Fender Tonemaster Amps

ICBM

HandwrittenHero said:

Those last two posts also skirt around another interesting point of repairability etc. There’s no right or wrong really, it can be cool to have something you can work on and keep going for decades etc. On the other hand consumable parts and service requirements are upkeep cost so it’s an argument over more economically viable to have something that costs £x per year but lasts forever vs something that has no upkeep but will need replacing at some point. The ethics of the landfill being another consideration.

I also don’t buy digital meaning less reliable. But that could be me working in IT. We have some kit that has an uptime of years that has been in service for decades and some of it barely had faults register over that time. Depends on what the kit is asked to do and environment it’s in etc. But when kit does fail there’s no reason objectively why you can’t repair - there’s probably not a part in an industrial level server I haven’t been involved in replacement of - it’s just down to the economics of such a repair and the practicality (mainly I can’t imagine the actual software being easy to get if it needed to be reinstalled after components were replaced)

As a repairer I’m at the sharp end of this. Digital gear - in fact all modern solid-state electronics - is more reliable than older and especially valve gear *when built to a similar quality*. This is important, and the evidence is then skewed considerably because cheaper modern gear is usually built down to a price not up to a quality. Even so, the failure rates of modern digital gear are very low. The problem is that in the rare cases it does fail, it’s often very difficult or impossible to repair, due to production methods or non-availability of custom integrated circuits (chips).

There’s also an issue of long-term repairability with switch-mode power supplies and Class D power amps in that if the electrolytic caps fail - just as they do in any older gear - it can often do so much collateral damage that the module is then a write-off, whereas with a valve or old solid-state amp it’s usually just a case of changing the caps.

One thing that’s nice to see about the Tonemasters is that these potentially long-term-problem modules are completely separate inside the chassis, so in theory it would be possible to replace them with a future equivalent even if the exact part isn’t available. That doesn’t necessarily mean it’s practical without a bit of physical bodging though - they’re usually very specifically designed for the way they’re mounted.

But overall they do look better-made and a safer long-term bet than most other modeling amps.

HandwrittenHero

ICBM said:

HandwrittenHero said:

Those last two posts also skirt around another interesting point of repairability etc. There’s no right or wrong really, it can be cool to have something you can work on and keep going for decades etc. On the other hand consumable parts and service requirements are upkeep cost so it’s an argument over more economically viable to have something that costs £x per year but lasts forever vs something that has no upkeep but will need replacing at some point. The ethics of the landfill being another consideration.

I also don’t buy digital meaning less reliable. But that could be me working in IT. We have some kit that has an uptime of years that has been in service for decades and some of it barely had faults register over that time. Depends on what the kit is asked to do and environment it’s in etc. But when kit does fail there’s no reason objectively why you can’t repair - there’s probably not a part in an industrial level server I haven’t been involved in replacement of - it’s just down to the economics of such a repair and the practicality (mainly I can’t imagine the actual software being easy to get if it needed to be reinstalled after components were replaced)

As a repairer I’m at the sharp end of this. Digital gear - in fact all modern solid-state electronics - is more reliable than older and especially valve gear *when built to a similar quality*. This is important, and the evidence is then skewed considerably because cheaper modern gear is usually built down to a price not up to a quality. Even so, the failure rates of modern digital gear are very low. The problem is that in the rare cases it does fail, it’s often very difficult or impossible to repair, due to production methods or non-availability of custom integrated circuits (chips).

There’s also an issue of long-term repairability with switch-mode power supplies and Class D power amps in that if the electrolytic caps fail - just as they do in any older gear - it can often do so much collateral damage that the module is then a write-off, whereas with a valve or old solid-state amp it’s usually just a case of changing the caps.

One thing that’s nice to see about the Tonemasters is that these potentially long-term-problem modules are completely separate inside the chassis, so in theory it would be possible to replace them with a future equivalent. That doesn’t necessarily mean it’s practical without a bit of physical bodging though - they’re usually very specifically designed for the way they’re mounted.

But overall they do look better-made and a safer long-term bet than most other modeling amps.

Handy to have it from an amp perspective. From IT component/hardware it’s a combination of whether it’s built for components to be easily swapped, how compatible it is with different chipsets and as you say what splash damage failure does.

So if for example the systemboard dies, theoretically the same or a compatible systemboard replaces and you reinstall the OS but otherwise any components, daughter boards etc are fine to just hook up to the new. If it kills the cpu with it though or you can’t get a board compatible with the memory in situ etc then it can quickly become unviable to repair compared to replace.

Neckwringer

rlw said:

As a purely home user who has bought and sold

 

• Cornford Harlequin
  
• Princeton 65 RI
• Supro Blues King 12
• Tone King Falcon
• Tone King Gremlin
• Yamaha THR10c x 3

I can safely say that the Tonemaster Deluxe sounds better at any home friendly volume and a million times better than any of the above attenuated right down.  It sounds like a real amp.

Does it sound like a valve DRRI?  Don't know as I've never tried one very loud, or at home.  But I do know that it sounds great with a nice drive pedal - Great North Tweed Drive or a BD-2 Wazacraft - in front of it and I can see absolutely no reason why anyone would spend thousands on a loud and heavy valve amp purely to play at home.

I simply cannot imagine what could be better for home use - if you are after a Fender sound - other than a TM Princeton which, despite so many saying they can play their valve Princeton at 4 or 5 at home, would be perfect with the low wattage and attenuated right down so you could play it on 10 all the time.

rlw

Quite possibly a very good solution but they're not thick on the ground are they.

stickyfiddle

rlw said:

Quite possibly a very good solution but they're not thick on the ground are they.

And more to the point won't sound like a Deluxe Reverb..?! (10" speaker, small box, no trem, etc)

Lewy

Seeing mention of cranking the TMDR at home volumes - I have to say my experience was that even at the most attenuated level, above 6 or 7 on the volume you were getting above what you'd think of as bedroom volumes. Thought I'd mention it as people have varying perceptions of what actually constitutes bedroom volumes. Cranked, fully attenuated, this amp will wake the baby up no problem!

HandwrittenHero

Lewy said:

Seeing mention of cranking the TMDR at home volumes - I have to say my experience was that even at the most attenuated level, above 6 or 7 on the volume you were getting above what you'd think of as bedroom volumes. Thought I'd mention it as people have varying perceptions of what actually constitutes bedroom volumes. Cranked, fully attenuated, this amp will wake the baby up no problem!

Line out to headphones for that level of play.

Obviously everyone has different tolerances but as a volume on 6-7ish user the 0.2w for me I’d be really disappointed if neighbours knocked on the wall in the daytime. 

stickyfiddle

I'm in an apartment (admittedly a very solidly built one) and had no complaints at 5 with a couple of pedals on top. That's pretty loud in the room but get it off the floor and I'd be surprised if anyone reasonable would complain. Probably depends how melodic your playing is, mind you  

Lewy

HandwrittenHero said:

Lewy said:

Seeing mention of cranking the TMDR at home volumes - I have to say my experience was that even at the most attenuated level, above 6 or 7 on the volume you were getting above what you'd think of as bedroom volumes. Thought I'd mention it as people have varying perceptions of what actually constitutes bedroom volumes. Cranked, fully attenuated, this amp will wake the baby up no problem!

Line out to headphones for that level of play.

Obviously everyone has different tolerances but as a volume on 6-7ish user the 0.2w for me I’d be really disappointed if neighbours knocked on the wall in the daytime. 

I agree with that, but someone who expects to be able to dime this amp without imposition to the rest of a typical household is likely to be similarly disappointed. So they should expect to either use headphones as you say - which some people really dislike (myself included), keep the amp at 4/5 and use a pedal for drive, or use the DI out into a mixer and into studio monitors. It doesn't take anything away from the amp to point out that people could buy a TMDR and still find themselves still looking for an amp-on-10 sound solution for bedroom playing.

HandwrittenHero

Get what you’re saying, but it’s very hard to find something at that quiet a level without other compromises. 5ft away from the TMDR on 0.2w volume 6 and rolling down to clean up I’m getting towards hearing as much of my strings acoustically as the amp and into the territory of having to isolate the sound for quieter. Headphones are just the most accessible/practical way of isolating.

I think I’d struggle to hit that requirement even with a Yamaha THR10 and me sat directly in the beam.

koss59

@stilwel has fender got any plans to put the tech into a pedal? The DI out sounds so good on these compared to other modellers I’ve tried it seems crazy if they don’t.

dindude

At home volumes the Vibro Champ Reverb with pedals is ridiculously good. At gig levels the Hot Rod Deluxe with pedals is pretty darn good.

I can kinda see for similar price of either this might be a good option for both home and gigging. I’d like to try one for my own curiosity, but if only one or the other and weight not a big issue then don’t really see the point. 

longjaw

I'd be interested if a head version of the 60s Bassman or Bandmaster in brown or blonde was released!

Loobs

Played the TM Deluxe Reverb the other day. It sounded good, no doubt, but didn't sound as good as real valve amp. That said, given how light it is, it's very impressive and no one would notice at a gig either...

Fez

I am really interested in trying the tonemasters I wonder if I can swing a trip to a music equipment emporium with her indoors?

rossi

Buy a used Champion 20 or 40, then casually take it out  to a gig or shop to be looked at and come back with a Tonemaster. 

Gulliver

I 100% understand why someone would want one and from what I've heard they're pretty decent sounding.

That said, I 100% would not buy one, and I know it's for purely illogical reasons.   I like valves. You can tell me how transistors are superior in every way (as the owner of Session amps told me many times in pubs) and I will still want valves.  I won't go down the Kemper/Helix/AxeFX route, because they will no doubt sound excellent - but I'll still want valves. 

Is it logical? No.  Will my knowledge of that change my mind?  Also no.

rlw

This thread amuses and annoys me in that, was Fender to develop the tech to the point where the Tonemaster amps were measurably better in every way to the valve based originals, some people would still prefer valves because, well valves.

dazzajl

rlw said:

This thread amuses and annoys me in that, was Fender to develop the tech to the point where the Tonemaster amps were measurably better in every way to the valve based originals, some people would still prefer valves because, well valves.

I do get it. I think most of us have our little illogical takes and baseless prejudices when it comes to gear. In any hobby. 

HandwrittenHero

dazzajl said:

rlw said:

This thread amuses and annoys me in that, was Fender to develop the tech to the point where the Tonemaster amps were measurably better in every way to the valve based originals, some people would still prefer valves because, well valves.

I do get it. I think most of us have our little illogical takes and baseless prejudices when it comes to gear. In any hobby. 

I'm usually running my Les Paul into the Tonemaster so I'm at least going to chuckle at the irony.