-
I have a Fender Mustang Floor multi-fx with amp modeling. It includes a "Super-Sonic (burn)" amp model that I never played with until recently. (It didn't sound like something I'd be interested in, and the preset for it was over-the-top obnoxious.)
Then I decided to compare all of the amp models at the same default clean settings, no other effects turned on. Basically minimum gain/treble/bass and maximum middle/volume.
To my surprise, the Super-Sonic model had the sweetest, most musical cleans, unlike the other Fender amp models, even nicer than the Vox cleans.
My question is, is this true of the real amps? I've seen a 22W 1x12 version of the Super-Sonic available online. Unfortunately they're expensive (>$1k) and heavy (40 lbs). But has anyone played through one? If so, what's your opinion of them? Do they really sound that good, and that different from other Fenders?
-
03-23-2019 03:59 AM
-
Yes. I prefer the sounds of the Burn channels turned down than the clean channels. It's like the clean channels on these amps are TOO clean, they don't really sag or breakup, and when they do breakup it isn't pleasant. I prefer my Supersonic 22 "cleans" when I'm on the Burn channel, Gain1 about 3 (gain 2 is 0), and I'll turn the guitar volume down a little as well. There's always just a little "hair" on the notes, which is how I like my clean.
For straight-up clean (dead clean) jazz tones, the clean channel might be preferred..
I own 2 Supersonics: a 22 and one of the newer 60s. I also owned one of the ORIGINAL Supersonics (with the star trek logo) when they came out. The new ones are better.
-
I played through an SS22 for over three years after trading up from a Mustang IV V2. I never could get a decent tone from the Mustang’s Burn Channel model, but really like the real thing.
I can dial in the Burn Channel with just enough grit to be interesting. Gives a great contrast to the Vintage Channel without being overbearing.
-
Not to hijack your thread, but I’m a fan of the Mustang Floor. It’s the only modeller I could ever get decent cleans from (granted I never tried a Kemper or an AxeFX). All the others seem to concentrate on distortion.
I’ll have to get it out and try the burn model, i usually start with a basic Twin and go from there.
Steven
-
Ah, fantastic, that's exactly what I wanted to know, and also answers even more questions. Yah, my modler only has the 'burn' channel model. That's why I was surprised it sounded so pretty. You never know how accurate these models are, so it's good to get confirmation. From what I've read, the clean channel is kind of sterile sounding.
Originally Posted by ruger9
The newer Super-Sonics sound *better* than the originals? That's great news. I didn't know that there was a newer 60W. I assume they're really heavy. Is the 22W loud and clean enough for small gigs with a drummer? And thanks so much for replying. I wasn't sure I'd find anyone using these for jazz.Last edited by strumcat; 03-23-2019 at 12:14 PM.
-
The real amp sounds better than the Mustang model... I must be dreaming. I actually expected something more like "Yer model must be bad, these things sound like old cars being crushed at the junkyard..." I need to try one of these out myself. Originally Posted by Alder Statesman
-
They're fun to play with. Mine has the notorious fizz/buzz of the original V1 Mustangs, but I still like it. The distortions are useless (sounds like a piece of soggy cardboard caught in bicycle spokes), but the delays/reverbs are nice, and some of the modulations are ok. Try the pitch shifter set to the exact same note, but with a little bit of detune. Much more subtle than the chorus/flangers. I got the Mustang floor when my old Zoom 9002 went south. Loved that thing. Originally Posted by stevo58
-
I have a SuperSonic 22 and I love it. To me, the clean channel with the 'fat' button on sounds great. And the burn channel, while poorly named, has a ton of great sounds in it. The two gain knobs make it very tweakable.
I also have a 65 Amps Tupelo that I play more at home, but the SuperSonic is my main amp for leaving the house. Sounds great and lighter than the Tupelo.
My only (slight) complaint would be that it doesn't have the lowest noise floor, but it's really only noticeable at home in a dead quiet room.
-
They didn't make many of the newer 60s or 100s or Twins (all Supersonics). The 22 is the only one still in production. Originally Posted by strumcat
I do think the clean channel sounds kind of sterile, BUT... I had a PRRI too, and the clean channel of the SS22 sounded 95% the same as the PRRI (not considering the PRRI reverb which is AWESOME, the 22's reverb sucks... ALL the Supersonics have crappy reverb, don't know why Fender couldn't get that right). It's actually why I sold my PRRI after getting the SS22: the base tones were so close. (But boy do I miss that reverb!)
SS22 loud enough? Yes, unless you're playing with a loud drummer and not micing the amps. then you could easily run out of headroom with the 22, especially on the Burn channel, that's why I hunted down a used 60W, which works perfectly for that situation. I still prefer the sweeter tone of the 6V6s over the tighter 6L6s, but both amps sound great. 22W for home use, 60W for gigs.
-
The SS22 is based on the deluxe reverb 6V6 tube amplifier platform, but with a solid state rectifier, like a twin reverb. Punchier and more articulate.
-
Only the clean channel. And yes- I believe the SS rectifier is part of the reason why it doesn't break up as "sweetly" as the DR. Originally Posted by cosmic gumbo
The Burn channel is based on the old Prosonic, designed by Bruce Zinky. (actually, it's based on the original SS60, which was based on the old Prosonic).
-
I noticed something interesting about the SS (model) and thought I'd pass it along. The 'gain2' seemed oddly useless except for increasing loudness in a kind of compressed way. But I discovered that it's great for setting the relative loudness of the higher and lower strings/frequencies. Unlike a 'tone' control, turning it up increases the loudness of the lower notes/strings in a very crisp, distinct, well-defined way with no increase in 'mud' at all. (However, if you turn it up too much, you start to lose loudness and clarity in the higher frequencies.) There's a definite sweet spot there if you experiment a bit. So if you've played with gain2 and wondered what use it is, there's the trick. *Very* nice indeed for getting those nice, clear lower notes without mud.
-
I never use Gain2. That's the control that supposedly turns the "Marshall-like" Burn channel into a "Boogie-like" channel, adding thickness and compression. But I find it's just too muddy for me in most applications, and I have found it really prevents me from doing the "turn-down-guitar-volume-to-clean-up" thing that I rely on. I usually run Gain1@5, and at that level, it cleans up really nicely with the guitar's volume pot.
If I want more thickness, I turn the bass up (I run it pretty high with my tele anyway, anywhere from 7-10), and because I play it pretty loud (Master Volume is never below 4, usually a little above... up to 5 for rehearsals/gigs), the amp is already compressing plenty for me, and I don't need the added compression of Gain2. I could see however, when playing at lower volumes than that, Gain2 being useful to "fatten up" the channel when you don't have enough volume to do it. It's a well-thought-out design, I really think Fender has a winner with this amp, despite the fact it's a nightmare to work on, with all the PCBs, relays, and ribbon cables.... it looks like a computer/amplifier hybrid inside LOL.
Reply With Quote
Has anyone played or had a Supro Amulet ?
Today, 04:44 AM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos