Yamaha THR100

handsomerik · December 2015

Oh that's cool then. It's handy having people in the know on the forum.

Cabicular · December 2015

rossyamaha;891570" said:
[quote="handsomerik;891563"]I heard on a guitar nerds podcast a week or so back that all the THR100 amps had been recalled. Not sure why or if it's true but the boys on the podcast are usually in the know.

Yeah they were but it's all sorted now. An incredibly specific fault that probably nobody would ever be able to make happen. That said, they fixed it, replaced all the wrong ones and we're back on track now. [/quote]

Yup a total non problem. Just Yamaha behaving like a good Japanese company and being super safe
If I remember correctly the fault related to you turning the amp full up and then removing the speaker cable in flight would cause bad things to happen
It's not a practice I would recommend for ANY amp

english_bob · December 2015

Cabicular said:

If I remember correctly the fault related to you turning the amp full up and then removing the speaker cable in flight would cause bad things to happen

But seriously. Anybody who'd do that to an amp deserves to have bad things happen to them.

ICBM · January 2016

Well… today that nice Mr Ross Yamaha brought me the THR100 (the dual channel one) to try at the shop. I have to admit I haven't been that impressed with the online clips of it, so I wasn't 100% sure what to expect.

First, it's *very* light, even compared to what I was expecting for a small metal-cased digital head. I didn't weigh it but I'm sure it was well under 5Kg. I also really like the look of it, unlike the THR10 which looks like an oversized air freshener. I wasn't quite so keen on the cooling fan… I generally think they're a band-aid to fix an amp which hasn't been properly designed to cool itself naturally, which causes problems if they ever fail or get blocked up with dirt. And they suck a lot of crap into the amp that wouldn't otherwise get there, although that's less of a problem following the smoking ban. (You really don't want to see inside a fan-cooled amp which has spent most of its life in pubs pre-ban.) Also nice to see it has an impedance selector so it won't lose power going into an 8 or 16-ohm cab.

Which is good since the test cab was a 16-ohm Marshall 4x12" with G12T-75s - not normally my favourite speaker and pretty much guaranteed to bring out any boominess or fizziness in the amp.

But there isn't any. Really - unlike any digital amp I have ever played before, there was not a trace of that crushed-glass top-end harshness no matter how hard it was thrashed with the guitar, and we had it up at substantial volume some of the time too - not full, but sometimes up as far as what I would think of as a modern gig volume (amp mic'ed) with a reasonably loud drummer - nor with the guitar backed off to nearly zero and just tickling a high-gain sound, which also normally brings it out. Every sound on it was completely usable. Even better, it responds dynamically almost exactly like a valve amp, although I thought the compression in the "Class A" mode was a *tiny* bit overdone - you can hear it working, whereas on the "Class AB" it just sounds natural and feels natural without actually sounding compressed… which is a hard trick to pull off.

It also somehow manages to sound quite like a lot of different amps without apeing them directly - there's no specific setting for any particular amp, but you can dial it in to sound like a wide range of them if you don't want an exact copy. It's not characterless either, although I wouldn't say it has a very specific voice of its own - less so than the Blackstar ID for example. Just a very good range of flexible sounds - I would say the best compromise I've heard between not trying to be a cartoon of other amps and not being too tied to one sound.

It also has the ability to mix two different amp sounds. Normally, I hate this through one set of speakers - I've never heard it sound right, it always sounds somehow 'separated' with the dirt sitting slightly unnaturally over the top of the clean and ending up sounding like something is broken (not in a good way). This doesn't - it sounds like two completely separate amps mixed in the studio, so as you play harder the dirty amp takes over from the clean with no obvious transition.

For what it's worth, Ross just ran through the various sounds and options while I just played the guitar, and occasionally tweaked the knobs, so it was all me hearing and feeling what I was playing rather than just listening to someone else. (So I apologise for my awful playing

.) I tried it with a Custom Shop Strat, a mid-range parts Telecaster and an Epiphone Les Paul, and it sounded good with all of them, so clearly it's not picky about guitars either. We didn't have time to try it with pedals unfortunately.

Ross asked if I would have been able to tell it was a digital amp if I'd heard it blind without knowing. I have to say… I'm not sure! I think I would have been able to say it probably wasn't valve - it doesn't have the loose low-end thump of a big valve amp, nor the soft and slightly flubby breakup of something like a 5E3. It might have guessed it was analogue solid-state - except that the actual *tone* is much more valve-like.

Would I buy one? Yes. I don't need anything like this at the moment, but if I was in the market for a lightweight modern amp that would cover a lot of bases then it would be on the shortlist. I would go as far as saying it's the best digital amp I've heard, and perhaps the best solid-state one of any kind. It's not cheap, but clearly a lot has been invested in making it good.

Seriously impressed, and many thanks to Ross for taking the time to drop by.

Chuffola · January 2016

Stick that quote from ICBM on your marketing Rossy Amaha!

ICBM said:

Seriously impressed

stratman3142 · January 2016

One thing I don't understand is how it's output power can be rated as higher than its power consumption. Apologies if that's been answered on this forum before - I'm new here.

The THR100D was one of the lightweight amp heads I tried before I got my Victory V40, which seems to be dividing opinion on another thread.

The THR100 got great reviews, but I decided this one wasn't for me. At the time my perception was that, on cleaner settings, it might not be as loud as my Fender Hotrod 40W and not as full sounding. But I didn't use it through the recommended cab. I was using my Marshall 1x12 with a Vintage 30, so perhaps I didn't give it a completely fair chance and maybe I was doing something wrong.

Pete

rossyamaha · January 2016

Huge thanks to you @ICBM for taking the time out to see me. Absolute pleasure to meet you. Also massive thanks for the review. Like I said, it wasn't what I was expecting but thanks so much for the kind words. Much appreciated. Must grab a coffee next time I'm up. ;-)

ICBM · January 2016

stratman3142 said:

One thing I don't understand is how it's output power can be rated as higher than it's power consumption. Apologies if that's been answered on this forum before - I'm new here.

The THR100 got great reviews, but I decided this one wasn't for me. At the time my perception was that, on cleaner settings, it might not be as loud as my Fender Hotrod 40W and not as full sounding. But I didn't use it through the recommended cab. I was using my Marshall 1x12 with a Vintage 30, so perhaps I didn't give it a completely fair chance and maybe I was doing something wrong.

I had a look at the spec and you're right - the consumption is listed as only 60W, so the amp can't be a genuine 100W continuous output. Both of us thought it sounded about as loud as a 30W valve amp today, which I would say does correlate with that if they've got the dynamics right - there isn't any reason why "valve watts" should sound any louder than "solid state watts" if the usual factors in why they don't are taken out - they are the same watts really. One of the differences is the ability to deal with speaker thermal compression, and given that we were using a 300W cab today that wouldn't be an issue. With a 60W V30 it may well be though.

Rating amps' power outputs impossibly high seems to be a common problem recently - Roland have been doing it too.

rossyamaha said:
Huge thanks to you @ICBM for taking the time out to see me. Absolute pleasure to meet you. Also massive thanks for the review. Like I said, it wasn't what I was expecting but thanks so much for the kind words. Much appreciated. Must grab a coffee next time I'm up. ;-)

No problem, and we should maybe spend some time *not* talking about gear

.

It really was a nice surprise to hear how good it sounded, and I'm more than happy to say so for whatever little it counts!

DrJazzTap · January 2016

I have to admit these have me interested. I'm a massive holdsworth fan. And I always loved his DG era tones.
My father is a retired mechanical engineer and when I first started playing guitar. He could never understand my fascination with valve amps (pumped down my throat by guitarist mags). He thought surely if you were gigging you'd want something reliable. And as he put it "50's" technology (delicate glass bottles) isn't the way forward.
But then my first valve amp sounded considerably better than the crappy solid state amp I had. But these intrigue me. Definitely going to check one out.

ecc83 · January 2016

But, I was intrigued first of all by the impedance "selector" and HTF they had done it on a sstate amp? Well at least one trick is to restrict the output power* at 4Ohms to 50watts. I assume the "D" circuit is therefore optimised for 8-16 Ohms power delivery?

*Yes, "power"! If the amp can put a 100watt sine into a load it must of course draw more than 100W from the supply, otherwise Yammies have solved Global Warming! And I thought the "peak/music/total music/peak" power SNAFU was done and dusted LAST century?

But otherwise all props to Yamaha. They seem to have produced a fine amplifier. Half again as expensive as the ID 100 of course but has more/different features.

Yer pays yer money....Hope they are as reliable (or do I?.....)

I appear to have lost my opening sentence...I started off by saying "Hope this does not come across as sour grapes and I have HUGE respect for ICBM's opinions on amplifier performance.

Dave.

ICBM · January 2016

My guess would be that the impedance switch selects different power supply voltages - I'm sure there's a Class D power amp (Peavey DPC? I can't quite remember) designed like that so it gives the same power into higher impedances as low.

And it will amuse you that after what I said in the other thread, yes this is a Class D amp

. "They" seem to have cracked whatever problem it was that made the earlier ones sound less good than Class AB.

The power output claim is annoying too, but it is interesting given how loud the amp sounds, given that it cannot be any more than about a 50W output in reality if it draws 60 (even assuming very minimal preamp draw). Maybe they have cracked some of the reasons why solid-state tends not to sound as loud as valve, too?

I also hope they are reliable. I have to admit that cooling fan is a niggle - I'd much rather it was just properly heatsinked and with enough ventilation to make sure it never needs a fan… like another one we know of

.

The only other thing I forgot to mention is that Ross said the FX loop is a bit limited in that it's a dual-path loop that can't be applied to both channels - which means that if you want the same effects on your clean and dirty sounds, you will need to either use all true-stereo in/out effects, or double up on mono ones. Slightly annoying.

I do see this as something of a competitor to the Blackstar ID60 - for me personally it sounds better, is a better size physically and I like the dual-channel operation. But it's also more expensive, doesn't have built-in FX other than reverb, and is perhaps less distinctive-sounding, so not a direct competitor I don't think - for me it's a slightly more 'professional' product.

Hopefully, it will be successful and encourage others to up their game.

monquixote · January 2016

Great review @ICBM ;

The only thing that bothers me for use as a professional product is that you can't set the level going to FoH through the DI independently from the level going to the cab.

not_the_dj · January 2016

Wow, surprised at that glowing review. Great job Yamaha and Ross!

Sporky · January 2016

ICBM said:

My guess would be that the impedance switch selects different power supply voltages - I'm sure there's a Class D power amp (Peavey DPC? I can't quite remember) designed like that so it gives the same power into higher impedances as low.

And it will amuse you that after what I said in the other thread, yes this is a Class D amp . "They" seem to have cracked whatever problem it was that made the earlier ones sound less good than Class AB.

Impedance insensitivity appears on a few amps; Lab Gruppen e-series, a coupel of my current employer's amps. I don't know how it's done universally, but the Labs are 4-channel internally, presented as two external channels, and they hint that it's handled by the bridging. Somehow.

One of the issues with early Class D is that it was difficult to deal with the ripple; you had to have very good output filters, ideally with carefully handwound toroids. There are some more modern ways to approach it which greatly improve the sound of Class D. Again, my current employer holds a number of patents to do with handling the ripple in an elegant manner. Best not say who they are as I'm meant to be working...

ICBM · January 2016

Sporky said:
Impedance insensitivity appears on a few amps; Lab Gruppen e-series, a coupel of my current employer's amps. I don't know how it's done universally, but the Labs are 4-channel internally, presented as two external channels, and they hint that it's handled by the bridging. Somehow.

The THR100 isn't insensitive, it has a manual impedance selector switch.

I didn't ask what happens if you set it to 16 ohms and connect a 4-ohm cab, but hopefully it has internal protection to prevent anything bad - if they were concerned enough to recall them for a "fault" which only showed up when someone disconnected the speaker at full power, you would think they've already thought of the far more likely scenario of a musician not knowing what impedance is.

not_the_dj said:

Wow, surprised at that glowing review.

So was I! I was all prepared to give it a fair listen and then have to say to Ross that it wasn't bad but that it still sounded 'digital' and hence was going to be something I would never want to actually use.

I was wrong.

fretmeister · January 2016

Class D bass amps have come along way. My Demeter is far better than older efforts.

The new prototype Darkglass head has an even newer Class D unit - even the "proper iron" sceptics are reporting it has the proper heft of a Class AB.

stratman3142 · January 2016

Regarding the amp power rating. My first experience of an amp spec. that defied the law of conservation of energy was with my Crate Power Blocks that claim to deliver 150w RMS but have an input power rating of 45VA (i.e. watts). I have a couple that I carry with me as back up amps. They're definitely not as loud on a clean'ish setting as my 40W valve amps or my solid state Marshall 8008 power amp, but they could get me through a gig as backup so they serve their purpose.

Is there something about a class D that allows the power to be measured in a way that might imply a higher rating. I suppose once one supplier starts, everyone wants to be on a level playing field.

Also, some of the Roland Cube specs suggest an output power that's greater than the input power.

I suppose what matters is whether the amp gives you the sound you want in the situation where you want to use it. So try before you buy. But it's a bit confusing for consumers.

Pete

ICBM · January 2016

It is, and it's dishonest. I don't know if there's anything unique to Class D that would allow a spurious peak measurement, I'm not familiar enough with it.

But I do know that it's physically impossible for an amp to put out more power than it uses, or even the same amount. As far as I know the best efficiency that can be reached with both a switch-mode power supply and a Class D output section is about 90%, and there's always a bit of power used by the preamp too, not normally less than a few watts.

Phil_aka_Pip · January 2016

ICBM said:

No, it's very different. Solid-state analogue and digital modelling are not the same thing at all, even though they use the same physical technology - and in fact, it would be theoretically possible (if you had a building about the size of the Pentagon to put it in, a power station to run it and you could stop valves failing all the time) to build a digital modeller using valves.

I think that would be fun to do, but ultimately pointless!

ICBM · January 2016

Phil_aka_Pip said:

ICBM said:

No, it's very different. Solid-state analogue and digital modelling are not the same thing at all, even though they use the same physical technology - and in fact, it would be theoretically possible (if you had a building about the size of the Pentagon to put it in, a power station to run it and you could stop valves failing all the time) to build a digital modeller using valves.

I think that would be fun to do, but ultimately pointless!

Completely pointless, since the valves would be used simply as switching devices in a computer, and there is no effect on the resulting sound from the technology used.

In fact the earliest computers were all-valve of course, and they were the size of a building but had about the same processing power as a very basic pocket calculator these days… which is not remotely enough to process a guitar sound.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

In this Discussion

Become a Subscriber!

Yamaha THR100

Comments