Fryette Pittbull Ultralead II

[S̷͖͑m̵͎͂á̵̺s̸͚̈́h̴̬̑]

Some of us just got old and still gig. In the 90’s my rig was 5 4-12’s, 3 Marshall heads, rack and a jazz chorus for cleans. 2000’s 2 heads and 2 412’s. 20teens 1 head and 2 2-12’s…now mostly one head and 1 212. If this UL 2 sounds good I woukd happily swap out the current Wizard head for the much lighter UL. 2 space rack as a headshell. Still probably use a cab, but maybe the ir thing would be cool direct, never tried that.
Most players around here don’t even use amps, just a modeler pedal direct. Sounds like it too.

I have thought of getting a fm3
I think it would be awesome live. But the thing that sucks is playing it at home loud isn't going to sound good unless you buy a lot of shit. Plus I would have to learn how to use it. A tube amp with 6 knobs is much easier and sounds much better. But you should definitely get a floor modeler if you have front of house where you gig. No one will notice/care

 

[midnightlaundry]

 

[Eazy-ESP]

Some of us just got old and still gig. In the 90’s my rig was 5 4-12’s, 3 Marshall heads, rack and a jazz chorus for cleans. 2000’s 2 heads and 2 412’s. 20teens 1 head and 2 2-12’s…now mostly one head and 1 212. If this UL 2 sounds good I woukd happily swap out the current Wizard head for the much lighter UL. 2 space rack as a headshell. Still probably use a cab, but maybe the ir thing would be cool direct, never tried that.
Most players around here don’t even use amps, just a modeler pedal direct. Sounds like it too.

I get you. I’ve probably been one of the most vocal complainers about this thing. But I do see how good it could be for gigging. I’m trying to reform a band now and this could be better than lugging full size heads for most occasions. This into a 2x12.

That said…

This would need to sound much better than a synergy pittbull module into an lxII. Otherwise what is the point? IRs? I would be using a 2x12 100%.

Also…

This may sound cool and very close, but you cannot tell me it will fully equal or compare to a full size Pittbull head. So once again this should be its own product. Even if this remains and is good, a Pittbull OG should be released. Even if it just “stays in my house” like Steve is against. But also for the times I may have a gig where I don’t want easy to carry and “close enough” tone.

But I guess the real thing now is to wait to hear this thing.

 

[7704A]

This may sound cool and very close, but you cannot tell me it will fully equal or compare to a full size Pittbull head.

I'm withholding judgment for now. In I think the PG video, Steve mentions that the output transformer was only changed in respect to format (and I think the ability to mix 'n match tubes), and that he had the manufacturer make sure that their models/simulations for the behavior of the reformatted OT matched the ones for the original OT. He might have mentioned back-to-back live testing between the original amp and the new rack version amp too?

What I'm most curious about is the new switchmode power supply. He mentioned telling an engineer what characteristics he needed and setting the guy loose to make it, I wonder what sorta stuff was done to make it behave like the old linear power supply in terms of loading characteristics. However now that I think about it, Steve regulates the power rails in most of his amps (I think), so maybe there wasn't much to do since most of the amp is already designed around a rock-solid input voltage and not the dynamic behavior of a loaded power transformer. Spitballing here, I haven't studied SMPS' closely or done an in-depth analysis of the original UL.

 

[Eazy-ESP]

I'm withholding judgment for now. In I think the PG video, Steve mentions that the output transformer was only changed in respect to format (and I think the ability to mix 'n match tubes), and that he had the manufacturer make sure that their models/simulations for the behavior of the reformatted OT matched the ones for the original OT. He might have mentioned back-to-back live testing between the original amp and the new rack version amp too?

What I'm most curious about is the new switchmode power supply. He mentioned telling an engineer what characteristics he needed and setting the guy loose to make it, I wonder what sorta stuff was done to make it behave like the old linear power supply in terms of loading characteristics. However now that I think about it, Steve regulates the power rails in most of his amps (I think), so maybe there wasn't much to do since most of the amp is already designed around a rock-solid input voltage and not the dynamic behavior of a loaded power transformer. Spitballing here, I haven't studied SMPS' closely or done an in-depth analysis of the original UL.

Yep and in the end the truth is in the pudding. Will have to wait and see.

 

[Greazygeo]

I have thought of getting a fm3
I think it would be awesome live. But the thing that sucks is playing it at home loud isn't going to sound good unless you buy a lot of shit. Plus I would have to learn how to use it. A tube amp with 6 knobs is much easier and sounds much better. But you should definitely get a floor modeler if you have front of house where you gig. No one will notice/care

I have a Tonex deal I was setting up to try. It isn’t bad, modeled my amp and used another for clean along with a few pedals. Never tried it at a gig. The Fractal stuff probably is awesome, but for me it would end up with just too many options. Im with you, a few knobs and an amp. Always been an amp guy and will keep lugging my Wizard and cab around till I can find something that still has the sound but lighter. Hopefully the UL is the ticket. Loved my old one.

We get alot of the local musicians coming to gigs. Guess they like loud as hell rock.

 

[Greazygeo]

I get you. I’ve probably been one of the most vocal complainers about this thing. But I do see how good it could be for gigging. I’m trying to reform a band now and this could be better than lugging full size heads for most occasions. This into a 2x12.

That said…

This would need to sound much better than a synergy pittbull module into an lxII. Otherwise what is the point? IRs? I would be using a 2x12 100%.

Also…

This may sound cool and very close, but you cannot tell me it will fully equal or compare to a full size Pittbull head. So once again this should be its own product. Even if this remains and is good, a Pittbull OG should be released. Even if it just “stays in my house” like Steve is against. But also for the times I may have a gig where I don’t want easy to carry and “close enough” tone.

But I guess the real thing now is to wait to hear this thing.

Time will tell, has to sound good or the rest won’t matter. Hope you can find an OG sometime, really liked mine.

 

[Simon Dorn]

Yep. When I first saw it I was hoping for digitally-confrolled analog, but not the case.

The graphic for example is conceptually the same as sticking a digital EQ pedal in the loop. Probably sounds fine, but it does mean we’re not in Kansas anymore.

Kansas?
So at least 1 AD/DA conversion.

 

[DanTravis62]

Kansas?
So at least 1 AD/DA conversion.

With the expense and difficulty in implementation of high quality ad/da, I think it's very likely that this is the choke point where it will either sound great, or not - unfortunately, the long term viability in terms of repair and use is gonna be killed by it either way.

Could still sound great though

 

[Shask]

I have a Tonex deal I was setting up to try. It isn’t bad, modeled my amp and used another for clean along with a few pedals. Never tried it at a gig. The Fractal stuff probably is awesome, but for me it would end up with just too many options. Im with you, a few knobs and an amp. Always been an amp guy and will keep lugging my Wizard and cab around till I can find something that still has the sound but lighter. Hopefully the UL is the ticket. Loved my old one.

We get alot of the local musicians coming to gigs. Guess they like loud as hell rock.

Personally, I have been liking ToneX better than Fractal lately. With some good captures I think it responds just like playing the amp in the room. I think Fractal has a smoother recorded tone. I relevance to this thread, I was capturing my Synergy Ultra Lead module last week.

 

[Simon Dorn]

With the expense and difficulty in implementation of high quality ad/da, I think it's very likely that this is the choke point where it will either sound great, or not - unfortunately, the long term viability in terms of repair and use is gonna be killed by it either way.

Could still sound great though

Absolutely.

 

[Greazygeo]

Personally, I have been liking ToneX better than Fractal lately. With some good captures I think it responds just like playing the amp in the room. I think Fractal has a smoother recorded tone. I relevance to this thread, I was capturing my Synergy Ultra Lead module last week.

Yeah I have been pretty surprised at the Tonex. Whether it sounds good with the band at a gig, just not sure. We have amps and acoustic drums and play loud. Most times I hear bands with a mix of modelers and amps drums, the modelers just kind of disappear.

 

[Shask]

Yeah I have been pretty surprised at the Tonex. Whether it sounds good with the band at a gig, just not sure. We have amps and acoustic drums and play loud. Most times I hear bands with a mix of modelers and amps drums, the modelers just kind of disappear.

ToneX has seriously wrecked me, lol. I always hated playing into a computer until this thing. The Captures and mixing my own IRs have drastically changed that to the point where I wonder if a hardware modeler is even necessary unless you are playing out, traveling with it. NAM is great also, but more fidgety to mess with. I find them way better than traditional amp modeling.

I would recommend making some captures of your amp at the volumes you play at with your cab plugged in. I get very different results when I use a reactive loadbox vs when I just use it as a DI with the cab attached. I don't play out, but I would think that would give you the tone that is closer to what you expect at those volumes.

 

[Greazygeo]

ToneX has seriously wrecked me, lol. I always hated playing into a computer until this thing. The Captures and mixing my own IRs have drastically changed that to the point where I wonder if a hardware modeler is even necessary unless you are playing out, traveling with it. NAM is great also, but more fidgety to mess with. I find them way better than traditional amp modeling.

I would recommend making some captures of your amp at the volumes you play at with your cab plugged in. I get very different results when I use a reactive loadbox vs when I just use it as a DI with the cab attached. I don't play out, but I would think that would give you the tone that is closer to what you expect at those volumes.

I find the same thing with using the PS-2, the DI and IRs are different sounding with and without a cab hooked up.
I have done captures the way you suggested, even micing the cab. Sound good. I practice alot thru the software version on my computer.
Only tried my Tonex at practice once. Cab sim off thru a small Fender Princeton Reverb. It was pretty good.

 

[Shask]

I find the same thing with using the PS-2, the DI and IRs are different sounding with and without a cab hooked up.
I have done captures the way you suggested, even micing the cab. Sound good. I practice alot thru the software version on my computer.
Only tried my Tonex at practice once. Cab sim off thru a small Fender Princeton Reverb. It was pretty good.

I mean take a DI capture with only the loadbox hooked up, and then taking another DI capture plugging in the cab and only using the loadbox as a DI (no micing). The captures will come out quite different, depending on the impedance curve of the cab and loadbox. When I did this, my loadbox captures come out more scooped and hi-fi, where the cab captures have more mids, and just kind of more fuzzy all around.

I have tried this because sometimes I like to play DI into the computer with IRs, and other times I like to download the capture to my ToneX One pedal to play through a SS poweramp and cabs in my room when I dont feel like turning on the tubes. I find different captures, or way different EQ settings are required. However, when I get all this right, playing my ToneX One pedal into a solid state rack poweramp into a pair of 412 cabs is VERY hard to tell the difference from playing the tube head through the same cabs.

 

[Eazy-ESP]

With the expense and difficulty in implementation of high quality ad/da, I think it's very likely that this is the choke point where it will either sound great, or not - unfortunately, the long term viability in terms of repair and use is gonna be killed by it either way.

Could still sound great though

The people who want one will convince themselves the digital EQ sounds just as good. Then several years from now be “back to a normal amp”. That’s the problem with digital I’ve found.

Now that I’m looking at it more, I can understand what he has done, but now I think he should have just gone all the way. If he is already putting digital in it, should have added a full sweet of effects. Then it would have real don’t what he wanted. 2RU amp with digital delay, reverb, EQ and IR post amp.

 

[DanTravis62]

The people who want one will convince themselves the digital EQ sounds just as good. Then several years from now be “back to a normal amp”. That’s the problem with digital I’ve found.

Now that I’m looking at it more, I can understand what he has done, but now I think he should have just gone all the way. If he is already putting digital in it, should have added a full sweet of effects. Then it would have real don’t what he wanted. 2RU amp with digital delay, reverb, EQ and IR post amp.

You are really close to what I said a few pages ago - there's already modelers that already do an amazing job of all this.

Why not just do a 2RU Pittbull preamp WITHOUT all that shit but with I/O that you can integrate (with already established, much more popular and higher selling products) at a much, much lower price point? You already do pcb (famously)

So give people what they don't already have - that killer gain sound the pittbull is famous for.

 

[Eazy-ESP]

You are really close to what I said a few pages ago - there's already modelers that already do an amazing job of all this.

Why not just do a 2RU Pittbull preamp WITHOUT all that shit but with I/O that you can integrate (with already established, much more popular and higher selling products) at a much, much lower price point? You already do pcb (famously)

So give people what they don't already have - that killer gain sound the pittbull is famous for.

How good are you with a soldering iron? We have a company to start.

 

[Kelly]

You are really close to what I said a few pages ago - there's already modelers that already do an amazing job of all this.

Why not just do a 2RU Pittbull preamp WITHOUT all that shit but with I/O that you can integrate (with already established, much more popular and higher selling products) at a much, much lower price point? You already do pcb (famously)

So give people what they don't already have - that killer gain sound the pittbull is famous for.

I believe the Suhr Pete Thorn amp was the first tube amp with built in IRs, but they also sell a version without the IRs.

 

[Kelly]

I thought him and his partner split . Partner kept the VHT name , Steve kept the builds

As SgtThump mentioned earlier, Steve took a loan from AXL and put up the name for collateral. AXL ended up with the name. A lot of companies went under during the 2009 crash, including the one I was working for. If it wasn't for the success of the Power Station I don't know if Fryette would still be around.