Synergy Owners Thread

Elric said:
Given how well this module seemed to sell and the fact that a lot of folks forked $100 just for a purple version of it, I'm going to guess your letter came off as random feedback from some lone nut outlier. :D

They might silently rev it with some improvements, like Fryette did the Deliverance though if they get enough constructive criticism here on the net, though; so I guess there is always hope!

FWIW, I don't think it is horrible. The problem is it's not an SLO module, really. It's some other thing. It's definitely not my least favorite module and tweaked for lower gain it gets closer to the SLO.
Click to expand...
I haven't tried a whole lot of them, but the SLO II is definitely my least favorite, and no, it is not an SLO as you stated.
 
Spaced Out Ace said:
I haven't tried a whole lot of them, but the SLO II is definitely my least favorite, and no, it is not an SLO as you stated.
Click to expand...
As compared to the OG Slo
I suspect you probably much preferred that one , that’s seems to be the the general comments that it’s odd this one is not as good because the single eq one is pretty much on everyone’s top list
 
Whizzinby said:
Yeah I was talking about IRX type pedals but of amps/modules they (BAD) already own or make. Like a IR-SLO or IR-Uber pedal.
Click to expand...
Yes, I think we are definitely going to see more of that action. I am under the impression the Friedman stuff was a big hit based on the fact that he whipped out three of them so fast, including the IR-J which had no corresponding model.

The IR-SLO will be a huge hit. Everyone wants an SLO but no one wants to buy one that hasn't already.
 
Elric said:
Yes, I think we are definitely going to see more of that action. I am under the impression the Friedman stuff was a big hit based on the fact that he whipped out three of them so fast, including the IR-J which had no corresponding model.

The IR-SLO will be a huge hit. Everyone wants an SLO but no one wants to buy one that hasn't already.
Click to expand...
I hope it's based on the original module, which people online say is better than the second version.
 
Elric said:
Yes, I think we are definitely going to see more of that action. I am under the impression the Friedman stuff was a big hit based on the fact that he whipped out three of them so fast, including the IR-J which had no corresponding model.

The IR-SLO will be a huge hit. Everyone wants an SLO but no one wants to buy one that hasn't already.
Click to expand...
A Bogner XTC IR with blue /red channels and the modes would be killer
 
Shredder777 said:
How would the digital backend in the rack work? I believe that the friedman pedals have res/pres/lopass and ampsim which are tuned specifically for those preamps. Each module would have to have its own digital backend, which would need to be developed for each module.

Does the rack know which modules are plugged in? If not, they could offer a menu to select from all the amp types. They could be mix and matched with the modules which would be value added over the pedals. Then i would be interested in the synergy modules.

I think the digital back end combined with analog front end is what elevates them. Preamp played directly into ir not as good. There is some magic tuning going on.
Click to expand...
The Syn20 head that's coming out next month should be an idea of how they will be looking at handling the different power amp voicing
They have not said much but it looks like the same as the cathode switch that allows you to set it like a Fender/Freidman or SLO type
they are basically going to apply that same principle to the power amp with 3 settings that are programable per channel
So you could have an SLO with a complimentary power amp response or you could set it to be paired with a Marshall response etc .
The also have a reactance which is said to be a NFB, with all the controls it should be able to deliver a more authentic exp when playing through each module
 
Shredder777 said:
How would the digital backend in the rack work? I believe that the friedman pedals have res/pres/lopass and ampsim which are tuned specifically for those preamps. Each module would have to have its own digital backend, which would need to be developed for each module.

Does the rack know which modules are plugged in? If not, they could offer a menu to select from all the amp types. They could be mix and matched with the modules which would be value added over the pedals. Then i would be interested in the synergy modules.

I think the digital back end combined with analog front end is what elevates them. Preamp played directly into ir not as good. There is some magic tuning going on.
Click to expand...
I think you are overthinking it. Basically any poweramp model of a 50-100W poweramp would be good enough. It's not like rack users in the past had typically multiple poweramps, they used one with multiple preamps.

But if they wanted to go to that level of detail, they wouldn't have to identify the modules but just let you pick from a list of poweramp models, just like you pick IRs.
 
They did the ir section for the X88ir it also has a power amp simulator.
On the X88ir you get xlrs for the digital stuff and the jacks on the main outs are all tube analog.
They have the tech already and you could just reintroduce the Egnator M4 with the ir board from the X88. No market though I suspect because add up the cost of four modules and a more expensive chassis.
 
Eagle said:
They have the tech already and you could just reintroduce the Egnator M4 with the ir board from the X88. No market though I suspect because add up the cost of four modules and a more expensive chassis.
Click to expand...
Afaik the Egnater M4 only supports single channel modules, which is what they were before Synergy. A 4 module thing to me would be just two SYN-2 chassis piled together with shared PCBs, transformer etc.

8 channel amp? Might be fun! The Synergy system doesn't really appeal to me because of the chore of having to swap modules. 4 modules would make that far less frequent, even if it sounds a bit overkill.

Shredder777 said:
I think they would have to do this. And they would have to develop power amp modeleing for every module. I believe that the reason the pedals sound so good and distinct is because of custom tailored power sim. If they don't do this, then every module is going to sound either too similar or too different.

When you plug different preamp into a poweramp, it homogenizes them (which you dont want), but also an amp with pres/res controls allows you to fit a preamp that is naturally bright or dark. The res/pre/lopass filters I believe were carefully chosen so that the IR series shine. If they gave full range sliders then there would be alot of mismatched settings possible.
Click to expand...

The SYN5050 is already just one poweramp meant to be used with all the modules, so it's not like the system is designed to have a "Plexi poweramp" or "Fender poweramp".

Using different cabs with different modules would already give you helluva lot more variation than different poweramps.
 
laxu said:
Afaik the Egnater M4 only supports single channel modules, which is what they were before Synergy. A 4 module thing to me would be just two SYN-2 chassis piled together with shared PCBs, transformer etc.
Click to expand...

I believe later in it's life the M4 did have a revision that supported dual channel modules. There's also a fairly easy mod you can do to the single channel Egnater M4/Randall RM4 that allows you to use dual channel Egnater & Synergy Modules. You just have to swap out the MIDI board. I think Rob @ Jaded Faith in the US and Yuneo in Germany still sell the mod set.

laxu said:
8 channel amp? Might be fun! The Synergy system doesn't really appeal to me because of the chore of having to swap modules. 4 modules would make that far less frequent, even if it sounds a bit overkill.
Click to expand...
Here you go. I have another M4 that does dual channel modules. All together I can have a 20 channel amp and it is rather fun LOL.

1734013753141.png
 
laxu said:
Afaik the Egnater M4 only supports single channel modules, which is what they were before Synergy. A 4 module thing to me would be just two SYN-2 chassis piled together with shared PCBs, transformer etc.

8 channel amp? Might be fun! The Synergy system doesn't really appeal to me because of the chore of having to swap modules. 4 modules would make that far less frequent, even if it sounds a bit overkill.



The SYN5050 is already just one poweramp meant to be used with all the modules, so it's not like the system is designed to have a "Plexi poweramp" or "Fender poweramp".

Using different cabs with different modules would already give you helluva lot more variation than different poweramps.
Click to expand...
No it doesn’t. M4 takes its own two channel modules and all synergy ones two .
IMG_4184.jpeg

They also take Randall modules.
 
paisleywookiee said:
Correct. Randall RM4's only worked with one channel (unless modded, I believe). Egnater was always two channel. You could use an Egnater module in the Randalls, but only one channel worked.
Click to expand...
The earlier Egnater M4's were single channel or possibly the other way around. Either way it's easy to tell them apart.
I have 2 of them. The one in the pic I posted was modded for dual channel & cathode bias.

The single channel ones had the FX loops Effects knob on front & 3 tubes; just like the Randalls
The dual channels did not have FX loop, no Effects knob on front and only 2 tubes.



Single channel:
1734016896644.png

1734016574031.png






Dual Channel:
1734016921454.png

1734016607391.png
 
MadAsAHatter said:
The earlier Egnater M4's were single channel or possibly the other way around. Either way it's easy to tell them apart.
I have 2 of them. The one in the pic I posted was modded for dual channel & cathode bias.

The single channel ones had the FX loops Effects knob on front & 3 tubes; just like the Randalls
The dual channels did not have FX loop, no Effects knob on front and only 2 tubes.



Single channel:
View attachment 34602
View attachment 34600





Dual Channel:
View attachment 34603
View attachment 34601
Click to expand...
O Rly? Interesting.
 
The Syn20 would have been way cooler if instead of two EL84’s, they hired Thomas Blug to design a class D power amp to go with the preamp modules.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
BLIND COMPARO IS THE BESTO!!!!!!!!! EVEN WHEN THEY MAKE NO SENSE!! Helix vs Synergy
2
Replies
29
Views
3K
Boudoir Guitar
B
Back
Top