Ronnie had a trademark distorted sound for much of his work with the Faces, particularly the rhythm parts (example on Cindy Incidentally below). Does anyone know what guitar/amp combo he used to get this sound. It's kind of primitive in a cool way. It's not a sound he used after joining the Stones.

Cool story about Ron's amp, a Hiwatt 100 Model DR103, here:
[www.vintageguitar.com]


....Just one artist amid a growing list of notable British guitarists who appreciated what Hiwatt had to offer, Ronnie Wood epitomized the professional that Reeves aimed to please. After stints with the Jeff Beck Group and other projects, Wood jumped in with the Small Faces in ’69 to fill a void left by the departed Steve Marriott, alongside replacement singer Rod Stewart. The change marked the band’s transition from “Small Faces” to “Faces,” a simplification represented by someone’s effort to rub out the “Faces” from the stencil on the side of the head shell. This Hiwatt DR103 Custom 100 was built for the band by Reeves in ’69, in the small garage of his house in New Malden, Surrey, when Hiwatt was a one-man operation. After training at Marconi and Mullard, Reeves worked for Mullard in the mid ’60s, and built amps for Ivor Arbiter’s Sound City music store in ’67-’68, but was developing his own Hiwatt designs all the while. By the time the familiar black-and-white block logo appeared on the amps in late ’66/early ’67, Reeves had already established the meticulous wiring techniques and an obsession with quality in all facets of the manufacturing process – characteristics that would help Hiwatt amps stand out from the pack (and which Reeves would insist on maintaining even as the company expanded and wiring work was jobbed out to Harry Reeves Electronics after 1971). ...

OK, Hiwatt amps are part of the story, but lots of people used Hiwatts. I am trying tio get to the core of his grungy rhythm tonality with Faces.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-12-21 20:27 by 71Tele.

Well, Hiwatts are aggressive amps distortion-wise, with the right adjusting. Just listen to HTW or Miss Judy's Farm

But I thought Ronnie used Ampegs mostly with the Faces as well? There isn't really a long way from Miss Judy's Farm to Love You Live sound-wise.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-12-21 20:44 by DandelionPowderman.

200 watts wide open..watch the videos and even switching guitars he has that ROAR

My guess is a fuzz pedal, possibly a Univox Uni-Fuzz. It sounds similar to Hendrix's rhythm tone on Isabella and I remember reading somewhere that's what he used for that. And they were roommates, no doubt they talked about and possibly shared gear. You can still find original ones but they can be a bit pricey.


peace

Quote
Naturalust
My guess is a fuzz pedal, possibly a Univox Uni-Fuzz. It sounds similar to Hendrix's rhythm tone on Isabella and I remember reading somewhere that's what he used for that. And they were roommates, no doubt they talked about and possibly shared gear. You can still find original ones but they can be a bit pricey.


peace

Hmm. Maybe. It's a very distinctive distortion that sounds very different to me than just amp overdrive.

Hendrix used Fuzz Face. Ronnie was never a pedal guy, but played through a Leslie on the 75/76 tours.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-12-21 20:59 by DandelionPowderman.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Hendrix used Fuzz Face. Ronnie was never a pedal guy, but played through a Leslie on the 75/76 tours.

Didn't know that about the Leslie. More interested in his rhythm sound pre-Stones. Check out the "Cindy" clip. Stay With Me is another good example.

Maybe a MK I tonebender?

This may be interesting: [www.treblebooster.net]

the US tour amps that did not go back to England since shipping was too costly are around now and then.. that is the sound.

on record some of it has to do with the gear used to record the boys. I have not yet read Glyn's book since I am getting it for xmas but there may be insights there as well. those serious tube compressors add much drive and warmth but it was hot hot pickups into roaring amps and then one uses the guitar volume to manage it. play at 4 solo at 10. that sort of deal.

Agree it's a wonderful tone.

The closest I get in Faces area, is with with my Ampeg a LP and a booster in between. Tone pots on the guitar slightly closed. Volume on the amp 2/3, while the gain on the booster quite high.

The amp is an old Jet from the 60s, only 15w. But I guess a more powerful Ampeg won't do no harm.

I tried using a bass amp too, an Ampeg b15, obtaining a terrific tone, but way cleaner, more Exile, so to say.

I tried a variety of distortion pedals, but you end up missing Ronnie's sharp attack.

C

I put my money on guitar volume on 6/7 for rhythm and 10 for soloing. No pedals.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I put my money on guitar volume on 6/7 for rhythm and 10 for soloing. No pedals.

Yeah that's probably correct for most of Ronnie's Faces work but just listen to the guitar on that Cindy track. That doesn't sound like a reduced volume pot guitar or an over driven tube amp mic'ed up. It sounds to me like an early fuzz pedal.

Jimmy Page's quieter passages is a great example of what most volume pots do to an overdriven amp and that scratchy fuzz isn't a part of it. Although when he turns the pot up, wham, instant smoother overdrive. Of course it's bound to be a bit different with different guitar/amp combos but I still say pedal.

In any case, if I was trying to replicate that tone today, pedals would be my first choice.

peace

I remember reading on The Gear Page a few years back that Ronnie used a silver face Champ or Princeton a lot in the studio.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-12-22 00:19 by jabhead.

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I put my money on guitar volume on 6/7 for rhythm and 10 for soloing. No pedals.

Yeah that's probably correct for most of Ronnie's Faces work but just listen to the guitar on that Cindy track. That doesn't sound like a reduced volume pot guitar or an over driven tube amp mic'ed up. It sounds to me like an early fuzz pedal.

Jimmy Page's quieter passages is a great example of what most volume pots do to an overdriven amp and that scratchy fuzz isn't a part of it. Although when he turns the pot up, wham, instant smoother overdrive. Of course it's bound to be a bit different with different guitar/amp combos but I still say pedal.

In any case, if I was trying to replicate that tone today, pedals would be my first choice.

peace

Do you think he used a pedal all the way through for that rhythm/riffing track? On that particular track I'd say full volum through a british tube amp. The second guitar is less distorted, albeit dirtier in sound. Both excellent choices on a fantastic song, imo.

I have an Ampeg V4, and I can get that Faces/Stones tone pretty easily. Mine came with a master volume, so I can dial it in at somewhat of a low volume. IT's way too heavy and unnecessary for me to lug it around now. I learned way too late that you don't need to have a big amp to get a good sound at gigs. The stupidity of youth. I saw the Stones with a big Ampeg, so I had to have one.

Quote
tomk
I have an Ampeg V4, and I can get that Faces/Stones tone pretty easily. Mine came with a master volume, so I can dial it in at somewhat of a low volume. IT's way too heavy and unnecessary for me to lug it around now. I learned way too late that you don't need to have a big amp to get a good sound at gigs. The stupidity of youth. I saw the Stones with a big Ampeg, so I had to have one.

I think many of us made that mistake, tomk...Great posts here, but still looking for the key to Ronnie's distinctive Faces rhythm sound. He did NOT bring this sound with him to the Stones. I can't recall whether he used a pedal live when I saw the Faces, but he definitely had the same rhythm tone live as he did on the "Cindy" clip I posted above.

Quote
71Tele

Quote
tomk
I have an Ampeg V4, and I can get that Faces/Stones tone pretty easily. Mine came with a master volume, so I can dial it in at somewhat of a low volume. IT's way too heavy and unnecessary for me to lug it around now. I learned way too late that you don't need to have a big amp to get a good sound at gigs. The stupidity of youth. I saw the Stones with a big Ampeg, so I had to have one.

I think many of us made that mistake, tomk...Great posts here, but still looking for the key to Ronnie's distinctive Faces rhythm sound. He did NOT bring this sound with him to the Stones. I can't recall whether he used a pedal live when I saw the Faces, but he definitely had the same rhythm tone live as he did on the "Cindy" clip I posted above.

Yeah, I was talking about the live tone we all know and love. As for Cindy, hmm. A Deluxe maybe? Doesn't sound like a Hiwatt to me.

Quote
tomk

Quote
71Tele

Quote
tomk
I have an Ampeg V4, and I can get that Faces/Stones tone pretty easily. Mine came with a master volume, so I can dial it in at somewhat of a low volume. IT's way too heavy and unnecessary for me to lug it around now. I learned way too late that you don't need to have a big amp to get a good sound at gigs. The stupidity of youth. I saw the Stones with a big Ampeg, so I had to have one.

I think many of us made that mistake, tomk...Great posts here, but still looking for the key to Ronnie's distinctive Faces rhythm sound. He did NOT bring this sound with him to the Stones. I can't recall whether he used a pedal live when I saw the Faces, but he definitely had the same rhythm tone live as he did on the "Cindy" clip I posted above.

Yeah, I was talking about the live tone we all know and love. As for Cindy, hmm. A Deluxe maybe? Doesn't sound like a Hiwatt to me.

From the live versions I've heard on YouTube, it's definitely an Ampeg. Studio? Good question. Great tone.

I used to get a sound like that from overdriving the speaker in an old reel-to-reel tape teck.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I put my money on guitar volume on 6/7 for rhythm and 10 for soloing. No pedals.

Yeah that's probably correct for most of Ronnie's Faces work but just listen to the guitar on that Cindy track. That doesn't sound like a reduced volume pot guitar or an over driven tube amp mic'ed up. It sounds to me like an early fuzz pedal.

Jimmy Page's quieter passages is a great example of what most volume pots do to an overdriven amp and that scratchy fuzz isn't a part of it. Although when he turns the pot up, wham, instant smoother overdrive. Of course it's bound to be a bit different with different guitar/amp combos but I still say pedal.

In any case, if I was trying to replicate that tone today, pedals would be my first choice.

peace

Do you think he used a pedal all the way through for that rhythm/riffing track? On that particular track I'd say full volum through a british tube amp. The second guitar is less distorted, albeit dirtier in sound. Both excellent choices on a fantastic song, imo.

You may be right but as you know there are so many factors involved in a recording and things such as speaker type and condition, mic type and placement, EQ from both the guitar and the amp and pickup type and output that individually or in combination can change things in a hurry.

Here is a great example that gets pretty close to that tone and as I remember it was Brian Henneman playing a Les Paul (P90's) thru a cranked Vox AC30, close mic'ed with an SM57, just as you are suggesting. Turn it up!





peace

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I put my money on guitar volume on 6/7 for rhythm and 10 for soloing. No pedals.

Yeah that's probably correct for most of Ronnie's Faces work but just listen to the guitar on that Cindy track. That doesn't sound like a reduced volume pot guitar or an over driven tube amp mic'ed up. It sounds to me like an early fuzz pedal.

Jimmy Page's quieter passages is a great example of what most volume pots do to an overdriven amp and that scratchy fuzz isn't a part of it. Although when he turns the pot up, wham, instant smoother overdrive. Of course it's bound to be a bit different with different guitar/amp combos but I still say pedal.

In any case, if I was trying to replicate that tone today, pedals would be my first choice.

peace

Do you think he used a pedal all the way through for that rhythm/riffing track? On that particular track I'd say full volum through a british tube amp. The second guitar is less distorted, albeit dirtier in sound. Both excellent choices on a fantastic song, imo.

You may be right but as you know there are so many factors involved in a recording and things such as speaker type and condition, mic type and placement, EQ from both the guitar and the amp and pickup type and output that individually or in combination can change things in a hurry.

Here is a great example that gets pretty close to that tone and as I remember it was Brian Henneman playing a Les Paul (P90's) thru a cranked Vox AC30, close mic'ed with an SM57, just as you are suggesting. Turn it up!





peace

Yeah, that's a great sound in that Wilco clip, albeit maybe without the warmness Ronnie had on Cindy?

@ Tele: I'm hearing Stay With Me, Cindy, Miss Judy and You're So Rude in his 1976 sound with the Stones here (1:14)

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Hendrix used Fuzz Face. Ronnie was never a pedal guy, but played through a Leslie on the 75/76 tours.

what songs did Ronnie use the leslie in 75?

[www.iorr.org]

By the way, Cindy features great tone, yes, but also great guitar work!

As for a recent example of some great Ron Wood tone - She's so Cold from the Bang tour was stellar (check the Toronto official boot for a good example).


C

Quote
liddas
By the way, Cindy features great tone, yes, but also great guitar work!

As for a recent example of some great Ron Wood tone - She's so Cold from the Bang tour was stellar (check the Toronto official boot for a good example).


C

Indeed! He had a great tone on this tour for songs like Worried About You and You Can't Always Get What You Want as well, imo.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I put my money on guitar volume on 6/7 for rhythm and 10 for soloing. No pedals.

Yeah that's probably correct for most of Ronnie's Faces work but just listen to the guitar on that Cindy track. That doesn't sound like a reduced volume pot guitar or an over driven tube amp mic'ed up. It sounds to me like an early fuzz pedal.

Jimmy Page's quieter passages is a great example of what most volume pots do to an overdriven amp and that scratchy fuzz isn't a part of it. Although when he turns the pot up, wham, instant smoother overdrive. Of course it's bound to be a bit different with different guitar/amp combos but I still say pedal.

In any case, if I was trying to replicate that tone today, pedals would be my first choice.

peace

Do you think he used a pedal all the way through for that rhythm/riffing track? On that particular track I'd say full volum through a british tube amp. The second guitar is less distorted, albeit dirtier in sound. Both excellent choices on a fantastic song, imo.

You may be right but as you know there are so many factors involved in a recording and things such as speaker type and condition, mic type and placement, EQ from both the guitar and the amp and pickup type and output that individually or in combination can change things in a hurry.

Here is a great example that gets pretty close to that tone and as I remember it was Brian Henneman playing a Les Paul (P90's) thru a cranked Vox AC30, close mic'ed with an SM57, just as you are suggesting. Turn it up!





peace

Yeah, that's a great sound in that Wilco clip, albeit maybe without the warmness Ronnie had on Cindy?

@ Tele: I'm hearing Stay With Me, Cindy, Miss Judy and You're So Rude in his 1976 sound with the Stones here (1:14)

Well, you know how I feel about Stones songs with Ronnie playing Taylor parts but yeah, that's close to the same tone as with Faces.

It's Keith's part, not Taylor's

Quote
DandelionPowderman
It's Keith's part, not Taylor's

Studio, not live!