Fender Tone Master Bassman

[jumpnblues]

Anyone seen or heard one of these yet? I'm not even sure they've been released. Definitely piques my interest.

[Campbell_jazz]

I’ll second that — looks like an interesting package for some classic jazz, blues, and rock tones.

[Oscar67]

It’s out there and a few mouse clicks from delivery to your door. I haven’t tried it yet. Did try the other TM models and those couldn’t make me forget that I was playing through a smartphone with a speaker. I don’t mean that to sound derogatory, I mean I love my phone and respect the technology behind it. But thus far, digital amps always distract me when I play them and the TM’s are no exception.

This Bassman model looks interesting but it’s less of a weight saver than the other TM’s and at €1700 it’s above the price point of some very nice tube or solid state amps.

[entresz]

I think highly of my Tonemaster Deluxe, a super practical amp for gigging that consistently sounds great. I'd love to try the Tone Master Bassman, especially noting it has inbuilt reverb. I've used the tube reissue bassman amps a few times, and while the tone was good, it's a nuisance not having reverb there.

[Herbie]

(…) Did try the other TM models and those couldn’t make me forget that I was playing through a smartphone with a speaker.
(…)

Ha, I just had to ’Like’ this for that expression! I dig it!

Although my 1 minute experience with TMDR left me amazed how real it sounded.

Some like them, some not. We are lucky to have many options!

[Jx30510]

For me also the Tone Masters really lack that special sparkle that their tube counterparts have.
But they're nontheless very good amps. Still not comparable for edge of breakup tube sweetness.

[ruger9]

I think the demo videos sound pretty great.

I think Fender and Roland (the cubes) have done great jobs at making digital sound and feel and react like tubes. I was not impressed with anything (Boss) Katana.

I think where these ToneMaster amps shine is for live purposes: mainly because they are easy to TRANSPORT thanks to their lighter weight. Do they sound 100% like the tube version? Probably not. But plenty close enough for live use, when the volume goes up. I'd still prefer the real deal (tubes) for home and recording use. But having owned and gigged a Roland Cube Artist for a few years now, I can say they are plenty close for live work, the ease of transport (and no tubes to come loose or break during), really give these amps an edge their heavier tube counterparts don't have for gigging. I'd love to have a 410 Bassman, but I ain't carrying' it NOWHERE.

OH, AND:
Master volume features... all these amps have master volumes or attenuators or whatever, that allow you to get the cranked up tone at lower volumes, which is AWESOME for gigs. Their tube counterparts do not; by the time the 410 Bassman is sounding goooood it's f'ing loud. But not the TM version. HUGE PLUS for gigging.

[Oscar67]

For me the demo vids focused a bit too much on the amp’s overdrive tones. And those sounded a bit digital to me, but perhaps the amp would sound great in the room. About gigging: I don’t own a TM so it’s all hearsay, but more than once I’ve heard it said the earlier TM’s (i.e. not the Bassman!) sounded great at home but not on the gig. Apparently the clean headroom ceiling and dynamic response start to differ noticeably from the tube original when turning up the amp to stage levels.

Personally I’m intrigued by the TM amps. The ones I’ve tried couldn’t persuade me, but to be fair I A/B’d them against my own tube amps - and I love those and know them inside out. But I’m certainly interested in a non-tube alternative that doesn’t require finding proper high-quality replacement tubes, biasing, filter cap replacement or handling it like a newborn (because almost modern tube amps are extremely fragile compared to their predecessors from the golden age). So far, no such luck.

[jumpnblues]

I own two amps...a Fender Tone Master Deluxe and Victoria 20112 (5e3), Tweed Deluxe. Each amp has it's own respective application.

The Tone Master Deluxe Reverb is my go to gig amp. It's perfect for live applications and, at 23 lbs, it's very easily transported. The attenuator works and sounds great. The mic and cab simulators also work very well. And, in a live situation (especially straight ahead jazz) the TMDR is perfect. With the attenuator, it can break up nicely at very low volume levels and works well with pedals. It's clean settings sound very respectable...perfect for jazz.

The Vicky Tweed Deluxe is my stay at home amp. It never leaves the house. It is my "ultimate tone amp". Since I use it exclusively for my home amp I can use it and revel in the gorgeous tone, nuances, and versatility of the Vicky Tweed Deluxe.

IMHO, I have the ideal amp combination. It's taken me 60+ years to arrive at the amp choices I've made. So far, I'm very happy with the amps I own. They complement each other quite nicely. Anyway, that's my story and I'm sticking to it.

[bluenote61]

About gigging: I don’t own a TM so it’s all hearsay, but more than once I’ve heard it said the earlier TM’s (i.e. not the Bassman!) sounded great at home but not on the gig. Apparently the clean headroom ceiling and dynamic response start to differ noticeably from the tube original when turning up the amp to stage levels.

I have a TM Twin which I use for gigs since 2 years. Last week I had the oppurtunity for an A/B comparison with an old SF Twin which I had in my hands for servicing. (I made the A/B check after the service work, i.e. no worn out or rotten tubes in the old SF!)
Not only me, also the owner of the SF was impressed by the excellent "sound copy" of the TM.
However they have not the identical sound due to the fact of different speakers, the attack, tone response and dynamic of both amps are more or less the same. Also the dynamic behaviour when turning up to stage level was the same. Both amps are loud, very loud and keep their great dynamic range also when played loud. Both are simply sounding like a Twin.

[ruger9]

Both are simply sounding like a Twin.

Or, I dare say, no different than any 2 Twins of different ages (but same eras): tweed, blackface, silverface.

[DawgBone]

Or, I dare say, no different than any 2 Twins of different ages (but same eras): tweed, blackface, silverface.

I am reasonably certain that if I used my gig settings on a TM it would fail miserably in the "sounds just like my Twin" department.

[ruger9]

I am reasonably certain that if I used my gig settings on a TM it would fail miserably in the "sounds just like my Twin" department.

You don't know until you try; you can speculate all you want. But this tech has gotten very good in recent years. But some people prefer to hear with their eyes.

[DawgBone]

You don't know until you try; you can speculate all you want. But this tech has gotten very good in recent years. But some people prefer to hear with their eyes.

Yes, very good. They said the same things about the Johnson Millenium, the roland cube, the roland blues cube, the boss waza, the fender mustangs, etc etc. It's always "soooooo close". I've played about half of those. You could hardly give those away today. They were usable as throwaways for jams or a grab and go disposable amp but didn't feel pliable or warm like an actual tube amp. The people whose opinions I trust did not say great things about the Tone Master Twin and truthfully at over 1400 bucks why wouldn't I just get an actual real handwired Twin used and have it serviced? It doesn't make financial or tonal sense unless you just don't know any better or have digital gear love. I would probably be more impressed if I was using it for clean tones at something less than max volume so there is that. I like to run as loud as possible where the sweet Twin tube od tone is and digital stuff is always harsh in the high end, especially under gain, whether it's an amp or a reverb pedal. It's getting better but it still has a long way to go.

[ruger9]

Yes, very good. They said the same things about the Johnson Millenium, the roland cube, the roland blues cube, the boss waza, the fender mustangs, etc etc. It's always "soooooo close". I've played about half of those. You could hardly give those away today. They were usable as throwaways for jams or a grab and go disposable amp but didn't feel pliable or warm like an actual tube amp. The people whose opinions I trust did not say great things about the Tone Master Twin and truthfully at over 1400 bucks why wouldn't I just get an actual real handwired Twin used and have it serviced? It doesn't make financial or tonal sense unless you just don't know any better or have digital gear love. I would probably be more impressed if I was using it for clean tones at something less than max volume so there is that. I like to run as loud as possible where the sweet Twin tube od tone is and digital stuff is always harsh in the high end, especially under gain, whether it's an amp or a reverb pedal. It's getting better but it still has a long way to go.

I've got the Roland Artist. It's great. It sounds like a tube amp, feels like a tube amp, reacts about 90% like a tube amp, and is half thew weight. Worth it's weight in spades for gigging, load-ins/load-outs. I also have a Fender Supersonic 22 (which was my main gig amp), and it's also great, the Roland is 95% there.

[jim777]

So, this is a 45 Watt 4x10 combo then? I think at those specs I'd go with the TM Super Reverb, whch I've heard and played and liked a lot.

[Jx30510]

I'm in the same camp as Dawgbone. I tried really to convince myself that the Princeton TM I bought sounded like a tube amp, but it just didn't. I would have loved that it did, because the design (power scaling, weight, look and recording options) are very nice. But the 10% - everybody says it's 90% or so like "the Real thing" - is what makes all the difference. And that's what I want in an amp. But it's a real personal thing, so I understand it can suit many players. I'm bit of a tone hound anyway.

[ruger9]

I'm in the same camp as Dawgbone. I tried really to convince myself that the Princeton TM I bought sounded like a tube amp, but it just didn't. I would have loved that it did, because the design (power scaling, weight, look and recording options) are very nice. But the 10% - everybody says it's 90% or so like "the Real thing" - is what makes all the difference. And that's what I want in an amp. But it's a real personal thing, so I understand it can suit many players. I'm bit of a tone hound anyway.

For home use (where it's just me and the amp; subtleties matter) or recording, tubes all the way. But for live, 90% gets you there no worries. A bad workman blames his tools.

[Stringswinger]

For those who cannot abide by the Tonemaster digital thing or the Quilter SS sound, may I suggest trying the Milkman hybrid amps that use the Class D Power amp module along with a tube driven preamp.

My Milkman the amp 100 combined with my Rich Raezer built Stealth 12 ER sounds as good to me as any Fender or Mesa tube amp that I have owned, and I have owned quite a few.

[Cunamara]

If you think you have to have tubes, use tubes. It's pretty simple: no matter how the amps sound, if you believe you need tubes then you need tubes. Even if there were no objectively discernible difference, your mind would still hear a difference. Hearing is a cognitive process as well as a sensory process.

Personally with a bad back, hauling my Fender Pro Reverb around to gigs is not going to happen ever again. I wouldn't be able to play the gig because I'd be flat on my back in agony.

I play once a week through my buddy's TMDR. It sounds great. Not quite as good as his silverface/blackfaced Twin nor my Pro Reverb, but both of those have two speakers and a bigger cab compared to the TMDR which accounts for some or perhaps all of that. It sounds different from my go-to amp, a 5E3 clone, but not worse- more classic Fendery in fact and some people would think the TMDR sounds better. FWIW he has updated the firmware to, remove the virtual bright cap.

[DawgBone]

For home use (where it's just me and the amp; subtleties matter) or recording, tubes all the way. But for live, 90% gets you there no worries. A bad workman blames his tools.

I just don't see the point in spending 10 percent more on a TM vs the real thing only to get ten percent less than the real thing in terms of sound. It doesn't make sense. The only thing digital has ever offered over analog was convenience and price point. All the top recording and guitar tech prior to the digital revolution was based around fidelity and sonic quality for the most part. Now it's all about convenience and cost savings, not tonal excellence. That's pretty much all I need to know. Everything has gone digital cause it's cheap and convenient, not cause it sounds better.

[Jx30510]

"a bad workman blames his tools".
We say say the Tonemaster is a great tool. Well that's what I said in my post "it's a great design".
Not everybody needs the same tools, and I don't know what "blame" and "bad workman" come in the equation in this thread ?
If you can't hear the difference, don't blame to us.
The difference is just obvious, it's got nothing to do with us.

[Oscar67]

If you think you have to have tubes, use tubes. It's pretty simple: no matter how the amps sound, if you believe you need tubes then you need tubes.

True. And vice versa: if a digital amp sounds the same to someone as the tube amp it’s based on, then to that person it sounds the same. Period. The debate is somewhat similar to the eternal cheap/expensive comparisons. Some folks swear a $400 Squier is just as good as a $4000 custom shop Strat. Same for PRS SE vs Core. Epiphone vs Gibson. Half the gear vids on YT are feeding on this.

Me, sadly I notice a difference with digital that detracts me somehow. I wish I didn’t notice that. The concept of the TM is very appealing to me but I’m sticking to tubes for a while longer.

[ruger9]

"a bad workman blames his tools".
We say say the Tonemaster is a great tool. Well that's what I said in my post "it's a great design".
Not everybody needs the same tools, and I don't know what "blame" and "bad workman" come in the equation in this thread ?
If you can't hear the difference, don't blame to us.
The difference is just obvious, it's got nothing to do with us.

I CAN hear the difference, and exactly how much difference there is (a little). I don't obsess about it any longer like others do, I still get great tones out of the stuff, because it's great stuff... I simply "Keep Calm" and play the crap out of it. Digital or not.

Just don't hand me a Boss Katana. That thing sounds like bees in a can. (ironic, because my Roland Cube Artist sounds fantastic.)

[ruger9]

I just don't see the point in spending 10 percent more on a TM vs the real thing only to get ten percent less than the real thing in terms of sound. It doesn't make sense..

When you get older, start having aches and pains (especially in your back), and can't afford a roadie to carry your 80 lb. Bassman, it makes alot of sense.