Local dealer tells me not to buy a Boogie!

[simonich]

The digital modelers seem to be taking over the market and it's the first thing they try and buy (cheaper price, convenience, versatility). The trend will continue, but even as technology gets better, a digital process will never perfectly emulate what we can get from a well made analog tube amp - it is physically impossible.

Interesting. I actually think you're likely wrong on that last point. I think there will be a time, not too far off, where the digital process will get to the point that for human hearing, it will perfectly emulate what you can get from an analog tube amp. It's just a matter of (a) having enough processing power, and (b) having an accurate enough model.

For example, just look at video. Today, everything you see on satellite or digital cable is digital. Can you tell the difference in video quality from an analog feed? No.

Or take an example a bit further away. Chess. For the longest time the thinking was "there is no way a computer can beat a human grandmaster at chess, the process is just too complex." Well, that one happened too because of better algorithms and more processing power.

A 3.0 GHz 64 bit processor is more than enough processing power for audio, even complex harmonics, so that one is here now. If someone invests in an accurate model, and decent D/A circuits, boom, there you have it. (and of course the question of economics comes into play.)

Anyway, this one will be interesting to see as it plays out.

 

[Chris F]

It may be that we one day have digital modelling devices that closely emulates the sound of a decent tube amp, but that is just “half the battle”. The other half is the human being and their perception and decoding of the sound. The auditory pathways are very complex, and more elaborate than the visual and somatosensory pathways (information from receptors in skin, connective tissue, muscles, tendons, ligaments and joints). Complex circuitry is involved in processing and magnifying the differences in timing, intensity, encoding the pitch information and analyzing the quality of the sound, giving it a “meaning”. Frequencies from 20Hz to 20kHz can be detected. This is just the processing.

The sounds that a person hears are produced by the brain. Sound waves make no noise. The “creation” of sound by the brain is not purely a product of auditory signal transmission. In the past decade, position emission tomography (PET) imaging studies (a non-invasive scanning technique that utilizes small amounts of radioactive positrons, positively charged, to visualize body function and metabolism) have shown that auditory information is also processed in other parts of the brain which is associated with putting emotional labels on sounds and tunes.

So in context, an individuals interpretation of sound is influenced by the physiological process of auditory signal transmission, and the preconceived or conditioned response to the sound based on what our notion if ‘ideal’ is (this is the very emotional part of sound creation). This is why most people have different opinions on what constitutes ‘good tones’.

Based on the complexity of the brain, I like to thing that sound signals that are ‘organic’ may have a more normal processing than those frequencies that are ‘digital’. I have played quite a lot on Vox AD30 VT, Pod 2.0. and Digitech GNX3000. No doubt, they are much fun and good value for the money. Plug-and-play. What I did notice however, is that when I used such equipment for a while, I got “tired” of the sounds (perhaps “hearing exhaustion” is a better term). I don’t get the same with tube amps. Browsing the web, I concluded that this is a common phenomenon. So even though digital devices becomes better at emulating tube sounds, almost to the point of perfection, based on how an individual processes and interprets sounds and tones, it will not be exactly the same. Or maybe I am wrong…I could be pre-conditioned with the notion that digital devices are inferior sound-wise to tube amps.

Most of us still have a good collection of LP records, and probably plenty of CDs. Comparing sounds between a decent record player and a CD player in many cases leaves an individual with the feeling of a more organic and better sound from the LP records.

But as pointed out in this thread, we shouldn’t discourage anyone from using whatever they want. If digital technology such as the POD or Digitech inspires young players to develop music and become better players, it has served a purpose. On the other side of the coin, the GC chap shouldn’t bash other brands in order to make you leave their store with a truckload of crate or marshall’s.
8)

 

[jdurso]

Even GC sales people are guilty of Mesa bashing at times. I recently went to do an A/B between the new 5150III and the Road King. Mr. Knowledgeable tells me the 5150III is way better in versatility and tone, and that would certainly be untrue in most opinion polls.

Another GC rep, different location, tells me the new $1,700 Marshall I'm playing is all that over the Roadster head. So I plug in the Roadster, and yet another GC rep is guilty of speaking with forked tongue.

I have purchased most of my Mesa gear from GC, new and used. Same goes for Fender and Marshall stuff.

Can't we all just get along?

Lemme tell ya' something: I was in GC about a week and a half ago, tested a Diezel, a Roadster, and a Marshall JVM410. Both the Diezel and the Marshall ate the Roadster for breakfast, lunch, dinner, and even had a bit for dessert (they needed dessert room for all the Crates laying around). I play a Recto, and like it, but the Marshall was pure badass in tone. Speaking of tone, it took me all of 30 seconds on the Marshall to dial in a good tone, can't say that about our beloved Mesa's, can we now? This is a Mesa board, but be a little objective.

it is quite easy to dial in a great tone on that jvm..... but all you have with all that technology they added in is a tsl with a midi switching system..... and a pourly built on at that..... if you go through all the modes on each channel there is very little difference.... while on a roadster each mode on each channel produces something different...... and once you get used to the roadster you can get far better tone than out of that jvm..... not to say the jvm isnt good at what it does but i've heard better tones out of a regular dsl which you can get for 1200 or under at GC.... the diezel on the other hand... i'm not touching that one... if it was a vh4 i envy you for finding a GC with one.... the only thing that sucks is that they run you a **** load of $$$$

 

[oyster]

I concede that the deficiencies in digital sound production vs. analog could be an academic issue only if technology advances beyond a certain point (ie. what a human can actually differentiate) but

(a) it is a physical impossibility for a digital process to perfectly emulate an analog one, the resolution can be increased dramatically but a discrete process can't perfectly replicate a continuous process...this is simple science that can't be denied, and

(b) right now we are nowhere near the point at which it is impossible for humans to differentiate DMA against analog so let's worry about that when it happens, eh? :wink:

A very good point was made though, about the benefits of DMA which allow players who cannot otherwise afford good analog gear, to get decent tones on a limited budget. Even a cheap DMA rig costs less and sounds better than the crap I learned to play on for sure!

 

[JoeEllison]

it is quite easy to dial in a great tone on that jvm..... but all you have with all that technology they added in is a tsl with a midi switching system..... and a pourly built on at that..... if you go through all the modes on each channel there is very little difference.... while on a roadster each mode on each channel produces something different...... and once you get used to the roadster you can get far better tone than out of that jvm..... not to say the jvm isnt good at what it does but i've heard better tones out of a regular dsl which you can get for 1200 or under at GC.... the diezel on the other hand... i'm not touching that one... if it was a vh4 i envy you for finding a GC with one.... the only thing that sucks is that they run you a sh!t load of $$$$

I'm just not all that impressed with the Marshall sound, especially not the TSL amp. I prefer the DSL sound anyways, so I can't imagine the JVM will impress me much. Marshall amps ARE easy to dial in, though but that's all it sounds like. On the other hand, I found the Roadster pretty intuitive, and there was always a feeling that there was "a little more". The depth of sounds seems significantly greater with the Roadster.

 

[jdurso]

why does everyone think we are soooooo far away from hearing a digital modeller sound like a analog amp??? the only reason why the vetta which up until a year or so ago was the best you could find was because of cost.... L6 wants to make money.... has anyone heard or played an Axe-FX by fractal audio???? let me tell you something..... its light years ahead of all the other modellers out that and sounds and feels like a tube amp... it has all the nuances of a tube amp that has been missing

here's how they do it.... more lines of code..... the axe-fx has about 10 times the amount of code built into the modelling alone in order to emulate the tube sound and feel.... the harmonics are their, the response is there from your fingers, it reacts like a tube amp in terms of sag and when you let off the volume knob the amp cleans up just like a tube amp..... so we're not too far off from the day where you wont notice the difference.... does it have something to do with the fact that its a preamp which you can put with the power amp of your choice? maybe but a lot of axe-fx owner use it right into a PA with great results..... hopefully (or for some hopefully not) the rest of the industry should realize they should make a little less profit off the product but make a better product..... and all those who go listen to the clips online and say it still sounds like a modeller, well all i ahve to say is you have to try one before you diss it.... i've ab'd my buddies axe-fx through a 2:100 with my roadster and there was absolutley no difference..... the only arguement i can see is that it takes more time to tweak a modeller and a piece of equipment of that level..... put it this way it likes an eventide (effects on it are just as good) with amp modelling that sounds like a tube amp (many tube amps that you can stack on each other like the vetta) for $1400

 

[JoeEllison]

why does everyone think we are soooooo far away from hearing a digital modeller sound like a analog amp??? the only reason why the vetta which up until a year or so ago was the best you could find was because of cost.... L6 wants to make money.... has anyone heard or played an Axe-FX by fractal audio???? let me tell you something..... its light years ahead of all the other modellers out that and sounds and feels like a tube amp... it has all the nuances of a tube amp that has been missing

Yeah, and Hughes & Kettner used to make a really sweet modeling amp, that sounded better than anything before or since. Too bad it cost something ridiculous like $4500 for the halfstack and footpedal.

*shrugs*

 

[jdurso]

if your talking about the switchblade it can be had for about 1500 on musiciansfriend... if your speaking of the zentera they can be had for under 1500 on ebay when they pop up.... but still the axe-fx is lightyears beyond both and the switchblade is a tube amp

 

[JoeEllison]

if your talking about the switchblade it can be had for about 1500 on musiciansfriend... if your speaking of the zentera they can be had for under 1500 on ebay when they pop up.... but still the axe-fx is lightyears beyond both and the switchblade is a tube amp

I meant the ZenTera. The halfstacks were ridiculously priced, and the footswitch was another $500 or something stupid like that. Yeah, you can probably get the combo version for $1500 used.

 

[Matterra]

I meant the ZenTera. The halfstacks were ridiculously priced, and the footswitch was another $500 or something stupid like that. Yeah, you can probably get the combo version for $1500 used.

Indeed. I never played one, but judging by the videos on youtube comparing the ZenTera to the VettaII... well the VettaII sounds like a cheap toy, or a Spider.

I might have to score a Zen if they really go that cheap on Ebay.

 

[twostring]

To me, the whole "analog vs digital" debate is pointless. Both technologies yam what they yam. I loved my Boss GT-8, and I regret selling it. Was I using it with the intent that it would replace my tube amp? At first, yes, but then I realized that it was pointless...they both sound different. I'm not going to get into "_____ was better than _____" because like I said, it's pointless. After the first few weeks with the GT-8, I was no longer trying to dial in a recreation, I was trying to create something new all together. So what if the amp model you're using has the Mesa or Fender label on it? The main test is always 1) does it vibe with what I'm doing and 2) is it pleasing to me. If the answer to both of those questions is yes, then it doesn't make a **** bit of difference if you're playing through tube, SS, digital or a tuna sandwich. I've done a lot in my few years on this planet. I've had the pleasure of recording in the studio with several bands, I've built effects pedals and guitar, I've helped others build and dail in their amps and effects. I was a tube snob for the longest when I should have been concentrating on WHAT I was playing, not what I was playing through. That was a lot of wasted time. After helping someone set up their POD and tube power amp rig, I found that you CAN get a great sound with a digital device. After that, I put my tube snobery behind me and started looking into the technology, which after about 8 months of study and research brought me to the GT-8. I bought it, completely bypassed the preamp on my Fender HRD, and had a blast. If I didn't have such a weakness for lots of knobs and swapping tubes, I probably never would have purchased the Roadster. There's just something in me that makes me want to swap tubes and resistors and such. As soon as a digital device comes along that allows me to do that in a virtual environment, I'll leap on it no matter the cost. Like I've said many times before, once digital modelers stop trying to fit your guitar tone into a preset EQ curve (the "model") and starts calculating the complete interaction between capacitor, resistor, tube, transformer and speakers, we'll be on an entirely different planet.

...

But I think that may be the whole thing that leads us to that Terminator 2 scenario. "The machines became self-aware and started trying to rebuild old Voxs and Marshalls."

 

[JoeEllison]

None of this is helping me buy an amp, BTW... :shock:

 

[Jak0lantern01]

What kind of music are you looking to play? Generally speaking, you can't go wrong with a Mesa. Perhaps, if you can deal with the tweakiness of the model, you should go for a Mark IV. It's a top-notch amp that can give you an array of sounds. If you prefer straight rock or a Marshall-esque sound, go with a Stiletto. Either way, test out any amp before buying to see if its sound is for you. In terms of quality, though, I've never heard of any major issues. Any amp can be great or aweful, it's an electronic device and things can easily happen. Plus, Mesa has some solid customer service, and amps have a 5-year warranty, so I wouldn't worry. Put it into this perspective: I had to replace my tubes not too long after I bought my recto, within six months of bringing it home. Some time later, I had to contact Mesa for a reason I can't recall, but mentioned that the tubes had to be replaced before the 6-month period. The service rep I spoke to immediately took down my shipping info and sent a set of brand new 6L6 tubes without my even asking for them. That's quality service, even beyond what they had to do. This is why I am sticking with Mesa.Just make sure you purchase the amp that sounds good to you.

 

[Chris F]

I'll keep short for once

If you like more "Fenderish" or "Voxish" tone (EL84s), the Lonestar Special is good. Wonderful cleans and very good up=to-medium gain,

CF

 

[CoG]

Why would you buy a Rec Pre?

Well, it's basically a two-channel Road King 1 (with better cleans) that can be bought for as little as $700 used and is considerably more apartment/family-friendly. The DI doesn't sound as good as a primo cab with multiple $400 mics and a sexy mic pre in a perfect room, but it sounds better than you'll be able to do in your basement. If you're playing out you can pair it with a variety of power amps-- the 20/20 (which I use) is nice, I've run it into a 300-watt solid-state and was pretty happy with the sound, or you can go up to the lofty/insane heights of the 2:100. Separate pre- and power amps give you a good place to stick all kinds of (true stereo!) rack fx, especially important if you're into high-quality eq or reverb.

However, a Rec Pre-based rig is only really cost-effective if you buy parts of it used, or if high-quality silent practice/recording is really important to you.

It's another option to think about if you are a home studio guy or do an assload of recording.

 

[JoeEllison]

Thanks guys.

I'm all worried about the popping channel switching thing now...

 

[jdurso]

Thanks guys.

I'm all worried about the popping channel switching thing now...

you know it really depends on the amp.... my roadster only pops if i dont cycle through the channels first.... i only hear a very slight pop when switching to channel 3.... thats if i'm looking for it..... some other guys on here dont have it as good as me though so again it depends on that particular amp

 

[73h Nils]

Thanks guys.

I'm all worried about the popping channel switching thing now...

you know it really depends on the amp.... my roadster only pops if i dont cycle through the channels first.... i only hear a very slight pop when switching to channel 3.... thats if i'm looking for it..... some other guys on here dont have it as good as me though so again it depends on that particular amp

Same here, I just cycle through and it disappears.

 

[JOEY B.]

Maybe try a rackmount MkIV. No channel switch popping and it might get away from the "goofy" look :wink: . They are great amps with not near enough exposure in most Boogie dealerships.

 

[JoeEllison]

Maybe try a rackmount MkIV. No channel switch popping and it might get away from the "goofy" look :wink: . They are great amps with not near enough exposure in most Boogie dealerships.

You guys do sell those amps, don't you? I hope I can find a place to demo one.