felicia506's Reviews
16 reviews Back to felicia506's Equipboard
182
Most neutral microphone under $100.
My little fur baby knocked my Superlux PRA 628 MKII off my table and it fell into her water bowl. I dried it up but it stopped working. So, I got this microphone from the local guitar store. Initial impressions, it's a very uncolored microphone. It's everything that microphones like the Shure SM57, and Audio-Technica ATM650 should have been. The top end is crispy, clear but smooth, the mid-range is detailed and neutral, low end is tight and clean. I never expected a dynamic microphone that costs under $100 to be so detailed and neutral. I think if given enough time in the market this microphone has what it takes to be the new industry standard. As for build quality, this thing is built like a hammer.
1268
I've heard good stuffs about this new Lewitt microphone. Even my sound engineer and good old friend who swears by microphones like Sennheiser MD421, and E906 loves them. It's quite a game changer in its category, and I do agree with you, it indeed has what it takes to be the new industry standard.
182
Best pickups for Grunge and Pop Punk.
I swapped the stock pickups on my guitars with these pickups because I wanted pickups that get rid of the 60 cycle hum but at the same time have the raspiness of hot single-coil pickups. The thing I love about Zexcoils is that they get rid of the hum, but instead of sounding like humbuckers, they sound exactly like true hot single-coil pickups. Their raspy hot single-coil like tone works really great for my needs. I have never been fond of humbuckers, all humbuckers have too much low-mids and sound really dark for my tastes, but these pickups despite technically being humbuckers sound nothing like humbuckers. Just like true hot single-coil pickups, they have just the perfect amount of growl and rasp for Grunge and Pop Punk guitar tones. If you ever need a set of pickups that completely preserve your single-coil tones but get rid of the annoying 60 cycle hum then get these puppies, and unlike many active solutions out there these puppies are passive.
182
Neither too thick nor too thin just perfect.
I've always used these picks and the reason I use them is that I feel their thickness is just perfect. It's not too thin, it has the right amount of thickness to impart control and power to my riffs, however it's not too heavy. The small size of Jazz III actually suits me because I have thin fingers. I like the Tortex material more than the newly introduced Ultex. Tortex is stiffer and brighter than Nylon but isn't as stiff and unforgiving as Ultex. Yes, I do agree that for proficient players, Ultex highlights their picking nuances, however for players who don't have an exactly polished picking technique Ultex makes every flaw in their picking technique stand out like a sore thumb. Tortex is more articulate than Nylon but it's a lot more forgiving to less refined picking techniques than Ultex. Hence I prefer Tortex picks.
1268
I don't agree with your assessment of the Ultex picks. I switched from 1.5mm Tortex Jazz III to the new 1.5mm John Petrucci Ultex Jazz III pick and the improvement in volume & clarity of the notes, and control & precision of my picking style was phenomenal. The way Ultex picks glide across strings is unmatched by any Delrin, Tortex, Acetal, or acrylic picks. Even notes played on my downtuned seven-string guitar at high gain sound extremely clear and articulate with the Ultex picks. They are streamlined for fast and efficient picking. Their mirror-like finished frontal part makes them slide easily over the strings. Techniques like sweep picking, alternate picking, and economy picking are really easy to execute with the John Petrucci Ultex Jazz III pick. Their stiffness which you call ridiculous provides a lot of control to the guitarist. They also highlight a lot of nuances in my playing that otherwise get buried by Tortex picks. Ultex picks are one of the best choices for technically proficient guitarists.
182
Maybe you don't find them bright because you play guitars with high output humbuckers through bass-heavy high gain amps. I play an Offset Mustang through a bright Fender amp. The Zexcoil Z-Core noiseless pickups on my guitar just sound like overwound single-coil pickups. With my bright set-up, the Ultex picks sound bit too bright. As I have mentioned in my review I am not a shredder, I play Grunge and Pop Punk, so maybe I'm not one of the technically proficient guitarists you describe in your comment. Since you have mentioned that Ultex highlights the nuances of a player then it makes even more sense why I don't sound good with it, my picking style isn't polished and refined enough, and instead of nuances, the Ultex highlights my flaws in the worst possible way.
1268
Your assumption is wrong, I have played single-coil guitars through the clean channel of my amp without any problem with the John Petrucci Ultex Jazz III pick, I've even used it while playing a Strat through a Fender Super Reverb. I never ran into this overly bright tone problem you speak of. On the contrary, the notes played sounded extremely clear and articulate. I think there's either something wrong about your amp or with the way you pick. No offense, but those two maybe valid reasons.
182
No offense taken, my amp is perfectly fine, there's no problem with it. Others have played through it too and they like how it sounds. However, as I've mentioned in my previous comment my picking style isn't exactly polished and refined. You did mention that Ultex picks highlight subtle nuances of a player's technique, so it's pretty obvious that they highlight flaws in a player's technique too. So that might be a reason why they don't work right for me.
1268
In such an instance maybe you should consider changing your review because in its present state it's pretty misleading and gives this idea that Ultex is some sort of overly stiff and horribly bright material for picks which is not at all true.
182
Okay, I'll change it.
182
Suits my vocals better than the SM58.
I use the D5 as my live vocal microphone. It has a fuller and clearer sound signature than the SM58. It suits my vocals better than the SM58. With SM58 there's a nasal feel to my vocals, the D5 doesn't have that nasal nature.
182
Surprisingly good microphone.
I wish I could say that when I bought this microphone I did it so because of its tonal signature and all those stuff, because If I need to tell the truth I didn't buy it for those reasons. Back when I bought this microphone I simply bought it because it was cheap and didn't require a microphone stand to place it before the amp. I just dangle it on my amp's speaker. I never expected anything great from this microphone but after I compared it side by side with the Sennheiser E609 and the Shure SM57 owned by some of my buddies I realized that this is one of those sleeper microphones which often get ignored but are actually of great quality. Speaking of its tonality, with this microphone looks can be deceiving. On first look, it looks like a Sennheiser E609 clone but in terms of tonality it's quite far from it, I dare to say to my ears it sounds better than the E609. It has the definition and clarity of the E609 but at the same time, it doesn't have the harshness of the E609. As for its comparison with SM57, it has more low end and more neutral mids than the SM-57. Its tonality reminds me of a lot of the AKG D40 but at the same time, it isn't as bass-heavy as the D40. It doesn't sound like a cheap $50 microphone at all.
41016
the 57 is barely a microphone unless you modify it, the stock output transformer is total junk
182
Indeed, and nowadays it's getting curb stomped by microphones made by AKG and Audio-Technica.
1268
I won't describe the sound signature of AKG D40 as bass-heavy. What the AKG D40 does is that unlike other dynamic microphones it doesn't cut the low end of the amp. Its sound signature can be best described as extremely clear and accurate, almost like a condenser microphone. It's a great quality microphone from a sound engineer's perspective because amps mic'd with the D40 sit quite easily in the mix.
Speaking of Audio-Technica, I use the AE2500 dual-element microphone to record my amps. It's hands down the best microphone I've ever used for recording guitars. After using it I just couldn't go back to normal dynamic microphones. Its tonal accuracy is unlike any other microphone I've ever used for miking high gain guitar amps.
182
That explains why I felt that the D40 was bass-heavy. For anyone used to normal dynamic microphones that have a tendency to cut the low end and have a spike in the upper-mids, microphones like the D40 which keep the low end intact and have an accurate tonality will obviously sound bass-heavy. Looks like I have to get the AKG D40, if its anything like what you have described over here then it'll make my life a lot easier.
Whoa, the AE2500 does look like a cool microphone but at $550 it's way out of my league.
182
A decent and affordable tube amp.
I use it as my practice amp, it's okay for its price. Then again I didn't even pay for it because I was gifted this amp by my older sis, so I shouldn't talk about the price. I have never compared it to vintage Fender Vibro Champ amps but even if it doesn't sound like them I don't care because it sounds decent to my ears. The built-in effects are okay, they're nothing stellar but not bad either. I wish they would have used a larger speaker though.
182
One of the best tuner pedal money can buy.
Not only it's highly accurate but the large 3D meter display is also easy to read. Yeah, there are other tuners out there which may be equally accurate but none of them feel so convenient to use and easy to read.
182
Sounds good and costs cheap.
It costs cheap, sounds good, has true bypass switching, switchable voicings and it looks cute too. Not to forget it's an optical wah, no worries about the wear and tear of the wah pot with this pedal. That's why it was an obvious choice for me.
182
Sounds warm but may not appeal analog purists.
This delay pedal uses PT2399 chip, so it's not a real analog delay. Nevertheless, it sounds warm enough to my ears and unlike a bucket brigade analog delay it isn't unpredictable. However, I don't think it'll appeal analog purists who swear by bucket brigade analog delay pedals.
182
Good pedal but the 8 stage phaser setting is crazy.
It's a great quality pedal and compared to MXR Phase 90 or EHX Small Stone it's a lot versatile. However, that being said I still haven't found a proper usage of the 8-stage setting of this pedal. Maybe it's meant for someone who is into the ambient stuff. For me the 4-stage setting is enough.
182
Great bang for the buck chorus and vibrato pedal.
It costs cheap, it's analog, and it does both the chorus and vibrato thingie.
182
It works great but it isn't a noise gate.
This pedal works great for me for reducing noise from my rig, but that being said it's not a noise gate. From what I've felt after using it seems this pedal is a downward expanding noise reduction pedal like the Rocktron HUSH. It works well for me because I don't require the choppy nature of a noise gate but I don't think people who play genres that require tight riffs and stuff and require a noise gate to chop off their signal will like this pedal.
182
Quite an underrated compressor pedal from an equally underrated pedal maker.
This pedal along with the GT-10 was one of the first two Yerasov pedals that I bought form myself. It's a great quality compressor. Its extended settings let me dial the compression real good. I don't think too many guitarists know about this brand or else this pedal will be outselling compressor pedals from other brands.
182
Great quality pedal from an otherwise unknown brand.
I own many Yerasov pedals. The way I found this brand is an interesting story. One of my fellow guitarist buddies had an ENGL compressor pedal. I liked it very much but found its price to be a bit higher than the compressor sold by other brands like MXR, EHX, etc. Then a member from the TGP forum informed me that those pedals are manufactured by a Russian manufacturer named Yerasov. So, I checked out their pedals and decided to buy a few of them. My first two pedals from them were the GT-10 overdrive and the BF-10 compressor, I was really pleased with their performance so I ordered more pedals from them. As for the GT-10, it's a great quality Tube Screamer clone, with the fat switch on it cuts less low than a normal tube screamer. As for noise and other issues, I haven't faced any such issues with this pedal so far.
182
One of the best Fender guitar ever made.
It's pink, it has chrome, and it has a pearloid pickguard, long story in short, it's a sexy little guitar. I swapped the stock pickups with Z-Core Modern 5 (ZMD5) at the neck and Z-Core Overwound 5 (ZOW5) at the bridge though, because they suit my musical style better than those stock single-coil pickups.
182
It's a lot better than what people think it to be.
It's not the best amp made by Fender but nevertheless it isn't a bad amp either. A lot of Fender amp users like to trash talk about this amp but I think they are just judgemental. They sell at dirt-cheap prices in the used market, I paid barely $400 for mine and it was in mint condition with the original Fender footswitch and the original Eminence Fender Special Design speakers. The clean channel is the usual Fender clean channel, you can't go wrong with it. As for the dirt channel, it's no Marshall or Mesa but it works good enough for me. It's a 100-watt tube amp with switchable quarter-power mode, tube-driven reverb, tremolo, and even a tube buffered effects loop with adjustable send and return level. What more can anyone ask for at $400?
182
So far I haven't run into any problems with my amp, but yeah I'll watch out for any issues in the future. I do agree with you that this amp is quite notorious for being pretty hit and miss in terms of reliability. For some players, they work without a hitch, while others run into myriads of issues. So far I think I got lucky with mine, but only time will tell whether I got really lucky or not.
41016
they're all lemons eventually, I'm not a total handwired purist but as a repair guy Ic an say taking a look inside one of these was terrifying. It looked more like the inside of a 90s desktop PC than a tube amp. Definitely up there with the JCM2000 for excessive ribbon connectors.
213
This is NOT "the notorious EVIL TWIN"... Keep up with your facts!