Roland Cube 60 vs Henriksen

**Tom Karol** · 01-20-2010, 04:16 PM

My jazz/pop duo partner and I were recently asked to collaborate with a bass player and a drummer to form a side-project (well, let's face it - all my projects are side-projects) doing a lot of our existing material but adding a bunch of 'classic rock' tunes as well. So, of course, I immediately turned to the Tele - which also means I'm going to use the Cube 60 (Tweed model).

But I have this 3-month-old Henriksen JazzAmp 112 (and a Tweetey) with which I'm completely enamored. It doesn’t do the rock thing by itself. But I’ve also got this new VOX ToneLab ST multi-effects processor that works great with my A/E hybrid guitar and the JazzAmp for the jazz/pop duo stuff. I’ve used up numbers 0-40 (1 for each song in the setlist) of the 50 user presets for that context.

So I programmed the remaining 9 available slots (numbers 41-49) for various rock sounds with the Tele and the JazzAmp. Plus my previous number 40 and the first 3 of the factory presets (numbers 50-52) are applicable as well. It sounds amazing! So, now I don’t need the Cube 60 anymore, right? Wrong!

I realized that looking down at the floor to shuffle through 13 presets in the middle of a song is just not going to work for me. I went back to the Cube 60, and you know, it sounds fine – really good, even – and a rhythm and lead channel plus a 3-way pickup selector switch is about all I can handle in the heat of the moment.

I’ll bring the VOX ToneLab ST to the rock gigs in its little laptop bag as a backup (through the PA), and I’ll use the Tele/VOX/JazzAmp combo for rock-tone recording or if the Cube 60 someday blows up and I have a rock gig on the horizon. But I’m not going to sell the Cube 60, and I really don’t want to beat up on the Henriksen anyway.

That’s my story, and I’m sticking to it (for now)!

**randyc** · 01-20-2010, 05:04 PM

Tom, you have a talent for luring me into these anecdotes .... with endings that I wouldn't have suspected

Good, useful information, especially for those that don't require any more equipment than can be carried, in one trip, from auto to stage. ("Stage" being a euphemism for a too-tiny area set aside for musicians ...)

**derek** · 01-20-2010, 05:33 PM

Interesting progression Tom. I have run the gamut of amps, effects, modelers and the like thru the years. These days, I have a range of tones for rock/pop stuff that I like. It starts with a clean 6L6 based amp. I use a bit of grit to thicken my tone up (think Stones) using a Keeley Fuzzhead.

For a smoother, gainier tone I have a TS sort of pedal from a boutique maker. From there, I use modulation, and time based stuff along with a wah. My board is pretty stripped down, and I am not doing the pedal board dance you describe above anymore.

My jazz tone is pretty simple, and static. Clean and mid to dark with just enough reverb that you can barely detect it. I suspect I could get these general sounds from a variety of amps.

**Tom Karol** · 01-20-2010, 10:33 PM

File this under: If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

Every time I've used the Tele/Cube 60 in a live situation, it's been on the floor (not elevated), and I've had a tuner connected to the Tuner-Out jack. I've always been pleased with the results.

At this group's initial rehearsal, I put it on a little table (1 foot high) that happened to be there and also didn't connect the tuner to the amp.

What set off the whole exercise above, was that at this session, I felt that my sound was a just a bit thin and harsh.

Long story short: For me, the Cube 60 sounds better on the floor, and it sounds better with a tuner (possibly even a specific tuner) connected to the Tuner Output jack.

The schematic in the owner's manual shows the Tuner Output jack branching off right after the Input Jack before the signal goes into the amp. Based on prior experience trying to use this output to drive the input of a second amp, I know that the guitar's signal coming out of this jack is split/attenuated/padded/modified in some way. It would make sense that the same thing is happening to the signal going into the amp, wouldn't it? But here's the serendipity part: It sounds better (warmer, less strident) this way!

Thoughts?

**randyc** · 01-20-2010, 10:58 PM

It's not an unusual practice to elevate/tilt a small amplifier to prevent the absorption of higher frequencies (by dancers in a club, for example), right? Seems like you experienced the corresponding inverse effect and that's reasonable.

I'm puzzled by your second observation and if you can refer me to an internet site where I can see a schematic of your amplifier, I'd like to pursue this a bit. Either there's a logical explanation or we'll have to attribute the effect to the phase of the moon

Ray C. · 01-21-2010, 08:06 AM

I can second that. I use a Tele-Cube 60 setup as well, and the tweed model is only model I use. I run it with a Dyna Comp Compression pedal to add some twang and pop. It's a good combo if your going solid state IMO for rock and urban blues.

**randyc** · 01-21-2010, 07:32 PM

I tried a search for "schematic 2005 Roland Cube 60 d" and did get a hit on a French web site. Bad news is that I need a security code to look at the schematic, LOL. Too bad, this is one of those things that I just love to get my teeth into !!

Also tried to get a schematic of your tuner - no luck on that, either. Next time you find yourself in a similar situation, why not try unplugging your short 3 foot cable from the tuner (leave the cable plugged into the amplifier). Because most amplifiers are very high impedance (up to 1 megohm) even small values of capacitance can affect high frequency response.

For example, if an amplifier does have the 1 Meg input impedance mentioned, a relatively tiny capacitance of 15 picofarad (.000015 uF) can drop the high frequency response to 10 kHz, which will lose the "sparkle" that some people seem to prefer, especially from a Telecaster.

Putting that into perspective, one foot of a typical high impedance guitar cable would be about 15 picofarad. As I've frequently mentioned on the forum, cables should always be as short as possible, leave the EQ function of the amplifier the flattest frequency response to work with so that it can do its job effectively.

If we assume the usage of a high impedance cable, the high frequency response of your amplifier can be approximately determined by:

F high = 1 / [2 * PI * Z amplifier * 13.5 (10^-12) * cable lgth in feet] or even more simply

F high = 11.8 (10^9) /[Z amplifier * cable lgth in feet]

Working through this simple equation will give one an idea of how cable lengths affect frequency response if amplifier input impedance is known. Most amplifiers will have an input impedance around 100k and if the desired upper frequency limit is about 15 kHz (upper limit of male hearing for males over 18, IIRC) then one can work backward through the equation to solve for maximum cable length which would be about 8 feet.

Digressing from the original thought but my point was that small changes in setup (e.g. tuner input impedance and capacitance - even if tuner is switched off - cable length and so forth) can make audible differences in sound quality. But then maybe the phase of the moon can, too J

**Tom Karol** · 01-29-2010, 04:29 PM

You know, I think the jury may still be out. I just fine-tuned the Tele-Vox-JazzAmp combination, and it sounds killer. I made rhythm and lead settings for different styles contiguous (except for the 'Funky Bass-Wah' patch which would be incredible for a solo version of Chameleon) so switching shouldn't be too tricky even for an old guy. Hmm ...! See below:
40. Jazz, or Acoustic-Electric Rhythm
41. Acoustic-Electric Lead
42. Country Rhythm
43. Country Lead
44. Rock/Blues Rhythm
45. Rock/Blues Lead
46. Rock/Blues Classic Fuzz
47. Mellow Chorused Rhythm
48. Bright Chorused Lead
49. Funky Bass-Wah

**Tarek** · 08-29-2010, 06:32 PM

I have a Henriksen 112 combo and a Roland Cube 60 COSM. I compared the two amps using my Peerless Monarch, Peerless GigMaster, and Ibanez AF 105. All guitars still have the stock humbuckers on them. Using the neck pickup only on each guitar, below is what I found.

Henriksen (of course being much louder) stays very clean even at high volumes. It does not get muddy and does not distort and produces nothing but a clean jazz sound. The Roland Cube 60 JC Clean channel also produced a clean jazz sound but it was thinner at first and it took some tone dialing on the guitars and the Roland amp to fatten the trebles and mids, which was doable. But here is what I do not like about the Roland Cube 60. At Volume level 4 or 4.5, I could hear annoying and ugly noise that sounds like a "snare drum vibration when placed next to a loud PA speaker". I guess that is what is called "Breakup"?? Whatever it was, I did not like it and after trying everything to avoid this noise, I was convinced that the Roland amp cannot produce a clean jazz guitar tone from a humbucker at volume levels above 4 on the Clean JC channel. However, when I started plugging in some Lowden acoustic guitars into the Cube, that noise disappeared and I was able to turn the volume all the way up to 10 without hearing it. This lead me to suspect that the noise might have been caused by the cheap humbuckers on those guitars? There is no way the guitar cable was the culprit as I used several very high end cables. I will upgrade the stock humbuckers to Gibson 57 and Benedetto B-6 and report whether the "snare drum/distortion" noise still remains when using the Roland Cube 60 above volume level 4.

In summary, I was hoping the Roland Cube 60 Clean JC channel would stay clean even at high volumes, but it does not. While using it at high volumes, every time my right hand touched the strings I could hear that "snare drum vibration" echo bang, and the sound gets distorted. This means the Roland Cube 60 is not an amp I would use to gig with a loud jazz band. It is good for low volume bedroom practice though.

I welcome feedback from anyone who has anything to say about this. Thanks!

**Tom Karol** · 08-29-2010, 08:13 PM

Actually, I did sell my Cube 60. Here's what I do now:
Solo: Henriksen Jazzamp 112 combo and Tweetey with a T5 clone;
Jazz: Jazzamp 112 with a 335 clone;
Pop: Jazzamp 112 and Tweetey with the T5 clone and a VOX ToneLabST;
Blues: ZT Club (on the floor) with a Tele clone;
Rock: ZT Club (up on a milk crate) with a Tele clone and the VOX ToneLabST.

**Tarek** · 08-29-2010, 08:49 PM

Tom, did you have the same problem with the Cube 60, i.e. noise (like a snare drum vibration when placed next to a loud PA speaker) when playing the Cube's clean JC channel at volume levels exceeding 4??

**Tom Karol** · 08-29-2010, 10:13 PM

No, I don't think so. I could go up to 12 O'Clock and stay clean, but I wasn't using humbuckers. I used the JC Clean channel for rhythm. For Jazz, I used the Twin model for lead. For Rock, I used the Tweed model for lead. For effects, usually just delay at 9 O'clock; once in a while Chorus just barely on.

**Joe Piler** · 04-08-2015, 11:55 AM

Hi,

I'm looking for a new amp.
Have a PRS Sweet 16 Combo, but the Jazz sound is not what I like.

I hear great stories about the Roland Cube 60 amp, which sells used for only 150 euro...
Also hear great stories about the Henriksen Jazzamp 110, found it on Youtube, great amp.
Don't know about the Polytunes or Quilter Micropro's...

What is your opinion?

I'm selling my Gibson ES-335 Fat Neck to buy a Gibson ES-175 and what this big fat Jazz Sound.

This time I want a combo (guitar and amp) that is just fine!

Thanks!

**Bluedawg** · 04-08-2015, 12:11 PM

I love my Henriksen .. great sounds ..

The Roland Cube 60s and 80s are lots of bang for the buck .. I have a 60 ... guitars that don't seem like a good match for the Henriksen can still sound great in the Roland ... and the Cube has some nice low volume blues and rock sounds in it as well

if you can afford it go ahead and get a Cube ... then keep on looking for a nice boutique solid state amp like the Henriksen or Mambo

**docbop** · 04-08-2015, 12:36 PM

The Henriksen and the Roland aren't even in the same league the price difference should give you a hint. The Roland is good amp for the money. Henriksen is a great Jazz amp not cheap around $1000 USD. I'd say figure out your budget first then see what's fits new and used.

**Rob MacKillop** · 04-08-2015, 12:46 PM

What guitar WOULDN'T suit a Henriksen? I'm getting an Eastman 371, not a million miles away from the 175 Joe mentioned above, and with a P90 from Bare Knuckle. I imagine we are both hoping our guitars would be compatible with a Henriksen Jazzamp 110.

**Rob MacKillop** · 04-08-2015, 01:01 PM

This might help, Joe, though he never goes for a really fat sound:

**drbhrb** · 04-08-2015, 01:16 PM

Originally Posted by docbop

The Henriksen and the Roland aren't even in the same league the price difference should give you a hint. The Roland is good amp for the money. Henriksen is a great Jazz amp not cheap around $1000 USD. I'd say figure out your budget first then see what's fits new and used.

Price isn't always an indicator. I've owned a Henriksen and currently own a Roland 80gx and Quilter Aviator. Got rid of the Henriksen a while back when I got the Quilter. For a while I thought the Quilter was a much better amp than the Roland but over time I think that was just perceived quality based on price and jazz-cache. I find myself using my Roland Cube more than the Aviator or my Acoustic Image lately. Mostly because the Cube sounds good in any room. The Quilter every so often just doesn't agree with the room on a gig and then I'm miserable the whole time.

**Bluedawg** · 04-08-2015, 02:42 PM

Originally Posted by drbhrb

Price isn't always an indicator. I've owned a Henriksen and currently own a Roland 80gx and Quilter Aviator. Got rid of the Henriksen a while back when I got the Quilter. For a while I thought the Quilter was a much better amp than the Roland but over time I think that was just perceived quality based on price and jazz-cache. I find myself using my Roland Cube more than the Aviator or my Acoustic Image lately. Mostly because the Cube sounds good in any room. The Quilter every so often just doesn't agree with the room on a gig and then I'm miserable the whole time.

I love my Henriksen, but I have to agree that the Roland Cube 60s and 80s punch well above their cost bracket when it comes to good jazz tone ...

On the other hand if we were talking rock or blues I would be more hesitant to compare it to more expensive amps

**kid335** · 04-08-2015, 05:41 PM

Originally Posted by docbop

The Henriksen and the Roland aren't even in the same league the price difference should give you a hint. The Roland is good amp for the money. Henriksen is a great Jazz amp not cheap around $1000 USD. I'd say figure out your budget first then see what's fits new and used.

I couldn't agree more. I owned a Cube 60 and currently own a Henriksen 112. It's not a fair fight, Henriksen all the way. A great guitar deserves a great amp.

Unless you need the portability of a 110, I suggest that you do not rule out the 112. Try to pick up a new model, as the recent upgrades to the tweeter that Henriksen implemented are a big improvement and can easily be heard.

**rio** · 04-08-2015, 05:56 PM

I sold my Henriksen and kept my Roland. It is a Cube 30x with a Eminence delta demon in it, so it is tweaked for the sound I like. The Henriksen is/was a great amp, though.

**Rob MacKillop** · 04-08-2015, 06:02 PM

Oh, this is a difficult choice. Cheap and cheerful versus relatively expensive and weighty. And fans on both sides claiming victory. What to do...

**Rob MacKillop** · 04-08-2015, 06:21 PM

I'll buy the Cube first - it will do for round the house.

**Longways to Go** · 04-08-2015, 06:30 PM

problem with the cube for around the house is the noise gate -- I could hear it sort of zoom in & zoom out in quiet practice -- drove me nuts & ultimately lead me to sell the cube 60. I still have a nice Microcube RX -- smaller (& newer) cubes maybe not so much . . .

Henriksen is pretty much perfect at what it does, but it only does one thing, so either you like it or you don't.

Meanwhile, I'm still diggin' my Little Jazz! LOL

I suppose I'd plunge into a Little Bud or Mambo if I had big $$ laying around & wanted another amp to try out.

Actually, I wouldn't mind trying out that Sweet 16 either! And if I was amp shopping the Marshall DSL15c is on my radar. I know . . . not a jazz amp, but I dig the Marshall clean tone for quieter jazz sounds -- so go figure!

**vinnyv1k** · 04-09-2015, 09:24 PM

I am a poster boy for Henriksens. I have both the 110 & 112. They do one thing extremely well. Great jazz tone. The reverb is adequate but not fantastic. The only amp I find more pleasing for great tone is my Fender Twin but you are talking big time heavy. The Henriksens are dead quiet when turned on which is a must for me as I like playing ballads and chord melodies were hissing or humming would distract from the tune. When I was young I liked to play lightning fast. Now I like playing slow and colorful and the Henriksen really works well. All my archtops laminate or carved sound great with the Henriksens. Yes it is a 1 trick pony but I only like a thick dark tone which the Henriksen delivers.