Roland Cube 80X

[rickshapiro]

I purchased an 80X off of Craigslist yesterday. I did not read carefully, I thought it was and 80XL until I got home and realized it was a 80X. I paid $200 which may have been a little high for a 80X. It was perfect condition.

I've had a few hours in with it am thoroughly impressed. I have a few amps; I have a Blackstar Club 40 that I use on my rock gig, A Fender Princeton solid state that I leave at our rehearsal space, a recently defunct little Frontman, and lastly a Tech 21 Power Engine used with my modelers.

I was looking for something for practicing at home but wanted to keep my options open for stage so I went with the 80X.

Some initial impressions: For my non-archtops the Fender and JC cleans are excellent. Although the blackface sounds great I found myself going to the deluxe often. I cannot believe how full it sounds is for such a small amp. This amp gets loud, I would have to try it onstage to really know but within my studio it gets stupid loud. I was less enamored with the distortion on any of the other models. They all sounded "buzzy" to me. I tried various gain levels but was not able to find anything really usable. I will need to revisit them again.

For my archtops the JC channel with a touch of plate was excellent, all I needed. I can definitively see this as viable stage amp for Jazz gigs.

I'm thinking that putting a distortion pedal in front of the clean channels would make this amp perfect for smaller venues.

Anyway, for $200 I think it is a good value and from looking at the build I would assume this thing should last a long time.

[PTChristopher]

Likewise really like the 80X. I do not use the looper, so the XL has no extra value for me.

I also stick to JC and Deluxe.

For any compression or dirt I use the Tech 21 Para Driver DI, which beats anything as far as my ears are concerned. It also costs about what an 80X costs - but it is such a great tool.

Anyway, congrats on the 80X - definitely a great value amp.

Chris

[zigzag]

I sold my Fender Princeton Chorus (SS) for an 80XL. A great move for me. I like most everything about the Cube, but there are a couple of settings in modeling modes that generate some hiss. I'm very happy with clean settings. It is loud.

[Sphereacidburn]

The Roland 80x is a great amplifier. I actually own 2 Roland cubes and 60 and of course the 80x

I have never regretted the purchase, it sounds great live in small and big venues.

I don't really have any complaints. It works great with my Gretsch and my Gibson ES-175. At low volumes I get the woodiness of the guitar along with a great projection of the sound from the amp. IT'S GREAT. Even at loud volumes it's still one of the best solid state amps out there. I know I'm going to get crap for saying that. But, I see the Roland as a poor mans Polytone.

$200 is defiantly a great price since they cost about $400 new.

[Jazzman301]

I have said that MANY times "the Cube is a poor mans Polytone". I think its not quite as dark as the Polytone and dare I say more versatile. I would love to hear my Cube with a custom open back cab with a 15" speaker....

'Mike

[ruiner54]

Not sure if this is true, but I heard the Xs actually sound better than the newer XLs, but if they are the same circuitry then it could be hogwash.

I was at the music store the other day and they had an 80x (obviously old stock) brand new that actually cost more than a brand new 80XL...so maybe that says something about whether it does sound better

[ruiner54]

Might as well mention here...every so often I get a little bored with my tone on the Cube (just because I'm human and need a change now and then). I have always stuck to JC clean, blackface and tweed models (and once in a while the acoustic sim).

I decided to start messing with the higher gain amp models and to my surprise I get a sweet clean, clear punchy tone from the DYNA model using my Epi Emperor II....just turned the gain down as fair as it goes....I was very surprised

[PTChristopher]

Hi ru'54,

In my opinion, once you offer something that is quite good and priced to be available to the broad music market, then the opinion, myth, conspiracy theory, and other versions of modern interpretive thinking (or "typing" anyway) kick in.

>>> but I heard the Xs actually sound better than the newer XLs,

And I am sure you can get every other combination of opinion as well.

- 60 is better than 80 (especially if one has a 60 and they are somehow harder to get).

- 80 is better than 60 ('cause I can get one and it is 20 more.)

- 80XL is worse than 80X. Especially if one buys an X for low cost, or they become hard to get, or both, or neither.

- 80XL is better than the 80X (beyond the specification difference). Again, sometimes following a set of circumstances that appear to drive the view when the actual audio performance may not.

>>> but if they are the same circuitry then it could be hogwash.

I don't know. If one player loves his amp, than that's great. But the hearsay and sometimes bewildering opinion can possibly best be seen as entertainment vs. a practical guideline for sound.

I suppose entertainment is not hogwash per se, and one opinion is as good as another under some circumstances.

The part that continues to have be absolutely baffled is:

[OK, I tried a good 4 or 5 sentences here, but none worked. Or none seemed straightforward without seeming to offend anyone.]

How about: Does simple fact help in any of this, or does it kill the fun?

Fun is the goal for most of us after all.

In my opinion.

Chris

[boatheelmusic]

All-

Let's remember that all these modeling amps are taking your cherished guitar tones, sampling them, converting them into digital, processing them, then reconstructing them into modeled analog.

Seems like if that's what we're doing, may as well all buy Ibanez or Epiphone jazzers (not that there's anything really wrong with them), and skip the Gibsons, Sadowskys, Benedettos, etc. and save a bundle.

But that's not what the originals did.......

[PTChristopher]

b'heel,

Interesting thought.

I do not particularly think that digital processing eliminates the player and guitar from the picture.

An analog amp also processes the sound. So do the walls in a room, curtains, furniture, carpets, the air density (temp/humidity), the direction the amp is pointing, etc..

In my view, nothing fundamentally changes when we digitize a sound. There can be artifacts just like there are in analog processing and amplification.

Now if you put in a synth pickup and only use the guitar as an instruction generator for a six-channel synthesizer, then you could argue that some of the differences between guitars would be unimportant. Of course you would still have playability, sustain (down to some sensor threshold), and possibly some sort of feel that one guitar may give a player vs. another guitar.

But I think that a Cube 80XL vs. Tech 21 TM 60 (analog) do not present a practical difference in the part the guitar and player play in the picture.

Chris

[PTChristopher]

OR,

If I use my Cube 80X or my Princeton Reverb, the difference from one guitar to the next remains about the same to me.

[VanEpsInDeChirico]

Hi.

Someone in my area is selling a Roland Cube 80x from 2009 and I'm considering buying it. I've played a Cube 60 that was made in 2015 and it sounded pretty great to me. But I'm wondering if maybe the technology on the Cubes was very different back in 2009. Mostly I will be using the JC clean setting so whether or not that would sound different from the later Cubes is my main concern.

Thanks for any tips.

[Gitfiddler]

Roland made three different 80 watt Cube amps...the 80x, 80XL or 80GX. All are great little grab n go amps.

Roland made slight improvements in each iteration of the series, most notably in their COSM circuitry. One of the more obvious differences in these amps is that the last version (80GX) did NOT have an extension speaker out. I own an 80GX and wish it had the speaker out so I could connect it to an extension cab. I mostly use the JC Clean patch, but there are others that sound great as well.

Do a search on all three of these and it should help you decide if the 80X you are considering is the best for you. Good hunting!

[cosmic gumbo]

I believe the Cube 80x is newer technology and was the replacement for the Cube 60.

[VanEpsInDeChirico]

You're right! I'm either remembering the "60" part wrong or I am wrong about the year the amp was made. Oh well.

In any case, I hear so much blanket praise heaped on these amps, but surely the Cubes made in 2004 must be radically different sounding (inferior?) to the GX Cubes made a decade later? The technology must have radically changed over the decade. I wonder if its even worth seeking one out that was made before 2013 or so when the GX series was in production.

[Gitterbug]

I used the Cube 60 a lot before starting to build my own cabs. There's still one as shareware in the practice room, and a Cube 40 I sold eons ago to an accordionist is still going strong. They never die. I remember trying the 80 when it was introduced but found no reason to switch. Others have already commented on the various 80 versions. I just don't think the newer ones should a priori sound radically different when played clean.

[Boogaloo]

I don’t know the 80x, but I very briefly owned an XL. Beware the built in non adjustable noise gate. It has to be there for the very distorted high gain models. However when playing clean at practice volumes, if you are in a noisy room, be prepared for every note to float on a pillow of noise. Very noticeable. Deal breaker. Mine was gone within a week.

[jads57]

Depending how much it costs might be worth it. I had one a couple years back and it worked just fine for most gigs.
But things have improved and you might want to look at their Katana 100 1x12" combo used. Might not be much more $.