#1
everytime they're mentioned peiople get outraged at the thought they might be
decent amps, is there something im not seeing?
or is it the fact that they're not tube?
Quote by guitardude34875
be the music, not the scene
#2
MG's are way overpriced
SPider 3's have crappy tone
Quote by TunerAddict,mdawg24
+Infinity

Listen to ExtremeMetalFTW, he knows what he is talking about...

Quote by vmanoman
I clicked System Restore and it said "System Restore Is Unable To Protect You".

^^SO KVLT!!
#3
Quote by ExtremeMetalFTW
MG's are way overpriced
SPider 3's have crappy tone



other way around pal eventhgouhg they're both overpriced
Quote by gregs1020
Brett has been saving for a splawn for 4 years
countries have been toppled in the time it's taking, revolutions won got a black pres

yawn


Quote by bubb_tubbs
When he finally gets one it'll probably be televised like the Berlin Wall coming down.
The end of an era
#4
well at least in defense of the spider III it is a great practice amp...very versatile and you dont need to buy a bunch of pedals for effects....though it would never do for a gig...
and as for the EMG's i think they are great
Total Failure

If every dream is a wish, then to dream of zombies is to wish for an appetite without responsibility
#5
Quote by Slovak_Ghost
well at least in defense of the spider III it is a great practice amp...very versatile and you dont need to buy a bunch of pedals for effects....though it would never do for a gig...
and as for the EMG's i think they are great

not emg's
marshall MG series
Quote by guitardude34875
be the music, not the scene
#6
MG = low quality, always breaking and sound ****,

III = nothing wrong with it, but it has a digital tone...which is gay.
*Enter Sig Here*
#7
Searchbar, pls

Anyways. The Spiders and MGs are good only for practicing. Outside of that, they have crappy tone and crappy quality.

Well, actually, the Spiders seem to have a better track record than the MG's. But still.
--

How do you say "I'm okay" to an answering machine?

--
#8
there's nothing wrong with them as practice amps but they're way over priced, especially the MG.
Ibanez RG321MH (Air Classic/Tone Zone)
Fernandes Telecaster (Twang King/stock bridge pickup)
Blackstar HT-20 (Scumback 55 speaker/ Tung Sol tubes)
TC Electronic Nova Repeater
Lava Cables Clear Connect, Soar and Mini ELC
#9
my bad....
and as for a spider III being over priced....i beg to differ
you can get the 75 for 300 bucks....

and it has a MASSIVE amount of preprogramed effects and tones......which you would need over 300 bucks in pedals to reproduce.....

especially for a beginning guitarist....it is great to experiment with differnet effects and sounds.....though the tremb and delay effects are sh1t it is still nice to play around with
Total Failure

If every dream is a wish, then to dream of zombies is to wish for an appetite without responsibility
#10
MGs are just terrible overpriced crap.
Spiders are ok but i prefer cubes. there also overpriced but good practice amps.
My Gear:
Jackson DK2M
PRS Paul Allender Sig
Epiphone SG Special
Fender Blues Jr.
Roland Micro Cube
#11
Quote by Hale_91


III = nothing wrong with it, but it has a digital tone...which is gay.


HAHAHA
Valveking CLIPS/Gear HERE
#12
There isn't anything "wrong" with the Spider III and MG series. Everyone has their own opinion about amps, so a Spider might be great for one person and not the next. Personally, I love my Spider III 120 watter. I looked at the MG series when I was amp shopping, but to me the distortion on the MG's was comparable to a cat ripping out your ear drums. Now, I'm sure that with enough tuning time I would have fixed that, but overall I like the Spider better, so that's what I got.

There are many people on here who are quite knowledgeable, and have experience with all sorts of equipment, and that arn't biased, who give honest opinions on amps and the like. Then you have the people who put down these amps; some have experiences with them and have formed their own opinion of the gear, but then there are others who read that these amps "suck" somewhere on the internet and they spread this everywhere, even though they have no seat time with the gear. Many of the people here who just post crap about the Spiders and MGs are the people who have absolutely no experience with them. It is these people who give gear that can be potentially good/great bad reps.
#13
Quote by Blecter
There isn't anything "wrong" with the Spider III and MG series. Everyone has their own opinion about amps, so a Spider might be great for one person and not the next. Personally, I love my Spider III 120 watter. I looked at the MG series when I was amp shopping, but to me the distortion on the MG's was comparable to a cat ripping out your ear drums. Now, I'm sure that with enough tuning time I would have fixed that, but overall I like the Spider better, so that's what I got.

There are many people on here who are quite knowledgeable, and have experience with all sorts of equipment, and that arn't biased, who give honest opinions on amps and the like. Then you have the people who put down these amps; some have experiences with them and have formed their own opinion of the gear, but then there are others who read that these amps "suck" somewhere on the internet and they spread this everywhere, even though they have no seat time with the gear. Many of the people here who just post crap about the Spiders and MGs are the people who have absolutely no experience with them. It is these people who give gear that can be potentially good/great bad reps.


quit trying to justify that you bought a 120 watt spider. Granted, people do spread word that the spider sucks just because they read it somewhere but luckily there just happens to be lots of options MUCH MUCH better than a spider.

ive had experience with both. ive even gotten a chance to gig with a spider III. the spider III has some bells and whistles, but once you go past the 15w version, all you have is a loud practice amp that doesnt sound very good.

edit: and to the TS, please do us all a favor and delete this thread.
Valveking CLIPS/Gear HERE
#14
I had an MG. For a while I was satisfied and thought it sounded good, but after a while, I just couldn't get the tones I was looking for. Also, it was too small to do anything with. The tone was very lacking, and the only effects I ever found myself using was the reverb, and sometimes the delay. Which took forever to dial in the right delay time. The chorus was manageable, nothing spectacular. And I don't like flangers anyway. So, the effects were a waste.

The "overdrive" channel was crap. I didn't even use it after I got a distortion pedal. I couldn' find any sort of use for it. Not blues, rock, metal... nothing. So I got a cheap distortion pedal and played that through the clean channel. It still sounded like crap, though. Very lacking.

The cleans? Not very good for anything to be honest. It had a very... dull tone. I can't quite remember, because I haven't played it in such a long time. But it just wasn't cutting it for the tone that I wanted, that much I am sure of. Very dead and dull. The little tube-emulating switch just kind of made it louder and added a little bass, and I had to scoop the mids just to get semi-useable tone. Which is fine, because I was just using it for bedroom practice.

The only thing good I can really say about the MG is that it was like a tank, in my experience. It never failed me. In terms of working. But it failed me greatly when it came to tone.

Never played through a Spider amp. I've heard sound clips, and it sounds much better than an MG. Doesn't sound like anything to really gig with, though. But don't take my word on the Spiders, because I'm just going on what I've heard, never actually messed around with one myself.
Peavey HP Signature EXP (SH4 JB/ SH2 Jazz)
Jackson DK2M
Fender MIM Stratocaster HSS
Fender MiM Telecaster

EVH 5150 III w/ EVH 2x12 cab
Peavey Vypyr Tube 60
Fender Blues Jr.

Boss ME-50; NS-2; RV-5; BF-3
MXR M101 Phase 90
#15
When I created a topic about this two weeks ago, someone told me that these threads pop up every two weeks. I should of listened...
#16
i had a line 6 spider II a while ago and it was great when i started really getting into guitar... line 6's were great to start off with but eventually you just need more so i got a crate half stack lol and i have to say it didnt do **** for me.... and im stuck saving for a tube amp now...
#18
TS, have you ever played a tube amp? mgs and spiders suck ass tonewise. (most ss amps do, but some exceptions)

Q#m
e|--6--|
B|--5--|
G|--7--|
D|--7--|x2586
A|--5--|
E|-----|


Play until she breaks up with you.

The most brutal band to ever exist is...

You should go like them...even if you don't like them.


-Sloppyjoe24
#19
Spider 3's are okay practice amps, 50w and up are a waste though.
RIP Jasmine You.

Lieutenant of the 7-string/ERG Legion

Quote by FaygoBro420
Yo wassup, I'm trying to expand my musical horizons if you know what I mean, so can anybody reccomend me some cool Juggalo jazz?
#20
I really can't say about the spider, i've never plugged into one, but when I bought my first guitar I was pretty excited when i saw the marshall micro stack and thought that would be the amp for sure until i plugged into it. to this day it's still the most horrible thing i've ever heard. the little amp that came with my esteban is better then that thing.
Dean Icon PZ
Line 6 Variax 700
Dean V-Wing
Dean ML 79 SilverBurst
MXR M 108
H2O Chorus/Echo
Valve Junior (V3 Head/Cab and Combo)
VHT Special 6
Phonic 620 Power Pod PA
Wampler Super Plextortion
Line 6 Pod HD
#21
My problem with both is there lack of a "searchbar". If Marshall and Line 6 would just add that, it would make me happy.
#22
makes me sad because I have the spider III 120 watt
I think it's great tho

But good thing Ups dropped it and MF gave me a brand new one for 300 instead of 400

lol truck driver damaged it and returned it before it got to my house
Last edited by 877O at Jul 17, 2008,
#23
You know, there really isnt anything wrong with Spiders. I think MG's are horrid. But the Spiders arent half bad honestly. I mean, if you play alot of solo stuff and dont play in a band or anything then they are great. They really cant get over a full band very well and maintain a decent sound. But if you play in a setting that is in the bedroom or even small venues by yourself, and dont want to have to worry about alot of pedals and such and you need versatility then the Spiders are ideal.

The only people who are ever gonna notice the sterility of a digital amp are people who play guitar. BUt alot of the presets are great on the Spider series and most people are only going to notice whether or not you can play decent.
#24
Quote by 877O
makes me sad because I have the spider III 120 watt
I think it's great tho

But good thing Ups dropped it and MF gave me a brand new one for 300 instead of 400

lol truck driver damaged it and returned it before it got to my house


Was it this guy? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4xGQ49Qij8
#26
they're practice amps. they're better than some of the squawk boxes you can get but they're also quite a bit worse than some of the better practice amps like the cubes or voxes AD series..

and really.. its the bigger amps like the MG halfstack or the spider halfstack are the REAL rip offs.. (or even the 60 watt combos with a 12") they're quite literally just the same 15 watt practice amp inflated to half stack size.

short answer: fine for practice, but there is just SO much better you can get for the same money as those brutal sounding spider/mg halfstacks.
Grammar and spelling omitted as an exercise for the reader.
#27
Yeah there great for practice and some amateur band work. However I would recommend a vox valvetronix, my rhythm guitarist has a spider and the tone I get from the valvetronix just completely drowns him out at equal volume levels, which he finds quite annoying.
GENERATION 10: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.
#28
Quote by ShredGod George
everytime they're mentioned peiople get outraged at the thought they might be
decent amps, is there something im not seeing?
or is it the fact that they're not tube?


It seems to me that they are somewhat pricey.

However, i do believe that alot of what is said on here is from people jumping on the bandwagon. It seems to me that the smaller ones are perfectly adequate practice amps. I think that people find the fact that they make the big halfstacks bad because they have poor tone and theres no need for that much as a practice amp and that you can get better for less.

It varies it would seem.

Apologies for the poor English today, im feeling kinda ill and my head isnt working with regards to constructing sensible sentences.
#29
I don't really have anything against either as practise amps, but I wouldn't get one because there's better gear out there for the price, such as Cubes and Vox Valvetronix.
Gear
Epiphone G-400
Orange Tiny Terror
Marshall 1936 2x12 Cabinet
Blackstar HT-Dual
MXR 10-Band EQ
#30
*reported*

somebody posts a thread like this every other day
Actually called Mark!

Quote by TNfootballfan62
People with a duck for their avatar always give good advice.

...it's a seagull

Quote by Dave_Mc
i wanna see a clip of a recto buying some groceries.


stuffmycatswatchontv.tumblr.com