Truly Nailing Schenker's 70's Tone

[Blake F]

Hi guys, my passion is nailing some of the amazing guitar tones I heard as a teenager in the 70's. There's nothing like just the right old Marshall with just the right internal components and tubes, just the right cab and guitar. If you've heard it, you know what I mean- it will floor you. Cherry-picked Marshalls if you will. Not all of them sounded phenomenal, but as I've been experimenting with for years, ALL of them *can* sound great with 'just the right' everything and sometimes 'just a little extra help' like Ed, the Young Brothers, Schenker. Anyone who's heard such a rig knows it can sound better live than even the best recording.

My current obsession is Schenker. I heard him in '78 close enough that I could hear his cab as well as the PA. Tone was ridiculous. Others have heard that tone in like bowling alleys etc. with the same comments.

This will be a bit of a deep dive but if it's interesting, please read on. If you have a passion for absolutely nailing tones maybe we can collaborate here. Not meant offensively, but I don't want people who've 'kinda sorta gotten the tone'- I'm trying to *nail* it. It's easy to kinda sorta get, but actually nailing it... not so much.

Note: this is for IMO his best tone in the late 70's, not his '2205 front ended by a bunch of pedals' tone.

------------------

I've experimented extensively to get where I am and I'm super close... except for the wah.

I have the base tone nailed 100%: a 4-input 50W (from 1969), just the right Mullard preamp tubes, Siemens EL34's into a (also 1969) G12M/25 cab, with a great-sounding V with 'just the right' hot t-top from about 1975. The crunch tone is insane.

Below is a super-rare pic of his gear from the Strangers in the Night era



I have the exact WEM Super IC 300 and it definitely imparts a musical tone that you can subtly hear on the recording, plus it has adjustable gain. Mostly imparts a pretty tone on leads without losing crunch.

I have several vintage wah's including a Fasel-equipped Jen Cry Baby.

The only problem I now have in absolutely nailing this tone is the wah tone. With every wah, the effect is too extreme. If one really listens to Schenker's 70's tone, the wah is very subtle- sometimes it sounds like it's not there (sometimes it's not, but most of the time it is there it's just really subtle). In the studio they can get these effects levels perfect, but I'm talking live- live, I think he found a way to get what he had gotten in the studio with a live rig.

I've tried every combination of front-ending one or both FX, going in an FX loop I installed in the Marshall (sacrilege) and the wah is always too extreme. Putting the wah after the echo does make it less extreme, but it's just still way too much.

I'm trying to figure out what he might have been doing live and if there's something I'm missing. Now, this may not be important since I'm 100% happy with the echo tone, but the WEM echo has had XLR circuitry added as well as an extra (2) phono jacks. It looks like that would be most likely because he was mic'ing the cab and going right from the mic to the echo, then to the mixer and out the PA. The other 2 added jacks might have been something if he needed an alternate setup that required phono jacks- don't know. But does anyone have experience with how this kind of setup might reduce the wah effect? I know that putting the wah 2nd behind the echo definitely makes it a little more subtle but nowhere near enough.

The top of the pic seems to indicate he's running phono jacks with long cords to/from the wah back to a jack either in the front input of the amp or through an FX loop (as a tidbit if anyone is interested, Schenker was indeed using non-factory FX loops in the back of his amps, at least I have seen one added in a 2204 he used for a while then sold).

Lastly, it may just be that he was using a wah that was modified to be more subtle. The only info I have about that was just some comment on a forum that 'some guy in LA modified his wah' which could be true or not. I have experimented with a BYOC wah that has internal trimpots on all the pertinent components and allows you to adjust Q and gain etc etc like some of the more recent wahs do. Still nothing gets it right. I have drawn up a circuit to go inside the wah (I studied to be an EE before switching my major to computer science) that will allow you to blend the raw signal with the wha signal and vary the mix with a pot. I have tried 2 different 'blend' pedals that should do the same thing but they lose some of that crunch tone, maybe because they're op-amp based, don't know. I'm about ready to implement the 'inside the wah' blend circuit, but just trying to see if I'm missing anything.

If we have any sound engineers or enthusiasts that find this topic interesting and/or have absolutely nailed this tone, I'd love any input or what to try or anything I may have missed.

Thanks in advance!

 

[Resident 217]

What about trying some long old guitar cords to cut the treble frequencies a bit?
Those old 20ft cords, curly or not were cheap and nasty and probably affected the sound a lot.

 

[Scumback Speakers]

I would go with the curly guitar cord as well. I saw the SITN tour in 78, freaking great show, especially Rock Bottom.

 

[Blake F]

I would go with the curly guitar cord as well. I saw the SITN tour in 78, freaking great show, especially Rock Bottom.

Certainly a factor that I'll try. I was close enough in that tour to hear his cab blending with the PA. '78 tour for me too. I'll never forget. Would have loved to see him in a bowling alley in '76 like a post I once saw, but I wouldn't have known what to look for on his setup then, I was only 15 and just starting to play. Thanks for the suggestion!

 

[Blake F]

What about trying some long old guitar cords to cut the treble frequencies a bit?
Those old 20ft cords, curly or not were cheap and nasty and probably affected the sound a lot.

Yeah I'll check that out. I have read tidbits about the positive tone those produced. Hendrix loved those.Thanks for the comment!

 

[79 2203]

Love Schenker era UFO, and yes, my 71 1987/68 Pulsonic t1221 halfstack gets pretty close. Not that I have a V, or Schenkers God tier skills, but you can hear its in there.
That said, for Strangers In The Night, I always thought it sounded a little more Blackback than Greenback. I only have the t1281 55hz/30 watt version but when I listen closely to the opening riff on SITN’s first track Natural Thing, I hear a little more aggression in the top end than I get from my Pulsonics.

Anyway, great taste in music.

 

[freefrog]

Lastly, it may just be that he was using a wah that was modified to be more subtle. The only info I have about that was just some comment on a forum that 'some guy in LA modified his wah' which could be true or not. I have experimented with a BYOC wah that has internal trimpots on all the pertinent components and allows you to adjust Q and gain etc etc like some of the more recent wahs do. Still nothing gets it right

Did you check the Joe Hart mod?

Anyway, a stock Vox or Dunlop wah tends to have a very high Q factor, giving a narrow resonant peak to extreme positions. it's nice when such a pedal is effectively used as wah but not IME when used as a fixed input filter.

To me, a useful trick is to lower the Q factor of the wah effect in order to make it close to the Q factor of the guitar pickups used. I've got good results by lowering the value of the resistor in parallel with the inductor to 7.5k (in series with a 47k pot allowing to rise to 54.5k for a more normal wah effect if needed but most of the time, I let this control on 0). I call this my "antivocal mod" and it works for me, reason why I share the idea in this topic.

I also prefer the "sweep cap" to be a 22nF instead of a 10nF. Years ago I've experimented with lower values (and have still a switchable 4.7nF sweep cap in a Cry Baby, along with 10nF and 22nF options): might be something to try too.

Oh, and I agree with the advices regarding a high cable capacitance... unlike a Les Paul, a Flying V has a low capacitance inner wiring due to the short cables between PUs and pots, so the resonant peak of its pickups is naturally high pitched. T-Top's have a relatively low inductance (typically in the 3.7H to 4.2H range) and a higher Q factor than most contemporary humbuckers. So they can sound shrill through a short cable. A higher capacitive load drags down their resonance in the high mids and makes them warmer / thicker sounding, of course. But a long and/or coily cable is not necessary for that: a cap from hot to ground in one male plug of a normal cable does the job (count something like 120pF per meter of cable to emulate).

FWIW. HTH. Good luck in your quest.

 

[Blake F]

Really great info. I bought a BYOC wah kit specifically because gain, Q, bass, mids are all adjustable via trimpots and I don't want to hack-up my vintage wahs. You're absolutely correct about varying those factors, but I just still can't get the overall wah effect down low enough despite being able to vary them. I have tried the sweep cap too. The info about the V circuitry is great info I didn't have.

The closest approximation so far is running the wah through an X-Blender (where you can mix an effect with the raw signal). My friend built one for me to try but it lost a good bit of tone and crunch so it was a no-go. I got a real Xotic X-Blender yesterday and it sounds much better.

When you stand in front of the rig it just floors you. With the WEM it adds a really pretty tone to the leads especially without losing much of the crunch. This is what I heard live in '78.

I'm becoming more and more certain that Schenker's wah was modified to blend the raw signal with the wah tone. In the wahs, the phase is flipped by the first transistor. It's pretty easy to add another transistor stage (which takes care of impedance matching in the wah circuitry) and output it to one end of a pot and the wah signal to the other and make a variable blend circuit. I think what I've experienced is that in general, simple transistor stages hold the raw signal truer than op-amps (generalized). Most stuff nowadays is op-amp based. Good engineers can improve the op-amp circuits but I think I'll lose less raw tone with an additional transistor stage and blend circuit in the wah. By my calculations, it should also produce a boost which would help with those long cable runs on stage and help drive the amp too- which Schenker would have loved. It will be a little while before I get that done but I will post my results for anyone interested.

 

[Blake F]

Love Schenker era UFO, and yes, my 71 1987/68 Pulsonic t1221 halfstack gets pretty close. Not that I have a V, or Schenkers God tier skills, but you can hear its in there.
That said, for Strangers In The Night, I always thought it sounded a little more Blackback than Greenback. I only have the t1281 55hz/30 watt version but when I listen closely to the opening riff on SITN’s first track Natural Thing, I hear a little more aggression in the top end than I get from my Pulsonics.

Anyway, great taste in music.

I have a cab of BlackBacks and it doesn't sound right to me. I have a '71 G12H/30's too and that doesn't sound right either (really great for Mr. Young's tone though). Only that G12M cab sounds right when I'm standing in front of it. But whatever is correct, you can see in lots of photos that Schenker's mic'd cab is usually different than the rest of them on stage. I know Schenker isn't a gearhead but it seems he specifically worked out how to get a great tone, probably with sound engineers helping him replicate what he'd gotten in the studio for an on-stage rig.

 

[freefrog]

I'm becoming more and more certain that Schenker's wah was modified to blend the raw signal with the wah tone. In the wahs, the phase is flipped by the first transistor. It's pretty easy to add another transistor stage (which takes care of impedance matching in the wah circuitry) and output it to one end of a pot and the wah signal to the other and make a variable blend circuit. I think what I've experienced is that in general, simple transistor stages hold the raw signal truer than op-amps (generalized). Most stuff nowadays is op-amp based. Good engineers can improve the op-amp circuits but I think I'll lose less raw tone with an additional transistor stage and blend circuit in the wah. By my calculations, it should also produce a boost which would help with those long cable runs on stage and help drive the amp too- which Schenker would have loved. It will be a little while before I get that done but I will post my results for anyone interested.

I won't pretend to know if MS's wah was blending direct and processed signals or not and I'll certainly read with interest the results of your experiments.

That said, the idea behind my testimonial was that if the wah signal has the very same Q factor than the guitar pickup itself, it seems to deliver an almost unprocessed tone, exactly as if a part of raw signal was blended with the wah tone...

If time permits, I'll try to come back here with some comparative tests between the electrically induced resonant peak of a (real vintage) T-Top and the same pickup through a wah with its Q factor lowered...

More later maybe, so. ;-)

 

[Blake F]

That said, the idea behind my testimonial was that if the wah signal has the very same Q factor than the guitar pickup itself, it seems to deliver an almost unprocessed tone, exactly as if a part of raw signal was blended with the wah tone...

Really appreciate it! I *did* experiment with exactly what you're doing but I don't know that I got it to match the Q of the guitar pickup. When I couldn't get the Q adjusting to do what I wanted, IIRC I had to add a resistor in series with the Q trimpot and I did eventually get it where it almost dropped off the wah tone but I can only remember that it didn't sound right or perhaps it was that the gain dropped way down- it was a while back, got frustrating so I abandoned the experiments for a while.

 

[AlvisX]

That's a lotta tone chasin homework
I love UFO era MS ....Surprisingly , Phenomenon / Force It tones are my absolute favorites
He's one of the reasons I gravitated toward 50w 4 holers (Duane Allman being another )

I could never really get into the MSG era stuff ....or the 2205 tone

You know , and Im deviating from the real topic, I thought at some point his playing changed, and it was as if he had to find a way to compete with the EVH "phenomenon" .....correct me if Im wrong

 

[freefrog]

Ain't got much free time to tinker with component values yesterday nor any opportunity to plug in a cranked Marshall but I've toyed with some modified CryBB and VOX wah's plugged in various toob amps and cabs.

Below is the electrically induced response of a 1968 Patent Sticker T-Top (the bridge pickup in my own Flying V) through a cable long enough to set its resonance around 2.5khz.
In the name of clarity, the scale used is hybrid (half way between log and lin).
Vertical increments go by steps of 3dB if memory serves me.
Red= pickup alone.
Black= pickup through a stock Wah. Don't remember which one but it has the typical high Q factor / narrow resonance crying "hey, I'm a wah".
Green= pickup through a wah with lowered Q factor. No,the response is still not as flat as with the pickup alone. But the peak is flattened enough to look similar to the resonance of the pickup itself and therefore, to deliver the same "Natural thing" to my ears. ;-)



I've done a bunch of other tests but the only that I find interesting to share right now is the one below, with a log scale this time. Upper line = the aforementioned T-Top through a Germanium Treble Booster (Rangemaster circuit)... under it, it's the same PU still through the Wah with a lowered Q... Should put the "Natural thing" in perspective.



Footnotes.
-Listened UFO live yesterday. Didn't find the Wah sound SO subtle but maybe the performances of my old ears begin to drift...
-I've also toyed with a sweep cap whose value is super low: 1nF. It makes the wah high pitched when full up (and therefore awful through SOME circuits / cabs). But it also makes the cocked wah more subtle than with a 10nF or 22nF sweep cap.
Among these two last conventional sweep cap values, I still think that 22nF is better for Schenker, whatever is the cable used - I've even plugged yesterday through a 60' straight one, with an enormous parasitic capacitance of 4nF making the sound super mid centric: cocked wah effect guaranted JUST with a cable!

Edit: electrically induced resonance below, VS the same T-Top in my Flying V through a 10' coily cord (measured capacitance: 1nF).




Now a 3,3nF cap from hot to ground of a normal cable would give the same sound than the longest cable (without the buzz of a 60' one).

FWIW: my 2 cents of ideas to chew...

 

[jeffp]

well i don’t know anything any of that stuff but Michael Shenker with UFO was awesome! His tone was awesome! I still listen to Strangers in the night and consider it a favorite!

 

[Dogs of Doom]

That's a lotta tone chasin homework
I love UFO era MS ....Surprisingly , Phenomenon / Force It tones are my absolute favorites
He's one of the reasons I gravitated toward 50w 4 holers (Duane Allman being another )

I could never really get into the MSG era stuff ....or the 2205 tone

You know , and Im deviating from the real topic, I thought at some point his playing changed, and it was as if he had to find a way to compete with the EVH "phenomenon" .....correct me if Im wrong

around that time, there was an explosion of tone bending...

along w/ Schenker, doing his cock'd wah, Richrath was also doing it, w/ similar tone-style. Tom Scholz was also doing cock'd wah, but, also started doing the master volume / power soak stuff...

Of course, VH doing the variac & everything else, he could, to get that "over the top" vibe of the sound that would become VH....

There definitely was a race to the top, in regards to outdoing someone's tone right then...

 

[guitarbilly74]

I use this pedal:

It's specifically made to create a parked wah tone and you can dial the Q and how much you want blended in.

 

[Musicmaniac]

Nothing to add other than Schenker is the best!

 

[ibmorjamn]

Hi guys, my passion is nailing some of the amazing guitar tones I heard as a teenager in the 70's. There's nothing like just the right old Marshall with just the right internal components and tubes, just the right cab and guitar. If you've heard it, you know what I mean- it will floor you. Cherry-picked Marshalls if you will. Not all of them sounded phenomenal, but as I've been experimenting with for years, ALL of them *can* sound great with 'just the right' everything and sometimes 'just a little extra help' like Ed, the Young Brothers, Schenker. Anyone who's heard such a rig knows it can sound better live than even the best recording.

My current obsession is Schenker. I heard him in '78 close enough that I could hear his cab as well as the PA. Tone was ridiculous. Others have heard that tone in like bowling alleys etc. with the same comments.

This will be a bit of a deep dive but if it's interesting, please read on. If you have a passion for absolutely nailing tones maybe we can collaborate here. Not meant offensively, but I don't want people who've 'kinda sorta gotten the tone'- I'm trying to *nail* it. It's easy to kinda sorta get, but actually nailing it... not so much.

Note: this is for IMO his best tone in the late 70's, not his '2205 front ended by a bunch of pedals' tone.

------------------

I've experimented extensively to get where I am and I'm super close... except for the wah.

I have the base tone nailed 100%: a 4-input 50W (from 1969), just the right Mullard preamp tubes, Siemens EL34's into a (also 1969) G12M/25 cab, with a great-sounding V with 'just the right' hot t-top from about 1975. The crunch tone is insane.

Below is a super-rare pic of his gear from the Strangers in the Night era

View attachment 145618

I have the exact WEM Super IC 300 and it definitely imparts a musical tone that you can subtly hear on the recording, plus it has adjustable gain. Mostly imparts a pretty tone on leads without losing crunch.

I have several vintage wah's including a Fasel-equipped Jen Cry Baby.

The only problem I now have in absolutely nailing this tone is the wah tone. With every wah, the effect is too extreme. If one really listens to Schenker's 70's tone, the wah is very subtle- sometimes it sounds like it's not there (sometimes it's not, but most of the time it is there it's just really subtle). In the studio they can get these effects levels perfect, but I'm talking live- live, I think he found a way to get what he had gotten in the studio with a live rig.

I've tried every combination of front-ending one or both FX, going in an FX loop I installed in the Marshall (sacrilege) and the wah is always too extreme. Putting the wah after the echo does make it less extreme, but it's just still way too much.

I'm trying to figure out what he might have been doing live and if there's something I'm missing. Now, this may not be important since I'm 100% happy with the echo tone, but the WEM echo has had XLR circuitry added as well as an extra (2) phono jacks. It looks like that would be most likely because he was mic'ing the cab and going right from the mic to the echo, then to the mixer and out the PA. The other 2 added jacks might have been something if he needed an alternate setup that required phono jacks- don't know. But does anyone have experience with how this kind of setup might reduce the wah effect? I know that putting the wah 2nd behind the echo definitely makes it a little more subtle but nowhere near enough.

The top of the pic seems to indicate he's running phono jacks with long cords to/from the wah back to a jack either in the front input of the amp or through an FX loop (as a tidbit if anyone is interested, Schenker was indeed using non-factory FX loops in the back of his amps, at least I have seen one added in a 2204 he used for a while then sold).

Lastly, it may just be that he was using a wah that was modified to be more subtle. The only info I have about that was just some comment on a forum that 'some guy in LA modified his wah' which could be true or not. I have experimented with a BYOC wah that has internal trimpots on all the pertinent components and allows you to adjust Q and gain etc etc like some of the more recent wahs do. Still nothing gets it right. I have drawn up a circuit to go inside the wah (I studied to be an EE before switching my major to computer science) that will allow you to blend the raw signal with the wha signal and vary the mix with a pot. I have tried 2 different 'blend' pedals that should do the same thing but they lose some of that crunch tone, maybe because they're op-amp based, don't know. I'm about ready to implement the 'inside the wah' blend circuit, but just trying to see if I'm missing anything.

If we have any sound engineers or enthusiasts that find this topic interesting and/or have absolutely nailed this tone, I'd love any input or what to try or anything I may have missed.

Thanks in advance!

Wow , definitely a deep dive . I can appreciate your effort I can't afford it. Lol
The amp is a huge step but being able to have a place big enough to crank it loud enough is my problem even if I had his exact amp.

I agree the tone is the UFO amp.
Michael always sound like Michael but that era tone is by far the best.
I had a 2205 for a short time.

I do think playing like him is a lot harder than buying some of the gear.
I have been trying for years to play one song correctly.
I never will it seems.
All of the beautiful equipment is very nice.

I know what he sounded like in 78 and I have heard recordings other than SITN
That I almost like better.

I think Leo Lyons really did great work capturing his tone on Phenomenon.
I actually prefer the studio recordings.

 

[ibmorjamn]

" Schenker's 70's tone, the wah is very subtle- sometimes it sounds like it's not there (sometimes it's not, but most of the time it is there it's just really subtle). In the studio they can get these effects levels perfect"
I like your opinion on this. Agreed
Sounds like yo know more than most fans.

 

[El Gringo]

What about trying some long old guitar cords to cut the treble frequencies a bit?
Those old 20ft cords, curly or not were cheap and nasty and probably affected the sound a lot.

I think you nailed it exactly as that cord was part of the recipe .