat Recordist

Next article in this issue:

> Music


Help Support The Things You Love

mu:zines is the result of thousands of hours of effort, and will require many thousands more going forward to reach our goals of getting all this content online.

If you value this resource, you can support this project - it really helps!

Donations for February 2025
Issues donated this month: 13

New issues that have been donated or scanned for us this month.

Funds donated this month: £14.00

All donations and support are gratefully appreciated - thank you.


Magazines Needed - Can You Help?

Do you have any of these magazine issues?

> See all issues we need

If so, and you can donate, lend or scan them to help complete our archive, please get in touch via the Contribute page - thanks!

If you're enjoying the site, please consider supporting me to help build this archive...

...with a one time Donation, or a recurring Donation of just £2 a month. It really helps - thank you!
muzines_logo_02

Small Print

Terms of usePrivacy