Digital transistor amps. modelling amps not really solid state ??

FWIW, I consider a digital amp to be any amp that takes an analog guitar signal, converts it to digital for processing, then converts it back to analog for amplification. Analog amplification of a signal that has been digitally converted is still going to recreate any artifacts created by the imperfect conversion, so will have whatever digital 'flavour' exists in the signal.
 
Thing is, I've used amps using every technology (and every combination of technology) that have sounded terrible.
 
Much like there are sucky digital modeler, there are sucky SS and tube amps, honestly.

Just because it's tube, doesn't mean it's better.

I'd much rather play an Axe FX with a decent poweramp than a fucking Bugera 1990, personally.
 
Last edited:
I don't think I've ever played a really crappy sounding tube amp myself though I 'm sure they're out there somewhere.:lmao:

No Experience w/ The Bugera 1990 but I have'nt heard much bad said about them tbh...and in most of the YT reviews I've heard they sound rather sweet (that Euge Valovirta guy's especially comes to mind). If it's a Plexi w/ more (actual high) gain your looking for well that's the way they sound to my ears after all the jumpering of patch cables at the inputs and what not "lmao: ...

(EDIT: Sorry That was his Bugera "1960" video I was thinking about...the 1990 is apparently a JCM 900 clone...he got some decent tones out of the video he did for that one too. I have'nt seen or played one myself though.)

As for Bugera's in general..they are much-maligned sweetass amp's imo. All the one's I have personal experience with (333XL Infy which I own, TriRec which my buddy has at his studio & 6262 or w/e it's called..played those a lot in practice spaces/onstage).

In fact I'd totally love to have a TriRec (since the real deal is sadly above my pay grade :( . It's not totally Recto-ish.(more like a Peavey or Randall mixed w/ a Recto) but it's a fantastic sounding amp in it's own right..and the Recto tones are (almost) there if you want them ..it's just a whole lot more versatile tone-wise, you can get a lot of other stuff out of it :bigthumb:


As far as reliability , every guy I know who actaully owns one has said it's been pretty much trouble-free for years as opposed to the guy's in the YT video comments who always say "theirs" sounded great for "the one week it worked" :lol ..fucking BS.
 
Last edited:
Mine's going on 15 years with a couple tube changes being the only "issues" I've had ...just saying

And here's the reason why no one ever says anything about their tone (insert butt-plug) :laugh2:

​
 
Phantasmagoria said:
Mine's going on 15 years with a couple tube changes being the only "issues" I've had ...just saying

And here's the reason why no one ever says anything about their tone (insert butt-plug) :laugh2:

​
Click to expand...

but we're not really comparing tubes amps here to non tube...or saying one is better than the other ..
 
jeremy said:
analog is a full wave, digital is an approximation of said wave
Click to expand...

There's a nuance there. The output of digital, when it's converted back into sound, is the full sound wave. How absolutely accurate it is to the original is a function of sampling and resolution, but these days, most digital does reproduce the waves accurately. Higher sampling rates just yield additional information like the more delicate harmonics that the average user may or may not even perceive given their playback mechanism, speakers/earphones or listening environment.
 
Gold star said:
but we're not really comparing tubes amps here to non tube...or saying one is better than the other ..
Click to expand...



Nope I was responding to Mincer saying any kind of amp can sound like shiz (kinda true ..though tube amps generally tend to do so far less) & then the reply implying that the Bugera 1990 was a crappy soundiing tube amp (which could well be the case..I have'nt had any experience with it myself...). However people do tend to bag on Bugera's "reliability issues" (as opposed to how they sound..cuz there's really nothing to complain about there ..and I wanted to point that out :bigthumb:)


But if we absolutely need to compare tube to SS, modellers hybrids etc.....why not..

Here's my little SS Laney Dualtop (60W Class D):



& my Hybrid Randall T2 (4x12AX7 tube preamp/ Mosfet Power section):



& they could both go up nicely against my Bugera (or any other tube amp :bigthumb:) any day imo..​
 
Phantasmagoria said:
(EDIT: Sorry That was his Bugera "1960" video I was thinking about...the 1990 is apparently a JCM 900 clone...he got some decent tones out of the video he did for that one too. I have'nt seen or played one myself though.)
Click to expand...
Yeah, I meant the JCM900 clone. Honestly, I could say the same about the JCM900. I just mentioned the Bugera because it's a cheapie copy of an amp I already hate, LOL. I know many people make it sound good. It probably doesn't sound terrible for some people. But it's not an amp I'd pick for myself. I'd much rather play an Axe FX through a decent poweramp. I know I can get something I like more out of that setup. But that's not saying, much, honestly. I'd play almost anything over a JCM900.

I have nothing against a good working Bugera. I mean, I do own a Mooer poweramp which isn't miles ahead of the quality of a Bugera. That being said, I did buy a Peavey XXX some time ago for less than the price of a Bugera 333.
 
Well the Axe FX/Power amp combo is also going to be about 10x the price of the Bugera. And while I have no experience w/ the 1990 I can honestly say regardless of price I'd personally pick my 333XL Infinium (supposed a JSX clone.) over the Axe-Fx/power amp all day long on account of it " soiunding way better" imo. As for being unreliable or cheaply made the first run of Bugera "non-iInfinium" models had a defective transformer clip that caused many of them to malfunction. And that was played up like crazy (most likely stoked by the competition)....

I know a lot of guys who have had Infinium models forv years like me and apart from being noticeably better made & finished than the older models, none of them have ever faced serious reliability issues..although the internet is full of folk w/ both Infinium & non-infinium models who's amp's all "sounded glorious" (cuz that actually ca'nt be disputed as all one has do to 'call BS' is post up a clip or two) "for two days and then died"....

Things like Transformers etc where they could really be cutting costs are actually huge....often way bigger than the amp's they're supposedly copying (a fact that Bugera advertised).

Yeah they're mass produced and have boards full of SMD components that are'nt meant to be "worked on" by amp tech's, just pulled out & replaced like you would a board in your TV or washing machine, But that does'nt make them unreliable...it's just a diffferent way of manufacturing and one that is'nt antiquated...welcome to the age of mass-production.

These were selling like hot-cakes and were the best selling tube amp's in Europe (according to Thomann's figures) for years & years running :bigthumb:
 
Last edited:
Rex_Rocker said:
That being said, I did buy a Peavey XXX some time ago for less than the price of a Bugera 333.
Click to expand...

Well , you got lucky :bigthumb:

That's actually another thing. Bugera actually encouraged and marketed the amps as cheaper "clones" of this or that amp..especially by making them look similar, cos they sold more amp's that way. But imo they always "sounded" different. Like a tweaked/souped up/hot-rodded version of the "source" amp. I think the 333 is a xxx clone & the 333XL is supposedly a JSX...but there are actually pretty big differences in the feel & tone (not better or worse....but different). The 333XL for example has noticeably more gain than the JSX .....& those differences are evident with all the other models as well (TriRec, 1960 etc..)
 
Phantasmagoria said:
Well the Axe FX/Power amp combo is also going to be about 10x the price of the Bugera. And while I have no experience w/ the 1990 I can honestly say regardless of price I'd personally pick my 333XL Infinium (supposed a JSX clone.) over the Axe-Fx/power amp all day long on account of it " soiunding way better" imo.
Click to expand...
I don't think we agree there. But each to his own. :)
 
Last edited:
Phantasmagoria said:
Well , you got lucky

That's actually another thing. Bugera actually encouraged and marketed the amps as cheaper "clones" of this or that amp..especially by making them look similar, cos they sold more amp's that way. But imo they always "sounded" different. Like a tweaked/souped up/hot-rodded version of the "source" amp. I think the 333 is a xxx clone & the 333XL is supposedly a JSX...but there are actually pretty big differences in the feel & tone (not better or worse....but different). The 333XL for example has noticeably more gain than the JSX .....& those differences are evident with all the other models as well (TriRec, 1960 etc..)
Click to expand...
Nah, I don't think it was luck. But at the time, the XXX wasn't super popular, so it wasn't hard for them to go for 300-400 dollars used.

Really underappreciated amp, IMO. Never played the Bugera equilvant, honestly. I bet they sound great. Like I said, nothing against Bugera here. I was going to comment on how ethical the whole marking as clones is, but I mean... I would choke on my words seing as how much I love Rectos and I don't think it's a secret that the first revisions were pretty blatant SLO preamp clones.

I don't think most Bugeras sound bad, FWIW. At least the heads. I just don't think cloning a JCM900 was such a great idea when they could've just gone for the 800... which still isn't my cup of tea, but at least is not a such widely hated amp as the 900, LOL.
 
Last edited:
Rex_Rocker said:
Nah, I don't think it was luck. But at the time, the XXX wasn't super popular, so it wasn't hard for them to go for 300-400 dollars used.

Really underappreciated amp, IMO. Never played the Bugera equilvant, honestly. I bet they sound great. Like I said, nothing against Bugera here. I was going to comment on how ethical the whole marking as clones is, but I mean... I would choke on my words seing as how much I love Rectos and I don't think it's a secret that the first revisions were pretty blatant SLO preamp clones.

I don't think most Bugeras sound bad, FWIW. At least the heads. I just don't think cloning a JCM900 was such a great idea when they could've just gone for the 800... which still isn't my cup of tea, but at least is not a such widely hated amp as the 900, LOL.
Click to expand...

Well I don't think it's such a secret that in the guitar, amp, pedal world everyone is pretty much just blatantly copying everyone else. Bugera just owned it & even made it their marketing platform :lmao:

I seriously could'nt care less about the "ethics" involved ..because the whole industry is unethical whether they try to cover it up or are open & blatant about it. Everyone is constantly copying everyone else's stuff...and that's just that :D

The 900 was a funny choice yeah... I don't hate them though. They were the quintessential house/back-line amp at every gig back in the day,,.and now the "re-issues" are $2000+ :laugh2:
 
Rex_Rocker said:
I don't think we agree there. But each to his own. :)
Click to expand...

I honestly could'nt bear the Axe-FX II when I finally tried it To say I thought it totally blowed is putting it mildly :laugh2: ....just super-sanitized , fake & plastic sounding no matter which patches & settings I tried & I actually got to spend a lot of time w/ it w/ the owner tweaking stuff & showing me all the "great tones"....aha no, really not my thing.

The Axe III does sound a fair bit better in all the clips I've heard though..so who know but eh, the 333XL still gets my vote all day long :D
 
Phantasmagoria said:
The 900 was a funny choice yeah... I don't hate them though. They were the quintessential house/back-line amp at every gig back in the day,,.and now the "re-issues" are $2000+
Click to expand...
Yeah, I honestly don't know who buys the reissues. I'd much rather have a reissue of the Valvestate 8100 than a 900.

I suppose I hate them exactly because they were indeed the quintessential backline amp when I was young playing gigs too. Extremely buzzy gain with barely any low-end at all. Funny how an amp could sound so loose and fuzzy yet so thin at the same time.

There are a bunch of versions of the 900, though. Maybe I tried one of the bad ones.

But that leads me back to my point. Plenty of amps are like that. Just because it's tube doesn't mean it's "good" or "better" than a digital setup. At least not to everyone for every application. And those 900 RI's aren't cheap. For that money, I mean... pick your modeler of choice, runt it through a Power Stage, and bam.

I used to have a friend that joked that he'd rather play the 900 model on his POD XT at the time than an actual 900, LOL.
 
Last edited:
I'd be all over a Valvestate 8100 re-issue in a trice lol....


It's the analog SS stuff that does'nt get the love it deserves imo....

Modeling..yeah, I think its great for recording but I would'nt gig w/ that shit personally..

OK maybe w/ a tube power-amp & tube buffer/booster for the models themselves (cuz I'm guessing that's where the "problem" w/ modeling begins...w/ the preamp/models ..the lack of convincing dynamics/presence etc..). But to lug all that around to a gig & daisy chain it all etc...why not just use a tube head instead? Or even better ...a solid state one?
 
Having said that I've never played a Katana (I'll admit,I'm baised.... everyone & their uncle has/uses them these days & that's a turn-off for me) and I guess that's a modeling amp that consistently sounds pretty sweet in demo's. Does it move air? That I could'nt say.......

I actually think they're sounding progressively worse as the new models come out though. Thinner, treblier & more typically plastic/modeler as they try to make them more dynamic/responsive or w/e. The Mk I demo's sound best to me..
 
Katanas are cool bang for the buck amps, but I don't think they're even in the same league as most of the higher-end modelers through a good poweramp. You could probably run one of those through the Katana's poweramp and notice an instant improvement.

YMMV. I'm just not all that much into Katanas. Yeah, they're fine. I'd rather have a Vypyr, personally. But I wouldn't have a Vypyr over... I don't know, Tonemaster, Quad Cortex, AxeFX, pick whichever, LOL.

I'm one of those guys who could get along more than fine with a good Dual Rectifier. If I had an actual Recto, I probably wouldn't record or play a modeler live over it. But I don't. I still dig the digital stuff for what it is, personally. Like I said, I'd rather run a cool modeler+poweramp than just some random tube amp. But there are also many tube amps I'd play over a cool modeler+poweramp.
 
Last edited:
Well I would'nt mind a SLO or a Recto either :laugh2:

But realistically..

If I were on a desert Island and had to pick three of my large heads (100W and above)

& three smaller ones (50W & below) I'd be carting these one's along :bigthumb:

(And yes, you do need at least 6 heads for life on a desert island :lmao:)

!00W & above: Laney Ironheart 120, Bugera 333XL & Randall T2HL

50W and below: Line 6 DT50 (still the honeymoon period? ...can't say...), AMT Stonehead & Cicognani Brutus Live


Not necessarily because they're the one's I like best, but 'cause, between them, they'd cover every tone I'd ever want to produce....

^^ And that's a fair mix of Tube, SS, Hybrid & even Modelling of some sort...

and yeah I'd throw in my Orange CR120 combo as well (always nice to have a combo on hand :D)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top