TC Electronic Custom Deluxe 65 - Giving it a second chance

[Jim Soloway]

I bought a Custom Deluxe 65 pedal when they fist came out and while I like the sound and the features, I thought it was a bit too noisy and sold it fairly quickly.` I had an opportunity to pick one up for a decent price last week and I thought I'd give it a second chance. Running it through my recording setup, it is a bit noisy but with a bit more effort than I was willing to give it last time I think I managed to get it down to a livable level. This is my first test with it and to keep it as fair/objective as possible, there are no other plugins used on this (including no eq). It's just the guitar and the pedal. I'm running it on the clean channel with the bright switch engaged and a modest amount of reverb. The output is coming from the DI connection so it includes the speaker sim. Thoughts?

[jads57]

Sounds pretty good to my ears Jim. I wonder if you used a good optical type compressor in front if it would improve it any? I say that because I use a Nux Sculpture pedal in front of my Quilter Aviator at pretty low compression and it seems to give me a better tone with the gain boosted a bit.
Not sure about the noise issue?

[DawgBone]

Not too shabby really. I'd guess it's not really far off tone quality-wise from the UAD '65 blackface but one thing I've noticed about budget boxes is they all seem to have a high noise floor vs something of higher quality.

[StefanoGhirardo]

It's a nice tone, rich in harmonics and dynamics, and yes: a bit noisy; your previous recordings using the plugins were beautiful and had a better signal-to-noise ratio. This one, perhaps because of the noise, has a more club-like tone.

[rpjazzguitar]

Sounds good to me.

[GuyBoden]

My 'Actual' Fender Deluxe Reverb amp was noisy too, but a great amp.

I have and like the TC Electronic 65, but I only use it live.

[Jim Soloway]

My 'Actual' Fender Deluxe Reverb amp was noisy too, but a great amp.

I have and like the TC Electronic 65, but I only use it live.

This is pretty much what I was thinking but I'm not sure I want a device like this just to play live so I may end up returning it. It's really a shame because it does do a good job of getting that Fender Blackface sound.

Thanks to everyone for the responses.

[Jim Soloway]

It's a nice tone, rich in harmonics and dynamics, and yes: a bit noisy; your previous recordings using the plugins were beautiful and had a better signal-to-noise ratio. This one, perhaps because of the noise, has a more club-like tone.

I love the sound I'm getting from the VST host. It's really a joy to play through that system. Now if I could just figure out how to use it to play out rather than just a tool for sitting at my desk. I've been looking at some tiny laptops that coupled with a little Zoom AMS 22 interface might be a good answer.

[Alter]

WIth all these gadgets the most important part is the speakers you use. They can sound great or pretty lame depending..

[dconeill]

Think also about cost, engineering, setup, load-in/load-out, and durability.

A laptop with an interface and stand comprise three things to transport and set up in addition to the amp. A NUC-style computer, a display, a keyboard and mouse, and stand is five things. Tthe laptop or display is easy to damage and takes up a lot of stage room. A computer on a stand is easy to knock over if you're playing standing. Such a setup can be expensive. A military-hardened laptop is probably what you'd want, but even more expensive. And your computer can fail for a variety of reasons. And how are you going to control the computer during performance without looking like an accountant tallying the door receipts?

How are your engineering skills? Can you put together a system that can withstand the potential problems you'll run into in performance? It's not just a question of slapping a Costco laptop onto a TV-meal table. To set this all up would be expensive.

On the other hand, an effects box like a 65 Deluxe emulator is a single thing to be set up in addition to the amp, and is difficult to damage. A single box is less expensive and less likely to fail during a performance.

Everything has a cost/benefit balance. Maybe the computer approach sounds better, but by how much? Is it worth the extra cost, fragility, and logistical issues for a difference that maybe you can hear in the performance space but the audience likely cannot perceive? That's a value judgement on your part.

[Jim Soloway]

Think also about cost, engineering, setup, load-in/load-out, and durability.

A laptop with an interface and stand comprise three things to transport and set up in addition to the amp. A NUC-style computer, a display, a keyboard and mouse, and stand is five things. Tthe laptop or display is easy to damage and takes up a lot of stage room. A computer on a stand is easy to knock over if you're playing standing. Such a setup can be expensive. A military-hardened laptop is probably what you'd want, but even more expensive. And your computer can fail for a variety of reasons. And how are you going to control the computer during performance without looking like an accountant tallying the door receipts?

How are your engineering skills? Can you put together a system that can withstand the potential problems you'll run into in performance? It's not just a question of slapping a Costco laptop onto a TV-meal table. To set this all up would be expensive.

On the other hand, an effects box like a 65 Deluxe emulator is a single thing to be set up in addition to the amp, and is difficult to damage. A single box is less expensive and less likely to fail during a performance.

Everything has a cost/benefit balance. Maybe the computer approach sounds better, but by how much? Is it worth the extra cost, fragility, and logistical issues for a difference that maybe you can hear in the performance space but the audience likely cannot perceive? That's a value judgement on your part.

I understand and pretty much agree with what you're saying but (and this is a very big but), whether it's for a single box or a computer running a vst host, there still needs to be a power amp between the tone shaping device and the speaker cab and that part seems to be the most difficult part of the puzzle to solve. 14 years ago I was running a Line 6 Pod HD with a Raezers Edge NY8. I had jerry-rugged an inexpensive class D amp to provide the power and it sounded great. With all the many quality options available in modeling these days, you would think that there would have been a lot of progress made in amplifying them but it seems like it's the same bottle neck that existed in 2012.

[dconeill]

... With all the many quality options available in modeling these days, you would think that there would have been a lot of progress made in amplifying [instruments] but it seems like it's the same bottle neck that existed in 2012.

I don't quite understand. What do you see as the bottleneck? The topology is somewhat different now, in that we get most or all of our tone from a preamp/processor/modeller and the amp just amplifies. There are more high-quality self-contained, dare I say, high-fidelity amps now than formerly, as for example the Henriksen line (have one, am biased in favor of them).

So, as I already asked, what do you see as the "same bottle neck"?

Is it possible that you're chasing a Holy Grail that doesn't exist?

[Jim Soloway]

I don't quite understand. What do you see as the bottleneck? The topology is somewhat different now, in that we get most or all of our tone from a preamp/processor/modeller and the amp just amplifies. There are more high-quality self-contained, dare I say, high-fidelity amps now than formerly, as for example the Henriksen line (have one, am biased in favor of them).

So, as I already asked, what do you see as the "same bottle neck"?

Is it possible that you're chasing a Holy Grail that doesn't exist?

The Henriksen is a guitar amp with its own tone shaping capability. What I am referring to is a simple power amp. It's not a holy grail. They do exist but they are not common or inexpensive despite the technology having existed for a very long time. All of the active frfr cabs have them and those have been marketed as a solution for modelers for many years. What I am looking for is a stand alone version of the same solution that can run between the preamp/modeler and a passive cab.

[Cunamara]

I have one of the TCE CD '65 pedals and I don't find it very noisy. I have it on a pedalboard and use it as a DI to the mixing board at rehearsals and gigs, rather than carrying an amplifier.

Your easiest route might be from your pedal to a small powered mixer to the speaker, or the pedal to a powered speaker. It sounds really good through a QSC 8" powered speaker, Although since I like a much darker sound than you I would actually like to have the EQ capabilities of a mixer between the pedal and the speaker. I have done gigs and rehearsals with just the pedal to the PA and nothing else (well, a guitar and cord). Sounds good, works fine, easy as can be to set up and tear down.

Also, within the limitations of my computer-related audio equipment (either earbuds or the built-in speakers in my iPad or my laptop), I can barely discern- if at all- differences in sound between your various setups. It all sounds like Jim Soloway's lovely playing, no matter what the signal chain is- bright and chimey with a nice bloom and excellent note separation. You might be hearing differences in the room on your monitor speakers with the different setups, but the ears on the other end of the Internet might not be hearing those things. I don't know about how it is for you, but for me it is very easy to let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Happens every day in fact. If I could actually avoid that, I'd probably only need one guitar and one amp.

[jads57]

Jim try using a used Boss Micro Cube direct out for recording. I had great luck both for a recording and live use. You can further shape your preferred tone with an eq,compressor or an Xotic sweet boost type pedal as well.

[dconeill]

... What I am referring to is a simple power amp. It's not a holy grail. ... What I am looking for is a stand alone version of the same solution that can run between the preamp/modeler and a passive cab.

Oh, I see. You're right, such a thing will be expensive. Have you tried looking around in the high-end audio world? There might be more available there than you'd see in the guitar universe. Stereophile, The Absolute Sound, and WhatHiFi might be some places to start looking. DJ and PA equipment vendors might have something as well. Maybe Crutchfield? I'm sure there are many others. Good luck.

[GuyBoden]

The Henriksen is a guitar amp with its own tone shaping capability. What I am referring to is a simple power amp. It's not a holy grail. They do exist but they are not common or inexpensive despite the technology having existed for a very long time. All of the active frfr cabs have them and those have been marketed as a solution for modelers for many years. What I am looking for is a stand alone version of the same solution that can run between the preamp/modeler and a passive cab.

Studio Power Amp.

Behringer A800 Reference Amp has no fan, so very very quiet. It's stereo. (I use one for my home studio with passive speakers and a small mixer.)

[Alter]

How about a powered speaker, say the Bose S1 pro +. Light, powerful, the pedal through it and you're done. Loud enough for any jazz gig.

If you have a cab you like already, get a Bam 200. But the Bose solution is dead simple, easy to work with, great sounding and reliable.