Mesa/Boogie FormulaPre
Вставка
- Опубліковано 16 вер 2024
- ♫ Become a Patron - / leontodd
♫ My music - ragdollrock.ba...
♫ Join my Discord - / discord
Invite Code - knnMWCsPrS
SIGNAL CHAIN
Guitar - FormulaPre - Mesa/Boogie Mark IV fx return - Marshall 160tV (25w greenbacks) - Sennheiser MD421 - UAD Apollo Twin - Pro-Tools
Plugins used - Fabfilter Pro Q-3, various Soundtoys plugins as indicated
★ My cabinet IR's (FREE)
dropbox.com/sh...
Follow me online
★ / leontoddmusic
★ / leon_ragdoll
Gear I use
► Fractal Audio Axe-Fx III & FM3
www.fractalaudi...
► Camera (Affiliate Link)
amzn.to/3bORm0Y
►Footswitch Toppers (Affiliate Link)
thehomemusicia...
Use code "Leon2021" to save 10% on your order
► Save 7% on DistroKid (Affiliate Link)
distrokid.com/v...
Gear shown on this channel may be either sent by the manufacturer, on loan for review or purchased at a discount - in these cases you will see the "contains paid promotion" icon. The content of the video is entirely my opinion and was not dictated by any third party.
Thanks again for watching and supporting my channel.
"It was spotted in John Petrucci's rack." That's true for basically any Boogie amp.
lol
"Yeah you're gonna need to be more specific there Leon" :p
Man, those cleans sound amazing. If it weren't for the fact that I'm not in love with the overdriven sound. It has a very similar loose sputtery quality that the V-Twin pedal has.
8:55 aaaaa sound like heaven!!! 😍🎸
After some heavy mods, I've finally come to love my Formula. Swapped out cheap caps and metal film resistors made the most difference in all channels. Implemented stages from Mk 4, 5, Recto and Studio schematics. It really came alive.
The cleans on it are so good so I can imagine sprucing up the lead channels to do mark style stuff would be lovely
Where did you get these mods ?
@@LeonTodd The clean channel got even better with upgraded capacitors. Ld 1 & 2 aren't voiced much different and felt Ld 1 had too much gain for crunch, so I modded the gain structure of each channel. I don't have a Mk to compare, but it opened up a lot and more useable, meaty gain.
@@PhilipJoyceMusician I started with the usual on the web. They only helped a little. I started analyzing schematics of Mark series, Lonestar, Rectifier, and Studio and Quad, and used the component values of various stages from different amps to get something I really like. A lot of trial and error. I'll never revert it back to factory, if it was when I got it.
@@stevebeck3164, Do you have the schematics for the mod? I´m looking for a long time! Thank´s anyway!
I suggest getting a Quad Preamp, if you can, pure bliss
got the mesa vtwin rack version of this era, just amazing pieces of vintage rack gear,, this is the preamp of the mesa F series by the way
I've had my Formula Pre for about 10 years now and the clean tone is sparkly clean which makes a great front end for my Keeley Tone Workstation and that's all I need.
Awesome sounds!
So glad I got one of these... over 20 years ago!
Memories!... I miss that preamp! Wicked and horribly underrated unit!
Digging the Son guitar!
I really love the clean and edge of breakup tones in mine... but not much else. Great video as always Leon!
Boogie did this thing where they added the GEQ to amps that didn't really need it (Formula, DC series come to mind). Since people associate the GEQ with "Mark series" high gain, the Formula is a disappointment bc it couldn't be further from the Studio Pre/MkIIC+/etc with regard to the lead channel.
I looked up the schematic, and the Formula clean channel more or less standard Fender, but the Lead channel is similar to a SLO/Recto without the cold clipping stage. The tone stack is post preamp, but the values are "odd" - quite similar to the DC series amps. Almost as if they "dumbed down" the effectiveness of the passive EQ to give a reason for the GEQ.
Anyway, that's just my take. Thanks for the video!
The Formula schem is puzzling. It's like they were trying to experiment / do something different, and the end product was a prototype that wasn't quite ready for prime time. The earliest models had to be corrected with some creative rewiring to completely change a part of the circuit from what the PCB was originally designed for. I read somewhere that it was similar to the Heartbreaker. IDK I never got along with it though.
I have the formula, and believe me, the GEQ is needed for ch3.
the removed a lot of low/low mids from that channel in order to make it work with the shared eq of ch2.
finally, yes the formula is based on the mesa boogie heartbreaker, which again is based on a three channel split of the mark I.
you can compare the two schematics online
@@FedericoMK My point was the Formula's lead circuit inherently doesn't need a GEQ to sound good. But Boogie added a bunch of LP filtering at the passive TS, thus making the GEQ a necessity.
@@dannyd.8860 they wanted to differenciate between ch2 and ch3, in order to remove the GEQ, they would have to remove the shared eq pots.
I only use if for ch3 btw the skinniest one, and I only use it to make it more twangy / glassy believe it or not :)
anyway I'm glad they put it :)
The clean of the formular is phenomenal. To get those tight crunch and creamy leads sounds we love, I put a SD 1 in the front. Try it :-)
It's Boogie, but does have it's own tone. I always immediately V out the graphic eq to ear than adjust the knobs to ear from there. It's a cool pre. I would have love one back in the day.
This is the video I've been waiting for a while.
One been using a formula pre in my life rig for over 10 years now.
When I first got it I didn't really take to it. As your noticed. It wasn't that thick smooth boogie mark series time I was expecting. I loved the clean but the lead channels were a bit flubby and didn't have as much gain as I would have thought.
I put it away for a while but thought I'd give it another shot but this time using the tried and tested trick of boosting the front end with a tubescreamer.
That was the gain changer.
I could run the lead channels with the gain at maybe just over half and then hit them hard with the boost and get that searing tone I was looking for.
Before you send it back try that.
They're probably more closely related to the recto family and the heartbreaker, dual caliber amps. So they do require a slightly different approach.
But delighted to see you finally checking one out.
Since they've remained pretty affordable, it's worth having just for that juicy clean channel.
A pedal-platform-preamp!
@@LeonTodd did you happen to try the recording out ?
The clean side is more Fender black/silver panel than typical Mark, and the lead side is a JCM-800-ish architecture, so neither Mark or quite Rectifier. Surprised that modders haven’t gone hog wild with them, since the bones are there to make the lead like a lot of Marshall mod flavors.
Sounds cool. Has a different flavour.
I have one of these in my studio rack :) :)
I love it for clean, bluesy, jazzy, fusion thingy!!!
this is based on the heartbreaker, and ultimately on the Mark I.
hence this preamp is screaming vintage...
It is not made for metal at all, unless you put some OD in front with "tone" maxed out.
but IMHO you should use other preams for that anyway.
Aha...this clears things up, thank you! Yes, I played a Mark I combo, the original white one, on stage during the 90s with a Boos OD1 in front and a Boss FX50/FC5 through a Mesa Boogie 50/50 with 2 112 cabinets in a W/D/W setup, if I don't remember it wrong. It can definitely Rock, but a lot of tap-dance was needed for that little rig...
It was a more Marshall voiced preamp.
Thinking about getting one of these pres and using it a pedal platform along with a Simul 295.
Mesa’s are so amazing! Any form just amazing products
I’ve had one for a couple of years now. Bought it because I couldn’t find any plugins that really matched the cleans of my old Mark III. The Formula gets maybe 85-90% of that sweet creamy clean for about $500 and fits into a single rack space. I don’t play metal, so I was able to find a few usable overdrive sounds, but the 2nd and 3rd channel are overall disappointing. One thing about this demo that kind of misses the Boogie boat is setting the eqs to 5 and only tweaking slightly. This may not be a Mark-style circuit but you’ve still got to treat the EQ knobs like elements of the gain stage. If you really want to drive it, your mid and treble need to be at 7 or 8, if not completely cranked.
It’s too bad ch 2 3 kind of suck. The switching on this rig is pretty advanced for its time and would otherwise be amazing in a live rig since you’d essentially have quick access to 8 switchable sounds from the foot pedal: Clean, Clean + EQ, Clean Boost, Clean Boost + EQ, Lead 1, Lead 1 + EQ, Lead 2, Lead 2 + EQ. Would probably be worth it to have the pre modded so that Ch 2/3 was was just a duplicate of the clean channel.
Hi Leon! Pretty cool pre!
Thanks for sharing Ren!
Appreciate the Strat Today!
Be Well All!
I understand this is designed as a recording preamp with a recording out.
Does the recording output came with a cab simulator of sorts?
I always thought these where supposed to be just a Mark I style rackmount preamp. Heard other hit them with od's and such get cool higher gain tones out of them.
yep. spot on.
I do own one and I can get heavier tones than what you got here in the video but I am finally thankful that somebody is showing this nice preamp..
With what OD you boost it?
@Omar A. Salman I don't use any OD to boost, if you are asking me.
I personally think if I need a pedal to make it sound heavier then I bough the wrong amp or rack gear. My personal opinion. Cheers..
@eloyone Good to know! I was about to pull the trigger on one. But I'm just into metal.. so I don't think it will get what I want .. I mean even my Quad rack I do not like it that much! But thanks man! 😊
Hi, I was gonna tell you that I use the Strategy 500 rack amp that it has 2 channels and I use one for boosting the solos,I play metal and is good enough for me.
loved the clean, disliked the lead channel, so i did the only thing i could. i sold it
I'm glad your honest. I know you going to let it go lol. For the money, the studio preamp would be a good option
I had the impression that the Formula pre was based on the preamps of the Dual calibre series, virtually the Soldano lead channel and a Mark rhythm channel on a caliber series power amp section with a V30 speaker...now I know I was wrong, the V-twin preamp is more like that. The distortion channel on the Formula is way too muddy, like the Nomad amp...clean channel is good though
It definitely has its own thing going and just doesn’t really have that Mesa sound we’re all used to. I had both the Throttle Box EQ and Flux Five EQ stompboxes. Both sounded much more Boogie, if that’s what you’re looking for. I thought I wanted one of these, but I think I’ll pass.
IDK. I know I'm going to be the minority on this one, but I like it!
I better get one of these before Johan Segeborn demos the Formula. If he does, this sleeper might be sought after.
Sounds pretty good. Not the atypical though. Got the chance of one cheap. Might just get it lol. Thoughts on the recto recording preamp mate ?
It sounds ok. That's about it. At least in this demo
Hey Leon! Have you heard of the Mesa Boogie coliseum 400 amplifier? It's a 400 watt rack mount power amp from the mid-80's.
Supposedly, that power amplifier, dual tracked is responsible for John Sykes sound on the self-titled whitesnake album.
I've been chasing two tones my entire adult life. That Zach Wylde chorus and that monstrous John Sykes tone.
@Not Rusty Shackleford I stand corrected my friend. Thank you. The Mark 3 coliseum's were 300 watts correct?
I know I've butchered my Mesa credibility with my original comment but I swore that they were super high-powered rack mount units.
MK III Coliseum is something I want to try before I kick the bucket!
@Not Rusty Shackleford I certainly appreciate the updated ( on my behalf) information! Thank you for taking the time out of your day to share your knowledge and calmly and patiently describe the amplifiers to me!
I had one of these for a while. I ultimately let it go. The cleans on my Mark V and my studio pre i felt were more to my taste. The crunch channel i liked, the lead 2 not as much. I think part of the reason is that this unit has a cathode follower tonestack for lead 1 and lead 2 after the gain. stages, which makes it very different from a mark series. All in all it was a good sounding versatile preamp, I just had the ground covered already. For a boogie, for the price they sell at, I think they're a good value.
the cathode follower is required if you have post tone eq stack ;)
the schematic is pretty similar to the heartbreaker minus some features, if you check them online.
Mesa tried to split the mark I from volume1 + volume2 combination into three distinct channels IMHO.
The same semplfication they did on Mark V, where they freezed the Volume1 pot at certain value, and relabeled the "lead drive" to "gain".
As a Mark zealot, I really do not like this approach at all on the mark V.
I really wish they would make a Mark VI with both gain and drive back in the circuit for each mode...
@@FedericoMK yes but in a mark series the tonestack is early in the gain staging after the first triode i believe, and it does not have a cathode follower. The tonestack is fed off the plate. then there are more gain stages afterwards. This is why everyone generally runs the bass almost on zero and makes up for it with the graphic eq. It makes for a very different sounding amp. I believe this is why this pre is not really comparable to a mark in sound. also if memory serves me correctly it has a solid state gain stage in lead 2, i think it was a jfet or something, but I havent looked at the schematic in a while...
@@ericharbauer seems my long previous reply has gone... sigh
Here we go again:
ch1 is basically mark I clean section + the pull gain for addional gain
ch2 and ch3 are instead a mark I inspired lead section, but built a-là marshall style, i.e. two preamp stages, followed by the mandatory cathode follower feeding the tone stack.
the JFET you are mentioning is a J175, which is just used for channel switching IMHO
Hence there is no right or wrong, the preamp design is just different, that's all.
again this was meant for clean, edge of breakup, bluesy/jazzy tones, rock/ hard rock at most.
not metal.
Meh. That clean channel is freaking sick though. It's just to honky and thin and mushy? Smooshy? Not tight.
It's like what a country guy would have for a high gain sounds. Boogie light.
I think JP used this for the Score DVD. I know he had the "Nunya" preamp for that show, and ran that preamp through a Recto power amp. The guitar tone at that show was awesome.
In case you didn't know about the Nunya, it was a dual lead channel Mark pre made by rig ambassador turned California wine maker, Mark Schneider. It was somewhere between a IIC+ and a IV with 2 high gain channels, and cleans came via the Formula. He also had a 2290, an Eventide harmonizer, DBX compressor and a couple multi effect processors...all routed in stereo through a DOD stereo rack EQ into a rack mount Rectifier power amp, which is the exciting part of the rig in my opinion.
I would love to make a stereo rig with a Mark and a Recto with a pair of Boogie cabs. Have both amps four cabled through an Axe FX so you get stereo Recto, stereo Mark, and stereo Fractal models. Maybe add a pair of FRFR wedges for the wet stereo insanity and put the Boogie gear dry in mono straight up the middle for the best W/D/W mess that has ever existed.
Could you capture both Mesa preamps in that scenario with an Axe FX without a couple ABY boxes or a patch bay? Every time I dream this thing up it hurts my head. Setting up presets on that would suck, but once it's all done, hold the fuck on...wow
did you reamp the intro song with the formula pre or did you redo the original intro recording with different post processing??? because I swear to god I used to hear afx3 crackles and shards in the intro guitar tone and now I hear the 90s spongy squishy mesa rackmount breakup. or maybe it's just an asston of multiband comp in post...
Fascinating. 🖖🏼
hi Leon, any chance of downloading the amazing power amp/cabinet IRs you did for the Mercuriall SS-11X plugin? Those sound amazing, would love to use them with other plugins as well. Thank you
Sounds a bit, I don't know... Vanilla? Anemic? Compared to its brethren. But I appreciate getting to hear it.
Synergy BE/BB vs Morgan AC modules, I want to see a video with your comments.
Hello. I also have this preamp. May I know where you plugged it in to get him to pull this sound out?
Not Boogie's finest. Has a really strange texture to it. It's not a MK and its not Recto. Somewhere in between but not for the better.
it's a Mark I... vintage
Not a big fan of these tones. Of course effects make everything better, but I don’t think I “missed out” by never owning one….
Fuck yeah mate! 😉👍🏻
Hey man, so i was thinking about getting myself a tube pre-amp. A friend of mine plays two old Marshall pre-amps, and he plugs it into the FX loop of a Marshall JCM2000 to use its Power section, just like Dave Murray of Iron Maiden does. Does that work with this one too?
Yes, that will work for any preamp. Gigged with a DSL as a power section for a while and it's awesome!
Never seen this 🤔👍
Off topic but
I thought yours would be the first axe 3 version 17 review, now I downloaded it and I don’t know which buttons to push,
C’mon bro be everywhere at once please
There was a Brazilian guy selling one in Perth. I was keen but reached out to him too late. hahaa
This is that exact preamp!
@@LeonTodd Then, I am more happy than if I bough my self. went straight to the right person. Thanks for the video mate.
I was never very impressed with the formula. I remember playing it in music stores and feeling underwhelmed. It looks like they were trying to modernize the studio pre, but I'm not sure they achieved that if it was the goal. After watching this I feel like I could make it through a gig with one of these, but no reason to buy one.
i'm pretty sure i had one for a bit and flipped it pretty quick. the shared 5 band was a real problem, because you could never get both channels sounding good at the same time and the quality of the drive channel was a bit lacking, if i remember rightly. i ended up with the triaxis and was a happy bunny.
If I'd had the time I would have done a side by side with the Triaxis and Studio pre - the "liquid lead" and cleans on the Tri plus the fact it's so programmable really make it a no brainer.
no they did not try to modernize anything, quite the contrary.
The formula is an underrated and misunderstood.
this pre is based on the Heartbreaker, and hence the Mark I.
This preamp is good for clean, edge of breakup, blues, fusion, hard rock.
NOT for metal at all and it is different from the other mesa preamps (studio, quad etc) which are based on the mark II/III
@@FedericoMK Oh, with the right power amps, it will do metal from a light patina on gold to all-out figured reticulated Uranium.
@@michaelcarey9359 you need to push it with a pedal in order to achieve metal tones. power amp is secondary.
eitherway, why do it?
studio, quad pre or triaxis are more suited for metal tones.
Well that's the reason why Petrucci was using it only for his clean sounds ;)
Hey Leon... How low is your action?
This one has too much of that wooly character for my taste.
These failed due to their lack of gain on the rythm channel, and they were discontinued very quickly. I remember trying one out desperately hoping for some serious-gain and leaving heavily disappointed. It wasn't a Mark series, nor a Rectifier. The bass is flubby, and the mids too strong for hard rock or metal ... right when Mesa was destroying the amp market with the Rectifiers, this was an odd addition ... but they had a few weird products then too, like the Heartbreaker combo or the VTwin pedal (and rack pre-amp) ... weird times at Mesa.
I have a Nomad 45, possibly considered Boogies worst amp. lol
Well, looks like my opinion of this preamp hasn't changed over the years...great clean, meh lead.
Marks and Rectos aside, there are a couple of unsung Boogies out there, namely the old .50 cal and its successor the dual calibur series (DC-5,&10).
Probably the my least favorite mesa preamp. I get why Petrucci used the clean and nothing else. The gain channels are soooo mushy and raspy in a bad way.
High gain sounds terrible with this
Eh... That sounds kind of, I don't know, okay-ish? Definitely not worth $800 like people are trying to get on Reverb.
As also a Boogie lover, the formula pre is one of the few pieces from Mesa that I've never owned or tried. After this vídeo, no regrets. For me the sounds are not that good, only after processing that they are nice. The lead tone is lame and plain. Lacking balls and with a wierd voice. All in all, the formula didnt get the right lane.
Nice video again Leon!
I have one on my rack and I can get heavier tones on this video, try it for yourself when you get the opportunity
@@eloyone will do then! 👍👍
Woof..that thing sounds terrible. Why are these selling for 500 bucks??? I have never heard a mesa with such a floppy, flubby drive channel. It's not even about the lack of gain....it just sounds bad.
Sounds meh. Triaxis for the win!
Doesn't impress. For somebody else perhaps.
...Meh...