@@RichardBeales I've had an MX5 since last December and used it for home recording into Logic Pro. It's been great but... GAS (the need for moar gear) led me to buy a NUX Amp Academy and initially I was "Woah this is amazing" and - to be fair - it really is a great little box for half the price of the the Strymon and MX5, but... while it sounded good on the pedal board, I didn't like the way it recorded as much as the MX5, even with the XLR balanced input option and using it as an integrated interface with my current UMC404. So... I'm sending it back for refund. Frankly there is just so much choice around (with more arriving every day) that it is hard to get something rubbish. They are all amazing compared to trying to mic up an amp at home and not piss off the neighbours. Live wise, I'll just use my HB Tube 15 (too old to lug the Marshall Bluesbreaker around lol) with a few decent pedals and leave the amp modellers on my desk for recording. This truly is a golden age for guitar gear. You can find whatever tone you want from a small box. Now back in my day, by 'eck we had to have 14 different cabs and 20 heads in the studio with 30+ mics 😂😂😂 - anyway... love it all and love the Anderton channel vidz as even though they are selling gear for a living, they always give us honest reviews imho. Rock on Captain, Danish Pete and Digital John 🤘
Ideas Daily Pedal/amp Dream Rig vs Quad Cortex or similar top end modeller for your staple tones. Extreme Edition = Mick/Dan bringing in their rig vs Quad Cortex or similar. Signature edition = modellers trying to recreate Andertons employees signature amp/rig tones. eg, Pete's and Rabeas Victory rigs. Rubbing it in edition = budget modellers that can recreate iconic/signature tones. Sounds like edition = Digital John uses modelling to outperform sounds like combos from old videos.
I think the purpose of Guitar Amp Pedals is to add that Amp modelling to an existing Pedal board. A Multi-FX unit is more of a Pedal Board replacement. Helix Stomp adds Amps to a pedal board too but also adds a 'few' extra FX too if you don't have certain FX or want a smaller footprint pedal board. Some Multi-FX units (Helix Floor, Boss GT-1000 etc) are rather large and quite heavy to lug around for Fly gigs. It maybe easier to take a 'small' pedal board with a small Guitar Pedal Amp and a couple of pedals than a Multi-fx unit... Basically the same principal but some prefer to have individual pedals they can swap in/out over an all-in-one Multi-FX unit. Guitar Amp Pedals bring the benefits of 'Digital' to existing pedal boards...
Totally agreed. This is why I love my Iridium. I want to go ampless with MY pedals. Not a multi-FX setup. Plus I don’t like screens on pedals. You spend too much time trying to dialing in a tone you like rather than playing. I like to “set it and forget it”, and the Iridium is clean and simple.
I happened to have both. Bought MX5 first and then got kinda fed up with the screen (despite being the best in the business, and having the best interface), and it's kind of hard to compare them. I find the MX5 to be the best processor I've ever had (had Pod Go, tried NUX MG-30, had Helix, Pod Bean, Boss GT-1000 core, etc). The Iridium sounds very good but it's hard to compare it because it doesn't have any reverb. I'd have to get an overdrive pedal and a reverb pedal so I can give a better chance to the Iridium. I prefer using the Iridium from user interface perspective, but damn that MX5 sounds good and is a great value for money. Not sure yet which I'll keep. 🤔I do think that Iridium has awesome dynamics, it feels very much like a tube amp.
I’ve never used a MX5, but I’ve had a Helix for several years now. It’s a beast … sounds great, built like a tank, very portable, and can do just about anything imaginable. Line6 really knocked it out of the park. I recently bought an Iridium. My first Strymon, and I’m super impressed. Call me old school, but I really like the simplicity of it. I feel like the Helix requires me to be somewhat of a sound engineer to get proper tones out of it (I.e. global EQ, shelf EQ, etc. to get the harsh highs and lows tamed through my FRFR). I really only ever used the Deluxe Reverb and Plexi amps in the Helix so with the Iridium, I have that, and I can’t get a bad sound out of it. They’re both great products, and it looks like the MX5 is as well. I think it just comes down to your preference of complexity vs. simplicity. For now, I’m keeping the Helix and Iridium and we’ll see what I end up preferring in another 6 months.
I found a used Iridium I could purchase. I mostly like playing along stuff like ABB and love that Fender at edge of breakup. Also would love some Marshall and Voz tones. Thought the Iridium would be it, but I cannot play along with backing tracks and headphones. I want a simple pedalboard, not to add a mixer. In that case, I would keep playing through my interface and S-Gear
I'm listening in my mixing studio, and all the time the Headrush is louder than the iridium! (Our brain is easy to fool, anything that has a higher volume than another is perceived as "better") And I wonder if both pedals are digital, why not use the same IR to compare them, listen to the harmonic saturation that each one has and the response in the same IR. And the final comment, that the Iridium sounds at 360p, please use the manual to know that the middle control in the VOX version is not middle! .. With this I do not mean that the Mx5 sounds bad, not at all, but the comparison did not seem correct to me.
Loving all this content with Lee's godchild Digital John XD But I think you guys are missing out on a key use case for all these mfx units: running them in a live gigging situation, with the output going to front of house PA or increasingly, going into FRFR powered speakers or even the standard 4 cable method into the power amp section of traditional amps. We need to hear these units mic'd up in the room, with zero post processing of the audio on these vids. Could also be a task for John during any mfx unit shootouts you have planned - have him create a few similar tones on each unit being tested, getting each as close as possible within the limitations of each unit. That's two video series ideas for you guys! XD Honestly, I think pretty much everyone on youtube is forgetting about trying to capture that live, in room sound, direct from FRFR powered speakers or traditional power amp effect loops. Kind of old school low-tech recording method, which Phil McKnight uses a lot to really try and demonstrate what is being heard in the room. Ponder it, Cap? Cheers!
I listened on a nice pair of AKGs. To me, it sounds like you didn’t match the output volumes. You repeatedly had the Headrush quite a bit louder. No wonder you think it sounds better. Everything sounds better louder 😎
I thought the Headrush sounded worse because of the volume. I like loud music, but the headrush just sounded like noise to me, today. I feel like my ears were violated. If I listen again later, I may feel differently.
For me, the single biggest issue is 'guitar in isolation' So...Are you playing for your ears or a mix? Both are valid but require a different approach. If I spend to long with guitar only I get lush tones that when played in a full band mix get lost or worse, muddy the mix. If your saving to presets, consider having a live set and a practice set. Get the sound you're after, then play it in a mix(backing track) tweak accordingly and save as a live version. What I heard here was Iridium = Live and Headrush = Bedroom
Great point. As we heard it you’re right on about which would be better for a mix vs at home. SMG always does “here’s how it sounds in a mix” which is pretty unique to UA-cam in my experience. Of course, he only does Metal. The output volume differences were pretty ridiculous too. I wonder if in the room they sounded the same because I was shocked they didn’t fix it. Of course the louder one is going to sound fuller and bigger. If they are truly modeling how an amp works then being quiet isn’t going to make the thing work.
I have owned both ...Dumped the Iridium FAST... 2 glaring problems when using the Iridium live. I always place my Reverb and Delay after my amp and with no EFX loop you loose the Cab emulation from the Iridium ... the final output becomes the horrible sound of the effect pedal "amplification". 2nd ... it was impossible to balance the Levels between your clean sound and driven sound when switching on the Iridium because of a lack of "channel Volume" . I wanted so bad to love the Iridium but I hated it. Headrush MX5 on the other hand is fabulous in comparison! ...And it is still very simple to use! Only a complete Strymon Fanboy could love the very dry sounding Iridium!
The IR is ultimately what changes the overall sound. Suggestion: use a line out minus the cab sim and use an IR loader pedal. Maybe that TC one? I think it would make the comparison more even. 🤔
It's the different IR's here that make it hard to compare the 2 pieces of gear. You guys should try and run the 2 devices into the same IR. That way it's like we're comparing amp heads.
Even if I had a choice I'd still go with something like the iridium. Menu's and options on the headrush make it extremely difficult to just sit with something. The whole option paralysis deal.
the iridium is a software amp in a box for 3 times the price of a software amp, they can keep it, I aint paying all that extra because it says strymon on the box, it isn't "THAT" good
Well, if you know how your "regular" analog gear works, it should be not that difficult to dial its digital equivalent... I.e. : you grab your amp of choice, put your typical tube screamer, or whatever, in front of it, put your delay and reverb after and set them just like you would do with physical units 🤷🏻♂️
@@damiengreen28 I disagree...I think it IS that good! Not cheap, admittedly, so I picked up a good used one for the cost of a decent pedal. It now sits at the end of my pedalboard and allows me to run all my pedals through it, either into an FRFR cab or headphones. Love it!
A cool series would be blind rating famous amp tones from different emulator devices… like a Vox AC30 tones conparison from iridium, UA ruby, walrus, kemper, etc and the real amp
The Strymon sounded flat and dead but the MX5 did one thing I've not heard an amp sim do before and thats the 'thud' you get from playing a big amp. You know if you hit a high note on a piano, there's a thud that goes through the piano cabinet and frame, the same is true of a Marshall. Play high notes and there is that subsonic thud on each note. Bloody amazing!
Great concept. I’d love to see more comparisons of amp modeling at different price points - maybe Mustang Micro vs 1990s Line 6 Pod vs Boss Katana vs Valeton GP-100 vs Axe Effects vs HX Stomp vs Walrus ACS vs Simplifier vs Kemper vs Yamaha THR10, all with a focus on how good the amp and cab modeling is for a Fender clean sound through studio monitors or headphones. Maybe even throw in a Tonemaster DI out, and an actual Deluxe Reverb through an attenuator.
Agree on the blindfold test. Would be really interesting to see blindfolded tests of, for instance, MX5, HX Stomp, Kemper, and Neural DSP, considering those are the most popular opposite ends of the spectrum in terms of multi-fx amp modeller prices.
I own a iridium and a hx stomp. And the iridium I used to stick on the end of my pedal board. It’s a great way to retain my current sound and tone with the pedals I like and still have a mobile rig. The hx stomp is more versatile but I don’t want to change out all my gear just for helix voiced effects.
the issue with the Strymon is to change amps types during a song for clean, heavy and lead you have to switch a switch and change eq settings with your hands that you can't do during a song. with the multi fx you have them pre programmed on different patches or scenes and just press one button with your foot and you get all the other fx you need on those patches/ scenes too and can be done during a song
As a Digital John myself, I’m liking these comparisons as I look for options for what I want in a guitar tone from a digital perspective. Also I’m afraid of the prices for tube amps in the near future
I think you should be afraid. My JVM now goes for almost 3k by the time it's delivered to your door (with taxes if that applies). I could not afford it myself now!
@Dizzy Duke Same - have a 1970s Bluesbreaker and a Fender Twin gathering dust and just use a cheap but great sound Harley Benton Tube 15 all the time at home. Played my first gig in years a few weeks back and just took the little Tube 15 along and frankly, once mic'd up it sounded great. Can't yet bring myself to sell the two big boy amps but pretty sure that day will come soon. Not like I'm playing any arenas soon lol 😂
i would probably buy the Strymon if I had a pedal board with favorite pedals collected over the years i.e. I just want to stop lugging the amps. If I had no pedals at all I would consider the Headrush as a good complete solution.
12:05 yes, Lee, I think that is exactly the point of the Iridium, and ASC-1, etc...you already have a big pedalboard full of kit that you use in your amps and want something to just either use headphones, or go straight into a PA, or recorder, you just put the Iridium in place of your amp, and carry on as always.
I've been thinking about this recently myself. Either as a backup or for smaller gigs / last minute bookings where I don't want to hump amps and cabs around.
I have both! One for my actual pedalboard, the other to stick in a rucksack/gigbag when I cannot be bothered to lug the big board around. Both sound ace!
I still think for the home enthusiast Multi-FX pedals are the way to go. They offer great value for money, individual pedals at £60+ each it's a no brainer. You get the drum machines, built in loopers you can update them via USB, use them as an audio interface. The only downside is if it breaks and you've spent £500 on it, if a £60 pedal breaks it's easier to replace. I do have a question, Andertons seem to have a great selection of pedals but don't seem to sell the NUX pedals?.
For the longest time I was a digital fan, they sound great and can do so much BUT Over time I've discovered the dark sides Less reliable and often unrepairable so failures are often a complete loss They are constantly made more obsolete by newer better technology, they don't hold their value unlike analogue that even gets more valuable over time. You get what you get while new analogue flavours are constantly invented both in pedals and amps. No Hudson pedals in modlers, no Blackstar St James. They are ultimately only as flexible as they are designed, while pedals and amps can be as complicated or simple as you want They are more complicated to use, analogue is just simple Option paralysis They often do not play nicely with other gear, yes many can 4CM but the reality is often analogue and digital just don't get the same result as the digital pedals they emulate when used with other gear. So the place for analogue gear is simple, they are simple and effectively better value over the long term and can be an investment, are reliable and can be repaired and look cool and have a more prestigious image.
I think you are on to something great here, how about a video series: MX5 VS. _____ Comparisons with various popular pedals could challenge these 'industry standards." Can the MX5 hold its own against the Big Sky?? How much ground (in pedals) does the £400 MX5 cover?
Ugh I wish I would have found this video BEFORE making my purchase and watching several different videos comparing these lol. But it's all good. You guys confirmed what I still feel today: the MX5 is the overall better value. I looked at these pedals, the UA Ruby, the Boss IR200, and even the Mooer stuff. I ended up buying the MX5 because the amps inside sounded great, I already have an HX Effects so on the effects and button side I'm covered, but I wanted more options for amp models. The MX5 just does it really well. The interface isn't as great as some make it out to be. That's where pedals like the Strymon succeed. However if you don't mind tinkering and digging into the hardware and software (I get weird pleasure in doing so lol) then the MX5 is an awesome choice. I have yet to find a model on the thing that stinks. You'll probably spend more time going back and forth between all the models than actually playing because once you think you have a tone down that you like, you realize there are about 50 others to choose from that are also great. MX5 highly recommended
I never see videos like this either. I came to the same conclusion as soon as the processors made that huge jump from stinking on ice, to: "wow, kinda can't tell the difference unless you're A/B'ing them at once." And that's when I had bought my last pedal. No more rabbit holes, no more pedal guessing, etc. You still change your mind, evolve, whatever, but then you just bend down and pick a new pedal from the multitudes of options. as opposed to figuring out what pedal to buy next, trying them out, etc. I never had the patience for that.
Think both units work great and do serve their purpose for different players...but right now stoked that I ordered the MX5 on sale for 320 dollars! That's value for money!
Idea for a video series: A "Champions League" of FX modelers! Search a for a common ground: Clean, crunch, overdrive with common amp models (Twin, JCM etc.) and cab sim (Marshall 4x12 trough SM57) or maybe even the same IRs for every unit, so it is comparable. Every week two units compete in an annihilation process until one ultimately wins. Combine it with a weeklong discount campaign on the winning unit (and maybe let the audience give a vote that partially counts into the summary?) Should bring a bit of attention, reach, and conversions, I guess. ✌
I use the Iridium, love it. I used either a Line 6 HX Effects or an Eventide H9 in front of it, or both. that's how I record a lot of my electric tracks. They sound great.
I am a home player and the question being asked @ 16:38 is the very reason, (even though I've had and tried many amps, including tube amps) I currently have a 50watt Fender Mustang GTX and no other modeling or amp gear. Does it take a little bit to dial stuff in? OF COURSE it does, but that's the same with ANY unit/pedals/amps you buy. I can go from the Smashing Pumpkins to Johhny Marr to John Mayer and have all of them 'dialed in' to where they sound really close!
I have a Mustang as well and while I can certainly see where you are coming from, I do find that having everything all in one unit does make it difficult to quickly enable, disable, or adjust individual effects in a given preset as you play. There are some footswitches you can get to help but that only goes so far. This is a big reason why I tend to use the Mustang as a late-night practice tool or a sort of portable solution for casual, on the go playing. For anything more serious, I want to have all my pedals in front of me so I am not so beholden to whatever I set up in a preset.
As a truck driver that has dragged an old acoustic around the county for the last couple of decades I'm totally new to the amp in the box or the Line 6 POD 2.0 that I just recently stumbled over at a pawnshop while looking for an amp for the first electric I've bought in decades and I'm still like a kid on Christmas morning. As an old geezer that's spent the last twenty or so years cursing technology for everything it's worth I take it all back. I love technology now. Who knew??? Not me but I'm glad I do now. And I could've been dragging and electric all over the country instead.
Great comparison. I think it's fair to say that Lee expected the Strymon to "win" this ... and so did I. In the event it wasn't close. I know people are saying that the Iridium gets closer to the sound that a sound engineer would want in a mix or in a room, but I'm not sure that guitarists should be doing the sound engineers' jobs for them. Also, how many of us are buying both of these types of unit just to sound good at home? Is that "narrow bandwidth tone" really something we're hoping to achieve?
This has me wondering 1) if a mic’d amp in the room actually sounds more like the iridium where as the head rush sounds more Hifi - especially in stereo (which it sounded in my car speakers). 2) Powering an effects unit on a board is always a series of will it work and weird adapters I can’t find - so simplicity of board integration might matter along with size… 3) do more complicated effects units breakdown more often than an iridium? Seems like they might have the propensity to quit working like a cellphone or a computer where as the iridium seems pretty stable in it’s components. Maybe this is just perception, but also maybe that perception is what other people see too in making this decision…
Really interesting look at current state of the art. I have a deep suspicion of multi-effects whether pedals or amps. Comes from bad experiences in the past! On another note, how about a video on the top 5 selling guitars, amps and pedals at Andertons over the year and looking at why?
Might have been even more revealing to compare the MX5 using an amp model and an IR. The stock IRs are ok but it comes with 2 Celestion IRs once you register. I stopped using the MX5 cab models 2 weeks after I got it. The frequency response on the cab models in the MX5 are so bloated they all require a parametric EQ after the cab to get to sound correct. The IRs from God's Cab and the Celestion IRs sound great with minimal fussing.
nice idea! but this AB testing is very innacurate for me due to huge level settings different between the two. Why didn't you adjust so they're roughly on the same level?
Agree and that would be the real test. Put them in a live environment... and see what an engineer thinks too. Gear is skewed toward the average punter and there are way more people playing at home than in a live mix.
The whole point of the Iridium is that it is simple. Three classic amps, each with three appropriate cabs, and "room" for ambience. The "middle" knob on the EQ isn't just a mid; it does different things, depending which amp setting you use. The best use (and the reason I got one) is to have it at the end of your pedal board. Although this comparison is interesting...kinda... they are apples and oranges, really. The MX-5 is a compact multi effects that requires a level of editing. The Iridium is the antidote to option paralysis. I don't have an MX-5 but I do have a full size Headrush Pedalboard, which is amazing. It's a lot of fun and very versatile... but the Strymon sits at the end of my analogue pedalboard and is instant gratification. They're both great, just...different.
I found this comparison confusing. I've heard demos of these where they sounded good, but in this demo they both sounded terrible. The HX5 was just louder. If you are going to compare a sim with anything, wouldn't it be against the thing you are trying to simulate? How else can you know if it is any good? Comparing one fake to another is pointless.
I'd like to see videos where you: 1. Take a common and popular amp. 2. Set it up so that it sounds as good as it can. 3. Take each of the multi-fx pedals you sell and set them up exactly the same as the real amp 4. Record some playing through the real amp and directly into your DAW. 5. Re-amp the "clean" DAW tone into each multi-fx pedal. 6. Compare the results of #5. 7. Discuss.
Most multi EFX pedals have a weak compressor and none that I know of place it last in line where it can be used as a boost for single coil guitars. The Iridium is nice because you can use your best pedals in your preferred sequence with the Iridium last as if it were your amp.
How about an all Strymon multi pedal setup vs one high end multi fx unit? Now that would be interesting! With multiple guitar players doing comparison? Might be a multi part vid.
I think you missed a thought on this. There is a huge difference between a live guitarist and a sit at home or studio guitarist. If you paly on a flat floor one night, an elevated hollow stage the next night and a solid elevated stage the third night, each has it's own acoustics. Each require you to reset your amp to meet the room dynamics. This is much easier to do with the Strymon. Time is money.
The answer is simple: the Iridium is for people like me, who HAVE a load of pedals; a decent tube amp and doesn't want to go through the dark art of how to mic a live amp in a home studio. I use my amp for practice and live work, I use my Iridium for top quality recording. A mulit-stomp with amp modelling is a great option for someone wanting to save bucks and get into recording without the initial outlay. But no-one, surely, would use an amp modeller for live work?
I was at a show two weeks ago and the lead guitarist of a professional band had an iridium on his board and engaged almost the whole time. That’s what made me find this video lol. But I get your point and tend to agree with you based on my use of digital units like helix
I've been an Iridium user for almost a year in live situations, and I love it for its small form factor and "amp like" controls. As a reformed 50 lb tube amp guy my back has thanked me many times as well. However, as the only electric guitarist in my band that covers a lot of musical ground my pedal board has grown to a size that I just am not happy with. Sooooo I just bought the MX5 and am very curious as to how I can get it "replace" the Iridium and pedalboard. I think in some respects I am that guy who is afraid to move to that type of solution permanently. In a live situation do I want to be fiddling with menus? Although having that A/B box there has given me an idea..... As some others have noted the MX5 came through much louder and bassier. I was listening on my PC through headphones. Anyway I know it's been nearly a year since this video came out but I loved it. Thanks guys.
I watched this yesterday and I've been trying all night to understand why I am still considering the Iridium- and I think I've got it. If I buy the Headrush- that's the end of me buying pedals, and it makes using the pedals I already have a little awkward as well, they're all analogue. I assume they would still work in the fx loop of this pedal but- not sure why you would even do that because all those fx already exist inside the unit. So, all those JHS pedals I've been slobbering over, wanting to try- there would be no reason to get them. Same for the LPD line I've always wanted to try- there wouldn't be any reason to. When you buy an all-in-one unit like this- like Captain said, it is your pedal board. Man, I've been building my board for over a year now, I put tons of thought and care into it- I don't want to just forget it now and go digital. Not to mention, when I finish my analogue board, it will be unique. The chances of anyone else having those same pedals, and only those pedals, and using them the same way- very small. If I get the Headrush, I have exactly the same thing as thousands of others- I don't like that. All that said- the Iridium is not available at Zzounds so- the folks that make them couldn't stand the idea of mere commoners playing their pedal I suppose. So, I'll likely never own it, even though it fits my tastes more. If you're wondering ZZounds sells things on payment plans- no credit check, all you need is a debit card. So if a piece of gear is not available from them- and it costs a lot- I can't get it. Strymon apparently can't stand the idea that someone who can't afford to just plop down 400$ might have one of their pedals.
If I’m gigging and something is a bit lacking, I can quickly bend down and tweak a pot. I may even be able to adjust it with my foot, there will never be a time that midway through a song I can bend down and start rifling through menus. Even after a good sound check, the frequencies in a room will change with the crowd, or the crowd/band might decide to get a little wilder, and suddenly you need more drive. A menu isn’t going to cut it. - look to the camera world where Fuji have had massive success by taking away buttons and switches in favour of good old dials. A menu might work in a studio, but not on stage
Why you ask? I bought an Iridium strictly as a backup for my Headrush pedalboard. The HR has been replaced by a Helix floor and the Iridium is still just a backup in case the Helix fries. A lot of players, and I know one personally won't touch a modeler, not because they don't like it but analog controls are easier to adjust than going into menus. My friend has actually told me that these things are beyond him so he uses his Deluxe reverb with a pedal board full of stomp boxes. It sounds great but again, it's easier to adjust on the fly without menus. Why get one? If you have your own pedals and just need the amp. That's how I did my backup. I have the Iridium paired with a Line 6 M13 which is being replaced by a TC Electronics Nova System pedal.
I like the idea of the simplicity of the Iridium. Plus the fact it looks like a regular pedal give the illusion of ‘analogue / more real’ etc. but at the end of the day it’s 100% digital. And I actually thought the Headrush sounded better.
Me too mate. I think we're really reaching peak gear and, let's face it, once the signal leaves the guitar or the amp and mic, then the world is digital these days.
I prefer an all analogue amp modeller, like a samsamp, rather than a digital algorithm amp model. Feels better to play and sounds better IMO. Digital algorithm models have their place though, especially for delay effects.
The benefit of the Iridium (and it's ilk) is the ability to have a completely modular pedalboard with components that YOU choose and in the order that YOU want, rather than an all-in-one multi-effects unit. MFX units are great and they have their advantages as well, but it's not a direct comparison.
sometimes im jealous of younger players having awesome gear to start out on, but times like these make me glad i didnt have to figure out amp vs IR vs iridium vs digital vs helix etc as a newbie!
I get what you’re saying man but I’m also an older player and switched to Headrush cause of the touchscreen and how easy it was to get great tones out of it. I recommend trying one out for yourself. Plus it’s also saved my back from carrying combos to gigs lol.
@@ratelvis 100% mate. My young career was pretty much guitar>lead>amp to start with and then a few effects - an OD to boost for riffs/solos - and now, sitting on my desk I have a world of possibilities in a tiny MX5 box. Does it make me a better player? Nope, but it sure makes recording at home a piece of cake compared to the old days. Not used it for a gig yet but hopefully soon.
Digital John has a good ear. Nice playing too. Very interesting comparison, but I think the Iridium was never meant to be used by itself. I think the headrush wins for the price.
Why the Iridium? Well you don’t get option paralysis with it...it’s like using an amp. I use mine as a back up for live gigs in case my amp blows. I can then go into the PA (pedal board into Iridium into Desk) I also use it for rehearsals to save carrying a heavy amp all the time. Plus the Iridium with tweaking really does sound great.
So I have pedalboard with a bunch of single effects alongside a TC Plethora x5. The Plethora is a great tool and is very powerful but it also isn't as fast or as convenient to use as a single effect pedal. Multi-effects units are great but they do require a bit more attention to effectively use on the fly. Both single effects pedals and multi-effects units have benefits and drawbacks and there is never really going to be a "one size fits all" solution for everyone.
The Iridium has the obvious benefit of just adding it to the end of an existing pedal chain and boom you're done. Then again, you could do the same with any multi-fx that offers amp & cab sims. While this wasn't a comparison of tones exactly, they both sound (subjectively) good and both can be tweaked with EQ to suit anyone's needs I'm sure. I think the bottom line with all modern pedals, whether they're analog, digital, multi-fx or whathaveyou, is that they all have "good" sounds in them. The deciding factor for me is always the user interface and user experience. I fall in the DJ (Digital John) camp: For live performances, I opt for multi-fx units because saving/recalling patches is essential. Wherever I go, my "tone" will be consistent and always sound roughly the same. It's also convenient because I don't have the headache of dodgy patch leads, pedal boards, power supplies, loop switchers...the list goes on :-)
I actually was thinking about this. Seriously good content. Would have helped if you dialed the Room on the Iridium because it does affect the overall character. I found that clocking it to around 2 (past 12) I get a more realistic amp character.
Without using the same IRs those comparisons are - at least for me - completely pointless. IRs are ESSENTIAL for your digital amp-sound. In this shootout Andertons compared mono (for example Strymon Round Cab a) to stereo IRs (MX5) . That's... well again - pointless. Especially when your volume levels are all over the place (the Headrush was always way louder). The Amp-Stage of the Iridium is top-notch, at least for me. No Helix, no UAFX comes close to this - when using identical IRs (never had the chance to play any Headrush stuff myself though). And if you check latency stats, the Iridium is always between 0,5 to 1,25 ms - all the competitors are plus 2ms. Latency this low is not essential (cause I definitely can't hear or feel a difference between 0,5 and 2ms), but still... Iridium all the way. PS: by the way, the MIDDLE knob on the iridium is NOT for controlling mids. Only on the Punch-setting it's controlling mids. Check the manual in case you want to learn more :-)
To me the Headrush needs more knobs. Accessing via menus, PCs, tablets etc. is not good although it does provide almost unlimited options. Suggestion - How do 4 x 12 emulations sound through 1 x 8 bedroom speakers?
18:15 well you could say, if you can here a difference on your smartphone then it must be a significant difference most people would here on your recording as well.
I'm a POD user since 2007. Imagine I've been playing pod floor plus for every concert and the sound engineers where confused to make the difference. They thought I'm a analog gear user. They where impressed by the old POD floor plus.
I am writing with the help of a translator, hopefully it will be understandable. Personally, I think it's all about everyone's preferences, i.e. how much of this or that, the ideal would be to compare the classic apparatus in the sound of the band, and then each connection in the same place of the composition, and we are not at the end of the possibilities, how it sounds live and as it sounds in the recording, each time it is a different situation and each time we can reach the goal by a different path...
Well said, exactly. Only guitar players are obsessed with their gear (I am no different) but since getting an MX5 for recording at home, life has become so much simpler
Own a deluxe reverb and the Iridium sounds like an amp. The Headrush sounds not like a real amp buy useful as a tool for expression. Definitely choose the Iridium since I was raised on real amp.
I have the Headrush MX5. I bought it because Andertons (and other UA-camrs) did great video demonstrations and I wanted something versatile and portable with options for connectivity. I can't say I'm getting the best results with it though. I can't quite get it to sound how I want despite menu diving and playing it through studio monitors. I don't have the Iridium, but on the basis of this video comparison, the Headrush sounds great - louder, more present, better clarity. I'm not against digital in the slightest - it's the best option for anyone on a budget (in comparison to buying all analogue/valve amp gear) to open up a lot of versatility and give amazing sound-alike for the money. I'm a fan of my Fender Mustang GTX100 amp, my UAD pedals (which are incredible), etc. I probably need more time with the Headrush though. If anyone has some basic set-ups and tips to unleash this thing and make it astonishing, please feel free to educate me!
My friend, I feel the same way as you. I had my MX5 for 4 months and sadly sold it. I really want to love it and I’m all for digital modelling. Unfortunately I just couldn’t get it sounding good, and have gone back to my trusty workhorse BOSS Katana 50W. My studio monitors are good and no matter what I did with the Headrush it just sounded dull and lifeless. I know it’s able to sound killer and it’s clearly an amazing product, but I wasn’t prepared to buy ‘better’ studio monitors to get it sounding better. By the time I would’ve spent that kind of money on the whole setup, I’d rather get a Victory V4 Kraken!
@@Chris_Nouvelli It's interesting you mention Victory, because I also bought a Jack V4 Pre-amp pedal with the valves in it and hooked that to the FX loop of my Fender Mustang, so I can use that digital combo amp's cab and Celestion speaker with the Victory valve V4 pedal. The Jack may as well be called The Ace, I like it a lot.. Just the kind of tone I wanted on the clean channel that feels more present than a lot of the digital modelling stuff (even though the Mustang's sounds are pretty good, IMO)..
I used to own the full size Headrush and the reason I got rid of it was the switches were/are activate on release. I can’t truck with that. The unit sounded really good though.
The Quilter Superblocks sounds as good as the Iridium in my opinion. I have owned both for over a year. You should do a comparison. It takes more time to dial in tones on the Iridium. It looks simple, but it really takes time to get stellar tones. They are different animals but share many of the same applications. The Headrush does more but takes up more real estate but does more. To me it sounds less real.
I feel like the Strymon is in Mono and the HeadRush is in Stereo. Like one has been mastered ( HeadRush) and the other is just an Amp without Presence or Depth control. One sounds wider vs the other. On a mastered track it's likely the same Strymon might be a bit more "real" sounding but that's what I hear.
Iridium is dead simple with hidden power under the hood, a hallmark of Strymon. If you like your dedicated FX pedals, El Cap, H9, Tumnus, GE7, Keeley comp whatever and want to add amp / cab for a portable rig the Iridium is perfect. MX5 is a full rig builder. Headrush GUI is ridiculously good and you can create almost any tone with a unit that fits in a gigbag for not much $$$. I use Kemper Stage for my mission critical gigs and studio work, pedal board and amp for jamming improv gigs, and MX5 for rehearsals and cover gigs. If you can’t get great tones from even the cheapest gear in 2023 then practice more.
A few days ago I compared the Fender Deluxe Tone Master XLR line out against HX Stomp and Toperdo CabM. Tone Master beats every day of the week all of them. It feels like an amp and recorded amazing...
I've played AC30's for 40 years now. I recently heard how good the Universal Audio Ruby '63 sounds. To me, my guitar into my pedalboard into the Ruby '63 into my audio interface would be the way to go. I bought a POD Go two years ago. Never used it. I don't want to spend hours to dial in a good enough AC30 sound. I just want to record quickly and easy. Both the Irridium and the Ruby are small enough to live on my desk. That's why I prefer those (especially the Ruby). I regret the purchase of the POD Go.
To me, there are two things to consider...Sound/Tone and Ease of Use...I don't know if these digital multi-unit have become equal or surpass they're analog counterpart in the Tone department ...I'll have to check for myself...As for the Ease of Use...an analog pedal is really great for 2-3 basic tone and fast editability...If the Digital Multi-Effects can get to sound and be editable as easily as an analog unit...they will rule the futur...I'm eying an Helix LT...Ease of use is ''ok'' but i'm still not sure about the tone...
Thanks for the video. I have the Strymon and could hear the sonic difference as described by John (although I thought the Strymon was never loud enough - perhaps it was through your speakers). However, I really only use the Strymon for rehearsals - I don’t think it can ever replace my various amps (I now use a Tone Master which is wonderful - and I can DI it into a board). In terms of comparing with the multi fx board. Yes, perhaps a better sound but I know I would use it for a while and then put it back in the box and go back to my pedals, like I did with my Boss ME50 20 years ago. I can’t be doing with the menus and ultimately, I love individual pedals. Great stuff though - cheers!
It’s clear to me that with all of the multi Fx boards getting the tones right that the high end amp in a box pedals like the Irridium simply need to lower their prices to answer the Captain’s excellent question (16:50): “why?” P.S. please be aware of the volume differences next time. The Irridium was ridiculously quiet compared to the Headrush making it sound flat and dull.
If you have nothing else... the MX5 is the way to go IMO especially if you're looking for plenty of effects. Very receptive developers for the remaining gaps in functionality. However, I sold mine soon after release. I didn't want to wait for the updates, for instance the footswitch options alone will (or may already be) epic. Maybe a computer interface soon as well, although editing on the touch screen is very good. But then, I have plenty of other options. Iridium is on my pedal board and with the MultiSwitch I have 5 preset sounds available from it. A Spark by my desk for various noodling sounds. AxeFX II while I wait for the FM9. Mark V and JVM410C for traditional amps.
Good idea making this vid. The last two years most of us were locked down in our little homestudios and there they came: the amps in a pedal, multifx's and you forgot all the DAW related or stand alone programs emulating amps, pedals, instruments, rigs or orchestras. There has to be a second part of this comparing multifx and software solutions, right?
thank you for this comparative test. 🙏 You rock guys! 🤘🎸🎛 video idea: you should compare the Strymon Iridium with the Two Notes Torpedo Cab M+ and with the Walrus Audio ACS 1 Amp + Cab Simulator. 😉
![Ditch The Guitar Amp? Direct Options For Your Pedalboard [Iridium, Simplifier, Iconoclast]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ie2IAK9TEd0/mqdefault.jpg)
What do we think?! Interesting test for sure
I gave it a like just because you're digital.
Lee's face when he realises how good the MX-5 actually sounds, and how simple to use.
@@RichardBeales I've had an MX5 since last December and used it for home recording into Logic Pro. It's been great but... GAS (the need for moar gear) led me to buy a NUX Amp Academy and initially I was "Woah this is amazing" and - to be fair - it really is a great little box for half the price of the the Strymon and MX5, but... while it sounded good on the pedal board, I didn't like the way it recorded as much as the MX5, even with the XLR balanced input option and using it as an integrated interface with my current UMC404. So... I'm sending it back for refund. Frankly there is just so much choice around (with more arriving every day) that it is hard to get something rubbish. They are all amazing compared to trying to mic up an amp at home and not piss off the neighbours. Live wise, I'll just use my HB Tube 15 (too old to lug the Marshall Bluesbreaker around lol) with a few decent pedals and leave the amp modellers on my desk for recording. This truly is a golden age for guitar gear. You can find whatever tone you want from a small box. Now back in my day, by 'eck we had to have 14 different cabs and 20 heads in the studio with 30+ mics 😂😂😂 - anyway... love it all and love the Anderton channel vidz as even though they are selling gear for a living, they always give us honest reviews imho. Rock on Captain, Danish Pete and Digital John 🤘
Ideas
Daily Pedal/amp Dream Rig vs Quad Cortex or similar top end modeller for your staple tones.
Extreme Edition = Mick/Dan bringing in their rig vs Quad Cortex or similar.
Signature edition = modellers trying to recreate Andertons employees signature amp/rig tones. eg, Pete's and Rabeas Victory rigs.
Rubbing it in edition = budget modellers that can recreate iconic/signature tones.
Sounds like edition = Digital John uses modelling to outperform sounds like combos from old videos.
Mx5 for the win 🏆
The Headrush was so much louder every time, it was impossible for me to make any comparison.
I think the purpose of Guitar Amp Pedals is to add that Amp modelling to an existing Pedal board. A Multi-FX unit is more of a Pedal Board replacement. Helix Stomp adds Amps to a pedal board too but also adds a 'few' extra FX too if you don't have certain FX or want a smaller footprint pedal board.
Some Multi-FX units (Helix Floor, Boss GT-1000 etc) are rather large and quite heavy to lug around for Fly gigs. It maybe easier to take a 'small' pedal board with a small Guitar Pedal Amp and a couple of pedals than a Multi-fx unit...
Basically the same principal but some prefer to have individual pedals they can swap in/out over an all-in-one Multi-FX unit. Guitar Amp Pedals bring the benefits of 'Digital' to existing pedal boards...
This
How dare you answer the video title in a brief, eloquent and entirely common-sensible way. This is UA-cam.
Exactly that. The amplifirebox does a little bit of both for example. And I barely use more than a bit of reverb and a boost with a touch of delay
Totally agreed. This is why I love my Iridium. I want to go ampless with MY pedals. Not a multi-FX setup. Plus I don’t like screens on pedals. You spend too much time trying to dialing in a tone you like rather than playing. I like to “set it and forget it”, and the Iridium is clean and simple.
Exactly.
I happened to have both. Bought MX5 first and then got kinda fed up with the screen (despite being the best in the business, and having the best interface), and it's kind of hard to compare them. I find the MX5 to be the best processor I've ever had (had Pod Go, tried NUX MG-30, had Helix, Pod Bean, Boss GT-1000 core, etc). The Iridium sounds very good but it's hard to compare it because it doesn't have any reverb. I'd have to get an overdrive pedal and a reverb pedal so I can give a better chance to the Iridium. I prefer using the Iridium from user interface perspective, but damn that MX5 sounds good and is a great value for money. Not sure yet which I'll keep. 🤔I do think that Iridium has awesome dynamics, it feels very much like a tube amp.
Did you keep MX5 or iridium?
I’ve never used a MX5, but I’ve had a Helix for several years now. It’s a beast … sounds great, built like a tank, very portable, and can do just about anything imaginable. Line6 really knocked it out of the park. I recently bought an Iridium. My first Strymon, and I’m super impressed. Call me old school, but I really like the simplicity of it. I feel like the Helix requires me to be somewhat of a sound engineer to get proper tones out of it (I.e. global EQ, shelf EQ, etc. to get the harsh highs and lows tamed through my FRFR). I really only ever used the Deluxe Reverb and Plexi amps in the Helix so with the Iridium, I have that, and I can’t get a bad sound out of it. They’re both great products, and it looks like the MX5 is as well. I think it just comes down to your preference of complexity vs. simplicity. For now, I’m keeping the Helix and Iridium and we’ll see what I end up preferring in another 6 months.
I have the same feeling: Multi-Effects need more patience to get the tone whereas analog devices are ready
Its been 6 months -- where are you now?
I found a used Iridium I could purchase. I mostly like playing along stuff like ABB and love that Fender at edge of breakup. Also would love some Marshall and Voz tones. Thought the Iridium would be it, but I cannot play along with backing tracks and headphones. I want a simple pedalboard, not to add a mixer. In that case, I would keep playing through my interface and S-Gear
I'm listening in my mixing studio, and all the time the Headrush is louder than the iridium! (Our brain is easy to fool, anything that has a higher volume than another is perceived as "better")
And I wonder if both pedals are digital, why not use the same IR to compare them, listen to the harmonic saturation that each one has and the response in the same IR.
And the final comment, that the Iridium sounds at 360p, please use the manual to know that the middle control in the VOX version is not middle! ..
With this I do not mean that the Mx5 sounds bad, not at all, but the comparison did not seem correct to me.
I have an MX5 and since I got it, I've been selling ALL of my other pedals. I've had it for around 4 months now and its still blowing my mind.
Nooooo, never sell a pedal...
@@roscius6204 you obviously haven't used an MX5
@@mondochumstyle I still have the BluesBreaker I bought in 91
I'll check in in 2053 and see how your MX5's going.. 😁
@@roscius6204lol😂
Loving all this content with Lee's godchild Digital John XD But I think you guys are missing out on a key use case for all these mfx units: running them in a live gigging situation, with the output going to front of house PA or increasingly, going into FRFR powered speakers or even the standard 4 cable method into the power amp section of traditional amps.
We need to hear these units mic'd up in the room, with zero post processing of the audio on these vids.
Could also be a task for John during any mfx unit shootouts you have planned - have him create a few similar tones on each unit being tested, getting each as close as possible within the limitations of each unit.
That's two video series ideas for you guys! XD Honestly, I think pretty much everyone on youtube is forgetting about trying to capture that live, in room sound, direct from FRFR powered speakers or traditional power amp effect loops. Kind of old school low-tech recording method, which Phil McKnight uses a lot to really try and demonstrate what is being heard in the room.
Ponder it, Cap? Cheers!
Great video. Digital John becoming a firm favourite in these tests
I listened on a nice pair of AKGs. To me, it sounds like you didn’t match the output volumes. You repeatedly had the Headrush quite a bit louder. No wonder you think it sounds better. Everything sounds better louder 😎
I thought the Headrush sounded worse because of the volume. I like loud music, but the headrush just sounded like noise to me, today. I feel like my ears were violated. If I listen again later, I may feel differently.
Fletcher Munson would agree.
That’s right, loud does not mean better , very bad test
For me, the single biggest issue is 'guitar in isolation' So...Are you playing for your ears or a mix? Both are valid but require a different approach.
If I spend to long with guitar only I get lush tones that when played in a full band mix get lost or worse, muddy the mix.
If your saving to presets, consider having a live set and a practice set.
Get the sound you're after, then play it in a mix(backing track) tweak accordingly and save as a live version.
What I heard here was Iridium = Live and Headrush = Bedroom
Great point. As we heard it you’re right on about which would be better for a mix vs at home. SMG always does “here’s how it sounds in a mix” which is pretty unique to UA-cam in my experience. Of course, he only does Metal. The output volume differences were pretty ridiculous too. I wonder if in the room they sounded the same because I was shocked they didn’t fix it. Of course the louder one is going to sound fuller and bigger. If they are truly modeling how an amp works then being quiet isn’t going to make the thing work.
I have owned both ...Dumped the Iridium FAST... 2 glaring problems when using the Iridium live. I always place my Reverb and Delay after my amp and with no EFX loop you loose the Cab emulation from the Iridium ... the final output becomes the horrible sound of the effect pedal "amplification". 2nd ... it was impossible to balance the Levels between your clean sound and driven sound when switching on the Iridium because of a lack of "channel Volume" . I wanted so bad to love the Iridium but I hated it. Headrush MX5 on the other hand is fabulous in comparison! ...And it is still very simple to use! Only a complete Strymon Fanboy could love the very dry sounding Iridium!
The IR is ultimately what changes the overall sound. Suggestion: use a line out minus the cab sim and use an IR loader pedal. Maybe that TC one? I think it would make the comparison more even. 🤔
You hit the nail. We don't wanna listen to differences caused by IRr section
It's the different IR's here that make it hard to compare the 2 pieces of gear. You guys should try and run the 2 devices into the same IR. That way it's like we're comparing amp heads.
This!
Even if I had a choice I'd still go with something like the iridium. Menu's and options on the headrush make it extremely difficult to just sit with something. The whole option paralysis deal.
the iridium is a software amp in a box for 3 times the price of a software amp, they can keep it, I aint paying all that extra because it says strymon on the box, it isn't "THAT" good
Well, if you know how your "regular" analog gear works, it should be not that difficult to dial its digital equivalent...
I.e. : you grab your amp of choice, put your typical tube screamer, or whatever, in front of it, put your delay and reverb after and set them just like you would do with physical units 🤷🏻♂️
@@damiengreen28 I disagree...I think it IS that good! Not cheap, admittedly, so I picked up a good used one for the cost of a decent pedal. It now sits at the end of my pedalboard and allows me to run all my pedals through it, either into an FRFR cab or headphones. Love it!
A cool series would be blind rating famous amp tones from different emulator devices… like a Vox AC30 tones conparison from iridium, UA ruby, walrus, kemper, etc and the real amp
The Strymon sounded flat and dead but the MX5 did one thing I've not heard an amp sim do before and thats the 'thud' you get from playing a big amp. You know if you hit a high note on a piano, there's a thud that goes through the piano cabinet and frame, the same is true of a Marshall. Play high notes and there is that subsonic thud on each note. Bloody amazing!
Great concept. I’d love to see more comparisons of amp modeling at different price points - maybe Mustang Micro vs 1990s Line 6 Pod vs Boss Katana vs Valeton GP-100 vs Axe Effects vs HX Stomp vs Walrus ACS vs Simplifier vs Kemper vs Yamaha THR10, all with a focus on how good the amp and cab modeling is for a Fender clean sound through studio monitors or headphones. Maybe even throw in a Tonemaster DI out, and an actual Deluxe Reverb through an attenuator.
Agree on the blindfold test. Would be really interesting to see blindfolded tests of, for instance, MX5, HX Stomp, Kemper, and Neural DSP, considering those are the most popular opposite ends of the spectrum in terms of multi-fx amp modeller prices.
I own a iridium and a hx stomp. And the iridium I used to stick on the end of my pedal board. It’s a great way to retain my current sound and tone with the pedals I like and still have a mobile rig. The hx stomp is more versatile but I don’t want to change out all my gear just for helix voiced effects.
the issue with the Strymon is to change amps types during a song for clean, heavy and lead you have to switch a switch and change eq settings with your hands that you can't do during a song. with the multi fx you have them pre programmed on different patches or scenes and just press one button with your foot and you get all the other fx you need on those patches/ scenes too and can be done during a song
Well to be fair strymon gives you a preset slot in the fav switch but i get where you're coming from
Use the FAV button for that
As a Digital John myself, I’m liking these comparisons as I look for options for what I want in a guitar tone from a digital perspective. Also I’m afraid of the prices for tube amps in the near future
I think you should be afraid. My JVM now goes for almost 3k by the time it's delivered to your door (with taxes if that applies). I could not afford it myself now!
I'm a digital John too, I've had valve amps, solid state amps, full pedal boards but in recent years the newer modelers do everything I need.
@Dizzy Duke Same - have a 1970s Bluesbreaker and a Fender Twin gathering dust and just use a cheap but great sound Harley Benton Tube 15 all the time at home. Played my first gig in years a few weeks back and just took the little Tube 15 along and frankly, once mic'd up it sounded great. Can't yet bring myself to sell the two big boy amps but pretty sure that day will come soon. Not like I'm playing any arenas soon lol 😂
i would probably buy the Strymon if I had a pedal board with favorite pedals collected over the years i.e. I just want to stop lugging the amps. If I had no pedals at all I would consider the Headrush as a good complete solution.
12:05 yes, Lee, I think that is exactly the point of the Iridium, and ASC-1, etc...you already have a big pedalboard full of kit that you use in your amps and want something to just either use headphones, or go straight into a PA, or recorder, you just put the Iridium in place of your amp, and carry on as always.
I've been thinking about this recently myself. Either as a backup or for smaller gigs / last minute bookings where I don't want to hump amps and cabs around.
I have both! One for my actual pedalboard, the other to stick in a rucksack/gigbag when I cannot be bothered to lug the big board around. Both sound ace!
I still think for the home enthusiast Multi-FX pedals are the way to go. They offer great value for money, individual pedals at £60+ each it's a no brainer. You get the drum machines, built in loopers you can update them via USB, use them as an audio interface. The only downside is if it breaks and you've spent £500 on it, if a £60 pedal breaks it's easier to replace. I do have a question, Andertons seem to have a great selection of pedals but don't seem to sell the NUX pedals?.
For the longest time I was a digital fan, they sound great and can do so much BUT
Over time I've discovered the dark sides
Less reliable and often unrepairable so failures are often a complete loss
They are constantly made more obsolete by newer better technology, they don't hold their value unlike analogue that even gets more valuable over time.
You get what you get while new analogue flavours are constantly invented both in pedals and amps. No Hudson pedals in modlers, no Blackstar St James.
They are ultimately only as flexible as they are designed, while pedals and amps can be as complicated or simple as you want
They are more complicated to use, analogue is just simple
Option paralysis
They often do not play nicely with other gear, yes many can 4CM but the reality is often analogue and digital just don't get the same result as the digital pedals they emulate when used with other gear.
So the place for analogue gear is simple, they are simple and effectively better value over the long term and can be an investment, are reliable and can be repaired and look cool and have a more prestigious image.
I think you are on to something great here, how about a video series: MX5 VS. _____
Comparisons with various popular pedals could challenge these 'industry standards." Can the MX5 hold its own against the Big Sky??
How much ground (in pedals) does the £400 MX5 cover?
Ugh I wish I would have found this video BEFORE making my purchase and watching several different videos comparing these lol. But it's all good. You guys confirmed what I still feel today: the MX5 is the overall better value. I looked at these pedals, the UA Ruby, the Boss IR200, and even the Mooer stuff. I ended up buying the MX5 because the amps inside sounded great, I already have an HX Effects so on the effects and button side I'm covered, but I wanted more options for amp models. The MX5 just does it really well. The interface isn't as great as some make it out to be. That's where pedals like the Strymon succeed. However if you don't mind tinkering and digging into the hardware and software (I get weird pleasure in doing so lol) then the MX5 is an awesome choice. I have yet to find a model on the thing that stinks. You'll probably spend more time going back and forth between all the models than actually playing because once you think you have a tone down that you like, you realize there are about 50 others to choose from that are also great. MX5 highly recommended
I never see videos like this either. I came to the same conclusion as soon as the processors made that huge jump from stinking on ice, to: "wow, kinda can't tell the difference unless you're A/B'ing them at once."
And that's when I had bought my last pedal. No more rabbit holes, no more pedal guessing, etc. You still change your mind, evolve, whatever, but then you just bend down and pick a new pedal from the multitudes of options. as opposed to figuring out what pedal to buy next, trying them out, etc. I never had the patience for that.
Think both units work great and do serve their purpose for different players...but right now stoked that I ordered the MX5 on sale for 320 dollars! That's value for money!
Idea for a video series: A "Champions League" of FX modelers!
Search a for a common ground: Clean, crunch, overdrive with common amp models (Twin, JCM etc.) and cab sim (Marshall 4x12 trough SM57) or maybe even the same IRs for every unit, so it is comparable.
Every week two units compete in an annihilation process until one ultimately wins.
Combine it with a weeklong discount campaign on the winning unit (and maybe let the audience give a vote that partially counts into the summary?)
Should bring a bit of attention, reach, and conversions, I guess. ✌
I use the Iridium, love it. I used either a Line 6 HX Effects or an Eventide H9 in front of it, or both. that's how I record a lot of my electric tracks. They sound great.
I am a home player and the question being asked @ 16:38 is the very reason, (even though I've had and tried many amps, including tube amps) I currently have a 50watt Fender Mustang GTX and no other modeling or amp gear. Does it take a little bit to dial stuff in? OF COURSE it does, but that's the same with ANY unit/pedals/amps you buy. I can go from the Smashing Pumpkins to Johhny Marr to John Mayer and have all of them 'dialed in' to where they sound really close!
I have a Mustang as well and while I can certainly see where you are coming from, I do find that having everything all in one unit does make it difficult to quickly enable, disable, or adjust individual effects in a given preset as you play. There are some footswitches you can get to help but that only goes so far. This is a big reason why I tend to use the Mustang as a late-night practice tool or a sort of portable solution for casual, on the go playing. For anything more serious, I want to have all my pedals in front of me so I am not so beholden to whatever I set up in a preset.
As a truck driver that has dragged an old acoustic around the county for the last couple of decades I'm totally new to the amp in the box or the Line 6 POD 2.0 that I just recently stumbled over at a pawnshop while looking for an amp for the first electric I've bought in decades and I'm still like a kid on Christmas morning. As an old geezer that's spent the last twenty or so years cursing technology for everything it's worth I take it all back. I love technology now. Who knew??? Not me but I'm glad I do now. And I could've been dragging and electric all over the country instead.
Great comparison. I think it's fair to say that Lee expected the Strymon to "win" this ... and so did I. In the event it wasn't close. I know people are saying that the Iridium gets closer to the sound that a sound engineer would want in a mix or in a room, but I'm not sure that guitarists should be doing the sound engineers' jobs for them. Also, how many of us are buying both of these types of unit just to sound good at home? Is that "narrow bandwidth tone" really something we're hoping to achieve?
Amen
I'm trying to get good tone at home. Eventually I'd like to record but I'm not quite there yet.
This has me wondering
1) if a mic’d amp in the room actually sounds more like the iridium where as the head rush sounds more Hifi - especially in stereo (which it sounded in my car speakers).
2) Powering an effects unit on a board is always a series of will it work and weird adapters I can’t find - so simplicity of board integration might matter along with size…
3) do more complicated effects units breakdown more often than an iridium? Seems like they might have the propensity to quit working like a cellphone or a computer where as the iridium seems pretty stable in it’s components. Maybe this is just perception, but also maybe that perception is what other people see too in making this decision…
Iridium can be programmed with IR cabs, so unlike an oldschool analog piece of kit like a SansAmp, the Iridium is "a computer".
Really interesting look at current state of the art. I have a deep suspicion of multi-effects whether pedals or amps. Comes from bad experiences in the past! On another note, how about a video on the top 5 selling guitars, amps and pedals at Andertons over the year and looking at why?
The middle knob in Strymon Vox mode, functions as a hi cut, and you must turn down to get son highs to pass.
Lee looks so defeated by digital yet again lol at least with the MX5. I loved this video. Mx5 for the win
I have a headrush gigboard and I think it’s awesome and sounds great.
Might have been even more revealing to compare the MX5 using an amp model and an IR. The stock IRs are ok but it comes with 2 Celestion IRs once you register. I stopped using the MX5 cab models 2 weeks after I got it. The frequency response on the cab models in the MX5 are so bloated they all require a parametric EQ after the cab to get to sound correct. The IRs from God's Cab and the Celestion IRs sound great with minimal fussing.
nice idea! but this AB testing is very innacurate for me due to huge level settings different between the two. Why didn't you adjust so they're roughly on the same level?
The Iridium is stage ready, no horrible nasty highs so will always sound decent through a massive PA
Agree and that would be the real test.
Put them in a live environment... and see what an engineer thinks too.
Gear is skewed toward the average punter and there are way more people playing at home than in a live mix.
But where's the effects? Or do I need to spend extra money for those? And where's the other amp models cos some of us play more than one genre
The Iridium is essentially a modern Sansamp GT2. That was the inspiration. So scrolling, no menus.
The engineer will always filter it anywayz..
The whole point of the Iridium is that it is simple. Three classic amps, each with three appropriate cabs, and "room" for ambience. The "middle" knob on the EQ isn't just a mid; it does different things, depending which amp setting you use.
The best use (and the reason I got one) is to have it at the end of your pedal board. Although this comparison is interesting...kinda... they are apples and oranges, really. The MX-5 is a compact multi effects that requires a level of editing. The Iridium is the antidote to option paralysis. I don't have an MX-5 but I do have a full size Headrush Pedalboard, which is amazing. It's a lot of fun and very versatile... but the Strymon sits at the end of my analogue pedalboard and is instant gratification.
They're both great, just...different.
I found this comparison confusing. I've heard demos of these where they sounded good, but in this demo they both sounded terrible. The HX5 was just louder. If you are going to compare a sim with anything, wouldn't it be against the thing you are trying to simulate? How else can you know if it is any good? Comparing one fake to another is pointless.
I'd like to see videos where you:
1. Take a common and popular amp.
2. Set it up so that it sounds as good as it can.
3. Take each of the multi-fx pedals you sell and set them up exactly the same as the real amp
4. Record some playing through the real amp and directly into your DAW.
5. Re-amp the "clean" DAW tone into each multi-fx pedal.
6. Compare the results of #5.
7. Discuss.
I love the digital John effect at the beginning always makes me chuckle.
The iridium sounds like the black and white Philco TV my family had in the 1950s. When we got the color RCA TV in the 60s we never looked back.
Most multi EFX pedals have a weak compressor and none that I know of place it last in line where it can be used as a boost for single coil guitars. The Iridium is nice because you can use your best pedals in your preferred sequence with the Iridium last as if it were your amp.
These days many multi-effects pedals allow you to choose effects order, and even run two of the same effect, so can achieve what you seek.
These days many multi-effects pedals allow you to choose effects order, and even run two of the same effect, so can achieve what you seek.
How about an all Strymon multi pedal setup vs one high end multi fx unit? Now that would be interesting! With multiple guitar players doing comparison? Might be a multi part vid.
Yes but why the “one high end multi fx”? Just keep still the MX5.
Strymon effects (Big Sky/Timeline/Mobius) are top flight.
I think you missed a thought on this. There is a huge difference between a live guitarist and a sit at home or studio guitarist. If you paly on a flat floor one night, an elevated hollow stage the next night and a solid elevated stage the third night, each has it's own acoustics. Each require you to reset your amp to meet the room dynamics. This is much easier to do with the Strymon. Time is money.
The answer is simple: the Iridium is for people like me, who HAVE a load of pedals; a decent tube amp and doesn't want to go through the dark art of how to mic a live amp in a home studio. I use my amp for practice and live work, I use my Iridium for top quality recording. A mulit-stomp with amp modelling is a great option for someone wanting to save bucks and get into recording without the initial outlay. But no-one, surely, would use an amp modeller for live work?
I was at a show two weeks ago and the lead guitarist of a professional band had an iridium on his board and engaged almost the whole time. That’s what made me find this video lol. But I get your point and tend to agree with you based on my use of digital units like helix
Except for many famous touring bands. The average joes like me are using amps, but more and more and more I see modeling being used live.
Nita Strauss' rig rundown is how I learned about modeling in the first place
I've been an Iridium user for almost a year in live situations, and I love it for its small form factor and "amp like" controls. As a reformed 50 lb tube amp guy my back has thanked me many times as well. However, as the only electric guitarist in my band that covers a lot of musical ground my pedal board has grown to a size that I just am not happy with. Sooooo I just bought the MX5 and am very curious as to how I can get it "replace" the Iridium and pedalboard. I think in some respects I am that guy who is afraid to move to that type of solution permanently. In a live situation do I want to be fiddling with menus? Although having that A/B box there has given me an idea..... As some others have noted the MX5 came through much louder and bassier. I was listening on my PC through headphones. Anyway I know it's been nearly a year since this video came out but I loved it. Thanks guys.
I watched this yesterday and I've been trying all night to understand why I am still considering the Iridium- and I think I've got it. If I buy the Headrush- that's the end of me buying pedals, and it makes using the pedals I already have a little awkward as well, they're all analogue. I assume they would still work in the fx loop of this pedal but- not sure why you would even do that because all those fx already exist inside the unit. So, all those JHS pedals I've been slobbering over, wanting to try- there would be no reason to get them. Same for the LPD line I've always wanted to try- there wouldn't be any reason to. When you buy an all-in-one unit like this- like Captain said, it is your pedal board. Man, I've been building my board for over a year now, I put tons of thought and care into it- I don't want to just forget it now and go digital. Not to mention, when I finish my analogue board, it will be unique. The chances of anyone else having those same pedals, and only those pedals, and using them the same way- very small. If I get the Headrush, I have exactly the same thing as thousands of others- I don't like that.
All that said- the Iridium is not available at Zzounds so- the folks that make them couldn't stand the idea of mere commoners playing their pedal I suppose. So, I'll likely never own it, even though it fits my tastes more. If you're wondering ZZounds sells things on payment plans- no credit check, all you need is a debit card. So if a piece of gear is not available from them- and it costs a lot- I can't get it. Strymon apparently can't stand the idea that someone who can't afford to just plop down 400$ might have one of their pedals.
If I’m gigging and something is a bit lacking, I can quickly bend down and tweak a pot. I may even be able to adjust it with my foot, there will never be a time that midway through a song I can bend down and start rifling through menus. Even after a good sound check, the frequencies in a room will change with the crowd, or the crowd/band might decide to get a little wilder, and suddenly you need more drive. A menu isn’t going to cut it. - look to the camera world where Fuji have had massive success by taking away buttons and switches in favour of good old dials. A menu might work in a studio, but not on stage
Does Digital John use a Digital Lou?
Why you ask? I bought an Iridium strictly as a backup for my Headrush pedalboard. The HR has been replaced by a Helix floor and the Iridium is still just a backup in case the Helix fries. A lot of players, and I know one personally won't touch a modeler, not because they don't like it but analog controls are easier to adjust than going into menus. My friend has actually told me that these things are beyond him so he uses his Deluxe reverb with a pedal board full of stomp boxes. It sounds great but again, it's easier to adjust on the fly without menus. Why get one? If you have your own pedals and just need the amp. That's how I did my backup. I have the Iridium paired with a Line 6 M13 which is being replaced by a TC Electronics Nova System pedal.
I like the idea of the simplicity of the Iridium. Plus the fact it looks like a regular pedal give the illusion of ‘analogue / more real’ etc. but at the end of the day it’s 100% digital. And I actually thought the Headrush sounded better.
Me too mate. I think we're really reaching peak gear and, let's face it, once the signal leaves the guitar or the amp and mic, then the world is digital these days.
Cleans are better on the iridium
I believe the pre amp on the iridium is analogic and the ir is digital.
ua-cam.com/video/OD1X2323WxI/v-deo.html
I prefer an all analogue amp modeller, like a samsamp, rather than a digital algorithm amp model. Feels better to play and sounds better IMO.
Digital algorithm models have their place though, especially for delay effects.
The benefit of the Iridium (and it's ilk) is the ability to have a completely modular pedalboard with components that YOU choose and in the order that YOU want, rather than an all-in-one multi-effects unit. MFX units are great and they have their advantages as well, but it's not a direct comparison.
They have effects loops though so you can do the exact same thing if you want
Thanks for this video. I'd be interested in a follow-up video comparing the two with the same cab IR.
Every time Lee says MX-5 I think of the Mazda Miata and get momentarily confused
sometimes im jealous of younger players having awesome gear to start out on, but times like these make me glad i didnt have to figure out amp vs IR vs iridium vs digital vs helix etc as a newbie!
I get what you’re saying man but I’m also an older player and switched to Headrush cause of the touchscreen and how easy it was to get great tones out of it. I recommend trying one out for yourself. Plus it’s also saved my back from carrying combos to gigs lol.
@@ratelvis 100% mate. My young career was pretty much guitar>lead>amp to start with and then a few effects - an OD to boost for riffs/solos - and now, sitting on my desk I have a world of possibilities in a tiny MX5 box. Does it make me a better player? Nope, but it sure makes recording at home a piece of cake compared to the old days. Not used it for a gig yet but hopefully soon.
I just sold some of my pedals yersterday and I’ve been undecided as to what modeler to buy. This video just helped me make my mind up. Thanks!
Digital John has a good ear. Nice playing too. Very interesting comparison, but I think the Iridium was never meant to be used by itself. I think the headrush wins for the price.
Why the Iridium? Well you don’t get option paralysis with it...it’s like using an amp. I use mine as a back up for live gigs in case my amp blows. I can then go into the PA (pedal board into Iridium into Desk) I also use it for rehearsals to save carrying a heavy amp all the time. Plus the Iridium with tweaking really does sound great.
I'm an old school amp guy, just prefer my amp. I hate option overload.
Bought an MX5 and now selling my pedals. Also sold two amps. Very liberating.
So I have pedalboard with a bunch of single effects alongside a TC Plethora x5. The Plethora is a great tool and is very powerful but it also isn't as fast or as convenient to use as a single effect pedal. Multi-effects units are great but they do require a bit more attention to effectively use on the fly. Both single effects pedals and multi-effects units have benefits and drawbacks and there is never really going to be a "one size fits all" solution for everyone.
was just asking a use case question after watching a NUX academy video, scrolled down and found this video. Thank you, guys.
The Iridium has the obvious benefit of just adding it to the end of an existing pedal chain and boom you're done. Then again, you could do the same with any multi-fx that offers amp & cab sims. While this wasn't a comparison of tones exactly, they both sound (subjectively) good and both can be tweaked with EQ to suit anyone's needs I'm sure.
I think the bottom line with all modern pedals, whether they're analog, digital, multi-fx or whathaveyou, is that they all have "good" sounds in them. The deciding factor for me is always the user interface and user experience.
I fall in the DJ (Digital John) camp: For live performances, I opt for multi-fx units because saving/recalling patches is essential. Wherever I go, my "tone" will be consistent and always sound roughly the same. It's also convenient because I don't have the headache of dodgy patch leads, pedal boards, power supplies, loop switchers...the list goes on :-)
I should've found this channel yrs ago. Ive been on a binge, like watching an entire t.v series back to back,lmao!
I actually was thinking about this. Seriously good content. Would have helped if you dialed the Room on the Iridium because it does affect the overall character. I found that clocking it to around 2 (past 12) I get a more realistic amp character.
Without using the same IRs those comparisons are - at least for me - completely pointless. IRs are ESSENTIAL for your digital amp-sound. In this shootout Andertons compared mono (for example Strymon Round Cab a) to stereo IRs (MX5) . That's... well again - pointless. Especially when your volume levels are all over the place (the Headrush was always way louder). The Amp-Stage of the Iridium is top-notch, at least for me. No Helix, no UAFX comes close to this - when using identical IRs (never had the chance to play any Headrush stuff myself though). And if you check latency stats, the Iridium is always between 0,5 to 1,25 ms - all the competitors are plus 2ms. Latency this low is not essential (cause I definitely can't hear or feel a difference between 0,5 and 2ms), but still... Iridium all the way. PS: by the way, the MIDDLE knob on the iridium is NOT for controlling mids. Only on the Punch-setting it's controlling mids. Check the manual in case you want to learn more :-)
Do you recommend playing Wonderwall by Oasis through Amp Pedal or a Multi FX Unit?
Boss Metalzone will get you that tone you are chasing...haha
To me the Headrush needs more knobs. Accessing via menus, PCs, tablets etc. is not good although it does provide almost unlimited options.
Suggestion - How do 4 x 12 emulations sound through 1 x 8 bedroom speakers?
18:15 well you could say, if you can here a difference on your smartphone then it must be a significant difference most people would here on your recording as well.
I'm a POD user since 2007. Imagine I've been playing pod floor plus for every concert and the sound engineers where confused to make the difference. They thought I'm a analog gear user. They where impressed by the old POD floor plus.
I am writing with the help of a translator, hopefully it will be understandable. Personally, I think it's all about everyone's preferences, i.e. how much of this or that, the ideal would be to compare the classic apparatus in the sound of the band, and then each connection in the same place of the composition, and we are not at the end of the possibilities, how it sounds live and as it sounds in the recording, each time it is a different situation and each time we can reach the goal by a different path...
The Iridium really comes to life when you get outside the stock IRs.
As does the MX5
Plus, the iridium is supposed to do that only; so why aren’t the stock ones good enough?
If it sounds good, it's good, never known the crowd to care really about gear and on a record you would never know these days. My opinion 😁
Well said, exactly. Only guitar players are obsessed with their gear (I am no different) but since getting an MX5 for recording at home, life has become so much simpler
Own a deluxe reverb and the Iridium sounds like an amp. The Headrush sounds not like a real amp buy useful as a tool for expression. Definitely choose the Iridium since I was raised on real amp.
I have the Headrush MX5. I bought it because Andertons (and other UA-camrs) did great video demonstrations and I wanted something versatile and portable with options for connectivity. I can't say I'm getting the best results with it though. I can't quite get it to sound how I want despite menu diving and playing it through studio monitors. I don't have the Iridium, but on the basis of this video comparison, the Headrush sounds great - louder, more present, better clarity.
I'm not against digital in the slightest - it's the best option for anyone on a budget (in comparison to buying all analogue/valve amp gear) to open up a lot of versatility and give amazing sound-alike for the money. I'm a fan of my Fender Mustang GTX100 amp, my UAD pedals (which are incredible), etc. I probably need more time with the Headrush though. If anyone has some basic set-ups and tips to unleash this thing and make it astonishing, please feel free to educate me!
My friend, I feel the same way as you. I had my MX5 for 4 months and sadly sold it. I really want to love it and I’m all for digital modelling. Unfortunately I just couldn’t get it sounding good, and have gone back to my trusty workhorse BOSS Katana 50W. My studio monitors are good and no matter what I did with the Headrush it just sounded dull and lifeless. I know it’s able to sound killer and it’s clearly an amazing product, but I wasn’t prepared to buy ‘better’ studio monitors to get it sounding better. By the time I would’ve spent that kind of money on the whole setup, I’d rather get a Victory V4 Kraken!
@@Chris_Nouvelli It's interesting you mention Victory, because I also bought a Jack V4 Pre-amp pedal with the valves in it and hooked that to the FX loop of my Fender Mustang, so I can use that digital combo amp's cab and Celestion speaker with the Victory valve V4 pedal. The Jack may as well be called The Ace, I like it a lot.. Just the kind of tone I wanted on the clean channel that feels more present than a lot of the digital modelling stuff (even though the Mustang's sounds are pretty good, IMO)..
I used to own the full size Headrush and the reason I got rid of it was the switches were/are activate on release. I can’t truck with that. The unit sounded really good though.
I might be just as blown away as Lee was!🤯👀
The Quilter Superblocks sounds as good as the Iridium in my opinion. I have owned both for over a year. You should do a comparison. It takes more time to dial in tones on the Iridium. It looks simple, but it really takes time to get stellar tones. They are different animals but share many of the same applications. The Headrush does more but takes up more real estate but does more. To me it sounds less real.
I feel like the Strymon is in Mono and the HeadRush is in Stereo. Like one has been mastered ( HeadRush) and the other is just an Amp without Presence or Depth control. One sounds wider vs the other. On a mastered track it's likely the same Strymon might be a bit more "real" sounding but that's what I hear.
Oddly enough I asked this yesterday afternoon. And these are pretty much the exact items I was looking at.
Looks like you're in for a treat then!
Iridium is dead simple with hidden power under the hood, a hallmark of Strymon. If you like your dedicated FX pedals, El Cap, H9, Tumnus, GE7, Keeley comp whatever and want to add amp / cab for a portable rig the Iridium is perfect.
MX5 is a full rig builder. Headrush GUI is ridiculously good and you can create almost any tone with a unit that fits in a gigbag for not much $$$.
I use Kemper Stage for my mission critical gigs and studio work, pedal board and amp for jamming improv gigs, and MX5 for rehearsals and cover gigs.
If you can’t get great tones from even the cheapest gear in 2023 then practice more.
A few days ago I compared the Fender Deluxe Tone Master XLR line out against HX Stomp and Toperdo CabM. Tone Master beats every day of the week all of them. It feels like an amp and recorded amazing...
I've played AC30's for 40 years now. I recently heard how good the Universal Audio Ruby '63 sounds. To me, my guitar into my pedalboard into the Ruby '63 into my audio interface would be the way to go.
I bought a POD Go two years ago. Never used it. I don't want to spend hours to dial in a good enough AC30 sound. I just want to record quickly and easy. Both the Irridium and the Ruby are small enough to live on my desk. That's why I prefer those (especially the Ruby). I regret the purchase of the POD Go.
Just got the Ruby today. It's phenomenal. Way better than the AC30 model on the Iridium.
So pleased… just bought a HeadRush!!
To me, there are two things to consider...Sound/Tone and Ease of Use...I don't know if these digital multi-unit have become equal or surpass they're analog counterpart in the Tone department ...I'll have to check for myself...As for the Ease of Use...an analog pedal is really great for 2-3 basic tone and fast editability...If the Digital Multi-Effects can get to sound and be editable as easily as an analog unit...they will rule the futur...I'm eying an Helix LT...Ease of use is ''ok'' but i'm still not sure about the tone...
Thanks for the video. I have the Strymon and could hear the sonic difference as described by John (although I thought the Strymon was never loud enough - perhaps it was through your speakers). However, I really only use the Strymon for rehearsals - I don’t think it can ever replace my various amps (I now use a Tone Master which is wonderful - and I can DI it into a board). In terms of comparing with the multi fx board. Yes, perhaps a better sound but I know I would use it for a while and then put it back in the box and go back to my pedals, like I did with my Boss ME50 20 years ago. I can’t be doing with the menus and ultimately, I love individual pedals. Great stuff though - cheers!
It’s clear to me that with all of the multi Fx boards getting the tones right that the high end amp in a box pedals like the Irridium simply need to lower their prices to answer the Captain’s excellent question (16:50): “why?”
P.S. please be aware of the volume differences next time. The Irridium was ridiculously quiet compared to the Headrush making it sound flat and dull.
You were right this IS the video you need to see regarding these new products! They both can do a job but it’s a legitimate comparison.
Love my FM3, would never trade for anything but an AxeFX!
If you have nothing else... the MX5 is the way to go IMO especially if you're looking for plenty of effects. Very receptive developers for the remaining gaps in functionality. However, I sold mine soon after release. I didn't want to wait for the updates, for instance the footswitch options alone will (or may already be) epic. Maybe a computer interface soon as well, although editing on the touch screen is very good.
But then, I have plenty of other options. Iridium is on my pedal board and with the MultiSwitch I have 5 preset sounds available from it. A Spark by my desk for various noodling sounds. AxeFX II while I wait for the FM9. Mark V and JVM410C for traditional amps.
Good idea making this vid. The last two years most of us were locked down in our little homestudios and there they came: the amps in a pedal, multifx's and you forgot all the DAW related or stand alone programs emulating amps, pedals, instruments, rigs or orchestras. There has to be a second part of this comparing multifx and software solutions, right?
thank you for this comparative test. 🙏
You rock guys! 🤘🎸🎛
video idea: you should compare the Strymon Iridium with the Two Notes Torpedo Cab M+ and with the Walrus Audio ACS 1 Amp + Cab Simulator. 😉