Fender Cyber Twin Help
Pleased2MeetMe69
find a setting that has no effects or distortion of some kind. If you kill the
gain you have no sound, so that doesn't work. The reason I ask, I prefer some
pedals I have for distortion and don't care for the amps own distortion so I
want to find a good clean setting so I can use my pedals for crunch.Any
suggestions would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.-Steve
Lord Valve
Lord Valve
American
Pleased2MeetMe69
>
>Lord Valve
>American
can't believe I didn't think of that.What a moron I am.How can I ever repay you
for that great resolution?
RoccaforteAmps
>>
You old bastard(smile),
you really crack me up!!!!!!
Can I have some more please?
Doug
AJS
am not familar with amp as far as settings, but turn the gain way down but
not off. Again, I'm not used to this amp but also, if you can, try to go in
and turn off all the "effects" you are not using.
Call Fender
Call the music store where you bought it
Turn your ax's volume down
"Lord Valve" <detr...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:3BF40D97...@ix.netcom.com...
Pleased2MeetMe69
but for some songs/styles I prefer the sound of a distortion pedal I own. The
point being this, I know some settings for amp models are cleaner than others,
but was wondering if there is some trick one of you guys know about that would
disable (temporarily) all presets and it would just be an amp without any
effects. I'm probably not asking this correctly but thanks for listening.-Steve
PMG
(Pleased2MeetMe69) wrote:
No shit. So this amp that's supposed to be able to duplicate the
sound of so many different amps can't even get at the sound of a REAL
Fender Twin. It was hard to see that one coming, bet that was
embarrassing.
Sell it and buy real amp, that's my only possible suggestion. I'm not
saying that JUST to slam the Cyber Twin. You're just not going to get
what you want out of that expensive toy, so cut your losses and move
on.
Pete
--
Can I borrow a bucket of worms
and a keg of gunpowder? --Froggo
nuke
It just don't do what you want. So much for technology.
Go figger, 99 motorized knobs and interactive menus and sub menus and no clean
tone.
--
Dr. Nuketopia
Spam filtering is off. AO-Hell catches most of it now.
Spike
You know there just aren't enought BTUs in that
amp to even make it worth while.
Tonefully,
Spike
LenBum
to the club! I'll assume you tried the CT out before you bought it. Did you
get a clean tone while trying it? My advice is to go to www.fenderforum.com
and get suggestions there.
"Pleased2MeetMe69" <pleased2...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20011115124949...@mb-cu.aol.com...
Pleased2MeetMe69
is...you guys need to chill out. I have no real problem with the amp and I
enjoy it's versatility.I have other amps(Fender and Peavy)that I can achieve
the effect I want,I was just hoping I could get a similar sound out of the
Cyber Twin.-Steve
BLUESBEN
about an hour I still could not find a clean tone. For me all the other
features would be fun if their was a great clean tone to build on. I wound up
buying a new Hot Rod Deville 2X12 and will add some outboard effects.
Censored Boards Suck
>sound of so many different amps can't even get at the sound of a REAL
>Fender Twin.
I spent a couple hours with a Cyber Twin at a local Fender dealer. What a
PIECE OF SHIT. They can't even model the sound of their own amps (Twin,
Bassman, etc.) correctly. Those patches sound awful. Too bright, too much
gain, too much distortion. Boxy, dull, lifeless. It doesn't breathe like a
*real* tube amp. Lots of useless, strange sounds.
The two 12AX7 preamp tubes are buried inside, so if one noises-up or goes
microphonic at a gig, you're screwed. Grab the screwdriver and pull the sucker
apart to change the bad tube. What if one of those nonsensical motorized pots
breaks? You're screwed. Computer modelling amps...bah!!!
LV hit the nail on the head. Fireplace.
Sell the sucker before it breaks and get a real tube amp.
*You can guess what to remove from my email address to get rid of the spam
block.*
*Valid Targets:*
u...@ftc.gov
tos...@aol.com
gre...@northrim.net
*****
Censored Boards Suck
Oh yeah, Chris Greene's FDP. The most over-moderated and highly censored web
page on the net.
Bad-rap the Cyborg amp over there, and you're booted off. Criticize Fender and
you're booted off. THE place to go if you worship at the altar of Fender, and
fall for Fliegler's hype and BS.
Chris Mohrbacher
A Cyber Twin broke into his house one night and he had to shoot it, then he threw it into the fireplace before the police arrived.
All that burning-plastic smoke did a number on the chimney flue, but luckily he was able to convince the cops that the smell was
just from soldering. Since then, no Cyber Twin dares set foot near his place, and everybody's happy.
--- Chris
greg z
> >
> >Lord Valve
> >American
Why fuckup a perfectly good fireplace?
Firepit Maybe
Or take it over to Afganistan and crank it up,OBL would be more than happy to
surrender then.
Greg Z
to thine own sound be true
John Templeton
"Censored Boards Suck" <trem...@aol.com.no.uce> wrote in message
news:20011116003708...@mb-dh.aol.com...
> >No shit. So this amp that's supposed to be able to duplicate the
> >sound of so many different amps can't even get at the sound of a REAL
> >Fender Twin.
>
> I spent a couple hours with a Cyber Twin at a local Fender dealer. What a
> PIECE OF SHIT. They can't even model the sound of their own amps (Twin,
> Bassman, etc.) correctly. Those patches sound awful. Too bright, too
much
> gain, too much distortion. Boxy, dull, lifeless. It doesn't breathe like
a
> *real* tube amp. Lots of useless, strange sounds.
>
> The two 12AX7 preamp tubes are buried inside, so if one noises-up or goes
> microphonic at a gig, you're screwed. Grab the screwdriver and pull the
sucker
> apart to change the bad tube. What if one of those nonsensical motorized
pots
> breaks? You're screwed. Computer modelling amps...bah!!!
>
> LV hit the nail on the head. Fireplace.
>
> Sell the sucker before it breaks and get a real tube amp.
>
>
Trem., haven't heard from you in a while. Nice to see you've mellowed a bit
;^)
Regards,
JT
Lord Valve
USELESS!
Lord Valve
American
Lord Valve
*TOTALLY* useless. ;-)
Lord Valve
American
JTM50
Wow Trem, how'd you do it -I only lasted about half an hour!
To my ears I thought the Twin "model" was (only) pathetic.
Everything else sounded even worse.
Hell, even Line6 is noticibly better...
Lloyd
Lord Valve
>I can see the flames coming now.
LV: No, no flames. Spike says the damn things won't
even burn.
>Why doesn't someone just help the guy?
LV: We *are* helping him. He bought poo. Poo sounds
bad. If it won't burn, he'll have to bury it.
>I am not familar with amp as far as settings,
LV: Set it in the dumpster. I heard Buddy Guy playing
a CyberTwin. His tone was *wretched*. Ick.
>but turn the gain way down but not off.
LV: It'll sound much better if he unplugs the speakers.
>Again, I'm not used to this amp but also, if you can,
>try to go in and turn off all the "effects" you are
>not using.
LV: The whole damn thing is an effect. By all means,
turn it off.
>Call Fender
LV: Indeed. Tell 'em they got it wrong. Tell 'em to
go to a pawnshop and buy a '65 Super Reverb. Copy
it *exactly.* *THAT* is a fucking amplifier, not
a pile of digital-sounding silicon horse-shit.
>Call the music store where you bought it
LV: Also a good idea. Tell 'em you want your money back.
>Turn your ax's volume down
LV: Nothing wrong with his axe, he just has it plugged
into the wrong jack. The right jack is located on
a tube amplifier.
Lord Valve
Tone Chaperone
VISIT MY WEBSITE: http://www.nebsnow.com/LordValve
I specialize in top quality HAND SELECTED NOS and
current-production vacuum tubes for guitar and
bass amps. Good prices, fast service.
QSC amps, RNC compressors, lots of other good stuff!
NBS Electronics, 230 South Broadway, Denver, CO 80209-1510
Phone orders/tech support after 1:30 PM Denver time at 303-778-1156
VISA - MASTERCARD - PAYPAL
"I'm not an asshole, but I *play* one on the Internet." - Lord Valve
Lord Valve
RoccaforteAmps wrote:
Y'know, Doug...I'm not down on modeling. I think it
could work. I'm just pissed at the phony-sounding
crap the big companies are pushing on people in
the name of "innovation." Their "innovations" consist
of piss-poor imitations of designs that were *great*
40 years ago...and *still* great today. When I hear
a modeling amp that sounds as good as the real
thing, I'll say so. I'm an honest cat; I don't shit anyone.
I've heard Hammond clones that were pretty damn
close, and I'd know *for sure*. "Close" is the best
compliment I can muster. In the case of the modeling
amps, they're not close. They *stink*. If they want
to go digital, they ought to concentrate on *new*
sounds, stuff no-one's heard before. They sure as
shit haven't made any progress on emulating the
old stuff, as far as I can hear. And I can hear pretty
far. BTW, I'm burning a batch of Chinese KT88-98
(latest generation) right now. Want to try to kill a
quad? ;-) I gotta say, they look pretty good so far.
If they survive in this Major I have in for repair, I'll send
you a set. They're from the same outfit that makes
the KT-66s, and those ain't too shabby.
Lord Valve
Tone Chaperone
VISIT MY WEBSITE: http://www.nebsnow.com/LordValve
I specialize in top quality HAND SELECTED NOS and
current-production vacuum tubes for guitar and
bass amps. Good prices, fast service.
QSC amps, RNC compressors, lots of other good stuff!
NBS Electronics, 230 South Broadway, Denver, CO 80209-1510
Phone orders/tech support after 1:30 PM Denver time at 303-778-1156
VISA - MASTERCARD - PAYPAL
Philo T. Farnsworth sez, "Vacuum tubes kick major ass.
Be a MAN...and buy some TODAY!"
Rich Koerner
Censored Boards Suck wrote:
>
> >No shit. So this amp that's supposed to be able to duplicate the
> >sound of so many different amps can't even get at the sound of a REAL
> >Fender Twin.
>
> I spent a couple hours with a Cyber Twin at a local Fender dealer. What a
> PIECE OF SHIT. They can't even model the sound of their own amps (Twin,
> Bassman, etc.) correctly. Those patches sound awful. Too bright, too much
> gain, too much distortion. Boxy, dull, lifeless. It doesn't breathe like a
> *real* tube amp. Lots of useless, strange sounds.
>
> The two 12AX7 preamp tubes are buried inside, so if one noises-up or goes
> microphonic at a gig, you're screwed. Grab the screwdriver and pull the sucker
> apart to change the bad tube. What if one of those nonsensical motorized pots
> breaks? You're screwed. Computer modelling amps...bah!!!
>
> LV hit the nail on the head. Fireplace.
>
> Sell the sucker before it breaks and get a real tube amp.
>
Why does the output stage of the cyber turd look like the output stage
of a Kustom 200????
TUBE SOUND.............. WHERE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Regards,
Rich Koerner,
Time Electronics.
http://www.timeelect.com
Specialists in Live Sound FOH Engineering,
Music & Studio Production,
Vintage Instruments, and Tube Amplifiers
Lord Valve
Chris Mohrbacher wrote:
Double-ought buckshot do tend to fuck a CyberTwin up a mite. ;-)
LV
RonSonic
<detr...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>Y'know, Doug...I'm not down on modeling. I think it
>could work. I'm just pissed at the phony-sounding
>crap the big companies are pushing on people in
>the name of "innovation." Their "innovations" consist
>of piss-poor imitations of designs that were *great*
>40 years ago...and *still* great today. When I hear
>a modeling amp that sounds as good as the real
>thing, I'll say so. I'm an honest cat; I don't shit anyone.
>I've heard Hammond clones that were pretty damn
>close, and I'd know *for sure*. "Close" is the best
>compliment I can muster.
Hey, off topic a bit, but I'm curious:
What're your opinions on the latest generation of synths and their
Hammond sounds. I'm a listener and fixer of these things, but can't
play 'em for shit so I'm probably easier to impress.
Thinking of the Kurzy 2600 and Tritons mostly. Sounds like they've
gone a long way to getting it right.
Ron
Matt Seniff
<detr...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>
>RoccaforteAmps wrote:
>
>> <<LV wrote: Do you have a fireplace?
>> >>
>>
>> You old bastard(smile),
>> you really crack me up!!!!!!
>> Can I have some more please?
>> Doug
>
>
>
>Y'know, Doug...I'm not down on modeling. I think it
>could work. I'm just pissed at the phony-sounding
>crap the big companies are pushing on people in
>the name of "innovation." Their "innovations" consist
>of piss-poor imitations of designs that were *great*
>40 years ago...and *still* great today. When I hear
>a modeling amp that sounds as good as the real
>thing, I'll say so. I'm an honest cat; I don't shit anyone.
>I've heard Hammond clones that were pretty damn
>close, and I'd know *for sure*. "Close" is the best
>compliment I can muster. In the case of the modeling
>amps, they're not close. They *stink*. If they want
>to go digital, they ought to concentrate on *new*
>sounds, stuff no-one's heard before.
Willie, this is an excellent point (but then even a stopped clock is
right twice a day). It seems to me that the digital stuff has really
missed the boat as a whole. If you have a new technology you should
use it in a different manner rather than trying to do what is already
done so well by the old line stuff (why re-invent the wheel using
square parts?). But in a way it is sort of understandable as most
guitarist are not inventors but rather are imitators and that is where
the market is perceived to be by the manufacturers. matt
RoccaforteAmps
thats "Orange 200"
Doug
RoccaforteAmps
>could work. I'm just pissed at the phony-sounding
>crap the big companies are pushing on people in
>the name of "innovation." Their "innovations" consist
>of piss-poor imitations of designs that were *great* >>
I think your *fire place* idea
is good.
<< I gotta say, they look pretty good so far.
>If they survive in this Major I have in for repair, I'll >send
>you a set. >>
If you send them I will
torture them in my Ogange200.
Doug
RonSonic
Suck) wrote:
>> go to www.fenderforum.com
>
>Oh yeah, Chris Greene's FDP. The most over-moderated and highly censored web
>page on the net.
>
>Bad-rap the Cyborg amp over there, and you're booted off. Criticize Fender and
>you're booted off. THE place to go if you worship at the altar of Fender, and
>fall for Fliegler's hype and BS.
I can say this now. Fender, of all the major amp makers out there is
the worst, most shameless corporate whore. They'll do anything for a
buck and if screwing their dealers and service centers is cheaper than
keeping their customers happy (and it is) then that is what they do.
They build shit, stick a long term warranty on it - sell big steaming
piles of it - when it breaks, as it will - deny the claim. They ship
amps with fucking parts missing and charge for the parts. To hell with
the fucks. They brand and market some of the most execrable junk I've
ever seen and customers rightly expect it to be respectable gear
because of the name.
They had a wonderful name earned over decades by Leo's brilliance and
conscientious desire to sell real-deal quality for a fair price. Even
CBS, outside of a few disastrous mistakes, lacked the stomach to cash
in and sell out the way the present management has.
The guitars seem to have fared better than the amps. Perhaps there
are health and sanitation codes that prevent them from selling guitars
as bad as the amps.
Ron
Gary Gerhart
>
> > go to www.fenderforum.com
>
> Oh yeah, Chris Greene's FDP. The most over-moderated and highly censored web
> page on the net.
>
> Bad-rap the Cyborg amp over there, and you're booted off. Criticize Fender and
> you're booted off. THE place to go if you worship at the altar of Fender, and
> fall for Fliegler's hype and BS.
>
Ain't that the truth!
--
Gary Gerhart
www.GerhartAmps.com
Gary Gerhart
>
> >No shit. So this amp that's supposed to be able to duplicate the
> >sound of so many different amps can't even get at the sound of a REAL
> >Fender Twin.
>
> I spent a couple hours with a Cyber Twin at a local Fender dealer. What a
> PIECE OF SHIT. They can't even model the sound of their own amps (Twin,
> Bassman, etc.) correctly. Those patches sound awful. Too bright, too much
> gain, too much distortion. Boxy, dull, lifeless. It doesn't breathe like a
> *real* tube amp. Lots of useless, strange sounds.
>
> The two 12AX7 preamp tubes are buried inside, so if one noises-up or goes
> microphonic at a gig, you're screwed. Grab the screwdriver and pull the sucker
> apart to change the bad tube. What if one of those nonsensical motorized pots
> breaks? You're screwed. Computer modelling amps...bah!!!
>
> LV hit the nail on the head. Fireplace.
>
> Sell the sucker before it breaks and get a real tube amp.
>
I couldn't do a couple of hours. I played it at the winter NAMM.
Hated it. Played it a the local Sam Ash. Hated it. Played it
at the Catalina Blues Festival. Hated it. I'm done with it.
About the motorized pots. They're the only thing I like about it.
I have no idea of the quality of the motors used but, in concept,
they are a great idea. Analog boards were using flying faders
long before digital. If I were ever to build a MIDI amp, motorized
pots would be the *only* way to go. Imagine a *real* tube amp,
PTP, top quality components, with a MIDI driven logic board that
did nothing but control the position of high quality pots. Not hard
to do and dead reliable as long as the motors and drivers are high
quality. That's more *my* idea of a modeling amp!
Fender could have made a great amp in the Cyber Twin. Maybe they
just don't listen. Think about it. BF Fender, AC30, Plexi, Bassman,
JCM800. How hard is it to *basically* turn one into the other.
I don't mean physically, but on paper. It could be done. Not
perfectly, of
course, but a hell of a lot closer and with digital used only for
control of switching, routing, and pot position. Of course, it wouldn't
sell for around a grand at GC.
--
Gary Gerhart
www.GerhartAmps.com
Lord Valve
RonSonic wrote:
The Kurzweil is ok, sound-wise. Nothing special, though.
What the design boys don't realize is that the actual
tone *body* is the most important thing, not the swirly-
distorto Leslie emulations. Most of these guys think
the epitome of Hammond tone is Jon Lord or Steppenwolf,
and that's what they aim for. Phooey, that's not Hammond
tone, it's just amp clipping and poor recording technique.
If they'd concentrate on getting the actual *organ* to sound
right, they could put the effects on later in the chain so it'd
sound the "right" kind of shitty for the rockheads. Voce
did this with their V-3, for my money the best Hammond
emulator so far. Of course, they were a one-man company
with no bread, so they went tits-up. I believe some Japanese
firm has the Voce line now, and they're not making the V-3
anymore. Most of the Hammond patches you find on today's
synths are what I call caricatures...Hammond "cartoons" where
the percussion is *too* percussive, the Leslie is *too* swirly,
the distortion is *way* over the top, the key-click volume is
*ridiculously* loud, etc. If you let an actual *organist* tweak
the patches, you may come up with something that's at
least marginally useful. It won't fool a real Hammond player,
but it'll fool the audience for sure, and most guitar players. ;-)
Lord Valve, PHD
(Professional Hammond Doctor)
Gary Gerhart
>
> RoccaforteAmps wrote:
>
> > <<LV wrote: Do you have a fireplace?
> > >>
> >
> > You old bastard(smile),
> > you really crack me up!!!!!!
> > Can I have some more please?
> > Doug
>
> Y'know, Doug...I'm not down on modeling. I think it
> could work. I'm just pissed at the phony-sounding
> crap the big companies are pushing on people in
> the name of "innovation." Their "innovations" consist
> of piss-poor imitations of designs that were *great*
> 40 years ago...and *still* great today. When I hear
> a modeling amp that sounds as good as the real
> thing, I'll say so. I'm an honest cat; I don't shit anyone.
> I've heard Hammond clones that were pretty damn
> close, and I'd know *for sure*. "Close" is the best
> compliment I can muster. In the case of the modeling
> amps, they're not close. They *stink*. If they want
> to go digital, they ought to concentrate on *new*
> sounds, stuff no-one's heard before. They sure as
> shit haven't made any progress on emulating the
> old stuff, as far as I can hear. And I can hear pretty
> far.
<snip>
Keyboards are miles ahead of guitar amps as digital goes. They have
to be. You can't throw a Steinway in the van and haul it to a gig.
Most guys can't throw a B3 in the van and haul it to a gig. Let's
not even discuss Moogs!
AC30s, Supers, Twins, Marshalls, no problem. So guitarists don't
demand a superior digital product. Guys who like the digital stuff
take whatever they get. My guess is, the engineers at Line6, etc.
come up with some pretty good stuff in the lab. Then the producibility,
marketing, and accounting guys start cutting costs, and out pops
the crap in the stores. *Great* digital keyboards cost a lot of money.
Keyboard players pay it because it's cheaper than a Steinway and
portable. Who, in their right mind, would pay a premium price for
an imitation of a great amp when the amp is still relatively affordable
and certainly no less portable than the imitation?
That's just my take, I could be dumber than dirt...
--
Gary Gerhart
www.GerhartAmps.com
Chris Mohrbacher
"Lord Valve" <detr...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message news:3BF4C4E7...@ix.netcom.com...
I'll see about having one set up at the next pistol match, preferably playing. hmm... it's kinda big, we'll have to set it up at a
suitable distance so we can get a few shots off before it croaks... 50 yards, you think?
--- Chris
tonehenge
The transistor was invented to replace the tube and it is only
a poor imitation.
PMG
(tonehenge) wrote:
My interpretation is that it wasn't specifically designed to replace
the tube. In many applications it's obviously far superior to a tube.
Personal computers for example could never have happened if SS
technology hadn't evolved.
Those applications however don't include guitar amps, even though some
small SS practice amps are pretty impressive (by now) but still not
superior.
Pete
--
Can I borrow a bucket of worms
and a keg of gunpowder? --Froggo
Greg
> Is it possible to get a totally clean sound out of this amp? I can't seem to
> find a setting that has no effects or distortion of some kind. If you kill the
> gain you have no sound, so that doesn't work. The reason I ask, I prefer some
> pedals I have for distortion and don't care for the amps own distortion so I
> want to find a good clean setting so I can use my pedals for crunch.Any
> suggestions would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.-Steve
I can't speak about the CT, but I had a Yamaha DG80-112 modeling amp and could
never get a decent clean tone out of it. Plenty of drive and grit, but never a
good clean jazz tone. I hope the CT is better than that.
Greg
Greg
> I guess I should clarify something....I use the amp the way it was intended,
> but for some songs/styles I prefer the sound of a distortion pedal I own. The
> point being this, I know some settings for amp models are cleaner than others,
> but was wondering if there is some trick one of you guys know about that would
> disable (temporarily) all presets and it would just be an amp without any
> effects. I'm probably not asking this correctly but thanks for listening.-Steve
You are asking correctly. Heck, the CT models a Fender Twin Reverb, right? Start
with that preset and twiddle the controls. I think the key to success with the CT
is drilling down to config it - beyond the presets and the first line of controls.
I played one at a shop and did not have time to learn it well enough to use
anything other than the presets. I didn't like the amp on that level, but I've
heard good things if you are willing to dig in deeper.
Greg
Greg
I've been over there plenty and did not get the same idea you got. Though many of
the comments about amps were positive, not all were. I know Fender monitors the
board, but it is independent AFAIK. I support it with a few bucks.
Greg
JTM50
to rid all the effects to hear just the amp in about five to ten minutes.
That's the first thing I do with any amp modeling or not.
Lloyd
P.S. HP has Printer/Plotters (the 1055 for example) that are harder to
cofigure than these modeling amps...
> From: Greg <oas...@home.com>
> Organization: Excite@Home - The Leader in Broadband http://home.com/faster
> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.amps
> Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 04:22:38 GMT
> Subject: Re: Fender Cyber Twin Help
>
Censored Boards Suck
>To my ears I thought the Twin "model" was (only) pathetic.
>Everything else sounded even worse.
>Hell, even Line6 is noticibly better...
No shit. I also played the Rocktron modelling amp just for the hell of it.
Sounded WAY better than the Cyborg Twin.
Censored Boards Suck
>board, but it is independent AFAIK.
Uhhh, I don't think so. FMIC does not own it, but they do execrise quite a bit
of control. I believe they pump money into it, as well as give Greene
freebies.
Censored Boards Suck
>the worst, most shameless corporate whore. They'll do anything for a
>buck
What do you expect with Fliegler in charge?
Twip
Fit over 1.2 MILLION tubes onto a 1"X1" silicon wafer!
"PMG" <avo...@home.com> wrote in message
news:t1tavto4b94c63abe...@4ax.com...
PMG
Lord Valve
Twip wrote:
> Ya,
> Fit over 1.2 MILLION tubes onto a 1"X1" silicon wafer!
Ya,
Make 'em SOUND like anything besides poo!
LV
Rich Koerner
Twip wrote:
>
> Ya,
> Fit over 1.2 MILLION tubes onto a 1"X1" silicon wafer!
Yeah, and don't forget to include the blue glow, so you can see it
through the little tiny window on the top of the chip too!!!!!
It's a blue glow thing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
BobF
Ignore these narrow-minded tube-bigots - you've got a great amp. I've got
one and it does a great clean sound if you take the time to "build" yourself
a clean amp with it.
If you haven't solved your problem yet, send me an email and I'll try to
write up a step-by-step for you.
BobF
"Pleased2MeetMe69" <pleased2...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20011115124949...@mb-cu.aol.com...
MBarnett
> Ignore these narrow-minded tube-bigots - you've got a great amp. I've got
> one and it does a great clean sound if you take the time to "build"
yourself
> a clean amp with it.
We "narrow-minded tube bigots" became this way after years of hype on how
the newest batch of silicon or ceramic was going to be the greatest thing
that ever happened to guitar amps. We support and use the old technology
because the new technology still can't deliver on its promises. We don't
need to "take the time to build" ourselves a clean amp; we just plug in,
adjust the volume and tone controls, and play. If selecting a "Vintage
Fender Twin" setting on the Cyber Twin doesn't give you a precise emulation
of a real Vintage Fender Twin, then the technology doesn't live up to its
hype.
I think you misjudge our position. I'd bet that most of the
"narrow-minded tube bigots" would switch in a heartbeat if the new
technology was everything it *says* it is, and was as reliable as the old
technology. Who *wouldn't* want a great-sounding amp that took a lot of road
abuse, was easy to maintain, and didn't weigh 40 (or more) pounds? I'd LOVE
to have an amp that was the size of a Fender Champ, sounded exactly like a
Deluxe/Super/Twin/Marshall/Vox/Ampeg/Supro/Kitchen-Aid, and weighed 10
pounds or less. Somehow, though, I'm not holding my breath waiting for it to
come out. Maybe someday .........
Monte
JTM50
Alot of us so called "narrow-minded tube bigots" happen to make our living
in high tech. For example I work as a field service tech. I go on site and
work on computer peripherals such as large format printers/ plotters and
scanners. Others here are programmers or engineers.
What Im saying is that figuring out/ using the Cyber twin isn't exaclty a
challange for us and we aren't scared of somthing new and (so called)
better. As a matter of fact Ive tried some of these products more than once
hoping that there was somthing that I missed that made them sound so
marginal...
Lloyd
> From: "MBarnett" <res0...@Verizon.net>
> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.amps
> Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 01:07:31 GMT
> Subject: Re: Fender Cyber Twin Help
>
BobF
across.
The point is that someone came here looking for help with his amp. Not only
did he fail to receive constructive advice, he was told to put his amp in
the fireplace. The thread continued down from there.
He asked for help with settings. He got nothing even close. This from a
group that proclaims itself to be a "fellowship".
He didn't ask for a review of his amp - he asked for help with it.
On to other topics in the thread:
I haven't seen any claims, by Fender or anyone else, that the Cyber-Twin is
*better* than the amps it bases it's configurations on. I haven't seen any
claims that say the Cyber-Twin is *exact* in it's functions/sounds - it
isn't. It is a damn good sounding amp with a huge amount a versatility,
which is more cost effective than a collection of amps and also sounds
decent at lower volumes. It fits a niche for some us. That's all - nothing
more, nothing less.
Is the Cyber-Twin a panacea for every amp situation? No.
Motorized knobs? Better than the alternative, IMO. Same concept as
motorized faders on boards.
I do wish that Fender had been more realistic in the presets they chose to
include as defaults. More realistic settings in the presets would probably
get it more takers.
Anyway, sorry again for the "narrow-minded tube-bigot" tag ...
BobF
"JTM50" <lgi...@telus.net> wrote in message
news:B81DAFDF.1BDB2%lgi...@telus.net...
Twip
Cool, my amp has a blue glowy thing!
"Rich Koerner" <ric...@home.com> wrote in message
news:3BF822B8...@home.com...
Twip
I agree with both arguements.
1. The guy does have a problem that he needs resolved. Thats what
newsgroups are for. If this guy gets the sounds he wants from his Cybertwin,
then he bought the right amp for him!
2. Agreed, the Cybertwin sounds like shite in my opinion, but that is only
*my* opinion. I'd never buy one, or if someone gave me one, I'd sell it for
a *real* Twin.
I don't have one, so therefore I can't offer any assistance, but it would
be nice if you guys could help this guy. Isn't that wht this newsgroup is
for?
"JTM50" <lgi...@telus.net> wrote in message
news:B81DAFDF.1BDB2%lgi...@telus.net...
Gary Gerhart
>
> Sorry 'bout the epithet, I didn't intend it to be as inflammatory as it came
> across.
>
> The point is that someone came here looking for help with his amp. Not only
> did he fail to receive constructive advice, he was told to put his amp in
> the fireplace. The thread continued down from there.
>
> He asked for help with settings. He got nothing even close. This from a
> group that proclaims itself to be a "fellowship".
>
> He didn't ask for a review of his amp - he asked for help with it.
>
> On to other topics in the thread:
>
> I haven't seen any claims, by Fender or anyone else, that the Cyber-Twin is
> *better* than the amps it bases it's configurations on. I haven't seen any
> claims that say the Cyber-Twin is *exact* in it's functions/sounds - it
> isn't. It is a damn good sounding amp with a huge amount a versatility,
> which is more cost effective than a collection of amps and also sounds
> decent at lower volumes. It fits a niche for some us. That's all - nothing
> more, nothing less.
>
> Is the Cyber-Twin a panacea for every amp situation? No.
>
> Motorized knobs? Better than the alternative, IMO. Same concept as
> motorized faders on boards.
>
> I do wish that Fender had been more realistic in the presets they chose to
> include as defaults. More realistic settings in the presets would probably
> get it more takers.
>
> Anyway, sorry again for the "narrow-minded tube-bigot" tag ...
>
BobF,
Am I missing something here?
Isn't "I didn't intend it to be as inflammatory as it came across"
about the same as being caught standing over a corpse, smoking
gun in hand, and saying, "I didn't mean to shoot him, officer"?
The guy asked for advice. He got advice and opinion. Very few
posts were directed to him, most were sidebars. The posts to him
included throw it in the fireplace, sell it, dig deeper into the
parameters, call Fender, try the Fender Forum. Burn it and sell
it are clearly opinion (Fireplace was pretty funny too, don't
you think) but the other three are good, sound advice. Those
who responded to his request for help don't own the amp, so
that's about as specific as they can be. Right?
So now you come along wielding epithets and chastise the group.
You own one and love it. Good. You're the guy to address his
questions. But you don't! You wrote:
"If you haven't solved your problem yet, send me an email and I'll try
to
write up a step-by-step for you."
That's nice of you, but why not post some settings that work
so the guys who read but don't post can learn, and maybe even
some of us narrow-minded-tube-bigots can learn something, too.
Just a thought.
--
Gary Gerhart
www.GerhartAmps.com
MBarnett
> Sorry 'bout the epithet, I didn't intend it to be as inflammatory as it
came
> across.
Not really a big deal. It happens frequently, Bob, so we're used to it.
> The point is that someone came here looking for help with his amp. Not
only
> did he fail to receive constructive advice, he was told to put his amp in
> the fireplace. The thread continued down from there.
>
> He asked for help with settings. He got nothing even close. This from a
> group that proclaims itself to be a "fellowship".
>
> He didn't ask for a review of his amp - he asked for help with it.
Bob, from the "traditionalist" (read - "tube snob") viewpoint, using an
amp should be simple. If the thing is done right, it shouldn't take a 10-,
20-, 50- (or more) page manual to understand how to use the amp. Again, from
our perspective, if an amp *does* require an in-depth manual, then it's up
to the owner to figure out how to use it. Cold as it may seem, this newgroup
isn't (yet) a resource for teaching people how to use their new
computer-controlled amplifiers. The general consensus has been "You bought
it; you figure it out."
> I haven't seen any claims, by Fender or anyone else, that the Cyber-Twin
is
> *better* than the amps it bases it's configurations on. I haven't seen
any
> claims that say the Cyber-Twin is *exact* in it's functions/sounds - it
> isn't. It is a damn good sounding amp with a huge amount a versatility,
> which is more cost effective than a collection of amps and also sounds
> decent at lower volumes. It fits a niche for some us. That's all -
nothing
> more, nothing less.
We tend to lump all of the digital amps into one concept: A
poorly-executed attempt to replace several amps with one. Pretty much all of
the manufacturers of digital amps claim that their product is "innovative",
"revolutionary", and will forever change they way we think about and use
amplifiers, but again, they just don't deliver what they promise. Add to
that the fact that, out of the box, none of them seem to be able to
accurately duplicate the sound and feel of our beloved classic tube amps,
and you get our collective reaction: Disdain for what we see as bogus hype,
unnecessary complexity, and unproven reliability.
> I do wish that Fender had been more realistic in the presets they chose to
> include as defaults. More realistic settings in the presets would
probably
> get it more takers.
My take on it is that manufacturers need to focus on no more than a
half-dozen "models" or "preset" amp types, and make them sound as accurate
as possible, with EXTREME ease of changing from model to model. If I could
flip one switch, turn one or two knobs, and go from Deluxe Reverb to
Marshall half-stack, I might me tempted to try a digital amp. If it really
delivered what I was looking for, I might be tempted to buy it. Another key
factor for most guitarists, though, is reliability. When an amp breaks down,
how difficult and expensive is it to fix? How often is it going to break
down? Do I have to go to some web site and download software or firmware
patches, or is it as simple as replacing a component in a
point-to-point-wired circuit? Can I just re-tube and bias it, or do I have
to pay for a new DSP printed circuit board, and then try to "rebuild" all of
my "user presets"? There are a number of important unknowns that factor into
the equation, and the sum of them makes us "toob doods" skeptical.
All this aside, I recently fixed a DigiTech RP100 pedal for a co-worker,
and I gotta admit I was tempted to buy a multi-effects pedal to play with.
Some of the sounds sucked like a Hoover, but some of them were *really* fun!
> Anyway, sorry again for the "narrow-minded tube-bigot" tag ...
In the words of a buddy from New York "Fegeddaboudit!", and thanks for
listening to my rambling!
Monte
JTM50
-otherwise he wouldn't have posted.
You can't make a (great) 72 metalpannel Marshall sound like a Fender Twin
and (in my experience) you can't get the tone the poster is looking for out
of the Cyber Twin either...
Lloyd
JTM50
retailer and try out these (secret) settings for great tones...
;)
Lloyd
> From: Gary Gerhart <Ga...@Gerhartamps.com>
> Organization: Gerhart Amplification
> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.amps
> Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 16:32:35 GMT
> Subject: Re: Fender Cyber Twin Help
>
Lord Valve
it ain't gonna improve no matter how many patches
you write for it. Poo, however, has the decency to
eventually dry up and blow away. The CT won't.
Lord Valve
Thermionic Terrorist
RonSonic
wrote:
>About the motorized pots. They're the only thing I like about it.
>I have no idea of the quality of the motors used but, in concept,
>they are a great idea. Analog boards were using flying faders
>long before digital. If I were ever to build a MIDI amp, motorized
>pots would be the *only* way to go. Imagine a *real* tube amp,
>PTP, top quality components, with a MIDI driven logic board that
>did nothing but control the position of high quality pots. Not hard
>to do and dead reliable as long as the motors and drivers are high
>quality. That's more *my* idea of a modeling amp!
>
>Fender could have made a great amp in the Cyber Twin. Maybe they
>just don't listen. Think about it. BF Fender, AC30, Plexi, Bassman,
>JCM800. How hard is it to *basically* turn one into the other.
>I don't mean physically, but on paper. It could be done. Not
>perfectly, of
>course, but a hell of a lot closer and with digital used only for
>control of switching, routing, and pot position. Of course, it wouldn't
>sell for around a grand at GC.
That'd be an interesting amp. Some "conversions" would be pretty
interesting to manage on the fly, like the CF tonestack driver for the
59 Bassman and Marshall setups. The Motorized pots would be
non-invasive of tone, just take some room. A lot of possibilities
here.
Be interesting to see Mesa take on a project like this.
Ron
RonSonic
>Sorry 'bout the epithet, I didn't intend it to be as inflammatory as it came
>across.
What, don't think us narrow-minded-tube-bigots can handle the truth?
That's insulting. :)
>He asked for help with settings. He got nothing even close. This from a
>group that proclaims itself to be a "fellowship".
My standard answer to settings is using the approach SRV used, turn
the knobs until it sounds the way you like. If that don't work then
there is something wrong with the amp.
>I haven't seen any claims, by Fender or anyone else, that the Cyber-Twin is
>*better* than the amps it bases it's configurations on. I haven't seen any
>claims that say the Cyber-Twin is *exact* in it's functions/sounds - it
>isn't. It is a damn good sounding amp with a huge amount a versatility,
>which is more cost effective than a collection of amps and also sounds
>decent at lower volumes. It fits a niche for some us. That's all - nothing
>more, nothing less.
A used silver-face with a couple pedals will sound better and cost
less. Nevermind being sufficiently user-friendly that an ordinary
guitar player can figure out how to get a sound out of it without
having to ask around the internet.
>Motorized knobs? Better than the alternative, IMO. Same concept as
>motorized faders on boards.
Yes, a cool concept.
>I do wish that Fender had been more realistic in the presets they chose to
>include as defaults. More realistic settings in the presets would probably
>get it more takers.
Well, isn't that the whole point, that the thing take advantage of its
digital complexity to make it easier for the player to get great
sounds.
Ron
Gary Gerhart
Yeah, I think it could be done, and done well. I'd do it
myself, if I had the time to learn the digital crap for
all the logic and motor control.
Any digital wizards out there want to team up?
--
Gary Gerhart
www.GerhartAmps.com
Andy van Tol
>www.GerhartAmps.com
Sure. You still have my phone number?
--
Andy
---
"A/B switch" boxes at http://ab_box.tripod.com
"True bypass" boxes at http://true_bypass.tripod.com
Basic, cheap, effective.
Stefan Markowitz
Gary Gerhart schrieb in Nachricht <3BF95A17...@Gerhartamps.com>...
>
>Yeah, I think it could be done, and done well. I'd do it
>myself, if I had the time to learn the digital crap for
>all the logic and motor control.
>
>Any digital wizards out there want to team up?
I could design the digital circuitry. But I惴 in doubt about
the concept. If I understand you correctly, you think about
using the motorized pots directly in the tube circuit (instead
of the normal pots). Now there is the problem that the motorized
pots are relatively slow (really fast ones are probably very expensive).
I think that most guitar players (who want to use the feature of
recalling presets while playing) insist on immediate "channel switching".
There愀 nothing worse than kicking the "solo" preset on the floorboard
and some notes get lost due to switching delay.
In order to avoid that disadvantage, it would be better to control the
tube circuit with LDRs. So the LDRs would react very fast to preset
changes, whereas the motorized pots don愒 need to hurry to drive
to the correct position. The sound change would be almost immediate.
Of course, this would complicate the design somewhat. But I think it is
the way to go if you want to digitally control a conventional tube circuit.
What do you think about it?
Stefan
JTM50
It switches very fast and there are no pops,swells, or surges no matter how
each channel is set.
Lloyd
> From: "Stefan Markowitz" <S.Mar...@dontspam.gmx.de>
> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.amps
> Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 00:25:28 +0100
> Subject: Re: Fender Cyber Twin Help
>
>
Terry Lacy
It sounded damn good too!
Terry
TD Madden
the pots to preset points for his different tones by footswitch?
Regards.
Stefan Markowitz
JTM50 schrieb in Nachricht ...
>My Guytron uses a relay to switch between the channels.
>It switches very fast and there are no pops,swells, or surges no matter how
>each channel is set.
I did not talk about channel switching (that愀 why I put that term in
quotation marks) ;-)
My posting was related to the concept of a digitally controlled tube amp
with a single set of motorized pots (vs. the concept of double or triple
sets of pots - one set for each channel - combined with channel switching).
Stefan
BobF
"Gary Gerhart" <Ga...@Gerhartamps.com> wrote in message
news:3BF9342D...@Gerhartamps.com...
>
> Am I missing something here?
>
> Isn't "I didn't intend it to be as inflammatory as it came across"
> about the same as being caught standing over a corpse, smoking
> gun in hand, and saying, "I didn't mean to shoot him, officer"?
>
Exactly. You saw right through that one, didn't you?! Seriously, it wasn't
intended more toungue-in-cheek than anything. Didn't mean to hit any
nerves.
<<SNIP for brevity>>
> That's nice of you, but why not post some settings that work
> so the guys who read but don't post can learn, and maybe even
> some of us narrow-minded-tube-bigots can learn something, too.
>
Great suggestion, Gary. I didn't think of the non-posting readers ...
Two almost identical settings I like; 1 for clean and 1 a little dirty:
(To select these settings, repeatedly press <amp> and turn the data knob to
change the setting for each)
Tone Stack Type - Tweed
Tone Stack Location - Pre-Distortion
Drive Circuitry - Hot Rod Tube 2
(set reverb type and parms to taste. mine are type "small plate", input
"9.0", tone "9.5", time "5.5", diffusion "9.5")
Timbre - Full Body
Line/Spkr Phase - Standard Polarity
Compressor - Low
Noise Gate Depth - 5.0
Noise Gate Thresh - Medium
Knobs:
Trim - to your guitar
Gain - 4 (dirty), 3 (clean)
Volume - 5 (dirty), 6 (clean)
Treb - 4
Mid - 5
Bass - 5
Presence - 5
Reverb - 4
Master - to desired volume
I also like to add a touch of chorus.
> Just a thought.
>
> --
> Gary Gerhart
> www.GerhartAmps.com
BobF
BobF
you're not, I wonder why you have such a strong opinion on this topic?
BobF
"Lord Valve" <detr...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:3BF955EF...@ix.netcom.com...
Gary Gerhart
Yes, the motorized pots are very slow. There are ways around this
such as motors external to the pots, but this would probably be
prohibitively expensive. VCAs would overcome this, but the idea
is to have nothing in the signal path. Two discreet channels is
and easy solution. That way the individual channels are preset
and switching between them is instantaneous. Reconfiguring the
controls would only be possible between songs, etc.
Again, the concept is to use digital for what it does best.
Logic.
A logic controller that handles tasks like selecting tone stack
slope resistors, interstage coupling capacitors, feedback resistors,
cathode bypass capacitors, volume bypass capacitors, and so on.
The entire tone stack could even be *relocated*.
The logic controller handles channel select, and also passes
instructions to the motor controller.
By configuring the pots and values of passives within the circuit
a player could effectivly switch amps between songs. Naturally,
the biggest compromise is in the power amp but a nicely configured
pair of EL34s, along with the selectable feedback should be good
enough. The screen voltage and bias point could also be switched
to allow different power levels.
Better just ignore me. I think I'm becoming a raving lunatic...
--
Gary Gerhart
www.GerhartAmps.com
Gary Gerhart
Now that's more like it!
So you know, I've printed this and the next time I wander into SamAsh,
I'll try them. Unless that voids my narrow-minded standing.
--
Gary Gerhart
www.GerhartAmps.com
Lord Valve
No, I ain't no guitar player. I don't play the violin, either,
but I can damnsure tell the difference between Perlman
and the kid next door. I'm up to my ass in amplifiers
all day long. I fix 'em, I buy 'em, I sell 'em, I even build
one now and then. I've heard a whole lot of 'em. I don't
like the CT. I don't like any of the modeling amps I've
heard so far, because of all the compression they squash
the signal with before it's input to the A/D converter stage.
When you strip all the time-based effects off, the basic
tone is garbage. Now, the Baboon Squad is gonna start
screeching that I hate modeling amps because I sell tubes;
I sell transistors and ICs, too, and a whole shitload of
other parts. I don't hate SS amps in general, in fact,
the Roland JC-160 is one of my all-time favorites. I also
like the old Yamaha G100-212 with the parametric mid
control. I've had Line 6 stuff in my shop - couldn't stand
it. Ick! I've heard the CT in my own shop and on TV.
It's poo. I don't have any problem with anyone else liking
it. Hell, if it gets better, I'll carry it. Right now, modeling
is in its infancy; it's attempting to compete with a *very*
mature technology which has produced some of the finest
tone on the planet for over half a century. Modeling ain't
there yet. When it is, I'll let ya know. BTW, I play a
*shitload* of instruments, including the Hammond B-3,
the trombone, the upright bass, most of the lower register
brasses, the vibes, and the tympani. Let's not forget
the synths, too. If you want to point fingers and holler
"no-blowin' tech nerd," point 'em elsewhere. I've paid
my road dues. I know what kicks ass, and I ain't afraid to
say so. So Sayeth the Lord.
Lord Valve
Asshole
BobF
box. A far cry better than Line6 stuff and similar technology.
Hope you like it!
BobF
"Gary Gerhart" <Ga...@Gerhartamps.com> wrote in message
news:3BF9AB40...@Gerhartamps.com...
> > <<SNIP for brevity>>
BobF
there may be effects you don't want selected. Press <fx> and turn the data
wheel until "none" is displayed. You don't have to save the settings to
play - the changes take place real-time as you select the different
settings.
BobF
"Gary Gerhart" <Ga...@Gerhartamps.com> wrote in message
news:3BF9AB40...@Gerhartamps.com...
Miles O'Neal
|Lord Valve Speaketh:
|
|the trombone,
I should have known.
Bongo, no tympani.
-Miles
RoccaforteAmps
You collaborator!
Doug
Gary Gerhart
> No, I ain't no guitar player. I don't play the violin, either,
<snip>
> I play a *shitload* of instruments, including the Hammond B-3,
> the trombone, the upright bass, most of the lower register
> brasses, the vibes, and the tympani.
Dude, for the most part, you only play axes that you have to be a
lineman to move or carry!! Lemme guess, as a lad in school you
were one of the biggest guys to show up for band...
Oh, one more thing: Vibes -- beyond cool. Do you have Norvo
and Sinatra "Live in Australia 1959"? If not, get it.
--
Gary Gerhart
www.GerhartAmps.com
BobF
"Lord Valve" <detr...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:3BF9AC6B...@ix.netcom.com...
RonSonic
wrote:
>Stefan Markowitz wrote:
Oh shit. I was reading and thought you were making sense. Guess my
mind is going fast.
Steve Cowell
"Gary Gerhart" <Ga...@Gerhartamps.com> wrote in message
...
> Yes, the motorized pots are very slow. There are ways around this
> such as motors external to the pots, but this would probably be
> prohibitively expensive. VCAs would overcome this, but the idea
> is to have nothing in the signal path.
What about dual LDRs, with the processor watching the resistance
of the extra R? The knobs on the front panel would be connected
straight to the processor's A/D, of course... LDRs are slow enough
that you could pulse the LEDs in the LDRs if you couldn't get enough
linearity from adjusting LED drive voltage (I'm pretty sure that you can
get incandescent drive for LDRs). Every important resistor in the amp
could be remoted like this... at least the lower-powered ones.
LDRs are not often used as pass elements... maybe there's a reason.
Their reliability is not like a regular resistor, too... they are going to
be
temperature sensitive. Perhaps the packaging could try to make
both CdS cells on the same substrate for thermal tracking... somebody
shoot me now.
__
Steve
.
Gary Gerhart
He racks the slide and shoots...bang
The idea is to avoid any trace of *non-conventional* tube amp
technology in the signal path. The pots are conventional pots
that happen to have servo or stepper motors and encoders attached.
All passives in the signal path must be traditional resistors and
capacitors, with digital logic controlling their inclusion or
omission.
No digital in the signal path, no DSP, no A/D - D/A. (Unless the
the servo motors are analog).
--
Gary Gerhart
www.GerhartAmps.com
Steve Cowell
"Gary Gerhart" <Ga...@Gerhartamps.com> wrote in message
> He racks the slide and shoots...bang
Ouch... that's enough! Thanks, I needed that...
> The idea is to avoid any trace of *non-conventional* tube amp
> technology in the signal path. The pots are conventional pots
> that happen to have servo or stepper motors and encoders attached.
LDRs are in conventional tube amps... even as pass elements in
certain (perhaps not classic) tube amps. By dual LDR I mean Light-
Dependant Resistors... basically two CdS cells with an illumination
source in an opaque package.
>
> All passives in the signal path must be traditional resistors and
> capacitors, with digital logic controlling their inclusion or
> omission.
That's what I'm talking about... the LDRs are controlled by
the processor, but the audio circuit is resistors (with LDRs), caps, and
tubes.
>
> No digital in the signal path, no DSP, no A/D - D/A. (Unless the
> the servo motors are analog).
The A/D is to watch the resistance of the LDR... can't very well
do that while it's in circuit, so you use a dual one. The processor
controls the illumination of the LDR... when you find a setting you
like, the processor remembers the resistance (well, voltage via
ref V) of that particular illumination... the A/D is not involved
in audio signal processing, it is just for the uP to read the settings
of the front panel knobs and the current through the reference
LDR's... am I not communicating? The LDR needs to be watched
since they can drift, are temperature sensitive, etc... the dual LDR
allows repeatability of settings (these circuits are very sensitive).
Can a CdS cell take plate (c.250) voltage? You could replace
the plate and cathode resistors of a stage with LDRs and control
them via the illumination. You could vary the feedback loop resistor
of the final amp... you could vary the presence.
Time for sleep... I'm suffering from logorrhea...
__
Steve
.
Lord Valve
Miles O'Neal wrote:
The trombone is completely useless for earning
money with, but it sure as hell develops your ear.
Lord Valve
Musician
Påt ¦¬{
name for the Cyber-Twin (an amp that I'd probably buy before any other
modeler was considered) is
"The Over-Achieving-Bastard-Child-That-Can't-Find-Any-Playfriends Amp"
Twip wrote in message ...
> Actually,
> I agree with both arguements.
> 1. The guy does have a problem that he needs resolved. Thats what
>newsgroups are for. If this guy gets the sounds he wants from his
Cybertwin,
>then he bought the right amp for him!
>2. Agreed, the Cybertwin sounds like shite in my opinion, but that is only
>*my* opinion. I'd never buy one, or if someone gave me one, I'd sell it for
>a *real* Twin.
> I don't have one, so therefore I can't offer any assistance, but it would
>be nice if you guys could help this guy. Isn't that wht this newsgroup is
>for?
>
>
>
>
>"JTM50" <lgi...@telus.net> wrote in message
>news:B81DAFDF.1BDB2%lgi...@telus.net...
>> Exactly Monte, and to add:
>> Alot of us so called "narrow-minded tube bigots" happen to make our
>living
>> in high tech. For example I work as a field service tech. I go on site
and
>> work on computer peripherals such as large format printers/ plotters and
>> scanners. Others here are programmers or engineers.
>> What Im saying is that figuring out/ using the Cyber twin isn't exaclty a
>> challange for us and we aren't scared of somthing new and (so called)
>> better. As a matter of fact Ive tried some of these products more than
>once
>> hoping that there was somthing that I missed that made them sound so
>> marginal...
>>
>> Lloyd
>>
>> > From: "MBarnett" <res0...@Verizon.net>
>> > Newsgroups: alt.guitar.amps
>> > Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 01:07:31 GMT
>> > Subject: Re: Fender Cyber Twin Help
>> >
>> > "BobF" <rfr...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Ignore these narrow-minded tube-bigots - you've got a great amp. I've
>got
>> >> one and it does a great clean sound if you take the time to "build"
>> > yourself
>> >> a clean amp with it.
>> >
>> > We "narrow-minded tube bigots" became this way after years of hype on
>how
>> > the newest batch of silicon or ceramic was going to be the greatest
>thing
>> > that ever happened to guitar amps. We support and use the old
technology
>> > because the new technology still can't deliver on its promises. We
don't
>> > need to "take the time to build" ourselves a clean amp; we just plug
in,
>> > adjust the volume and tone controls, and play. If selecting a "Vintage
>> > Fender Twin" setting on the Cyber Twin doesn't give you a precise
>emulation
>> > of a real Vintage Fender Twin, then the technology doesn't live up to
>its
>> > hype.
>> >
>> > I think you misjudge our position. I'd bet that most of the
>> > "narrow-minded tube bigots" would switch in a heartbeat if the new
>> > technology was everything it *says* it is, and was as reliable as the
>old
>> > technology. Who *wouldn't* want a great-sounding amp that took a lot of
>road
>> > abuse, was easy to maintain, and didn't weigh 40 (or more) pounds? I'd
>LOVE
>> > to have an amp that was the size of a Fender Champ, sounded exactly
like
>a
>> > Deluxe/Super/Twin/Marshall/Vox/Ampeg/Supro/Kitchen-Aid, and weighed 10
>> > pounds or less. Somehow, though, I'm not holding my breath waiting for
>it to
>> > come out. Maybe someday .........
>> >
>> > Monte
>> >
>>
>
>
DBCooper41
>Now, the Baboon Squad is gonna start
>screeching
willie, why don't you lie down on this nice couch and you can tell me all about
this obsesion you have.
Gary Gerhart
Steve,
I hear what your saying, I just don't support it.
I don't like LDRs and would rather use a few *banks* of discrete
passives and merely switch them in and out of circuit. Even this
will adversely affect tone, but I think that in a live situation
the delta tone may not be noticeable.
See, the idea is not to try to be all amps in one box, rather
to offer a small few outstanding choices.
--
Gary Gerhart
www.GerhartAmps.com
RoyB
money with, but it sure as hell develops your ear.
Lord Valve
Musician
Which brings up an interesting topic. How many musicians here started with
piano lessons or school band?
Roy
DBCooper41
>Which brings up an interesting topic. How many musicians here started with
>piano lessons or school band?
>
>Roy
>
school band
recorder, then clarinet, then oboe.
Gary Gerhart
I started with guitar. I was eight.
I was very fortunate to be attending a church that was sort of
a haven for jazz musicians. The pastor had been a pro sax
player, always had a Martin flattop with him, and played a mean
piano to boot. Alex Bedini was the main guitar guy and that
cat could play! Ed Overstreet on bass with his wife, Grace,
on the Hammond. Not your typical church. I auditioned at eight,
was allowed to sit in at eight and a half, and at nine, they
finally let me plug in! I had an old Kay thinline single cut
with three pickups (kinda a thin ES-5) and a little Kay tube amp.
I'll never forget the time the pastor started his sermon with
the words, "You know, I used to play that evil jazz music for
a living. When I became a Christian, the Lord took all that
away -- except this..." He ran over to the piano, all the guys
jumped in, and it was jazz improv for about two hours!
Band came later...
Clarinet, oboe, sax, trumpet, bari horn, tuba, tymp.
Naturally, from that list the only one they ever let me
play was oboe. Piano I never mastered, but I always would
use it for classical compositions in Music Theory classes.
Now, it's just guitar and bass with a little time behind
a kit when there's no one else to do it.
Someday, before I kick, I'd love to really play piano and cello.
Well, there's way more information than anyone cares to have!
BTW, If Miles reads this: Tim Chandler (DA, Choir, ...) started
on guitar in that same church.
--
Gary Gerhart
www.GerhartAmps.com
greg z
>> piano lessons or school band?
>>
>> Roy
First chair Bb Trumpet in j High out of 6
Got bumped back to third chair in senior high, not too bad out
of 16 trumpet players. Dropped out of band in my Junior year to
drink beer, drag race, and chase women.
Greg Z
to thine own sound be true