RIP: Amps

Philtre

@ICBM What would you recommend for a SS amp?

ICBM

Philtre said:

@ICBM What would you recommend for a SS amp?

I'm a big fan of the Peavey Transtubes, especially the 'red stripe' series which are sadly not made any more. They can benefit from better speakers - good though they are, they were still built down to a price.

The same applies to the Vox AC30VR amps, which are all-analogue (and do actually have a valve in) but are fitted with dreadful speakers as stock.

I'm not really sure what else is good that's currently being made - the market seems to have shifted almost entirely to modelling in one form or another.

Philtre

ICBM said:

Philtre said:

@ICBM What would you recommend for a SS amp?

I'm a big fan of the Peavey Transtubes, especially the 'red stripe' series which are sadly not made any more. They can benefit from better speakers - good though they are, they were still built down to a price.

The same applies to the Vox AC30VR amps, which are all-analogue (and do actually have a valve in) but are fitted with dreadful speakers as stock.

I'm not really sure what else is good that's currently being made - the market seems to have shifted almost entirely to modelling in one form or another.

When I briefly dipped my toe into SS world I tried an Orange CR35 and CR60 with an inclination perhaps for the CR120. To my ears they sounded dull and characterless, like a dried Ryvita bread with nothing on it. Even a cheap valve amp sounded better.

ICBM

Philtre said:

When I briefly dipped my toe into SS world I tried an Orange CR35 and CR60 with an inclination perhaps for the CR120. To my ears they sounded dull and characterless, like a dried Ryvita bread with nothing on it. Even a cheap valve amp sounded better.

I have to say I was disappointed when I played one - they aren't bad, but nowhere near as good as I was expecting. They've got a couple of CR60s in the practice room I use, and although I can get a usable sound out of them it wouldn't be my first choice. Interestingly I found they work best used clean with pedals, but on the amp's overdrive channel with the gain low enough to keep it clean, not on the clean channel.

Kittyfrisk

Fuengi said:

I think lots of people now have become accustomed to terrible audio quality. All the speakers in new devices - phones, TVs, those awful Alexis things - are a pile of shite next to a decent stereo speaker setup, which very few people seem to have.

I wonder if this isn't starting to transfer into the home music market - a reduction of quality. 

This has been going on for years.
CD's are now obsolete technology and yet they were all about exactly this.
They contained less musical information, but were sold as sounding better because there was no hiss or background noise.
Even though analogue vinyl sound was (and still is) better.
MP3 files are a lossy technology, so again are audibly worse.
The UK implementation of DAB involved reducing data rates in order to fit stations into the 'pipelines' or bandwidth available.
Result, poorer audio quality sold to the public as 'better'.
Not being luddite here, I love messing around with tech; just observing that frequently progress is not made without loss.

ICBM

Kittyfrisk said:

This has been going on for years.

CD's are now obsolete technology and yet they were all about exactly this.
They contained less musical information, but were sold as sounding better because there was no hiss or background noise.
Even though analogue vinyl sound was (and still is) better.

Thread diversion time... this is not true. CD sound quality is better in technical terms than even the most perfect vinyl record, let alone after it starts to wear. What it might not do is sound more pleasing to the listener.

This is also like solid-state and valve amps. We like valve amps not because they're technically better - they're not, they're worse - but because they sound subjectively more pleasing. Slightly stranger is that they can sound perceptively louder, even when they're producing less power and measured SPL.

AndyJP

https://imgur.com/gallery/Wuc03KS

dindude

Well this is a nifty meeting of new vs old tech. at NAMM. Bad Cat Paw - valve pre feeding class D stereo amp with digital reverb and IR’s, 2 x 6” speakers built in but ability to feed proper cabs, and doesn’t sound half bad in this quick demo, certainly better than any of the modelling demos I’ve heard at NAMM. Andertons will be stocking them too. $799 so about the same in £ likely. 

https://youtu.be/H-jDB2DIy5o

WiresDreamDisasters

I'm emotionally invested in my music and my equipment.

Sorry.

Grunfeld

Philtre said:

When I briefly dipped my toe into SS world I tried an Orange CR35 and CR60 with an inclination perhaps for the CR120. To my ears they sounded dull and characterless, like a dried Ryvita bread with nothing on it. Even a cheap valve amp sounded better.

And yet... I love the CR120.  Been using it for years now. 

In some kind of fairness I've always enjoyed getting a basic guitar sound from pedals rather than amps and the way I work with the CR120 is no exception.  I run a Catalinbread Formula 55 into the amp. 

spirit7

Amps just sound and feel better and the impracticality is worth it.  I may invest in an Ox but that’s as far as it’ll go for me.  I’ve tried the Axe-FX and it’s just not for me.  As ICBM said, it’s all about 50-100w heads - not because of the volume, but because of the richness and fullness.  And now we’re in a golden age of attenuation there is nothing impractical or OTT about them other than their physical size. 

downbytheriver

ICBM said:

Kittyfrisk said:

This has been going on for years.

CD's are now obsolete technology and yet they were all about exactly this.
They contained less musical information, but were sold as sounding better because there was no hiss or background noise.
Even though analogue vinyl sound was (and still is) better.

Thread diversion time... this is not true. CD sound quality is better in technical terms than even the most perfect vinyl record, let alone after it starts to wear. What it might not do is sound more pleasing to the listener.

This is also like solid-state and valve amps. We like valve amps not because they're technically better - they're not, they're worse - but because they sound subjectively more pleasing. Slightly stranger is that they can sound perceptively louder, even when they're producing less power and measured SPL.

Firstly, sorry ICBM, unlike 99% of what you post, I fervently disagree with this. Records, through even a half decent system, sound MUCH better than CDs. “In technical terms” is a nonsensical argument. If it sounds better, it is better - the listener is the only arbiter. If “technically” it isn’t then it is perfectly clear that the technical argument is flawed- it’s either being measured Ineffectively or the technical argument is addressing the wrong aspects. 

Having said that, I have always been a valve amp user (yes even in my Hifi). I’ve been through masses of Fenders, one Marshall (very briefly), Victorias, Lazy Js, Dr Z etc etc BUT at the same time I have owned Sessionettes, a Blues Baby, Peavey Bandit, a Roland Blues Cube, a Roland VGA-3 (which for some reason I remember very fondly), Roland JC120 and probably several more solid state heroes. They were all, in shorthand terms, less than. I kept trying because you are right - one day it will be game over for the valve. 

What changed everything was buying the Fender Tone Master Deluxe Reverb. This is the first solid state (modelling, whatever) amp that delivers something very close to the valve amp experience. Enough that I’m selling valve amps and gigging the TM. 

BUT... it’s still the “amp experience” - box at the back with racket coming out of it. I can’t get past that! I’m sure the DI thing is a very effective way of delivering but it isn’t very visceral is it? 

On the the other hand, I am a bit mental - I used to shop at Russ Andrews Hifi in Edinburgh - that might say a bit too much about me.  

soma1975

Good Valve amp with  a good attenuator sounds fabulous at bedroom levels, at the Dog and Duck or wherever. 

And most good attenuators also offer a line out too if you really want to plug into a PA. 

Not to diss modellers because they have their own thing going on. But we all have different ears. Not everyone wants or needs or appreciates a phenomenal camera compared to a bog standard one. Not everyone wants or needs or appreciates a fine and rare wine compared to a standard off the shelf jobby (like me). Not everyone wants or needs or appreciates a good valve amp. Plenty of musical situations that wouldn't see the benefits as much.

But that doesn't mean they aren't fab and judged on the metrics that 'most' people with good ears would judge these things by superior to other solutions at present. 

dindude

downbytheriver said:

ICBM said:

Kittyfrisk said:

This has been going on for years.

CD's are now obsolete technology and yet they were all about exactly this.
They contained less musical information, but were sold as sounding better because there was no hiss or background noise.
Even though analogue vinyl sound was (and still is) better.

Thread diversion time... this is not true. CD sound quality is better in technical terms than even the most perfect vinyl record, let alone after it starts to wear. What it might not do is sound more pleasing to the listener.

This is also like solid-state and valve amps. We like valve amps not because they're technically better - they're not, they're worse - but because they sound subjectively more pleasing. Slightly stranger is that they can sound perceptively louder, even when they're producing less power and measured SPL.

Firstly, sorry ICBM, unlike 99% of what you post, I fervently disagree with this. Records, through even a half decent system, sound MUCH better than CDs. “In technical terms” is a nonsensical argument. If it sounds better, it is better - the listener is the only arbiter. If “technically” it isn’t then it is perfectly clear that the technical argument is flawed- it’s either being measured Ineffectively or the technical argument is addressing the wrong aspects. 

Having said that, I have always been a valve amp user (yes even in my Hifi). I’ve been through masses of Fenders, one Marshall (very briefly), Victorias, Lazy Js, Dr Z etc etc BUT at the same time I have owned Sessionettes, a Blues Baby, Peavey Bandit, a Roland Blues Cube, a Roland VGA-3 (which for some reason I remember very fondly), Roland JC120 and probably several more solid state heroes. They were all, in shorthand terms, less than. I kept trying because you are right - one day it will be game over for the valve. 

What changed everything was buying the Fender Tone Master Deluxe Reverb. This is the first solid state (modelling, whatever) amp that delivers something very close to the valve amp experience. Enough that I’m selling valve amps and gigging the TM. 

BUT... it’s still the “amp experience” - box at the back with racket coming out of it. I can’t get past that! I’m sure the DI thing is a very effective way of delivering but it isn’t very visceral is it? 

On the the other hand, I am a bit mental - I used to shop at Russ Andrews Hifi in Edinburgh - that might say a bit too much about me.  

I thought (May be completely wrong here) that  the technical issue with CD vs anolog was that CD does have frequency range limits - so low and so high that it makes it theoretically no difference to the human ear - but essentially anolog is unlimited in its bandwidth / “bitrate” or whatever measure you want to use. 

I like the Tone Master approach to modelling, I’ve considered these, but in the demos they sound good whilst replicating a base clean tone but wasn’t feeling it as soon as a pedal was kicked in - what’s your first hand experience?  

ICBM

downbytheriver said:

Firstly, sorry ICBM, unlike 99% of what you post, I fervently disagree with this. Records, through even a half decent system, sound MUCH better than CDs. “In technical terms” is a nonsensical argument. If it sounds better, it is better - the listener is the only arbiter. If “technically” it isn’t then it is perfectly clear that the technical argument is flawed- it’s either being measured Ineffectively or the technical argument is addressing the wrong aspects.  

You’re missing the point . Kittyfrisk said that CD was a reduction in quality compared to vinyl, and contains less musical information - it isn’t. In objective measurable characteristics it’s better, and contains more information not less. mp3 is definitely a reduction in quality though.

People may well prefer the sound of vinyl, but what they like about it is the exact reason it’s less good technically, mostly the various types of non-linear distortion it introduces compared to the sound of CD. I agree that assessing it technically doesn’t necessarily give the right answer - although historically, the race for ‘fidelity’ made it look like it was the goal.

This is also why we like the sound of valve amps rather than solid-state, even for clean sounds... they’re not actually clean, even when they’re not clipping - they introduce all sorts of other distortion. Solid-state amps can be technically far better, but unless they’re designed to emulate the inferior characteristics of valve amps they tend to sound ‘cold’ in the same way people think CD does.

Digital modelling is a bit like mp3 - no matter how good it is, even if it gets to the point where an outside listener can’t reliably tell that it’s modelled, it will only ever be an approximation of the way a valve amp works, or even an analogue solid-state one. That doesn’t mean it’s no good, just that it’s unlikely to ever quite be able to duplicate all the characteristics of a valve amp - especially to the player, who is inside the feedback loop that’s generating the sound... which is what the difference in ‘feel’ is.

That’s really obvious if you listen to AndyJP’s clips above, even over Youtube.

downbytheriver

dindude said:

I like the Tone Master approach to modelling, I’ve considered these, but in the demos they sound good whilst replicating a base clean tone but wasn’t feeling it as soon as a pedal was kicked in - what’s your first hand experience?  

The way I use pedals is that the pedals generate the effect and don’t Overdrive the front end of the amp. I take this approach so as to minimise the amount of mucking about to get my precious sound before a gig (yeah, plug in, go, no mucking about). 

In this usage the TM is fine - certainly as good as my Vibrolux. 

roberty

downbytheriver said:

ICBM said:

Kittyfrisk said:

This has been going on for years.

CD's are now obsolete technology and yet they were all about exactly this.
They contained less musical information, but were sold as sounding better because there was no hiss or background noise.
Even though analogue vinyl sound was (and still is) better.

Thread diversion time... this is not true. CD sound quality is better in technical terms than even the most perfect vinyl record, let alone after it starts to wear. What it might not do is sound more pleasing to the listener.

This is also like solid-state and valve amps. We like valve amps not because they're technically better - they're not, they're worse - but because they sound subjectively more pleasing. Slightly stranger is that they can sound perceptively louder, even when they're producing less power and measured SPL.

Firstly, sorry ICBM, unlike 99% of what you post, I fervently disagree with this. Records, through even a half decent system, sound MUCH better than CDs. “In technical terms” is a nonsensical argument. If it sounds better, it is better - the listener is the only arbiter. If “technically” it isn’t then it is perfectly clear that the technical argument is flawed- it’s either being measured Ineffectively or the technical argument is addressing the wrong aspects. 

Having said that, I have always been a valve amp user (yes even in my Hifi). I’ve been through masses of Fenders, one Marshall (very briefly), Victorias, Lazy Js, Dr Z etc etc BUT at the same time I have owned Sessionettes, a Blues Baby, Peavey Bandit, a Roland Blues Cube, a Roland VGA-3 (which for some reason I remember very fondly), Roland JC120 and probably several more solid state heroes. They were all, in shorthand terms, less than. I kept trying because you are right - one day it will be game over for the valve. 

What changed everything was buying the Fender Tone Master Deluxe Reverb. This is the first solid state (modelling, whatever) amp that delivers something very close to the valve amp experience. Enough that I’m selling valve amps and gigging the TM. 

BUT... it’s still the “amp experience” - box at the back with racket coming out of it. I can’t get past that! I’m sure the DI thing is a very effective way of delivering but it isn’t very visceral is it? 

On the the other hand, I am a bit mental - I used to shop at Russ Andrews Hifi in Edinburgh - that might say a bit too much about me.  

Digital audio imparts no colouration these days. You can pass audio through a dozen generations of ADA and you will not be able to tell it from the master. But as soon as you press to vinyl you get colourations from RIAA EQ and distortion. The bass has to be centered to stop the needle jumping out of the groove. Then the act of playing it back introduces more distortion. It does not sound like the master any more. If you were to make a recording of a vinyl record and press this recording to a new record, and repeat this process a dozen times it would sound like shit. There is degradation at every stage

TL;DR digital sounds exactly like the master, vinyl does not

I say this with the greatest of love, being a record collector of sorts. A good vinyl frontend can sound phenomenal

menamestom

Valve amps we’re pretty much perfected in the 50’s and 60’s for me in the lines of Fender Combos.
I have a 5E3 now.  Hand wired by MJW, forever serviceable and the perfect volume for my requirements.  If it breaks I’ll fix it myself.  

My Helix is great, I use it for different things but I’m very interested in developments in this area and would rather see this kind of innovation at Namm.  Amps are already perfect, so I would expect to see less movement in that area.

But while my state if the art modelling device is borked I’ll use my perfect 1950’s tech to fill the gap.

Incidentally, I do like the look at that Badcat amp!

EricTheWeary

dindude said:

Ok, a little bit overdramatic, but it’s striking how few traditional amps are either at NAMM or if they are, they’re not getting any press. For valve amps, I see the new Soldano coming through from Boutique Amp Distribution, Fender has a hardwired Princeton, and I think there’s some new stuff from Fryette. And that’s it. 

A few hybrid valve pre-amp with class D power amps, the rest digital amps and modelling floorboards.

See I wouldn’t mind at all, seriously - cheaper, lighter, more options - but every one of them to a man sounds utter shite in the demos. The Neural Quad, the Line 6 GO, the Victory V4 blah blah blah, just piss poor blandness.

Rant over, I know I’m probably on my own here but need to get off my chest.

There seem to be a few more amps on display at NAMM than that list but I think there's probably also a need to take into account the importance of NAMM slowly dying. I haven't read any commentary yet this year but from the last couple it was becoming clear that more and more manufacturers weren't bothering - it's a lot of hassle and expense for less exposure than shipping out a few examples of your product to some YouTubers, keeping your Instagram up to date,etc. 
It seems that for smaller companies still trying to get a bigger foothold in the USA then the face to face conversations are important and there are larger companies that feel the need to be seen ( remember the hoo ha when Gibson pulled out) but if you've got established distribution and a reasonable social media profile then NAMM must be looking like an expensive outing. 

lukedlb

Would a Revival Drive solid state amp be acceptable to the valve amp army (card carrying member)?