-
Well then, that makes sense, and would seem to achieve what you are after (and what everyone would be after, I would think)? Power amp distortion at lower levels. Modeled power amp distortion, who's VOLUME can then be controlled (but distortion characteristics not changed) with a SS power amp/attenuator.
Originally Posted by jzucker
-
09-16-2019 01:26 PM
-
This brief review on TDPRI is damning:
I played the Fender Tone Master amps today | Page 16 | Telecaster Guitar Forum
OK, I played the Tone Master Twin Reverb at GC today, and as luck would have it, there was a TRRI sitting right beside it. I was able to a/b them.
My take...I could probably use the Tone Master on a gig and be ok with it. It sounds pretty good. But I'm sorry, it does NOT sound like a Twin Reverb with tubes. In full power mode, I cranked the TM to 8, and it was just somewhat loud, the Twin I never got past about 3.5. I tried some of the other power settings and they seemed to do what they are supposed to do.
The TM did not have the sparkle of the TRRI. I tried turning up the treble, turning on the bright switch. It just doesn't have it. It did not have the rich bottom to it either, was just a bit flat.
I'm confident that in a blind test (live, not on the internet) I could DEFINITELY tell the difference. And it's not a small difference.
I was disappointed, but not really surprised, this has been my experience with ss and modeling amps. As a backline amp, I'd be ok with it, but I wouldn't buy it.
-
While that is interesting, I have read 1-2 similar reviews on the Blues Cube Artist... and about 20 that say the exact opposite! LOL! I think the jury will still be out for awhile.
Altho, and I hate to say this, but... if anybody could NOT get it right, it's Fender. I love all things Fender, and I know the Mustangs are quite popular for what they are, but something tells me when it comes to "big amps" (which these are supposed to be), Fender doesn't "have it", not yet, when it comes to modeling tech. I hope I'm wrong, I'd love to see them get into this field in a big way (with giggable amps)... it just wouldn't surprise me if the reviews are overall less than stellar.... because... it's Fender. Unfortunately.
And this is coming from someone who owns and LOVES his Supersonic 22, a modern Fender amp. I think it's the best modern amp they make. I just feel like Fender throws ALOT of stuff up against the wall, just to see if it sticks.
-
Lack of sparkle and bottom end (if we assume that this wasn't even a product of the room or the imagination of the tester) is typical of speakers that aren't broken-in yet. These amps are brand new from the factory. They aren't even store worn yet. Originally Posted by BigDaddyLoveHandles
-
Sure, 100% Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
-
Yeah I don't believe that Fender couldn't get the TM twin with a class D amplifier quarter of the loudness of the tube version (What the poster claims.). Matching the power with a class D amp was the least of their worries and easiest parameter to verify during design. Originally Posted by BigDaddyLoveHandles
-
Oh hang on Jeff that’s actually complete bollocks.
You are meant to gearheads. Speakers make a fuck of a difference.
I’m not saying that a little more headroom might not be nice, it’s just I’ve not had a problem with head room.
Comping is a little quiet here, but I could have turned up a bit. I think I was on about 5 or 6. Solo had a very substantial clean boost and even that is ... fairly clean. It takes a lot of make it drive actually.
I’ve never had it on 8 so I don’t really know what happens up there. Maybe it breaks a little.
I think you could squeeze a lot out of DR. First thing I’d do is swap the speaker for something efficient.
Before I changed it I couldn’t have gigged with the PRRi. I thought I’d bought the wrong amp. But I got advice from Princeton player who also builds amps, luckily, and not this forum.
20 minutes of your time and $100 or whatever it is. Do that in the tonemaster DR (10kg) and you would have headroom for DAYS.
-
no, that's not what I'm saying at all. Quite the opposite in fact. These new amps the ability to dial in the preamp gain and then utilize the attenuator to simulate the power tube distortion (all in the digital domain). At that point, the signal is converted to analog and sent to the class D power amp. Originally Posted by ruger9
After the signal is converted to analog, every other modeler that I know of allows you to set the level control to maximize the output to the power amp. So for example, if my "sweet spot" is that modeled volume on 3 and the modeled power amp on 10, i could increase the level control so that my power amp is able to amplify the signal and get maximum power out of the power amp.
On the tone master, this isn't possible. IOW, if you have the volume on 3, you will be getting approximately 30% of the rated power of the class D amp.
-
speaker break-in is one of the biggest myths of guitar amps IMO... Originally Posted by Tal_175
-
+1. Originally Posted by christianm77
A speaker swap can (but does not always) completely change an amp... the PRRI is a good example, that stock P10R ain't good for much, and certainly not good for much amp gain, and DEFINITELY not good for pedal gain. A speaker swap can turn a PR into a totally different amp, one capable of much more than the stock speaker is. Of course, if low-volume cleans are all you use it for, then it doesn't matter.
I've swapped many speakers over the years, and it always makes SOME difference... not always for the better. But with the PR, it made some very real almost-night-and-day differences, at volume. I definitely want another PR someday, but it's going to have a Celestion Gold 10 or maybe a Celestion Greenback 10 (or the Weber Legacy equivalent) in it, as I find the stock P10R good for very little.
-
my Celestion G12H-75 and Jensen Jet Tornado speakers sound almost exactly the same 60+ hours of loud playing later than they did when they were new. When people speak of speaker break-in what they are really experiencing is psycho-acoustic perception.
-
I don't know if we've had this discussion, but I couldn't disagree more. It's not a drastic difference, but it's certainly no "myth!" Weber even used to offer the service for people when buying new speakers. It's no myth. Altho I think you need to play at volume levels... lets say "louder than most jazz" to hear it. Originally Posted by jzucker
-
Disagree 100%. But we are are entitled to our opinions. Originally Posted by jzucker
And keep in mind: this is coming from a tube snob who now plays a solid state amp alot of the time. I don't prescribe to dogma. I listen with my ears, not my eyes.
-
The entire point of psycho-acoustics is that you cannot say what you are hearing. It's actually a brain-related phenomenon. It's not something you consciously choose to do. It's been tested over and over. It's not new-agey talk. Speaker-breakin is, unfortunately. Originally Posted by ruger9
Here's my question to the folks who believe in speaker break in. If speakers change so radically when they break in, why is it universally accepted that in 100% of the cases, the speakers sound Better when they break in? It doesn't make sense from a physics and logic standpoint. If it made such a difference, statistically speaking, 50% of the time people would be unhappy once it broke in.
NONE of my speakers sound any different years later than they sounded new. And weber is selling snake oil.
-
But... on the originals, this was done with one knob: the volume knob. And that is, if I'm not mistaken, exactly how these new TM amps work. An attenuator, which attenuates the CLEAN SS POWER AMP , was "Added".... it's like taking a tube DR, micing it, and sending that signal into a clean SS power amp for re-amping. The attenuator IS that "master volume". The preamp AND "tube" power amp gain on the TMs is controlled with one knob. So, if your tube DR's "sweet spot" is at 7, then dial the TM DR up to 7. (supposed to be) the same thing. THEN put the overall volume (not gain) wherever you want it. that sounds perfect to me, at least if you are trying to DUPLICATE the originals... it's like adding a master volume that actually works to the originals. Not a PPIMV, not power scaling the power tubes, an actual VOLUME control to the originals. Originally Posted by jzucker
-
That's not what I think. I said they change. And they do. Better or worse? Perhaps neither... perhaps just different. Why do you think 70-year-old Jensens don't sound like brand-new ones? I mean, after all... speakers DON'T CHANGE, right? Originally Posted by jzucker
If speakers DON'T CHANGE, why do people get them reconed (because they are "tired", not blown)? More psycho-acoustics?
-
Did this reviewer know about the knob on the back for setting the output "wattage" emulation? That would account for not being able to get significant volume out of it. Just curious. Originally Posted by BigDaddyLoveHandles
-
No, the attenuator does not attenuate the clean power amp. The attenuator on the tone master is working in the digital domain. There is no advantage and quite a few disadvantages to attempt to attenuate a class D amplifier. Originally Posted by ruger9
If you were duplicating the original, you wouldn't be adding an attenuator and line level / cabinet simulator output.
And I agree they are attempting to replicate the originals in some way but IMO, it's a fail to not have a level control after the last D/A conversion (other than the attenuator which goes only in one direction)
-
I think this is similar to the power scaling approach of the Katana: crank master volume, set preamp gain to desired level of breakup/saturation, then set the power scaling option to set final volume. I don’t recall what the exact power scaling options are on the TM Deluxe Reverb are, but the net effect would be basically having a 1/5/10/22 (or whatever they may be) watt amp that would exhibit breakup characteristics accurate to the original amp no matter the final output of the amp. So, yeah. It’s not gonna be possible to goose the output so that you have the same maximum output for all preamp gain levels.
-
Website says the new tonemaster deluxe is 23lbs (I say 10kg) if it sounds good .... and it may not sound as good as the real thing from the video I’ve seen, but worth a try, that makes me go hmmmmm. Originally Posted by jzucker
-
Who cares if it's in the digital domain? It's just controlling clean volume. It has nothing to do with the modeling part of the amp. The WHOLE POINT is that the "tube" power amp characteristics have already been accounted for with the VOLUME knob on the front panel, just like the original tube versions. Originally Posted by jzucker
Originally Posted by jzucker
If, as I suspect/assume, the "tube" power amp characteristics have already been included in the front panel volume knob, again- just like the original- there's no purpose being served by what you suggest. If you want something OTHER than a DR or Twin, great. But if you want the SAME PERFORMANCE/FUNCTION of a tube DR/Twin, just at a lower volume (e.g., you want a Twin on 7 but at many fewer decibels), what Fender did is exactly right. They wanted to make SS/modeling versions of iconic amps, and they did that, it looks like to me. What you suggest has nothing to do with the original version, in tone. On the TM amps, it's ALL in the volume knob, just like on the tube originals - they have no master volume, as you know. So the "attenuator" or whatever you want to call it- acts AS a master volume, AFTER getting the preamp AND POWER AMP characteristics with the volume knob... one more time: just like the originals.
Think of it this way, conceptually: inside the chassis, Fender put an entire DR, with a "silent speaker". They also added a SS clean power amp. They mic'ed the DR silent speaker (lol), then sent THAT back into the SS clean power amp they ADDED TO the DR. They are able to this because the whole thing is solid state. I can't vouch for how close they SOUND to the originals, but the intent and execution seems perfect to me, if what they were trying to achieve was "cranked tube amp tone at lower volumes", without using an external device like an attenuator. THAT is what the masses would want... who wouldn't love to be able to "crank" a Twin, without having fillings fall out? Mission accomplished.
As for the cab sim and direct out, they did that because they could: it's a SS amp. Why not? It could very handy in a gig situation, especially when isolation in the mains is wanted.
-
This is the way I understand the flow in this amp: Originally Posted by jzucker
1. input-> 2. A/D-> 3. model of pre-amp section of (including tone stack, volume knob, and reverb and vibrator)-> 4. PI section model -> 5. Power amp section model -> 6. PT model -> 7. D/A -> 8. Class D amp -> 9. Speaker(s)
Where do think the power amp attenuator is in this chain? Where do you think it should be? Why does it matter?
John
-
Wow! All this conjecture about a new amp! How many have played one?
Reading this has pretty much turned me off to the idea of even trying one. Not that I need one.
My Princeton Reverb, old and worked on, with efficient transformers, and a GREAT Eminence Legend 10in. speaker, is too loud. Great tone but, when it's cooking, I have people asking me to turn it down. I would like a lighter amp than this one, but damn, is it worth all the thinking and scrutinizing?
I just want to go and practice my playing and expression.
-
Well here is an idea. May be next time you want to just "practice your playing and expression" refrain from reading long threads about amps that you don't need and don't feel obligated to take your precious practice time to share with the world how you don't want to buy the amp and just want to practice your expression. Instead just practice. Ignore all this. Originally Posted by Jimmy Mack
-
At the end of the day it's if sounds great on different gigs. For me Quilter Aviator amps sound really good on all my gigs. And I'm sure the 200 watt Tone Blocks would sound maybe even better.
So until someone can come up with a more portable great Loud Clean platform,I'm sticking with Quilter.
Reply With Quote
“Shearing style”
Today, 05:26 PM in Comping, Chords & Chord Progressions