Vox Valvetronix Vs Marshall Valvestate

[DrPuls]

Which one would you rather have... I have been leaning toward the VOX valvetronix for a while now, let me know your opinions though... THanks

[Gabe Nickelson]

Vox, no question. Go with the Vox.

Gabe

[Jakan555WHT]

I have a Demo cd of the Vox Valvetronix and i know the Marshall. I would go with Vox. I dont like Marshall at all but i think Vox has the better digital solution.

[Globbits]

I would say Vox for Versatility, there's all the amps you could ever want, except for one- I wasn't convinced by the MESA triple-Rec simulator. Not nearly enough gain. Marshall valvestate just lacks something though, compared to the Vox. (possibly valves.. )

[urkoman]

Donīt like any of them. The Valvestate is a poor amp, and the Vox, as the other tube simulators(H & K Zentera, etc...), does not sound as a real tube amp. Iīd suggest you to buy a real all-valve amp.

[Carlo]

Shane and Darin was using a Valvetronix at Jemfest....they had GREAT tone.

[DrPuls]

Originally Posted by urkoman

Donīt like any of them. The Valvestate is a poor amp, and the Vox, as the other tube simulators(H & K Zentera, etc...), does not sound as a real tube amp. Iīd suggest you to buy a real all-valve amp.

Yea yea yea...blah blah buy a tube amp its waaay better...blah blah.. Dude if i wanted an all tube amp i would go buy one... Im am looking for a modeling amp. THats what i want. If i wanted a tube amp i would ask for a different comparison. Thanks for your chritisism.

[microdmitry]

That wasn't criticism. That was wisdom. These amps aren't really "modelling", they're "cost cutting". That's the sole purpose of their existence.

[DrPuls]

Oh yea i forgot, Everyone on this forum is experts about everything right?

[Shane Regal]

I really like the Vox. I had a Flextone II and was very dissappointed with how it sounded when turned up. I like the way the vox sounds and feels when cranked... very natural to me. I have a Marshall TSL 100 and a Rivera TBR-1SL, but when I gig I just take the Valvetronix. It always sounds great and is super flexible. I fought it for awhile, but it just works for me.

[microdmitry]

Originally Posted by DrPuls

Oh yea i forgot, Everyone on this forum is experts about everything right?

I don't consider myself an expert, but I've made a few tube amps myself, I know how they work, why they're built the way they are, how to repair them, how to design them, how to alter an existing amp's sound characteristics and even why solid state amps will never sound like tube amps. "Digital" amps might get pretty close to tube one day, but not the cheap stuff like valvestate and valvetronix.

So all these "valves" in their names are what amp techs and designers call "market follower" (as opposed to cathode follower in a tube amp). To get the preamp with the sound Marshall is famous for, you need four gain stages which means at least TWO 12ax7 tubes. Then you need a power amp which is at least 3 more tubes (phase splitter and two power tubes). THEN you will get tube sound. It's five tubes as a bare minimum, not one.

[hottoddy]

The Vox website is impressive. I have nothing against solid state. Heck most people buy expensive tube amps and then throw a solid state circuitry in front of chain or in the effects loop.

But, what I have trouble understanding is buying an amp with the all the modelling built in. This stuff improves every year. Aren't you better off getting a good amp, and then building your effects around it (eg, POD XT, G Major)? That way you don't have to throw the whole amp out everytime the solid state technology advances.

[sniperfrommars1]

Originally Posted by microdmitry

I don't consider myself an expert, but I've made a few tube amps myself, I know how they work, why they're built the way they are, how to repair them, how to design them, how to alter an existing amp's sound characteristics and even why solid state amps will never sound like tube amps. "Digital" amps might get pretty close to tube one day, but not the cheap stuff like valvestate and valvetronix.

So all these "valves" in their names are what amp techs and designers call "market follower" (as opposed to cathode follower in a tube amp). To get the preamp with the sound Marshall is famous for, you need four gain stages which means at least TWO 12ax7 tubes. Then you need a power amp which is at least 3 more tubes (phase splitter and two power tubes). THEN you will get tube sound. It's five tubes as a bare minimum, not one.

The amp bashing is just getting ridiculous. The only true reason tubes sound better is due to the natural compression they create. This can also be digitally reproduced. So blah smah . Tell vai not to use an eventide harmonizer and he would laugh in your face. For me personally I would rather have one amp that sounded like 20 for a tenth of the cost for a single boutique amp.

[DrPuls]

My point exactly. Im looking for somthing with stuff built in. Enough with the amp bashing... I mean, good critisism but, I just wanted people that owned this amp and actually could give me insight. Oh well, thanks for everyones help!

CLOSE THIS THREAD PLEASE!

[microdmitry]

After a few years and a few thousand dollars wasted, you'll buy all-tube amp anyway. 'cuz no matter what you say, 10 guitar players out of 10 will say they sound better.

As to what "expert" from Mars said above, study your books, that's not the only reason why tube amps sound better.