NAD: Friedman Smallbox

[jcj]

I got the Cornford...

Congrats to both of you!

 

[campbellcj]

I just got mine yesterday - loving it! I'm glad it sounds as good as it does at low home volumes.

 

[journeyman73]

has anyone tried the SB and the Dirty Shirley? a lot of the descriptions of the SB (i.e. more open, raw, vintage, organic) are what i thought the shirley was, also...

are they pretty similar but the Smallbox having more gain at hand?

I have not played the DS. Hopefully someone else who has will chime in...

thanks - i may just have to try both to really know.

btw, since you do have the SS - am i correct in assuming that the SS is much closer to the BE than it is to the Smallbox (ie that the Smallbox has really different feel and sound than the SS)?

 

[leos]

I'd be very interested in hearing how you think the sb compares to your old cornford (and which one?).
I am considering to buy my old mk50 ii back or go for the small box.
I know my mk50 ii had the open and raw tone that I desire, but it felt a little stiff at times and the gain structure was not as rich as good marshalls usually are. However, the leas tone was so fat and powerfull .. The amp has so much balls , huge but always controlled bottom end with tons of punch. Anf I fear that the sb maybe cannot match properties (will sound smaller, weaker or more compressed).
Hope to hear your assesment ... At the moment i am swaying to the cornford , but would hate to miss out on the sb - btw it is not possible to try a friedman before buying.

 

[Moshaholic]

Congrats... I had one for a short time and loved it but since I had a the latest version BE100 I decided to sell it. But ya what a rocking and very organic amp.

 

[Superunknown]

I'd be very interested in hearing how you think the sb compares to your old cornford (and which one?).
I am considering to buy my old mk50 ii back or go for the small box.
I know my mk50 ii had the open and raw tone that I desire, but it felt a little stiff at times and the gain structure was not as rich as good marshalls usually are. However, the leas tone was so fat and powerfull .. The amp has so much balls , huge but always controlled bottom end with tons of punch. Anf I fear that the sb maybe cannot match properties (will sound smaller, weaker or more compressed).
Hope to hear your assesment ... At the moment i am swaying to the cornford , but would hate to miss out on the sb - btw it is not possible to try a friedman before buying.

No worries with either the Smallbox or the 50HMKII. Up to your ear and personal taste. I will say that the Smallbox has just as much if not more balls than the Cornford. I love the Cornford and will have one again. The Cornford is somewhat unforgiving in comparison to the Smallbox....but it has a very unique tone and all of the bells and whistles (two loops, two masters, foot switch, etc). Both have very different voicings in that the Cornford is more dry with lots of note definition where the Smallbox has a big vintage high gain tone with a bit more sag....both SB channels are very usable in a live situation as well. Two incredible amps...just depends on what type of tone, feel, and voicing you dig bro!

 

[Superunknown]

has anyone tried the SB and the Dirty Shirley? a lot of the descriptions of the SB (i.e. more open, raw, vintage, organic) are what i thought the shirley was, also...

are they pretty similar but the Smallbox having more gain at hand?

I have not played the DS. Hopefully someone else who has will chime in...

thanks - i may just have to try both to really know.

btw, since you do have the SS - am i correct in assuming that the SS is much closer to the BE than it is to the Smallbox (ie that the Smallbox has really different feel and sound than the SS)?

All three are very different IMHO. You need to play them all and make up your mind...