| Author |
Topic: Tubefex ? |
Mike Sweeney
From:
Nashville,TN,USA
|
Posted 14 Jan 2004 9:40 am |
|
I used to use a Profex2 for direct recording and it seemed to do o.k. but it always lacked warmth to me. It was as clean as a whistle and the reverbs and stuff were great.
Right now I'm using a Mesa Boogie studio pre and it's alot warmer sounding due to the tubes [I guess] but it's a little heavy and takes up a lot of room. Plus if I want any effects that's another piece to add weight to the rack.
So, my main question is, Would the Tubefex give me the warmth of tone I'm looking for in a smaller, lighter unit.
Thanks,
Mike
I also should mention, I just want to use this for recording direct, not with an amp.[This message was edited by Mike Sweeney on 14 January 2004 at 09:55 AM.] |
|
|
 |
Erv Niehaus
From:
Litchfield, MN, USA
|
Posted 14 Jan 2004 10:13 am
|
|
You can always warm up a Profex with a Peavey "Tube Sweetener".
Erv |
|
|
|
Mike Sweeney
From:
Nashville,TN,USA
|
Posted 14 Jan 2004 10:47 am
|
|
Erv,
I sold my profex2 so I can't do that. Also I want just 1 unit to worry with. Thanks!
Mike |
|
|
|
John Lazarus
From:
Tucson, AZ.
|
Posted 14 Jan 2004 11:35 am
|
|
| Mike, Tubefex is the way to go. My Profex II sounded sterile in comparison to the tube warmth of the TF. Besides, you get a good tuner in one unit. |
|
|
|
Mike Sweeney
From:
Nashville,TN,USA
|
Posted 14 Jan 2004 11:47 am
|
|
John,
That's what I'm thinking. I've gotten some emails about this and one said I'd be better off with the transtube fex. They said it was more quiet than the tubefex. My profex2 had a little noise to it in some of the programs.
I'm testing waters right now as to which way to go.
It just seems to me that you have more eq with the tubefex than the profex2 with the knobs on front and the internal programs combined and with the tubes it would have to be warmer going to tape.
Mike |
|
|
|
John Lazarus
From:
Tucson, AZ.
|
Posted 14 Jan 2004 1:06 pm
|
|
Mike, Doesn't the Profex power with a wall wart supply? The Tubefex is internal. I like that for reliability and less noise.
I personally have no experience with a Transtubefex, and I have heard good things about them. It just seems to me that without the actual tubes, it would be hard to get the real tube warmth and tone. If you could, all amps would have this circuitry and tubes would be totally redundant. But they're not. |
|
|
|
Mike Sweeney
From:
Nashville,TN,USA
|
Posted 14 Jan 2004 1:19 pm
|
|
John,
Yes mine had a wall-wart. But, I've got a Lexicon MPX100 with a wall-wart and it's pretty quiet.
Thanks!
Mike |
|
|
|
Dennis Wood
From:
Savannah, TN USA
|
Posted 14 Jan 2004 4:02 pm
|
|
I've had both the ttfex and the tubefex..and actually my tubefex has less noise than the ttfex when direct to board. Not a lot of difference in the sound, but to me the tubes sound a little warmer and more depth. it works really great for recording and direct to the board playing.
------------------
Sierra U-12 Crown Gearless, Peavey Nashville 400,
1971 Fender Twin Reverb,
Peavey Tubefex,
Peavey Stereo 212,
Peavey TT Bandit w/ex speaker. Regal Reso, Tele, Strat, 1970 Les Paul Std.
|
|
|
|
Jeff Peterson
From:
Nashville, TN USA
|
Posted 14 Jan 2004 7:10 pm
|
|
| Possum-pellets! (That's for you Mike.) No, a TransTube wattanabe is not like the TubeFex. Why? Real tubes! I'll bring a rack by Jimmie's, and you come try it out....small space, real tubes, light weight, great sound. Gimme' a call, I'll just keep a rack over there and you stop by at your leisure. Until then........bite me. |
|
|
|
Tony Dingus
From:
Kingsport, Tennessee, USA
|
Posted 14 Jan 2004 8:25 pm
|
|
Hey Mike, your guitar have single coil pup's.
Tony |
|
|
|
Ken Fox
From:
Nashville GA USA
|
Posted 14 Jan 2004 9:34 pm
|
|
| Mike, I will have one ready to go in a few days. Just got to get anew battery in and load it with Peterson or Newman effects. I will have it on the for sale section ASAP. I also have a controller for it. |
|
|
|
Mike Sweeney
From:
Nashville,TN,USA
|
Posted 15 Jan 2004 12:21 am
|
|
Tony, I've got single coils.
Ken, I've already found one. Thanks.
Mike |
|
|
|
David L. Donald
From:
Koh Samui Island, Thailand
|
Posted 15 Jan 2004 4:50 am
|
|
I have a TubeFex and liked it, but got a TransFex Amp rather than lug my bass rig.
The Tubefex AND the Hartke were quite heavy in one rack.
The sounds are quite simliar, other than the amp version being stereo amps in one package, and I transfered the presets no problem.
The TubeFex does have cannon outs and that is good for the studio, the amp doesn't. But they have different jobs to do now.
I am keeping the TubeFex for the studio rack. |
|
|
|
Mike Sweeney
From:
Nashville,TN,USA
|
Posted 15 Jan 2004 6:31 am
|
|
David,
The weight/no. of pieces is why I use an RV-3 for live jobs with a Session 400 amp. Alot of places I use just an amp in the studio [no rv-3 or any effects], but some of the smaller studios I work I have to go direct. I miss having everything in a single rack space unit. I just didn't think the profex2 was warm enough.
Mike |
|
|
|
Mike Sweeney
From:
Nashville,TN,USA
|
Posted 16 Jan 2004 11:58 am
|
|
Looks like the tubefex is the way to go. That's good, I've got one on the way.
Any other thoughts? |
|
|
|
Ken Fox
From:
Nashville GA USA
|
Posted 16 Jan 2004 12:49 pm
|
|
| Change out the tubes (if original). The originals were Chinese, microphonic and poor frequency response (lack low end). I just did the one I just got in with a New JJ tube and one other tube I had in stock, major difference. |
|
|
|
