Tech 21 Trademark 60 recommendation

[Rob TeleMan]

Wondering how the TM60 works for a more Nashville, chicken' pickin' sound. I've found the Roland cube amps just don't have the "chime" of the Fender tube sound, but like the idea of the weight and trouble-free nature of solid-state. I currently have a Cube 30x.

[xjazzy]

I have a TM 60 but I yhink it's a much darker sounding than Fenders.
I don't play it for about 2 years now cause it's broken. But it's how I remember it.

[markinlondon]

Here's my Ch1 setup, (clock face settings) Drive 1:30, Punch 8:00, Level to taste, Bite on. Low EQ at 11:00, High at 1:00. Very Fender, chickens are well and truly picked on the bridge, and the front pickup give warm R&B tones. I've considered labelling my pickup switch as Memphis/Nashville. I have a light touch, so if you're heavy handed you might want to back off the Drive a bit. I've found that engaging "bite" gives a little compression of the natural amp/speaker variety as well as a treble boost.

[Tony474]

My settings are similar to, though not quite the same as Mark's - but then I believe his TM60 is an early one with the Eminence speaker whereas mine is recent with a Celestion Seventy-80.

I have Drive around the 12 o'clock position, Punch anywhere between 7:00 and 9:00 depending on the room acoustics, Level as required, Bite on. Low EQ from 12:00 to 1:00, High 1:00 to 1:30. Reverb about 10:30, again depending on the room. I almost always dial in a bit of Boost by default. Reverb and Boost are on permanently.

If your guitar has lower-output pickups, a higher Drive setting may be appropriate (which is much what Mark said, only the other way round).

You can get a "chimey" sound out of the Cube 60 but it certainly does possess an inherently slightly forward midrange, which can nevertheless be useful sometimes for pushing the sound out through the mix. Don't be seduced by the "Black Panel" model; use "JC Clean" with bass at 12:30 to 1:30, mid at 11:00, treble at 2:00 - 2:30 and presence 1:00 to 3:00. Bright engaged or disengaged depending on the room. Tweak to taste - the presence control is particularly effective, I find.

[Rob TeleMan]

Originally Posted by Tony474

My settings are similar to, though not quite the same as Mark's - but then I believe his TM60 is an early one with the Eminence speaker whereas mine is recent with a Celestion Seventy-80.

I have Drive around the 12 o'clock position, Punch anywhere between 7:00 and 9:00 depending on the room acoustics, Level as required, Bite on. Low EQ from 12:00 to 1:00, High 1:00 to 1:30. Reverb about 10:30, again depending on the room. I almost always dial in a bit of Boost by default. Reverb and Boost are on permanently.

If your guitar has lower-output pickups, a higher Drive setting may be appropriate (which is much what Mark said, only the other way round).

You can get a "chimey" sound out of the Cube 60 but it certainly does possess an inherently slightly forward midrange, which can nevertheless be useful sometimes for pushing the sound out through the mix. Don't be seduced by the "Black Panel" model; use "JC Clean" with bass at 12:30 to 1:30, mid at 11:00, treble at 2:00 - 2:30 and presence 1:00 to 3:00. Bright engaged or disengaged depending on the room. Tweak to taste - the presence control is particularly effective, I find.

So you seem to own both the TM60 & the Cube 60. Do you have an overall recommendation as far as the most tube-like tone of the two. thanks!

[Tony474]

Originally Posted by Rob TeleMan

So you seem to own both the TM60 & the Cube 60. Do you have an overall recommendation as far as the most tube-like tone of the two. thanks!

That's a reasonable question to ask, and for me the answer is not as straightforward as it might seem... I tend not to think in terms of the extent to which my solid state amps sound like tube amps. What matters is whether they provide me with the sounds I need to do what I use them for.

The Roland Cube 60 is a remarkable little beastie and capable of an enormously wide range of different tonalities, most of which, unlike those of some of its competitors in the digital modelling market, are fairly usable. It has an unexpectedly full sound with good strong midrange and is quite giggable in terms of its clean headroom. If I could only have one amp I'd be able to get by well enough with one of these. And in terms of initial cost it is value for money that's tough to beat.

However, it's purely my own subjective view, but the Roland, good as it is, is perhaps something of a novelty, whereas the TM60 is without doubt a "proper" amplifier. Playing through both of them side by side, the TM60 has a character and responsiveness that the Cube can't match. Maybe it doesn't ultimately have the slicing top-end that the Roland can produce - that could be down to the speaker as much as anything, which can be upgraded - but it does respond so well when you dig in and seems to be that bit more "organic" in the manner of a tube amp. What the TM60 doesn't do is give you that big, lush, full-bottomed tone that some amps provide, which sounds so great in the store or the living-room but is next to useless on a gig, where the low end is swallowed up by the rest of the band and the resulting sound is thin and weak. In fact, the TM60 has a nice tight bass response and sounds better the louder it gets, something like a decent tube amp, but unlike one of those it's still very good indeed at lower levels too.

The Cube seems well and sturdily constructed but is obviously built down to a price. The TM60, though of course not a hand-built "boo-teek" item, seems made to a high standard of quality. Though I use both of these amps (and others) as appropriate, I find the TM60 much more satisfying to play through.

If you're thinking about upgrading from the Cube 30X, by all means check out the Cube 60, which is seemingly more of the same with all the toys built in, a fatter sound and a few more bells and whistles, but my feeling is that the TM60 is a better proposition altogether as a serious amp.

[Steve G]

Great thorough review Tony, you didnt try the Tm30 by any chance did you?

[Tony474]

Originally Posted by Steve G

Great thorough review Tony, you didnt try the Tm30 by any chance did you?

Funny you should ask - I never have got to play through a TM30 (or TM10, for that matter), but it was "Guitarist" magazine's review of the TM30 Limited Edition in the polished timber cabinet with the Weber speaker that sparked my interest in Tech 21 in the first place. On enquiring, I found out that the review sample was the only one in the UK and that someone else had bought it.

They're no longer made (presumably having as the name implied been limited!), though the regular TM30 has since become available, featuring an "ordinary" speaker and cabinet.

From what I gather the TM10 and 30 are configured quite differently from the TM60 and have their own set of sounds, which have earned praise from many reviewers. Beyond that, I'm unable to comment. Sorry!

[Steve G]

No probs, thanks for getting back. I feel the TM30 would have enough umph for most of the low vol. gigs I play, Ill just have to give one a go. Those polished wood cabinets were gorgeous weren't they?

Sorry for the thread hijack.

[Tony474]

Originally Posted by Steve G

No probs, thanks for getting back. I feel the TM30 would have enough umph for most of the low vol. gigs I play, Ill just have to give one a go. Those polished wood cabinets were gorgeous weren't they?

Sorry for the thread hijack.

No prob. Indeed, the cabinet pic was what drew my attention in the magazine review - it reminded me of a Peterson amp I once had (in teak rather than oak), which was quite good but ultimately failed to live up to its early promise.

Anyway, you aroused my curiosity, so I've checked the TM30 reviews on Harmony Central - there are two lots, for some reason. I have to say that reactions seem to be mixed and would tend to put me off in favour of the Cube 60, which is a little bigger and much more versatile, works just as well at low volumes as at high, and costs significantly less.

Only you can decide if it's for you - a case, I think, of suck it and see! I'd be interested to hear what you make of it.

[garytelecastor]

Originally Posted by Rob TeleMan

Wondering how the TM60 works for a more Nashville, chicken' pickin' sound. I've found the Roland cube amps just don't have the "chime" of the Fender tube sound, but like the idea of the weight and trouble-free nature of solid-state. I currently have a Cube 30x.

I don't think you have enough headroom. The Cubes really need to be cranked. I use a 60 all the time and other players are always saying I have great tone. You get up to about 10 or 11 O'clock on the clean channel and these babies sing.
Go to a music store and try the 60.
Of course, nothing is going to beat the classic Fender tone. I had to decide between function and form. I have found though that you can get really close if you play with it a little.
Also, it helps, if you aren't already using one, to throw a comp first in line from your guitar on your pedalboard. Put on a little compression and this will enhance that Nashville "sound".

[Tony474]

Originally Posted by garytelecastor

...it helps, if you aren't already using one, to throw a comp first in line from your guitar on your pedalboard. Put on a little compression and this will enhance that Nashville "sound".

Interesting observation and often overlooked - the Nashville guys I know do indeed often use a compressor as a matter of course. This is quite relevant to the TM60 because engaging the "Bite" switch on channel 1 not only brightens up the tonality but also seems to introduce a measure of compression into the signal path. It was Markinlondon(butnowinnewzealand) who drew this to my attention. I checked it out and I do believe he's right.

[markinlondon]

The TM10/30 is effectively a Sansamp GT2 with a power amp, speaker and reverb unit added and iirc was designed as a practice/recording device. The TM60 was designed as a gigging tool with Sansamp emulation but more immediate controls and channel switching. When I last went amp shopping I tried a used Cube 60 but found it very boxy, maybe I didn't crank it enough. The VOX Valvetronix amps were much more open and natural sounding to my ears. I've since bought an AD50VT but the old Trademark seems to be winning out yet again. One day I'll sit down and list all the amps I've owned and sold on while keeping the TM60, it'll be quite a long list.

[Rob TeleMan]

Tony, Thanks for the in-depth evaluation of the TM60 & Cube 60. For some reason here in San Francisco the Rolands are everywhere & no one carries the Trademarks. (I think there is just a glut of available amps for these stores to carry.) But still leaning towards the TM60. I had one years ago, (too many to remember the exact sound quality) but I did have to send the chassis into the company for repair, & they were great.

[Tony474]

Originally Posted by markinlondon

One day I'll sit down and list all the amps I've owned and sold on while keeping the TM60, it'll be quite a long list.

Funny, I've started a collection of the "good" SS amps - as well as the TM60 I've got two Roland BC-60s (a 1 x 12 and a 3 x 10), a Lab Series, the Cube 60 and some others - but both your TM60 and mine are beginning to look like the amp equivalent of Old Father Thames... "Men may come and men may go, but I go on for ever". Or in this case, amps.

[Tony474]

Originally Posted by Rob TeleMan

Tony, Thanks for the in-depth evaluation of the TM60 & Cube 60.

...I did have to send the chassis into the company for repair, & they were great.

You're welcome - it gave me the chance to play them both one on one and think about it. That's another excellent point about Tech 21 - their service department is reportedly very good indeed and their guy Lloyd was certainly most helpful when I had some questions to ask.

[nosuch]

Originally Posted by Tony474

Funny, I've started a collection of the "good" SS amps - as well as the TM60 I've got two Roland BC-60s (a 1 x 12 and a 3 x 10), a Lab Series, the Cube 60 and some others - but both your TM60 and mine are beginning to look like the amp equivalent of Old Father Thames... "Men may come and men may go, but I go on for ever". Or in this case, amps.

as a ss-collector - what do you think about the 80s sessionette?
I have one and think the channel B (clean) is quite useful.

[Tony474]

Originally Posted by nosuch

as a ss-collector - what do you think about the 80s sessionette?
I have one and think the channel B (clean) is quite useful.

I think the Sessionette is one of the great SS amps - I've had no fewer than eight of them, Mark I, Mark II, 1 x 12, 2 x 10, black vinyl, grey tweed, etc., etc. They were immensely popular in their day because they had great sounds both clean and overdriven, were very loud, very portable and very affordable.

There were a couple of downsides. Particularly with the Mark I with the encapsulated ILP power-amp module, heat was the enemy as there was only the pressed-steel chassis to act as a heat-sink. If the thermal paste dried out the power module could overheat and fail. The later Mark II models with the MOS-FET power stage weren't as bad in this respect, though some say the earlier ones sounded a little better.

Also, you have to take good care of the the footswitch cable as the signal actually passes through it to the switch and back. Any damage to the conductors in the multi-core cable will cause a problem. This is simply cured by unplugging the footswitch and instead using the panel-mounted controls, which can be inconvenient but will get you through the gig.

What is noticeable about the Sessionette is that, while it does have a great general sound, it tends to be lacking in bottom-end fullness and can be shrill. I overcame this problem by using a simple graphic equaliser in the effects loop.

For technical support, circuit diagrams, etc., you can still contact Stewart Ward, the designer and manufacturer, through the website www.award-session.com or by telephone on +44 (0)1256 477222.

Sessionettes to avoid are those made after 1987, marked as being made by Axession as distinct from Axess Electronics. This is because, after Stewart lost control of the original company at that time, changes were made to the design which badly affected reliability. This does not apply to the more recent and different Sessionette models from the late '90s to the present, which are once more Stewart's babies.