<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Gettin&#8217; In the Vibe&#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://guitargear.org/2009/07/14/gettin-in-the-vibe/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://guitargear.org/2009/07/14/gettin-in-the-vibe/</link>
	<description>Real. Guitar.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 13:47:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: goofydawg</title>
		<link>http://guitargear.org/2009/07/14/gettin-in-the-vibe/#comment-3324</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[goofydawg]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 16:52:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://guitargear.org/?p=1586#comment-3324</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I actually re-mixed the song this morning, and re-amped the third solo through a &#039;59 Bassman to add some texture to the track. I also removed all the echo and spatial reverb that I had layered onto the second solo track. I wanted a more pure sound.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I actually re-mixed the song this morning, and re-amped the third solo through a &#8217;59 Bassman to add some texture to the track. I also removed all the echo and spatial reverb that I had layered onto the second solo track. I wanted a more pure sound.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: goofydawg</title>
		<link>http://guitargear.org/2009/07/14/gettin-in-the-vibe/#comment-3323</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[goofydawg]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 21:22:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://guitargear.org/?p=1586#comment-3323</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You&#039;ve got a good point there, Phil. Too bad it&#039;s covering your head. :)

You&#039;re right, but that&#039;s why I mentioned the fine line between &quot;acceptable&quot; versus &quot;transparent.&quot; There is a big difference. But users and manufacturers tout &quot;transparency&quot; as one of the features of the attenuators they use, and really what they mean is &quot;acceptable.&quot;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;ve got a good point there, Phil. Too bad it&#8217;s covering your head. <img src='http://s0.wp.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>You&#8217;re right, but that&#8217;s why I mentioned the fine line between &#8220;acceptable&#8221; versus &#8220;transparent.&#8221; There is a big difference. But users and manufacturers tout &#8220;transparency&#8221; as one of the features of the attenuators they use, and really what they mean is &#8220;acceptable.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Phil</title>
		<link>http://guitargear.org/2009/07/14/gettin-in-the-vibe/#comment-3322</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Phil]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 20:47:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://guitargear.org/?p=1586#comment-3322</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[One word for you dawg:  DECAF. 

Seriously, who really cares about transparency anyway? I just can&#039;t &quot;see&quot; it. If you like the way your amp sounds using the attenuator of your choice, then it&#039;s all good right? ;-)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One word for you dawg:  DECAF. </p>
<p>Seriously, who really cares about transparency anyway? I just can&#8217;t &#8220;see&#8221; it. If you like the way your amp sounds using the attenuator of your choice, then it&#8217;s all good right? <img src='http://s1.wp.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: goofydawg</title>
		<link>http://guitargear.org/2009/07/14/gettin-in-the-vibe/#comment-3321</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[goofydawg]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 14:51:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://guitargear.org/?p=1586#comment-3321</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thanks, 56!

I have to tell you, that attenuator was what did it for me. Its transparency while attenuating to reasonable sound levels allowed me to peg my amp. What I discovered in the process was that when amps are cranked, they take on a completely different character. I think this has a lot to do with the power tubes getting lots of juice, so they can finally contribute to the tone of the amp.

Unfortunately, under normal, unattenuated circumstances, being able to feed enough power to the power tubes isn&#039;t an option as even a lower-wattage amp like the VRX22 will be way too loud when you dime the Master volume. This is where an effective attenuator comes into play.

I&#039;ve played a bunch of &#039;em, and the Aracom by far kicks ass on any that I&#039;ve played. I love the fact that it&#039;s completely passive and doesn&#039;t require any EQ boosting like you have to do with the Webber or the Hot Plate, and I totally dig the fact that the amp and speaker are always reacting to each other, something that can&#039;t be said of the Ultimate, which uses a cheap, $15 resistor and a solid state amp to re-amp the attenuated signal coming from its single 32ohm fixed resistor! Where&#039;s the transparency there? What a load of shit! 

The plain fact of the matter is that people do like the Ultimate Attenuator. I can&#039;t argue that, and as a fellow gear slut, I will never put people down for the gear they choose to buy: If it works for them, that&#039;s really all that matters. But many of these same people hype that unit despite the numerous reports of problems running it with a low resistance amp, and speak about its transparency. Sorry, I just don&#039;t see how a re-amped signal will be transparent! For chrissakes! With the UA, the speaker is interacting with the SS amp, not your amp!

I guess that kind of defines the fine line between acceptable tone versus transparent tone... Okay... I gotta stop this rant... time for another cup of coffee. :)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, 56!</p>
<p>I have to tell you, that attenuator was what did it for me. Its transparency while attenuating to reasonable sound levels allowed me to peg my amp. What I discovered in the process was that when amps are cranked, they take on a completely different character. I think this has a lot to do with the power tubes getting lots of juice, so they can finally contribute to the tone of the amp.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, under normal, unattenuated circumstances, being able to feed enough power to the power tubes isn&#8217;t an option as even a lower-wattage amp like the VRX22 will be way too loud when you dime the Master volume. This is where an effective attenuator comes into play.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve played a bunch of &#8216;em, and the Aracom by far kicks ass on any that I&#8217;ve played. I love the fact that it&#8217;s completely passive and doesn&#8217;t require any EQ boosting like you have to do with the Webber or the Hot Plate, and I totally dig the fact that the amp and speaker are always reacting to each other, something that can&#8217;t be said of the Ultimate, which uses a cheap, $15 resistor and a solid state amp to re-amp the attenuated signal coming from its single 32ohm fixed resistor! Where&#8217;s the transparency there? What a load of shit! </p>
<p>The plain fact of the matter is that people do like the Ultimate Attenuator. I can&#8217;t argue that, and as a fellow gear slut, I will never put people down for the gear they choose to buy: If it works for them, that&#8217;s really all that matters. But many of these same people hype that unit despite the numerous reports of problems running it with a low resistance amp, and speak about its transparency. Sorry, I just don&#8217;t see how a re-amped signal will be transparent! For chrissakes! With the UA, the speaker is interacting with the SS amp, not your amp!</p>
<p>I guess that kind of defines the fine line between acceptable tone versus transparent tone&#8230; Okay&#8230; I gotta stop this rant&#8230; time for another cup of coffee. <img src='http://s0.wp.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 56lp</title>
		<link>http://guitargear.org/2009/07/14/gettin-in-the-vibe/#comment-3320</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[56lp]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 13:26:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://guitargear.org/?p=1586#comment-3320</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[FANTASTIC SONG and AWESOME TONE!  You out did yourself this time Goofydawg!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>FANTASTIC SONG and AWESOME TONE!  You out did yourself this time Goofydawg!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

