I think I understand the tonemaster amp thing now

[PBO Blues]

If the DRTM EQ seems less mid-scooped and flatter than a DR, do the controls respond like a DR? I.e. does increasing bass and treble produce a mid-scoop?

IME, yes. When I'm playing through mine, the treble and bass are turned up to the 8-10 range, and with the mid set around 6-6.5, the "scoop" is attained. To achieve a more mid-forward sound, adjust back the bass and treble levels.

Mid on a DR?

 

[39martind18]

Mid on a DR?

Should have clarified: The mid level is fixed in the circuitry, so that boosting bass and treble knobs above that fixed mid level gives the scoop. Didn't mean to infer there was a mid control.

 

[TwangerWannabe]

I'm late to this discussion, and only read through the first 5 pages or so. Nothing surprising here, jsut more of peopel dealing in absolutes, either it's all or nothing. People crapping on one thing because it's not what they like, even if someone else says it works for them. Not sure what the goal is disregarding what someone else likes simply because you don't, but in the end that says more about the person crapping on the other person more than anything.

I said this in another thread, but it would be such a glorious thing if everyone's playing was at the same level of their high requirement of great tone. I mean, it seems like we have so many Golden Ears here who demand nothing but the "best', whatever that may be, and if you aren't in agreement to what they have arbitrarily defined as the "best" then your opinion doesn't count. y guess is most of us are probably can't play all that well anyway (myself included) and if many of us held ourselves to the same standard for our playing and ability as we hold for our tone or sound we'd be much better guitarists. If you suck playing a Tone Master and blame it on the amp, you're not magically going to sound amazing on a vintage tube amp.

 

[Milspec]

I hesitate to jump into these debates, but I'm interested in the discussion about mids. Milspec's original post says he thinks the TM is less scooped than vintage DRs. I haven't played a vintage blackface Deluxe in a long time, but I have a DRRI and my experience is the opposite. My DRRI seems a hair fuller in the mids, like there's a bit of thickness there that's not in the TM. There's definitely a difference between the amps, but it's close enough I simply wonder about tube bias or component value tolerances.

A family member with no guitar experience (my test subject!) instantly preferred the DRRI. Another who goes with me all the time to audition gear (and who has good ears) preferred the TMDR. Honestly, I don't care much myself. They're pretty darn close and if I can't get it done with one then I'm not getting it done with the other.

I'll say I'm definitely keeping my TM, which is a different outcome than in the original post. I like the consistency of the XLR output and the attenuator is very useful. I also love the weight. My favorite part, though, is the near total absence of noise. No reverb feeding back on high settings, no hum from the heater filaments or circuit or whatever, way less EMI getting through. The TM is QUIET!

My claim isn't really that it seems "less scooped" but at a higher frequency across the board. If you looked at the 2 amps on a scope, they might have similar rise and fall, but the TM seems to be at a higher frequency....at least it sounds that way to me.

So, although you can adjust your settings to affect the scooping, you can't lower it's frequency. I hope that makes sense, I am just a cowboy caveman and not any electronics wizard...it just sounds like the tone profile is at a higher frequency and not in a good way.

Is that the result of the speaker selection or the amp? I have no idea and don't want to throw another $200 at it right now to find out. Still sounds good to me, just a little "off" in the same way that the Hot Rod series of amps always sounded to me.

 

[TheCheapGuitarist]

Funny how people will say things like, "this sounds close to a [whatever amp], but only 99% of the way there", etc., when in reality two of that same [whatever amp] side-by-side probably sound only about 80% like each other. Especially with vintage amps.

Side note: there are dozens of threads about gear, and people discuss/argue which is "better", etc., sometimes for 20+ pages. But only one (that I've seen) thread about actually playing the friggin' guitar.....

 

[scelestus]

My claim isn't really that it seems "less scooped" but at a higher frequency across the board. If you looked at the 2 amps on a scope, they might have similar rise and fall, but the TM seems to be at a higher frequency....at least it sounds that way to me.

So, although you can adjust your settings to affect the scooping, you can't lower it's frequency. I hope that makes sense, I am just a cowboy caveman and not any electronics wizard...it just sounds like the tone profile is at a higher frequency and not in a good way.

Is that the result of the speaker selection or the amp? I have no idea and don't want to throw another $200 at it right now to find out. Still sounds good to me, just a little "off" in the same way that the Hot Rod series of amps always sounded to me.

I get it now. I don't think it's worth it for a speaker change either because they're soldered in and not designed to be changed. I think the only real way to compare would be an aftermarket neo put in a DRRI. But that's an expensive experiment.

 

[PhredE]

I just poked around online to chase the specs of the Jensens involved -- the C12K and the N12K.

The specs are similar overall. There's a few minor differences, but the overall responses curves are very similar and most the rest of the parameters are pretty close. The ceramic is about +2db greater than the neo counterpart however.

C12K

C12K | Jensen Loudspeakers

While not strictly a vintage reissue, the C12K is the first design that Jensen developed in the early ‘90s. It is tonally inspired by the classic vintage ceramic Jensen, but with a substantially stronger voice, full bass and smooth top end. The C12K became one of the speakers of choice for...

www.jensentone.com

N12K

N12K | Jensen Loudspeakers

The N12K was developed in conjunction with Fender® as the speaker for the new Fender® Tone Masterä Deluxe Reverb® and Twin Reverb®. It delivers the closest sound, character and dynamic feel of the classic Jensen C12K with half the weight, thanks to the exclusive Jensen Neodymium magnet design...

www.jensentone.com

 

[11 Gauge]

I just poked around online to chase the specs of the Jensens involved -- the C12K and the N12K.

The specs are similar overall. There's a few minor differences, but the overall responses curves are very similar and most the rest of the parameters are pretty close. The ceramic is about +2db greater than the neo counterpart however.

C12K

C12K | Jensen Loudspeakers

While not strictly a vintage reissue, the C12K is the first design that Jensen developed in the early ‘90s. It is tonally inspired by the classic vintage ceramic Jensen, but with a substantially stronger voice, full bass and smooth top end. The C12K became one of the speakers of choice for...

www.jensentone.com

N12K

N12K | Jensen Loudspeakers

The N12K was developed in conjunction with Fender® as the speaker for the new Fender® Tone Masterä Deluxe Reverb® and Twin Reverb®. It delivers the closest sound, character and dynamic feel of the classic Jensen C12K with half the weight, thanks to the exclusive Jensen Neodymium magnet design...

www.jensentone.com

I never thought to investigate the C12K to see how it differed from a C12N, which is obviously a sort of benchmark speaker in something like a DR.

Anyhow, the K has a 2" voice coil, compared to the N's 1.5" voice coil. Point being that the diameter has a really big impact in freq. response.

That's why I like the Emi Texas Heat and Lil Texas for some applications, because both of those also have a 2" voice coil. The Emi Private Jack is more aggressive/pronounced in the upper mids to treble, with its smaller 1.75" voice coil, but otherwise the TH has the same 38 oz magnet and such as the PJ.

For the most part, I personally don't care for a TH with a BF/SF Fender amp, with the notable exception being my drip-edge AB165 Bassman head, but that thing is not like your typical BF/SF Fender (especially since mine has mods). I could understand someone not caring for the C12K/N12K in a DR or TR for the same reason.

...This also reminds me that my Emi LT is still not yet totally broken in, and it can be kind of harsh sounding. I've kind of relegated its use to an amp that I have a Vox-like treble cut circuit installed in.

 

[TwangerWannabe]

I'm sure that many of you out there (and this isn't directed specifically at the TM amps) were perfectly fine with something, be it an amp, a guitar, set of pickups, strings, bridge saddles until you read somethwere on this site or another gear site that it was inferior, and from that point on someone else's negative option planted a seed in your mind and from that point on made yourself believe that it sucked and you had to do something about it.

 

[11 Gauge]

I get it now. I don't think it's worth it for a speaker change either because they're soldered in and not designed to be changed. I think the only real way to compare would be an aftermarket neo put in a DRRI. But that's an expensive experiment.

Are they soldered in? I thought they used press-on terminal connectors.

The bigger issue that I heard of had to do with baffle paint being like glue on the speaker gasket, making a bit of a mess and chore when trying to remove it.

I see the press-on terminals being used in these pics:

...And in the case of that specific speaker, it was being sold on Reverb, because the owner replaced it with a Weber 12F150.

https://reverb.com/item/29011236-jensen-n-12k-neodymium-speaker-2019-green-similar-to-jensen-c12k

 

[TwangerWannabe]

Are they soldered in? I thought they used press-on terminal connectors.

The bigger issue that I heard of had to do with baffle paint being like glue on the speaker gasket, making a bit of a mess and chore when trying to remove it.

I see the press-on terminals being used in these pics:

...And in the case of that specific speaker, it was being sold on Reverb, because the owner replaced it with a Weber 12F150.

https://reverb.com/item/29011236-jensen-n-12k-neodymium-speaker-2019-green-similar-to-jensen-c12k

Nobody's ever gone tone chasing with their DRRI or vintage tube Deluxe Reverb and replaced the speakers or gone down a rabbit hole swapping out tubes, changing the bias, etc., right?!

 

[Brent Hutto]

Nobody's ever gone tone chasing with their DRRI or vintage tube Deluxe Reverb and replaced the speakers or gone down a rabbit hole swapping out tubes, changing the bias, etc., right?!

Yeah, that stuff is all legit.

But if Fender had a way of changing those parameters through the USB port they'd apparently lose about 90% of their Tonemaster sales. Go figure.

 

[TwangerWannabe]

Yeah, that stuff is all legit.

But if Fender had a way of changing those parameters through the USB port they'd apparently lose about 90% of their Tonemaster sales. Go figure.

Not sure if I'm following you on this. What makes you think every Tome Master owner wants to change things around? Many like that they just plug into it and are happy with the way it sounds. Those that don't like it have returned, sold or never bought one in the first place. Why would someone who doesn't like the TM amps buy one and then go to great lengths to try and change it's sound when they've already admitted they prefer the tube versions?

 

[Brent Hutto]

Not sure if I'm following you on this. What makes you think every Tome Master owner wants to change things around? Many like that they just plug into it and are happy with the way it sounds. Those that don't like it have returned, sold or never bought one in the first place. Why would someone who doesn't like the TM amps buy one and then go to great lengths to try and change it's sound when they've already admitted they prefer the tube versions?

I'd say 90%+ of people who buy a Deluxe Reverb play it for years with the speakers and tubes that Fender puts in there. They aren't bothered by the idea that IF THEY WANTED TO they could roll tubes and swap speakers.

Likewise almost everyone who buys a Tonemaster Deluxe Reverb will be happy to play it just as it comes from the factory. But if it had a way to change parameters via USB port and an app they'd freak out. Paralysis By Analysis! Too many options! So Fender has to assiduously avoid any configurability at all lest they alienate those people.

I'm not sure why ignoring the possibility of speaker swaps is easy but ignoring the possibility of plugging in your laptop and dialing up a different speaker emulation is paralyzing and fearful.

 

[TwangerWannabe]

I'd say 90%+ of people who buy a Deluxe Reverb play it for years with the speakers and tubes that Fender puts in there. They aren't bothered by the idea that IF THEY WANTED TO they could roll tubes and swap speakers.

Likewise almost everyone who buys a Tonemaster Deluxe Reverb will be happy to play it just as it comes from the factory. But if it had a way to change parameters via USB port and an app they'd freak out. Paralysis By Analysis! Too many options! So Fender has to assiduously avoid any configurability at all lest they alienate those people.

I'm not sure why ignoring the possibility of speaker swaps is easy but ignoring the possibility of plugging in your laptop and dialing up a different speaker emulation is paralyzing and fearful.

It has nothing to do with being "paralyzed" or "fearful". Many of us don't give a crap about that and would rather spend our time actually playing and less time blaming the gear and Turing virtual knobs in a laptop.

There are a myriad of modelers that already allow this where you can dive in as deep as you want and control everything down to the most minute parameter. So many great sounding platforms already exist for that crowd if that's what you want.

I personally prefer the current form factor and lack of the ability to do a "deep dive". For me (and I'm just talking about me here) when I've tried something that allows the user to go in and start charging everything I found that I spent more time twiddling virtual knobs and parameters and spent way less time actually playing which is counter-productive to why you buy something like that if it's supposed to improve the playing experience and make it easier to dial in great sounds. In the end I found one or two presets that I liked and after that never bothered even taking advantage of anything else the amp had to offer because I really had no need for it.

Some are complaining that the Tone Masters don't warrant the asking price cause of the lack of features and ability to do a deep dive on the parameters, when in reality if you have this mindset the problem isn't with the amp, it's with the user buying the wrong amp. Why do you think Fender should change the product just for you when the current form factor has proven to be successful and there are a myriad of other products out there that do what you wish the Tone Masters would do? I have one of the original Yamaha THR-10's and you can go do a deep dive on those as well. Int he 10+ years I've owned it I've opened the editing software once and realized I could care less and have been happy with two of the presets and the stock EQ controls.

More isn't always better.

 

[Brent Hutto]

I personally prefer the current form factor and lack of the ability to do a "deep dive". For me (and I'm just talking about me here) when I've tried something that allows the user to go in and start charging everything I found that I spent more time twiddling virtual knobs and parameters and spent way less time actually playing which is counter-productive to why you buy something like that if it's supposed to improve the playing experience and make it easier to dial in great sounds.

So when you've used a real tube amp, have you managed to avoid wasting time on a "deep dive" into tube rolling and speaker swapping?

 

[Beachbum]

 

[TwangerWannabe]

So when you've used a real tube amp, have you managed to avoid wasting time on a "deep dive" into tube rolling and speaker swapping?

I've done both and learned my lesson.

Anytime I've bought a vintage tube amp the first thing I did was take it to the tech and have them go through it and just make sure it's in good working order and take care of anything it needed; if anyone went in there previously and mucked around and have the tech take it back to stock, replace the caps if needed, replace tubes and rebias, etc. Routine maintenance stuff. When I was younger and thought that things like speaker swaps, tube swaps, etc were holding me back I have gone down that rabbit hole, but later admitted to myself that the reason I don't sound the way I want is because I need to actually play and practice more, not waste my time (and money) doing all the things mentioned above in ragrds to swapping and mods, etc.

For many it's way easier to open the wallet and buy stuff to replace than it is to actually hunker down and practice. So these days if I am in the market for a guitar or amp if it doesn't check the boxes right away I'm not going to start going down those rabbit holes by replacing stuff. I'll just put it back on the rack and move on and continue the search knowing that swapping out a speaker or saddles or volume pots isn't going to make a darn bit of difference, or what usually happens is I just remind myself I already ahve really nice gear and it's not the gear that's holding me back. Only reason I recently bought the TM recently was because I haven't had an amp in a while (sold all my vintage silver face Fenders a few years ago) and have been just playing and recording into a UA Apollo and using plug-ins.

If I suck as a player in the first place, and dare I say this is probably the majority of us here, you're not going to magically play any better after the mods and swaps. We spend more time fiddling and tinkering and less time actually playing, only to blame our lack of ability on the gear instead of being honest with ourselves. Amateurs and wood shedders (like myself) seem to go to great lengths financially and time-wise to get that last bit of tone out of a guitar or amp but modding and swapping stuff when in reality could reap much greater returns if they actually just sat down and practiced more. All that speaker swap is going to do is make you still suck in a difference frequency range.

I think there's a relationship between the longer someone has been playing and the more they suck the greater the chance they spend more time bouncing from one guitar to the other or modding guitars endlessly because they think that is what will make them sound better, but the never get any better because they tinker and mod more than they actually play.

 

[scelestus]

I'm pretty sure they're hardwired on the other end inside the chassis, there isn't a speaker jack like on a tube model.

I'm not sure, but I remember some discussion about Fender being weird about the warranty thing on these when you change speakers.

 

[Chipss36]

I do believe I was banned from this very forum, for a few weeks, or so, for talking bad about the tone master amp, and the engineering inside it, when it was first released, I find this thread pretty darn funny…… when fender first puts something new out, you better like it, and not make waves, or else……no matter how it sounds, how it’s built, or especially how it is engineered.

not a fan of these amps, from day one, and still am not. On many levels.
glad to see at least this can be discussed now…sanely.