Digital Amps a Warning From History

monquixote

Been reading through a load of old guitarist mags from 15 years ago before I bin them and looking what has changed and what has stayed the same. 

Other than the obvious that back in the day the mag was a decent thickness, had in depth articles and gave things less than four stars on occasion, it was interesting to see how prices of things have changed. 

I was surprised how much of the shop advertising space was given over to rack kit even in the post grunge era with Rocktron seemingly being the thing to have (a number of the pros reference "Intelifex" in their rigs). 

One of the featured articles was a roundup of top end digital combos (Peavey, Rocktron, Johnson) most of which were about £1,500 with the foot controler. To put it into context you could have a Soldano, or Matchless for that sort of money in 2000, or in guitar terms it was a Custom 24 or LP Custom territory. I expect if you'd bought one you'd struggle to get £50 for it now.

I suspect a £400 Blackstar ID:60 would take a big piss on any of them (in fact even the review says none of them actually sound that great). 

It gave me food for thought when considering shelling out for something like a Kemper.

Deijavoo

Snap.

vasselmeyer

I have a Johnson JT50 Mirage that I couldn't give away these days and it makes a pretty decent practice or backup amp. There are some decent amp sounds and effects in it if you are patient.

Certainly not as good as my Egnater but perfectly capable. Only other guitarists would even know I wasn't playing a valve amp.

Roland

Whilst electronic kit will,undoubtedly, lose it's value I'm not sure that the Marxist "history repeats itself" argument applies. The Axe FX has cost me less over the time I've had it than I would otherwise have spent on amps, speakers, effects and stuff to link and control them. Yes, it doesn't feel exactly like a valve amp in a live situation, but it doesn't weight as much, or fail as frequently either.

The argument is really about what balance of cost, complexity and convenience suits you, your playing style, and performance needs.

guitarfishbay

Any tech loses resale value over time. But you need some kind of gear to achieve some kind of result. For some people the advantages of the tech is worth the inevitable depreciation, for some it isn't.

Cars are a similar proposition. At some point that 60k luxury German motor is going to be worth 5k if you're lucky enough to find someone who is happy to take on the running costs. But if you need a car you need a car - up to you if you want an old one/new one/fancy one/basic one.

guitarfishbay

Also - try selling high end multi channel amps these days. Friedman is about the only name that holds value and has a relatively 'fast' market. Try selling a Rectifier of any description right now... That market is dead. Most of those players went Kemper/Axe/lunchbox head etc.

richardhomer

The 'digital' thing is interesting.

I'm guessing some home-players will only ever need a software solution these days - which even makes things like Pods redundant.

I suspect the 'future' for gigging guitarists will be small, high powered 'acoustic' type amps (ie full range, flat frequency response 'mini PAs') with software modelled amps run from phones/iPads, with foot controllers to allow 'channel' switching.

DannyP

richardhomer;620295" said:

I suspect the 'future' for gigging guitarists will be small, high powered 'acoustic' type amps (ie full range, flat frequency response 'mini PAs') with software modelled amps run from phones/iPads, with foot controllers to allow 'channel' switching.

Never!

Out of my cold, dead hands etc. etc.

ICBM

richardhomer said:

The 'digital' thing is interesting.

I'm guessing some home-players will only ever need a software solution these days - which even makes things like Pods redundant.

I suspect the 'future' for gigging guitarists will be small, high powered 'acoustic' type amps (ie full range, flat frequency response 'mini PAs') with software modelled amps run from phones/iPads, with foot controllers to allow 'channel' switching.

I agre that the future will probably be digital, but not the acoustic-amp thing - there is simply no point for an electric player, it introduces extra complexity and cost and reduces efficiency, to produce a sound that isn't as good or loud as just not bothering with the tweeter and the proper cabinet design and then having to EQ it to be ineffective.

That only becomes necessary when electric guitar players start using more non-traditional electric guitar sounds which do use those extra frequencies, and I don't see any evidence of that. Although it will be interesting to see if kit like the new Boss SY-300 starts to have any impact on that (assuming it actually works as advertised).

monquixote

I think it highlights the differences between guitar playing and a lot of other hobbies. At the same time you could have picked up an HRD for about £400 and a US Strat for about £600. Fifteen years later you'd have a fair shout of getting about that back for them if you'd kept them in good nick. In just about any other hobby you accept that anything you buy will depreciate fairly rapidly so resale doesn't come into it (I know someone who paid £6k for a first gen plasma screen). 

There was plenty of other stuff you could take an absolute bath on that wasn't as high tech. You could still buy high end solid state amps for more than most entry level valve amps and as people have mentioned you could spend staggering amounts on something like a Triamp or Knucklehead which people just don't really want any more. 

I bought a POD2 around that time and I certainly don't regret it. The vast amount of utility I got from it offsets the fact that it's not really worth anything now. 

I think the main thing that shocked me is people were paying huge amounts of money for something with zero resale value, that was hard to use and didn't actually sound that good. That's certainly not the case with an Axe or Kemper.

Danny1969

I find it interesting that guitarist care about the resale value . When I worked in the building trade I didn't care about the resale value of a drill when I brought it. I simply brought the drill and used it as a tool. Nowadays the first thing somebody thinks about when they buy a guitar or amp is the market value now and the resale value

And that the resell value is only dictated by fashion and not about how good the product is. The rackmounted Marshall pre amp and valve Amp I use are very unfashionable and therefore not worth much but are actually superb

To get the most out of playing guitar as an enjoyable hobby just buy things that you actually like and sod the resell value

hubobulous

Good kit sounds good, no matter what. As others have said, fashion is more to blame for items being sold on than how it performs.

I also agree that I never consider resell value when buying stuff. If the purchase is just to try something out then I understand that resell is a factor, but I'd never make a considerable purchase without first having tested enough kit to know that its what I want. If I need to sell it, then something's happened that's unforeseen or I just want something different.

I'd not shy away from the Kemper given that it might not be worth much in 15 years time.It sounds great, is easy to use and if you get 15 years of amazing performance from it, I'd say its paid for itself :-)

ICBM

The difference is that for most guitarists, resale value matters because they are forever changing gear - it's not a tool that you use until it wears out, it's part of an endless quest for something they're looking for but possibly don't know exactly what it is, and which may change over time anyway. (I admit to being nearly as bad about this as some others.)

The hobby is the quest, not the use. The use is secondary.

Danny1969

The quest for me is in the learning of the instrument, the fact that no matter how much you practice there's always someone better .... that's the challenge .... in formula 1 the car accounts for 90% of the success, the driver the last 10% or something like that. In music the player is 90% ... the instrument the last 10% ....  maybe less

I do sometimes think I would sound better playing through a Matchless though so I understand the pangs and yearning

ElectroDan

I don't know mate. I've got a Johnson Millennium 250 head hanging around that I haven't used for a long time. It completed a LOT of gigs and sounded pretty good at considerable volume. It needs a major service now, but through FOUR 4x12's I think it would still sound pretty epic to most ears.

Roland

Danny1969 said:

To get the most out of playing guitar as an enjoyable hobby just buy things that you actually like and sod the resell value

ICBM said:

The difference is that for most guitarists, resale value matters because they are forever changing gear - it's not a tool that you use until it wears out, it's part of an endless quest for something they're looking for but possibly don't know exactly what it is, and which may change over time anyway.

The hobby is the quest, not the use. The use is secondary.

... and that my friends is the reason that I decided to go down the multi FX/amp modelling route.  Back in the days of the Boss ME-6 I realised that the time that I put in, whether to configuring, or to chopping and changing, far outweighed the initial purchase cost.

crunchman

There is also the saving in running costs with digital.  If you are running a valve amp on a semi-regular basis then I'd guess you need to budget at least £20 a year for replacement valves.  If you are a pro and using it a lot then probably more than that.  Over 15 or 20 years that will add up.

paulmapp8306

Is shouldn't be about resale valve.  If you ever thinking in terms of "how much would I get when I sell", then you shouldn't be buying it.

Digital kit does loose valve - because components get cheaper, and functionality gets better (and with modelling over the years it has got more realistic) - however like amps/guitars any digital unit does the same think=g after 20 years as it does when its new.  If its good enough for you when you buy it it should still be good enough for you ears later.  If you want more just for the sake of wanting more then that's down to you.  If the equipment doesn't sound good enough then it never has - and maybe you shouldn't have bought it.

I used to have an inteliflex - and the only reason I sold it was the lack of spillover.  When units started offering that (a G-Maj in my case) I upgraded.  The actual FX on the inteliflex would still be more than good enough for me now.   I sold the G Maj only when I bought the AFX - and the AFX is a better quality FX unit - on par with eventide units.  Ultimately, If I didnt have a unit - or was on a budget (the same kind of budget as I ssa 15 years ago) and was offered an intelliflex - it would still be good enough for my needs (if not my wants)

Danny1969

crunchman said:

There is also the saving in running costs with digital.  If you are running a valve amp on a semi-regular basis then I'd guess you need to budget at least £20 a year for replacement valves.  If you are a pro and using it a lot then probably more than that.  Over 15 or 20 years that will add up.

I haven't changed a single valve in any amp for the last 5 years or more despite doing a 100 odd gigs a year.  I know valve amps are supposed to be unreliable but in my experience they aren't 

viz

Any mag with steve Vai in it - you know where to send it

hugbot

Digital Amps, a warning from the future.

The Axefx 3 goes online on august 4th 2017, human input is removed from guitar playing altogether. At 2.14 am eastern time it becomes self aware. In a panic they try to pull the plug...