Fryette Pittbull Ultralead II

  • Thread starter Thread starter stephen sawall
  • Start date Start date
He will sell no wine before it's time..

MV5BYzBiMjc2NzQtODg5Ni00OTRlLWIzNGMtNTIzOTMzYjc1ZmJmXkEyXkFqcGc@._V1_.jpg
 
The digital is going to be outdated before it is available.

Possibly, yeah

And by the time they need serviced? Not only is it going to be outdated, it's going to be impossible to fix or service

This is exactly the problem everyone was talking about with this amp when this thread was started. I don't think anyone has any doubts that it will sound good (although, who fucking knows when anyone will hear it?) but this is a simple math problem

Digital gear, and especially modeling, is getting cheaper and cheaper, and is selling like hotcakes because at those prices it doesn't matter if it's disposable.

Analog gear, especially tube amps which can be repaired and enjoyed for a lifetime, are expensive because they can be serviced and maintained forever.

When you tie digital to the tube amp like this, you are taking a huge risk. There's a reason why few people took the plunge with the VHX, even though it's by a reputable amp company with an excellent track record.

Fryette has a MUCH spottier customer service record than Peter Diezel, so I have no idea why he thought this was gonna be a smash success.
 
Possibly, yeah

And by the time they need serviced? Not only is it going to be outdated, it's going to be impossible to fix or service

This is exactly the problem everyone was talking about with this amp when this thread was started. I don't think anyone has any doubts that it will sound good (although, who fucking knows when anyone will hear it?) but this is a simple math problem

Digital gear, and especially modeling, is getting cheaper and cheaper, and is selling like hotcakes because at those prices it doesn't matter if it's disposable.

Analog gear, especially tube amps which can be repaired and enjoyed for a lifetime, are expensive because they can be serviced and maintained forever.

When you tie digital to the tube amp like this, you are taking a huge risk. There's a reason why few people took the plunge with the VHX, even though it's by a reputable amp company with an excellent track record.

Fryette has a MUCH spottier customer service record than Peter Diezel, so I have no idea why he thought this was gonna be a smash success.
Add in the fact the Steven is in his seventies and could retire any day.
 
Add in the fact the Steven is in his seventies and could retire any day.
This is a fair point, but it also begs the question; if you were going to hang your hat on one last amp, would you really want it to be this digital bastardization of the best sounding (and possibly best selling) amp you ever created.

I just think that if he made a newer revision of the same amp with a slightly altered (for punch) circuit...or a 150 watt version...he would have gotten a much warmer reception and could have avoided the embarrassment and waste of money at NAMM
 
Possibly, yeah

And by the time they need serviced? Not only is it going to be outdated, it's going to be impossible to fix or service

This is exactly the problem everyone was talking about with this amp when this thread was started. I don't think anyone has any doubts that it will sound good (although, who fucking knows when anyone will hear it?) but this is a simple math problem

Digital gear, and especially modeling, is getting cheaper and cheaper, and is selling like hotcakes because at those prices it doesn't matter if it's disposable.

Analog gear, especially tube amps which can be repaired and enjoyed for a lifetime, are expensive because they can be serviced and maintained forever.

When you tie digital to the tube amp like this, you are taking a huge risk. There's a reason why few people took the plunge with the VHX, even though it's by a reputable amp company with an excellent track record.

Fryette has a MUCH spottier customer service record than Peter Diezel, so I have no idea why he thought this was gonna be a smash success.
This is such a good point. I am so turned off by this monstrosity, that I have ignored the possibility it sounds killer. But when you have a killer sound that has its fragility tied to a quickly obsolete technology, the sustainability vs cost becomes a bitter pill to swallow
 
Well, at least this week we were treated to the Cryette Kylebull Ultratrigged II video. Better than nothing.
 
Digital gear, and especially modeling, is getting cheaper and cheaper, and is selling like hotcakes because at those prices it doesn't matter if it's disposable.
Had a thought. How are ADA MP-1's holding up? I think those have a digital interface to the analog guts?
 
This is a fair point, but it also begs the question; if you were going to hang your hat on one last amp, would you really want it to be this digital bastardization of the best sounding (and possibly best selling) amp you ever created.

I just think that if he made a newer revision of the same amp with a slightly altered (for punch) circuit...or a 150 watt version...he would have gotten a much warmer reception and could have avoided the embarrassment and waste of money at NAMM
He wouldn’t see it that way. He must truly believe this is a great idea. In some ways I can see it. For me personally though, I just wanted an amp.
 
If there are 8 slices in a pizza, and she "chefs" 46 pizzas a day, how many pizzas will be served before the ultralead 2 is a paper weight

Maths
 
This thread is 34 pages long, so I may have already said this. If so, forgive me.

But if you want to go another route with the ultralead besides giving people what they want, why not prove your ealier boast that you could design a high end solid state amp using high quality parts? I would easily purchase a bad ass solidstate over a non working digital paperweight any day. And i can't imagine it would have even gotten close to the $4k mark.

If you really could make it sound badass, there would be a market. There are a good amount of us that would love to get what we were all hoping for from the theta
 
Back
Top