Now that we have been at this google "best amp" thing for a cope decades

[grahambop]

Is this guy using a dual Twin setup ?

Yes, he mentions it in this interview:

New Album From English Guitarist Rob Luft, A Time To Remember - Jazz Guitar Today

[nevershouldhavesoldit]

Sorry, I don't know for sure. They boast proprietary technology, which may mean anything but probably not many parallel things. DV Mark is pretty reticent about technical info on their products. To wit: their 12" speakers. All we know is that they come in different colors.

It is not. The front end has what looks to me to be an additional gain stage with a gain control plus a master volume. You can dial in the dirt by balancing gain vs volume, and the 50s I’ve tried did not seem to have as much clean headroom as my LJ. The power module is probably basically the same.

The 250W DV Mark heads (like my EG250) have one microtube in the front end, but I don’t think the smaller heads (50 & 60) do.

[starjasmine]

JFYI, google search results are not the same for every user. Your location, past searches, and the links you clicked on in past results affect the results that your search displays. For example, if you tend to click on links about SS amps more than you click on links about tube amps, more SS results will appear higher in the list of results that you see.

[nevershouldhavesoldit]

Cowboy coffee and jazz cabbage, that's how I roll

And you wonder why the only gigs you get are solo dates on big outdoor stages???

[Woodstove]

Unless it's a Tone Master

Agree!

[Woodstove]

The Fender Tone Master amps are a re-packaging of a solution (digital models of tube amps) that Fender and others have had for many years. In the future, we may not read about the specific iteration of this solution that we're reading about now, but for sure we'll be reading about Fender (and other) modeling amps for a very long time.

I have both the deluxe and twin tone masters. I prefer the twin which has much more headroom, like its tube grandaddy, while the deluxe has less than its forbearer. The twin has excellent jazz tone at low volumes as well.

[BigDaddyLoveHandles]

I have both the deluxe and twin tone masters. I prefer the twin which has much more headroom, like its tube grandaddy, while the deluxe has less than its forbearer. The twin has excellent jazz tone at low volumes as well.

I find the idea of a 2x12 combo weighing in at 15kg tempting. Now if they had a knob at the back labelled tweed/blonde/black I won't be able to resist!

[Woodstove]

I find the idea of a 2x12 combo weighing in at 15kg tempting. Now if they had a knob at the back labelled tweed/blonde/black I won't be able to resist!

yeah they went all the way against the trend of the modeling amp with limitless iterations and locked into exactly one amp, and one version of that amp in these units. I do find it refreshing to not have choices however!! And it sounds good.

[John A.]

I find the idea of a 2x12 combo weighing in at 15kg tempting. Now if they had a knob at the back labelled tweed/blonde/black I won't be able to resist!

Fender kind of makes that amp (though the knob is on the front): Champion 100. I guess it's possible that the Tone Master amps have better models and/or better processors than the models/processors that are in the Champion and Mustang amps. However, the cynic in me suspects not, and that what you get for the additional cost of a TM is a better cabinet and better speakers, plus the XLR out and more options for speaker/mic simulations (IR).

[BigDaddyLoveHandles]

Fender kind of makes that amp (though the knob is on the front): Champion 100. I guess it's possible that the Tone Master amps have better models and/or better processors than the models/processors that are in the Champion and Mustang amps. However, the cynic in me suspects not, and that what you get for the additional cost of a TM is a better cabinet and better speakers, plus the XLR out and more options for speaker/mic simulations (IR).

Hmmm... I had forgotten about the Champion 100. Sounds like a bargain, although given that it was introduced ten years ago in 2013, I suspect the software/hardware is superior in the TMs.

[John A.]

Hmmm... I had forgotten about the Champion 100. Sounds like a bargain, although given that it was introduced ten years ago in 2013, I suspect the software/hardware is superior in the TMs.

Maybe faster/more powerful chips, but I doubt the actual software model is different. The math for amp modeling was figured out quite a long time ago. The Champion amps sound really good, with (as far as I can tell) the main constraint being the speakers and cabinets.

[jim777]

Here is a case in point. These days we read recommendations, like this one, for the Fender Tone Master instead of a Fender Twin. The Tone Master is relatively new offering thats touted as THE solution to a lot of questions. But will we be reading about it tomorrow?

Solid state amps aren't exactly new technology. My bass player plays a 30+ year old Pearce bass amp, so I'm not worried about my $1100 (when new) Twin lasting. I feel pretty confidently that will outlast me, actually.

[Woodstove]

Solid state amps aren't exactly new technology. My bass player plays a 30+ year old Pearce bass amp, so I'm not worried about my $1100 (when new) Twin lasting. I feel pretty confidently that will outlast me, actually.

My bass player sometimes plays my Twin TM, sounds nice. Its also my keyboard amp just like its grandad was with my Rhodes in 1972.

[nevershouldhavesoldit]

Solid state amps aren't exactly new technology. My bass player plays a 30+ year old Pearce bass amp, so I'm not worried about my $1100 (when new) Twin lasting. I feel pretty confidently that will outlast me, actually.

We all know of examples of fragile gear that's been trouble free forever. But based on a lot of collective experience, the probability seems significantly higher to me that a well designed and built SS amp will fail well before an equally well designed and built tube amp if both are subjected to the same use and care (or lack of same). I lost 3 G-K MB150s over about 15 years, two of them to dramatic smoke-and-sparks deaths (one in the middle of a session at Hard Hat Studios). An original 12" orange Roland Cube died on me after about 5 years of moderate use, and a Crate Powerblock just died a quiet death on a duo gig one fine night. I recall at least 8 SS amp failures among about 15 that I bought new and used regularly for at least 5+ years each.

OTOH, I've had about 20 tube amps since 1959, about half bought new and half used. I only remember one failure and it was a 6L6 that let go on the stand. My original Boogie Mk 1 lived a perfect life and went to its second owner about 30 years after I bought it with its second set of tubes (changed as a precaution). I used a Bassman 50 head from its birth in the mid-'70s until I sold it 25+ years later, and I dragged a B15N many miles over a decade with only that single tube failure. I sold my SF Vibrolux a few years ago after about 30 trouble free years.

Add computerization and reliability takes another dip. This has been true in everything from amplifiers to welding machines (almost all early SS TIG welders had board failures within the first year) to coffee makers to washing machines to refrigerators to televisions to air conditioners to cars. Don't get me wrong. I bought a new Blu 6 last year and love it. I have a Superblock US, two Microblocks, and a DV Mark EG250 and I love them all. But at least to the present, the expected time to failure of solid state / computerized controls, displays and assemblies is shorter than it was for the equivalent products in analog mechanical form.

I hope the latest amps are better, and I've invested a fair amount of money in the belief that they are. But I only got into the 21st century because I'm old and don't want to schlep stuff any more. Give me class D, give me neo, give me whatever - as long as it sounds great and comes in a package I can easily carry in my frail old arms and keep in my downsized living quarters. I'll pay the total cost of ownership, including early replacement if that's what turns out to be necessary. But I'm not delusional - to date, computerized and SS products of all kinds are generally not as reliable as their analog and mechanical predecessors were.

[CaptainLemming]

We all know of examples of fragile gear that's been trouble free forever. But based on a lot of collective experience, the probability seems significantly higher to me that a well designed and built SS amp will fail well before an equally well designed and built tube amp if both are subjected to the same use and care (or lack of same). I lost 3 G-K MB150s over about 15 years, two of them to dramatic smoke-and-sparks deaths (one in the middle of a session at Hard Hat Studios). An original 12" orange Roland Cube died on me after about 5 years of moderate use, and a Crate Powerblock just died a quiet death on a duo gig one fine night. I recall at least 8 SS amp failures among about 15 that I bought new and used regularly for at least 5+ years each.

OTOH, I've had about 20 tube amps since 1959, about half bought new and half used. I only remember one failure and it was a 6L6 that let go on the stand. My original Boogie Mk 1 lived a perfect life and went to its second owner about 30 years after I bought it with its second set of tubes (changed as a precaution). I used a Bassman 50 head from its birth in the mid-'70s until I sold it 25+ years later, and I dragged a B15N many miles over a decade with only that single tube failure. I sold my SF Vibrolux a few years ago after about 30 trouble free years.

Add computerization and reliability takes another dip. This has been true in everything from amplifiers to welding machines (almost all early SS TIG welders had board failures within the first year) to coffee makers to washing machines to refrigerators to televisions to air conditioners to cars. Don't get me wrong. I bought a new Blu 6 last year and love it. I have a Superblock US, two Microblocks, and a DV Mark EG250 and I love them all. But at least to the present, the expected time to failure of solid state / computerized controls, displays and assemblies is shorter than it was for the equivalent products in analog mechanical form.

I hope the latest amps are better, and I've invested a fair amount of money in the belief that they are. But I only got into the 21st century because I'm old and don't want to schlep stuff any more. Give me class D, give me neo, give me whatever - as long as it sounds great and comes in a package I can easily carry in my frail old arms and keep in my downsized living quarters. I'll pay the total cost of ownership, including early replacement if that's what turns out to be necessary. But I'm not delusional - to date, computerized and SS products of all kinds are generally not as reliable as their analog and mechanical predecessors were.

IMO digital hardware just isn't designed to last that long. Maybe 5 years tops? Then its one software upgrade away from being totally unusable. Bug fixes, security patches, new features, etc. all designed to take advantage of the latest hardware improvements, all downloaded and applied automatically, will lay our old tech to waste. Some of it recycled, but most landfill. Woohoo!

I think the business model embraces advancements in order to remain competitive, surely, but also to keep consumers on the never ending upgrade path. If thats ever the case with music gear we are in for a bumpy ride. It wont be tubes failing but some patch to an OS that installed before you headed out to your gig, something like that. I'm just waiting for the first AI empowered amp. One that learns from your mistakes and corrects your playing, in the amp, accordingly, before it ever hits the speakers. A sort of AI driven autotune for the old mumbly pegs. Its not if but when at this point.

[lawson-stone]

Here is a case in point. These days we read recommendations, like this one, for the Fender Tone Master instead of a Fender Twin. The Tone Master is relatively new offering thats touted as THE solution to a lot of questions. But will we be reading about it tomorrow?

that's a resaonable question. I think we will, because the Tone Master Twin Reverb keeps close to what makes the Twin Reverb a perennial favorite. Where it varies, it does so in all the right ways. So you can "sound good" at lower volume because there is an output trim separate from the main tone controls on the front. It has a nice pair of direct out microphone emulations. But otherwise, it only does one thing: it sounds and works like a Twin Reverb. So I actually think it will last. Once I got mine, I almost stopped using other amps altogether.

I still own two polytones, a DVMark head, a Fender Princeton Reverb, a Silvertone tube head, and some others... but the Tone Master Twin checks all the boxes and is lightweight as well.

[Doctor Jeff]

We all know of examples of fragile gear that's been trouble free forever. But based on a lot of collective experience, the probability seems significantly higher to me that a well designed and built SS amp will fail well before an equally well designed and built tube amp if both are subjected to the same use and care (or lack of same). I lost 3 G-K MB150s over about 15 years, two of them to dramatic smoke-and-sparks deaths (one in the middle of a session at Hard Hat Studios). An original 12" orange Roland Cube died on me after about 5 years of moderate use, and a Crate Powerblock just died a quiet death on a duo gig one fine night. I recall at least 8 SS amp failures among about 15 that I bought new and used regularly for at least 5+ years each.

OTOH, I've had about 20 tube amps since 1959, about half bought new and half used. I only remember one failure and it was a 6L6 that let go on the stand. My original Boogie Mk 1 lived a perfect life and went to its second owner about 30 years after I bought it with its second set of tubes (changed as a precaution). I used a Bassman 50 head from its birth in the mid-'70s until I sold it 25+ years later, and I dragged a B15N many miles over a decade with only that single tube failure. I sold my SF Vibrolux a few years ago after about 30 trouble free years.

Add computerization and reliability takes another dip. This has been true in everything from amplifiers to welding machines (almost all early SS TIG welders had board failures within the first year) to coffee makers to washing machines to refrigerators to televisions to air conditioners to cars. Don't get me wrong. I bought a new Blu 6 last year and love it. I have a Superblock US, two Microblocks, and a DV Mark EG250 and I love them all. But at least to the present, the expected time to failure of solid state / computerized controls, displays and assemblies is shorter than it was for the equivalent products in analog mechanical form.

I hope the latest amps are better, and I've invested a fair amount of money in the belief that they are. But I only got into the 21st century because I'm old and don't want to schlep stuff any more. Give me class D, give me neo, give me whatever - as long as it sounds great and comes in a package I can easily carry in my frail old arms and keep in my downsized living quarters. I'll pay the total cost of ownership, including early replacement if that's what turns out to be necessary. But I'm not delusional - to date, computerized and SS products of all kinds are generally not as reliable as their analog and mechanical predecessors were.

You're probably right with your argument, but the downside is that older tech was built sturdily but with (by modern standards) certain inefficiencies, and often did have predictable failures that were relatively easy to take care of in 1950's/60's but not today. For instance--TVs. Do older TVs last longer than modern? IDK, but I remember having the TV guy out at our house occasionally in the 60's. There's no point in maintaining an old CRT TV today, even if you could. Same with refrigerators--everyone knows one in a garage someplace that's been around since 1958, but very inefficient, needs frequent defrosting, etc. Old cars--same thing. Carburetors--life is too short...

Old guitars rule of course. But amps...I have a Fender SCXD, Fishman Artist, and Epiphone Valve Jr that are a few years old but maintenance free. (With one tube change for the Fender.) I don't see a need for another old amp. If I needed another one I'd probably get a Tonemaster since it does what I need at a weight that won't break my back. I don't think I'll worry if it will last more than 15 years, because I'll be lucky to be upright in 15 years. (I keed--planning on going to the Rolling Stones concert in 2038 headlined by Mick and Keef.)

[sgosnell]

My father had a radio/TV store back in the '60s, and he stayed pretty busy. Tubes died all the time, but it wasn't difficult to replace them, because tubes were everywhere, in everything - TVs, radios, hifi/record players, what have you. Transistors were just coming in, and I was the first in my school to have a transistor radio. Transistorized devices were a little more difficult to repair, but not by much. I don't think modern solid-state devices are any less dependable than old tube devices, and probably more so. The thing about new devices is that economics have changed, and while repairable, repairs cost more than a new device, in many cases. Hell, it was cheaper to buy a new ink-jet printer than to replace the cartridges in the one you bought just a couple of months ago, starting 25 years or so ago. You can still get a mobile phone repaired, because it's still cheaper than buying a new phone, but it's getting closer. I don't believe any manufacturer intentionally produces anything designed to fail, but anything can fail, given enough time. I still have a Fender tube amp, but that's because I bought it, used, about 30 years ago. It doesn't work, and I've been unable to find anyone to repair it since the guy I've used got old and retired. I could probably do it, but I no longer have any test equipment, nor parts, and my memory isn't what it was back when I was working in Dad's repair shop. My newer amps are lighter, newer, and sound better, so I haven't bothered to seriously look for a repair tech. If anyone prefers old amps, they're welcome to them, but claiming they're better or more reliable is just wishful thinking. Some people just like old stuff, for no good reason, and that's fine, but that doesn't make them superior, just slightly eccentric. Sometimes concentric isn't all it's cracked up to be, either.

[medblues]

I don't believe any manufacturer intentionally produces anything designed to fail...

There are many convincing reports of "planned obsolescence" usually coinciding with the end of the warranty period.

[pingu]

i saw Larry Carlton play
a gig with his Dumble (main and a spare)
he got lots of different wonderful sounds out of it that night
from super clean to dirty growl and everything in between

i asked his roady after the gig about the setup and it was guitar straight
into the Dumble !

I’m voting Dumble

shame they’re so expensive/unobtainable

[jim777]

IMO digital hardware just isn't designed to last that long. Maybe 5 years tops? Then its one software upgrade away from being totally unusable. Bug fixes, security patches, new features, etc. all designed to take advantage of the latest hardware improvements, all downloaded and applied automatically, will lay our old tech to waste. Some of it recycled, but most landfill. Woohoo!

I think the business model embraces advancements in order to remain competitive, surely, but also to keep consumers on the never ending upgrade path. If thats ever the case with music gear we are in for a bumpy ride. It wont be tubes failing but some patch to an OS that installed before you headed out to your gig, something like that. I'm just waiting for the first AI empowered amp. One that learns from your mistakes and corrects your playing, in the amp, accordingly, before it ever hits the speakers. A sort of AI driven autotune for the old mumbly pegs. Its not if but when at this point.

I think if the TM amps were designed to last no more that 5 years then there would be quite a lot of stories about them giving up the ghost after 2 and 3 years (or less). I haven't seen those stories yet (though others certainly may have). and Fender has been making amps consistently for decades, and solid state amps since '66 so the get the benefit of a doubt from me. And, the TM Twin is half the price of the tube version and way less than half the weight, and that's with a pair of Celestions in it so for me it's a no brainer. You'd have to put a gun to my head to get me to drag out one of my tube amps to a show now.

[pingu]

1286619[/URL]]Maybe faster/more powerful chips, but I doubt the actual software model is different. The math for amp modeling was figured out quite a long time ago. The Champion amps sound really good, with (as far as I can tell) the main constraint being the speakers and cabinets.

It would be interesting to hear from
someone who has compared
the current Tonemaster amps with the other
Fender modelling amps , Champions , Mustangs etc

the general opinion we hear is
that the TM’s are better at doing
the tube thing ….
but there are other opinions too

[CaptainLemming]

Whats interesting to me is that this conversation has, perhaps for lack of a better word, devolved into a more or less latest hype cycle feeding frenzy. Lol.

[CaptainLemming]

I think if the TM amps were designed to last no more that 5 years then there would be quite a lot of stories about them giving up the ghost after 2 and 3 years (or less). I haven't seen those stories yet (though others certainly may have). and Fender has been making amps consistently for decades, and solid state amps since '66 so the get the benefit of a doubt from me. And, the TM Twin is half the price of the tube version and way less than half the weight, and that's with a pair of Celestions in it so for me it's a no brainer. You'd have to put a gun to my head to get me to drag out one of my tube amps to a show now.

I get that, and I appreciate the convenience factor is a freaking big deal when it comes to hauling gear. My point was more about the, if not planned, still the necessary lifecycle obsolescence built into digital gear of any kind. As has been mentioned processors get more powerful and so can handle more instructions, thus the software driving these devices becomes more sophisticated, etc. And so previous gen stuff becomes obsolete. Therefore, quite literally, you need to pay to play. Then again maybe Fender now builds, contrary to conventional wisdom, better, future proof boards, ICs and all that knowing their consumers will feel their latest offerings are so close to the "real thing" that said consumers will never need to upgrade* a single thing. Upgrade, not maintain. Not talking about new tubes or caps and all that. I would think, correct me if I'm wrong, a lot of that depends on at least a couple things: 1.) high quality digital components that are affordable, available and mass produced and 2.) a sustainable business model that supports such a mission. I don't know.

Ok, I may be totally wrong here, so let me ask: Is the original Fender SCXD is success story for all and sundry? In the meantime I'll drag mine out of hibernation and give it another go. I do kinda miss it now, after reading these posts.

*How would we upgrade the hardware in an amp anyways? By a new amp altogether, and hopefully recycle old? Or maybe like a PC? Buy a board online, install it and new drivers, attach to internet for bug fixes, etc. and away we go for another next 5 years? I mean, maybe?

[sgosnell]

There are many convincing reports of "planned obsolescence" usually coinciding with the end of the warranty period.

Reports, yes. Convincing, at least to me, not so much.