Blackstar enters the trough of disillusionment

stickyfiddle

I really don't care anymore. My old Rivera Clubster had clipping diodes on the Marshally channel. It sounded brilliant and costs 30% more than a Blackstart HT40. 

That said, I don't like Blackstars or modern Marshalls. No sag, just fizzy dirt and dry sounding cleans. Maybe I'd like an Artisan, but I don't have any interest in trying one.

Voxman

• reasonably universally accepted (not totally, but by most people)
• strictest, literal interpretation
• mall element of dispute about solid-state diode clipping 

ICBM, if even a seasoned expert like you is using such expressions, what chance does your typical non-tech average consumer have! 

Re the Valvetronix, you said " This is not a power stage. It's a very unusual push-pull circuit, but it is not a power stage by any definition. Also notice there's no output transformer... " - But Vox says:

VALVE REACTOR: THE INSIDE STORY
In the Valve Reactor power amplifier, a 12AX7 dual-triode tube
(12AX7s are typically used as preamp tubes) is connected directly
to an output transformer. Because of the relatively low Wattage
this 100% tube power amp produces, our amp designers had to
develop a way to raise the output level to one which could actually
drive speakers to stage volume levels while maintaining the
integrity of the tube-amp sound and feel. We accomplished this
by creating a circuit of proprietary design dubbed the VOX
VariAmp Power Circuit. The output transformer is connected to
this new VariAmp Power Circuit which uses Constant Current
design and Reactive Feedback technology. The VariAmp Power
Circuit cannot be overdriven, is totally transparent and can be
configured to be 1, 15, 30 or 60 Watts.
The VariAmp Power Circuit does not color or change the signal
in any way and the resulting output tone is pure. It also ensures
that the output signal maintains the high dynamic range associated
with traditional tube amps — something most solid-state
amplifiers simply cannot deliver, and one of the primary reasons
why tube guitar amps normally sound and feel so much
louder and more alive than solid-state amps boasting the same
output power rating.
The Reactive Feedback technology used in the VariAmp Circuit
“reads” the impedance curve of the speaker and then reports
this reactive information back to the secondary side of the output
transformer. This information is fed back to the primary
side of the output transformer and therefore changes the loading
on the tubes, another important part of the vital role an alltube
power amp plays in the creation of traditional tube tone.

I'm not disputing anything you say - I don't have your tech expertise.  But Vox is referring to 100% pure tube power amp.  I would add that the design of the current Valvetronix line is not exactly the same as for the original AD60/120s (I have the AD120VTX) to which the above text and .pdf link refers.  In the original 'Blue' Valvetronix such as mine a much higher voltage is going to the valves and the circuit interacts with speaker impedence.  In the new range (post Blues) much lower voltages apply across the valve and it doesn't directly react to speaker impedence (at least not in the same way)  I'm not sure which amp line your circuit diagram is from but if it isn't the AD60/120 you can access the full service manual for the AD120VT here if this helps: http://www.valvetronix.net/valvetronix/download/service-manuals-s6.html ) .  

And if Line 6 is misdescribing its Spider valve, that's another example where an amp manufacturer's assertions are misleading. 

I think that all of this just highlights the whole thing is a mess and needs tidying up with definitions set and agreed by a panel of independent experts like you who have the knowledge, experience & expertise to write sensible definitions and have the gravitas to challenge manufacturers claims.  Otherwise this is only going to get worse for consumers, not better.  

strtdv

Meh.

Sounds like the original advertising was blatantly false, and Blackstar have not changed this.

They make some nice enough products, I have a HT-Dist (I have no idea whether the valve is there to do anything other than look pretty, but it sounds good) and while I would have the significant gripe that the pots are scratchy, other than that it does a good '80s Marshall sound, and I haven't found anything to do the job better so it's staying.

As far as their amps go, I like the Artisan ones, the rest I wouldn't spend my money on.

I get a bit fed up with all the guitarist awards they get though, their products aren't all that brilliant, and plenty of other stuff is just as good.

DartmoorHedgehog

I'm not sure any "amp classification scale" is needed.  Like somebody said a few posts back, if an amp sounds good to you and is reliable then it *is* good.  If we like the sound, build quality should matter to us more than what the components are.  Fair enough, it's a reasonable argument that too much bespoke digital stuff, multi-layer PCBs, etc. make future maintenance a potential problem, but if that stopped people buying stuff then the AxeFX would be extremely undesirable, which it clearly isn't.  

There are so many ways of making amps these days, all of which can sound good, crap or somewhere in between (and even that is a matter of taste), that the technology used shouldn't really matter any more.  After all, anybody running a pedal in front of their amp makes the "nothing but all valve" argument pretty moot.

(Obviously misleading advertising is wrong and a different matter from whether we should care about the means to the sound)

ICBM

Voxman said:

I'm not disputing anything you say - I don't have your tech expertise.  But Vox is referring to 100% pure tube power amp.  I would add that the design of the current Valvetronix line is not exactly the same as for the original AD60/120s (I have the AD120VTX) to which the above text and .pdf link refers.  In the original 'Blue' Valvetronix such as mine a much higher voltage is going to the valves and the circuit interacts with speaker impedence.  In the new range (post Blues) much lower voltages apply across the valve and it doesn't directly react to speaker impedence (at least not in the same way)  I'm not sure which amp line your circuit diagram is from but if it isn't the AD60/120 you can access the full service manual for the AD120VT here if this helps: http://www.valvetronix.net/valvetronix/download/service-manuals-s6.html ) .

Aha . Many thanks for that. The AD15/30 is the diagram I posted a section of above, and is the "not a valve power amp" one. But the AD120VT (and presumably the 60 since it's just half of it) does indeed have a valve power amp with an output transformer, exactly as described. So they are completely different! How odd. To date I've only worked on the power section of the AD30 so I didn't realise there was that much difference.

So Vox *are* telling the truth… just not about all the range! To be fair, Marshall don't put a valve in the smallest Valvestates either.

I completely agree that it's all a huge confusing mess that doesn't benefit anyone really - other than manufacturers who might sell a product they wouldn't otherwise, although I doubt even that at the cheaper end of the range. I suppose I just don't understand why they feel the need to at best elaborate on the truth… especially when they get found out and it can backfire.

ThePrettyDamned

ICBM said:

Voxman said:

I'm not disputing anything you say - I don't have your tech expertise.  But Vox is referring to 100% pure tube power amp.  I would add that the design of the current Valvetronix line is not exactly the same as for the original AD60/120s (I have the AD120VTX) to which the above text and .pdf link refers.  In the original 'Blue' Valvetronix such as mine a much higher voltage is going to the valves and the circuit interacts with speaker impedence.  In the new range (post Blues) much lower voltages apply across the valve and it doesn't directly react to speaker impedence (at least not in the same way)  I'm not sure which amp line your circuit diagram is from but if it isn't the AD60/120 you can access the full service manual for the AD120VT here if this helps: http://www.valvetronix.net/valvetronix/download/service-manuals-s6.html ) .

Aha . Many thanks for that. The AD15/30 is the diagram I posted a section of above, and is the "not a valve power amp" one. But the AD120VT (and presumably the 60 since it's just half of it) does indeed have a valve power amp with an output transformer, exactly as described. So they are completely different! How odd. To date I've only worked on the power section of the AD30 so I didn't realise there was that much difference.

So Vox *are* telling the truth… just not about all the range! To be fair, Marshall don't put a valve in the smallest Valvestates either.

I completely agree that it's all a huge confusing mess that doesn't benefit anyone really - other than manufacturers who might sell a product they wouldn't otherwise, although I doubt even that at the cheaper end of the range. I suppose I just don't understand why they feel the need to at best elaborate on the truth… especially when they get found out and it can backfire.

I'd be interested to see what the valve does in the 100 watt advt. It's the first with the metal grill. Great sounding thing, that was! The blue ones were the best sounding, but also supposed to be relatively unreliable, which was why I avoided them. I know that nickelback used them to record some tracks after silver side up though (random factoid, I have an interview in a guitar mag somewhere where they have a triple rec, fender deluxe and a vox 120 advt!).

BigMonka

DartmoorHedgehog said:

I'm not sure any "amp classification scale" is needed.  Like somebody said a few posts back, if an amp sounds good to you and is reliable then it *is* good.  

That should be true but I reckon that the proportion of amps sold to guitar enthusiasts is surprisingly low. I'd guess that most sales are online by people who've never played the amp but have just read some reviews and the marketing spiel.

Dave_Mc

ICBM said:

It certainly is confusing, although it wouldn't be if companies were honest. That's the problem...

+1

I don't have much time for people who muddy the waters for their own ends, and who then fall back on, "It's confusing/the punters wouldn't understand it anyway" when half (at least) of the reason why it's confusing is the people muddying the waters...

sinbaadi said:

I do kind of get the reaction of some to the TVP thing, but I don't really think it's an attempt to mislead and deceive people.  They know what people want amps to sound like, and they're saying these amps are quite good at sounding like that.  Nothing except the name would suggest anything other than solid-state- the button, the switching to multiple valve types.  "Loud as Valve" is quite obviously stating it is not a valve amplifier, to me.  

Fine. That's your prerogative.

What about the HT amps and pedals?

jpfamps said:

My main marketing gripe with Blackstar is not so much the "all/pure/true" valve claims, more the plastering of their products with union jacks.

Yeah in this part of the world that can get you a beating.

Seriously, though, I agree that that's not great either.

Voxman said:

Frankly all this valve holier than thou crap pisses me off. If an amp uses valves in any way to make it sound good provided its use of the valves is explained ...so what. Are we so insecure that we have to stone the blasphemers that don't live up to our interpretation of valve purity? With that type of inflexibility its a wonder that any new ideas are introduced.

It wasn't explained in the HT series, though (and still isn't, to the best of my knowledge). There's also a Youtube video where a blackstar guy claims the HT5 is all-valve, and a lot of the early magazine reviews claim they were all-valve. They also have "pure valve" plastered all over their (clearly not all-valve) pedals.

Even when challenged (in an email), Blackstar still tried to pretend they were all-valve, and that the solid state stuff did nothing (including using some ludicrous (IMO) terms like "pre-gain" etc., if I remember correctly).

I'd be inclined to agree that the TVP series is maybe not quite as bad as what's come before from Blackstar- but what's come before (considering they're still selling it) is still relevant, and it also makes me think it's a plan by the company.

In my opinion, etc. etc.

ICBM said:

I certainly don't think it's wrong or misleading to describe any amp which *predominantly* uses valves as a 'valve amp'. I do think it is wrong and misleading to describe an amp with a single preamp valve, or even a bit more than that, as a 'valve amp', if most of it is solid state; or to describe an amp which has *any* solid-state parts in the direct signal path as 'all valve'.

Not because I care personally - I like hybrid sounds and solid-state distortion - but because I do know the difference and I think it's wrong for manufacturers to take advantage of other people who don't know, but who do - for whatever reason, including snobbery - care. It *does* matter. It's wrong to gain a sale by deception - which it is, since the designers of these amps know full well what these things should mean.

For what it's worth I don't think many people actually think of amps like Marshall Valvestates as 'valve', although I have come across a couple. I also don't know many who think a Peavey Transtube contains 'tubes', and none who think a Tube Screamer does. They're recognised as trade names and there isn't an intention to deceive.

But I know many people believed the Blackstar HT series were all-valve, because it said so in the original advertising, and was repeated in reviews - some were not at all happy when they found out the truth, and felt they had been cheated. Whether they *should* have cared or not is irrelevant. In many other fields, false advertising intended to persuade someone who would not otherwise have bought the product to do so would be a clear breach of the Trade Descriptions Act.

I've said this before but I honestly think Blackstar should have been proud that they'd come up with quite an original hybrid circuit which uses the valves where they're most needed.

+ Infinity (though I would prefer all manufacturers were 100% up-front- "all-valve signal path, ss-driven loop and reverb", how hard is that?)

I certainly thought, when first released, that the HT5 was all-valve.

As I've said before, the irony is that had they been upfront, the same people who are now criticising them for dodgy (in their opinion) advertising would probably have been praising Blackstar for making a hybrid the "right way".

ecc83

I would just like to add...

Knowing the technical people who were around at the start of the "all valve" debacle I can say, hand on heart, "It wasn't them guv"!

The whole issue was a bit of bad copy that did not originate from the design side and a slip (Freudian perhaps!) by a salesman.

I remain completely convinced that there was never any desire to deceive anyone and I think Blackstar have been lambasted to a totally excessive degree especially when, as has been said, there are plenty of "hybrids" out there and THEY don't shout about it!

Dave.

impmann

TBH, though, if us soppy guitarists didn't believe that the only way to great tone is using technology that was superceded many years ago elsewhere, the marketing people wouldn't come up with this crap about valve-this, tube-that or whatever.

I was talking to someone the other day and they wouldn't have it that their signal path wasn't 100% valve and 100% analogue... The chain was:

Strat (CS, naturally for da tonz) > Tubescreamer (with the chip for da tonz) > Strymon Timeline (da tonz, donchyano) > 65 Deluxe Reissue 

Then factor in that they used a Line6 wireless system in front of the TS9... 

But he'd bought all of it based on reviews and opinions on forums for the best "all analogue" tone and so it would sound "authentic" for his blues band.  :-t   )

jdbwales

I'm a massive fan of Blackstar so thought I'd chime in.

I've owned the HT5, 20,40,50 and 100 and the Artisan 15 and genuinely think they're the best amplifiers out there for my needs. I don't give a solitary shit about whether they're all-valve or otherwise, they're dependable, consistent, take effects well and are loud enough and varied enough for any situation.

I've owned a shit-ton of amps from mega-bucks Mesa Lonestars through Marshalls, Fenders, H&K, blah blah blah. As soon as I found Blackstar I gigged them exclusively and find their sound preferable to anything else. Obviously this is utterly subjective, but there's a lot of 'expensive equals better' in the guitar world and Blackstar taught me that's just not true - mid priced as they are, I'd never gig anything else. They're my sound.

What I will say, however, is the only area where they let themselves down is in stock speakers. I think this is also where the 'I plug in and it just sounds like a Blackstar' comments as well as the HT negativity comes from - the Celestion 70/80s in there do the amps absolutely no favours; they're fizzy and muddy, lack power and definition and do not cut through. I find something Greenback flavoured works wonders (Emi GB128 is my choice) and is a ridiculous improvement over stock in terms of tone, clarity and projection. V30s and V30/G12H mixes also sound wonderful.

Obviously they have to use stock speakers to meet a price point and are having zero trouble selling many, many amps bone stock, so it's unlikely they will change the 70/80, but the HT series potential really comes about through a swap in my opinion. Just a thought.

Also, as a footnote the Artisan 2x12 is my favourite cabinet ever!

ICBM

Dave_Mc said:

As I've said before, the irony is that had they been upfront, the same people who are now criticising them for dodgy (in their opinion) advertising would probably have been praising Blackstar for making a hybrid the "right way".

That's always been my opinion - even more so after I scoped the HT circuit and found out exactly how little the "tube screamer section" contributes to the distortion. The valves are used where they matter most - the part of the preamp which distorts and drives the tone stack, and the power section - and solid-state is used where valves really don't add a lot (like the phase inverter), or can cause problems like microphonics and noise (like the input gain stages). The overall layout is really not very different from using a Tube Screamer set nearly clean into the front end of a valve amp with a solid-state unit of some sort in the FX loop - and that's pretty much how a lot of people run their 'all valve' rigs, as impmann said!

If fact, I think the perceived 'solid-state-iness' which many people hear in the Blackstar sound has very little to do with the solid-state parts of the circuit - I think it has more to do with the stiffness of the power section. I know Blackstar have gone for an almost hi-fi approach to low noise and tight power supply regulation, and I think these are a big part of the reason I don't like Blackstars - I even hear these things to an extent in the Artisans, which are really all-valve! But to me, sound too tight and characterless compared to the sort of valve amps I like.

For example, the old MusicMan amps are far *more* solid-state than the Blackstar HTs - everything except the actual power valves - and sound much more like all-valve amps, because they are much less tight.

ecc83

I am befuddled and banjaxed IC!

No Blackstar amp has any kind of HT regulator. The HT is CONTROLLED in the Series ones (well, part of it!) but not regulated.

Dave.

ICBM

ecc83 said:

I am befuddled and banjaxed IC!

No Blackstar amp has any kind of HT regulator. The HT is CONTROLLED in the Series ones (well, part of it!) but not regulated.

I never said they had regulators! Just that the natural regulation (due to standard power supply design) sounds like it's a lot better than in many other amps - ie less sag, more controlled response, ie tighter dynamics. I much prefer looser-sounding amps - to me, that's an important factor in many classic valve amps and a few modern ones. I think it's a big part of why I like the Mesa Rectifier series so much - terrible power supply regulation .

The reason I don't like the sound of any Blackstar amp I've yet played is that - to me - they sound too dark in the preamp and too tight in the power amp, which makes them sound dull (lacking 'sparkle') and 'lifeless' (lacking depth or responiveness). In my opinion! There is a very definite 'Blackstar voicing' which I expect is deliberate and that the designers just have different goals to me... which might include making them "too good" in some ways.

Actually I'm not completely sure that I don't like the ID the *most* out of any of them...

cbilly22

jdbwales said:

I'm a massive fan of Blackstar so thought I'd chime in.

I've owned the HT5, 20,40,50 and 100 and the Artisan 15 and genuinely think they're the best amplifiers out there for my needs. I don't give a solitary shit about whether they're all-valve or otherwise, they're dependable, consistent, take effects well and are loud enough and varied enough for any situation.

I've owned a shit-ton of amps from mega-bucks Mesa Lonestars through Marshalls, Fenders, H&K, blah blah blah. As soon as I found Blackstar I gigged them exclusively and find their sound preferable to anything else. Obviously this is utterly subjective, but there's a lot of 'expensive equals better' in the guitar world and Blackstar taught me that's just not true - mid priced as they are, I'd never gig anything else. They're my sound.

What I will say, however, is the only area where they let themselves down is in stock speakers. I think this is also where the 'I plug in and it just sounds like a Blackstar' comments as well as the HT negativity comes from - the Celestion 70/80s in there do the amps absolutely no favours; they're fizzy and muddy, lack power and definition and do not cut through. I find something Greenback flavoured works wonders (Emi GB128 is my choice) and is a ridiculous improvement over stock in terms of tone, clarity and projection. V30s and V30/G12H mixes also sound wonderful.

Obviously they have to use stock speakers to meet a price point and are having zero trouble selling many, many amps bone stock, so it's unlikely they will change the 70/80, but the HT series potential really comes about through a swap in my opinion. Just a thought.

Also, as a footnote the Artisan 2x12 is my favourite cabinet ever!

Agree with the speaker point. I had a HT 2x12 cab and it made two other amps sound like Blackstars (a VHT and a Laney Cub). Sold it on and started using an orange cab and both amps sounded like themselves again.

Dave_Mc

ICBM said:

Dave_Mc said:

As I've said before, the irony is that had they been upfront, the same people who are now criticising them for dodgy (in their opinion) advertising would probably have been praising Blackstar for making a hybrid the "right way".

That's always been my opinion - even more so after I scoped the HT circuit and found out exactly how little the "tube screamer section" contributes to the distortion. The valves are used where they matter most - the part of the preamp which distorts and drives the tone stack, and the power section - and solid-state is used where valves really don't add a lot (like the phase inverter), or can cause problems like microphonics and noise (like the input gain stages). The overall layout is really not very different from using a Tube Screamer set nearly clean into the front end of a valve amp with a solid-state unit of some sort in the FX loop - and that's pretty much how a lot of people run their 'all valve' rigs, as impmann said!

If fact, I think the perceived 'solid-state-iness' which many people hear in the Blackstar sound has very little to do with the solid-state parts of the circuit - I think it has more to do with the stiffness of the power section. I know Blackstar have gone for an almost hi-fi approach to low noise and tight power supply regulation, and I think these are a big part of the reason I don't like Blackstars - I even hear these things to an extent in the Artisans, which are really all-valve! But to me, sound too tight and characterless compared to the sort of valve amps I like.

For example, the old MusicMan amps are far *more* solid-state than the Blackstar HTs - everything except the actual power valves - and sound much more like all-valve amps, because they are much less tight.

Yeah. ) I haven't tried the HT series, I've only tried the artisan (which is all-tube, at least as far as I'm aware it is), and I didn't really like it. I'm not sure why I didn't like it (it could well have been the V30 speakers), but I wasn't super-fussed. It wasn't awful, but it wasn't great either.

ICBM

I would agree with that, but I also think V30s are a poor choice in many of the amps they use them in, including the Artisan. The last thing you want in a dark, middy, tight amp is a dark, middy tight speaker. And I love V30s with the right amp! (Like a Rectifier.)

So they've picked a generic, flat-sounding speaker (presumably because it's cheap) or a shouty, middy-sounding one (possibly because it seems to be the only premium speaker anyone has heard of) and the result is... unsurprisingly dull in both cases.

For what its worth this is not just a criticism of Blackstar, I think *most* amp companies seem to choose speakers wrongly - "cheap or V30" seems to be the rule.

I would actually like to hear a Blackstar with something that might open it up and give it some life - Greenback, G12H-30, Gold, Classic Lead, Fane Alnico, Jensen Blackbird... just never got around to it.

The only exception is the ID60, which I tried with G12T-75s. Sounded worse .

Dave_Mc

^ Agreed. I think Blackstar actually does fit the greenback to the lower powered 15 watt combo, just unfortunately I tried the head version and the stock Blackstar cab seemed to have V30s.

Voxman

Just to clarify re Vox marketing, in fairness I don't think the post blue Valvetronix amps were ever described in the same way as the Blues. Of course the continuation of the Valvetronix name strongly suggested the technology was the same even though it wasn't but afaik Vox never actually misdescribed the newer design.

The blues were the best Valvetronix ever made. They were discontinued because of cost and because legislation changed regarding some of the materials used in the amp that no longer met newer cross border legislation eg lead solder. Re reliability the very first ones had a baffle issue that was rectified. Biggest issue was cheap jack sockets that oxidised mucking up the signal quality. Second issue was that older blues could suffer from dry solder joints. All easily sorted by a good amp tech. Other than that they are actually immensely reliable. I got my AD120VTX in Jan 2004 and its performed superbly and never let me down. I just clean the sockets every 6 months with electrical switch cleaner to keep them in good shape...takes two minutes.

The post blue Valvetronix have a different circuit to reduce production cost. The blues were designed as gigging amps from outset. The first chrome Valvetronix were the AD15/30VT that were designed as practuce amps and didn't need the more sophisticated design and features of the Blues. When these proved to be popular Vox simply made them bigger with more features but didn't go back to the original underlying circuit design in the Blues.

Going back to Blackstar I was in a band where the second guitarist had an HT60 1x12 combo. It was OK but too dark sounding for ny taste. Cleans were decent albeit a little flat but I didn"t like the distortions that were too dark and not crunchy enough. It just lacked the harmonic crunch you get with a Marshall. But it did seem to be built like a tank and was reliable. I much prefer the ID60 which I personally think sounds terrific. Just wish it had patch naming.

ICBM

That certainly might explain why I see the AD15 and 30 for repair but not the 120!

I did work on a 120 once, and on a 60 twice I think, but they just had blown speakers so I didn't bother investigating the amp section. They didn't look especially well-made, but if they don't show up for repair they can't be that bad.