Ultimate Rhoads

I have read a lot of commentary about Randy's tone and abou thow it has so much to do with his hands and his choice of notes and the way he arranges, etc....

Since the subject will eventually come up here, I wanted to say that his tone comes from his equipment while his sound comes from the combination of his arranging his fingering techniques and on and on.

It is semantics, but true none-the-less, and the semantics part bugs me because anyone can get Randy's tone with the right equipment, but they won't sound exactly like him because they are not him. Remember, Randy tried to help his students get their own sound, so if you are a true Randy disciple you should seek your own sound as well.

Anyway, there is an excellent article here if you want to learn about Randy's equipment. The one thing I've never seen is a discussion of the exact signal path he used. Like did the Cry Baby come before or after the Distortion +? And did he plug into the effects loop of the amp or the main guitar input?

Also, the difference between Diary and Blizzard is that Randy plugged directly into the amp for Blizzard and went through the studio's mixing board for Diary.

I agree there. I think it's about 50% in the hands and 50% in the equipment. Have seen some signal pads at the web and it always said that his wah became before his distortion+. Randy used old non-mastervolume superlead Marshalls. They didn't have an effectloop.
I also read somewhere that Randy's Marshalls where slaved like Eddy did. If true then it's very important to know. For instance when you have three Marshall heads you connect the speaker out of one head to a load resistance (instead of a speakercabinet). Then you take the lineout from the load to the other Marshall heads which serves as poweramps. The advantage is that you can run the first Marshall as hot as you want to get all the powertube distortion and then control the end-volume (and EQ the tone) with the other Marshalls. During the first VH tours Eddie used this trick as well. Three Marshall heads, one was running hot to get the powertube distortion and the other two heads were used as
poweramps. Later on Eddie used H&H V800 mosfet power amps in combination with a hot running Marshall. To me Randy's sound sounds typically like a slaved Marshall setup with all the compression and distortion he get. Connecting the speaker out of a Marshall to a load puts the output transformer under more tension which results into a little bit more distortion and compression than usually.

Although randy was a great player i personally never liked his studio sound.
I also agree with the previous poster that everyone should have their own sound ,go for what sounds good to your ears not what your fav guitarist is using.
I read a article back in the 80s were Randy mentioned he used a fender super twin in the studio ,so Im not sure about this marshall stuff unless he used them later or maybe he used differnt amps live.
The live recording Ive heard of Randy had a much better sound to me ,so maybe that was the case of different live and studio set ups.

Well...If you really want exactly what Randy had...His guitar tech told GW exactly how he set up his rig and all the tricks they used to gate the noise from his chip pan and all that

SixPounder wrote:Well...If you really want exactly what Randy had...His guitar tech told GW exactly how he set up his rig and all the tricks they used to gate the noise from his chip pan and all that

You mean Pete Mertons ? Did they ever publice that?

Flying Dutchman wrote:

SixPounder wrote:Well...If you really want exactly what Randy had...His guitar tech told GW exactly how he set up his rig and all the tricks they used to gate the noise from his chip pan and all that

You mean Pete Mertons ? Did they ever publice that?

I'm not sure..It was either his guitar tech or the guy that recorded it..I knwo that they did something to change the voltage and that gave it creamier distortion

^exactly,I think it was a circut breaker....or something that reduced the watt from 100watts to 92watts


his gear setup is as followed from guitar.

guitar,volume pedal,MXR Dist.,10 ban eq,chorus,flanger,analog delay,100(or 92watt)Marshal Super lead amps with altec speakers

randyrhoadsfan1 wrote:^exactly,I think it was a circut breaker....or something that reduced the watt from 100watts to 92watts


his gear setup is as followed from guitar.

guitar,volume pedal,MXR Dist.,10 ban eq,chorus,flanger,analog delay,100(or 92watt)Marshal Super lead amps with altec speakers

Yes thats what it was..Circuit breaker...Anyway..Its basically impossible to get an exact tone like Randy's unless you use all the stuff he did at the exact settings and do all the little tricks he did like using a circuit breaker to decrese the voltage

randyrhoadsfan1 wrote:^exactly,I think it was a circut breaker....or something that reduced the watt from 100watts to 92watts

An Variac, I think he got that idea from EVH he used that as well for the first VH album.

I remember that interview in GW, it was Max Norman who recorded blizzard and Diary and talked about that. He also mentioned the Variac. Never tried a variac but it would make the distortion a bit creamier. Check out http://vintageamps.com/plexiboard/index.php , lots of great info there. Also about Marshall slave setup.

SixPounder wrote:Well...If you really want exactly what Randy had...His guitar tech told GW exactly how he set up his rig and all the tricks they used to gate the noise from his chip pan and all that

That was Max Norman, and he never was "exact", he simple gave a general description. He was more specific on how the miking of the amps was done.

As for Pete, I have NEVER seen any interviews with him and at the time of Randy's death, discussions of guitar signal path just didn't happen. Some intervies mentioned effects, but not a signal path.

And the diagram in GW (the little cartoon one) shows a pedal board and is not specific or accurate.

I mostly use multi effects pedals and so I try to get as close to his sound as I can on them because then it's on their memory and not mine (my memory is awful). I've been trying for over a year now and unintentionally straying further and further away from his tone, when listening to my older attempts they began to sound better than the "improvements". However I accidently went to the wrong patch the other day and it's amazing how much it sounds like Randy to me. It still needs some work but it's the closest I think i've ever been.

Basically what I'm saying I guess is that, the tone you want, isn't always what you think you want. You may be able to get closer to his tone by maybe not using an MXR and marshall, just because that's how Randy got his tone it may not help any one else get his. Remember Max Norman must have changed it a lot as well through the recording process and stuff so using other equipment may be better.

As for all of the old attempts of Randy tones, bits and bobs of them have made me my own good patch
Sorry if i'm talking crap, I'm quite tired.

I was reading a manual on guitar repair and setup the other day and there was a comment regarding pickup hieght. I've never read about anyone considering this aspect of Randy's guitars when trying to get his tone. The distance of the pickup from the strings can significantly alter the tone...

Just wanted to mention it.

Ell wrote: Basically what I'm saying I guess is that, the tone you want, isn't always what you think you want. You may be able to get closer to his tone by maybe not using an MXR and marshall, just because that's how Randy got his tone it may not help any one else get his. Remember Max Norman must have changed it a lot as well through the recording process and stuff so using other equipment may be better.

Very true. And lets not forget that the tones we heard from him are speaker miked and comming out of the PA. You only hear the sweet spot of the guitarspeakers, the position of the mikes is like having an EQ. So his real sound comming out of his speaker cabinets could be still a bit different.

RockyRhoads wrote:I was reading a manual on guitar repair and setup the other day and there was a comment regarding pickup hieght. I've never read about anyone considering this aspect of Randy's guitars when trying to get his tone. The distance of the pickup from the strings can significantly alter the tone...

Just wanted to mention it.

Pickup height is very often overlooked by starting players but very important. You get more gain (output) when you raise the pickup more towards the strings.

I just love his use of feedback, some of the spookiest stuff I ever heard.

The Flying Dutchman wrote:

RockyRhoads wrote:I was reading a manual on guitar repair and setup the other day and there was a comment regarding pickup hieght. I've never read about anyone considering this aspect of Randy's guitars when trying to get his tone. The distance of the pickup from the strings can significantly alter the tone...

Just wanted to mention it.

Pickup height is very often overlooked by starting players but very important. You get more gain (output) when you raise the pickup more towards the strings.

I wouldn't say more gain, but a higher treble response and more prone to clipping.