UA Lion '68

[laxu]

Long ass interview here: https://www.musicradar.com/news/how...lling-amp-pedal-concept-and-won-the-edge-over

Reading this...I just have to say Tore Magnusen is just so full of shit.

"I always felt that it was kind of weird that if I go to a Tweed Deluxe emulation product from somebody, for example, and it has like a bass, middle and treble controls. I know Tweed Deluxes and that's not on my Tweed Deluxe. It might be nice to have a Tweed Deluxe that did that, but that's not where I came from.

"I like to know that whatever I do and however I turn the knob I can sort of expect the same thing that I would get from the real product. And that's one of the real benefits of having one pedal do one thing – you can emulate the product down to a tee and not add or miss stuff that would have been in the original product or the original amp."

A digital pedal doesn't become more complicated if you add a limited set of extra options. People using a Strymon Iridium with 3 amp models aren't going to have any worse time than people using a UA pedal with only one.

People who want a mid knob on a Deluxe Reverb or Tweed amp can just leave it at a particular setting to keep it "authentic" and everything else is additional functionality to fine tune it to your liking. There no justification for e.g UA Ruby's treble and bass controls functioning in exactly one of its three channels. That's stupid on a digital pedal that is not limited by a real amp circuit.

"So there's a certain point when you have a product without a screen on it. There would be no problem for us to basically have a row of LEDs and you get seven segments and say, you get 100 presets. But there's no way to tell what setting you're on. And I find that at some point, it just gets too confusing.

Whereas if you have two sounds that you can switch between and you know what they are that's, at least to me, that's very reassuring. I'm not stepping through preset number nine and then have no idea whether it's one thing or another."

Except it makes no difference if there's 1 preset to switch to vs 128 presets. You won't know what the settings are on preset 1 any more than you will know what they are on preset 9. If remembering presets is an issue - maybe you have too many of them?

While I agree visibility to presets is a legitimate issue on many pedals with presets but no displays/LEDs, it's still better than the alternative of no presets or a single one. Especially on multiple fx type pedals like the UA Astra modulation.

People who don't use MIDI have the same experience as if it doesn't exist. People who want to use MIDI to get extra functionality, or simply switching convenience, can then use those more advanced features as they please. I don't use all the capabilities of my MIDI controllable pedals, but I appreciate they are there if my needs change in the future.

Regarding the lack of headphone out:

"The other part is also just the fact that the platform is not really born with that and it would be really, really hard for us to fit it in there without making it quite a bit bigger. And also quite a bit more expensive. Which at the end of the day would get back to the to the customers in terms of how much the product would cost."

Yet many more compact digital modelers manage to do that just fine without making them significantly more expensive. UA just doesn't want to redesign anything.

James Santiago is way more honest about it:

"So I do feel that when someone's like, 'Oh, man, I have to use this other thing in my hotel room'. It's like, 'Dude, I'm bummed for you too. But here's 25 bucks. Let's go to Amazon and order you a little headphone amp'. And that's a terrible thing to say out loud. I'm sorry."

I'm ok hearing that. "We just decided not to include one" is an ok reason, and even something like the Strymon Iridium does sound better connected to a proper audio interface compared to using its headphone jack.

Tore talks about "keeping it simple" many times in the article, but what is simple about:

• Requiring account registration, internet connection and a mobile app to adjust secondary features on a pedal, with no fallback methods.
• Requiring both a computer app to update firmware and a mobile app to adjust settings.
• Requiring a mobile app to switch between multiple presets.
• Secret settings on those mobile app only presets that the end user cannot access.

This interview pretty much solidifies why I am not looking to buy any of their pedals, not with Tore at the helm. It doesn't seem like anything will change and UA will keep churning out more pedals with the exact same limitations.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

Tbh, I actually agree with what Tore is saying in a lot of ways.

If you consider comparing an Axe FX to (say) a Neural DSP plugin - you can obviously choose to ignore the extra options, but there is still something to be said for it just reflecting what the real gear is like to use in the most 1:1 way. You don't have to remember to set a particular control at 5, or adjust any deeper settings. How we interact with the gear, and how it looks, how the knobs feel, the tapers etc all influence into that. I don't think its so much about complexity as it is authenticity and familiarity. It doesn't become more complex, but it does become something else.

Except it makes no difference if there's 1 preset to switch to vs 128 presets. You won't know what the settings are on preset 1 any more than you will know what they are on preset 9. If remembering presets is an issue - maybe you have too many of them?

If you know there are 2 sounds, and what you hear isn't the right one, then you don't have to jump through tons of sounds. Again, I think its like when using a real amp - you might toggle through 2 or 3 channels, not 128. I think its just trying to make it more like the simplicity of using a real amp.

I tended to agree with you on the MIDI thing, but having read that article, I think they're actually just coming at it from another angle. The pedal is designed to not need MIDI - if MIDI was required, then I think they would have simplified that part of the pedal. Its simply not trying to be something as complex as that, and its the opposite direction of what they are trying to achieve.

The headphone omission I think is valid, that seems to be something most users of this type of pedal want and they should have just found a way. They missed the mark on what people want.

Tore talks about "keeping it simple" many times in the article, but what is simple about:

• Requiring account registration, internet connection and a mobile app to adjust secondary features on a pedal, with no fallback methods.
• Requiring both a computer app to update firmware and a mobile app to adjust settings.
• Requiring a mobile app to switch between multiple presets.
• Secret settings on those mobile app only presets that the end user cannot access.

Agree with this stuff, although I think they know they completely messed up the wireless control part of it. Its just plain bad.

I think overall though, the pedal isn't trying to be an Iridium, the "omissions" aren't things they've missed, they've tried to design the pedal to not need those features. If you want the pedal to be an Iridium, you'll be disappointed. But I don't think they'll feel like they got that stuff wrong, its something they clearly designed as a fundamental aspect of the pedal to NOT be like that.


I can't say I find any of these kinds of products appealing, but I do find it interesting to hear their approach towards them. I also hope they port the tech to some proper plugin versions (which I think UA generally have a much better track record with).

 

[laxu]

If you know there are 2 sounds, and what you hear isn't the right one, then you don't have to jump through tons of sounds. Again, I think its like when using a real amp - you might toggle through 2 or 3 channels, not 128. I think its just trying to make it more like the simplicity of using a real amp.

I tended to agree with you on the MIDI thing, but having read that article, I think they're actually just coming at it from another angle. The pedal is designed to not need MIDI - if MIDI was required, then I think they would have simplified that part of the pedal. Its simply not trying to be something as complex as that, and its the opposite direction of what they are trying to achieve.

But the UAFX lineup is also effects, where particularly with the delay and modulation models from the first 3 pedals UA put out, could benefit from MIDI big time. The amp pedals and the Golden Reverberator don't need it that much, the biggest benefit would be switching convenience or expression pedal control.

For example you could turn on your lead sound (turn on amp setting dialed for lead playing, turn off the reverb, turn on delay) by pressing one button on a MIDI controller. I can do that with my Strymon, SA and BluGuitar gear no problem. I cannot do that with UA without buying a loop switcher as if they were analog pedals.

To me UA made a platform, and immediately painted themselves into a corner. It looks as if they made the Golden Reverberator, and then did not account for needing a more versatile feature set for the Starlight and Astra. Then instead of making it better via software updates or "V2" pedals, they keep shooting themselves in the same foot over and over by spamming the market full of UAFX pedals. 18 pedals in 3 years is a lot.

 

[Boudoir Guitar]

If only there were delay, reverb, modulation, and/or amp modeling pedals with MIDI, loads of presets, and extra parameters...

 

[laxu]

If only there were delay, reverb, modulation, and/or amp modeling pedals with MIDI, loads of presets, and extra parameters...

Thankfully there are, so I just avoid buying UA.

But UA pedals do sound good, so I'd just really like them to do better. It would be great to be able to pick between say Strymon, Meris, Source Audio and UA pedals for whatever fx type you want, and still get largely the same utility feature set of presets, MIDI control etc.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

But the UAFX lineup is also effects, where particularly with the delay and modulation models from the first 3 pedals UA put out, could benefit from MIDI big time. The amp pedals and the Golden Reverberator don't need it that much, the biggest benefit would be switching convenience or expression pedal control.

For example you could turn on your lead sound (turn on amp setting dialed for lead playing, turn off the reverb, turn on delay) by pressing one button on a MIDI controller. I can do that with my Strymon, SA and BluGuitar gear no problem. I cannot do that with UA without buying a loop switcher as if they were analog pedals.

To me UA made a platform, and immediately painted themselves into a corner. It looks as if they made the Golden Reverberator, and then did not account for needing a more versatile feature set for the Starlight and Astra. Then instead of making it better via software updates or "V2" pedals, they keep shooting themselves in the same foot over and over by spamming the market full of UAFX pedals. 18 pedals in 3 years is a lot.

Yeah its frustrating, but I think its just not what they're trying to design. Tbh their DSP is amazing, but making hardware like this is very new for them and I wouldn't really trust them to get anything right on the early iterations. I find aspects of where the company is heading frustrating but its mostly because they are targeting to a different type of customer to what I am to them. I've just had to learn to accept that if their product doesn't meet my needs, its because its not intended for me.

 

[Boudoir Guitar]

Thankfully there are, so I just avoid buying UA.

But UA pedals do sound good, so I'd just really like them to do better what I want them to do.

Edited for your review.

 

[laxu]

Yeah its frustrating, but I think its just not what they're trying to design. Tbh their DSP is amazing, but making hardware like this is very new for them and I wouldn't really trust them to get anything right on the early iterations. I find aspects of where the company is heading frustrating but its mostly because they are targeting to a different type of customer to what I am to them. I've just had to learn to accept that if their product doesn't meet my needs, its because its not intended for me.

They've had 3 years to get it right though. I can understand the first 3 pedals, but not all the ones that followed.

Not everything is for everyone, but it's annoying to see a product line that could be so much more with fairly simple improvements, many of which are requested by people who do own the pedals.

 

[jellodog]

They've had 3 years to get it right though. I can understand the first 3 pedals, but not all the ones that followed.

That's right. They also had plently of feedback from many many people mostly saying the same things as us in the early days.

Then they doubled down on the flawed one-size-fits-all design and continued to pump out many more. So I've little sympathy for their "Design choices" here!

 

[Enchilada Jones]

I understand and for the most part agree with all the reasons people cite as failure in the design That so much potential is wasted.
Yet inside of the last month I sold my FM9, Helix floor, Kemper Stage, Boss Gm800 and GT1000 core and currently have listed numerous other modeling devices/ pedals including the Ruby, Woodrow and UA Stomp

I’m keeping the Lion and probably the Dream because they sound as good as the best modelers out there and with them I just plug in and play as if they are amps instead of constantly surf tweak and explore all the superior capabilities in the stuff I sold .

I don’t need presets, and don’t miss at all, the routine of managing, switching and organizing them entails. I hear my sound, if I want a change I reach out and twist a knob with one hand while I’m holding a note or chord with the other. I haven’t been this free in a long time.

I’ve recouped over $5000 and still get all the ‘go to’ amp sounds I was always landing on before I sold it all off.

And now I can afford to explore the synthesizer rabbit holes, same disease different scenery…lol
Gas for Polybrute 12 is building

 

[Jarick]

I'll be honest I'd love to try the Lion. I think it would be a really cool single channel amp with either a bunch of pedal effects or something like an HX Effects. I'm always going to be drawn to all in one devices though.

@Enchilada Jones - do you have a pedalboard now? Would be curious to see what you are running.

 

[Enchilada Jones]

I'll be honest I'd love to try the Lion. I think it would be a really cool single channel amp with either a bunch of pedal effects or something like an HX Effects. I'm always going to be drawn to all in one devices though.

@Enchilada Jones - do you have a pedalboard now? Would be curious to see what you are running.

My pedal board is ever evolving but usually only three or four pedals.
Most of the time I just put the Lion into a Strymon Volante, I’m a fan of tape echo and plate and although Spring reverb isn’t my ideal verb choice the spring in the Volante is really ‘just right’ for guitar to give some sense of space/room for my tastes. I don’t usually use anything in front of the Lion other than a Trombetta Bone Machine sometimes. I just set up the Lion for one channel of light crunch (and roll off guitar for clean) and the other channel for harder rock/ lead tones.

 

[Jarick]

I actually really enjoyed that interview on the UAD amp pedals and their perspective. They seemed to put a lot of time and money into designing those pedals for a very specific purpose, and they have a crazy amount of experience. I think it's great to have the really simple products that do one job really well with no menus, just like it's great to have a computer modeler that can do just about everything if you have the time and knowledge.

 

[metropolis_4]

I really loved the tones out of the Lion when I had one. It’s got that side of things nailed.

My only complaints about it were:

• I hated the presence knob being an “alt” control. It was really annoying dialing in the rest of the EQ and then having to flip to ALT to dial presence, and then you can’t see where you set Mids anymore. So you have to choose to either not know what you set Mids at or not know what you set Presence at because you can only see one!
• Not being able to see settings of the second channel

Basically anything where I can’t see my settings drives me insane

 

[CakeEater]

I really loved the tones out of the Lion when I had one. It’s got that side of things nailed.

My only complaints about it were:

• I hated the presence knob being an “alt” control. It was really annoying dialing in the rest of the EQ and then having to flip to ALT to dial presence, and then you can’t see where you set Mids anymore. So you have to choose to either not know what you set Mids at or not know what you set Presence at because you can only see one!
• Not being able to see settings of the second channel

Basically anything where I can’t see my settings drives me insane

Yep, I see these types of products and if it doesn't have a visible value or a wheel of LEDs like Kemper has, I lose interest. It's the not knowing or not being sure that makes me uncomfortable. Especially if there's two voices and one set of settings is completely invisible.

 

[laxu]

Yep, I see these types of products and if it doesn't have a visible value or a wheel of LEDs like Kemper has, I lose interest. It's the not knowing or not being sure that makes me uncomfortable. Especially if there's two voices and one set of settings is completely invisible.

That's most pedals with presets though. It's not ideal, but at least those usually have an indicator LED to show the stored preset value when you turn the knob to the matching setting.

I find this is much less of an issue with pedals where you just adjust separate presets as you aren't likely to be jumping between presets to adjust A and B. Even on my SA Collider adjusting delay vs reverb side is less of an issue than I thought it would be, as in my mind it is more like adjusting two different effects or presets. If I wanted to make a dual reverb or dual delay patch, forget about it...straight to editor for that!

UA could have solved this by doing what Strymon does: make a dedicated control board for each pedal. My Strymons have 4, 5 and 6 knob variants of the control board sandwiched with the DSP and I/O board. Afaik UA uses the exact same style structure with theirs, so they seem to have thought about doing this as well but don't seem to have any difference other than some pedals don't have the center switch.

The Alt/Amp/Store switch is kinda pointless (could be e.g footswitch hold functions) so swapping that for a presence knob would have gone a long way.

 

[CakeEater]

That's most pedals with presets though. It's not ideal, but at least those usually have an indicator LED to show the stored preset value when you turn the knob to the matching setting.

It is, but that’s probably why I’m more at home in all-in-ones like the Helix.

That's most pedals with presets though. It's not ideal, but at least those usually have an indicator LED to show the stored preset value when you turn the knob to the matching setting.

UA could have solved this by doing what Strymon does: make a dedicated control board for each pedal. My Strymons have 4, 5 and 6 knob variants of the control board sandwiched with the DSP and I/O board. Afaik UA uses the exact same style structure with theirs, so they seem to have thought about doing this as well but don't seem to have any difference other than some pedals don't have the center switch.

The Alt/Amp/Store switch is kinda pointless (could be e.g footswitch hold functions) so swapping that for a presence knob would have gone a long way.

Personally, I've always considered good form as important as good function, and I understand their want for consistency. In this case though, it's hard to know what's right. A standardised optional third row of knobs perhaps might have been beneficial, or maybe as a compromise one of those dual knobs you see on some Boss pedals. Either way, having one front panel knob differentiated from the rest just feels wrong to me. I’m sure it’s a non issue for most people, but I have interest in these kind of things!