#1
I know this is a topic that is fairly exhausted but I am wondering if there are any fresh ideas.

I LOVE the cleans of a twin, but I'm currently not in a band and won't need 85 watts (even if I was in a band I wouldn't need that much!!!). Is there an alternative amp that gets very similar cleans but at less wattage.

My budget is around £600 (£700 at a push for the right amp)
#2
I love my Blues Junior. It's no Twin Reverb, but I didn't pay for a Twin Reverb and it doesn't carry like a Twin Reverb either.
Quote by Cathbard
Quote by Raijouta
Unless its electronic drums.

BURN THE WITCH!!!!!
#3
A Deluxe Reverb is probably closer than a Blues Jr, but also more expensive.

You could try to find a 2nd hand musicman or maybe even be lucky to find a mesa combo that's not too expensive.

Jens
#4
How bout a Randall RM20 with the Blackface module?
Fender Mustang/Derfenstein DST> Boss Power Wah> Pedal Monsters Klone> Bogner Uberschall> Walrus Audio Janus> Randall RM20> Line 6 M9> Randall RM20
#5
Yes Princeton reverb, deluxe reverb, vibro champ
Vibrolux reverb, pro reverb, super champ and most Mesa amps all deliver magnificent fender clean tone and take pedals really well.
"Your sound is in your hands as much as anything. It's the way you pick, and the way you hold the guitar, more than it is the amp or the guitar you use." -- Stevie Ray Vaughan

"Anybody can play. The note is only 20 percent. The attitude of the motherfucker who plays it is 80 percent." -- Miles Davis

Guthrie on tone: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmohdG9lLqY
#6
How about a silver face twin & pull 2 power tubes?
My Gear:- A guitar, a guitar lead, a guitar amplifier. Or sometimes just an acoustic guitar!
#7
Deluxe Reverb would be the best, but having a twin and pulling two tubes would also be good (although still very heavy).

I would do one of those.
#8
Didn't yours come with a volume knob?

Sorry.. couldn't resist...

A silver face pulling tubes doesn't really make the volume less.. kinda makes the amp sound different, but it's still very loud before you get it to break up a bit...

Twins are heavy... but they have wheels on them..

I might look into amps that have a Gain Control.. the Twin's really don't, even the push pull's master volume on the silver faces I find are useless... the Marshall DSL series isn't a bad amp... I own the DSL 40C.. I like it.. the gain control lets me get that slight growl that I can't get with my twin unless the volume's cranked and my ears are bleeding...

A trick I also use is running a compressor, into a power booster like the Nano LPB-1, then into an over drive... you can play with the settings and keep the sound clean until you really lay into it... I found it emulated the slight overdriven tube sound, but at a lower volume and makes the volume knob on your guitar very responsive... turn it down a bit for really clean, then crank it up and let 'er growl...

As always... JMHO
I Play Guitar
Some Like it
Some don't
I don't care
Beats Workin'
OLD GUYS RULE!!!!
#10
I don't think anyone buys a Twin Reverb for power amp distortion... Punks excepted, as usual.
Quote by Cathbard
Quote by Raijouta
Unless its electronic drums.

BURN THE WITCH!!!!!
#11
my 1973 Fender twin is fine in the house , just turn down the volume , it still sounds beautiful at low volume .... when you need distortion just turn down the master volume to around 4 and bump up the channel volume to around 7 or more , it works great , I have yet to play a low watt combo that comes anywhere close to the sound of the Twin at low volume JMHO
#12
As I remember the Twin sounds pretty damned good even at bedroom volume, so if that's really the sound you want then that's the amp you should get.

Otherwise... Princeton.
#13
I just have one simple question - "Why?"
Gilchrist custom
Yamaha SBG500
Telecasters
Randall RM100 & RM20
Marshall JTM45 clone
Marshall JCM900 4102 (modded)
Marshall 18W clone
Fender 5F1 Champ clone
Atomic Amplifire
Marshall 1960A
Boss GT-100


Cathbard Amplification
My band
#14
Quote by Cathbard
I just have one simple question - "Why?"


because about 14 billion years ago a very dense bit of energy (we are still working on a spacetime independent theory to help explain where the energy came from) inflated at an exponential rate at fraction of a fraction of a second until the energy is quite evenly distributed (minus some small but significant quantum fluctuations) into a low entropy arrangement.

soon after the inflaton field (yes inflaton, not inflation) fell to a lower energy state matter coalesced from the dense energy soup. for some reason there is more matter than anti-matter after this phase transition of the universe

the universe continued expanding and the energy level of the universe continued to become more spread out as a result, this allowed for more interactions between particles and allowed the formation of protons and neutrons which then made the first nuclei of hydrogen isotopes and a bit of helium (i think some lithium nuclei was made here too).

space still expands and energy is diluted enough to allow electrons to couple with nuclei, finally allowing photons to travel freely and the universe becomes transparent. billions of years later a group of people win a nobel prize for discovering that the light from this event still persists in the universe today.

quantum fluctuations from the inflation allow for more matter-rich portions of the universe which start attracting neighboring mass more efficiently into lumps that eventually will turn into our galaxies.

these galaxies start lighting up with masses so dense that gravity causes atoms in such close and violent proximity that nuclear reactions occur and these masses start releasing immense amounts of energy while at the same time provide a crucible for creating new nuclear arrangement.

eventually these first generations 'stars' die, some of them die violently and eject these more complicated/newer atoms into neighboring nebulas, which causes the nebula to collapse. this nebula that is impregnated with remains of a dead star starts to rotate, eventually forming an accretion disk.

little lumps in the accretion disk turn into bigger lumps, a stars sparks in the center of the disk, rocky and gaseous satellites grow in size. one planet develops in special range from the star that allows for water in a liquid state.

the planet cools, water pools in spots, amino acids form proteins, certain groups of proteins allow for duplication, duplication leads to variation, the variations that are best suited to the dynamics of the environment are more likely to be duplicated.

billions of years of variation and selection produce land inhabiting organisms with thumbs that can walk upright. Robert Von Liebon patented an early verions of a triode electron tube, the design was improved upon, RCA released a book, Leo Fender opened a repair shop.

Fender was bought out by CBS, pre-CBS fender designs become overly hyped... very few people actually understand the differences between different eras of Fender amps and the different models of Fender amps.

a misunderstanding about wattage ratings compels someone to post to the internet for advice. a BF Deluxe has the same preamp circuit as the BF Twin and the Deluxe is only ~22 watts compared to the ~85 watts of the Twin. This difference in power output rating won't matter much though, as the deluxe is still quite loud and the deluxe won't allow for as much clean headroom as the twin.

he should just buy a twin and use the master volume.

cath, you always ask the hard questions.
punk isn't dead, it's always smelled that way.

"A perfection of means, and confusion of aims, seems to be our main problem."
-ae
Last edited by gumbilicious at May 2, 2014,
#16
yeah, i guess that Ryu Mitsuse book i have been reading inspired that.
punk isn't dead, it's always smelled that way.

"A perfection of means, and confusion of aims, seems to be our main problem."
-ae
#17
tldr the universe is scary stop worrying about watts
Ibanez Prestige RG852MPB
Ibanez Prestige RG652KFX
ESP E-II M-1
LTD AW-7
Schecter Loomis NT
EVH 5150 III 50
PRS 212 DB
Line 6 POD HD500X
Deadhorse OD/Boss HM-2
#18
I have a 100 watt Twin Reverb clone. I use it to practice at home all the time. I also have several other low wattage "practice" amps that I don't use at all anymore. The twin reverb stills sounds beautiful at practice volumes.
#19
gumbi:

I can understand, "my amp isn't loud enough to keep up with my maniac drummer." But, "my amp is too loud"?
Turn down the friggin volume, dumbass, that's what it's there for. Twins, sound fine turned down.
Gilchrist custom
Yamaha SBG500
Telecasters
Randall RM100 & RM20
Marshall JTM45 clone
Marshall JCM900 4102 (modded)
Marshall 18W clone
Fender 5F1 Champ clone
Atomic Amplifire
Marshall 1960A
Boss GT-100


Cathbard Amplification
My band
#21
Quote by iwannabesedated
Wanting a Twin sound without having to lug around a heavy amp seems perfectly reasonable to me.



no doubt !! ... but that wasn't the OP question
#22
Quote by Fumble fingers
no doubt !! ... but that wasn't the OP question


Fair enough, I just figured that it might be a helpful factor. Getting a 30 watt head with a 2x12 after having a Twin for a while was quite the welcome change.
#23
To all the smart arses that have been so hostile:

I wasn't aware that the twin sounded equally as good at bedroom levels as it does cranked a bit. I'm not looking for amp distortion from a twin (unsurprisingly). I'm not sure what people get out of putting people down on this forum but it's childish. Everyone has to start somewhere and people like you will put people with less experience off from asking questions. It would be much more useful for you to just say 'it sounds good at bedrooms level as well as loud' rather then a pointless sarcastic comment