Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Amp Central Station' started by stantheman, Oct 15, 2019.
We got freedom of choice. Let's be happy about that.
In my opinion, the ideal thing to do with this new technology is the smallest possible space
and weight and the maximum possible benefits, 3 small heads, tweed - brown - black face, 100w, gain, treble, mids, bass, reverb, tremolo, master volume, headphones, line, speaker out, effects loop, xlr, classic look, classic sound. Several different cabins (1x8, 1x10, 1x12, 2x10, 2x12...) to customize everything of low weight possible and BINGO!
That would get my vote. Hope it happens.
I like the idea of heads. I wonder how small they can be -- Quilter size? Quilter's bass head puts out 800W, but then Quilter's aren't digital, and I don't know how that adds to size. And would a head model one particular classic Fender amp?
Their 100W amps are tiny.
Perhaps something like a characteristic tweed / brown / blacface flavor, or a common model that reflects that flavor, '57 Pro amp, '62 Pro-amp, '64 pro-amp, commercially many aesthetic possibilities in their original colors and sounds.
As for the size, I currently have my '57 custom champ and deluxe parked, and I use 99% of the time a Vox MV50 Boutique for everything, record, headphones and direct, it is ultra light ultra powerful and ultra small. Something like that but with Fender sound would be perfect, especially a saturated blackface type Roy Buchannan or Albert Collins
As the O.P. I've got to say that after playing my Peavey Bandit 65 which I paid a hundred bucks for on a Craig's list ad I think I'm done lusting for Amplifiers.
I really am very satisfied and feel FREE and it's a beautiful design.
Shane from "In The Blues" and Johan are right about the vintage Peaveys...I'm starting to really believe that Amplifiers regardless of The Technology age like a good wine does, that the heat generated over the years contributes to The Brew.
I remember that Wilko Johnson used a Solid State "HH" in Doctor Feelgood and got that same vibe as Gene Vincent & The Bluecaps and Eddie Cochran had.
If you haven't seen Dr.Feelgood ...You haven't ROCKED. Check out "Oil City Confidential."
But it has power scaling. If all clipping happens algorithmically in the digital realm, why would it need power scaling? I’m genuinely perplexed by this.
High Powered Tweed Twin for the win.
Nah...Brown Super with the harmonic tremolo.
A lot of interesting ideas on this thread...
(now be nice,I'm almost 64 and have hauled around all the biggies---B3s,Leslies,A-7s,plexi stacks,SVTs,lots of vintage Fender half stacks and combos...you get the picture).
I still get a kick (and great tone) out of my old Fender tweeds and non-digital other amps (Dr. Z,Bad Cat,Fuchs,ect..)Can they be fingerprinted and reproduced digitally?
I will have to say in all fairness.....yes,but with a caveat.....meh.
I have had digital stuff crash (there is that ghost in the room of all digital),and I would just say time will tell how well it all lasts.Someone mentioned the Cyber-Twin---a great sounding amp in my opinion,yet where are they now?
I am all about technology---but because I am from the school of "if-it-ain't-broke-don't-fix-it" I will continue to use my well-worn tried and TRUE original versions of these great amps.
I'd be excited to see a tonemaster amp in a tweed guise but with specifically tweed amp options within one combo/head.
So like a champ, Princeton, 5e3, bassman, High/low powered twin. The idea being that it provides the gamut of tweed amps in a convenient package that is lightweight as easy to carry around for gigs, recording session etc.
I also like how the tonemaster series does the mic simulation, but I hope one day they will provide a series of mic A (dynamic/ribbon) and B (condenser) options and a knob to dial between the two for direct output to PA or DAW.
How else would you accomplish retaining the same amount of clipping at progressively lower volumes?
I don’t know, since we’re not talking about traditional analog circuits where clipping occurs with changes in amplification of AC signal, and is dependent on component physical design and limits. Digital models that. Which means (to me, anyway) that clipping and output volume are potentially independent of each other.
Tube amps saturate the tubes and output transformer with increased volume, which in turn is also a function of speaker load and efficiency. All of this can be modeled digitally. Power scaling in tube amps allows for output tube clipping at lower volumes. I can’t see how this would even need to be an issue in amps where clipping is digitally modeled. I would think that clipping could be modeled consistently regardless of output volume.
I also fully admit my lack of knowledge in DSP. That’s why I’m genuinely confused.
I think you are over thinking this.
Power scaling in these amps is nothing more than a recognizable term. They could have called it "master volume" but then people would have complained that a Twin or Deluxe doesn't have a master volume so why is it there? They could have called it an attenuator... maybe it would have caused less confusion.
At any rate, it does one purpose - it's turns down the volume yet retains the tone you have created, which is the same purpose it is physically added to tube amps.
That's exactly how it's supposed to work. I think there's a conceptual shift in these amps that not everyone has their heads wrapped around yet.
If you're playing through a stomp box-style modeler like a Helix, what you get out is a low-level signal that needs to be amplified before it can drive a speaker. If your goal is for the audience to be able to hear what the Helix produced, you'd run it directly to the venue's PA or maybe a full-range, flat-response (FRFR) speaker, which is really just a small PA. The modeler answers the "how should it sound?" question and the PA's question is "how loud do you want it?" The modeler doesn't have much effect on how loud the PA makes the sound and the PA doesn't have much effect on how the model sounds.
Combo modeling amps like the Tone Masters and Blues Cubes are the same two things (simplified Helix + PA) thing wrapped up in one box. Think of it as walking into a venue with a guitar in one hand and a Helix in the other. The guy who runs sound for the place says, "I have PAs in 1, 5, 12, 22, 40 and 85 watts. Which one shall I set up for you?" If the venue is a bar, you might ask for 40. If it's your bedroom, you might ask for 1 or 5. In either case, it's going to sound the same, just louder or softer. The switch on the back is the venue's sound guy asking how loud you want it.
I think the confusion sets in when people equate the output power switches on digital amps to what they would be in all-analog amps. In the all-analog case, you'd have to switch in different circuits to get clipping at different power levels, which would change the tone and make it whole different amp. The original Deluxe Reverb doesn't have anything like that; it just has a single, 22-watt power stage. If Fender did it right, the model running on the TMDR's DSP behaves tonally like the original when you twist the volume knobs on the front panel and the power level switch on the back is like the venue offering a choice of six different but otherwise-flat PAs.
I'm afraid I"m at a loss. I meant my question literally. You know they need some mechanism to do this, right? You need a knob of some sort to induce clipping at lower volumes. Is this a semantic issue (what they are calling it)? Most of us don't have chips in our head yet so we can't just think "clip sooner" and Bluetooth that instruction to the amp . . .
PS, what could come across as snarkiness is all playful here. To illustrate a point - “something” must be changed for the tone and saturation to remain constant when reducing volume.
Yeah. That's what a volume and master volume are for. After some thought I can only surmise that since the tonemasters are supposed to be as close in function to the actual TRs and DRs that are non-MV amps, that power scaling acts as a master volume - not an attenuator.
I guess that can get semantic. But it's otherwise clear to me that since clipping is occurring digitally, there is no need to turn up the volume loud to get clipping. It's just that in the case of a TR or DR there is no pre volume that could be used as a pre-amp level control for the DSP(?). So volume control is affecting both DSP and output volume, and thus volume would have to be scaled down to get modeled clipping at lower volume levels.
Do I have that right?
The Twin Reverb has *one* volume control (per channel).
No "Master Volume", no separate "Pre-Amp Volume" control.
The only way to get a Twin to distort is to crank that single volume knob on the front panel. It's the first knob to the right of the input jack.
But wait, there's more!
The 85-watt power section amplifies that single volume control to *very loud levels*.
The original designs have no way of getting around this. Want distortion/overdrive/pre-amp clipping?
No problem, *but it will be very loud*.
One way around this is the "output power selector for full power and five attenuated settings" (Fender's description.)
Want more distortion? See the knob on the front? Turn it UP.
Want it quiet? See the knob on the back? Turn it DOWN.
The Tone Masters don't just model preamp distortion. They also model power amp distortion and other characteristics of a heavily overdrive tube amp. So the entire sound of the preamp and power amp overdriving as it is cranked up is fed to the power amp. As you turn up the volume knob multiple things start happening in a vintage tube Deluxe or Twin. For the Tone Masters the power amp contributes nothing to the sound ideally in this case. So by scaling back the power or attenuating it you can adjust the overall volume level to suit the situation but still capture the characteristic tone of an overdriven preamp and power amp in a vintage Fender.