Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Amps and Cabs [BG]' started by Killed_by_Death, Dec 8, 2015.
Comparing clean sounds on them leads me nowhere, so I bumped up the gain to disturbing levels.
Could you do some cleaner takes?......... I kid
It's a matter of personal preference; I preferred 'B'. Both are fine amps and have a wide range of overdrive tones. However, the TH cannot be dialed in for as much high end as the MB. IME
Thank you for the warning! I really don't care for distorted bass so not sure I will plug in the cans, configure the sound card to listen this time (I don't leave them hooked up all the time).
Since you're asking our opinion as to which one sounds better, you should record them both clean, regardless of your opinion or ability to hear the difference.
B sounds more like bass to me, frankly. Not sure that's really your game though...
On the 'clean' recordings, A has good body, but sounds muffled. B sounds really clear, but lacks body (which it had in the overdriven recording). Not sure how to make a meaningful comparison without knowing what you are interested in. If it's a saturated tone, then maybe the comparison should be of the 'best' saturated tone you can get from each amp. I have experience with both. The MB has more clarity and better articulation (IMO). It has a very versatile EQ, but a steep learning curve. It can sound clear, but with plenty of body. The TH also has a versatile EQ, but cannot produce the clarity and articulation of the MB (which ultimately was a deal breaker for me). Both were rather noisy (white noise), though, to be fair, it could not be heard in a rock mix. IME, this often comes from a design with gain blocks (op amps) pushed to very high gains (saves cost). This can be avoided if the required gain is distributed over a greater number of devices, but that is more expensive. I would gladly pay a little more for a quiet amplifier.
"A" was the Demeter
"B" was the Monique
B is the GK, and I think you're right. It has more clarity than the Aquilar.
My initial impression of my th500 when I got it, was that it was dark.
Those two amps are intended to sound very different. GK is modern, TH is old skool.
Listening to them side-by-side. I prefer the GK sound, mainly because it more closely matches the sound of my guitar amp.
That being said. Why should I have two amps that sound the same?
I'm an idiot sometimes. I wanted a second amp head, for redundancies sake. So, I got the cheapest & smallest. The MB200.
Then I decided I wanted overdrive/boost.
I was leaning towards the MB500 this afternoon, because it sounds like what I'm used to, and it seems easier to EQ to me.
Now, I'm thinking maybe I should stick with the Tone Hammer, because it just doesn't sound like my Hughes & Kettner Tubemeister.
With all due respect to your ability & recording quality, I refuse to believe that any of your posts regarding A - B comparisons are intended to be taken seriously.
Sounds like way too many steps to use headphones, what gives?
By the way I like the distortion better on B but the clean better on A.
I built a nice desktop that also holds my cache of schematics, whitepapers. Don't have speakers hooked up, I even mute the sound on the laptop or tablet. If I want sound I need decent sound and just don't want to trip over cords and make things any more intrusive than it already is.
Yeah messes of cords drive me bonkers, I guess I'll let you off the hook for that. This time.
Both 'clean' tracks come through well overdriven.