Markbass F500 vs Tecamp Puma??

J.Wolf · #1 07-31-2011, 07:52 AM

(Before I launch into it, I know that tecamp heads have changed recently with the intro of the 1u puma heads, and folks have commented on the change in tone with the newer use of B&O power modules in the 1u models.. I'm not attached to the newer or older models, whichever fits the tone bill better is fine for me.)

So... I've been using an LMII as my mini head for the last couple years, and although its fine (reliable, "good" sounding, cost effective etc..) its not the most incredible sounding, nor does it produce enough headroom into a 4 ohm load for some of my needs. I also have a Demeter / QSC rig I use for higher volume/higher fi applications, but the form factor doesnt appeal as much for travel reasons.

I am wanting a micro head that would replace both of these setups, give me plenty of headroom, provide a tone thats alot more personally compelling (sweeter, creamier top end, fuller but tighter lows, richer midrange), and ideally have a great sounding DI output. The two amps that come to mind based on research and experience are the puma 1000 and the F500. I would love to simplify and consolidate into one great sounding powerful head. currently using 2x tri112 cabs

(For reference, I don't like the forward brightness of shuttles, didn't care for the streamliners tubey sag, liked the Iamp800 at home, but it didn't quite cut right without alot of eq work, liked the punch and volume of F1, but its upper mid thing wasn't happening for me, and it sounded a touch "dry" to me when I heard it).

So based on all that, anybody got a reccomendation about these two or other small heads that would fit the bill? thanks

4-string · #2 07-31-2011, 08:38 AM

If you get the chance, check out the TC Electronic RH750. Great sound IMO, killer features, small and light weight.

AFAIK, the F1 and F500 are the same except for the semi-parametric mid controls on the F500. If you didn't like the F1, I don't think you will like the F500 either. Others have user experience with both, let's hope they'll chime in.

Infidelity · #3 07-31-2011, 08:41 AM

I've read that the SD1200 is really close to F1/F500 tone. So that could be a great option for you.

J.Wolf · #4 07-31-2011, 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4-string

If you get the chance, check out the TC Electronic RH750. Great sound IMO, killer features, small and light weight.

AFAIK, the F1 and F500 are the same except for the semi-parametric mid controls on the F500. If you didn't like the F1, I don't think you will like the F500 either. Others have user experience with both, let's hope they'll chime in.

Thats a good point, I thought about that, although I suspect that a little of what I experienced lacking with the F1 had to do with its eq points not being ideal for me. The "dry" thing, could potentially be mitigated/shifted with some more precise eq'ing in the mids, but in the end, it may be more intrinsic to the amp than that.

Also, I was using another main bass back then (BN6), so its hard to know how it'll work with my current setup. But yeah, knowing that the F500 is pretty identical to the F1 makes me a little cautious about its degree of musicality and dynamics.

J.Wolf · #5 07-31-2011, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4-string

If you get the chance, check out the TC Electronic RH750. Great sound IMO, killer features, small and light weight.

AFAIK, the F1 and F500 are the same except for the semi-parametric mid controls on the F500. If you didn't like the F1, I don't think you will like the F500 either. Others have user experience with both, let's hope they'll chime in.

I forgot to mention that I tried an RH450, and didn't care for it. nice and warm, but the voicing wasnt what I was after.

J.Wolf · #6 07-31-2011, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Infidelity

I've read that the SD1200 is really close to F1/F500 tone. So that could be a great option for you.

Tried an SD800 in a GC one time, through a MarkBass 410, didn't dig it, but that was a bad testing scenario for several reasons. Definitely sounded "sterile" to me.

Thombas · #7 07-31-2011, 10:00 AM

The F500 vs the Puma... Now where is Ken when we need him

J.Wolf · #8 07-31-2011, 10:07 AM

I've read alot of Ken's posts about both.. And watched his videos, they are fantastic and very helpful.

4-string · #9 07-31-2011, 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J.Wolf

I forgot to mention that I tried an RH450, and didn't care for it. nice and warm, but the voicing wasnt what I was after.

Fair enough, they're not for everyone. Just remember that the 750 can be much wider and more open up top, thanks to the TweeterTone. Other than that, I believe the 450 and 750 are voiced the same.

Thombas · #10 07-31-2011, 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Infidelity

I've read that the SD1200 is really close to F1/F500 tone. So that could be a great option for you.

From what you describe in your original post, and what you disliked about the F1, this is actually an idea worth a try, I think. I found the SD1200 closer to F1/F500 territory than to SD800, but maybe a tad less edge in the upper mids, so...? It will DEFINITELY fill those two cabs, and still weighs absolutely nothing.

J.Wolf · #11 07-31-2011, 10:23 AM

I think I'm after a little more pristine and clear, yet warm tone. The RH450 sounded really great for some different tone goals, but it didn't do it for me.

To be honest, I go back and forth between thinking I need a "bass amp" and thinking I need a channel strip type setup, given that my needs seem a little less conventional than alot of folks. I used to do a lot of R&B/rock/blues gigs, where the many various flavors of bass amp voicings are perfect for the role of bass in those contexts.

These days, I'm playing electric bass in bands with alot of acoustic instruments, playing alot of lead voicings and melodies, and many of those bass amp voicings that work great for conventional needs don't sound great for my requirements (specifically in regards to the upper mids and highs) .

The bummer with the channel strip thing of course would be size/weight/expense. My fantasy is that the right micro bass head would sound just right for my needs.

J.Wolf · #12 07-31-2011, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thombas

From what you describe in your original post, and what you disliked about the F1, this is actually an idea worth a try, I think. I found the SD1200 closer to F1/F500 territory than to SD800, but maybe a tad less edge in the upper mids, so...? It will DEFINITELY fill those two cabs, and still weighs absolutely nothing.

To clarify, are you recommending the SD1200 then, or the 800, or the F500?

Jeff Scott · #13 07-31-2011, 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J.Wolf

I think I'm after a little more pristine and clear, yet warm tone.

Check out the Aguilar Tone Hammer 500.

Infidelity · #14 07-31-2011, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J.Wolf

Tried an SD800 in a GC one time, through a MarkBass 410, didn't dig it, but that was a bad testing scenario for several reasons. Definitely sounded "sterile" to me.

I didn't like the SD800 too. If the SD1200 is closer to the tone of F1/F500 it surely is a winner to my ears if I need that much power.

Thombas · #15 07-31-2011, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J.Wolf

To clarify, are you recommending the SD1200 then, or the 800, or the F500?

Sorry for the delay, but I was seconding the suggestion re. the SD1200: Much clearer (to my ears) than the SD800, but not quite as high-mid aggressive as the F1. But not a channel-strip either...

KJung · #16 07-31-2011, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thombas

The F500 vs the Puma... Now where is Ken when we need him

The newer Puma prototypes I've had the pleasure of trying (with the new power modules) sound VERY close to the F1/F500 IMO and IME.

The original 500 is much wider, fatter, smoother and cleaner than the F500.

unlined4string · #17 07-31-2011, 02:26 PM

I've played the Puma, F500 and SD1200. I like them all, but I'd say the Puma voicing is a bit more refined than MB. In a great sounding room I'd prefer the Puma, but in a bad sounding room the MB might have the edge.

My suggestion re the MarkBass options would be to try in a gig situation if possible, to see if you like the way it sits in the mix. Various TB members have mentioned that MB can sound a bit sterile alone, but still work very well in a live band setting.

tedsalt · #18 07-31-2011, 02:32 PM

I have an F500 and two different Epifani cabs. One is a UL-310, which runs 5.3 ohms and is great when I need more volume. The other is an 8 ohm UL2-112. The 112 is my favorite, giving me nice warm and even tone throughout its range. I think you might like the F500 ran thru (2) Epi 112s. Unfortunately, I don't have (2) 112s. I may someday ...

J.Wolf · #19 07-31-2011, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KJung

The newer Puma prototypes I've had the pleasure of trying (with the new power modules) sound VERY close to the F1/F500 IMO and IME.

The original 500 is much wider, fatter, smoother and cleaner than the F500.

Do you happen to know if the puma 1000 is reminiscent of the older puma 500, and unchanged in the current round of production?

I'm leaning towards the tone of the older 500, which I heard at NAMM briefly and really loved (with my cab even), but at NAMM you can't really hear much, so I don't feel that it counts, at least as far as amps go. I could see the 1000 being a good head for me, volume and versatiity wise even though I don't need the compressor and you can't bridge it (IIRC).

The MB heads are great. Reliable, effective, affordable, but the quality and richness of the tone has never bowled me over, even in the more hifi models ala F1.

J.Wolf · #20 07-31-2011, 03:09 PM

Puma users, any feedback on the DI tone? is it good, exceptional, acceptable?