Two Rock amps. I don’t get it?

Modulus_Amps

Wazmeister said:

From an amp cab point of view I would think that small cab will be quite boxy, not a lot of deep lows?

Would be great for a band setting or recording. But when people say it exposes your mistakes I think that mid forward focus of a small cab with no low deep end would do that.

Kittyfrisk

Ddigger said:

CaseOfAce said:

I'm reminded of this scene...!

Jack Burton: I don't get this at all. I thought Lo Pan—
Lo Pan: Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!

Sorry.  I don't get it.

'Big Trouble in Little China' 

Ddigger

Kittyfrisk said:

Ddigger said:

CaseOfAce said:

I'm reminded of this scene...!

Jack Burton: I don't get this at all. I thought Lo Pan—
Lo Pan: Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!

Sorry.  I don't get it.

'Big Trouble in Little China' 

Thanks!

snowblind

I suspect the term "unforgiving" in the context of Two Rocks is probably similar to that applied to HiWatts insofar as the detail that comes out of these things is greater than your average Marshall style amp. The headroom is stratospheric so you can push them in ways that most other amps won't cope with. 

By way of example here is my DR103. If you look at the input volumes you would be expecting some level of breakup from most other amps with the dials set like that. However the thing is still clear as a bell.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/18dqNHjyzO7bKUrNI-ntOlKN-lxLNsxbZ/view?usp=sharing

Not played through a Two Rock myself but I have seen them in action and there is a certain similarity. You get to hear everything. I always say if you ever really want to hear a guitar play it through a HiWatt. It's a bit like plugging into a hi-fi. Not to everyone's taste of course but nice if you like that sort of thing. 

goldtop

I once played my Diezel Herbert's clean channel at the full 160W, and that was definitely unforgiving of my sloppy technique. Clumsiness results in inconsistent volume.

So if you do a run that has hammer-ons and pull-offs as well as regular picked notes, it can be very difficult to sound fluid. Even when the notes are all present - and in the right order - the extra dB from an overly energetic pull-off stands out like a sore thumb.

Whereas a more typical compressed/distorted amp automatically smoothes that out.

ryanverbena

Two Rock is my favourite amp maker. No idea why they needed so many models, but you can't argue that they haven't refined them - genuine improvements on each iteration.

Josh_Cosku

I have an Studio Signature and it is the best amp I have ever tried/played. I mean Fender territory, and I didn't play tonnes of amps by the way, I am not an amp guru.

I think it is about clean headroom and nice EQ curve which can can cut the mix easily but not harshly. So dynamics can be heard in a band context similarly as your mistakes as well. I played Princetons, DR's but they compress and overdrive at the band volumes, because of this someone can say these are more forgiving. 

I guess a Twin will be same to TR, I don't have much experience with it. TR SS is 18-19 kgs and Fender Twin 30-35kgs? Not practicle at all. 

paulmapp8306

Modulus_Amps said:

Wazmeister said:

From an amp cab point of view I would think that small cab will be quite boxy, not a lot of deep lows?

Would be great for a band setting or recording. But when people say it exposes your mistakes I think that mid forward focus of a small cab with no low deep end would do that.

youd be wrong....  I tried a couple yesterday, and that small combo (and indeed the head into the stand alone 1x12 cab) had more bottom end than seom oversized 2x12 cabs I tried.   NO idea how they do it, but its massive.  

Wazmeister

Modulus_Amps said:

Wazmeister said:

From an amp cab point of view I would think that small cab will be quite boxy, not a lot of deep lows?

Would be great for a band setting or recording. But when people say it exposes your mistakes I think that mid forward focus of a small cab with no low deep end would do that.

Not boxy at all, strangely, and the deep ends are very good too if you want them. The EQ on these amps are the best I’ve encountered.

I guess that this is the design elements that you are paying for ?

Josh_Cosku

Wazmeister said:

Modulus_Amps said:

Wazmeister said:

From an amp cab point of view I would think that small cab will be quite boxy, not a lot of deep lows?

Would be great for a band setting or recording. But when people say it exposes your mistakes I think that mid forward focus of a small cab with no low deep end would do that.

Not boxy at all, strangely, and the deep ends are very good too if you want them. The EQ on these amps are the best I’ve encountered.

I guess that this is the design elements that you are paying for ?

Fully agree, not boxy at all. 

octatonic

Havent read all the comments, just the OP.

Two Rock have a different note attack to a lot of other amps.
They are sort of the anti-Matchless to me.

Matchless and Voxy circuits have more inherent distortion, even when clean, so it sort of rounds off the note attack.
It makes it easier to play certain styles.
Sometimes just a power chord on my Lightning is all I need to make me smile.

Two Rock have a totally different feel.
I know there are loads. of different models and variation within the product line but overall I find them spankier, even when distorted there is a clarity that cuts through. I find myself playing more in that modern fusion style on a Two Rock, being super picky about note choice, phrasing, muting.
Failing to do that leads to the rough edges being very obvious.
I had several friends, who are good guitarist, play my old Two Rock and really dislike it- finding it hard to work with, harder to get a tone they liked. I find this is generally true of Dumble style/inspired circuits.

That said, a Zen Drive into a Deluxe Reverb gets you 90% of the way there anyway.

With a Matchless there is so much hair that you almost don't want to play *too perfectly*, you want some of the grit and hair to be in there. 

On Legacy amps- they have changed hands and direction several times. I don't think it is a huge deal really.

fretfinder

sweepy said: they are a bit brutal where sloppiness is concerned but oh so rewarding to play 

There’s a contradiction in terms if ever I heard one! 

Keefy

octatonic said:

Havent read all the comments, just the OP.

Two Rock have a different note attack to a lot of other amps.
They are sort of the anti-Matchless to me.

Matchless and Voxy circuits have more inherent distortion, even when clean, so it sort of rounds off the note attack.
It makes it easier to play certain styles.
Sometimes just a power chord on my Lightning is all I need to make me smile.

Two Rock have a totally different feel.
I know there are loads. of different models and variation within the product line but overall I find them spankier, even when distorted there is a clarity that cuts through. I find myself playing more in that modern fusion style on a Two Rock, being super picky about note choice, phrasing, muting.
Failing to do that leads to the rough edges being very obvious.
I had several friends, who are good guitarist, play my old Two Rock and really dislike it- finding it hard to work with, harder to get a tone they liked. I find this is generally true of Dumble style/inspired circuits.

That said, a Zen Drive into a Deluxe Reverb gets you 90% of the way there anyway.

With a Matchless there is so much hair that you almost don't want to play *too perfectly*, you want some of the grit and hair to be in there. 

On Legacy amps- they have changed hands and direction several times. I don't think it is a huge deal really.

That’s very interesting. I mainly gig a Matchless Lightning and I was recently offered a Two Rock in trade for something else. I never got as far as trying it out, but I did wonder whether it would be so different that I would be bound not to like it.

I recently took my Matchless to a rehearsal where previously I had used either the studio’s Blackstar or my own Princeton Reverb, and the improvement in how good it sounded (and felt!) was incredible. If a Two Rock can do that then imo it is worth the money.

octatonic

Keefy said:

octatonic said:

Havent read all the comments, just the OP.

Two Rock have a different note attack to a lot of other amps.
They are sort of the anti-Matchless to me.

Matchless and Voxy circuits have more inherent distortion, even when clean, so it sort of rounds off the note attack.
It makes it easier to play certain styles.
Sometimes just a power chord on my Lightning is all I need to make me smile.

Two Rock have a totally different feel.
I know there are loads. of different models and variation within the product line but overall I find them spankier, even when distorted there is a clarity that cuts through. I find myself playing more in that modern fusion style on a Two Rock, being super picky about note choice, phrasing, muting.
Failing to do that leads to the rough edges being very obvious.
I had several friends, who are good guitarist, play my old Two Rock and really dislike it- finding it hard to work with, harder to get a tone they liked. I find this is generally true of Dumble style/inspired circuits.

That said, a Zen Drive into a Deluxe Reverb gets you 90% of the way there anyway.

With a Matchless there is so much hair that you almost don't want to play *too perfectly*, you want some of the grit and hair to be in there. 

On Legacy amps- they have changed hands and direction several times. I don't think it is a huge deal really.

That’s very interesting. I mainly gig a Matchless Lightning and I was recently offered a Two Rock in trade for something else. I never got as far as trying it out, but I did wonder whether it would be so different that I would be bound not to like it.

I recently took my Matchless to a rehearsal where previously I had used either the studio’s Blackstar or my own Princeton Reverb, and the improvement in how good it sounded (and felt!) was incredible. If a Two Rock can do that then imo it is worth the money.

I like Two Rock as a brand. Whether you'd like it comes down to what you are shooting for tonally.
If you like the Matchless thing and mostly only want that sound then I would say it isn't for you.

If you like the Matchless sound for some styles but then use other amps for different styles and can play in ways that suit that sound/styles then I'd say go for it.

I added a Lazy J recently which is very different to Matchless- some of the pedals I use with the Lightning do not work at all with the Lazy J- a Fulltone OCD for example, waaaaay too much in the lower mids. Unusable.
Zendrive going into both amps at the same time is tonal heaven though.

DartmoorHedgehog

I'm happy to be proven wrong, and I've never had a Fender-style amp so perhaps I just don't "get it" either, but all these "boutique" amp discussions just smack of Emperor's New Clothes to me. They must be amazing because otherwise they wouldn't be so expensive, and if you don't understand then it's because you're not good enough.

Surely various amps sound different and we all pick one that suits our taste. Versatility I do get - an amp that covers a wide range of sounds I want I would value higher than a one-trick pony, but most of these mythical holy-grail amps seem to be endless variations on clean Fenders.  I'm definitely one who doesn't get it.  Sorry  

ecc83

Reading through much of this I have formed a conclusion as to why some people think the 2 rock 'exposes' player faults? I think it comes down to distortion. The 2Rs seem to be very 'clean' amplifiers and thus add nothing to the notes you play. When playing an acoustic and especially a 'classical' style, any fret buzzes or squeaks are down to bad technique but these things are largely hidden in a sea of harmonics! Then, electrics tend to be loud and that suppresses your hearing acuity.

So, how do you make a guitar amp that is a bit distorted at almost all levels? One way is to deliberately underbias the OP stage so you get 'crossover' distortion. Another would be to have an earlier stage or stages working away from their optimum ( min THD) working point.

I would like to know the model of Blackstar in that studio?

Dave.

Bats_

digitalscream said:

sweepy said:

The CSRi is undoubtably the nest amp I’ve ever played or owned, they are a bit brutal where sloppiness is concerned but oh so rewarding to play 

True enough, but any more so than a Laney VH100R (for example)? That was the clearest clean-ish amp I've ever played, completely unforgiving, but amazing to play through if you're on your game.

Also, noticeably cheaper and without claims of mojo.

To be clear, I'm not knocking anybody's purchase. I just find that there's nothing new under the sun when it comes to amps, and almost all useful designs have already been built and rebuilt many times over the years.

In fact, modelling aside, I think the last genuinely innovative and unique amp I've seen was the HT-5.

Ahh the VH100R. 

Best sounding amp I’ve ever, ever owned/played though. Could do everything and sound incredible. 

Problem with it;

Louder than anything else on the planet. 
Weighed the same as my car. 

Playing though it felt like I was a child with a machine gun. 

RickLucas

rockmonster said:

Will they really make me sound like Matt Scoffield or John at Peach guitars?

Stands back after lighting the blue touch paper!

No.

Keefy

ecc83 said:

...

I would like to know the model of Blackstar in that studio?

Dave.

I think that question refers to my comment - it was the 100W(?) head in the picture below.

Reverend

Stuckfast said:

Mr_Claw said:

I played my old guitar teacher's Two Rock CRS a bunch of times. Every single mistake was magnified a billion fold.

Is there an amp that does the opposite of this?

Asking for a friend.

why do you think the good lord gave us wahs?