• Welcome to the General Discussion forum for UAD users!

    Please note that this forum is user-run, although we're thrilled to have so much contribution from Drew, Will, and other UA folks!

    Feel free to discuss both UAD and non-UAD related subjects!

    1) Please do not post technical issues here. Please use our UAD Support Forums instead.

    2) Please do not post complaints here. Use the Unrest Forum instead. They have no place in the the General Discussion forum.

    Threads posted in the wrong forum will be moved, so if you don't see your thread here anymore, please look in the correct forum.

    Lastly, please be respectful.

Is it just me or does UAD's Fender '55 Tweed Deluxe suck?

M

matthewrayrgv

Member
Compared to the Marshall stuff that softube did for UAD (which is in my opinion the best sim on the market) the fender was a complete dud. It's like someone had a crap guitar sim with a mix knob set to 50%. I can still hear the thin nasally DI sound of the guitar through this plug in. With the marshal sims you wouldn't have guess it was a sim. The break up on the fender is over exaggerated and sounds very 2D (I really hate that generic description but it is fitting in this case). UAD bragged about how much went into this amp but i've honestly have heard better simulations from guitar rig 3. I really hope they don't screw up the deluxe reverb or twin like they did this tweed. I think they should partner up with softube for their next release.
 
D

Dguidry

Venerated Member
Its actually an excellent emmulation of the real thing. It's the real thing sound that you don't like then. I'm waiting on a super reverb or blackface twin or something like that.
 
chime13

chime13

Active Member
matthewrayrgv said:
Compared to the Marshall stuff that softube did for UAD (which is in my opinion the best sim on the market) the fender was a complete dud. It's like someone had a crap guitar sim with a mix knob set to 50%. I can still hear the thin nasally DI sound of the guitar through this plug in. With the marshal sims you wouldn't have guess it was a sim. The break up on the fender is over exaggerated and sounds very 2D (I really hate that generic description but it is fitting in this case). UAD bragged about how much went into this amp but i've honestly have heard better simulations from guitar rig 3. I really hope they don't screw up the deluxe reverb or twin like they did this tweed. I think they should partner up with softube for their next release.
Click to expand...
It just goes to show you that all of this is purely subjective. I find your conclusions 180 degrees out of phase with mine. I'm really liking the UAD Chandler sim - and I find the rest of BW or ST offerings to fall way short of Amplitude 4. Ultimately, whatever works for you is the right choice. Thank god for demos!
 
Hoenerbr

Hoenerbr

Hall of Fame Member
chime13 said:
It just goes to show you that all of this is purely subjective. I find your conclusions 180 degrees out of phase with mine. I'm really liking the UAD Chandler sim - and I find the rest of BW or ST offerings to fall way short of Amplitude 4. Ultimately, whatever works for you is the right choice. Thank god for demos!
Click to expand...
It certainly is subjective. I happen to love the UA Fender Tweed but I didn't at first. I had to dig in and not be afraid to lower the input volume to almost off to get a clean tone. Its also nice to bring the input volume up and back off the guitar volume until its clean. Then you can control the clean to dirty with your guitars volume control. Its really very nice. I have all the Amplitube amps including Amplitube 4. The Red Pig and the Silver are so good I'm not buying the Silver Jubilee. Its hard to properly compare the UA Amp Sims with Amplitube because in Amplitube you have all the effects, cabs and stereo return in the patches. I guess to properly compare them I'd have to turn off all the effects and Room mics and monitor in Mono, but at that point its like Yucky! I know but I couldn't think of a better word. I wish the Console in Apollo would allow a stereo return for the Amp Sims without eating up an Aux return!
 
Kcatthedog

Kcatthedog

Hall of Fame Member
Same here: having a very good experience recording my new tune with the Tweed. When you can recognize the guitar sounds of certain artists and or records in the presets, I'd say thats " close enough for rock and roll " :)
 
kedavis

kedavis

Member
For clean tones I think it's ok. Beyond those, I don't like the sound of it.
 
U

UnitedWestern

Member
It may not be you or the plugin, it might be the amp. I'm new (8 months) to UAD but old (very) to guitar and recording and my first impression of the Tweed plugin was similar to my reaction to the Ocean Way plugin: they sound so close to reality that they remind me of what I didn't like back in 1971 about either of the real-world examples. I recorded two albums in the early 70's (my own band and a large multi-ensemble project which was the first 24 track album recorded in LA). These were recorded at United/Western (now Ocean Way I believe) using all of the rooms. I recall that Studio B had prototype models of the Westlake Audio "wooden horn" monitors. The Ocean Way plugin (which I love) reminded me of what a high end suck the big room was. My amps for those sessions were a 100W Plexi for my band and a 58 Bassman for the large project. During my years in LA I found the recorded sound of Deluxes (tweed or blackface) to be kind of "small" especially when overdriven. Just like the UAD 55 Tweed plugin is sounding to me so far.
HOWEVER, I love the 55 Tweed sound in the demo video that Josh Smith gets. My plugin never sounds that good. Anyone know what the settings were? I noticed that the better-sounding factory Tweed channel strip presets use a lot of extra plugins after the Tweed inserted first in Unison mode.
 
U

UnitedWestern

Member
chime13 said:
It just goes to show you that all of this is purely subjective. I find your conclusions 180 degrees out of phase with mine. I'm really liking the UAD Chandler sim
Click to expand...
Chandler was my first amp plugin choice also. Second was the Plexi, I could almost smell the tubes and hear the clank of the standby switch...

I have been using "D-Style" (don't know if Howard is still deploying his strike helicopters) amps (Fuchs, Brown Note, Ethos, ZenDrive, etc.) for a few years now so in the absence of a UAD "D-Style" option I inserted a TS808 in front of a Chandler model and got pretty close. I purchased the 55 Tweed plugin for the clean tones (works well with my archtop) but the clean Plexi and Jubilee tones work well. I won't be bringing a Plexi to the jazz lounge gig, however... D-Style plugins would be my next UAD plugin purchase. If Roland can clone them via a Robben Ford Blues Cube firmware chip maybe UAD can cut a deal with any of the other active D-Style guys.
 
caustix

caustix

Venerated Member
matthewrayrgv said:
Compared to the Marshall stuff that softube did for UAD (which is in my opinion the best sim on the market) the fender was a complete dud. It's like someone had a crap guitar sim with a mix knob set to 50%. I can still hear the thin nasally DI sound of the guitar through this plug in. With the marshal sims you wouldn't have guess it was a sim. The break up on the fender is over exaggerated and sounds very 2D (I really hate that generic description but it is fitting in this case). UAD bragged about how much went into this amp but i've honestly have heard better simulations from guitar rig 3. I really hope they don't screw up the deluxe reverb or twin like they did this tweed. I think they should partner up with softube for their next release.
Click to expand...
It's not just you, I think it sucks too.

http://uadforum.com/general-discussion/23387-fender-55-tweed-deluxe-hmmm-well.html#post203828
 
D

djstyleee

Established Member
I ended up buying this despite saying I would never buy a guitar sim because I thought it sounded great. Like people have already said you need to back off the input to achieve a decent tone.
 
tomtama

tomtama

Hall of Fame Member
IMO is does NOT suck , I'm enjoying it very much!!!
 
caustix

caustix

Venerated Member
Kcatthedog said:
Personally, I am really enjoying the tweed: just developing a new song today, new ampeg bass plug too.

agree with the less is more advice.

both guitar and bass di'd; using logic so midi drums for now.

https://soundcloud.com/kcatthedog/new-song-8-20-16-2
Click to expand...
Can you do a wee favour. Stick up the dry guitar. No EQ no processing and settings you used for the tweed please?

An amp should sound pretty much good to go off the bat. I've a few real - keep that hush for a while for a reason, profilers too. Most of the UAD sims. Most sims after processing sound good enough. Good enough that you'd need golden ears to know its a sim. Good enough to use!

The real trick is dry. No nothing. Just amp/cab and listen for the valve/tube "depth" in a way that's how I can describe it. None of the sims have this, not the tweed none. Doesn't mak em unusable just not authentic if played dry alone.

Be nice to know your settings, sounds like you used the bridge pickup for rhythm and neck for picking too. Be handy to know what your playing.

They all lack that tube vibe but in a mix very hard to tell. I love the ampeg svt 3 pro. Demo for a month the new ampeg. Dont dig it. Prefer the pro and a good ampeg Cab IR setup

Cheers dude
 
Last edited:
Kcatthedog

Kcatthedog

Hall of Fame Member
Sure post some screenshot tomorrow! I am playing a strat with a tele rosewood neck with oversized frets a buddy (George Gales) made for me with Texas special pick ups. using a preset and ua 1176 in console stock logic eq and comp and verb in mix.

As a songwriter, I just want an amp Sim to be easy,usable and to have good sound, that let's me convey my song. My last 3 songs have used tweed 55 and it has delivered in spades for me !:)
 
caustix

caustix

Venerated Member
Kcatthedog said:
Morning,

this is just the guitars, no fx in mix, so just tweed 55 in unison, plus ua 1176 as insert as it was recorded.

https://soundcloud.com/kcatthedog/just-gtrs-8-21-16
Click to expand...
Gonna try the settings out and try match. Sounds nice man. Obviously guitar, strings etc make a difference

Check these out. I'm playing from the neck with dark strings, in Open C with a Epiphone Limited Edition ES-175 Premium so the sound may not be exactly what you hear but the new '59 - this is the original doesn't sound too far off!


[video=youtube;Y0r1kVXSX3Q]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0r1kVXSX3Q[/video]


The Vox AC30 (Top Boost) ** listen around 0:40 you'll hear the tone I chose ** has a few different settings, the deeper one I chose. Obviously, again playing the neck. You'll find the tone in the original

[video=youtube;cR2W3a-cskw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cR2W3a-cskw[/video]

They all share one thing in common. A certain "depth" to them that isn't quite in the UAD Fender. If UAD did a Cab IR Loader then maybe you could capture that depth! But sure... what the f* do I know lol!
 
Kcatthedog

Kcatthedog

Hall of Fame Member
I completely get the great guitar/amp "tone" holy grail thing, but I'll settle for a decent sounding mix that engages the listener in my song.

I'll post another clip in a bit: same song, just developed the arrangement (option click regions in logic) and worked the mix a bit (Soundtoys decapitator) a little to taste on all tracks.

https://soundcloud.com/kcatthedog/new-song-3
 
Last edited:
Kcatthedog

Kcatthedog

Hall of Fame Member
Love the bassman clean by the way !!

notice the ampeg bass amp just in front of the guy with the vox video :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
UAD Bundle Month
Top