View Single Post
  #11  
Old 08-22-2016, 11:27 AM
Uncle Pauhana Uncle Pauhana is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 610
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by slewis View Post
So many people just seem to want to make the SA220 something more than it is. If you want to add more low end and more channels to it, I guess you're overlooking the fact that it's designed for a SOLO guitarist/vocalist. And for that, I still think it's been the best bang for the buck for many years. Clearly, their new 330 model is doing more than the above-described soloist needs, so I guess they're getting away from the "solo" thing without actually saying it. I have no problem with it, and more choices for we consumers is always good. But if I were a solo guitarist/soloist looking for the best value out there for use at small and medium-sized venues, I still think the SA220 is tough to beat. There are bigger and better and fuller-sounding systems out there, sure, but they're either overkill, with a negligible improvement in sound quality, IMO, or considerably more hassle to transport and set-up. All those comparisons have been discussed ad nauseum elsewhere anyway. My point is that the 220 -- for what it's designed for -- is still one great value, and the new 330 would certainly seem to be more appropriate for something beyond the solo guitarist/vocalist -- duos, trios, keyboardists, people using backing tracks, whatever.
I always appreciate your expertise and enthusiasm for the SA220. But isn't the (unaccessorized) 330 virtually identical to the 220, but with more power and some ports and electronics to add the sub and mixer if wanted? It seems to me like Fishman has not abandoned the solo performer, but rather bumped the power of the SA without bumping the price. And players can forget about the options entirely, if they don't need them. Win/win, yes?

_______
Reply With Quote