Whatever happened to the hype over the UA Dream 65, Ruby, Woodrow and Lion?

  • Thread starter burntfrijoles
  • Start date
  • This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links like Ebay, Amazon, and others.

Mr KnowItAll

TDPRI Member
Joined
May 18, 2024
Posts
7
Age
47
Location
Rockford, MI
Just curious. When they were originally introduced they were widely praised. Have they just followed the oft repeated trajectory of the "next best thing" to "not all that and a bag of chips"?

I am not saying they aren't good. It just seems that after YouTubers (some sponsored and some independent) flood the interweb with gushing reviews and "(name your device here) killers" superlatives, the stampede to obtain one dies down and folks resume their normal lives until the next "best ever" device comes out (again supported by gushing reviews, lavish praise, etc).
I don't think this is accurate. The UAFX pedals are still some of the highest selling Amp Sim pedals out there and people are loving the Lion more than the ToneX models for good reason. People are still talking about them, especially the Lion. People know that the UAFX pedals react differently than any profiler or amp sims out there. It's not that they possess some kind of magic, it's just that they react a bit more like a real amp.

I think you are confusing them with Strymon's stuff. I think we'll see an Iridium MX soon 🤔
 

loudboy

Friend of Leo's
Joined
May 21, 2003
Posts
3,737
Location
Sedona, Arizona
I haven't used any of them, but being able to mix the 2 channel volumes on the Marshall one is something that's key to the JMP sound, and I haven't seen on any other Marshall in a Box pedal.
 

burntfrijoles

Doctor of Teleocity
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Posts
12,441
Location
Somewhere Over The Rainbow
I think you are confusing them with Strymon's stuff. I think we'll see an Iridium MX soon 🤔
No, I’m not confusing them. I sold my Iridium recently but I have no inclination to consider the UAFX pedals. It’s just that Dream 65, Ruby et al dominated talk for awhile and then the hype seemed to disappear. It’s pretty typical after the introductory blitz and reviews. I was really just wondering about their current standing.
 

Lowspeid

Tele-Afflicted
Joined
Feb 4, 2021
Posts
1,209
Age
47
Location
North Idaho
I was really just wondering about their current standing.
If you look around at the guys who really like tube amps, and have invested heavily in analog effects pedals, you’ll see a lot of them have UA pedals on their boards. I’ve tried the Helix, the Iridium, and used a CaptorX with my amps in order to play silently at church. None of them sound, or FEEL, as good as the UA stuff. I’ve played the Dream’65, but the Ruby is “the one” for me. Even The Edge is using them at U2’s Sphere shows in Vegas. I find I’m using it more at home than my tube amps for the simple reason it sounds great through my monitors, is easy to record, and doesn’t hurt my ears when I get it “in the zone”.

It’s true they don’t get talked about that much anymore, but I think that has more to do with the guys who are using them have been using them, and the guys who are always looking, never finding have already tried them.
 

gonzo

Tele-Holic
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Posts
822
Location
salt lake city utah
I bought my strymon iridium back at the beginning of the pandemic...

Still have it.
Nothing has come along thats beat it so far.

Multiple recordings, an entire album done based on using Nothing but the iridium,
It has stood the test of time so far.
 

klasaine

Doctor of Teleocity
Silver Supporter
Joined
Nov 28, 2006
Posts
12,187
Location
Los Angeles, Ca
I wish UA would make a single knob native plugin with the room reverb that's on these pedals.
If you have the UA “Precision Reflection Engine”, you can get pretty close.
I use the Rectangular or Square Plate settings to give some space around a source.
 
Last edited:

62stratdoc

TDPRI Member
Ad Free Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2015
Posts
40
Location
Birmingham, AL
I have all 4 and love them all. they sit plugged in at my desk and are a quick practice setup. I don't use them live or on a pedalboard (I like moving air with a real amp too much) but they're great to just sit down and practice with. I envisioned using them in a different way when I bought them or I wouldn't have spent that kind of money on them, but like them enough to keep them at this point.
 

Attachments

  • UAFX.jpg
    UAFX.jpg
    319.8 KB · Views: 139

theGecko71

Tele-Afflicted
Joined
Nov 18, 2008
Posts
1,250
Location
Dayton and NYC
Just to revive this old thread, I'm actually getting more and more angry-pleased that I think I like my Ruby 63 more than my real Vox amps. It's ONLY downside for my purposes is that it generates a bit of noise, but I think that's mostly a result of dirty power in my basement office/studio--my amps generate noise, too, I just seem to notice it less (since I'm not playing with headphones on).

This thing shouldn't sound so good! It shouldn't be so handy. I should be saying to myself, "Well, it's a cool toy, but it ain't no tube amp!" but instead I'm finding new and enjoyable ways to record creatively with it in stereo that are so fun. At the moment, I have my compression, fuzz, and OD pedals in front of the Ruby, and then I go from the left output into my Audio Interface, while the right output is going into my modulation pedals (phaser, digital delay, chorus, and EHX Canyon for whatever I want it to do) and then into the interface--so I can have one track dry and another wet.

At least for a studio/home recording environment, this thing is much handier than using a real amp. The ONLY thing I guess it can't do is get real feedback, if I want feedback.
 

Heartbreaker_Esq

Friend of Leo's
Joined
Nov 4, 2022
Posts
2,293
Location
Orlando, FL
At the moment, I have my compression, fuzz, and OD pedals in front of the Ruby, and then I go from the left output into my Audio Interface, while the right output is going into my modulation pedals (phaser, digital delay, chorus, and EHX Canyon for whatever I want it to do) and then into the interface--so I can have one track dry and another wet.
I know some people like to record wet and dry guitar tracks so they can re-amp or adjust effects later. Is that what you're doing with this method, or are you planning to mix with both wet and dry tracks? I'm just curious as I think the next song I record will be more effect-heavy than usual, so I'm looking into the options I have at my disposal.
 

theGecko71

Tele-Afflicted
Joined
Nov 18, 2008
Posts
1,250
Location
Dayton and NYC
Ha! I haven’t decided. I was just experimenting with setups to see what it might accomplish.

It occurred to me that a separate wet track that could be further modified might allow interesting ambient guitar effects. I’ve slowly been working on an instrumental piece where I may use some of these techniques
 

Frodebro

Doctor of Teleocity
Ad Free Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2012
Posts
18,107
Age
55
Location
Seattle
This thing shouldn't sound so good! It shouldn't be so handy. I should be saying to myself, "Well, it's a cool toy, but it ain't no tube amp!"

This is exactly where too many people get hung up. For fifty years, people accepted that only tube amps could sound really good. More often than not, this held true. But the technology advanced, and now this is no longer true at all. Yet people stubbornly hang on to what used to be the truth, and many refuse to let go of it.

The bottom line is that sound is just vibrations in the air. How those vibrations are created is inconsequential compared to how they actually sound to our ears.
 

Heartbreaker_Esq

Friend of Leo's
Joined
Nov 4, 2022
Posts
2,293
Location
Orlando, FL
This is exactly where too many people get hung up. For fifty years, people accepted that only tube amps could sound really good. More often than not, this held true. But the technology advanced, and now this is no longer true at all. Yet people stubbornly hang on to what used to be the truth, and many refuse to let go of it.

The bottom line is that sound is just vibrations in the air. How those vibrations are created is inconsequential compared to how they actually sound to our ears.
It's funny how deeply-embedded and irrational this stuff can be, too. When I was a teenager, I was completely broke, and I knew absolutely nothing about gear, except for the few bits I would glean from Guitar World. I don't know how, but I ended up with a Marshall Valvestate as my one and only amp for years. At some point, I found myself spouting off to friends about how great and warm tube amps were, how solid state amps sucked, and how it was tube or nothing for me.

This was despite the fact that: a) I had no experience and absolutely nothing to compare it to; and b) I sounded terrible through my tube amp, because I didn't know how to use it, and barely knew how to play. I took in what was fed to me, and repeated it as fact (and believed it as fact), without any legitimate factual basis. Embarrassing to think back on now, but also pretty common, I think.

This kind of "accepted wisdom" gets passed along in all kinds of ways that have nothing to do with hard facts or genuine experience. Don't get me wrong: I'm not saying that everyone who prefers tube amps is coming from a place of ignorance. A lot of people have experience with both, and prefer tubes for valid reasons. But I think there is also a large group of people for whom the "accepted wisdom" long ago hardened into an impenetrable belief system, and those folks have a harder time listening with their ears when it comes to solid state and modelling amps.
 

klasaine

Doctor of Teleocity
Silver Supporter
Joined
Nov 28, 2006
Posts
12,187
Location
Los Angeles, Ca
At this point, my tube amps, microphones, and pre-amp are only another option in both my recording and live rigs. I have no preference anymore.
Parity arrived a few years ago.
Good. It’s way more economical.
 

theGecko71

Tele-Afflicted
Joined
Nov 18, 2008
Posts
1,250
Location
Dayton and NYC
I recently returned a new and inexpensive analog SS amp I bought bc although it had lots of features I liked, I didn’t like the tone, and I exchanged it for a tube amp that sounds better but which cost double. Then I bought the Ruby which cost about what I paid for the SS amp… and in many ways it sounds better than the tube amp.

1) tone is very subjective. You like what you like however that sound is produced and 2) the tech used to get that tone doesn’t really matter.
 

Blrfl

Friend of Leo's
Joined
May 3, 2018
Posts
3,976
Location
Northern Virginia
But I think there is also a large group of people for whom the "accepted wisdom" long ago hardened into an impenetrable belief system, and those folks have a harder time listening with their ears when it comes to solid state and modelling amps.

I've long thought this was a side effect of people allowing decisions that should be inconsequential to make and inconsequential to reverse to become part of their identities. There's a subtle-but-important difference between "I'm a guy who likes turnips" and "I'm a turnip guy." The former sees criticism of turnips as just that; the latter sees it as a personal attack.
 
Top