|
So '76 Bassman 100 amps. Thoughts? How much would you guys pay for one?
Kilometers Davis fucked around with this message at 00:51 on Jan 15, 2017 |
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 00:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 04:33 |
|
|
Not much. Earlier silverfaces abound, and even blackfaces aren't that ridiculous. I don't think the 100 is all that sought after: still kind of weak for a bass amp, probably won't break up fast enough for a guitarist, doesn't have the reverb you could get in a twin. That said, while I've never played a 100, I love bassmans for bass, and they're great for pedals. Bassmans are like old pickups: not sexy but very useful. Sorry I don't know prices.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 02:01
|
|
|
Kilometers Davis posted:So '76 Bassman 100 amps. Thoughts? How much would you guys pay for one? they go for around 5-600 in my area depending on condiotion of course
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 05:01
|
|
|
There's a silverface bassman head in a shop here for around that range so it sounds about right. Currently it's hooked up to a big marshall 1x12 combo someone ripped the amp part out of and made into a cab 
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 15:55
|
|
|
They're fine clean and with pedal distortion, plus you can chain the two channels together for preamp distortion (won't work on amps where one side is a reverb channel). From the low cost and simplicity of design, they have a reputation as Babby's First Amp Modding Project. If loud and clean is your jam, I'd say go for it, but I'm a sucker for all things Silverface.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 17:19
|
|
|
The bassman 100 is kind of weird. It's very similar to a lot of Fender's circuits, but it's also a little different- they're running the preamp plates at a lower voltage than in a Super Reverb, for example, and there's some 2000pf capacitors to ground after the phase inverter, and the phase inverter itself is being fed with a coupling cap an order of magnitude larger than on a blackface amp. I imagine this was a compromise, because they wanted the amp to be used for bass. The tone stack is also a little different, with a .047 mid cap, instead of a .022. Most notably, there is no bias adjustment, only a bias balance, which limits its usefulness. I tend to think Fender's circuits that include a reverb driver tend to sound much better than the ones without. I have a bassman 10 that is more or less the same amp, but with half the power tube compliment. It sounded good as an additional bass amp, but not so much by itself. For guitar it was a little mid-heavy, and somewhat sterile in the power section.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2017 17:05
|
|
|
Interesting stuff, thanks all. I passed on the amp with a $350 offer. I wouldn't mind getting my hands on it but considering I'm GASing for a new guitar it's definitely not a priority. I think I'd prefer a Twin or Blues Jr on the Fender front anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2017 20:08
|
|
|
Twins are probably still the best bang for the buck value in vintage Fenders, because they made a ton of them, but they're so ungodly heavy to lug around. Blues Junior's are okay, but I don't like the way they did the preamp. edit: it's also crazy to realize the Blues Jr. has been around for 21 years. jwh fucked around with this message at 21:13 on Jan 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2017 21:10
|
|
|
What are some go to/interesting Twin Reverb years while we're on the topic?
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 00:11
|
|
|
Kilometers Davis posted:What are some go to/interesting Twin Reverb years while we're on the topic? It all depends on what you want. 1963 – 1967 (85 watts): The holy grail, the one they all want to be, etc. I've gotten to play a few and they've aged very inconsistently - some were the voice of God, some were just sad and noisy. If one has been restored and plays great, it can go for less than a stock one that sounds crappy. 1968 - 1976 (100 watts): The beginning of the Silverfaces. This is where the religious wars start. There was apparently a brief period in 1968 where CBS tried a new circuit that sounded bad, then changed it back, except for higher wattage. The higher power and larger production required some parts changes from the Blackface era, which is one of the reasons Blues Dads hated these for years, and one reason they seem to have held up better on average than Blackfaces. It also kept the prices down, which made them a big favorite with the bands in the 80s that would get big in the 90s... you've heard these on a lot of albums without knowing it. Fender decided to try and cash in on this whole "distortion" thing in 1972 without having to change the circuit significantly by adding a Master Volume knob. It's generally disliked, and it's basically bypassed if you leave it at 10, although modders like to remove it from the circuit entirely. HOWEVER - if you dime the volume, mid and bass (treble to taste) and choke it at the Master, you can get a pretty raunchy garage/early punk sound (think New York Dolls and the Sex Pistols, both of whom used Silverface Twins and their oddball cousins almost exclusively). They added a mid-boost pull switch to the Master Volume in 1975, which helps fill out the sound if you do try the "no you shut up dad" settings. Speaking of oddball cousins, CBS Fender tried to spin off the Silverface Twin and Super/Pro circuits into as many models as possible. So you not only get heads like the Bandmaster Reverb, but also the Vibrosonic (a 115 Twin) Quad Reverb (a 412 Twin) and, yes, the Super Six Reverb, which is a monster Twin with six motherfucking 10" speakers. I have one in my basement because I wanted a rescue project and also I'm insane. These variants are rarer, but will almost always go for a lot less than a standard Twin or Pro. 1977 - 1983 (135 watts): Now things start to get contentious. Fender was basically in a power war with Marshall at this point and redid the power section with an ultralinear design, something you'd usually see in bass amps or home stereos (although Sunn had been doing it from the beginning, but their design was originally based on a Dynaco stereo, so...) So very clean, very aggressive, VERY loud. (The taper on the pot is actually adjusted so that a 3 is about where a 5 would have been on the 100 watt version). Blues Dads absolutely loathe this design, punk assholes who get their distortion from pedals like me and Kurt Cobain love 'em. (He had an '80 or '81 that was used on In Utero and loved so much the techs called it his "security blanket". They had to build a little box to hide it during the MTV Unplugged taping.) Note that CBS didn't start buying better speakers just because the amps were more powerful. I had to replace mine on the installment plan... first one blew up, then the other. There are a lot more options nowadays, though, so don't be scared off. Starting from 1980, a lot of them started using black faceplates again, but they're the same inside. Weirdly, people love to call this the Rivera era, but it started before they brought him on board, and a cleaner amp would have been the opposite of what they wanted him to do. 1983 - 1986 Twin Reverb II (105 watts): Here's your actual Paul Rivera design. Basically, Mesa (founded by an amp-modding guy from California) was crushing with its newfangled preamp distortion, so Fender hired an amp modder of their own to redesign everything. It's important to note that the Mesa design hadn't become the standard layout for preamp distortion yet, so you saw some interesting variations around this time. These were the first channel switching Twins, and the dirty channel has a volume AND a gain before it goes to the master volume. Along with a zillion boosts (nearly every knob is also a pull switch), you can dial in a lot of sounds on this. The footswitches were super proprietary, though, so don't lose it if you get one, and if you get an amp without one, look at getting a footswitch custom made. This is the tail end of the hand-wired era, because CBS would not include the factory under any circumstances when they sold Fender to its management in 1985. 1987 - 1994 The Twin (25/100 watts): The red knobbed stepchild. The first Twins made in the modern new factory, and different enough that they decided not to call it a Twin Reverb. You can get one of these for crazy cheap, and, while it's not the "classic" Fender sound, they're solid amps with a super crisp clean and their own distortion sound. First model to have two power modes, although 25 watts will still probably get you evicted. Has an effects loop, a line out, and a weird thing where you can run a guitar to the clean and dirty channels simultaneously. It's actually pretty cool - you can have clean tight bass and driven mids/highs. 1992 - Present '65 Twin Reissue (85 watts): These are all over the place. It's as close as they could get to the Blackface design while still using modern PCB construction. They're pretty much guaranteed to hold their value, and can apparently be greatly improved with better tubes and speakers. There was a 115 variation for a while, supposed to be great for lap steel. 1995 - Present Twin Amp (25/100 watts) : This is the "Evil Twin" Peter Gabriel got. Successor to the red knob Twin, but the clean is voiced more like the '65 reissue and a lot more gain to the drive. There are a few variations on these, some have tremolo, some have the Drive/More Drive control like the Hot Rod series. Effects loop, XLR out - for trying to be a vintage reissue and a modern amp at the same time, this thing gets it pretty close. There was also a Pro Reverb version at lower power, but I think I've only ever seen one in my life. 2013 - Present ’68 Custom Twin Reverb (85 watts): Far as I can tell, it's the same as the '65 reissue but with (an attempt at) the Silverface cosmetics and "Custom" voicing on the "Normal" side. Haven't been able to bring myself to try it. Well poo poo, that post got away from me, but you can probably tell I'm a fan. Also remember that there was a "Pro Reverb" for all the Blackface and Silverface versions, which was the same thing but with 2 6L6s for half power (or you could say it was a Twin with a Super circuit, which might be more accurate since they kept the rectifier tube long after the Twin had switched to solid state), so 40, 50, and 70 watts respectively. Will only get you hauled into court for the noise violation if you're going for output tube breakup, as opposed to ripping gaping fissures in the Earth's crust if you try it with a Twin.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 07:24
|
|
|
Y'all are a bunch of gear nerds in the worst way and I'm so thankful for it  seriously I love reading write ups like that. It's so much better and easier to digest compared to digging through tgp archives. Interesting info for sure. I think watching the Joe Bonamassa Reverb mini doc gave me an old Fender itch. I'm not sure I'll ever actually own one but the companies history is fascinating and fun to dig into.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 07:45
|
|
|
I find Fender history so fascinating and I love when I see posts or blogs that detail aspects of it. What's funny is that the distinguished Fender sound is generally not my cup of tea, though I do respect people who use it because drat they get some good sounds. For reference I think a Fender into a Fender is twangy and "springy" and sounds loving atrocious when I do it. But do one about the Bassman next, please! It's got a sound unlike other Fenders I've tried and I actually really dig it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 09:17
|
|
|
reasons why i shouldnt buy another concert lead:
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 14:08
|
|
|
syntaxfunction posted:But do one about the Bassman next, please! It's got a sound unlike other Fenders I've tried and I actually really dig it. A big part of the Fender sound, as it's come to be known, is the arrangement of the tone stack after the first gain stage, and the design of the phase inverter. But what's unusual about the Bassman- particularly the 5F6, which was the basis for the first Marshall amplifier, the JTM-45, was the use of 12AY7 preamplifier tubes, instead of the now ubiquitous 12AX7, and the use of a DC coupled cathode follower to drive the complicated impedance of the tone stack. Rich Kuehnel wrote an entire book about the 5F6: https://www.amazon.com/Circuit-Analysis-Legendary-Tube-Amplifier/dp/0976982250 The cathode follower, in particular, does some unusual things when driven. Read more about it here, from Merlin Blencowe: http://www.valvewizard.co.uk/dccf.html It asymmetrically compresses the positive excursions of the waveform. Anyway, the Bassman went through a ton of iterations, including the incredibly rare 5D6, a dual rectifier 4x10 combo of which only something like a dozen are known to still exist. As it's often been said, the only consistent thing about Fender was how inconsistent they were.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2017 16:26
|
|
|
After The War posted:
This is spot on and good on you for being totally accurate, there are tons of people out there who think the evil Twin is the red knob version. Why I got the specific Twin I got (it took ages to find one of these specific amps): It's usable at any volume. It's a full fat Twin (the thing has 12 valves in it) but it's got some cool features that make it a modern amp too. Effects loop, effects loop blending, line out, 25 watt mode and loads more crap. The channels are really flexible, you basically get clean and this will go deafening loud with no break up if you want it to like a classic Twin. Then you have a gain channel, think crunch / all those classic rock tones, it's a wonderful channel and I find my self in this a lot if without pedals. Then there is another gain channel that goes over the top, it's insane the amount of gain on tap. You also get a bright switch which works well, sweetens up a humbucker. There is even a switch on the back to choose which channel the reverb is on and how much you want it blended in, and that reverb has its own valve driving it and is a proper reverb tank inside - it's amazing. it's a massively full featured amp. That's why I chose it and I have to say the sound it makes is absolutely glorious. I've never heard a better clean channel with my 335, like never - it's that good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 02:15
|
|
|
might be trying to grab a 78 twin in pawn shop for 400
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 03:44
|
|
|
syntaxfunction posted:I find Fender history so fascinating and I love when I see posts or blogs that detail aspects of it. What's funny is that the distinguished Fender sound is generally not my cup of tea, though I do respect people who use it because drat they get some good sounds. One of the reasons they've been so successful over the decades is how versatile Fender amps can be, even when the (often official) "lore" refers to a particular sound. It's important to remember that, even when they were first dipping their toes into youth advertising, "rock and roll" wasn't where the real money was - it was the people playing for those kids' parents at Moose Lodge dances and on the Lawrence Welk show (which actually showcased a fair number of Fender advancements). The thing was, whether it could be attributed to Leo's hypochondria and stubbornness, or the desire to have their products visible even in the most remote venues, Fender amps were over-engineered as gently caress. So even when they were operated well above the levels they were designed for, the components would survive and give us all that distortion we take for granted. Which takes us to... syntaxfunction posted:But do one about the Bassman next, please! It's got a sound unlike other Fenders I've tried and I actually really dig it. jwh covered most of it, the Tweed Bassman was a unique beast in the Fender line. First of all, bass guitar was a totally new instrument and they didn't know what it would requirement int the field. For instance, they switched from one 15" speaker to 4 10"s because hey,you might just blow up three speakers in a night. Same goes with the power section , everything was overbuilt. The famous cathode follower tone stack was to help keep things from overloading on the front end with the newfangled hot P-Bass pickup, as well as giving the player a wide range of frequencies to fit themselves into bands that hadn't been planned around the sound. The cleaner front end meant more room for the power section to open up at higher volume, as well as that famous touch sensitivity. Of course, Fender wasn't going for distortion yet (or for guitar players to be using the drat thing, either), so future evolution would mean more clean headroom and the weird preamp arrangement was consigned to history. EXCEPT (as we all know) that a music store owner in the UK named Jim Marshall couldn't import Fender amps fast enough and had his guys try building a Bassman clone from British parts, cathode follower and all. They sold incredibly like crazy, including one to a kid named Pete Townshend, and the rest, as they say... Meanwhile, the Fender Bassmans (men?) essentially went through all the same changes as the rest of the line (blonde, brown, black, silver), the internal layout basically becoming a stripped-down version of the guitar amps with different voicing. Sorry I don't have the same blow-by-blow as with the Twins (although a lot of the same info applies), I've never owned one and it doesn't have the same link to my formative music years as that amp. But it's one of those amps that people (ie, Tone Dads) love to talk about and it's guaranteed a dedicated section in any Fender history. One interesting thing is that the first Tweed reissue (actually the first reissue amp Fender ever did) came out when there was no supply of rectifier tubes, so it had a plug-in solid state rectifier on a tube socket. If you could find a used or NOS tube, you could just swap it out. Smash it Smash hit posted:might be trying to grab a 78 twin in pawn shop for 400 Yes, join the ultralinear brute squad...
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 06:10
|
|
|
After The War posted:One of the reasons they've been so successful over the decades is how versatile Fender amps can be, even when the (often official) "lore" refers to a particular sound. It's important to remember that, even when they were first dipping their toes into youth advertising, "rock and roll" wasn't where the real money was - it was the people playing for those kids' parents at Moose Lodge dances and on the Lawrence Welk show (which actually showcased a fair number of Fender advancements). The thing was, whether it could be attributed to Leo's hypochondria and stubbornness, or the desire to have their products visible even in the most remote venues, Fender amps were over-engineered as gently caress. So even when they were operated well above the levels they were designed for, the components would survive and give us all that distortion we take for granted. Which takes us to... Leo also hated distortion and saw it as a flaw in the circuit so he did his best to design it out of amps.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 14:02
|
|
|
As would have been the case with the majority of customers - they weren't doing "niche" music like blues or rock 'n' roll. Change is only made by people pushing the status quo, but that status quo will still be around for a while. I have a book about that (and someday I might even read it!) called "How the Beatles Destroyed Rock 'n' Roll", considering influential music in the context of what was actually popular at the time. So for once, Leo was actually making the right business decision there. Of course, his idea (and the players who chose his products) of "clean" was itself distortion - just compare any classic Fender amp sound to an electric plugged direct into the board. Or read up on Ampeg founder Everett Hull, who wanted to make clean amps for real (ie, jazz) musicians, goddammit, not them dirty west coast kids. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 14:39
|
|
|
I should pop open my Phaez JTM-45/Blackface Fender amp to get some insight as to what is going on technically. Two different inputs, one with a gain knob (JTM45) and one without gain (Blackface).
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 16:18
|
|
|
After The War posted:As would have been the case with the majority of customers - they weren't doing "niche" music like blues or rock 'n' roll. Change is only made by people pushing the status quo, but that status quo will still be around for a while. I have a book about that (and someday I might even read it!) called "How the Beatles Destroyed Rock 'n' Roll", considering influential music in the context of what was actually popular at the time. You know out of all the historical figures of music I think Leo is my top most admired. That dude gave us so much
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 16:57
|
|
|
After The War posted:The thing was, whether it could be attributed to Leo's hypochondria and stubbornness, or the desire to have their products visible even in the most remote venues, Fender amps were over-engineered as gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 18:55
|
|
|
After The War posted:As would have been the case with the majority of customers - they weren't doing "niche" music like blues or rock 'n' roll. Change is only made by people pushing the status quo, but that status quo will still be around for a while. I have a book about that (and someday I might even read it!) called "How the Beatles Destroyed Rock 'n' Roll", considering influential music in the context of what was actually popular at the time. it's funny for a brief period in the early 60s until about 62-63 rock and roll was considered an outdated fad from the late 50s relegated back to being "race music", and girl groups and frank sinatra style crooners were the new hotness and car songs. so many loving car songs
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 21:55
|
|
|
Interesting aside, I played in a band with a guitar player that played a Super Six, and that thing, at 98 pounds, was not fun to lug around. http://ampwares.com/amplifiers/fender-super-six-reverb/
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 22:22
|
|
|
Lol went into pawn shop, Trem didn't work ("I brought it to a tech it should be working) it ain't fluttering my dude but it sounded good, I asked to crank it and after 30 seconds playing it Brzzztttt chunnkkkk breefhhhhh Dude was pissed Peaceshhhhgh
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 23:45
|
|
|
jwh posted:Interesting aside, I played in a band with a guitar player that played a Super Six, and that thing, at 98 pounds, was not fun to lug around. I was recording a demo of mine tonight for someone interested in buying it, and damned if it didn't make me want to keep the drat thing. Smash it Smash hit posted:Lol went into pawn shop, Trem didn't work ("I brought it to a tech it should be working) it ain't fluttering my dude but it sounded good, I asked to crank it and after 30 seconds playing it Other problems going on, obviously, but Silverface Fenders need the footstwitch for the trem to work. You can, however fool one into thinking there's a footswitch if you cut the end off an RCA cable and twist the two layers together. From the Super Six pics I took tonight: 
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 07:28
|
|
|
After The War posted:I was recording a demo of mine tonight for someone interested in buying it, and damned if it didn't make me want to keep the drat thing. Good to know, i was didnt really want the trem and was kinda leverating it to get it cheaper that is until it started screaching at me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 08:04
|
|
|
If your uncomfortable doing wiring stuff you can buy the plug thingies as well http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Shorting-...C8AAOSw5VFWMAHP
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 17:52
|
|
|
That's definitely cleaner looking, but it's the exact opposite of wiring. It's just taking the leftover connection cables from some piece of AV equipment, cutting, stripping, and twisting. I actually made it part of my presentation whenever I'd show an old Fender to a customer. Best thing is, if you do gently caress it up somehow, you still get three more tries (five if it's from a VCR). I guess you do need something that can strip wire, although you could do scissors or even a knife if you're careful. I've carried a multitool ever since my days as a theatre tech, and highly recommend one for all musicians, especially if they're gigging. It's the closest you'll get to a sonic screwdriver.* EDIT - OF course, if you do it right and have three leftover RCA connectors, you just have to buy three more amps, otherwise you'd be wasting them. It's the frugal, responsible decision! *I am aware of the irony of making this comparison while having one of the Doctors who didn't use the sonic screwdriver as my avatar. After The War fucked around with this message at 18:22 on Jan 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 18:18
|
|
|
I was a bout to disagree with you then I saw the bit about needing three more amps and now I'm totally on board
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 18:32
|
|
|
Quick question: If I find myself in a situation where I'm unable to use my amp and I have to make do with a amp + effects modeler, is there a decent to great option for doing so below 1 grand?
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 19:42
|
|
|
Wark Say posted:Quick question: If I find myself in a situation where I'm unable to use my amp and I have to make do with a amp + effects modeler, is there a decent to great option for doing so below 1 grand? You can find an old Axe-Fx Ultra used for right around that much these days, but it is just a modeler, no amp or speakers.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:08
|
|
|
An EHX 44 Magnum power amp would be good as a cheap power amp, and theoretcially you could wait to see if you could get a good deal on a used old Axe Fx. But in a pinch, you could do a Line 6 POD HD. But also, to be frank, you could probably use all but the cheapest modellers, and you would sound good enough for live gigs. The audience won't know the difference between an Axe FX II or a Spider IV. But if you're recording, well, might as well go for something that sounds good.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 21:09
|
|
|
Wow, I've been looking at Fender Twins for a bit now and I wandered into this forum at the right time. Any other faves for loud and clean? I don't see a stage in my future (but who knows) and I'm the ambient guitar sound person who plays a couple notes and lets all the delay and reverb work their magic; is that Twin territory or is there some other amp I should be trying? I see the deluxe reverb but for a couple hundred more it seems like the Twin is worth the upgrade. Beyond Twin, trying out the Roland JC series I guess? Also I promise not to blow my amp with a synthesizer. Hopefully
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 23:20
|
|
|
When in doubt get a twin
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2017 23:23
|
|
|
stillvisions posted:Wow, I've been looking at Fender Twins for a bit now and I wandered into this forum at the right time. Any other faves for loud and clean? I don't see a stage in my future (but who knows) and I'm the ambient guitar sound person who plays a couple notes and lets all the delay and reverb work their magic; is that Twin territory or is there some other amp I should be trying? I see the deluxe reverb but for a couple hundred more it seems like the Twin is worth the upgrade. Beyond Twin, trying out the Roland JC series I guess? The Jazz Chorus 40 and the 30-watt Blues Cube both:
Smash it Smash hit posted:When in doubt get a twin
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 00:25
|
|
|
I have an emperor 612 and 610 I use for every gig it keeps me young and Spritely
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:02
|
|
|
GreatGreen posted:You can find an old Axe-Fx Ultra used for right around that much these days, but it is just a modeler, no amp or speakers. umalt posted:An EHX 44 Magnum power amp would be good as a cheap power amp, and theoretcially you could wait to see if you could get a good deal on a used old Axe Fx. But in a pinch, you could do a Line 6 POD HD. So, since this year I'm returning as a hired gun for the same "camp" that I worked with last year, I wanna make things easier for everybody; and while I do plan to take my old analog rig on the US/Canada run, it's very likely that we're gonna do an overseas leg and if I get saddled with the same ol' pain-in-the-butt Tour Manager, I'd rather preemptively be buddy-buddy with him by throwing together an Amp Modeler + Power-amp and just use one of my Voodoo Lab controllers to switch patches and stuff. I do have a POD HD Pedalboard (the old 2010 POD HD500), but I'm wondering if that's gonna cut it. I read somewhere that the guys from both Fractal and the guys who did the Eleven Rack both came out with pedalboard versions of their main modelers for way cheaper than the rack versions. Has anyone tried those?
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:04
|
|
|
stillvisions posted:Wow, I've been looking at Fender Twins for a bit now and I wandered into this forum at the right time. Any other faves for loud and clean? I don't see a stage in my future (but who knows) and I'm the ambient guitar sound person who plays a couple notes and lets all the delay and reverb work their magic; is that Twin territory or is there some other amp I should be trying? I see the deluxe reverb but for a couple hundred more it seems like the Twin is worth the upgrade. Beyond Twin, trying out the Roland JC series I guess? I had a Twin for a little while, but wasn't into it. Didn't feel like it had enough low end, or something. It just wasn't the beefy monster I expected. Pre-master volume silverface, just not my thing. I like Bassmans better, though you have to supply your own reverb. With efficient speakers and the bass and treble at 10, they produce a decent volume, I found. A Bassman paired with a JC-120 gives you lots of options, and you can let the delay go to one amp and the clean to another for a clearer sound. I like JC on repeats, Fender on dry, but you could go the other way too. I would be all over the JC-40 (stereo effects loop!) but the chorus appears to be digital. Not for me. JC-77s are the same size and sound better than 120s to me. If you can find one, they're great amps. I'm currently using an Orange OR-120 as a clean platform, but the Fender/JC thing was what I used for years, and you can get atmospheric as gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 04:33 |
|
|
Wark Say posted:I read somewhere that the guys from both Fractal and the guys who did the Eleven Rack both came out with pedalboard versions of their main modelers for way cheaper than the rack versions. Has anyone tried those? I don't know much about the Eleven Rack I'm a big Fractal Audio fan. I currently own an Axe-Fx II and love love love it. I bought it a few years ago and still have zero regrets whatsoever selling a handful of tube amps to get one. The Fractal all-in-one floorboard is called the AX8. It's slightly above your listed price range, but maybe you could find a used one for less. The Good: The Amp model and effects algorithms are identical to what's in the Axe-Fx II. Not 'similar,' but identical. The Bad: You can only have one amp model active at a time in the AX8 instead of 2 like you can have in the Axe-Fx II. There's less RAM in the AX8, so you can't have as many things in each patch compared to the Axe-Fx II. To elaborate on the last "bad" point, if you're a normal guitar player who in addition to an Amp and Cab, will use something like a compressor and drive pedal before the amp, then an EQ, delay, reverb, chorus, and maybe one or two more things after, you'll be fine. If your sound is driven by complex rube goldberg cascades of layers upon layers of effects, the AX8 probably won't be quite enough. Here's a screenshot of a pretty standard patch in the AX8's editor: 
GreatGreen fucked around with this message at 01:47 on Feb 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2017 01:34
|
|