# Devin Townsend's Rig (general Rig questions)



## 7deadlysins666 (Nov 12, 2008)

My question is If he is using 2 Mesa heads, why does he also need the Mesa power amp?


----------



## halsinden (Nov 12, 2008)

7deadlysins666 said:


> My question is If he is using 2 Mesa heads, why does he also need the Mesa power amp?




because.

that's why.

now, eat your dinner.

(_christ_ that's nice)

H


----------



## HeavyMachinery (Nov 12, 2008)

Devin uses those heads for dry signal. Power amp is for delays sounds what he gets from G-force and Roland GP-100 pre amp.


----------



## 7deadlysins666 (Nov 12, 2008)

halsinden said:


> because.
> 
> that's why.
> 
> ...



What is it one of those Malmsteen things? Because he fucking can? 

Im curious because i've never been much of a "rig" guy until recently, been just guitar and amp kinda guy for years. But i've discovered how much better my tone is with other components, and will eventually (or atleast piece by piece) be putting together my rig. So im trying to learn all this shit and I don't know much of anything about it!


----------



## killiansguitar (Nov 12, 2008)

Theres a video of him from GuitarWorld thats also on youtube of him showing his rig and talking about his guitars. That black ESP 7 is beautiful, the ebony board on it is stunning, you can really see how nice of a guitar it is when hes playing it in the video.

Devin Townsend's THE man.


----------



## 7deadlysins666 (Nov 12, 2008)

HeavyMachinery said:


> Devin uses those heads for dry signal. Power amp is for delays sounds what he gets from G-force and Roland GP-100 pre amp.




Oh! That makes complete sense.


So...say I buy a G-Sharp (don't use enough effects/delays to justify the other two expensive ones) would I HAVE to have a power amp too, or could I run it through my amp?


----------



## Sang-Drax (Nov 12, 2008)

Phew, I thought I was the only wondering that. In reply to my question, Peteranima said that Devin probably uses the Roland pre + Mesa poweramp for fx because the DR's loop isn't that great.

I'd never heard of this GP-100 pre, though. Is it any good?



7deadlysins666 said:


> So...say I buy a G-Sharp (don't use enough effects/delays to justify the other two expensive ones) would I HAVE to have a power amp too, or could I run it through my amp?



AFAIK, preamp + power is roughly the same as a head.


----------



## Scoop_89 (Nov 12, 2008)

Sang-Drax said:


> AFAIK, preamp + power is roughly the same as a head.


 

That's exactly the same as a head!


----------



## Sang-Drax (Nov 12, 2008)

Scoop_89 said:


> That's exactly the same as a head!



Yeah, that's what I thought, too. But, y'know, I'm no rig expert, so, I expected someone to come and prove me wrong


----------



## 7deadlysins666 (Nov 12, 2008)

So....I would have to buy a power amp to run a G-Sharp with my rig? Are there any other processors out there that are just as good/better than say the G - Major...but without the price tag? haha. I may not even worry about the effects processor just for the fact I never use many effects. Im mainly looking to improve my tone, but am curious about effects processors too.


----------



## Variant (Nov 12, 2008)

Sang-Drax said:


> Phew, I thought I was the only wondering that. In reply to my question, Peteranima said that Devin probably uses the Roland pre + Mesa poweramp for fx because the DR's loop isn't that great.
> 
> I'd never heard of this GP-100 pre, though. Is it any good?
> 
> AFAIK, preamp + power is roughly the same as a head.




The GP-100 pre is the *CORNERSTONE* of his sound. he's used it forever. It's a decent sounding unit, especially so far as echos and reverbs go... but Roland/Boss has always made awesome delays. They have a certain "vibe" the them, particularly the aforementioned unit which is why he's had it in his setup for so long.

He basically runs a bi (tri, now) amp setup, with the GP-100 making all the echos and reflections, running in parallel with the "dry" head(s). If you listen to his sound at pretty much any given time, you can hear the echos are coming from from the distortion in the Roland preamp, and not the main crunch of the heads. He also dampens the sound coming from the GP-100 with the EQ... you'll note it's all trimmed off, espcially the lows, so the crazy reflections are not all woofy. He also mentions the G-Force is there for more subtle effects. The wet side of the rig simply goes out to a Mesa 2:90, then into two stereo cabinets, and all four cabs are miced up and recorded at once.

As for the dry side, he used a single 5150 for years, but switched to the blend of a Stiletto Deuce and a EL34 Dual Rectifier with most of the sound coming from the Stiletto and just the lows coming from the Recto. 



7deadlysins666 said:


> Im curious because i've never been much of a "rig" guy until recently, been just guitar and amp kinda guy for years. But i've discovered how much better my tone is with other components, and will eventually (or atleast piece by piece) be putting together my rig. So im trying to learn all this shit and I don't know much of anything about it!



This is true... outboard gear is good.  Too many guys on here plug their axe into a ENGL hooked up to a Vader 4 x 12 and call it a "rig". Bah, that's an amp, not a rig. Fine for tracking rhythms all day long, but if you really want to build your sound to fit all areas of your music (or maybe just to create a better crunch tone) you need to mess with different combinations of stuff, IMHO.


----------



## Drew (Nov 12, 2008)

Variant said:


> This is true... outboard gear is good.  Too many guys on here plug their axe into a ENGL hooked up to a Vader 4 x 12 and call it a "rig". Bah, that's an amp, not a rig. Fine for tracking rhythms all day long, but if you really want to build your sound to fit all areas of your music (or maybe just to create a better crunch tone) you need to mess with different combinations of stuff, IMHO.



Totally disagree. I'm a delay junky, and even I think that too much in the way of effects can ruin a tone. If you use anything, it needs to be to add some subtle color to an already solid tone, and not try to make something sound like something it's not. 

If push came to shove, I could gig with my Rectoverb and a patch cord, and get on just fine.


----------



## Variant (Nov 12, 2008)

Drew said:


> Totally disagree. I'm a delay junky, and even I think that too much in the way of effects can ruin a tone. If you use anything, it needs to be to add some subtle color to an already solid tone, and not try to make something sound like something it's not.
> 
> If push came to shove, I could gig with my Rectoverb and a patch cord, and get on just fine.




It's all how you integrate your outboard gear into your rig (or how you apply it in the studio). Good switchers are a start if you've got a lot of junk so you don't have a massive pedal chain (though I can think of a number of great sounding pro setups who violate that), as well as knowing what to put where, and how to adjust the levels. Devin is a excellent example of that, plexing wet and dry at the same time, so you're getting pure guitar-to-head-cab tone, unladen with any sort of processing, then, a whole other wet side just handling the reflections. 

I like my tone pretty wet (even rhythm, thanks to the aforementioned Mr. Townsend), and have an array of gear. It's nice to have options to color your tone in different, unique ways and give your sound some personality, in my opinion. I like the Gilmours and Vai's of the world, and they get some great sounds of of gads of gear... it's works for them. On the other hand, you've got guys like Billy Corrigan and The Edge, who have shit tons of expensive stuff in monster rigs, and never really sound good. It all how you apply it, but if it's not there to begin with, you can't try. I say experiment, try different things, shape your own sound.


----------



## maat (Nov 12, 2008)

Variant said:


> It's all how you integrate your outboard gear into your rig (or how you apply it in the studio). Good switchers are a start if you've got a lot of junk so you don't have a massive pedal chain (though I can think of a number of great sounding pro setups who violate that), as well as knowing what to put where, and how to adjust the levels. Devin is a excellent example of that, plexing wet and dry at the same time, so you're getting pure guitar-to-head-cab tone, unladen with any sort of processing, then, a whole other wet side just handling the reflections.
> 
> I like my tone pretty wet (even rhythm, thanks to the aforementioned Mr. Townsend), and have an array of gear. It's nice to have options to color your tone in different, unique ways and give your sound some personality, in my opinion. I like the Gilmours and Vai's of the world, and they get some great sounds of of gads of gear... it's works for them. On the other hand, you've got guys like Billy Corrigan and The Edge, who have shit tons of expensive stuff in monster rigs, and never really sound good. It all how you apply it, but if it's not there to begin with, you can't try. I say experiment, try different things, shape your own sound.


 

Seconded. Very valid points in both points of view though. 
I like Steve Morse's idea of using Volume Pedals to mix everything. I'm of the subscription that GUITAR>CABLE>AMP>CAB/PA is staid and old school. A mixture of both schools of thought seem to me at least more indicative of pushing guitar technology forward. Seems to me, WAY too many people are luddites because their guitar heroes are, and to keep the "troo 'tude" they create barriers for themselves instead of disciplining themselves to push things forward. And I'll be the first to admit that at times, I'm one of those luddites. Lateralus was the album I "woke up" to, I'm an Adam Jones nut...as such, I #$#%&-ing hate wankery solos and showboating... BUt I take the time whenever I have it to tune to standard and practice my damn scales.


----------



## stuh84 (Nov 12, 2008)

Using the wet/dry kind of thing is something a lot of people do, and it makes the effects way clearer. However it doesn't work for everyone. 

To answer 7deadlysins666, you don't need a separate power amp to run the G-Sharp, you only need that if you want to run the effects to a seperate cab at ALL times. However, if you are fine with the effects coming through the same cabinet as your distorted sound, then you dont need one.


----------



## 7deadlysins666 (Nov 12, 2008)

Ok, here are the stupid questions! 

1) Wouldn't that mean you would have a clean channel running at all times for delay/echo etc? That would sound pretty strange unless it is subtle and/or Only sends the echos, and not the original signal. 

2) Could I use something like a Crown power amp? (used for live sound) Or would I have to buy a $1500 Engl or Mesa  Though I would love to own an Engl anything, I don't have that much $$ to fork out, nor can I justify buying something like that (for the time being).


----------



## stuh84 (Nov 12, 2008)

No, because you would still have preamp distortion before it hits the effects. Most of the time effects tend to be used 100&#37; wet so its only the effect signal.

Also, you can use anything as a power amp really that has the capabilities to do it.

However, when I said a lot of people, I only meant quite a few do it, compared to how many dont do it, and just run effects in the effects loop of an amp. Thats all I do, and have no intention of using a wet/dry rig for a long time, if at all (maybe just to kick around with, but rarely for live or recording)


----------



## dudewtf (Nov 12, 2008)

Does anyone happen to know Devin's studio rig contains? As far as mic pres, interfaces, and outboard gear?


----------



## Ostia Man (Nov 13, 2008)

Sang-Drax said:


> I'd never heard of this GP-100 pre, though. Is it any good?
> .



its like a gt-5 in rack version.


----------



## Lozek (Nov 13, 2008)

7deadlysins666 said:


> Ok, here are the stupid questions!
> 
> 1) Wouldn't that mean you would have a clean channel running at all times for delay/echo etc? That would sound pretty strange unless it is subtle and/or Only sends the echos, and not the original signal.
> 
> 2) Could I use something like a Crown power amp? (used for live sound) Or would I have to buy a $1500 Engl or Mesa  Though I would love to own an Engl anything, I don't have that much $$ to fork out, nor can I justify buying something like that (for the time being).



Think of the rig in these terms and it should make more sense to you:

Guitar into Splitter into:

Amp 1 (Dry) 
Dual Rec
Mesa Cab

Amp 2 (Dry) 
Stilletto 
Mesa Cab

Amp 3 (Wet)
Roland GP-100 Pre-amp with in-built effects
TC-Electronics effects
EQ
Mesa 2-90 Stereo (for panning effects)
2 Mesa Cabs (1 left, 1 Right)

All Mic'd and combined

So, you taken one guitar, run it through two dry heads that are combined to get the best of each ones voicings characteristics, and a third rack rig that supplies all the effects. Combine these back together and you've got a great dry signal that's never affected by the seperate wet rig.

Does that make sense?


----------



## Brord (Nov 13, 2008)

Variant said:


> As for the dry side, he used a single 5150 for years, but switched to the blend of a Stiletto Deuce and a EL34 Dual Rectifier with most of the sound coming from the Stiletto and just the lows coming from the Recto.



Anybody knows why he stopped using the 5150? I saw zimmers hole, devin townsend band and strapping young lad perform a show some years ago and I remember Devin using a 5150 and the other guitarist a recto. Gave a great sound, wonder why he gave up on the 5150.


----------



## drmosh (Nov 13, 2008)

He stopped using the 5150s because he love the tone of the Mesas


----------



## Brord (Nov 13, 2008)

yeah I was kinda suspecting this myself but I was interested in a bit more in depth reasoning hehe

How's the 707 working out for you btw?


----------



## HeavyMachinery (Nov 13, 2008)

drmosh said:


> He stopped using the 5150s because he love the tone of the Mesas



NO he did it because he's a whore ! 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlWrapni5fk

Check if dont believe it 3.50 ->


----------



## Sang-Drax (Nov 13, 2008)

^ 

I still have one doubt concercning Devy's gear... if he opt to play, say, a chorused part. He would have to use only the the signal that goes through the GP-100, right? If so, wouldn't it sound way too different from the dry one? I mean, of course, besides the fact differences from the FX itself.

Speaking of Stilettos... I don't see many people around here talking about them, but I loved their tone in the few youtube clips I've seen. What's you guys' opinion?


----------



## 7deadlysins666 (Nov 13, 2008)

Lozek said:


> Think of the rig in these terms and it should make more sense to you:
> 
> Guitar into Splitter into:
> 
> ...



Thats a bit better, im starting to understand it now.


----------



## Variant (Nov 13, 2008)

Brord said:


> Anybody knows why he stopped using the 5150? I saw zimmers hole, devin townsend band and strapping young lad perform a show some years ago and I remember Devin using a 5150 and the other guitarist a recto. Gave a great sound, wonder why he gave up on the 5150.



He said something about the 5150 being more of a 'full-frequency' amp, and the combo of the Mesa's taking up less sonic space, mixing better with the bass, drums, etc. Honestly, I like the 5150's better than the Mesa's, at least how he's applied them to his music, respectively. 



dudewtf said:


> Does anyone happen to know Devin's studio rig contains? As far as mic pres, interfaces, and outboard gear?



Well, the guitar rig is _*the*_ guitar rig... that was in is basement studio. He listed all the gear he used to record Ziltoid (his latest) on the liner notes from the album... I can transcribe them here when I get home and take a look at the albums. If my memory serves me right, it's DigiDesign/Protools and M-Audio stuffs.


----------



## biggness (Nov 14, 2008)

This is what intrigues the shit outta me with the axe-fx. With an axe-fx, a stereo poweramp and 2 separate cabs, I could essentially achieve the same thing as devy here, BUT with even more flexibility. Pure craziness.


----------

