The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Posts 1 to 25 of 144
  1. #1

    User Info Menu

    So about 2 weeks ago I acquired one of the new Fender Tone Masters, the Twin Reverb. I had read literally thousands of posts on various gear-oriented boards, watched demo videos, read reports and reviews... it was hard to decide between the TMDR and the TMTR. Fact is, though, I've always wanted a twin. I played one a few times years ago, and I always felt like I was trying to ride a horse that was just too fast for me. The weight of course was also an issue. After a lot of research, and going with a vendor with a good return policy, I ordered the Tone Master Twin Reverb.

    I have so far been just delighted with it. The tone is everything I remember loving about the Twin I played long ago. I can't do a side-by-side, and also I've learned that's really pointless. The "real" tube amps vary a lot among themselves and if I had, say, 3 real tube TRs and the TMTR, likely there would be 4 different sounds coming out. But I have to say, I'm really impressed.

    Most impressive to me are the two "extras" Fender added, in violation of their general plan to stick solely to duplicating the Twin Reverb's performance in a digital amp. They added an attenuator that dials the output power down in very rough half-increments: 85 watts, 40 watts, 22 watts, 12 watts, 5 watts, and 1 watt. So you can set up the front controls for "cranked" or whatever, and then control the output for the room you're playing in. That seems to work pretty well as far as I can tell. There is also an XLR balanced line out, with 3 settings. One is a straight, I suppose FRFR out. Then there is a setting with an IR profile for a Shure SM57 close up at the edge of the speaker center cone. The second IR profile is for a Royer Lbs R-121 studio ribbon microphone. You have a level control to shape the output signal. These extra tools strike me as incredibly useful and they work extremely well. Combined with the light weight (33 lbs) this amp is really an amazing tool.

    So for a clip... I wasn't sure what to do. I can't do a side-by-side with a "real tube" version. So I decided to do 2 runs through the same music, one using the XLR IR#1 and the other using XLR IR#2. I can't hear much difference, but it might be helpful to some. I also recorded a clip using the SM57 set up at the edge of the cone, and I could not separate it from the XLR IR#1 clip in terms of sound. They were totally indistinguishable except the "real" microphone picked up the sound of the dehumidifier switching on in my office!

    I'll be glad to answer whatever questions I can about this amp. I'm really happy with it and think many will find the Tone Masters to be a great solution for performance and recording.


  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #2

    User Info Menu

    Lawson, that was some great playing and great tone.

    I have two tube amps (a 1964 Fender Princeton and a 1988 Mesa 50 caliber) and your review is making me question why I am staying with 1980 and earlier technology in 2019.

    Food for thought.

  4. #3

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Stringswinger
    Lawson, that was some great playing and great tone.

    I have two tube amps (a 1964 Fender Princeton and a 1988 Mesa 50 caliber) and your review is making me question why I am staying with 1980 and earlier technology in 2019.

    Food for thought.
    Thanks. I'm told the Tone Master Deluxe Reverb is also amazing, and even lighter (one speaker). I haven't had a chance to play one of those.

  5. #4

    User Info Menu

    Wow! That's a Gibby through a Twin alright. The two #IR settings are great. I slightly prefer the first one, myself.I had a TR here at home (wouldn't transport it--too heavy) until about ten years ago. It was great when played with my ES-175.Classic signal chain, Lawson.

  6. #5

    User Info Menu

    Nice job, LS! That's that sweet 175-through-a-Twin-Reverb tone I like to hear! Congratulations on your new amp, and play it in good health!

    And thanks for your informative and entertaining video!

  7. #6

    User Info Menu

    Really nice sounding setup! Very legit tone.

  8. #7

    User Info Menu

    I am glad you didn’t do an A/B test. Speaker alone can cause considerable variation. Thanks Lawson! How does it sound with bass and treble rolled all the way down? (This is supposed to be close to a flat frequency response on this tone stack.).

  9. #8

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by wzpgsr
    How does it sound with bass and treble rolled all the way down? (This is supposed to be close to a flat frequency response on this tone stack.).
    Even with this new Tone Master series?

  10. #9

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Greco
    Even with this new Tone Master series?
    Good question. My guess would be "yes" because that mid-scooped tone stack is part of what Fender is known for. The earth would shift on its axis if they introduced a Bandaxall tone circuit!

    The difference between the IRs is interesting. The first to me sounded more like 50s Jimmy Rainey or Tal Farlow type tone, the second sounded a bit more like early 60s Jim Hall type tone. I liked both although for my own use might prefer the second.

  11. #10

    User Info Menu

    I don’t think the difference would be as earth shattering as a move from scooped to baxandall. But I have read anecdotes saying that some unexpected control settings are required to match tones when comparing tube variants to the Tone Masters. Same caveat as before applies: speakers, tube types, age, component value drift, etc. all can alter the tone of a tube amp. One size does not fit all.

  12. #11

    User Info Menu

    Sounds great dude, congrats.

  13. #12

    User Info Menu

    Nice Lawson and thanks for posting.
    Both sound great to me and pretty close to many twins I've played - with much variation between all of them. I have a small preference for n° 2 - to my ears it was slightly more rounded and less strident, particularly in the middle and upper registers - I imagine the difference would be imperceptible in a live situation......

    Lawson, your video is pushing me very strongly towards replacing my dead Princeton Recording with the Tone Master in it's Deluxe version with a singe 12" and valve equivalent 22w output (100w solid state) - I really don't need more.

    May I ask how you rate the attenuator? Although I play a lot of jazz, I also play blues where being just on or above the point of break-up where attack and pick angle makes a big difference to dynamic reactivity. This means with a Deluxe I would want volume around 5 or 6 which is too loud for many situations without attenuation. To your ears how close are the "attenuated sounds" to the originals? Are they the same quality at all 5 attenuated levels?

    On the weight side, this looks like "lumbago heaven" for older guys like me - the Twin being only 33lbs and the Deluxe 25lbs.
    Last edited by Ray175; 10-20-2019 at 03:37 PM. Reason: typo

  14. #13

    User Info Menu

    Sounds like the real deal to my old ears!

  15. #14

    User Info Menu

    Awesome, Lawson!

    This amp could be a future classic, like the JC-120.

  16. #15

    User Info Menu

    Nice playing, both the guitar and amp sound great - but - it's the recording that sounds really, really terrific to me.

    Nice job!

  17. #16

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by wzpgsr
    I am glad you didn’t do an A/B test. Speaker alone can cause considerable variation. Thanks Lawson! How does it sound with bass and treble rolled all the way down? (This is supposed to be close to a flat frequency response on this tone stack.).
    I’ll give that a check Monday when I’m back at the office where the TMTR lives.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  18. #17

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by wzpgsr
    I don’t think the difference would be as earth shattering as a move from scooped to baxandall. But I have read anecdotes saying that some unexpected control settings are required to match tones when comparing tube variants to the Tone Masters. Same caveat as before applies: speakers, tube types, age, component value drift, etc. all can alter the tone of a tube amp. One size does not fit all.
    Mainly what I hear is the taper of the pots is longer and less steep on the TMTR than on the tube TR. you can get the same sound but the knobs won’t be in exactly the same place.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  19. #18

    User Info Menu

    too many variables...I have had several "twins" out side of the weight..they were (and to some still are) the go-to amp..now nice soft jazz can be had through many amps..but the twin in its day could just about break glass..and some eardrums..doing hard rock solos...and many country players didnt even know other amps existed..those super smooth chimey clear high notes and the Tele twang and tricks..

    todays sound technology ..including all attachments..can have you sounding like an acoustic on a les paul (which I love) and just about any altered sound you want short of a sound engineer in the studio..at a price many can afford..

    while Fender is saying this is a "real twin" ..SS tech has been around for decades now..welcome to the no tube needed world ..and dial in power - rheostat technology is not new ..

    yeah the weight and price will get you points ..but then your in a market where there are players far beyond the modest Fender "improvements"..

    This begs the question..being that Fender is having financial problems ..will it continue to produce both lines ..tube style and SS...that seems like car manufactures offering a carburetor and fuel injection on the same models today..

    yes there will be fans of both schools both saying they are the better sound..and it comes down to personal choice..some will say they can hear the difference and its no contest while others say it really dosent matter they just want an amp that is lighter and cost less..

  20. #19

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by lawson-stone
    I can't do a side-by-side, and also I've learned that's really pointless. The "real" tube amps vary a lot among themselves and if I had, say, 3 real tube TRs and the TMTR, likely there would be 4 different sounds coming out.
    That's a HUGE point that I think most people are missing, regarding "A vs B" type tests.

    Sounds great to me!

  21. #20

    User Info Menu

    A Twin that weighs only 15.8 kgs!

    Always difficult to judge the sound and behavior of an amp thru a recording like this. The recording sounds good!

    But to really know how the amp behaves on stage with a band, say with drummer, organ and sax, you have to play it on stage. The specs say it's 200W that simulates 85w.... this is a weird one for me - watts are watts in technical terms, so I really wonder how and what they are measuring then (the 'tube-watts' versus 'solid state watts' is a very old discussion that actually has nothing to do with real watts, but all the more with measuring methodes, speaker efficiency, clean watts cq power handling before distortion, interaction of speakers with output-transformers, etc.).

    I am curious though!

    The thing that hooks me to tube amps, is not the use of tubes, but the fact that tube amps need an output transformer. And the interaction of the output transformer and the speakers is what solid state amps and digital modeling amps are missing. It's relatively easy to model or emulatie a tube 'sound', but what makes playing tube-amps so preferable (to me at least) is the physical effect of the output-transformer (litterally under-dampening and influencing the travel of speaker-cone).

    So I am not a tube snob (I think/hope), but for a good 'feel' and response on stage, a solid state or digital amp needs to emulate the interaction of the speakers and output-transformer. Many manufacturers are doing so (retro-tone, transtube, current feedback, constant current drive... all kind of names for that), more or less succesfully. Award Session does a good job with their RetroTone circuit, so it can be done. So I am very curious how the Tone Master series score in that area!
    Last edited by Little Jay; 10-21-2019 at 07:38 AM.

  22. #21

    User Info Menu

    Thanks Lawson for a jazz tone example of the Tone Master amp.

    I ran the audio from your clip through ch 1 of my TMDR. Both your amp and my amp sounded great! haha...

  23. #22

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by archtopeddy
    Thanks Lawson for a jazz tone example of the Tone Master amp.

    I ran the audio from your clip through ch 1 of my TMDR. Both your amp and my amp sounded great! haha...
    I would love too have a chance to play a TMDR. I always wanted a Deluxe Reverb amp. I got the TMTwin because it was just $100 more and... a Twin Reverb... But I love the DR model on my SuperChamp X2 so i suspect I'd love a real Deluxe Reverb, either tube or Tone Master.

  24. #23

    User Info Menu

    Since this is a new amp, and in a way, a new kind of amp, I thought a post with a different guitar would be helpful. This is the same Bb Blues from the Raney/Aebersold set, but played with my 2015 Gibson L5ces. Many associate the "Big Gibson" with the "Big Fender" for the Big sound of jazz guitar. I was really happy to hear how the amp captures the more sophisticated tone of the L5ces over against the "thunk" of the ES175. The recording and YouTubing process wears that down a bit, but I think you can still hear the "L5-ish" quality of the L5ces in this clip.


  25. #24

    User Info Menu

    That L-5CES looks a s sweet as it sounds! And the TMTR loudens it admirably. Thanks, LS!

  26. #25

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by lawson-stone
    Since this is a new amp, and in a way, a new kind of amp, I thought a post with a different guitar would be helpful.
    Thanks very much for the YT clip.

    VERY impressive, wonderful, enjoyable, admirable and extremely enviable playing. Did I make my point?