Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Posts 51 to 100 of 253
  1. #51

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    A lighter PR would be very good. You don’t really want to take a PR too far on foot.

    If they got it down to 7kg say, that would be on my shopping list.

    As it is probably won’t bother. More likely to get lightweight separates. If they had a ToneMaster head I’d buy that.
    I don't see that happening in 'Merica. Outside of NYC, you're driving.
    Build bridges, not walls.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #52

    User Info Menu

    They oughta just re-do in one form or another ....... The BF Vibrolux Reverb and be done with it!
    If you read a lot of internet forums/threads/opinions, you'll see that that amp gets more "thumbs up" than all the others, I am serious. Hard to believe with the Twins, Deluxes, PR's and Pro's out there. Lighter, and just as responsive.

    Why they don't re-issue the BF VR is a mystery.

  4. #53

    User Info Menu

    Has anyone compared these to the new Boss Nextone amps? I am wondering if for half the price a Nextone can be dialed to approximately the same sound as either of these.

  5. #54

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by BigDaddyLoveHandles View Post
    I don't see that happening in 'Merica. Outside of NYC, you're driving.
    Indeed. There are plenty of practical super light options now anyway.

  6. #55

    User Info Menu

    Although I suppose you could also say - if you are driving why not use a real deluxe? (Ok twin is difficult even if you are driving haha)

  7. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    Although I suppose you could also say - if you are driving why not use a real deluxe? (Ok twin is difficult even if you are driving haha)
    I used to have a princeton. I had a gig one time that was only 15mins walking distance from the subway. I decided to just carry it. I regretted that decision extremely shortly after walking with it. It's weight doubles every 2 mins. Now I have deluxe. It's only a little bit heavier. For public transit I use a dolly.
    So yeah I guess for short distances like going up the stairs or carrying the amp to your car, Deluxe and Princeton are practically the same.

  8. #57

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Spook410 View Post
    This was the route I took. Kind of expensive but to my ears best of them. I'm using the crystal clear tone module with an archtop and liking it quite a bit.

    Thing is.. for the same 35 pounds that the Artist weighs, if I could have a really good Twin seems like I would go for the latter. If they are as good as early reviews, maybe I can avoid playing one for awhile. No room for more amps around here.
    I went with the Ultimate Blues Tone Capsule (which is a Marshall Superlead on the crunch channel), which works great for my classic rock cover band.

    For more jazzy/old-school stuff, I would have left it stock (no tone capsule = Fender Tweed Bassman)

  9. #58

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by jimmy mack View Post

    why they don't re-issue the bf vr is a mystery.
    indeed.

  10. #59

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    Although I suppose you could also say - if you are driving why not use a real deluxe? (Ok twin is difficult even if you are driving haha)
    Weight. In my case, it was a 60W tube amp (54 lbs) vs the Roland BCA (35 lbs.) Not only is it more pleasant to carry, when I have a staircase involved it MATTERS. Alot. While the BCA might not really have the "thump" of the tubes, that thump is not something that gets translated into the mains anyway.... especially when you can't turn up that loud anyway. So it doesn't really matter. The BCA sounds great, feels really good, and is light.

    Don't get me wrong- I'll always have tube amps. But in a loud live situation, it simply doesn't matter that much. People can get too precious with live tone. No one can tell the difference at those volumes, going thru PA, in a room full of people. (and in SOME of today's SS amps, there really isn't much difference anyway. The Roland stuff SHOCKED me, how much they sound AND FEEL and REACT like tubes.)

    Now... if I were in a jazz trio, I would be MUCH more picky about my tone, since it was front and center. Altho after years of reading here, the same still seems to apply- most people agree that, a good player with a decent amp can always get a good workable tone. Unless you're going for something very specific, like the Charlie Christian octal tube thing, in which case there's always the Nocturne Junior Barnyard for those situations.

  11. #60

    User Info Menu

    Well.... yeah.

    I tried a mambo yesterday. It was quite good.

  12. #61

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    Well.... yeah.

    I tried a mambo yesterday. It was quite good.
    Was it a recent one - i.e., the one with the mini toggle switch that gives a “fender” tone stack option? I tried a Mambo a few years back (pre-“fender”) and didn’t really like it that much. It was too polytone-ish for my taste. But, for me, the “fender” switch transforms the amp. I use it at home in preference to my Princeton and my Carr.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  13. #62

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by geoff23 View Post
    Was it a recent one - i.e., the one with the mini toggle switch that gives a “fender” tone stack option? I tried a Mambo a few years back (pre-“fender”) and didn’t really like it that much. It was too polytone-ish for my taste. But, for me, the “fender” switch transforms the amp. I use it at home in preference to my Princeton and my Carr.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Yeah I think I heard one of the early ones and it was a bit nasty sounding.

    New ones seem much improved.

    Re: the switch... I was happy with the vanilla eq actually. But - My guitar (old 175) sounds really good through flat response eqs though. I can plug it into a PA straight and it sounds good. Very characterful guitar.

    I’m kind of moving away from Fender with it and more towards solid state. i like it straight into my AER with no reverb for instance. Also fender amps do a fabulous job of taking those plinky, lively acoustic-ish tones older 175s produce and turning them into nasty ice pick trebles. I have to use an EQ.

    It’s going to be different for every instrument. Fender is probably a better match for an L5 or maybe more recent 175. OTOH I’ve heard a lot of pro guitarists (world class name players even) with great gear get some sounds I wouldn’t be happy with at all.... often it depends where you sit. I find fenders so directional with the treble .

    My friend was playing a Benedetto through the Mambo and wasn’t so happy (I thought it sounded good) he wants a Deluxe.... maybe he should try one of these Tonemasters....
    Last edited by christianm77; 09-16-2019 at 05:04 AM.

  14. #63
    there's a fundamental flaw in these amps. In every other digital/modeling amp, you have a master volume prior to the power amp. This allows you to dial in the sweet spot in the fender amp (typically 3-4 on the volume control for jazz, slightly higher for blues) and then turn the master up so that you can amplify *THAT* with your power amp. That's not how the new fenders work. They work exactly like the analog amps in terms of the volume. So even though the deluxe has a 100w power amp, you don't get a full 100w until the volume is cranked way up. To me, that's a fatal flaw. I'd probably buy the deluxe if it didn't have that issue.

    The twin version will likely have less of that issue since it has 2x the power of the deluxe version and I'm assuming you can get it loud enough and still be clean but it's disappointing that they'd whiff on this issue which every other modeler gets right.

  15. #64
    Treble is by nature (physics) directional. Easy solution, turn the treble down. I use fender amps and they sound great with my strat, tele, 335 style and barney kessel. From twang to fusion to straight ahead classic 50s/60s jazz to modern jazz. I haven't found anything they aren't good at. I can make it sound more similar to polytone just by adjusting the tone controls. Unfortunately, you can't make a mambo or clarus sound like a fender by adjusting the tone controls (even with the fender switch).

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    Yeah I think I heard one of the early ones and it was a bit nasty sounding.

    New ones seem much improved.

    Re: the switch... I was happy with the vanilla eq actually. But - My guitar (old 175) sounds really good through flat response eqs though. I can plug it into a PA straight and it sounds good. Very characterful guitar.

    I’m kind of moving away from Fender with it and more towards solid state. i like it straight into my AER with no reverb for instance. Also fender amps do a fabulous job of taking those plinky, lively acoustic-ish tones older 175s produce and turning them into nasty ice pick trebles. I have to use an EQ.

    It’s going to be different for every instrument. Fender is probably a better match for an L5 or maybe more recent 175. OTOH I’ve heard a lot of pro guitarists (world class name players even) with great gear get some sounds I wouldn’t be happy with at all.... often it depends where you sit. I find fenders so directional with the treble .

    My friend was playing a Benedetto through the Mambo and wasn’t so happy (I thought it sounded good) he wants a Deluxe.... maybe he should try one of these Tonemasters....

  16. #65

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by jzucker View Post
    Treble is by nature (physics) directional. Easy solution, turn the treble down. I use fender amps and they sound great with my strat, tele, 335 style and barney kessel. From twang to fusion to straight ahead classic 50s/60s jazz to modern jazz. I haven't found anything they aren't good at. I can make it sound more similar to polytone just by adjusting the tone controls.
    Indeed, less diffraction for higher frequencies. That's pretty hard to avoid, although how you set up your amp can help with this.

    Well I find an EQ pedal gives me better control, as the controls on a PR are treble and bass. I suppose I could mod it... But there is a voice going in my head - 'if you don't like smiley face EQ, why the hell did you buy a blackface fender amp?' which is.... fair enough.

    (This is after I've swapped in a Hemp speaker as well.)

    Unfortunately, you can't make a mambo or clarus sound like a fender by adjusting the tone controls (even with the fender switch).
    To me this is a feature rather than a problem. I don't necessarily need or want them to sound like that. I think the guitar is so characterful I need something flat. It's not like a 335, or a thick laminate archtop with a tune-o-matic bridge where the sound is quite smooth and neutral, it's something a lot more cantankerous and rude and it has a lot to say about the 500-800 Hz range, and it's not going to hold back to save anyone's feelings.

    So I need something quite transparent to flatter that particular quality. A small PA unit would do, honestly. The guy whose Mambo I tried owns a 175 of the previous year, and understood what I mean right away (he was keen for me to try it). A lot of people don't like those guitars. I love it though, suits my approach and style.

    The Princeton is a great amp, but I feel like I'm moving away from it. Probably hang on to it though, it does a thing. And, naturally, it sounds badass with my tele. And I do like to tele.

  17. #66

    User Info Menu

    Also, the PR is too loud for recording really. Need something that warms up a bit earlier. No, really.

  18. #67
    the hemp speaker may be your problem. They are EXTREMELY colored. The princeton is a very different beast of an amp. Different phase inverter than the standard blackface fender. I love them for low volume practicing but not loud enough for playing clean with a drummer.

  19. #68

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by jzucker View Post
    the hemp speaker may be your problem. They are EXTREMELY colored. The princeton is a very different beast of an amp. Different phase inverter than the standard blackface fender. I love them for low volume practicing but not loud enough for playing clean with a drummer.
    I got it on the recommendation of Tele/335 player... so... yeah maybe!

    Very efficient though. I've had no trouble with headroom. I did have trouble with the stock Jensen, it broke up fairly quickly. You should try a PR with a more efficient speaker sometime... It's pretty striking how much more usable the amp becomes.

  20. #69
    12w doesn't work for my style no matter how efficient the speaker is. Even a deluxe doesn't work for me. I need 40w minimum and even then, I usually run in stereo with a 2nd amp for headroom.

  21. #70

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by jzucker View Post
    there's a fundamental flaw in these amps. In every other digital/modeling amp, you have a master volume prior to the power amp. This allows you to dial in the sweet spot in the fender amp (typically 3-4 on the volume control for jazz, slightly higher for blues) and then turn the master up so that you can amplify *THAT* with your power amp. That's not how the new fenders work. They work exactly like the analog amps in terms of the volume. So even though the deluxe has a 100w power amp, you don't get a full 100w until the volume is cranked way up. To me, that's a fatal flaw. I'd probably buy the deluxe if it didn't have that issue.

    The twin version will likely have less of that issue since it has 2x the power of the deluxe version and I'm assuming you can get it loud enough and still be clean but it's disappointing that they'd whiff on this issue which every other modeler gets right.
    I'm sure that was conscious decision by Fender, to make as much like the real tube amp as possible. Altho I get where you're coming from, and imo I agree- the alternate MV design you describe would be better suited to the SS/modeling technology... that's kind of THE POINT, no? It's certainly a big reason why I bought the Roland Blues Cube Artist- the same sound, at any volume. Can do any size room or stage. There is no "sweet spot" to find. It just sounds good.

  22. #71

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by jzucker View Post
    12w doesn't work for my style no matter how efficient the speaker is. Even a deluxe doesn't work for me. I need 40w minimum and even then, I usually run in stereo with a 2nd amp for headroom.
    All I know is MF's be constantly asking me to turn down. Not electric bassists though, TBF.

  23. #72
    Quote Originally Posted by ruger9 View Post
    I'm sure that was conscious decision by Fender, to make as much like the real tube amp as possible. Altho I get where you're coming from, and imo I agree- the alternate MV design you describe would be better suited to the SS/modeling technology... that's kind of THE POINT, no? It's certainly a big reason why I bought the Roland Blues Cube Artist- the same sound, at any volume. Can do any size room or stage. There is no "sweet spot" to find. It just sounds good.
    I'm not sure it was conscious or not. If they wanted to make it as much as the original as possible they would not have built an attenuator in. Since they did that, I presume they did give it some thought.

    Also, the deluxe reverb (analog version) has a bright cap hard-wired in and from the clips I've heard, it appears they have modeled that in the deluxe version of the modeler. Many people I know never use the bright setting and clip out the capacitor on the analog model. Fender should have added this functionality. This lack of common sense feature set seems tone-deaf and gibson-esque IMO.

    Regarding the blues cube artist, I haven't tried it. But I had a katana and while it had potential, it was way too bright. I had to keep the treble on zero which is ridiculous.

  24. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    All I know is MF's be constantly asking me to turn down. Not electric bassists though, TBF.
    Nobody in NY is gigging with a princeton though. Guys like Adam Rogers are using a Twin in stereo with a walter woods for most gigs and a pair of deluxes for quieter gigs. Vic Juris and several other guys are using a 150w fuchs SS amp.

    I think the ship has sailed on being able to use a 12w guitar amp. Might be different for playing background music. On my duo gig in the wine shop, I could definitely use a princeton but not on the big stage at cleveland bop stop or night town.

  25. #74

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by jzucker View Post
    there's a fundamental flaw in these amps. In every other digital/modeling amp, you have a master volume prior to the power amp. This allows you to dial in the sweet spot in the fender amp (typically 3-4 on the volume control for jazz, slightly higher for blues) and then turn the master up so that you can amplify *THAT* with your power amp. That's not how the new fenders work. They work exactly like the analog amps in terms of the volume. So even though the deluxe has a 100w power amp, you don't get a full 100w until the volume is cranked way up. To me, that's a fatal flaw. I'd probably buy the deluxe if it didn't have that issue.

    The twin version will likely have less of that issue since it has 2x the power of the deluxe version and I'm assuming you can get it loud enough and still be clean but it's disappointing that they'd whiff on this issue which every other modeler gets right.
    Fender has other modeling amps that do scale the way you're talking about, so they're obviously aware of this approach. It seems to me, they're trying to build amps that behave the way original Deluxes and Twins behave (and I guess need more power than tube power sections to deal with the "tube watts vs SS watts" phenomenon), without the hassle factor of tubes, and somewhat lower weight. I assume that they have sussed out enough demand for this to make the investment. I tend to agree that that plus power scaling makes more sense, so I don't know if they're right about the market, but I guess time will tell how successful that turns out to be.

    John

  26. #75

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by jzucker View Post
    I'm not sure it was conscious or not. If they wanted to make it as much as the original as possible they would not have built an attenuator in. Since they did that, I presume they did give it some thought.

    Also, the deluxe reverb (analog version) has a bright cap hard-wired in and from the clips I've heard, it appears they have modeled that in the deluxe version of the modeler. Many people I know never use the bright setting and clip out the capacitor on the analog model. Fender should have added this functionality. This lack of common sense feature set seems tone-deaf and gibson-esque IMO.

    Regarding the blues cube artist, I haven't tried it. But I had a katana and while it had potential, it was way too bright. I had to keep the treble on zero which is ridiculous.
    Oh... well if Fender installed an attenuator, then they ARE trying to the same thing... "same tone at any level"... that's what attenuator (are supposed to) do. Of course, it's not that simple. Is the attenuator at the END of the signal chain, right before the speaker? If so, it's the same thing.

    The BCA is NOT bright. Some people actually think it's dark. I think it's neither. The EQ is so versatile (and subtle; for example, the bass control doesn't go from little to underwater, and the treble control doesn't go from blanket to ice pick; their entire ranges are VERY usable) that imo it's hard to get a bad sound out of it. Of course you have to like it's base tone (which is modeled after a Tweed Bassman), or get a Tone Capsule you prefer (I have the Ultimate Blues tone capsule)... and the amp sounds like that no matter where you put the EQ. And the "power scaling" (which, after reading your comments) seems to me to likely be the same or very similar to Fender's "attenuator". The BCA power scaling does indeed sound the same at pretty much any volume, except for very quiet levels (0.5W, MV turned down to 2)... nothing sounds the same when you're barely moving any air. But flip the switch to the 15W setting, and raise the MV to 3... and anywhere from there up sounds pretty much the same... I use the 15W setting at home, and the 45W setting with the band (much louder), and it sounds as much the same as it can, taking into consideration the Fletcher-Munson curve.

  27. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by John A. View Post
    Fender has other modeling amps that do scale the way you're talking about, so they're obviously aware of this approach. It seems to me, they're trying to build amps that behave the way original Deluxes and Twins behave
    I didn't realize the originals had digital attenuators, line out or cabinet sims. I guess they were more advanced than I give them credit for!



  28. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by ruger9 View Post
    Oh... well if Fender installed an attenuator, then they ARE trying to the same thing... "same tone at any level"... that's what attenuator (are supposed to) do. Of course, it's not that simple. Is the attenuator at the END of the signal chain, right before the speaker? If so, it's the same thing.
    The attenuator is not before the speaker. It's before the power amp. It's not a real attenuator. There would be no point in attenuating a class D power amp. Essentially they added the level control I was wishing for but did not add the ability increase the overall level. Only decreasing is allowed.

    So they obviously did think about this but decided it wasn't a feature that people wanted or needed... So with less than $5 worth of circuitry they could have added the master level control prior to the power amp.

  29. #78

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by jzucker View Post
    Nobody in NY is gigging with a princeton though. Guys like Adam Rogers are using a Twin in stereo with a walter woods for most gigs and a pair of deluxes for quieter gigs. Vic Juris and several other guys are using a 150w fuchs SS amp.

    I think the ship has sailed on being able to use a 12w guitar amp. Might be different for playing background music. On my duo gig in the wine shop, I could definitely use a princeton but not on the big stage at cleveland bop stop or night town.
    I will say you are correct as it seems important to you.

    If there's a DR or a Twin at the venue I'd rather play through that. Usually this is the case for a jazz club or festival... But I'm not up for lugging one of those around London. Can't comment on NYC, don't work there.

  30. #79

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by jzucker View Post
    The attenuator is not before the speaker. It's before the power amp. It's not a real attenuator. There would be no point in attenuating a class D power amp. Essentially they added the level control I was wishing for but did not add the ability increase the overall level. Only decreasing is allowed.

    So they obviously did think about this but decided it wasn't a feature that people wanted or needed... So with less than $5 worth of circuitry they could have added the master level control prior to the power amp.
    Yeah I was thinking that was a bit of a gimmick

  31. #80

    User Info Menu

    Yeah, you can't really gig with a drummer and use a princeton reverb and stay clean...unless we're talking real soundman/everybody mic'd up kind of situation...which, I don't know about you, but...

    These still really aren't a subway amp, I guess, the box is too big. For me, I'm far enough out from the city center that it makes more sense to drive to stuff, so I could see myself parking and walking a few blocks with a "lighter than my Polytone" Deluxe...if it sounded pretty darn close. I will be trying these.

    Anybody seen one "in the wild" yet?
    Jeff Matz, Jazz Guitar:
    http://www.youtube.com/user/jeffreymatz

    "Jazz is like life...it goes on longer than you think, and as soon as you're like 'oh, I get it,' it ends."

    --The Ghost of Duke Ellington

  32. #81
    Quote Originally Posted by jzucker View Post
    The attenuator is not before the speaker. It's before the power amp. It's not a real attenuator. There would be no point in attenuating a class D power amp.
    But the attenuator "functions" as if it's after the power amp. This is because both the preamp and power amp modelling is done before the class D amplifier. If attenuator was before the power amp, they wouldn't be able to simulate power amp distortion at lower wattages, but I believe that's not true. So both preamp and poweramp as far as tone shaping goes come before the class D amp in this design. The class d amp is not the power amp of the original amplifier TM is modeling.

  33. #82
    Quote Originally Posted by jzucker View Post
    I didn't realize the originals had digital attenuators, line out or cabinet sims. I guess they were more advanced than I give them credit for!


    You do have a point here. But that said, it seems like their philosophy was to keep these TM amps as pure an original blackface experience as possible. They were so hipsterishly fanatic about it that they didn't even add an F/X loop. They even kept the stand-by switch.
    Attenuator seems like one compromise they had to make to increase the appeal of these amps to their main crowd which isn't jazzers. Most people (blues and rock crowd) want high volume crunch tones at lower levels (attenuator) in quieter gigs or bedrooms, not low level tones at high volumes (master volume). They figured they already offer Twin for the second group. Also a master volume would have been more invasive to the original panel.

  34. #83

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by jzucker View Post
    I didn't realize the originals had digital attenuators, line out or cabinet sims. I guess they were more advanced than I give them credit for!


    Sorry, based on your earlier comment, and having only seen the front panel, I didn't realize they do in fact scale. I guess whatever point you were trying to make went over my head.

    John

  35. #84

    User Info Menu

    Well one things for sure Jack Z will give us a full review as soon as he gets one.
    Jack Z is our resident tester for all things gear. You go Jack,and we all thank you for saving us a bunch of $$

  36. #85
    Quote Originally Posted by Tal_175 View Post
    But the attenuator "functions" as if it's after the power amp. This is because both the preamp and power amp modelling is done before the class D amplifier. If attenuator was before the power amp, they wouldn't be able to simulate power amp distortion at lower wattages, but I believe that's not true. So both preamp and poweramp as far as tone shaping goes come before the class D amp in this design. The class d amp is not the power amp of the original amplifier TM is modeling.
    I should have been more specific. My posting was correct, i should have specified that the "attenuator" is after the modeling power amp but before the class D (the real) power amp

  37. #86
    Quote Originally Posted by jads57 View Post
    Well one things for sure Jack Z will give us a full review as soon as he gets one.
    Jack Z is our resident tester for all things gear. You go Jack,and we all thank you for saving us a bunch of $$
    If they made the 200w power amp version in a 1x12 config I'd buy it.

  38. #87

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by jzucker View Post
    The attenuator is not before the speaker. It's before the power amp. It's not a real attenuator. There would be no point in attenuating a class D power amp. Essentially they added the level control I was wishing for but did not add the ability increase the overall level. Only decreasing is allowed.

    So they obviously did think about this but decided it wasn't a feature that people wanted or needed... So with less than $5 worth of circuitry they could have added the master level control prior to the power amp.
    So what you're saying is, in effect, there's no way to get "power tube distortion" out of these new amps because of where the placed the attenuator? But if it's a SS power amp... I would think they DID dial in the "power tube distortion" right into the VOLUME control on the front panel, no? Just like the real tube amps? One control for preamp AND power amp gain.... you DON'T WANT SS power amp distortion, so the Class D power amp is volume controlled with the attenuator. Am I missing something? I don't see how Fender could NOT have modeled the power amp response in the channel's volume (gain) control, since that's how the real (tube) amps work...?

  39. #88

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by jzucker View Post
    I should have been more specific. My posting was correct, i should have specified that the "attenuator" is after the modeling power amp but before the class D (the real) power amp
    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.

  40. #89

    User Info Menu

    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.
    Build bridges, not walls.

  41. #90

    User Info Menu

    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.

  42. #91
    Quote Originally Posted by BigDaddyLoveHandles View Post
    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.
    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.

  43. #92

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Tal_175 View Post
    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.
    What about being able to turn it up to 8 in the store? Try doing that with a real Twin Reverb in a music store ...

    Build bridges, not walls.

  44. #93

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by mr. beaumont View Post
    Yeah, you can't really gig with a drummer and use a princeton reverb and stay clean...unless we're talking real soundman/everybody mic'd up kind of situation...which, I don't know about you, but...
    Sure, 100%


  45. #94
    Quote Originally Posted by BigDaddyLoveHandles View Post
    What about being able to turn it up to 8 in the store? Try doing that with a real Twin Reverb in a music store ...
    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.

  46. #95

    User Info Menu

    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.

  47. #96
    Quote Originally Posted by ruger9 View Post
    So what you're saying is, in effect, there's no way to get "power tube distortion" out of these new amps because of where the placed the attenuator? But if it's a SS power amp... I would think they DID dial in the "power tube distortion" right into the VOLUME control on the front panel, no? Just like the real tube amps? One control for preamp AND power amp gain.... you DON'T WANT SS power amp distortion, so the Class D power amp is volume controlled with the attenuator. Am I missing something? I don't see how Fender could NOT have modeled the power amp response in the channel's volume (gain) control, since that's how the real (tube) amps work...?
    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.

    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.

  48. #97
    Quote Originally Posted by Tal_175 View Post
    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.
    speaker break-in is one of the biggest myths of guitar amps IMO...

  49. #98

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    Oh hang on Jeff that’s actually complete bollocks.

    You are meant to gearheads. Speakers make a fuck of a difference.

    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.
    +1.

    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.

  50. #99
    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.

  51. #100

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by jzucker View Post
    speaker break-in is one of the biggest myths of guitar amps IMO...
    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.