timbuck2
Member
- Messages
- 3,912
its not a tube amp? I thought it was as far as using an actual tube in the power sectionI had a BluAmp, it's not a tube amp - but it's one of the better sounding units out there.
its not a tube amp? I thought it was as far as using an actual tube in the power sectionI had a BluAmp, it's not a tube amp - but it's one of the better sounding units out there.
It's got a Class D power amp with a nanotube in front, Looks like the X will follow the same recipe.its not a tube amp? I thought it was as far as using an actual tube in the power section
Despite the sycophants, it’s not a tube amp. Just a NOS military tube in the power section to warm things up. It does sound absolutely fantastic though.its not a tube amp? I thought it was as far as using an actual tube in the power section
DO YOU BRING PEOPLE INTO THE VENUE BLINDFOLDED WITH MUSTANG SALLY ON LOOPER AND SCREAM AT THE TOP OF YOUR LUNGS "BET YOU CAN'T GUESS THE HELIX?!?!?!?!?!"I hope it lacks weight. I didn’t do all this switching to digital, only to have to still carry a 50 pound piece of equipment.
NO BRO. BLACK BETTY. BAM BA LAMDO YOU BRING PEOPLE INTO THE VENUE BLINDFOLDED WITH MUSTANG SALLY ON LOOPER AND SCREAM AT THE TOP OF YOUR LUNGS "BET YOU CAN'T GUESS THE HELIX?!?!?!?!?!"
I don't find it to be a sacrifice at all. You either know how to eq your rig or you don't. Or you just believe the nonsense about digital from 30-40 years ago is still the caseSeen some very talented rock & roll cover bands with guitarists going through digital rigs.
All sound good, w/ tones that matched the cover songs well, but in general, for rock bands, the guitars just lacked a bit of weight.
Do y’all notice that was well?
Is it a sacrifice you’re willing to make in order to have all the other advantages?
Truly curious.
just like the older vox valvetronics did it then,,Despite the sycophants, it’s not a tube amp. Just a NOS military tube in the power section to warm things up. It does sound absolutely fantastic though.
This. I saw Motörhead once, in 1989. They had multiple full stacks on stage and their amps were louder than the PA. It was for TV, and they were repeatedly asked to turn it down by the TV producers. So they turned the amps up, of course.Considering you are most of the time hearing mostly a mix through the PA, maybe what you are missing is a guitar speaker cab on stage blasting and combining with the sound coming out of the PA? Most modeler users would use a full range system that would have a character similar to what comes out of the PA so that could make it sound "leaner."
This. If you run a decent modeler / profiler through a power amp and guitar cab, it's indistinguishable from the equivalent tube amp. This is not a new phenomenon. It's been the case for well over a decade now based on my experience with blind A/B testing.Considering you are most of the time hearing mostly a mix through the PA, maybe what you are missing is a guitar speaker cab on stage blasting and combining with the sound coming out of the PA? Most modeler users would use a full range system that would have a character similar to what comes out of the PA so that could make it sound "leaner."
Bold claim. This is not true for me, and I suspect many others. I wish it was, but it's not. I've found real amps have more "detail" or clarity in the sound/response across the frequency spectrum, whereas modelers are not as detailed. A good analogy is like watching a video at 720p resolution and then bumping it up to 4k. There is absolutely a difference, even in the best modeling tech right now. I don't think it's a huge percentage difference, but there is enough difference for me to prefer real amps and guitar speakers.If you run a decent modeler / profiler through a power amp and guitar cab, it's indistinguishable from the equivalent tube amp.