-
Has anyone already tried this :
Universal Audio UAFX Woodrow '55
Sadly but not surprisingly most of the clips online deal with the OVERDRIVE capabilities of this unit - I would much rather like to know how it behaves when dialing in
the classic 50's Jazz sounds that our hero's got with the then ubiquitous Fender tweed amps, especially the Deluxe/5E3 models ....
Universal Audio UAFX Woodrow '55 Instrument Amplifier Effects Pedal Copper | Guitar Center
-
06-08-2022 11:16 AM
-
Hello, long time lurker, first time poster here.
I got the UAD Woodrow and have been playing it for a couple of days. At first I was struggling, but now I really love the sound I can get.
Unlike typical amp-in-a-box pedals/modelers with really generic controls, I've learned that the controls on the Woodrow really do behave like a real Tweed Deluxe, along with all of the quirkiness that the real amp has:- tone control at max is actually darker than around 3-4 o’clock
- as volume knob goes up, the bright cap and tone control is slowly removed from the circuit, resulting in more bass response.
I ended up looking up some tutorials to learn how to set up the controls. This one was particularly helpful:
With that I was able to get a really warm, creamy and dynamic sound that doesn't break up unless I want it to. I've been able to get great cleans using just the instrument channel, mic channel, and even jumping the two together. Sometimes the channel volume knobs will be set pretty low (around 9 o'clock), but you easily make up the gain using the output knob. I have always wanted a Tweed Deluxe, but have always felt tube amps are too heavy, too loud for home use, and afraid it won't have enough clean headroom for live use. This pedal plus a quilter toneblock 202 solves all of my problems.
Some other notes regarding the pedal:
- if you just want to use one channel, turn the other volume all the way down. The moment both volumes are turned up they are jumped together, so it doesn't do the "the unconnected channel still affects tone" thing.
- it was noted by UAD that this pedal has more clean headroom than the software plugin, so it is easier to get a clean sound than the amp
- the room reverb is useful sometimes but for jazz I tend to keep it quite low or even off.
- the only down side I have is that for guitars with humbucker pickups the pedal can sound really boomy in certain settings. With no eq controls all you can do is indirectly affect the bass response by messing with the speaker sim, tone, and channel volume settings. Alternatively a small high-pass filter in front also works quite well.
-
I have ordered the Dream 65 but delivery has been postponed already two times. What I heard is that UA hadn't expected these pedals would be so popular.
-
Thank you pedalist. That was great information.
I might end up getting all three. My big question is: do the mic and cabs sound like an eq or do they respond in more dynamic ways?
I would think that would be even more important for jazz, due to typical jazz recordings not being as sonically dense as other genres.
(In my experience, I would maybe not go through the trouble of mic’ing a cab if the mix was really busy, and just use software. If it is a less busy mix, then I would certainly want a well mic’ed cab... maybe even in a good room).
-
Check the Universal Audio Forum. A lot of information can be found there.
-
Interesting, but expensive. You could get a whole Fender Mustang GTX50 amplifier for the same price here - and the tweed deluxe is just one of the many models included.
-
I have previously tried both analog and IR speaker and mic simulations. So far I find the UAD's cab simulations quite good, especially with the help of the room knob. Analog cab sim usually cuts through the mix quite well but for recording solo I find it can sound slightly unnatural at times. I can't really tell much difference between Woodrow cab sim and a good IR simulation, but having six good quality speakers right on the device is much easier to set up than going through tons of IR files hoping to find a good match.
Originally Posted by st.bede
-
Three UA pedals, compared to the actual amps they're simulating. Very well-done demo, with a fair amount of clean-ish playing
Last edited by raymoan; 06-17-2022 at 03:30 PM.
-
This is interesting. But double a reasonable price. Three of my amps cost less. I'd love to try UA pedals. The only way will be years later, on resale.
-
Is that the pedal dreaming that it is the amp or the amp dreaming that it is the pedal?
-
I just received the UA Dream 65. Reminds me of the UA Ox which I had at home for a short period. Reviewers were not exaggerating. The thing is really good. And a much better deal than the Ox. Originally Posted by Jabberwocky
-
Since tht OP asked about the Woodrow: I sold my Quad Cortex and bought four pedals from UA: the Dream, the Woodrow, Reverberator and Starlight (Delay). Tried the Ruby also, great cleans, but I am just a Fender guy and always will be. Why the Woodrow? It has thicker mids than the Dream and thus complements well with the Dream. I hate most Fuzz sounds (getting a bit better lately ;-), heavily overdriven Tweeds with too much bass when the tone crumbles apart. But Jazz guys from the 50s used Tweeds as well.
My main gain areas with both pedals is around 8 to 10 o clock, staying on the rather clean side with a touch of hair. When I need a bit of overdrive I have a Chase Bliss Brothers in front of them, dialed in with rather moderate settings.
Actually, the Woodrow plays nicely with my Gibson 225 and 330 from the early 60s/late 50s, equipped with old P90s. These guys can be difficult sometimes even if I like them to bits… The result is a warm clean dynamic tone, and that’s what you want. And if you lean into the strings, the pedal reacts to your playing. Haven’t experienced this response with other modellers before. Only with tube amps but I wont buy another one… ;-)Last edited by Heinrich; 01-06-2023 at 08:10 AM.
-
Well, the 'Jazz Guys' in the 50's used whatever was available which was not a whole lot - and the Fender 'Tweed' amps were the newest stuff on the market so it figures that they used those whenever possible. The thing one always has to be conscious of is the MUCH LOWER VOLUME LEVEL that was the norm back in the day, the way they did their recordings (live in a room with just a couple of mics) and ANY type of distortion was the ENEMY. The goal with almost all of the modern re-creations of old amp designs is just the opposite : to get a saturated/overdriven tone at low(er) volume levels and not having to deal with blown trannies and speakers. One very practical solution for players who want BOTH clean AND overdrive tones from an old amp design is either one of them pedals with built-in IR's or a modeller , fed into a DAW for recording or some type of "loud-maker" , i.e. powered speaker, guitar amp return input etc. One of my favorite LIVE-settings on my Quad Cortex is a blackface Princeton dialed in clean with a VERY slight push from a vintage compressor. Add sweetening/seasoning as needed : Yummmie.... Originally Posted by Heinrich
-
Very true @gitman! Just wanted to mention that clean tones are perfectly possible with tweed amps. So many think about Gibbons and Co. when it comes to this kind of amp. I hardly ever used sounds from overdriven amps, rather an amp for notoriously clean sounds as pedal platform plus a high quality overdrive or boost. I have a Two Rock Studio and an old Fender, no way to turn them up at levels where overdrive would kick in. After a very long journey with several modellers for home use and recordings I arrived at the UA pedals and they give me the tone I want from a modeller. Though it was a very tough decision to let the Quad Cortex go because it is so incredibly capable. Just wanted to go halfway back to old school, have the knobs on hand like the original amp and - that’s just me - be a tiny bit closer to the original sound.
Reply With Quote
Grant Green, What is This Thing
Today, 01:59 PM in Ear Training, Transcribing & Reading