#2
Epic amp.

If you want pristine cleans and high gain, its one of the better amps out there. Its kinda like an ENGL Fireball... but much more versatile.

Qualifier: I don't own one, but I've play on the 22 and the 60 quite a number of times.
Quote by Blompcube
it's so cool to hate Gibson, even the federal Department of Justice hates them.

( )( )
( . .) This is Bunny. Copy and paste Bunny into your
C('')('') signature to help him gain world domination.
#3
Quote by ragingkitty
Epic amp.

If you want pristine cleans and high gain, its one of the better amps out there. Its kinda like an ENGL Fireball... but much more versatile.

Qualifier: I don't own one, but I've play on the 22 and the 60 quite a number of times.


Fender.
High Gain.
/paradox
Did I miss out on something? I thought Fender didnt make br00tz amps?

Though it would explain the V30's in the combo......
#4
Quote by GS LEAD 5
Fender.
High Gain.
/paradox
Did I miss out on something? I thought Fender didnt make br00tz amps?

Though it would explain the V30's in the combo......


No man, the world didn't shift into a parallel reality where Spiders are high end modelers and Fender is the new Mesa.

The SuperSonics are amps that integrate a sparkling clean channel with pretty high gain Drive channel. Its gain channel is kinda like an SLO, I wouldn't use it for brootz... but its got balls aplenty for lead work and enough chugg up to metal... like Arch Enemy level gain. Not quite the dual recto chugga chugga amp tho.
Quote by Blompcube
it's so cool to hate Gibson, even the federal Department of Justice hates them.

( )( )
( . .) This is Bunny. Copy and paste Bunny into your
C('')('') signature to help him gain world domination.
Last edited by ragingkitty at Jun 11, 2011,
#5
Quote by ragingkitty
No man, the world didn't shift into a parallel reality where Spiders are high end modelers and Fender is the new Mesa.

The SuperSonics are amps that integrate a sparkling clean channel with pretty high gain Drive channel. Its kinda like an SLO, I wouldn't use it for brootz... but its got balls aplenty for lead work and enough chugg up to metal... like Arch Enemy level gain. Not quite the chugga chugga amps tho.

Arch Enemy is br00t4l enough x.x
#8
Quote by GS LEAD 5
I cant imagine ever needing more gain than Arch Enemy x.x heck the amount of gain they use for Night Falls Fast is roughly double the amount I normally use.


Its not so much the amount of gain, but rather the character of the gain.

I generally wouldn't use the SuperSonic for something like LOG...
Quote by Blompcube
it's so cool to hate Gibson, even the federal Department of Justice hates them.

( )( )
( . .) This is Bunny. Copy and paste Bunny into your
C('')('') signature to help him gain world domination.
#9
i've played the 22 at volume.

maybe it was the speaker because it was new out of the box at sam ash.

had high hopes, was very let down. again, at practice volume.

plus they changed the clean channels.

personally i think a used Supersonic 60 is a better amp.

but it's more of a classic rock amp than a modern brootz amp. imo.

maybe once the 22's speaker broke in it would be different. the tubes probably weren't burnt in either.

sounded fine at less than band volumes though. i just cant rec it because once someone cranks it up they're gonna be let down, is my thought.

i'd go used 60 watt Supersonic myself. or even a prosonic.
#11
Quote by beckyjc
^What would you think of it as a recording amp?

Does it simulate vintage fender clean and crunch well?

it may be geared for studio and lower volume playing.

i mean, with a 22 watt amp that's supposed to be modern voiced, you wouldn't want power tube break up. band levels and 22 watts mean you're gonna be pushing the power tubes.

for studio or even small pub blues playing, it's fine. rather good actually i'm sure.

again, maybe the speaker just needed some use.

i'd hate to slam them based on one experience, i'm trying not to do that here.
#12
I really wanna check one out sometime. Alot of opinions are very love/hate about it, not much middle ground. I think the clean channels on the 60 are more what im after.
#13
Quote by beckyjc
I really wanna check one out sometime. Alot of opinions are very love/hate about it, not much middle ground. I think the clean channels on the 60 are more what im after.

yea, why would you change from vibrolux/bassman? i mean, arguably the two most usable fender clean tones. (sure a super option would be good too but those two would work for me).

try one, again i'm trying not to hate on the amp. everything shy of band volume was very good. it just fell short at cranked tone. (cranked being 7/10.)
#14
^That's because the 22 is basically a DRRI with a Super-Sonic's overdrive channel and footswitchable reverb.
Quote by necrosis1193
As usual Natrone's mouth spouts general win.

Quote by Silverstein14
man, Natrone you're some kind of ninja I swear


Quote by gregs1020
plexi


i realize the longshot that is. little giant to humongous one.


Rest In Peace Stevie Ray
#16
I was really disappointed with my 60w SS head. Both the vintage amps have too much gain. There ok for 80" but for rock and roll or playing chord they are too shrill. Has anyone had any luck in "cleaning" up the sound?
#17
Quote by gregs1020
i'd go used 60 watt Supersonic myself.

This is what I'd do as well. I've had my eye on a Super-Sonic for awhile, but can't justify the purchase at the moment.

DON'T PANIC! DON'T PANIC!
THEY DON'T LIKE IT UP 'EM!
#18
I played one today, thought the gain channel sounded kind of really chewy, thick, a bit loose, you should really try one out before you buy.
I liked the Twin I played 2 weeks ago - which turned out to be an "Evil Twin" - much more than the Super Sonic.
#19
Quote by bbower
I was really disappointed with my 60w SS head. Both the vintage amps have too much gain. There ok for 80" but for rock and roll or playing chord they are too shrill. Has anyone had any luck in "cleaning" up the sound?

maybe start a new thread on it rather than bump an old one and jack it?


and i'd say some different preamp tubes would likely help.