Meh. Nothing really new, just a new attenuator to enter the market. It’s a bit funny the claim he made about the Rock Crusher being the only switchable impedance attenuator on the market today. He obviously didn’t research the Aracom or Faustine attenuators. Another thing he mentioned about an impedance mismatch with an 8 ohm output hitting a 20 ohm load blowing a transformer I found amusing. Possibly the other way around could do it, or a blown tube, but that kind of mismatch wouldn’t do any harm to your amp. From what I understand, all an impedance mismatch like that would do is reduce the output power of your amp. Can you say Ultimate Attenuator, which a lot of people use? 🙂 It attenuates by using a 30 ohm resistor.
I do like some of the features on his attenuator like the balanced line out. That’s pretty cool. But overall, since I already have a couple of fantastic Aracom attenuators, I’m just not too excited.
But I have no doubt that Rivera will have success with this as they already have a dealer chain, plus the price is $499, which is half as much as the Faustine, and not much more than the Alex which is a single impedance device. Even if it only has two impedance settings, you’d have to get two Alex’s to get that capability. It is less than the Aracom, which is $649 for the Pro, but with the Aracom’s input and output impedance matching, plus its technology, I’ll stick to my Aracom.
Guitar Gear 
They’re all priced to high. A good attenuator should cost maybe 200 bucks. Come on, all it is is a volume reducer that keeps the high volume sound at lower decibel levels. The rest is just marketing hype and an attempt to con hobbyists into parting with more of their money.
Actually, that’s not true, guitarboy. I know for a fact how much some of the parts cost, and they’re not just volume reducers, though that is the end result; they’re power reducers that operate on a network of resistors, and in the case of some, have expensive transformers to deal with the impedance matching. So there’s a lot more to reducing the volume than just a simple volume circuit.
I’ve been using a Weber attenuator for over a year, and I love it. It cost right around $200 and has some great features, including a 0/+3/+6db treble compensation switch. Sounds absolutely fantastic.
The Weber is a great unit for low attenuation. In fact, almost all attenuators I’ve tested are great for low-level attenuation. What always sets apart the high-end attenuators from the rest are the tone and dynamics at real high levels of attenuation.
Sure–like anything, the returns diminish as the price goes up. Anymore though, with the boom in production of great-sounding low-wattage amps, high levels of attenuation should be needed less and less.
If your route is to go low-wattage. I have several low-wattage amps, all the way down to 2 Watt. But I’m also now looking at getting 50 and 100 Watt amps because of their natural beefiness, and the only way to tame those to a reasonable level in my little home studio (garage 🙂 ), is to attenuate them – a lot.
Not sure what you mean by the returns diminish as the price goes up. I suppose that would depend on the attenuator. With the quality of tone that I get with my Aracom at high levels of attenuation, for me the value goes up. At $649 for the Pro and $749 for the DAG unit, it’s not cheap, but for me, being able to get my cranked up tone at low volume levels is invaluable. Plus, as Chris mentions in his comment, being able to safely mix and match amps and cabs is priceless.
Diminishing returns generally applies to almost all purchased goods, and becomes apparent in the world of music gear.
For example, a guitarist can make great music with a MIM Fender and a Blues Jr for around $600 bucks if sourced on the used market.
The same guitarist can drop several grand on a
However, there are a myriad of more expensive options out there that definitely improve the sound of the music, but not nearly as much as the cost differential would imply.
Everyone has a point where the increased cost of an item doesn’t justify the benefit received from it.
All that to say that I definitely agree that more expensive attenuators are well worth it to the person who (1) has the cash to spend on it and/or (2) who feels that the improvement gained from the expenditure is worth the cost, but that there are definitely lower-cost options that are high-quality durability-wise (meaning it won’t just break on you like some cheap shit), and have a more modest cost/benefit ratio.
I recently picked up a larger-wattage amp myself, albeit for the abundance of clean headroom (I don’t really want power tube distortion happening for the applications I’m using it, so I don’t use an attenuator with it), and I definitely agree on the level of beefiness that comes with running a big-ass amp into a 2 or 4×12 cab. It definitely rocks!
Ah! Totally see what you mean!
As far as attenuators are concerned, if I didn’t have something that would take my volume down, I wouldn’t be able to record late into the night as that is pretty much the only time I can, so my reason for it falls into your second category. 🙂
But as I mentioned above, if all you’re interested in is just taking the edge off, much less expensive attenuators like the Weber or even the HotPlate will work just fine.
I’m with you in that if you don’t need more expensive gear to get your tone or performance, why spend the money?
Thanks for all the input!
I can understand what he’s taling about a little. Like you I have always been told lower ohms on amps is ok while a cab that is too low in ohms will cause extra current which creates more heat and burns out the transformer. That being said it’s not ohms in the normal sense of the word. It’s ohms impedence rather than ohms resistance which can change as you change the amount of current going to it. Which is also from what I understand, why a 412 cab wired at 4 ohms reads 4 ohms on a meter and one wired at 16 ohms can read 13.5 ohms. There’s not enough current in the 9 volt batter in a meter to get the proper reading.
That being said, I’ve had a power soak, power brake, weber mass with adjustable impedence and have tried a few others. That being said, I bought the Aracom and actually use it unlike the others I’ve had which I had on a shelf, just in case low volume was somehow more important than decent…
(sprry must have deleted this part) tone at some time in the future. Not to mention amps and cabs in every ohms rating that I can now try together..
No kidding, Chris! When I first tested the prototype years back, I was amazed at what Jeff had done.
As far as the ohm rating, which implies pure resistance, the more accurate term to use is impedance because it is variable over a range of power. So an 8 ohm rating is more like an average rather than a fixed value.
I’m not totally buying, Dawg. My nephew bought me an attenuator online for $50 that does a fairly decent job. It may not stir the hot tub or sing the baby to sleep, but it attenuates.
I like what jacobyjd wrote: “There are a myriad of more expensive options out there that definitely improve the sound of the music, but not nearly as much as the cost differential would imply.”
In my opinion, there are lots better ways to spend your money and get much more bang for your buck than an expensive attenuator.
Keep the provocative articles coming, Dawg! I disagree with you from time to time, but always enjoy hearing about new equipment.
Totally see what you mean, guitarboy. But that $50 device is, I imagine, the one that goes into your effects loop. This acts like a secondary PPIMV (post phase inverter master volume) and limits the power that goes to your power tubes. It is an attenuator of sorts, but a completely different animal than what we’re talking about here.
A true attenuator sits between the amp and the speaker, which allows all the power to go to your power tubes, and in turn allowing them to saturate, which in turn provides for a more complex distortion.
The challenge with attenuators though is maintaining tonal clarity at high attenuation levels, which not too many do well, except for the high end ones.
If you’re good with just pure pre-amp distortion then a high-end attenuator doesn’t make much sense, so a solution like yours will work just fine.
To guitarboy’s credit, it might also be an l-pad attenuator: http://www.amazon.com/Eminence-PX-LPAD-Crossover-L-Pad-Attenuator/dp/B000BBF1UW
These are a viable option for lower-wattage amps, but offer no treble compensation or variable impedance matching. It’s a reasonable low-cost option for something like a Blues Jr, where you’re not going to be swapping a head with different cabs (with different impedance ratings), and where you don’t need a high level of attenuation.
Those work great, and in fact one my band mates has one for his Blues Deville when he brings it to church. Can’t get the Master Volume low enough, so he uses that to help out.
OK Dawg, now you’ve got me thinking it may just be that I’ve never heard a great attenuator and don’t know what I’m missing. I’m still skeptical, but will reserve judgment until I try one for myself. Have you tried the Hot Plate? If so, what’s your opinion of that one?
Thanks for writing such an interesting blog!
Yes, I have tried the Hot Plate and it’s like putting a blanket over your tone and dynamics at its higher levels. As I’ve said, using something like that to take the edge off your volume is perfectly valid, but when you need it quiet, it just doesn’t work that well. Besides, it is one attenuator that I would never use for high levels of attenuation. There have noted cases of it frying tubes. 🙂
And thanks for the kudos!
Hey Dawg,
I really like your blog. I found it when researching Aracom attenuators and find your insights helpful.
One feature of the Aracom in particular might get missed is its ability to balance cabinets. I can take my Fuchs ODS 50 combo’s second output at 4 Ohms and run it into my 8 Ohm 2×12″ cab and both impedance match AND attenuate so that both speakers have similar SPL levels. It helps cure efficiency issues of differing speakers.
Like others, I use it all the time; mixing and matching different speakers to different amps and cabs, and really enjoy the flexibility it gives me. (like taking my 5 watt Swart into a 4×10 cab…fun). And I feel safe knowing that the impedance match won’t create any potential problems.
Jeff’s design is some heavy duty stuff; massive heat sinks, huge transformer, giant ceramic core resistors and rheostats that could easily handle house current. It looks like the tube stuff my dad used to build in the 60’s. To my eyes, it’s taking the speaker output from the amp and putting it through a second output transformer, sectioning off the unwanted power to the resistors to dissipate as heat and tapping off the rest to the output.
This is NOT some big resistor that merely attenuates the signal overall (and would therefore vary the impedance on the output). This is a variable second output transformer that COULD be integrated into any amplifier if the maker had the desire.
But most amp manufacturers are content with a master volume to attenuate and therefore, like you said, only get the preamp distortion of the amp. And since all amps usually use the same preamp tubes (12ax7) you don’t get the varience of tone that different power tubes give you.
The size of the unit should tell you everything. If it wasn’t big enough, it wouldn’t work correctly. Siphoning off 100 watts into about 1 watt needs a great deal of heat dissipation capacity. I’ve never run it “hot”, but it has become a bit “warm” and I would have no fear in running full power amp saturation and pulling it down to almost bedroom levels.
One thing to be clear on is that impedance is a measurement of AC “resistance”, which is different from DC resistance, even though the nomenclature (Ohms) is the same. To your amp, the speaker is a coil which reacts to alternating current created by the coil of your output transformer. That current MUST see the same load (inductance) as the coils in the output transformer of the amp so they can work in unison and be efficient. Otherwise you will draw too much or too little current out of the amp and possibly damage or destroy the aforementioned components.
I love it, my wife loves it and, most importantly, my cats love it!
Keep on rockin’.
Thom,
Nice! Thank you for your obviously well-informed insights! Yup, like you I couldn’t live without my PRX-150 Pro; but more importantly, neither could my wife and kids (though I still like to crank the volume up now and then). 🙂
–Brendan