Quote
DandelionPowderman
This isn't everything, kleerie. My boss would have killed me if I listened thoroughly through the whole show

But Dandy, sometimes one has to sacrifice something in the interest of the spreading of the Stones music.

I sacrificed more than half a working day

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I read that, too, but it's not correct.

what if the amp was only miked and not a line to the board

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I read that, too, but it's not correct.

Yeah no way even an Ampeg SVT cranked could compete with the power used for a PA at a place as big as Arrowhead stadium. But the mix is somewhat strange on these KC recordings, I'm wondering what the source actually was.

peace

this was a arena show at the kemper arena not at arrowhead stadium

Quote
TheGreek

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I read that, too, but it's not correct.

what if the amp was only miked and not a line to the board

That's how guitar signals get to the board in a live concert. A microphone placed close to the amp's speaker provides the signal back to the mixing board.

peace

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
TheGreek

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I read that, too, but it's not correct.

what if the amp was only miked and not a line to the board

That's how guitar signals get to the board in a live concert. A microphone placed close to the amp's speaker provides the signal back to the mixing board.

peace

what about the direct out on the back of a lot of guitar amps?

Quote
TheGreek

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
TheGreek

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I read that, too, but it's not correct.

what if the amp was only miked and not a line to the board

That's how guitar signals get to the board in a live concert. A microphone placed close to the amp's speaker provides the signal back to the mixing board.

peace

what about the direct out on the back of a lot of guitar amps?

Generally, those are pre-amp signals, sometimes used in the studio to get a cleaner recording signal to be effected elsewhere or to be patched to another amp. They aren't used to represent a live guitar sound because the pre-amp, power amp and speaker combination are what give amps their classic sound.

In a live show you are wanting to get the total sound the guitar amp, the way the guitarist sets it and hears it. A pre-amp signal would sound too clean and not have the characteristics we associate with rock guitar.

There are modeling amps these days which have outputs that sound more like the total amp sound, but they didn't exist in 1981.

peace

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
TheGreek

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
TheGreek

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I read that, too, but it's not correct.

what if the amp was only miked and not a line to the board

That's how guitar signals get to the board in a live concert. A microphone placed close to the amp's speaker provides the signal back to the mixing board.

peace

what about the direct out on the back of a lot of guitar amps?

Generally, those are pre-amp signals, sometimes used in the studio to get a cleaner recording signal to be effected elsewhere or to be patched to another amp. They aren't used to represent a live guitar sound because the pre-amp, power amp and speaker combination are what give amps their classic sound.

In a live show you are wanting to get the total sound the guitar amp, the way the guitarist sets it and hears it. A pre-amp signal would sound too clean and not have the characteristics we associate with rock guitar.

There are modeling amps these days which have outputs that sound more like the total amp sound, but they didn't exist in 1981.

peace

On Boogie amps this is not correct -the Slave output is a direct, padded output signal taken from the speaker jack, to be used to slave power amps or as input to recording/PA consoles. The Effects Out is the signal taken from the output of the pre-amp.

The correct method to slave the amp, like the Stones did in 1978 with the Boogie MK1's slave to the Ampeg SVT's, is to use the slave of the Boogie to the 'Extension Amplifier Jack' of the SVT. Another way is to connect the Slave or the Effects Out of the Boogie to the Instrument Input of the SVT. The latter gives mixed results, as the amps impedance and grounds can be mis-matched. It is the way Hendrix and Clapton used to slave their Marshall's though.

Mathijs

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
TheGreek

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
TheGreek

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I read that, too, but it's not correct.

what if the amp was only miked and not a line to the board

That's how guitar signals get to the board in a live concert. A microphone placed close to the amp's speaker provides the signal back to the mixing board.

peace

what about the direct out on the back of a lot of guitar amps?

Generally, those are pre-amp signals, sometimes used in the studio to get a cleaner recording signal to be effected elsewhere or to be patched to another amp. They aren't used to represent a live guitar sound because the pre-amp, power amp and speaker combination are what give amps their classic sound.

In a live show you are wanting to get the total sound the guitar amp, the way the guitarist sets it and hears it. A pre-amp signal would sound too clean and not have the characteristics we associate with rock guitar.

There are modeling amps these days which have outputs that sound more like the total amp sound, but they didn't exist in 1981.

peace

On Boogie amps this is not correct -the Slave output is a direct, padded output signal taken from the speaker jack, to be used to slave power amps or as input to recording/PA consoles. The Effects Out is the signal taken from the output of the pre-amp.

The correct method to slave the amp, like the Stones did in 1978 with the Boogie MK1's slave to the Ampeg SVT's, is to use the slave of the Boogie to the 'Extension Amplifier Jack' of the SVT. Another way is to connect the Slave or the Effects Out of the Boogie to the Instrument Input of the SVT. The latter gives mixed results, as the amps impedance and grounds can be mis-matched. It is the way Hendrix and Clapton used to slave their Marshall's though.

Mathijs

thank you Mathijs !!! mucho gracias !!!!!!!!!!!!

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
TheGreek

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
TheGreek

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I read that, too, but it's not correct.

what if the amp was only miked and not a line to the board

That's how guitar signals get to the board in a live concert. A microphone placed close to the amp's speaker provides the signal back to the mixing board.

peace

what about the direct out on the back of a lot of guitar amps?

Generally, those are pre-amp signals, sometimes used in the studio to get a cleaner recording signal to be effected elsewhere or to be patched to another amp. They aren't used to represent a live guitar sound because the pre-amp, power amp and speaker combination are what give amps their classic sound.

In a live show you are wanting to get the total sound the guitar amp, the way the guitarist sets it and hears it. A pre-amp signal would sound too clean and not have the characteristics we associate with rock guitar.

There are modeling amps these days which have outputs that sound more like the total amp sound, but they didn't exist in 1981.

peace

On Boogie amps this is not correct -the Slave output is a direct, padded output signal taken from the speaker jack, to be used to slave power amps or as input to recording/PA consoles. The Effects Out is the signal taken from the output of the pre-amp.

The correct method to slave the amp, like the Stones did in 1978 with the Boogie MK1's slave to the Ampeg SVT's, is to use the slave of the Boogie to the 'Extension Amplifier Jack' of the SVT. Another way is to connect the Slave or the Effects Out of the Boogie to the Instrument Input of the SVT. The latter gives mixed results, as the amps impedance and grounds can be mis-matched. It is the way Hendrix and Clapton used to slave their Marshall's though.

Mathijs

Yeah the Boogie's are a bit different than most amps with their multiple pre-amp stages and slave output. It's all about signal level when interconnecting these things and, as you know, the slave output on a Boogie is still just a line level signal...but taken from after the output transformer and padded down, it's a cool way to get the total amp sound into a line level signal to be routed to boards, effects or other amps!

Depending on the impedances and sensitivity some inputs can accept a wide range of signal levels, but a line level signal isn't going to drive a speaker cabinet without a power amp connected in between. I know the later models have a knob to adjust the slave signal level, not really sure how hot it goes.

Instrument (low) level-->Pre-amp (line) level-->Power Amp (speakers) level.

I've always been curious how Hendrix slaved all those Marshalls, I guess you are saying he used a line level (effects) out of the first amp into an instrument level input of the downstream amps? I guess the Marshall inputs could handle the signal level...or it they distorted it sounded good enough to Hendrix and Clapton.

But, to get back to Taylor in 1981, I'm pretty sure he just mic'ed the speaker on his amp to feed the board..curious what amp MT was using for that KC show.

peace

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
TheGreek

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
TheGreek

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I read that, too, but it's not correct.

what if the amp was only miked and not a line to the board

That's how guitar signals get to the board in a live concert. A microphone placed close to the amp's speaker provides the signal back to the mixing board.

peace

what about the direct out on the back of a lot of guitar amps?

Generally, those are pre-amp signals, sometimes used in the studio to get a cleaner recording signal to be effected elsewhere or to be patched to another amp. They aren't used to represent a live guitar sound because the pre-amp, power amp and speaker combination are what give amps their classic sound.

In a live show you are wanting to get the total sound the guitar amp, the way the guitarist sets it and hears it. A pre-amp signal would sound too clean and not have the characteristics we associate with rock guitar.

There are modeling amps these days which have outputs that sound more like the total amp sound, but they didn't exist in 1981.

peace

On Boogie amps this is not correct -the Slave output is a direct, padded output signal taken from the speaker jack, to be used to slave power amps or as input to recording/PA consoles. The Effects Out is the signal taken from the output of the pre-amp.

The correct method to slave the amp, like the Stones did in 1978 with the Boogie MK1's slave to the Ampeg SVT's, is to use the slave of the Boogie to the 'Extension Amplifier Jack' of the SVT. Another way is to connect the Slave or the Effects Out of the Boogie to the Instrument Input of the SVT. The latter gives mixed results, as the amps impedance and grounds can be mis-matched. It is the way Hendrix and Clapton used to slave their Marshall's though.

Mathijs

Yeah the Boogie's are a bit different than most amps with their multiple pre-amp stages and slave output. It's all about signal level when interconnecting these things and, as you know, the slave output on a Boogie is still just a line level signal...but taken from after the output transformer and padded down, it's a cool way to get the total amp sound into a line level signal to be routed to boards, effects or other amps!

Depending on the impedances and sensitivity some inputs can accept a wide range of signal levels, but a line level signal isn't going to drive a speaker cabinet without a power amp connected in between. I know the later models have a knob to adjust the slave signal level, not really sure how hot it goes.

Instrument (low) level-->Pre-amp (line) level-->Power Amp (speakers) level.

I've always been curious how Hendrix slaved all those Marshalls, I guess you are saying he used a line level (effects) out of the first amp into an instrument level input of the downstream amps? I guess the Marshall inputs could handle the signal level...or it they distorted it sounded good enough to Hendrix and Clapton.

But, to get back to Taylor in 1981, I'm pretty sure he just mic'ed the speaker on his amp to feed the board..curious what amp MT was using for that KC show.

peace

Hendrix and Clapton slaved their Marshall heads simply by running a cable from the input of 1 head to the input of the other -the inputs of the Marshall Majors and Bass amps where internally connected. You do get problems with impedence and loads, and it is dangerous as both amps run to the same ground. If a microphone was connected improperly you'd get 800 volts and 1 ampere runing through your lips...

Taylor reportedly used a Boogie MK1 that was taken from the rehearsal room. That's probably the reason why he is constantly feeding back: he just couldn't hear himself next to Wood's 300 watt Coloseum. I don't understand though why Taylor didn't use Wood's spare Coloseum though.

Mathijs

Quote
Mathijs
I don't understand though why Taylor didn't use Wood's spare Coloseum though.

Mathijs

As Wood's spare Coloseum was there as a safety backup, there's no way they would have let anybody, not even Taylor, use it.

How do we know he didn't use Wood's spare amp?

Quote
Mathijs
Hendrix and Clapton slaved their Marshall heads simply by running a cable from the input of 1 head to the input of the other -the inputs of the Marshall Majors and Bass amps where internally connected. You do get problems with impedence and loads, and it is dangerous as both amps run to the same ground. If a microphone was connected improperly you'd get 800 volts and 1 ampere runing through your lips...
Mathijs

Hmmm. I'll have to think about that one but, with all due respect, it doesn't make sense that having a single ground on both Marshall's could cause problems. In fact having having a single ground is best because it eliminates a ground loop which causes hum and noise on both amps. And if both amps were grounded , even to separate grounds, you are not likely to get a shock from the microphone, just possible hum from a ground loop.

I think the more likely shock scenario is when one (or both) of the amp grounds are lifted to reduce the hum (or the outlet they are plugged in to isn't grounded) In that case the microphone may in fact provide a path to ground through your lips as you indicate. If the Amps are grounded, to the same or different points, this isn't likely to happen.

Also, not sure how you can improperly connect a microphone? As you know, they are connected with XLR cables and you just plug them from the mic to the board. I can see a scenario where the board isn't grounded or the ground of the board is at a different potential than the amp ground possibly causing a shock, but it has little to do with how the microphone itself is connected, imo.

peace

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman


Lots of good notes, lots of bum notes and feedback problems, too.

I didn't realize he integrated to the Rolling Stones AD 1981 so well...

- Doxa

Hahaha. Good one Doxa.

I'm just bumping this Taylor with the Stones 1981-compilation for anyone who haven't heard it yet.

Thanks DP, Taylor was great in 1981.

If you are going to ask Mick Taylor to play with the band you better expect a bulldozer, locomotive, hurricane or tornado. That's because when the Stones last performed with him live in 1973 that's what the band did. He was just doing what he had done the last time he played live with them. It shows how the Stones were mellowing out after that '73 tour. I saw it in 78. When you ask outsiders what they think about the Rolling Stones they can't remember or never witnessed that heavy metal sound for 1973 in Europe. That night he brought a sledge hammer while the rest of the band used dental tools. He even did it this past two years. Just seems to make the band play harder. Especially Keith. It's a shame Bill has fallen out of good graces with the band. Life's too short to hold grudges.

Quote
s083874
If you are going to ask Mick Taylor to play with the band you better expect a bulldozer, locomotive, hurricane or tornado. That's because when the Stones last performed with him live in 1973 that's what the band did. He was just doing what he had done the last time he played live with them. It shows how the Stones were mellowing out after that '73 tour. I saw it in 78. When you ask outsiders what they think about the Rolling Stones they can't remember or never witnessed that heavy metal sound for 1973 in Europe. That night he brought a sledge hammer while the rest of the band used dental tools. He even did it this past two years. Just seems to make the band play harder. Especially Keith. It's a shame Bill has fallen out of good graces with the band. Life's too short to hold grudges.

that is 100% true..

but is he not friends with them? I thought it was more a case of Bill having better things to do..

Bill won't likely be playing any 2 songs with them again but I believe they are still friends..

For some strange reason, I can't figure this out . . . which night did MT play with the band? 12/14/81 or 12/15/81?

According to Dbboots, he played on December 14, 1981.

It seems that he may have played both nights, according to Dbboots and a few of the titles under 12-14-81 and 12-15-81...

Now I'm just as lost as you...



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2015-05-07 04:41 by BeforeTheyMakeMeRun.

I always thought it was Dec. 14th only. I know he was touring with Alvin Lee at that time and that Mr. Lee had a gig in KC on Dec 12, little Rock on Dec 13 and Granite City, Ill on Dec 15th....but who knows how long he split from Alvin Lee to hang with his old bandmates.

peace

Is there one release (audience or soundboard source) of this show that is considered to be the best? Any input would be greatly appreciated.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-10-02 01:53 by tjkrol.

Kleermaker usually has good stuff. Here's the show:

[www.youtube.com]

duplicate of my previous post



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-10-02 05:52 by tjkrol.

Quote
tjkrol
Is there one release (audience or soundboard source) of this show that is considered to be the best? Any input would be greatly appreciated.

Best way to get both shows cheap in best possible sound (1: excellent soundboard/2: vg-exc audience) is the OMS 4CD, a clone of the Empress Valley.

Monsoon Ragoon, thanks for the info. Disc 3 & 4 are misdated then? It states December 15, 1981. Right?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-10-02 19:04 by tjkrol.

I'm just gonna go out on a limb here and suppose that neither Keith nor Ronnie were too thrilled to have Taylor playing on so many numbers. Those two had been working since 1975 at perfecting their two guitars-meshing-as-one thing and from what I've read, even though Taylor's not extremely loud in the recordings, on the stage he was so loud he was stepping all over everybody.

"Gonna find my way to heaven ..."

Quote
HonkeyTonkFlash
I'm just gonna go out on a limb here and suppose that neither Keith nor Ronnie were too thrilled to have Taylor playing on so many numbers. Those two had been working since 1975 at perfecting their two guitars-meshing-as-one thing and from what I've read, even though Taylor's not extremely loud in the recordings, on the stage he was so loud he was stepping all over everybody.

Listening to Taylor in Kansas '81 I don't hear he sounds more rehearsed or unrehearsed than Ron. Taylor fits the Stones perfectly here, although it's not the early 7-tees.

"Another notable performance during the tour was the 14 December performance at Kansas City's Kemper Arena. Previous Stones lead guitarist Mick Taylor joined the band for a large part of the performance. Ronnie Wood was not happy with Taylor's appearance, however: "[He was] bulldozing through parts of songs that should have been subtle, ignoring breaks and taking uninvited solos."

from: wikipedia