Should I get a Univalve?

[jsmineer]

Originally posted by Bob Savage I certainly hope you didn't buy the amp because you believed that. As far as hearing a difference between tubes such as an EL34, 6L6, KT66, etc., I heard a significant difference, but it's significant in the context of the amps voicing. As inferred above, the voicing of the amp dictates it's base sound, not the tube type.

 

 

No, I bought it more out of curiosity. Like I said, I really liked the clean side and wanted it to work out but for my playing situation it was too much work. But there was a lot of misinformation going around when these first came out and people made them out to be something they weren't.

 

If you could hear substantial differences between tubes, more power to ya. I had to go to extremes of tubes to hear any. My faves were the KT66 and 6V6. The EL84 was ok but it sounded like a little EL34 to me. Just a little spongier but not much. In a band context nobody could tell a difference. That's why I say that feature was overrated.

[Bob Savage]

Originally posted by jsmineer No, I bought it more out of curiosity. Like I said, I really liked the clean side and wanted it to work out but for my playing situation it was too much work. But there was a lot of misinformation going around when these first came out and people made them out to be something they weren't.

 

 

There's misinformation about every piece of gear out there. It's par for the course.

[acousticvoodoo]

I think we've found the REAL reason NOT to buy a UniValve.

Because like it or hate it...

You're likely to get involved in threads like THIS!



Better to stay FAR AWAY!

michael

[jsmineer]

Originally posted by maz_master Well, most new amps to hit the market are overhyped, so that's not unusual. But, to call the thing "useless" is just as inaccurate. Regarding the different tones available by swapping power tubes, I found huge differences myself. When I first plugged into mine, I was ready to send it back! The stock Svet EL34 sounded way too harsh for my tastes. But, an EH-6L6 made it pretty darn sweet and I decided to keep it. So, to my ears, it was the difference between returning and keeping! One thing that I think confuses the issue is the built-in attenuator. It really sucks tone and can make "bad" tube combinations even worse. With the attenuator bypassed, I think it's one of the best amps I've ever heard, regardless of tube choice. But, then, the Rock channel (with high gain dialed in) is too loud for most applications. So, some sort of attenuation or slaving is required. So, IMO, the only downside to the amp is the built-in attenuator. Compared to the stand-alone HP, it sucks and really detracts from the amp's great tone, unless you're barely attenuating.

 

 

If I said it was useless, that means it was only useless to me and my situation. I wouldn't try to talk someone out of buying something. I only stated the negatives pertaining to my experience. There were things I liked but the negative outweighed them. As far as the tube changing goes, maybe my ears aren't as sharp as some claim their's to be.

[GCDEF]

Originally posted by maz_master It's because you've called the amp totally useless (NO amp is totally useless!) and refuse to address any of the solutions to your original complaints about the amp! Can't you see how that would create a strong reaction? It's called trolling. It's like what Terje does with the volume thing. He makes totally ridiculous comments for the sole purpose of drawing attention to himself and stirring up the pot.

 

 

Where did I ever call the amp totally useless? Let's look at your solutions.

 

I recommend playing one to decide for yourself. I owned one and regret selling it. Here are some thoughts on the issues previously discussed.

 

1.) Clean Headroom: Not an issue for me, even when gigging at outdoor festivals. I used the amp in two different ways:

 

a.) As a high gain lead & crunchy rhythm dirty amp, as part of a two-amp rig, A/B'ing to another amp for cleans. Awesome tones. The only downside is hauling the extra gear.

 

b.) As a clean, one-channel amp with pedals for distortion. Awesome tones again. No real downsides here for me. I picked a tube complement and/or attenuator setting that gave me just enough clean headroom for my gigs, but allowed me to overdrive the amp with pedals to blend some amp distortion with pedal distortion for leads. The big gigs were mic'ed, so headroom was never an issue, even with a 6L6. Plus, switching to a 6550 increased the wattage and headroom even more, but I never needed it.

 

2.) Fizzy Distortion: Certain tube/speaker/cab/impedance combos could sound fizzy with higher attenuation settings. However, with an Ei-ECC83->JJ-12AX7->EH-6L6 tube complement into a 16 ohm cab with broken in Classic Lead 80 and Vintage 30, the distortion tones were smooth as butter, but could be made a lot more aggressive with the Attitude knob. If you don't know how to tweak an amp to get your tones, then the UV may not be for you.

 

3.) Tube Swapping: I found this feature indispensible in getting the amp to sound exactly the way I wanted, as in #2 above. It was never meant to be something you used "on the fly"!

 

4.) No Channel Switching: The UV is a single channel amp with low and high gain inputs. If you don't know how to use that kind of amp, you should never buy one! I never hear people complain that the Dr. Z Maz 18 (for example) doesn't have channel switching, so why would anyone in their right mind complain about the UV not having it?! For ways to get the most out of the UV in practical rigs, see #1 above.

 

1a) Why should someone have to buy two amps just to have a good clean sound.

 

1b) Why should one have to use pedals when the amp has its own natural distortion.

 

Many amps provide good clean and dirty sounds on their own.

 

2) I didn't care for its distortion, no matter what I tried. There aren't that many knobs that dialing it in is difficult. I won't say it sounded bad, just not my taste.

 

3) Many amps sound good right out of the box. For $800 or whatever it costs, I don't expect to have to put more money in it to make it sound good. THD should ship it with good sounding tubes to begin with.

 

4) I've been playing single channel amps likely longer than you've been alive. I didn't complain about it, I mentioned it as a limitation in response to the original poster's question.

 

Will somebody please tell me why you are taking this so personally. I mentioned I was underwhelmed by a Rivera and nobody said anything.

 

I'm done with this thread now, but if somebody asks for opinions in the future, I'll be back. That is what this forum is for. Perhaps you guys will learn to control your emotions by then.

[jonny guitar]

Originally posted by jsmineer If you could hear substantial differences between tubes, more power to ya.

 

 

What speakers were you running? I ask because I can tell the differences between different tubes of the same type (ie. different brand). I believe that the uni is an excellent tool for learning the true sound of each different tube type which may help down the road in choosing another amp with a specific tube tone.

 

Regardless of whether or not you like the amp, I find it difficult to believe that you can't tell the tonal differences between tube types when you are running a decent speaker.

[jsmineer]

Originally posted by GCDEF I mentioned I was underwhelmed by a Rivera and nobody said anything.

 

 

I didn't see that remark. I love Riveras. Let's fight.

[jonny guitar]

Originally posted by GCDEF


Where did I ever call the amp totally useless? Let's look at your solutions.

I recommend playing one to decide for yourself. I owned one and regret selling it. Here are some thoughts on the issues previously discussed........................

This is the post that you should of started with instead of the infammatory response that you posted. I suggest that you copy it so you can paste it into all your future univalve responses. This is informative and reflects that the amp didn't work for you.

[jsmineer]

Originally posted by jonny guitar What speakers were you running? I ask because I can tell the differences between different tubes of the same type (ie. different brand). I believe that the uni is an excellent tool for learning the true sound of each different tube type which may help down the road in choosing another amp with a specific tube tone. Regardless of whether or not you like the amp, I find it difficult to believe that you can't tell the tonal differences between tube types when you are running a decent speaker.

 

 

I was running it through a couple of 4x12's and a THD 2x12 (my fave). I didn't say I couldn't hear ANY difference. Just a substantial difference.

[Stratotone]

Originally posted by jsmineer If you could hear substantial differences between tubes, more power to ya. I had to go to extremes of tubes to hear any. My faves were the KT66 and 6V6. The EL84 was ok but it sounded like a little EL34 to me. Just a little spongier but not much. In a band context nobody could tell a difference. That's why I say that feature was overrated.

 

 

I preferred the 6V6s in mine too. I recorded some clips with different 6V6 brands (I had/have a shoebox full of RCAs, TungSol, JanVT109s,etc) and I could hear a difference. However, it was a lot more pronounced when playing the amp by itself, and in a band context I might be able to feel the difference in attack more so than tone. The 6V6s just seemed to 'squash' nicer than the 6L6s.

 

Pete

[jsmineer]

Originally posted by jonny guitar Originally posted by GCDEF Where did I ever call the amp totally useless? Let's look at your solutions. I recommend playing one to decide for yourself. I owned one and regret selling it. Here are some thoughts on the issues previously discussed........................ This is the post that you should of started with instead of the infammatory response that you posted. I suggest that you copy it so you can paste it into all your future univalve responses. This is informative and reflects that the amp didn't work for you. I didn't find his initial post that inflammatory. The guy asked "why shouldn't I buy one of these?" He gave him the downsides. I don't know anyone's history around here as I'm not here often, but within this thread I don't see what the big deal is. I've just always found it curious how people got so uproared over any criticism over the UV's. The great reviews got me interested in it and it didn't workout for me. It's like people have stock in the company or something. It was like the guitar forum. Guys over there are ready to throw fistacuffs if you mention a brand of string someone doesn't like.

[jonny guitar]

Originally posted by jsmineer I didn't find his initial post that inflammatory.

 

 

Have a nice day:)

[acousticvoodoo]

Most people talk about whether they hear differences in poweramp tubes with the UniValve, and it's a valid question... I do hear substantial differences between tubes.

Part of the UniValve's capability is to vary the plate voltage. I notice this has a BIG sound and feel difference with different poweramp tubes. I tend to prefer the low-v setting on most tubes, but for some reason 6L6's sound MUCH better on hi-v.

But more important that this... is the way that PRE-AMP tubes contribute to the sound.

I've got about 10 different 12AX7's of different makes and makers, a few 12AT7's, and some other pre-amp tubes and they ALL SOUND VERY DIFFERENT...

And they make the poweramp tubes sound different as well.

If you're only swapping poweramp tubes, and NOT trying pre-amp tubes, you're missing a LOT of the sound options available with a UniValve.

michael

[jsmineer]

Originally posted by jonny guitar Have a nice day:)

Right back at ya, slick.

[maz_master]

Originally posted by GCDEF Where did I ever call the amp totally useless? Let's look at your solutions. I recommend playing one to decide for yourself. I owned one and regret selling it. Here are some thoughts on the issues previously discussed. 1.) Clean Headroom: Not an issue for me, even when gigging at outdoor festivals. I used the amp in two different ways: a.) As a high gain lead & crunchy rhythm dirty amp, as part of a two-amp rig, A/B'ing to another amp for cleans. Awesome tones. The only downside is hauling the extra gear. b.) As a clean, one-channel amp with pedals for distortion. Awesome tones again. No real downsides here for me. I picked a tube complement and/or attenuator setting that gave me just enough clean headroom for my gigs, but allowed me to overdrive the amp with pedals to blend some amp distortion with pedal distortion for leads. The big gigs were mic'ed, so headroom was never an issue, even with a 6L6. Plus, switching to a 6550 increased the wattage and headroom even more, but I never needed it. 2.) Fizzy Distortion: Certain tube/speaker/cab/impedance combos could sound fizzy with higher attenuation settings. However, with an Ei-ECC83->JJ-12AX7->EH-6L6 tube complement into a 16 ohm cab with broken in Classic Lead 80 and Vintage 30, the distortion tones were smooth as butter, but could be made a lot more aggressive with the Attitude knob. If you don't know how to tweak an amp to get your tones, then the UV may not be for you. 3.) Tube Swapping: I found this feature indispensible in getting the amp to sound exactly the way I wanted, as in #2 above. It was never meant to be something you used "on the fly"! 4.) No Channel Switching: The UV is a single channel amp with low and high gain inputs. If you don't know how to use that kind of amp, you should never buy one! I never hear people complain that the Dr. Z Maz 18 (for example) doesn't have channel switching, so why would anyone in their right mind complain about the UV not having it?! For ways to get the most out of the UV in practical rigs, see #1 above. 1a) Why should someone have to buy two amps just to have a good clean sound. 1b) Why should one have to use pedals when the amp has its own natural distortion. Many amps provide good clean and dirty sounds on their own. 2) I didn't care for its distortion, no matter what I tried. There aren't that many knobs that dialing it in is difficult. I won't say it sounded bad, just not my taste. 3) Many amps sound good right out of the box. For $800 or whatever it costs, I don't expect to have to put more money in it to make it sound good. THD should ship it with good sounding tubes to begin with. 4) I've been playing single channel amps likely longer than you've been alive. I didn't complain about it, I mentioned it as a limitation in response to the original poster's question. Will somebody please tell me why you are taking this so personally. I mentioned I was underwhelmed by a Rivera and nobody said anything. I'm done with this thread now, but if somebody asks for opinions in the future, I'll be back. That is what this forum is for. Perhaps you guys will learn to control your emotions by then.

 

 

 

1a) Why should someone have to buy two amps just to have a good clean sound. 1b) Why should one have to use pedals when the amp has its own natural distortion.

 

 

You're talking in circles again! You knew these things ahead of time. Why did you buy the amp if you already knew you couldn't footswitch between a clean channel and a distortion channel? You've never answered that question.

 

 

2) I didn't care for its distortion, no matter what I tried. There aren't that many knobs that dialing it in is difficult. I won't say it sounded bad, just not my taste.

 

 

But, what did you try? You've never answered that question. It makes a huge difference. If all you did was turn knobs with the stock arrangement, then I can understand why you didn't like the amp! I didn't like the stock tubes either. But, the EI-ECC83->JJ-12AX7->EH-6L6 combination I ended up with sounded killer. Did you try anything like that? If you did and still didn't like the distortion, well, the amp's basic voicing is just not your cup of tea, which is perfectly understandable.

 

 

3) Many amps sound good right out of the box. For $800 or whatever it costs, I don't expect to have to put more money in it to make it sound good. THD should ship it with good sounding tubes to begin with.

 

 

What's "good" to one person is "ass" to another. That's why it's designed for tube swapping! That's the whole idea! And, you should have known that ahead of time. If you had purchased a Hot Cat or a Shiva, I could understand this complaint completely. Those amps are pretty darn fixed, regarding user configurability. They, indeed, should come out of the box sounding killer because there's not much you can do after the fact. But, the UV was designed and advertised as more of a template for creating your own tones. And, it's pretty inexpensive, relative to the cost of the amp, to go out a pick up a few tubes to mess with. And, besides, most experienced players (as you claim to be) already have a bunch of tubes laying around anyways. Lastly, given your discontent, I'm sure Ed would have shipped out a few tubes to try, if even on loaner, if it meant the difference between you dumping the amp or keeping it.

 

 

4) I've been playing single channel amps likely longer than you've been alive. I didn't complain about it, I mentioned it as a limitation in response to the original poster's question.

 

 

Well, I'm 46 (born in '59) and have been playing since I was 12 (started in '71)...so, that's about 34 years now. So, you've been playing single channel amps longer than 46 years? Wow, you must have some nice Tweed amps in your collection then! Whatever the case, reminding a prospective buyer (who may be inexperienced) that single channel amps have limitations is not a bad thing, but the context of your comments did not come off like that at all. You specifically said:

 

No way to swtich between clean and dirty sounds. Huge volume discrepency between clean and dirty inputs.

 

Why would you be worrying about the volume difference between the channels if you understood the single channel amp concept as well as you claim to? The amp never claimed to be anything other than a single channel amp with low and high gain inputs! I understand you were just warning the prospective buyer about that limitation, but it's kinda' like warning a prospective buyer of a Plexi that it's not a channel switcher!

[Myles]

Originally posted by GCDEF The question was "Why shouldn't I buy one of these things?"

 

 

 

There was somebody that was complaining.

[Stratotone]

Originally posted by jsmineer I didn't find his initial post that inflammatory. The guy asked "why shouldn't I buy one of these?" He gave him the downsides. I don't know anyone's history around here as I'm not here often, but within this thread I don't see what the big deal is. I've just always found it curious how people got so uproared over any criticism over the UV's. The great reviews got me interested in it and it didn't workout for me. It's like people have stock in the company or something. It was like the guitar forum. Guys over there are ready to throw fistacuffs if you mention a brand of string someone doesn't like.

 

 

Here's the thing though: It just seems like a lot of people bitch about things on the Univalve that should have kept them from buying it in the first place!

 

If I bought a Fender Twin and then bitched about how it doesn't have the gain of an Uberschall and I couldn't get a good distorted sound out of it, is it really a fault of the amp or the idiot who bought it?

 

Also, a lot of guys here have owned the UV and have experience with it. Enough that when people make bull{censored} claims, we want to set the record straight. I don't own a UV currently. If you buy one or not, it isn't going to put a smile on my face or $ in my pocket. But if someone makes a claim that isn't warranted on *any* gear that I've owned, I'll correct them.

 

I haven't seen anyone say that the overdrive is perfect - one of CDEFG's criticisms was that he didn't like the voicing of the overdrive. One has to wonder what tube combinations he tried, but regardless - I haven't seen anyone say that the UV has such a great overdrive that he must be a tone-deaf weasel.

 

Pete

[Bob Savage]

Originally posted by Stratotone Here's the thing though: It just seems like a lot of people bitch about things on the Univalve that should have kept them from buying it in the first place!

 

 

It seems like such a simple concept to grasp, doesn't it?

[GCDEF]

Originally posted by maz_master ... but it's kinda' like warning a prospective buyer of a Plexi that it's not a channel switcher!

 

 

I wasn't planning on coming back, but you raise a good point.

 

If somebody asked "why shouldn't I buy a plexi", I could give a bunch of reasons there too, none of which would have anything to do with whether or not it was a good amp.

[maz_master]

Originally posted by GCDEF I wasn't planning on coming back, but you raise a good point. If somebody asked "why shouldn't I buy a plexi", I could give a bunch of reasons there too, none of which would have anything to do with whether or not it was a good amp.

 

 

I understand. A perfectly valid response to the question, "Why shouldn't I buy a plexi (or a Uni-Valve, for that matter)?" could be, "Keep in mind that it's not a channel switcher, so if you expect the amp (alone) to switch between clean tones at any volume and dirty tones at any volume, you'll be disappointed".

 

But, to simply say something like, "No way to swtich between clean and dirty sounds. Huge volume discrepency between clean and dirty inputs" or "Nope. You experienced, lots of clean headroom, channel switching, an effects loop, no noticable difference in levels between the inputs? Wow!", in response to the question, "Did yours have some sort of defect?", begs the question, "Didn't you know it wasn't a channel switcher and didn't have an effects loop before you bought it"?

 

Can you see the difference between the two approaches?

[GCDEF]

Originally posted by maz_master I understand. A perfectly valid response to the question, "Why shouldn't I buy a plexi (or a Uni-Valve, for that matter)?" could be, "Keep in mind that it's not a channel switcher, so if you expect the amp (alone) to switch between clean tones at any volume and dirty tones at any volume, you'll be disappointed". But, to simply say something like, "No way to swtich between clean and dirty sounds. Huge volume discrepency between clean and dirty inputs" or "Nope. You experienced, lots of clean headroom, channel switching , an effects loop, no noticable difference in levels between the inputs? Wow!", in response to the question, "Did yours have some sort of defect?", begs the question, "Didn't you know it wasn't a channel switcher and didn't have an effects loop before you bought it"? Can you see the difference between the two approaches?

 

 

My response was in response to the comment "Man, when I played one, this isn't what I experienced at all". Since my list said among other things that it doesn't have reverb, an effects loop or channel switching, that response seemed kind of weird.

[Bob Savage]

This thread, or rather some of the "logic" in it, makes me want to rub my eyeballs on shag carpeting.

[maz_master]

Originally posted by GCDEF My response was in response to the comment "Man, when I played one, this isn't what I experienced at all". Since my list said among other things that it doesn't have reverb, an effects loop or channel switching, that response seemed kind of weird.

 

 

True. Maybe he was referring to the "fizzy distortion" comment.

[PhilBelanger]

Originally posted by Bob Savage This thread, or rather some of the "logic" in it, makes me want to rub my eyeballs on shag carpeting.

LOL! The visuals of this...

[maz_master]

Originally posted by Bob Savage This thread, or rather some of the "logic" in it, makes me want to rub my eyeballs on shag carpeting.

 

 

I like to shag.