AMP vs Active Monitors

I'm sure this subject has been discussed at length, so please feel free to point me in the right direction.

I've recently picked up a gorgeous used Les Paul Standard and a Line6 X3 Live.

Next up is something to play through.

I've got two buddies "helping". One is a huge fan of powered monitor speakers, while the other thinks a traditional amp is the way to go.

My musical tastes haven't changed since I was a kid growing up listening to AC/DC, Ted Nugent, Aerosmith, Pink Floyd, Stones, U2 etc. on the radio and going to concerts.

Marshall seems to be the sound that turns my crank.

I don't see my guitar playing going beyond the house. Perhaps to my buddies place occasionally to jam.

This afternoon, I tried out a Marshall AVT50XT at a local music store. Also tried a MG100HD with a 4x12 cabinet......wow, I don't think our neighbours would appreciate that one.

Both units sounded great. The larger cabinet definitely gave a more full-bodied sound.

But what about monitors ?

Monitors can be connected to a computer, enabling you to use them for your computers audio as well as the guitar.

I figure like anything else, you get what you pay for. From the few that I've seen, a decent pair of monitors seem to be about $1000 while a good Marshall amp is around $500.

I'm going to shop around this weekend and see what's available. In the meantime, I would greatly appreciate hearing your thoughts or suggestions.

Doug

First...Les Paul Standard....very nice.

Second, this is one of those subjects where everyone is going to have preference/opinion of their own. I suppose it's a matter of what reason folks bring forth that resonate with you. Key here is that no one is in your shoes to make the choice so their perspective (like mine) will be skewed to their tastes.

Me, I've recently gone towards amp modeling and monitors. I'm dabbling in home recording and this meets my needs better at this point. But that's my circumstances

...but that's the point. Even though you are only doing it for the fun of it, what is your goal. Do you think you may want to mess with some home recording? If so, thinking forward, getting a monitor set up and the ability via an interface to connect to your computer might be the way to go.

If you aren't planning so much of the recording thing, you really can't beat the sound of a good tone with a nice guitar coming out of an amp/cabinet. Something about the way an amp pushes air makes a guitar sound sooo good.

It's not much advice but maybe pops a question in to your thoughts as to your goal and what might best suit that.

I would definitely get an amp or you are going to be chained to your room. Unless you have a lap top and want to pack that and your monitors up and move everything around.

Jeff is leaning toward amp models & monitors for himself these days, but I would bet my paycheque against his that he already owns at least one amp, right? :)

IMO get an amp, but like Jeff says, that is just one man's opinion.

Oh, and if you really only plan in playing at "bedroom volumes" you can skip the 100 watt Marshalls and whatever. Go for something 2 - 5 watts. It'll still be too loud. I'm partial to the Fender Vibro Champ myself. ;)
http://www.fender.com/products/search.php?partno=2331000000

Originally Posted by: RazboJeff is leaning toward amp models & monitors for himself these days, but I would bet my paycheque against his that he already owns at least one amp, right? :)

Two.......

Great, so you're suggesting to get both and amp and monitors:) That's what I was afraid of.

Is there anything in particular to keep in mind when looking for monitors OR an amp for that matter ? Some obvious things to avoid ??

At this point I'm leaning towards the Marshall AVT50XT or possibly the AVT100XT

Originally Posted by: shaggylaneGreat, so you're suggesting to get both and amp and monitors:) That's what I was afraid of.

Is there anything in particular to keep in mind when looking for monitors OR an amp for that matter ? Some obvious things to avoid ??

At this point I'm leaning towards the Marshall AVT50XT or possibly the AVT100XT

Well, just like your buddies, it's just two perspectives; you must base your decision on what you plan to do. If money is not an object, then you don't have to make a choice, at least.

The Marshall might be a little overpowered. Are you going to be playing with a band and drums or what?

I figure most of my play time will be in the house or jamming with one of my buddies.

Power is something I'm wondering about. A 100watt per channel home theatre amplifier doesn't seem to be nearly as loud as a 50watt Marshall amp.

What I'm after is good sound or tone, if you prefer. My brother in-law leant me a Peavey Bravo 112amp. It's fine but the sound is nothing to write home about. The other day I tried a few Marshalls. I found the larger the speaker enclosure, the better the sound. I tried a MG20, followed by an AVT50, then a MG100H with a separate 4x12 cabinet.

The MG100H master volume was barely at 9 or 10 o'clock and it was loud. The AVT50 sounded quite nice. The salesman mentioned in a follow-up email that the AVT100 is on special at ~$70 more than the AVT50. I haven't tried the AVT100 so I really can't comment on it.

Fellow Canadian,
Doug

Generally speaking, any amp sounds better when "driven". This is especially true with tube amps, but also with solid state in that a speaker sounds better when it's pushed. So bigger is not always better. However, you will definitely have the power if you need it.

Make sure you try the amp at volumes you will actually be playing at. If it still sounds good to you, then that is what you should go for. As to exactly which amp, well, there will be a proponent for every one out there. Just depends on who you ask.

Good luck!

Originally Posted by: shaggylaneI figure most of my play time will be in the house or jamming with one of my buddies.

If you see this as your main need for an amp, don't bother with a Marshall. Unless you plan on harassing your neighbours you'll never get the Marshall loud enough to warrant owning one. You will end up setting the volume too low and the amp won't give you that cranked Marshall sound you want.

Imo, go the powered monitors and some pc guitar effects. That way you can have the sound you want, at less than ear bleeding volumes. You'll actually be able to hear your buddies too.:)

Originally Posted by: shaggylane
Power is something I'm wondering about. A 100watt per channel home theatre amplifier doesn't seem to be nearly as loud as a 50watt Marshall amp.

Sometimes with home stereo/theater equipment these days the wattage ratings are misleading. They add together the peak wattage (not even RMS) of all the channels. So in a home theater situation, if you have 5.1 channels, the peak wattage might be in the area of 15-20 watts per channel, but they add that all together and call it a 100 watt system.

Well, I went out today fully expecting to bring home the Marshall AVT50. So much for that plan. The salesman had me listen to an all-valve 50watt combo Marshall 2266C. Well, that's the one I want.

The sound was gorgeous.......I was really surprised by the difference between an all-valve versus a hybrid and solid-state. The downside with an all-valve is the price..... fricken expensive......about 3X the hybrid model.

I noticed with that amp that you don't need to crank it all the way up to get good sound. He had it on 2 and it was very comfortable. Of course, when he cranked it up, it sounded even better and just screamed "TAKE ME HOME DOUG................TAKE ME HOME......".

After that, I tried the AVT50 again and there's no comparison. They are simply in a different league.

Not sure if i can justify spending that kind of money on an amp.

I'll keep an eye out for a used one.