Eazy-ESP
Well-known member
What clip? Which amp?
glpg80
Well-known member
Sent a PM. I don’t want to hijack the thread.
enduroman
New member
hmm, I think I'll keep my 1992 classic 100 3 channel with no graphic.
T
tvegas99
Member
I am enjoying my GPDI/IR and PS2A, it's a relatively small and very portable rig, I appreciate the rack format of the PU2 and trying to make something smaller for the working musician.
90% of my gigs are IEM, so being able to bring the GPDI/IR has proven waayyyy more fun than modeling (which I've been using for the last 15 years).
Having a PU2 for gigs will just hopefully be another flavor of awesome.
90% of my gigs are IEM, so being able to bring the GPDI/IR has proven waayyyy more fun than modeling (which I've been using for the last 15 years).
Having a PU2 for gigs will just hopefully be another flavor of awesome.
Greazygeo
Well-known member
I had one of those and my later UL. Big difference and the Classic did not stay around long. If you like the Classic, you probaly wont like an UL.
TheGreatGreen
Well-known member
So not just the digital EQ, but all the analog buttons the OG amp had, like Edge, Boost, Mid Shift, Hi Gain, etc are all going to be hidden behind menu diving. Welp.
Say what you want about modeling vs tube tone, but instant access to all your tone shaping controls, in other words WYSIWYG design, is basically the single undeniable advantage that analog gear still has over digital stuff. Everything's right there. To hide that functionality behind an LCD screen and menu diving, I just... what? Why? So Steve could say the front face looks just a little bit "cleaner?"
If I have to go menu diving anyway, why in the world wouldn't I just go digital all the way and get all the advantages of that ecosystem?
Say what you want about modeling vs tube tone, but instant access to all your tone shaping controls, in other words WYSIWYG design, is basically the single undeniable advantage that analog gear still has over digital stuff. Everything's right there. To hide that functionality behind an LCD screen and menu diving, I just... what? Why? So Steve could say the front face looks just a little bit "cleaner?"
If I have to go menu diving anyway, why in the world wouldn't I just go digital all the way and get all the advantages of that ecosystem?
Last edited:
stephen sawall
SEMI ERECT MEMBER
The advantage is the same as digital delay or anything else digital. Presets.
I agree having everything right in front of you where you can always see it has it's own advantages.
Seems to me the UL II is very much going to be part of MIDI rigs.
glpg80
Well-known member
Randall tried that with a poweramp and it’s one of their worst technical blunders ever built. They aren’t known for reliability and no one seems to seek them out due to their short manufacturing time and difficulty to repair. People aren’t willing to trade ease of repair in analog for creature comforts. Analog needs maintenance and digital only makes it more challenging to techs with no digital background. If he’s using proprietary chips with short manufacturing lifespans (I’m assuming he won’t offer this 10 years from now?) then you only have to look as far as lexicon to see how that plays out.
C
Clay K
Active member
I have an ultralead and don’t like it. Had it for years but I don’t sell gear so I still have it. Am I the only one who is disappointed with Fryette, especially the customer service?
DanTravis62
Moderator
You can probably sell it for a pretty penny at the moment, now that everyone knows he isn't putting out another
OldGtrGuy
Well-known member
What year is it? I had the original version and it was pretty weak tbh. My 100CL blew it away no contest BUT the later UL had some changes.
PurityS.L.G
Well-known member
Just jammed on my OG UL and man what an amp. With that said in all honesty, the Synergy model is super close. I'm starting to think this version of it will be more than fine but man inflation is a supreme bitch. 4K....I have to think about this one for acquisition.
ZEN Amps
Well-known member
Yeah seems a little odd, but there are some advantages like storing different tones etc.
Someone earlier was asking about a global master volume. A rep on the Fryette forum said it was omitted because:
"The problem with that was that people didn’t understand that it was a global volume control, not a master volume as typically understood to be something you use to get distortion/overdrive."
Interesting take. Explaining it to customers better, or having a Vol on the clean channel are both better solutions surely?
I don't hate the idea of someone having a work-in-progress or prototype at a show - you can still chat with the company and have a peek at what they're doing.
What I'm a little perplexed about is in one of the videos, Steve mocks his potential customers who do ask to have a play, but then don't react the way he deems appropriate. Weird shit to say out loud.
S̷͖͑m̵͎͂á̵̺s̸͚̈́h̴̬̑
Hack
I meant this more from his point of view. I am sure that he planned on having it up and running. I was just thinking how it must have felt to have to explain how it would work, rather than letting people come by and try it. For me, it would be embarrassing
It is weird. And my dealings with him have been positive. It is possible that the overwhelming negative reaction to the amp coupled with the fact that he doesnt even have the thing working could be a sore spot for him. This may be why he reacts in this way
S̷͖͑m̵͎͂á̵̺s̸͚̈́h̴̬̑
Hack
I feel like the majority of the people that have played and bought his amps are similar in that they appreciate an all analog circuit, if they are not tube snobs..
If he made a solid state amp, i think there would be a lot of people interested.
If he remade the ultra lead with some improvements, i think he gets a lot of interest.
The amount of people into the digital shit is probably huge, but that clientele is unlikely to have been a fan of the ultralead.
Essentially, you stop making an amp. People request it back and you make it half digital. If he made a digital amp and called it something else, he gets target audience and doesn't piss off his faithful.
It just seems there were so many routes to take that don't end up here
If he made a solid state amp, i think there would be a lot of people interested.
If he remade the ultra lead with some improvements, i think he gets a lot of interest.
The amount of people into the digital shit is probably huge, but that clientele is unlikely to have been a fan of the ultralead.
Essentially, you stop making an amp. People request it back and you make it half digital. If he made a digital amp and called it something else, he gets target audience and doesn't piss off his faithful.
It just seems there were so many routes to take that don't end up here
S̷͖͑m̵͎͂á̵̺s̸͚̈́h̴̬̑
Hack
Essentially, i feel that the majority of the negativity about this stem from the name.
Who would even get pissed about him releasing a half digital rack if it didn't use that name?
Who would even get pissed about him releasing a half digital rack if it didn't use that name?
DanTravis62
Moderator
This is what is confusing to me, as well
It just seems like one of those diarrhea dumb business decisions that seemingly all amp makers are contractually obligated to make or else the universe will explode
Eazy-ESP
Well-known member
Coupled by the face that using that name and this product release means we won’t be getting an all analogue Pittbull like many of us have waited for. So now I don’t just have a lack of interest in this product, I feel bitterness towards it.
stephen sawall
SEMI ERECT MEMBER
Typically when a new amps like this comes out they sell about 150 worldwide in a relatively short time. After that they usually sell 300-500. By then with most amps it's over. They are now competing with the used market.
These are the numbers several builders have told me in the last two decades. Many of them don't even hit these numbers.
Last numbers I saw Fender was making about 700 amps daily. Marshall about 200. Most others less than 50. Small companies like Fryette it's going to be a lot less. As Kelly mentioned about 500 UL was made total. The last decade they made about 20 every few years.
Marshall less than 7% of sales is guitar gear. They mostly build bluetooth speakers now.
I'm only seeing about five people on the internet that was interested in actually buying one say they are not buying this version. A few dozen that are buying it immediately.
These are the numbers several builders have told me in the last two decades. Many of them don't even hit these numbers.
Last numbers I saw Fender was making about 700 amps daily. Marshall about 200. Most others less than 50. Small companies like Fryette it's going to be a lot less. As Kelly mentioned about 500 UL was made total. The last decade they made about 20 every few years.
Marshall less than 7% of sales is guitar gear. They mostly build bluetooth speakers now.
I'm only seeing about five people on the internet that was interested in actually buying one say they are not buying this version. A few dozen that are buying it immediately.
Last edited:
T
tvegas99
Member
@stephen sawall that's amazing, those numbers don't really reflect a great business model 
... I know you are a big Fryette fan, curious where you stand on the latest PU2 developments??
... I know you are a big Fryette fan, curious where you stand on the latest PU2 developments??
