New Fat Jimmy reproduction Greenbacks

la szum said:
That was in production before Creambacks existed and is based on the G12-65 Heritage used by cats like Robben Ford.

I think. :LOL:
Click to expand...
How do you know all this stuff? Got this old pedal from 1988, only made 1 year. Yeah, I owned it. Kinda mid-forward sounding.

Yeah that album was also produced by Mike Stone, and Hugh Syme did the cover art. The cabs were V30's and Greenbacks in an x-pattern, miked with...
 
Last edited:
No life. No wife. Filling the emptiness inside with useless and irrelevant gear minutiae.



rebecca howe flirting GIF by HULU





:idk
 
jellodog said:
You may know that I love my American-voiced Fat Jimmy C1025 in my PRRI. I also own his C1270.

I just noticed that Mike at Fat Jimmy has got a new repro Greenback offering:





Based on his other offerings, I'm betting these sound great!


View attachment 7727


Mike's other speakers are made by WGS to his own specifications. I'm assuming that he'd be taking a similar approach with these.
Click to expand...
I love the c1025 in my 70s SFPR. Somehow it allows the amp to get the classic Fender clean, but handles dirt way better than the Utah speaker that was in there originally.

I’ve been considering the c1270 for my SFDR, would love to hear your take on that one.

The greenback clone looks awesome too, but probably won’t work for my situation. Excited to see how it sounds though.
 
James Freeman said:
Why is everyone have to clone vintage Celestions?
I know exactly why, but FFS create something new that sounds great, don't parasite on well established names.
Click to expand...
Same reason that there are tons of Fender, Gibson and Marshall clones.

They've stood the test of time, and there is $$$ to be made. But like you said. You know why.

As a group, guitar player want a taste of that legacy.
 
Aye, and for the same reasons I'm happy with my vintage-style Jensen-like Fat Jimmy speaker... but don't care for the raspy modern Jensen 10" that it replaced.
 
Last edited:
KHAAAAAAANNNNNNN!!!!!!!! said:
Same reason that there are tons of Fender, Gibson and Marshall clones.

They've stood the test of time, and there is $$$ to be made. But like you said. You know why.

As a group, guitar player want a taste of that legacy.
Click to expand...
I agree. Speaker manufacturers are capable of walking and chewing gum. Some customers are reproducing traditional sounds. Others are looking for innovative new sounds. Many of us are interested in both.
 
EOengineer said:
I’ve been considering the c1270 for my SFDR, would love to hear your take on that one.
Click to expand...

You know what? I'm still not 100% sure of what to make of the C1270 at the moment.

I had it in a MojoTone Lite 1x12 pine extension cab, but tried it with my PRRI and single coils. I was considering going to a 12 inch baffle, but I found myself preferring the FJ C1025 in the Princeton itself. I'm still trying to decide why that is.

I've not played the C1270 for a few weeks but here are a few thoughts from memory:

It's _very_ touch sensitive, revealing and nuanced. Full, bold punchy lows - sounds big. Sparkle in the top end. It has depth and dimension. More muscular than the FJ 10". So those are all positives.

And yet... I found the top end and upper mids a little harder to control with the Princeton, than I do with the 10 inch and I'm not sure why. The mids are in a slightly different place for sure. BF circuits are tough to manage in the high end anyway.

I have a couple of theories. First one is simply that I'm an idiot and didn't dial in the Princeton correctly :rofl

Second - I'm not sure if the speaker needs more break in - that might smooth out the top end a little. I did try to break it in a little, but it was probably not enough.

Final theory is that perhaps this 12 inch speaker needs a bit more volume on it to reach its intended design parameters and behaviour and I'm simply not playing it loud enough. Some compression from volume might have done the trick to perfectly moderate the top end. I bought the C1270 thinking it would be the one I preferred over the C1025, so I was suprised by this.

Oh... I had glassier strat pickups too. I've recently changed them. I haven't played the C1270 since the swap.

I might try the C1270 again over the weekend, but I'll need to put it back in the extension cab. I need to spend more time with it.
 
Last edited:
I’ll have to consider these if and when I do a speaker swap on my Marshall 412 that is stock. My other Marshall 412 is loaded with WGS Retro 30’s and Reaper HP’s in an X pattern. That cabinet is a beast but now it weighs a friggin ton!!! I’ve always loved greenbacks and I may go this route as I’m a big fan of WGS…
IMG_0639.jpeg
 
As far as micing up and recording goes, I have no idea why I just don't really like any other speaker besides Celestions. Its quite telling that they're often the benchmark that others are compared to - I'm not sure I've ever heard something that's supposedly based on a Celestion that actually sounds as good.

Honourable mentions to EVM12L's and D120F's. I think I'd still rather switch to playing banjo than not play through Celestion speakers
 
James Freeman said:
Really? I thought Scumbacks are the end all be all greenbacks.
At least that's what I've read on the internet.
Click to expand...

Scumback man told me himself that they're great! And if anyone would know, it's him :LOL:


In all seriousness...

The old Pulsonic Cones are just very nice sounding. Smoother than modern Kurt Meuller ones. Not, like, dark smoother. Less fizzy up top. Like the difference between a ride bell and a sloshed hi hat. They're both bright, but one of them is a purer tone, so they sound smoother.

My suspicion is that Celestion themselves don't really care about sounding like the old ones (though they did say last year they've got a project to recreate the pulsonic cone, I'll believe it when I hear it), they get modern cones and make solid speakers. I like them a lot.

The other companies that make "better" Celestion equivalents or ones based on old speakers get them to sound vintage in certain ways - less doping, different doping pattern, darker speaker, less sensitivity, whatever - but it's all chasing something that the Pulsonics just had baked into them by chance, because they made that paper cone a particular way, maybe out of wood pulp of a kind that doesn't exist any more now the old growth trees are gone.
 
JiveTurkey said:
I have historically had a thing for greenbacks without ever playing any musical style that is directly attributed to using them primarily.


how bad would having an extra 2x12 really be?
Click to expand...
I'm planning a 2x4-furniture build of a new "work" desk and storage for the office/studio. No amp-head rack or anything....but there is a "rack" for speakers. It's not a bad rabbit hole if you just keep a cab or two, right? Right?!?!?!
 
jellodog said:
You may know that I love my American-voiced Fat Jimmy C1025 in my PRRI. I also own his C1270.

I just noticed that Mike at Fat Jimmy has got a new repro Greenback offering:





Based on his other offerings, I'm betting these sound great!


View attachment 7727


Mike's other speakers are made by WGS to his own specifications. I'm assuming that he'd be taking a similar approach with these.
Click to expand...
I bought a Fat Jimmy CR1025 about a year and a half ago and still haven't built a little 1x10 cab for it yet... :(
 
Boudoir Guitar said:
I'm planning a 2x4-furniture build of a new "work" desk and storage for the office/studio. No amp-head rack or anything....but there is a "rack" for speakers. It's not a bad rabbit hole if you just keep a cab or two, right? Right?!?!?!
Click to expand...

It's half the sound of the amp. This is essential stuff if you desire access to all the toanz. Safest thing to do would be go bigger than you'd originally planned for this storage rack ;)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top