singemonkey wrote:
Erm. No. Really. I have a 50watt tube amp that I've never been able to turn up beyond 3 at any live venue ever. If I'd been on a really big stage I could do it - go up to 6 and blast my hearing. On those stages you have monitors for that. So I have small amp envy. Not big amp envy.
Seriously, even stadium pros have to weigh up whether it's worth putting up with insane stage volumes in order to crank 100watt amps. I see some folks like Joe Bonnamassa have them perspex shields in front of their amp so that it doesn't raise stage volumes too high.
Huge amps were designed for a reason. Venues were getting bigger and their amps needed more power. That reason died with the development of high powered PA systems in the 70s. You can play to Knebworth stadium with a 5watt Champ and you, and the audience will hear it perfectly.
So the benefit of big amps then becomes:
1. They're crazy heavy to lug around
2. The venue has to be huge if you want to get any power amp drive out of them
3. They can kill your hearing with unnecessarily loud stage volumes - if you rely on amp volume instead of these things called, "monitor speakers".
4. They're critical to get enough volume when you time travel back to 1967 and play in a 2,000 seat theater with a 60watt announcer's PA.
Oh wait. Those aren't advantages. As the guy in the vid says. The magical device called "the microphone" brings you all the volume you need since 1975.
So, as you just mentioned, Mr. Bonnamassa uses what kind of amps? do you think he would be lugging them around + the perspex shield's you speak of
if he could be using something else?
BTW Bonnamassa has a sig. amp, designed to his specification...it's a nice, big old 100watt.
This man could have any thing built, sourced and designed, and he often makes use of his
name and finances to do exactly that, to get the tone he wants...and he wants a 100watt.
http://www.jbonamassa.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=15716
You have discredited your own argument.
Want to try again?
