Roland Cube 80XL alternatives?

[ooglybong]

Originally Posted by Meggy

The Mustang 2 may be better than the 3 in terms of not having the faults also.

To OOGLYBONG: No argument that the Mustang is more versatile in range of tones - really I would have bought one if it had worked properly. I'm sure the problems some people have noticed will be sorted in time, and it sounds like yours is a good one, so glad you are OK. As to the Yamaha G100 112 (and the G50 112 is also great and still pretty loud too), I almost think I should not have mentioned it, as I don't want everyone to know! I keep tabs on ebay though, if I ever see one at a half-decent price it will be mine. Fabulous amps for jazz I agree, circuit originally designed by Paul Rivera I think. But shush!

The Mustang III has a *tremendous* upgrade via the Celestion speaker. IMO. Tonally, there is NO comparison to the Mustang II (which I previously had owned for six months, loved it for what it was [more of a practice amp—for me] and then gave to my son [who is a talented drummer just starting out on guitar]). I'm thinking here that what might sound more acceptable on the II is simply being masked by its way less "detailed" speaker. The III's speaker, etc. is so far superior that you're liable to hear so much more sonic detail. Thereby, possibly the culprit in revealing that issue with the fizz.

As far as that Yamaha series, yeah... shhh. BTW, there were three series built of these amps, and the last design with the colored knobs is supposedly not worth picking up and also was not (IIRC) designed by Rivera, either. And, at least, the earlier ones were actually built in the USA, but be warned: they also weigh a quite a bit (more like 47 lbs. for my 1x12). The sound is worth it, though. I've been contemplating swapping for a neo speaker to lighten it up, but my dealer and other folks online are steering me away from this, so it'll probably just be casters added along with a softer, thicker handle. But, yeah, let's keep it really quiet on the Yamaha amps. Gotcha.

[Meggy]

Originally Posted by ooglybong

The Mustang III has a *tremendous* upgrade via the Celestion speaker. IMO. Tonally, there is NO comparison to the Mustang II (which I previously had owned for six months, loved it for what it was [more of a practice amp—for me] and then gave to my son [who is a talented drummer just starting out on guitar]). I'm thinking here that what might sound more acceptable on the II is simply being masked by its way less "detailed" speaker. The III's speaker, etc. is so far superior that you're liable to hear so much more sonic detail. Thereby, possibly the culprit in revealing that issue with the fizz.

As far as that Yamaha series, yeah... shhh. BTW, there were three series built of these amps, and the last design with the colored knobs is supposedly not worth picking up and also was not (IIRC) designed by Rivera, either. And, at least, the earlier ones were actually built in the USA, but be warned: they also weigh a quite a bit (more like 47 lbs. for my 1x12). The sound is worth it, though. I've been contemplating swapping for a neo speaker to lighten it up, but my dealer and other folks online are steering me away from this, so it'll probably just be casters added along with a softer, thicker handle. But, yeah, let's keep it really quiet on the Yamaha amps. Gotcha.

Could be a speaker thing with the Fender I guess, but what I heard with the one I had was absolutely not subtle, so I suspect it is just something that your amp and probably the Mustang 2 also, just don't suffer from. The whole thing is bit curious really, but there you go!

Those Yam amps do weigh a fair old bit I know, but I figure I can cope with the 112 models. I believe there are also 210 and 212 versions out there, even a 412 possibly, but I have a friend in the know who advises that these really are a bit of a pig to transport due to the weight issue. But why am still talking about this?... hush hush...

[Atticus]

So, here's my thoughts on the Mustang thus far.

Having tried the amp in multiple stores with no problems, I was a bit worried when the amp had some fizz when I brought it home, but the firmware update seems to have removed it. Obviously I can't speak for all Mustangs everywhere, but at least some of them do well.

I've replaced the default 00 preset (the echo filled, heavy metal solo one) with a Twin with low gain, boosted mids, and a touch of spring reverb, and it sounds pretty good. I've yet to fiddle as much with the other amps extensively, but they seem like they can get some good stuff.

It definitely nails the swiss army role I was looking for. Though a lot of the existing presets are too extreme with the effects, and the highly distorted ones all sound much the same to me, it definitely has range- some of the presets include an excellent duplication of Randy Rhoads' Blizzard of Ozz tone, or Hendrix's fuzz, while others are very clean and sparse.

The effects variety is pretty impressive, with multiple different varieties of chorus, tremolo, and other things, and very easy to tweak in great detail on the amp, so you don't need to bring your laptop with you to your practices and gigs. The extent to which you can mod things can be a bit intimidating- I'm still trying to get a nice chorus to add to the Twin, but I'll figure it out.

[Al_F]

Atticus, you picked up a III, right ?

[ooglybong]

Originally Posted by Atticus

So, here's my thoughts on the Mustang thus far...

It definitely nails the swiss army role I was looking for. Though a lot of the existing presets are too extreme with the effects, and the highly distorted ones all sound much the same to me, it definitely has range- some of the presets include an excellent duplication of Randy Rhoads' Blizzard of Ozz tone, or Hendrix's fuzz, while others are very clean and sparse.

The effects variety is pretty impressive, with multiple different varieties of chorus, tremolo, and other things, and very easy to tweak in great detail on the amp, so you don't need to bring your laptop with you to your practices and gigs. The extent to which you can mod things can be a bit intimidating- I'm still trying to get a nice chorus to add to the Twin, but I'll figure it out.

Swiss Army Knife: Yeah, I agree with you there. IMO, from what I've heard of other modeling amps, these Mustangs might also have all sorts of tones, but they do seem to have a *slight* edge in having more "cleaner" sounds and presets to start out with—only appropriate since, hey, it IS a Fender, right? There are, after all, a lot of Fender amps modeled here. The Line 6, Vox, and others seem to go a *bit* more towards the distorted side of the tonal universe, IMO. That being said, I do believe that there might be a bit more "clean-slate" tweaking potential starting off here in these Mustang amps, and then adding in distortion (thru gain, effects, etc.) over the competition. (You can't always dial the dirt out of a sound as easily, right?)

No laptop needed: Definitely. IMO, the Mustang III onboard interface really negates any major reason for needing to bring along a laptop for in-depth editing *onstage*. I think that was a HUGE step up from the II, and even though it, too, is a great amp, for my purposes, it was always going to be more of a practice amp and yet potentially useful as a studio recording interface—which I have to still explore.

In that last regard (studio editing/recording interface), I don't believe there is any advantage in the III over the II. To my knowledge, the software is still the same, correct? Does owning the III give you access to any additional amp models or effects?

Larry

[Atticus]

Originally Posted by Al_F

Atticus, you picked up a III, right ?

Yep.

Originally Posted by ooglybong

In that last regard (studio editing/recording interface), I don't believe there is any advantage in the III over the II. To my knowledge, the software is still the same, correct? Does owning the III give you access to any additional amp models or effects?

I'm not super clear on the II, but here's what I've got from looking at the Fender site. In addition to the models from the II, you get the British 70s (which is excellent) a Princeton (which I'm using now instead of the Twin), a Champ, and a Deluxe Reverb. I also don't know much about how much control you have over the effects on the I and II, but you definitely have to use the laptop to get the same depth of control.

Here's a minor complaint I've realized about the presets- they have absolutely no rhyme or reason to the order. I'm going to go through every preset, figure out which ones to keep and which to get rid of, and rearrange them in an order where I can find what I'm looking for without memorizing every number.

[cargoshorts]

It'd be really difficult to find the combination of reliability and versatility that is offered by the Roland Cube 40, 60, and 80.
I just bought a slightly used Cube 60 for 219 bucks shipped to my door and I'm thrilled beyond words.
I'll say this - it just may be the most perfect piece of Solid State Engineering I'll ever own.
32 lbs. and it's all business.
I actually love looking at it.

No looper on the Cube 60.
But it's on the Cubes 40 and 80.
I believe the Cube 40 weighs in at 23 lbs.

[ooglybong]

Originally Posted by Atticus

Yep.



I'm not super clear on the II, but here's what I've got from looking at the Fender site. In addition to the models from the II, you get the British 70s (which is excellent) a Princeton (which I'm using now instead of the Twin), a Champ, and a Deluxe Reverb. I also don't know much about how much control you have over the effects on the I and II, but you definitely have to use the laptop to get the same depth of control.

Here's a minor complaint I've realized about the presets- they have absolutely no rhyme or reason to the order. I'm going to go through every preset, figure out which ones to keep and which to get rid of, and rearrange them in an order where I can find what I'm looking for without memorizing every number.

So are you saying that owning the Mustang II also gives you fewer amp models in the software, too? Hmm. I still have the Fuse software loaded on my Mac from back when I got my II (and then only fooled around with it to see that it worked), but have not yet attempted to re-load the software from my III; I've been assuming all along that the install disks were identical, and so reinstalling was probably unnecessary. Therefore, I'm wondering (possibly incorrectly) if all the models are actually right there in the basic software and that the owner of a II could, for instance, load a Princeton onto the II. Or does the software more or less "wake up" and identify which amp is hooked up and then displays the appropriate selections? Got me, so I guess I'll have to get around soon to hooking up my III and seeing if all the models are present or only the selections leftover from the II. Unless someone already knows this and could shed some light. Sorry to say I just haven't messed around with the software at all.

Preset order: Yeah, that drives me crazy, too. It would be nice if there were some "swap places" function (like the Boss GT series has). But I also suppose that one can simply drag around the preset order right there in the Fender software and then dump that order over to the amp. What I've done in the GT-6 is to group my edited-from-scratch presets—where each bank of five presets sounded pretty good together, and then each succeeding number ramped up the gain, etc. for a more driven sound (#1 is sparkling clean -to- #5 is screaming, for instance). I had one bank set up with more rock-based tones, then another bank was more rootsy and jangly-sounding, and then another was more for country-rock, etc.. (I didn't use the GT-6 for jazz, but rather my AI Corus or Cube 30.) Maybe (since we're talking in a Jazz forum here) one could order all the best jazz sounds in numbers 1-10, then the more fusionesque sounds in 11-20, and then whatever comes next after that. That's the organization I'll probably be trying out 'cause I really don't need to load the thing up with 100 jazz presets.

Right now, I'm just having fun exploring all the different sounds (there are so many good ones to start out with) and have yet to gig out with either Mustang.

Larry

[Atticus]

I really don't know any thing about the software working with the II. If you can load the other models, hey, that's cool. I'd prefer to have the superior speaker if I were to record it, though.

That's pretty much the plan I'm going for with the presets- jazz in 1-10, blues in 11-20, etc.

[pghguitar]

I failed to read this thread when I posted something similar a few weeks ago. I ended up buying a Mustang III, then after I got it home and tried it in relative peace and quiet, the fizz was like Captain Obvious on Justin Bieber (FYI - Captain Obvious says "Justin Bieber sucks" [http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Captain_Obvious]) . It became more annoying when playing slower tempo tunes, and certain presets were more obvious than others. I just took it back today and am most likely going to order a cube 80xl, even though none of the music stores in Pittsburgh carry this or have one in stock that i can try first!

[vinlander]

Just got my Cube 80XL yesterday and frankly it is one of the best investment in music gear I have made in years...
I was at first a bit reluctant to go back to modelling stuff, because of my previous experiences with Boss GTs and Line 6 where there were so much parameters and menus I ended up wasting too much time finding a tone than playing...
I like the fact it is simple to use; you just plug the damn guitar and you dial up a nice tone right out of it in a minute.
No need for any external software or having to go into LCD menus because most of the time default patches always suck...
Yeah I know I am just lazy

[barrymclark]

Hey Meggy!

First, I do own and play an 80x.

My first love musically are songs from the 20's up through the late 50's.

The JC model does sound very good.

The Twin model, though, I have gotten compliments on for days from folks who'd rather die than be caught with a non-American made tube amp that weighs in less than 70lbs. So.. the compliments from them are well received.

The tone in this is purposely overdriven.
‪Sleep Walk‬‏ - YouTube

I threw the backing track together in roughly one half hour... so please dont judge that too harshly.

I'd say the best modeler that I have seen is the Axe-FX. As mentioned, it is an arm and a leg. The next best I have heard is the Roland Cube 80x. Not because it is a dead on model but because the models sound VERY good for the sounds they are going for. Coming in at a small fraction of the price and me being into fewer knobs... how could I resist?

[Funster]

I've been playing since the Earth first cooled and I've played many amps in my time. I owed a Roland Blues Cube 60 for a couple years and I demoed a Roland Cube 30 awhile back so I knew good tones were a Roland trademark. When the 80XL went on sale I pulled the trigger.

The Roland Jazz clean is indeed very nice. County, jazz, pop. I find it bright enough without adding tons of presence and a bright switch. I thought the Blues Cube had more bite in their bright switch than this one but it has its place for darker guitars.

The modellers are, to me, a mixed bag. The Fender twin emulation is quite good but low on volume as it's the lowest gain real amp modeller in the chain. The gain goes up drastically as you go up the food chain, something they could have tamed a bit. The Deluxe and Tweed emulations don't work well for me, the tone sounds odd to my ears, sort of squalky although I have no real experience with those amps. The AC30 emulation is usable but a bit dark unless I overboost the highs in the clear side. Sounds better pushed. The amp could really use basic EQ on the modellers as your clear EQ doesn't always work for all the modellers.

Big gain is on tap when you get to the Marshall emulation and above. I found these all very good, better than most pedals. Tone stays focused and thick with little fizz. When they say the Cube is loud, this may be what they're talking about. Mamouth gain.

Speaking of fizz, I hear a bit of the fizz similar to what Meggy was talking about with the Mustang III. Let a tone ring down to nothing and you'll hear it reduce in volume in steps as it goes to silence. It won't be a factor in the real world but I wonder if anyone else hears it.

I bought some Roland footswitches. It is a challenge to get all possible four tones going with reasonable volumes on all four with the footswitches. So many choices.

I like the effects fine. I think they are decent and usable. Every one.

No amp is perfect and you have to weigh the pros and cons. I find the amp tone responsive like the other Rolands I've tried. Build like a tank and portable without wearing a back brace. I bought a Avatar 1-12" cabinet with a Jensen K series that sounds great with this. A mini stack. I think this amp is appropriate for any style. Quite flexible.

When I demoed a Cube 30 about two years ago, I thought to myself if it had more power with a 12" speaker I'd buy it. I did in the Cube 80XL.

[Meggy]

Cheers Funster, having had the amp for a while now, and done a few gigs with it also, I have to say I am in broad agreement with what you find. The clean channel is indeed great and very versatile also - I recently did a show band type gig, and was required to switch between clean pop, jazz and country (not my forte!) styles from number to number. It was up to the job, and responds very well to different pickup settings, so that I didn't even have to do very much with the eq to cover these styles. Also like you I find the effects do exactly what I need them too, and easy to use.

On the other models, like you I find a bit more of a mixed bag, though I still have some exploring to do. Separate eq for the models would be very useful feature I agree, but to some extent I can again overcome this deficiency by changes in the guitar's pickup settings. Also I did get what I felt was quite a nice smooth overdrive from the Twin model recently. I do find a couple of the very high gain models a bit on the OTT side for my taste and not very usable in a real world situation.

But overall, it is as you say - a great, gig-able, well built bit of kit, and I'm happy to have it. It's not going to replace my Polytone (or Yamaha G50) as a dedicated jazz amp, but that wasn't really why I wanted it.

BTW, on the Mustang 3, what I heard was not at all subtle - I think it would have made the amp unusable even in a band situation. I found this Youtube vid which gives some idea of what I heard:

YouTube Video

If anything my amp seemed worse than this to me -very obvious sounds that weren't meant to be there, on pretty much any vaguely clean sound I dialled in. But things may be better on the Mustang 3 by now, that's just my experience!

[FrankLearns]

Own both, a cube 80xl and for a few days also a mustang iv (mainly for playing with a rock band, wanted to make sure it has enough headroom. The weight is still ok).

The clean channel on the cube is great and has lots of headroom. The modelling channel i find less convincing. The blackface simply has too little volume and doesn't really react to gain, the bassman is never clean enough. The Vox emulation doesn't do anything for me, the acoustic simulation sounds thin and brittle. The overdrive tones are ok but this is not what i have the amp for. I find it easy to use. It is sturdy. It is worth the money already for the JC clean channel.

Mainly got the Mustang because i was unhappy with the Fenderish tones on the cube. I was really surprised how good the mustang sounds. Quite stunning. Whether it is the Princeton, the Deluxe reverb or the Twin (my favorite), it just sounds great. It would probably be inappropriate to say "spot on" with the real tube amps, but fairly close, definitely, and miles better than the cube emulations. i am also not a big fan of the presets and dislike sounds with tons of gain and effects. But it just took an hour or so to set up the amp models clean and without effects and it is then straightforward to dial in a wide range of tones and just add thosee effects one like. The reverb and delay models sound great. Overall an amazingly good bang for the buck. Great for practice, gigging, recording. The mustang iv has two stereo Celestion speakers that sound good to me and it can get plenty loud. It is easy to operate even without studying the manual. Mine had no sign of a fizz whatsoever. I am quite happy with it. It allows me to have a wide variety of sounds at the switch of a button. I need that with the rock/cover band i am playing with.

For a dedicated jazz amp i still prefer the Henricksen (more than twice as expensive).

[JorgeFon]

I like the Mustang amps too! They sound great and are inexpensive I think.

[Atticus]

Some follow-up.

The Mustang III was doing fine, but I ended up selling it to the other guitarist in my band because he had more use for the different tones than I did. I've replaced it with a ZT Lunchbox and a future plan for a couple of Sansamp character pedals.