PS-100 or IR-D?

[mk5]

First world problems here. Anyone have experience with both? Insight welcome.

I was pretty set on picking up an IR-D Strictly for home use/recording and possible small church gigs.

On the other hand, I have a 1969 Marshall literally just sitting in my room. It is not getting played for obvious reasons of the dB kind and I would love to give it more use. Maybe a PS100 would be better? I know it’s twice the price.

Is the PS100 worth it in this scenario?

 

[GuitarBilly74]

I have both. They're very different products.
If you want to use your marshall, then the PS is one of the best option out there.

But the IR-D sounds great and its much more portable and easier to use.

If your playing church gigs, the IR-D is much more manageable in that type of situation. Easier to transport, setup etc

BTW, they also work great together. The IR-D preamp into the PS power amp is a killer rig.
So the only answer is get both

 

[Alex Kenivel]

Billy beat me to the punch by seconds! I'll echo the same sentiments:

Two very different products that are meant for two different things.

The IR-D is a preamp/direct solution whereas the PS is a reactive load/attenuator.

The answer is both.

 

[laxu]

If you can use the Marshall in church with an attenuator, then I'd go that route. If you are willing to haul it + extra 10 kg or so for the PS-100.

 

[OrganicZed]

The PS-100 is a very nice product and is kind of a swiss army knife with a lot of potential uses. I think you'd be very happy to own it. If you were strictly asking about home / recording use it would be the no brainer answer. It would turn your Marshall head into a totally viable home use amplifier, adds the ability to place effects like delay post power amp distortion, and would also allow for direct recording with an IR loading plugin.

Given that you are talking about playing out, that makes the decision more difficult. Assuming that you would need to go direct for playing at church (which is the norm these days), the IR-D would be way more attractive for playing out on a regular basis. It is small and specifically designed for direct to FOH use. If you wanted to use the Marshall head with the PS to go direct you will need to bring the head, PS, and an IR loader. That's a lot of stuff to setup and tear down.

 

[mk5]

You guys are not helping

Kidding. This makes total sense.

Maybe I should just get the PS-100 and a Tonex one and just model the Plexi. That’s another route…

 

[Jarick]

What does the rest of your rig look like?

Do you want to run direct or do you still need amplification?

 

[GuitarBilly74]

I played some shows with my '77 JMP and the Power Station.
It sounded great. You get great volume control, (which is non-existent with a non-master volume Marshall), plus you can run delays etc through the PS loop. It's an amazing rig.

BUT, as someone else pointed out, it's a lot of moving parts. You're basically gigging with 2 tube heads, with all that comes with it. Extra cables, tubes, power outlets etc

It's great but I usually play shows with 3-4 other bands on the same bill and minimal setup time and it's just not very practical for these situations. But if I was touring with a crew etc that would be my rig of choice without a doubt.

I've been gigging with the IR-D direct lately and it's way easier and it sounds great through the PA.

 

[mk5]

Every response is such a great response. Thanks.

@Jarick My rig is simple. I’m a plug and play guy and have whittled down a few smaller amps and the 69 Plexi. Some delay and reverb. Very spartan on effects.

I have a DAW with Neural plugins, but I don’t like the latency lag and I am too impatient right now to figure out that issue/solution.

Considered the AxeFx route but I hate tweaking. I am set it/forget it and learned that with my old Mark amps. So simple is preferred which is why the IR-D looks so dang attractive and it would probably get me 90% there on the Plexi tones.
Both really does seem to be the way to go.

PS-100 looks awesome, but yeah the ongoing amp maintenance is an excellent point.

 

[Jarick]

@mk5 Are you planning to go direct only or do you need the amp?

In my opinion I would only go the PS-100 route (or Ox Box or whatever) if you LOVE the Plexi and feel like it's key to what you need, or if you're cool with dragging around the amp and a cab and just need to tame the volume and get a direct out.

Personally I'd go with the IR-D first and add a couple pedals if that's how you like to roll. The IR-D should cover Plexi clean to drive, maybe not the exact same tone or response but in the ballpark. It's really an amp in a pedal experience and not like a modeler with menus and things. It also has an effects loop which could be useful.

 

[paisleywookiee]

I have both. They're very different products.
If you want to use your marshall, then the PS is one of the best option out there.

But the IR-D sounds great and its much more portable and easier to use.

If your playing church gigs, the IR-D is much more manageable in that type of situation. Easier to transport, setup etc

BTW, they also work great together. The IR-D preamp into the PS power amp is a killer rig.
So the only answer is get both

The answer is always “Get both”.

 

[Whizzinby]

I wouldn’t want to gig with a PS, but I consider the PS an essential piece of utility kit for hybrid home rigs.

 

[JasonE]

I also have both the PS-100 and IR-D. As mentioned these are two very different units designed for very different uses. If you are a modeler guy, the PS-100 is also nice for running your modeler into a guitar cabinet. This is why I bought the one I have. I can use it with my real amps and I can use it to run my modelers into a cabinet. The IR-D sounds fantastic running straight to the PA. It is nice to have multiple IRs on tap with it as well. It is one of my favorite pieces of gear because I can use it for live use, in home use and recording.

@mk5 after reading though this thread, it sounds like the IR-D is probably where you want to go.

 

[mk5]

Thanks and I agree! Unfortunately, I am hard-headed. I wound up deciding on an OG Suhr RL and a Tonex One for profiling the Marshall. The Friedman IR-D sounds awesome, but at the end of the day, I want to use my own amp and sounds from it.

I’ll get some of @BigHairyGuitars IRs for my DAW. This whole thing really mostly his fault anyway. Dude makes everything sound good.

I use maybe some delay and reverb, so the idea that I can bring a just a tiny pedal while everyone else brings a big pedal board is right up my alley. If that doesn’t pan out, I may try the Nano Cortex.

 

[GuitarBilly74]

Thanks and I agree! Unfortunately, I am hard-headed. I wound up deciding on an OG Suhr RL and a Tonex One for profiling the Marshall. The Friedman IR-D sounds awesome, but at the end of the day, I want to use my own amp and sounds from it.

If you get the Suhr Reactive Load with IRs you don't even have to profile anything. Just take the head and the load and send it to the PA. That's not too big a rig. Bigger than a Tonex One for sure but not unmanageable.