It is currently Mon Mar 16, 2020 11:11 pm

All times are UTC - 7 hours



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
Post subject: Re: Mustang III review
Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 6:47 pm
Offline
Roadie
Roadie

Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 11:08 am
Posts: 225
Well I know I have read from lots of tube amp guys, like myself, who have dialed in great tube tones on our M3. If it is that shrill I'd take it back to the store or at least go back and try a couple of others. But first make sure the speaker is broken in and you are using the advance options, sag and bias, to get that old tube amp tone. I can put it next to my DRRI and it is pretty darn close and certainly good enough to gig with. Better in some cases.


Top
Profile
Fender Play Winter Sale 2020
Post subject: Re: Mustang III review
Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 6:59 pm
Offline
Amateur
Amateur

Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 7:44 pm
Posts: 136
Location: Dayton, Ohio
I played it some more today.

It felt and sounded a bit different. Don't know if my ears are different or if I'm getting used to what this amp has.

One thing I did differently: I stayed away from the amp, if that makes sense. I just plugged in and played, and I didn't worry about hovering over the amp's top and dialing in the 'perfect' tone. I just played, going through some SRV tunes, some jazz chord melodies, Zeppelin riffs, fuzzed out blues, whatever I felt like playing. It was definitely more fun.

Right now, the basic '59 Bassman model is my favorite, but the '57 Deluxe rocks, too. Playing "Layla" to the "Derek Champ" preset is a blast, too.


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Mustang III review
Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 8:27 pm
Offline
Aspiring Musician
Aspiring Musician
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 8:15 am
Posts: 310
Location: Southeastern Seaboard
One more thing that might be worth mentioning, My MIII is somewhat directional. I keep mine on a stand (end table). It sounds... different... when its pointing more directly at me, as opposed to when its sitting on the floor, or if I stand off to the side of it.


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Mustang III review
Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 9:21 pm
Offline
Aspiring Musician
Aspiring Musician

Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2012 8:08 am
Posts: 824
Scorpaeon has a good point. I played my M3 for a couple months standing about two feet from it and right above it. Later I discovered that is possibly the worst sounding spot for this amp. The best I found would be to be level with the amp and at least 4 feet away.


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Mustang III review
Posted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 2:40 am
Offline
Hobbyist
Hobbyist

Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2011 6:31 am
Posts: 63
Location: France
InkStained wrote:
...I'm starting to think that people like me -- people familiar with good tube tone -- just aren't the target audience for the Mustang series. This is aimed at kids who've owned nothing but solid-state amps, who want a variety of tones at the turn of a knob, I think.


Happy that you finally started to like it a bit.
But I always feel sad when I see such comment.
Such arguments are pedantic, arrogant and insulting to users of this amp.
I will never understand the purpose of denigrate the other beyond the denigration of the product itself.

_________________
MUSTANG III


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Mustang III review
Posted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 9:12 am
Offline
Amateur
Amateur

Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 7:44 pm
Posts: 136
Location: Dayton, Ohio
willmodelisme wrote:
But I always feel sad when I see such comment.
Such arguments are pedantic, arrogant and insulting to users of this amp.
I will never understand the purpose of denigrate the other beyond the denigration of the product itself.


My 'criticisms' -- if that's even the right word -- were of the mildest variety.

It's the Fender Lounge, not the Fender Cheerleading Arena. People criticize FMIC in far harsher terms around here all the time -- and it's to FMIC's credit that it listens to the critics.

I own four Fender amps and three Fender guitars. I've been a walking Fender advertisement since the early 1990s. I'm allowed to form my own opinion, comprenez-vous?

Thanks for following the thread.


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Mustang III review
Posted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 9:55 am
Offline
Hobbyist
Hobbyist
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 7:54 am
Posts: 93
InkStained wrote:
willmodelisme wrote:
But I always feel sad when I see such comment.
Such arguments are pedantic, arrogant and insulting to users of this amp.
I will never understand the purpose of denigrate the other beyond the denigration of the product itself.


My 'criticisms' -- if that's even the right word -- were of the mildest variety.

It's the Fender Lounge, not the Fender Cheerleading Arena. People criticize FMIC in far harsher terms around here all the time -- and it's to FMIC's credit that it listens to the critics.

I own four Fender amps and three Fender guitars. I've been a walking Fender advertisement since the early 1990s. I'm allowed to form my own opinion, comprenez-vous?

Thanks for following the thread.


I think it was the "This is aimed at kids who've owned nothing but solid-state amps, who want a variety of tones at the turn of a knob" comment that gave it a tone of condescension, even though that may not of been how you wanted to come across.

There is a lot of personal taste involved here, and you need to remember that most of your audience does not have as refined an ear for tone as the professional musician, so often "close enough" works. lf you search the forums, you will find that some musicians gig with these amps.

When I bought my Mustang III, I also tried some tube amps, including the twin reverb (my favorite). I liked the twin better, so I agree in general with your assessment. However, I don't find the tone of the Mustang III "disagreeable", and I didn't feel that the difference in tone between the MIII and the tubes justified the cost, at least not in my case.

The "variety of tones at the turn of a knob" thing you mentioned is, in fact, a hoot. It's great fun, and allows you to approximate a broad variety of classic tones with ease. What's wrong with that?


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Mustang III review
Posted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 9:47 pm
Offline
Hobbyist
Hobbyist

Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2011 9:01 am
Posts: 30
InkStained wrote:
I'm starting to think that people like me -- people familiar with good tube tone -- just aren't the target audience for the Mustang series. This is aimed at kids who've owned nothing but solid-state amps, who want a variety of tones at the turn of a knob, I think.

That's a bold statement from a guy who's learning his Hendrix from Hal Leonard. :D


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Mustang III review
Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2012 1:19 am
Offline
Aspiring Musician
Aspiring Musician
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 8:15 am
Posts: 310
Location: Southeastern Seaboard
jeff_hatcher wrote:
There is a lot of personal taste involved here, and you need to remember that most of your audience does not have as refined an ear for tone as the professional musician, so often "close enough" works. lf you search the forums, you will find that some musicians gig with these amps.

I find that to be a little condescending to be honest. I reject this notion that you have to be a "professional" or in some way "refined" to know what consitutes "good tone". It's subjective no matter who you are or what your background is. The musician may have a refined idea of what kind of tone he/she likes, and the musican may settle for a tone that gets "close enough" to his/her personal idea of what that tone is, but that refinement is not lost on the audiance because they are unsophisticated. It's lost because they are not prevy to the musician's personal standard of "good tone". The audience could tell the same difference in refinement that the musician can if they could hear an A/B comparison. Whether they enjoy A or B more is completely subjective. So this idea of "close enough" is only relavent to the musician. In other words, it's not that the audiance has an unrefined ear, it's that they have no pre concieved notion of what the tone is supposed to sound like. To them its either good or bad. So if "close enough" is good, then its good.

InkStained wrote:
I'm starting to think that people like me -- people familiar with good tube tone -- just aren't the target audience for the Mustang series. This is aimed at kids who've owned nothing but solid-state amps, who want a variety of tones at the turn of a knob, I think.


I disagree whole heartedly. People who are familiar with good tube tone but want it at more managable levels and want a wide variety of it in a small foot print are certainly in the target audience.

I'm a 42 year old kid who's never owned a tube amp. I've been playing electric guitar for about 10 years (acoustic guitar for longer). I'm what you call a hobbiest or bedroom warrior. And I've always owned small, crappy, SS practice amps and/or some combination of modeling amp or multi-effects pedal. Does the fact that I'm not a professional musican or have never owned professional gear mean that I can't appreciate the warm, sweet, mojo of hot, driven tubes? No, on the contrary. I'm a student of guitar and music, and subsequently of gear and tone. I've been listening to music my whole life and I love classic rock and blues. I've played with tube amps before and I've heard enough other guitarists playing tube amps to know what good tone is to my ears. The fact that I've owned a lot of digital gear has helped me to understand the limitations of digital tone. It has allowed me to fully appreciate the frustration of trying to dial in that magical tube tone and falling short. And, it's given me a healthy respect for digital modeling that is done well.

The only reason I don't own an arsonal of tube amps, cabs, and analog effects is because its not practical for me (not to mention the price point). The digital stuff appeals to me because its versatile, its cheap, and it can be played at bedroom levels with satisfying results. I completely understand why digital/SS amp tone has always been regarded as inferior to tube tone. Yes, I agree, there is a certain amount of compromise that one has to assume. But digital technology has come a long way. It's still not perfect but starting to get good, in some cases scary good. Any tube snobs left out there will eventually have to come to grips with the fact that one day, maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, maybe not in the next ten years, but one day tubes will no longer be neeed to achieve tube tone.

The Mustang is not without issues. Its not the end all beat all amp. But for me, the bedroom warrior, it is a godsend. I still have gas for a real '57 Deluxe, and a real Twin Reverb, and real AC30, and real Marshall Plexi, etc, etc... but until I win the lottery and build my dream studio, my MIII is doing an excellent job at staving off those gas pangs.

I'm not trying to blast anyone personally, just using the above quotes as a spring board for my rambling. It was late and I was bored. :)


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Mustang III review
Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2012 5:01 am
Offline
Hobbyist
Hobbyist
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 7:54 am
Posts: 93
Scorpaeon wrote:
jeff_hatcher wrote:
There is a lot of personal taste involved here, and you need to remember that most of your audience does not have as refined an ear for tone as the professional musician, so often "close enough" works. lf you search the forums, you will find that some musicians gig with these amps.

I find that to be a little condescending to be honest. I reject this notion that you have to be a "professional" or in some way "refined" to know what consitutes "good tone". It's subjective no matter who you are or what your background is. The musician may have a refined idea of what kind of tone he/she likes, and the musican may settle for a tone that gets "close enough" to his/her personal idea of what that tone is, but that refinement is not lost on the audiance because they are unsophisticated. It's lost because they are not prevy to the musician's personal standard of "good tone". The audience could tell the same difference in refinement that the musician can if they could hear an A/B comparison. Whether they enjoy A or B more is completely subjective. So this idea of "close enough" is only relavent to the musician. In other words, it's not that the audiance has an unrefined ear, it's that they have no pre concieved notion of what the tone is supposed to sound like. To them its either good or bad. So if "close enough" is good, then its good.


A lot, if not most folks listen to the majority of their music through earbuds on their MP3 players. I'm not trying to be snobby about it, but convenience trumps audiophilic perfection these days. Nothing wrong with that. I'm just saying that the general public is by and large accustomed to compressed music played through less than perfect playback devices. Of course they'll appreciate the effort the musician puts in to crafting a good tone, but as you say, they don't have the vast library of tonal preconceptions that the musician himself has. As such, except for trying to meet your own personal aesthetic, the hunt for the elusive "perfect tone" is not a life-or-death mission. I know more than a few guitarists who spend huge chunks of time swapping parts and buying/selling/trading equipment to try to make incremental "improvements" (as you say, this is subjective) to their tone. This isn't a total waste, but after a while your resources are probably better utilized elsewhere. Tonal perfection is a moving target, and always will be.

Scorpaeon wrote:
I completely understand why digital/SS amp tone has always been regarded as inferior to tube tone. Yes, I agree, there is a certain amount of compromise that one has to assume. But digital technology has come a long way. It's still not perfect but starting to get good, in some cases scary good. Any tube snobs left out there will eventually have to come to grips with the fact that one day, maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, maybe not in the next ten years, but one day tubes will no longer be neeed to achieve tube tone.


The Mustang III/IV/V amps to come close enough to tube to fool even an experienced musician, in passing at any rate. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdwD03ZF5zM.


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Mustang III review
Posted: Tue Jan 01, 2013 8:44 pm
Offline
Aspiring Musician
Aspiring Musician
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 8:15 am
Posts: 310
Location: Southeastern Seaboard
@ jeff_hatcher

I knew what you meant, didnt' think you were trying to be snobby. I agree with what you're saying. I just wanted to make a point that casual listeners and amatuers deserve some credit. You don't need to have some special level of refinement to tell the difference between a hand selected, properly aged, perfectly cooked cut of beef prepared by a gourmet chef, vs. a piece of chopped steak from the local diner. You only have to be a fan of beef. Of course most fans will be happy with dinner at Outback, because its "close enough". And some Outbacks might even be good enough to fool people familiar with gourmet steak. It would be unfair to say that Outback is just aimed at kids who only ever ate hambuger. :)

jeff_hatcher wrote:
The Mustang III/IV/V amps to come close enough to tube to fool even an experienced musician, in passing at any rate. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdwD03ZF5zM.


Yes. I probably watched that video 5 times before I bought my MIII. At the time I was seriously considering buying a tube amp. One of my must haves was classic Fender tube amp tone. I was gassing real bad for a Blues Jr, or DRRI, but I'm also a fan of classic Marshal tones too. That smooth, glassy, bluesy, overdrive, is what I craved and just could not achieve with any digital setup that I previously experimented with. I really thought my only salvation would be to get a real tube amp and some pedals. The only reason I didn't pull the trigger is because I was afraid I'd never be able to enjoy the benefits of a cranked tube amp in my house. Then came the Mustang.

I remember reading an article on the net a couple years ago about a digital modeling vs tube amp comparison test. I can't find it now, so I'm going by memory, but they took like 5 people who were in the music business, and 5 who were non-professionals. They had a guitarist play samples from both a digital set up and a tube amp set up of various different types of tones/amps. Each group, using just there ears, had to guess which was digital and which was "real". I don't remember the exact numbers but both groups guessed about %50 average correct. Unfortunately I can't find that article but in my search I found the following.

Think you know tube tone? Break out your hi-fi headphones and give this test a try. No cheating....
http://www.seymourduncan.com/tonefiend/ ... mp-models/


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Mustang III review
Posted: Wed Jan 02, 2013 7:04 am
Offline
Hobbyist
Hobbyist
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 7:54 am
Posts: 93
Quote:
Think you know tube tone? Break out your hi-fi headphones and give this test a try. No cheating....
http://www.seymourduncan.com/tonefiend/ ... mp-models/


Tricky. I got the Vox and Bassman right, but botched everything else. Then again, I am more familiar with the bassman and vox tones. I completely mixed up the Marshalls and Diezels.

I used Grado SR325 headphones, Fiio E9 Headphone amplifier, and the 96khz samples.


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Mustang III review
Posted: Thu Jan 03, 2013 5:22 pm
Offline
Amateur
Amateur

Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 7:44 pm
Posts: 136
Location: Dayton, Ohio
nadzab wrote:
InkStained wrote:
I'm starting to think that people like me -- people familiar with good tube tone -- just aren't the target audience for the Mustang series. This is aimed at kids who've owned nothing but solid-state amps, who want a variety of tones at the turn of a knob, I think.

That's a bold statement from a guy who's learning his Hendrix from Hal Leonard. :D


Coming from someone who can't quite turn the knobs on the Fuse program without an IT tutorial, I'll take that as compliment. :D


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Mustang III review
Posted: Thu Jan 03, 2013 5:30 pm
Offline
Amateur
Amateur

Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 7:44 pm
Posts: 136
Location: Dayton, Ohio
Scorpaeon wrote:
I disagree whole heartedly.


Thanks for your opinion.

Scorpaeon wrote:
People who are familiar with good tube tone but want it at more managable levels and want a wide variety of it in a small foot print are certainly in the target audience.


Increasingly, the more I play the MIII, the more I would tend to agree. Before I bought the 'Stang, I felt sorry for anyone who might expect it to sound like a real-deal Twin or a word tweed 4X10 Bassman. And in truth, I never expected that, and never will.

But I'd agree "wholeheartedly" (you might say) with anyone who would still expect the Mustang series to sound good -- fundamentally good -- whether these are inexpensive digital amps or not.

The more I play it, the more I like it. It takes time to grow on you.


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Mustang III review
Posted: Thu Jan 03, 2013 5:55 pm
Offline
Amateur
Amateur

Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 7:44 pm
Posts: 136
Location: Dayton, Ohio
jedi2b wrote:
Scorpaeon has a good point. I played my M3 for a couple months standing about two feet from it and right above it. Later I discovered that is possibly the worst sounding spot for this amp. The best I found would be to be level with the amp and at least 4 feet away.


True. With the III to the V, you can make modifications over/in front of the amp, but that's going to sound dramatically different from a "normal" playing stance, which may usually be several feet away from the speaker.


Top
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours

Fender Play Winter Sale 2020

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: