Diezel Herbert mk II vs D-Moll - Is the D-Moll really Herberts little brother? 

Absolutely. I really want a mk3 and VH$ too but I need to part ways with some other gear first

Thank you for taking the time to leave a comment. I appreciate it!

Das kriegen wir hin! Der Diezel klang ist schon speziell

The Herbert seems to compress a bit more. As far as I am aware of they use the same amount of gain stages for their corresponding channels. Don't quote me on that though. I could be wrong. The Herbert also tracks a bit faster while the D-Moll sounds a bit more open. It really is very clear sounding. The Herbert has excellent note separation too though.

Thank you for taking the time to leave a comment. I appreciate it. Both the D-Moll and Herbert work quite well at bedroom levels in my opinion which most people find hard to believe given the massive 180 watt power section of the Herbert but Peter Diezel is a clever fellow and designed his amps to work at low volumes too. I'm stoked you like the riffs. Unless I inadvertently stole something they should all be mine. You should be able to recognize a few on my soundcloud where I posted instrumentals that were planned for my band back in the day. Most are quite old by now and production isn't great but I might get back into it. soundcloud.com/tojb The band was/is called Destined for Nothing and sadly the name was kind of prophetic. We recorded a two track demo back in 2014 of which I used some riffs towards the end of the demo. soundcloud.com/destined-for-nothing Cheers

@@TheOtherJohnBrowne Thanks for the quick answer. I agree - it is hard to believe they work this well, I stumbled across that in the VH-2 video from the Diezel channel (iirc) and that somehow stuck with me. I came across some 5-20W amps that were really hard to control volumewise, especially when switching channels - so maybe Diezel amps work better than this (though for me the closest possibility to test those amps is ~6h away (per car, each direction) :-/ ) Thanks for the links - I'll check it out. Cheers!

@@TheOtherJohnBrowne I'm still coming back to this comparison often and the more I listen the more i lean towards the Herbert - the sound has a fullness to it that the D-Moll simply doesn't seem have. Do you find yourself choosing one over the other usually? (also the Herbert Mk3 in black is something else...)

@@zanthraxus Yes, what you are describing is what I hear and feel. The Herbert has a more firm sounding and slightly bigger feeling low end to me. Th e D-Moll just feels slightly softer to me but has a great, complex midrange. I tend to play the Herbert more often than the D-Moll for that firmer low end. It just feels a tad faster.

​@@TheOtherJohnBrowne Thanks! I truly appreciate your insight and feedback! After hearing the comparisons once more I think I can hear what you mean by "complex midrange" - guess the question is "which one first?", not "which one?" ;) Will be looking out for future content! Cheers!

Play one in person. There not muddy at all unless you slam the front end like people keep doing. Sounds better running a clean boost like a mxr micro amp through the loop.

Ya diezels can be as tight as needed . Especially with a boost just as done with a recto

Thank you so much! This was my first attempt at voice overs. A bit shaky but I think I have been getting better

Why do you believe the preamps are identical? Did you trace them?

@@TheOtherJohnBrowne I know Peter Diezel personally and asked him, because I'm interested in amp design he also provided me the schematics of the Herbert MK3 the D-Moll and the Herbert Pedal. He is very kind and helpes always.

Alright. That's surprising to me seen as how it says in the service manual that Diezel only give out schematics without component values to techs. I have never even seen a Diezel schematic despite trying to find one. Diezel have claimed that the Herbert mk3 has a different circuit for the high gain channels compared to the mk2 and 1. Which one is the D-Moll identical to? Because I did my best in dialing the amps in the same way but could not get them to sound the same way. The transient response is also quite different in a way that I cannot attribute to different power amp designs. The Herbertt mk1 and mk2 seem pretty much the same to me but the D-Moll strikes me as different. It also has a preamp tube less if I recall correctly.

Not doubting your words by the way. It's just very surprising to me

@@TheOtherJohnBrowne i woudl show you but i cant leave any contact data here...

Man, that is a great question and I think you'll be the one who exposes me as a guy who has no idea what he's talking about but I'll give it a try. Now, I have to say that I have NO first hand experience with Mesas for some reason. The closest thing I have is a Treadplate module for the Randall/Synergy/Egnater modular preamp system but a thing I associate with Mesa Boogies, Rectifiers in particular, is a big low end, extended high end and a somewhat scooped midrange. The Herbert shares the two former qualities. It packs massive low end punch and has great grind. the midrange however is almost opposite to me. It's got a huge and complex midrange to offer which is very shapeable. In that sense it's not unlike a Marshall which to me is all mids. However, Diezels seem to have less of that pronounced high mid spike that to me is a signature trait of Marshall amps that makes them sit really well in a mix. It's not just stubborness that makes the JCM 800 a popular choice for heavy music to this day. It's a bit harder for me to put the Herbert in relation to EVH and Peavey. Peavey amps also have a signature midrange sound to me. They have a quality that some call honky and that tight low mid chunk. The EVH obviously shares a lot of qualities with the Peavey 5150/6505 as they are directly related but the EVH 5150 seems very balanced, almost neutral to me. It always sounds great but has no obvious distinctive characteristic to me, aside from shit tonnes of gain on tap of course. I'd say the Herbert and the 5150s offer similar levels of gain. The 5150s are tighter to me without a boost pedal in front but don't hang with the Herbert in terms of clarity and string separation on strongly distored big chords. One could also argue that the 5150 type amps are one trick ponies or perhaps a bit more than that. They live in the heavy crunch to high gain territory (to me at least) and while the EVH has a much more easily useable clean channel than its Peavey cousins, it's not outstanding. It's useable. The Herbert however works fanstastically from crystal cleans all the way up to balls out insane levels of distortion. So to sum it up, the Herberts signature quality is that it has a lot of everything with an exceptionally rich and complex mid range while being exceptionally versatile both in regards to EQ and range of useable gain. I hope this dissertation I ventured off into answers your question at least a bit :-D

​@@TheOtherJohnBrowne If that was a great question, you gave an even greater reply, thanks man for that indepth description! It pretty much sums up my thoughts as well! One question though since you said Herbert isn't as scooped as the Dual Rec but has the same big low end and the extended highs. Does the mid scoop knobs on the Herbert bring it closer to the Dual Rec or is it a different kind of mids that are scooped? I guess the Dual Rec is quite fizzy as well, no? Which I haven't gotten the impressions that the Herbert is. My reason for asking is because Mesas are just awfully expensive in Europe. To the point of me not being sure if they are worth it. I mean, a new Dual Rec is the same price as a new Diezel Herbert, about 300€ more expensive than a new ENGL Savage 120 MK2 and a whopping 1000€~ more expensive than a new JCM800. So I was hoping to find a European versions of the Dual Rec as well as the Mark series to avoid having to buy expensive Mesas :'D Obviously I realize a Mesa is a Mesa and nothing will be exactly the same, but at least in the same ballpark which was why I figured, after listening to many sound samples, that the Herbert could be a contender for the Dual Rec ^^ Always nice to discuss gear with a fellow brother, so cheers for the reply once again! :)

@@TheOtherJohnBrowne I agree with everything written here, had an Herbert MK2 a long time and miss it every now and then. Awesome signature sound, incredibly unique! My observations I'd like to add: 1.) Boosts don't work the same way as on most other amps. Don't know why exactly, but my Herb didnt liked any boost, they just added some dirt. 2.) Surgical tight and more clear bass than any amp available. Gain could be a bit "faster" for extreme metal. Perhaps it is the lowend. 3.) Cabs matter! A lot! Mesa OS would be my last choice tbh. 4.) Yes, no high mid spike, which could be a problem for some folks playing fast with a light touch. Dmoll has them, but misses the other Herb signature qualities imo. You have to work a bit with the right hand. 5.) Most people don't notice, the highend is very much "open" to the highest top, not earpiercing at all, but all the frequencies are there. At the end I'm happier with some other amps (incl. a Diezel ;-), but Herberts barking authority in a room - unmatched.

That's a tough one for me to answer because again, I don't have any real Mesa amps and I'm in Europe as well so that might be part of the reason. lol. Because despite being undeniably great amps. I can't bring myself to sink the same amount of money for a Mesa as for a Diezel or some of the other amps you mentioned. From my second hand experience, I don't believe the midcut Herbert sounds quite like a Rectifier. It still has the Diezel mid sound and a bolder low end in my opinion. The highs are not fizzy but they are "open to the highest top" as C S put it so well in his comment. The Herbert was designed for the demigraphic of players that were predominatly using Rectifiers at the time of its inception in the early 2000s which was when Nu Metal was in its most popular phase so the Herbert and Rectos share a lot of qualities but still have their own distinctive voices. If you are looking for a more affordable Rectifier sound in Europe, I would suggest you look into a Laboga Mr. Hector which I believe is closely based off of a Rectifier or get a Synergy or one of the old Randall units (like the RM100) and either get an old Randall Treadplate module or a Salvation Mods Dread Plate module. Randall RM100s can be found for al low as 400€ sometimes and a new Dread Plate will run you around 500€-ish I believe.

@@TheOtherJohnBrowne I played a boosted Triple Rec for years in a band. I can see why people point out similarities (bass heavy), but they are very different. Rectos, esp. the 3Ch have a slightly cold tone, boomy bass and pretty scooped low mids (esp together with the Mesa OS) and a rattling top end. Not fizz, more kind of a chainsaw. The Herbert is also brutal, but cultivated, dominating with an awesome deep bark. It combines some opposite attributes in a good way (very tight/dry, but doesn't feel dry). Tone is much more in the hands of the player and you'll hear everything. With a Recto... you won't. 😅 Herbs gain sounds incredibly thick and layered, but in comparison it feels kind of .. "clean". A Recto is a fuzz bomb in comparison (krrrrr, kssshhhh), which isn't necessarily a bad thing, many people love it on thousands of records. A Herbert sounds more like it would suck in the microphone through the speaker like a massive black hole. If it comes to features and cutting through live, I've never played a better channel switcher than the Herbert. Just awesome.

It's a Two Notes Torpedo Live with a GGD Cali IR loaded

@@TheOtherJohnBrowne if you don’t mind my asking what combo of cabs/mics? I just got a dmoll and I’m having a time dialing it in!

Sure! No problem! I'll check this evening and I'll get back to you!

It's an IR of an early 2000s Mesa 4x12 with Vintage 30s with a blend of SM57 and M160

I agree. At the same time, they sound very closely related. I have not tried a Hagen yet. It seem to be a bit of an underdog in the Diezel family. Between the legendary VH4, the infamous Herbert and the "entry level" D-Moll, the Hagen doesn't get talked about a lot. I bet it kills though

@@TheOtherJohnBrowne Also the Big Max is severely underrated.

@@FEAROWNAGE Sadly haven't had the chance to play a Big Max yet

Big Max is great! Takes boosts well. More marshally high mids. Love it! But not my first choice for metal.

@@TheOtherJohnBrowne D-Moll entry level? That is laughable. It is a full sized, fully featured, professional 2.5 channel amp that costs over 3 grand. The only Diezel that could remotely be considered "entry level" is the one channel Big Max.

Mein Bruder in Christus, bist du schwerhörig?

I've been thinking about this for ages now. You're being sarcastic, right?

@@TheOtherJohnBrowne of course BÔRTHER

@@RazorbackMat 😂👍