#1
...and I don't see why everyone hates so much on it. The fact that Blackstar "lies" about it being an all-valve amp aside (please don't even bring that up unless you're looking at it from a technical and tonal standpoint) I can't really see what's wrong with it.

Sure, the clean channel isn't amazing. The fact is, most high gain tube amps have "bad" clean channels. See: 60% of Orange amps, lots of Marshalls...need I go on? I put some reverb in front of it, it sounded great with a Strat.

Was it a Fender clean? No.
Did I expect a Fender clean? (a.k.a., am I batshit crazy? ) No. No I did not.
That's not reasonable. At all. At ALL. At all.

The crunch was pretty good too. So was the high gain. It can get a British sounding lead and an American sounding lead. How many tube amps can do that in this price range? Like 2. How many have 2 channels? None.

Does it sound like a $2000 amp? No.
Is it a $2000 amp? No. It is not.
Was I expecting it to sound like a $2000 amp? (a.k.a., am I a retard?) No. No I did not.

This amp has a DECENT clean with 2 channels, an effects loop, the ability to sound British or American, and a pedal to switch channels.

So...what makes it bad? Bandwagoners who jumped on the "diodes" train? Elitists who only think boutique amps or $2000 amps are acceptable? 15 year olds who repeat whatever they've just heard?

I can't really think of anything seriously wrong with it tonally for $329.

Oh yeah...also. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jxH7hkToxI
That is NOT bad tone.

TL, DR...Read it or don't post please.
Fender Deluxe Lonestar Stratocaster, Blackstar HT-5RS, Roland Micro Cube, Alvarez Regent Acoustic
Wishlist:
Carvin V3M
Agile AL-3100 Silverburst
Last edited by Ayses at Sep 15, 2010,
#2
You pretty much sum'd up my thoughts.
Gear pics

Quote by Cathbard
Bugera cloning Blackstar is a scandal cloaked in a tragedy making love to a nightmare.

#3
^^ Haha thanks. It's been bugging me for a while. Glad to see there's someone else out there who thinks like me.
Fender Deluxe Lonestar Stratocaster, Blackstar HT-5RS, Roland Micro Cube, Alvarez Regent Acoustic
Wishlist:
Carvin V3M
Agile AL-3100 Silverburst
#4
No-one who you say hates it so much has ever said anything bad about the amp itself. If you read what they're saying, they're bashing Blackstars false advertising, not the amp.
#5
I think Blackstar has a real good opportunity to grow in the next few years, especially with the Gus G. endorsement.
#6
And so many good metal artists use their products, just for example Ihsahn (I think)and Fredrik Åkesson.
Gear pics

Quote by Cathbard
Bugera cloning Blackstar is a scandal cloaked in a tragedy making love to a nightmare.

#7
Quote by littlephil
No-one who you say hates it so much has ever said anything bad about the amp itself. If you read what they're saying, they're bashing Blackstars false advertising, not the amp.
Actually...yeah they have.

"It has bad tone"
"It can't get that Marshall tone"
"Get the Tweaker instead"
"Save for a better amp"
"The cleans are unacceptable"
"The overdrive sounds digital"

The list goes on. Pretty much all of it is garbage.
After playing it, it seems like a great amp.
Fender Deluxe Lonestar Stratocaster, Blackstar HT-5RS, Roland Micro Cube, Alvarez Regent Acoustic
Wishlist:
Carvin V3M
Agile AL-3100 Silverburst
Last edited by Ayses at Sep 15, 2010,
#8
Its nice, but I definitely wouldn't say its a great amp. Its a good practice amp, but for anything more than that its not very good.
#9
^which is why it's 5 watts.
Fender Deluxe Lonestar Stratocaster, Blackstar HT-5RS, Roland Micro Cube, Alvarez Regent Acoustic
Wishlist:
Carvin V3M
Agile AL-3100 Silverburst
#10
Thats exactly my point, so many people claim its such a great amp, which for a practice amp it is.
You hardly ever see people say its great for a practice amp. They just say its great, which is where the problem starts.
I'm willing to bet that almost all the people who said the things you quoted ("It has bad tone", etc) are people who have a lot of experience with a lot of nice amps, high end gear, so compared to the stuff they're used to, the HT-5 is pretty lacklustre.
Now for someone who is just looking for a cheap practice amp, there is nothing wrong with the HT-5 at all, but a lot of people say its great, forgetting that it was designed to be used as a practice amp, so people go around saying how great it is, failing to mention that it is just a practice amp.
Thats where most of this started, that and Blackstars advertising.
#11
I’ve had an HT-5 since December. When I first got it I thought like you did: tube-amp sound at a low price and a relatively low volume! This is great! But once I got over the “OMG TOOBS ARE BETTER TEHY HAS MOAR DYNAMICS!!!” UG bandwagon crap I realized that a mediocre tube tone like the HT-5’s is still just mediocre. Good modeling tones sound better than the HT-5s mediocre tube tones, and for what I paid for my HT-5 I could have bought a Valvetronix and Vypyr and had access to a wide range of better tones than anything the HT-5 can offer up. The HT-5 is an overrated amp that would not have caught on the way it did if guitar players would think critically about tube amps instead of just assuming anything with tubes in it sounds great because it sounds like tubes.
#12
^The overdrive channel sounded like 2x better than anything my Vypyr can do. And I've had my Vypyr for over a year.

Of course, my Vypyr COULD play live unlike the HT-5, and it has more fender-y cleans and more effects. The overdrive just KILLS the Vypyr, though. And the Blackstar's cleans are definitely warmer.

I'm not one of those guys who thinks tube is always superior to solid-state or modelers. I just look at 2 amps and compare the features and tone. The Blackstar came out on top of the Vypyr.
Fender Deluxe Lonestar Stratocaster, Blackstar HT-5RS, Roland Micro Cube, Alvarez Regent Acoustic
Wishlist:
Carvin V3M
Agile AL-3100 Silverburst
#13
...Isn't this the wrong thread?
Agile Interceptor Pro 725 EB EMG
Gibson LP Future Tribute
G12T-75 4x12 Avatar
Krank Nineteen80-watt
Koch Loadbox
Avatar 18w
RMC4


Soundcloud
#14
Quote by littlephil
Thats exactly my point, so many people claim its such a great amp, which for a practice amp it is.
You hardly ever see people say its great for a practice amp. They just say its great, which is where the problem starts.
I'm willing to bet that almost all the people who said the things you quoted ("It has bad tone", etc) are people who have a lot of experience with a lot of nice amps, high end gear, so compared to the stuff they're used to, the HT-5 is pretty lacklustre.
Now for someone who is just looking for a cheap practice amp, there is nothing wrong with the HT-5 at all, but a lot of people say its great, forgetting that it was designed to be used as a practice amp, so people go around saying how great it is, failing to mention that it is just a practice amp.
Thats where most of this started, that and Blackstars advertising.


phil nailed it

apparently some people dont understand the difference between

"blackstar false advertising sucks" and "it sucks because it has diodez"