Why the hate for Nashville 112s?

John Dowden · Post by **John Dowden** » 28 Aug 2015 9:39 pm

Am I the only person that caught Mike Brown's post? What is this RR he's speaking of that's going to "fill the bill" with much more power?

Lane Gray · Post by **Lane Gray** » 28 Aug 2015 10:03 pm

It was announced some time ago. It's essentially grandson of Nashville 1000, but with some added effects.

John Billings · Post by **John Billings** » 28 Aug 2015 10:36 pm

Well,,,, I praise Peavey for making steel amps that a lot of guys love. But I hate solid state amps! Can't stand the sound. I was cursed with a Vegas for years. Really happy when I dumped it and got back to a Twin. Flame away!

Nathan Guilford · Post by **Nathan Guilford** » 29 Aug 2015 4:39 am

I replaced the reverb tank with the 3-spring, and lucked into buying a weber neo 12". Sounds awesome. Has a really sweet midrange. This is the amp that I use for recording. But onstage, I can't get that sound because I've gotta turn up the pre gain so much to be heard. That's ok. I just know that for gigs, I've got my Carvin BX500 into an old cab with a telonics speaker. Plenty...plenty of power there, (but I have to use digital reverb)

George Kimery · Post by **George Kimery** » 29 Aug 2015 4:39 am

I thought the 112 was designed to be a practice amp. If that is the case, then Peavey is not at fault for it only having 85 watts

I have owned two of them. I put the Fox mod and the Mod reverb in one of them. Both helped the sound to my ears. I put a Telonics speaker in one but it didn't set right with me, so I went back to the Blue Marvel.

I was using my Black Box and Wet Reverb. This combination gave me a really good sound. The only issue with me was lack of volume and headroom when playing with a band. That was my problem for trying to get the amp to deliver something that it was not designed to do. When any new player ask me about which amp to get, I tell them that I recommend a 112.

gary pierce · Post by **gary pierce** » 29 Aug 2015 5:31 am

I've owned two 112's and tried my best to get a tone I liked, but could not. Maybe if they had a tube preamp, and little more power it would help.

Joseph Napolitano · Post by **Joseph Napolitano** » 29 Aug 2015 6:10 am

I like my 112, I just don't love it. I love my tube amps ( Fender silverfaces, Marshall, Ampeg, etc.). I use the 112 everyday for practicing , which is what I guess it was designed for, in order to save wear and tear on the tube amps . Tubes are more forgiving, and I'm not good enough yet to get a great sound out of a SS amp for pedal steel. I'll just keep practicing and hopefully I'll get there someday

Mike Archer · Post by **Mike Archer** » 29 Aug 2015 6:14 am

wow some of you guys must play in loud bands

ive never had lack of headroom with the 112

mine has the stock speaker which to me fits the amp

sound just fine it does have factory replaced

chips that had been done when I got it and whatever value chips they used give it a nice tone all around I tell you peavey repair service is
one of the best...

chris ivey · Post by **chris ivey** » 29 Aug 2015 8:09 am

George Kimery wrote: The only issue with me was lack of volume and headroom when playing with a band. That was my problem for trying to get the amp to deliver something that it was not designed to do.

ha ha...i guess that about sums it up!

if it honks, it's a horn!

Lee Baucum · Post by **Lee Baucum** » 29 Aug 2015 8:30 am

chris ivey wrote:if it honks, it's a horn!

Or a goose!

Tom Gorr · Post by **Tom Gorr** » 29 Aug 2015 8:34 am

Interesting is that I prefer a 15 inch speaker for practice and a 12 inch for band context. As a solo instrument. .. things sound better with a wide footprint and in a band more focussed tones seem to help the mix. ...so......fwiw.

Richard Tipple · Post by **Richard Tipple** » 29 Aug 2015 9:20 am

I purchased a new NV112 new years ago . It seemed I was constantly fiddling with the Mids trying to find a sweet spot. I was spending more time adjusting the Mids over time than playing LOL. I added the latest Mods & speakers to no avail.
The little amp sounded decent but there was always a ,honk, I couldn't get around.
Then the reverb pan took a dump on it. I replaced the pan but no difference.
I tried running to the board from the XLR out on the back but it was way to noisy.
I finally just came to grips that the little amp is a SS with a 12" speaker and could only be expected to do so much.
As far as weight the little amp is great and as for tone, well the honk is still there

Jerry Roller · Post by **Jerry Roller** » 29 Aug 2015 9:48 am

About 3 years ago at the OzSGA steel show in Branson, Mo. I heard this guy playing thru 2 Nashville 112's and so help me he sounded just like Paul Franklin.............oh! it was Paul Franklin!

Georg Sørtun · Post by **Georg Sørtun** » 29 Aug 2015 10:53 am

I found the first NV112 I bought (7 years ago) to have a subpar pre and eq stage: high x-over distortion, low S/N, and filtered out lows. All in all a pretty irritating sound-reproduction.

My second NV112 has the better pre/eq chips and sounds better, but still no lows because of the high-pass filter on the eq input.

The power stage (in both) performs quite acceptable though, no low filtering, enough power and dynamic range for all settings I have played in, and it has a high-Z input. So, since I have no need for eq'ing or built-in pre stages for any of my PSGs ... tone is in the hands

... I only use the power stages in my two NV112s and find them to perform quite well also in the low range. Could do with a better speaker, but the original isn't bad in that open back cabinet.

Gary Lee Gimble · Post by **Gary Lee Gimble** » 29 Aug 2015 11:14 am

Every show I've attended where a NV112 was being used, the player, all players, had a rack of effects, eq, etc, hooked up to said amp. I couldn't help but wonder why all the external units were needed to get a decent sound was beyond me. Maybe my electronic aptitude is sub par, oh well...

Tom Quinn · Post by **Tom Quinn** » 29 Aug 2015 12:06 pm

Here are my settings for my '71 Emmons D-10. Sounds terrific:

Low: 9
Mid: -3
Shift: 750
Hi: -3
Presence: 0
Reverb: 4-5
Master: 10

I found these settings eliminated that cardboard sound from the amp that I got from a lower master and turned-up pre-amp.

b0b · Post by **b0b** » 29 Aug 2015 12:26 pm

Seems to me that most players like the 112. It's almost the defacto standard steel amp these days. The people who don't like it either 1) play in loud bands or 2) can't dial in their preferred tone.

Parametric EQ (the "shift" knob") baffles us folks who grew up on tube amps. I'm always uncomfortable with it. I do like the way that the 112 compresses instead of distorting when you hit its max volume.

Quentin Hickey · Post by **Quentin Hickey** » 29 Aug 2015 3:29 pm

I played an outdoor gig today with my nashville 112 and got alot of love about my tone and it had plenty of headroom. I ran my power amp at full and pre at about 5 to 6 oclock. Its stock untouched with the blue marvel. If you are playing with a couple of overdiven guitars than yes I can see this smp lacking the clean headroom you would need. I am going to be working with a band like this (modern country) and will likely be leaving the 112 home and bring something more powerful. I dont hear of too many people hating 112s. Honestly its a great little amp end of discussion. Alot of people including top pro's use and love the nashville 112. If you gotan amp that has tone that bad than maybe someone got into it with a golden screwdriver. Love my 112

Lee Warren · Post by **Lee Warren** » 29 Aug 2015 8:05 pm

I dropped by the Nashville Palace tonight, and had the pleasure of hearing Pete Finney playing through what looked like a Nashville 112.
His tone was great, and there was no problem hearing him.

Andy Eder · Post by **Andy Eder** » 29 Aug 2015 8:35 pm

I have an N112 with Fox chips, Telonics 12", and 3 springs and I love it just fine. I've never played through one without the mods.

Can't you guys just play?

Bobby Boggs · Post by **Bobby Boggs** » 29 Aug 2015 9:34 pm

Tommy White with a bone stock 112. No effects. Outside gig, recorded on a cell phone. Best sound I've ever heard him get? No, but it ain't bad.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xkwrz9ph9I

Donny Hinson · Post by **Donny Hinson** » 30 Aug 2015 5:05 am

b0b wrote: Parametric EQ (the "shift" knob") baffles us folks who grew up on tube amps.

Not all of us, b0b. Some of us "old timers" came to realize that the shift control adds a lot to the voicing of a solid-state amp.

Loren Morehouse · Post by **Loren Morehouse** » 30 Aug 2015 6:04 pm

Hey Mike I agree with you. Everyone must be deaf. When I was playing out, I was using the low gain input and the master was around 5 and the pre around 3. I wore ear plugs all the time! Lots of power! Couldn't hear me, run me hotter in the PA. I still think a huge difference is made just by changing out the chips. I Did the speaker change but really don't think that's neccessary, I don't like spring reverb except in my Webb so I use my Boss RV-5 but I run it in the pre eq patch, to me sounds much better!! I used to run my volume pedal into that but I think it's better just to go direct to the input. Especially if you have a Dunlop pot in your volume pedal. I'm still a 112 fan! It's always done and performed well for me, but the chip mod does make a significant difference! My two cents, Loren.

Mike Archer · Post by **Mike Archer** » 30 Aug 2015 9:20 pm

well I guess its a case of different stokes

for different folks Loren you and I must hear

the amp alike.....my setting on the shift knob

is about 800 mids at 9.00 oclock lows at

about 2 oclock treble at 12.30 presence
master at 2.00 oclock gain at 9.00 oclock
12.00 noon reverb at 9.00 oclock and I use an rv-3 which with the low amp reverb is nice
when I use my session its about the same settings your milage may vari.............

George Redmon · Post by **George Redmon** » 31 Aug 2015 3:51 pm

I think I just expected too much out of this little amp. I to was always twisting one knob after another. The reverb was not at all to my liking, hollow is how I would describe it. I did the Fox Mod thing. Helped a whole lot. I didn't like the speaker either. But if I have to rebuild an amp to use it, why keep it. I don't like any stamped frame speaker for a clean sound. Guitar, that's another story. It sounded nasal to me. I thought for sure this little amp would be a Session 400 Jr. sadly it wasn't. Then after it sat for years, I couldn't give it away. Finally moved it for $300 and I paid the shipping. Low resale on it. I don't hate it, just not what I expected. Paul, & Tommy would sound excellent in whatever they play through. I don't buy a product because someone uses it. I'm very interested in trying Peavey's new steel amp offering.
Nathan Guilford, I think you just missed my Weber Neo here on the forum. It sold on the forum in 30 minutes. I sure wish I would have kept that little speaker. It may have also helped the little Nashville 112. JBL, Weber Neo, and Peavey 1501-4SB, are the steel guitar speaker standards. I sadly do not like an Eminence product. I have 2 Weber Neo 12's in use today in steel cabs. As well as 2 Weber 15" Neo's in my Milkman Half & Half stack. One word.... Smoooooth. You can't get these anymore.
http://bb.steelguitarforum.com/viewtopi ... ight=weber

The Steel Guitar Forum

Why the hate for Nashville 112s?

power

why all the hate for the Nashvile 112

wow

Re: why all the hate for the Nashvile 112

Re: why all the hate for the Nashvile 112

112