BluGuitar Amp X

It's starting to show up for pre-order in some EU stores.

For example Bax Music says "Order now and receive delivery within approx. 14 business days".
 
Last edited:
I see it listed on another site available for order but still outside the EU (Swiss):

www.houseofsound.ch

Bluguitar AMP X

<p >Nach vier Jahrzehnten als Sounddesigner hatte BluGuitar-Mastermind Thomas Blug die Idee, einen voll analogen Nanotube™-Gitarrenverstärker zu entwickeln, der so flexibel ist, dass er den Aufbau und den Sound eines jeden erdenklichen Amps originalgetreu
www.houseofsound.ch www.houseofsound.ch
 
Sascha Franck said:
One of the huge mistakes possibly has been that he kinda announced "analog modeling", as in being able to deliver pretty much any classic amp tone in one single unit without using digital components in the dry signal path. Not only is that like dragging you into a corner you can't escape from anymore, it's also an incredibly tough task, especially in case you have high standards. Oh, that Vox sound isn't just right yet again? Time for another hardware revision whereas in the digital realm it'd just be some lines of code.
Click to expand...
Which is why he has taken this long to get it right. You only get one chance at this when software alone cannot fix issues.

The Amp 1 series is already a testament that the tech works. The Mercury Edition sent my much more expensive Bogner packing, and the Iridium is just as good as my Mesa Mark V - though obviously not voiced exactly the same.

Sascha Franck said:
Add to this that over the years this took, the average quality of digital modelers got a lot better. Even some pretty cheap devices produce very convincing tones by now. The very same devices are packed with features.
Click to expand...
Yet there's still a huge load of debate about what sounds/feels the best and all that crap. We have had "way more than good enough" for many years already in various products.

Sascha Franck said:
And when you look at the higher ended bracket, there's now things such as the HX Stadium. Which, from all I would imagine given the currently available information, would munch the AmpX for breakfast, especially as I also happen to think that the UI on the thing sucks (we've been talking about standard pots vs. endless encoders already).
The only things in favour of the AmpX would be a) that it's analog (but who really cares these days?) and b) that the dry path would have no latency (but again, who cares about 2-4ms of total latency?).
Click to expand...
I think the appeal is that it is a full 100W (as in equivalent to a 100W tube amp) amp in the size of about the Boss GX-100.

People lump it together with modelers but it really is meant to be plugged into a guitar cab first and foremost. Everything about it is likely designed to allow for an easy live experience.

The Amp 1 Mercury and Iridium feel very drastically different to play, and if the Amp X can alter the feel of the amp like that, I think there's a lot to like for the people who care about how a particular amp feels to play. I think some of that can be very hit-and-miss for modelers in the "modeler -> poweramp -> guitar cab" scenario. Running eg. an Axe-Fx 3 through a Fryette PS-100 is great, but it also required work to get it to feel like a particular tube amp through the same cab - none of which was very intuitive.

I don't agree with many of Amp X's design decisions and they could very realistically be its big downfall, but I still want to see the final product before judging.

Sascha Franck said:
So, what's the target audience? Does Blug expect some analog afficionados to get rid of their existing rigs? That very likely isn't going to happen, at least not much. Or does he expect being able to compete with digital modelers? That's even less likely, especially given that the thing certainly won't come for cheap.
We can only hope for the dude that he's sorted financially, because AmpX will very likely never be able to even just recoup all the R&D costs, let alone be profitable.
Click to expand...
There's room for products in their own niches. You could easily ask why people buy e.g a Friedman preamp pedal instead of a complex modeler that does way more.

I think the biggest hurdle for BluGuitar has always been to get people to try their devices. They have none of the familiarity people expect from amps. It looks different, its EQ works in a massively different way (even between the two Amp 1 versions) and the Mercury requires a lot of the same tricks that are used to tame e.g old school Superleads. The Iridium is by comparison much more approachable especially with humbucker guitars.

If the Amp 1 series had been a tolexed wooden box, it would have likely been a lot more popular. But it wouldn't travel in a backpack like the Amp 1 does, not work on a pedalboard etc. It has taken years for pedalboard amps to become even a little bit popular.

I still worry for BluGuitar about how it will turn out. If it had come out years earlier, it'd be fine but now it seems like it could be dated to use right out of the box compared to HX Stadium, QC etc.
 
laxu said:
ou could easily ask why people buy e.g a Friedman preamp pedal instead of a complex modeler that does way more.
Click to expand...

WYSIWYG, hence as easy to use as any analog pedal, at an affordable price.
Both not applicable to the AmpX.

laxu said:
but now it seems like it could be dated to use right out of the box compared to HX Stadium, QC etc.
Click to expand...

I'm almost sure that this will be the case.
And fwiw, the onboard amp isn't even remotely a strong point anymore as it once has been, either. There's plenty of small sized power amp boxes by now.
 
JiveTurkey said:
At the p[rice difference they go for; I'll live with the overcompression :LOL:
Click to expand...

I wouldn't. There's a reason the GT-1000 isn't even allowed to deliver clean sounds on my board.

Apart from that, I think there's plenty of other reasons why the two aren't comparable.
 
JiveTurkey said:
Why would you buy this over a Katana of some sort? I see them as the same thing.
Click to expand...
That's a very valid question since the Katana can also drive a cab.

I'm starting to question my waiting for the X to drop - I do like the Iridium a lot though but with the size increase in the X, that form-factor appeal is out the window.

Still looking forward to a proper demo of the X when it comes out (if it comes out) but man, Thomas' really taking his sweet time - guy must have deep pockets.
 
Sascha Franck said:
I wouldn't. There's a reason the GT-1000 isn't even allowed to deliver clean sounds on my board.

Apart from that, I think there's plenty of other reasons why the two aren't comparable.
Click to expand...
He has a great ear for his own amps but I have zero trust that he's going to deliver a plethora of "accurate" modeled amps and effects in any acceptable timeframe given the schedule he's been working at this whole time. Boss has the advantage of having a pile of effects they've invented/developed over the years at their fingertips. So as much as it "pains" me to say this; Boss is still winning this comparison and I do think it's valid to put the two up against each other.
2dor said:
That's a very valid question since the Katana can also drive a cab.

I'm starting to question my waiting for the X to drop - I do like the Iridium a lot though but with the size increase in the X, that form-factor appeal is out the window.

Still looking forward to a proper demo of the X when it comes out (if it comes out) but man, Thomas' really taking his sweet time - guy must have deep pockets.
Click to expand...
It's going to sound killer. Zero doubt about that. Just not something that has my attention for a plethora of reasons.
 
JiveTurkey said:
He has a great ear for his own amps but I have zero trust that he's going to deliver a plethora of "accurate" modeled amps and effects in any acceptable timeframe given the schedule he's been working at this whole time. Boss has the advantage of having a pile of effects they've invented/developed over the years at their fingertips. So as much as it "pains" me to say this; Boss is still winning this comparison and I do think it's valid to put the two up against each other.
Click to expand...
I don't think they are even in the same category unless you look only at paper specs. The Katanas are nice products in their price range, but the Amp 1 series IMO is truly as good sounding as any tube amp I've ever had.

The two Amp 1 models already do so much on their own. I'd say Vox type tones are something they don't do that well, but for a lot of stuff they can at least be dialed into pretty close ballparks. I can dial e.g the Amp 1 Iridium to sound pretty similar to how I'd dial my Mark V 90 ch3. Does it sound exactly like one? Nah, but it has its own thing going and you get there so much faster than fiddling with the knob and graphic EQ of the Mark.

To me the least interesting thing is the "This is a 5150, this is a AC30 model" part but I understand that can be a selling point for many. I've long lost interest in this even for modelers. I don't care about "This is a 1968 Fender Deluxe Reverb", I want "a really good Fender style clean/edge of breakup tone". Same as I don't care about all the nuances between Fractal's Plexi models, I just want "A really good Plexi tone".

I've got a pedals + both Amp 1 models -> BluGuitar Fatcab & Nanocab rig going at home and it sounds pretty glorious. Do I need an Amp X? Hell no, but I still want to give it a spin. It's entirely a usability thing for me at this point, if I don't like how it operates then it's a no go.

In the same manner I'm budgeting for HX Stadium purely for workflow things. A more likely rig for me might end up being Stadium + 2x Amp 1.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
SonicTone Loyalist amp review
Replies
10
Views
2K
MadAsAHatter
M
59Plexis
EVH 5150 iconic owners.. Beware!
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
Pissedplexi
Pissedplexi
M
Tone X 1.5 Update
2 3 4
Replies
67
Views
9K
MirrorProfiles
MirrorProfiles
Back
Top