My Letter/Suggestion to Fender (300PRO content)

[eyeballkid]

so this went to Fender today... Id like to hear you guys/girls input, and may perhaps send a link to this thread to Fender so they can see for themselves.. Discuss if youre interested.

"Dear Fender,
Over my many years with the Fender 300Pro I have had a chance to talk with ALOT of bassists about the amp. Over and over I have heard the same thing from every one of them. Every conversation starts with a bassist telling me how much they absolutely looooooove the tone of that amp, and how they are blown away by the features but the conversation ALWAYS goes to the inevitable "BUT..." Every time the other bassist has the same 2 reasons for NOT buying it as their "dream" amp and it comes down to a matter of weight and being oversized. Also, when you throw in the amount of knobs and sliders that could be hurt in moving it, this becomes one amp that necessitates a road case therefore making it heavier and EVEN BIGGER!!! Also, dozens of fellas have said that its size just looks awkward on top of their cabinet that isnt a fender size.

I myself have the same complaints but alot of times (not all the time because Im getting older and that big heavy thing is getting tough to move in the roadcase), but alot of times still heft it along for the benefit of a SUPERB SOUND!

SO... may I suggest something to your development team.

A Fender Bassman 200 Pro. This could possibly be a little lighter by using slightly smaller transformers, which would also save a little on space so that possibly the amp could be sized down a little bit to be of the same size as the rest of the markets tube amps. The less wood would shave off some weight. I have found that 300 tube watts is overkill most of the time as I have NEVER taken the Input volumes, or Master Volume over 4. Less tubes and smaller transformers could give you the space to make the control area fit into the space it did when you had the Sunn 1200 on the market.

Ive told soooo many folks that if you made a Bassman 200PRO it would be the worlds most perfect amp and I could sell every other tube amp I have ( the other amps are really just attempts to find a lighter/smaller alternative to my 300pro when my back hurts!).. and the folks agree!!

if you make one, I'll buy one, and I'll bet that you'll find them flying off the shelves alot quicker than the bulky 300.

just one idea from one guy... but so was the light bulb.

make it happen guys!!!!

thanks for your time."

[Valerus]

Although I have never used the head, it seems like a very valid suggestion.

[anderbass]

Cool Idea. Probably wouldn't end up all that much lighter but I've always thought a 200 watt SVT would be just right for me.

[RickenBoogie]

Well, I do agree that a 200 watt all tube bass amp is plenty enough for all but stadium shows, so you have my support.

[eyeballkid]

well even 10lbs lighter and being a more "standard" size would make this thing perfect if you ask me.. and look thru my gear list to get an idea what its beat out in my quest for tone.

[Thumpking]

It is still 20lbs lighter than my 1980 300W Ampeg SVT, which was 96lbs. It will be tough to get that weight down because of the plate and output transformer. It could be about 10-15lbs lighter max without reducing wattage, and this would be pushing it. Even some of the scaled down Hammond 280w output transformers are still 28lbs.

[BassmanPaul]

If you had suggested a Switch Mode Power Supply for the brute it would have saved even more weight. The problem is that the transformers for a 200W amp are not that much lighter than the 300w versions. Perhaps dumping the laminated transformers and going with lighter toroid versions would be a way to go.

[eyeballkid]

but that would change the sound a bit would it not? Every amp ive played with a toriodal transformer has always left me nonplussed. Besides, the weight isnt the killer issue, its the weight MIXED WITH the size that makes it a bit unweildy. For example its the only amp that cant fit on my front seat.

[D.M.N.]

I could dig a 200w version, though if I had it my way, it'd be 200w, a silver grill cloth, keep the two channels, take out the graphic EQ and Compression, and just pop in a Mid knob. I would buy that in a HEART beat. I love my 300pro, but I've always said I'd rather have just a mid knob than the graphic EQ. Plus, by dropping those, you'd have a less cluttered control panel, and it could be shorter than the 300 control panels, making it more "normal sized", though the size isn't an issue for me since I have a 30" wide cab.......

[Growly Lytes]

This sounds great (200w version) but would Fender bite on it ?
I hope so !! In Australia the `Fender Bassman 300pro` can be bought brand new from any music store for $4000 maybe $3000 with cash........
Wait` did he say $4000 maybe $3000
YES I DID !!
If you dont believe please write to any Australian music store & see.Ive looked all over the best i could find was $2500 floor stock display model with full warranty
This is my biggest drama with Fender ! I dont mind the weight, features & looks.Its the price that kills me. Four Grand come on fellas are you @ Fender that greedy or is the Australian economy the instigator? How do they justify a $3000 price increase ????

[warnergt]

My suggestion would be for a 500 watt, solid-state, class D Fender Bassman 500.
I'm not convinced that you need tubes to get that classic Fender Bassman tone.
I believe the tone is primarily in the Bassman passive stack; my solid-state
Bassman 250 has it.

I'd love a small, lightweight, powerful, affordable Fender Bassman.

[Coolhandjjl]

If I ever decide to sell mine, I'll list it exclusively on eBay.com.au!

[Sartori]

Originally Posted by D.M.N.

I could dig a 200w version, though if I had it my way, it'd be 200w, a silver grill cloth, keep the two channels, take out the graphic EQ and Compression, and just pop in a Mid knob. I would buy that in a HEART beat. I love my 300pro, but I've always said I'd rather have just a mid knob than the graphic EQ. Plus, by dropping those, you'd have a less cluttered control panel, and it could be shorter than the 300 control panels, making it more "normal sized", though the size isn't an issue for me since I have a 30" wide cab.......

Agree on this. To me, a mid knob is more useful than a graphic EQ. My amp has a mid knob, but it's cut only, making it essentially useless, so I have to use the graphic EQ instead.

I don't think a tube amp, especially one with an overdrive channel, really needs a compressor, either.

I like the black metal grill though.

Also, did you get my PM?

[mpdd]

good idea, cause when my ss marshall head finally craps out i would love to have a new fender 200 pro, i have lusted after my friend's 300 but it seemed to be more amp than i need for my garage and or my drummer's living room

[Govier966]

Originally Posted by warnergt

My suggestion would be for a 500 watt, solid-state, class D Fender Bassman 500.
I'm not convinced that you need tubes to get that classic Fender Bassman tone.
I believe the tone is primarily in the Bassman passive stack; my solid-state
Bassman 250 has it.

I'd love a small, lightweight, powerful, affordable Fender Bassman.

good idea. Though i would not be able to afford a 200 pro it also seems like a good idea, most people will not need a full 300 watts.

[eyeballkid]

well hopefully they will bite.. I sent em the email, but if theres enough of an interest here Im gonna forward them the link so they can see what "consumers" think..

btw, Ive never been a fan of onboard compressors, but I find I use the one on my 300PRO all the time!! It fattens it up just right AND acts really well as a peak limiter.. I love it!.. I think the graphic COULD possibly go and Id still be happy, but I do always use mine. However, Ive found Im very happy with just the bass, mid, treble on my Orange and V4B, so if its just right, its right. But if it wasnt just right I would REALLY miss it. Its especially important in the 100-250 hz range where some basses fall flat or can be kinda muddy, and in the 1.5 range where you can get some real good bite without the total zing of highs.

Besides, I think that overall 300 watts of tube is more than anyone needs and thats why the 200 watters are catchin on. Most of the joes playing lots of clubs dont need TONS of power, just the extra headroom and saturation. I say this and my band is LOOOOUUUUUD!

[Sartori]

Originally Posted by warnergt

My suggestion would be for a 500 watt, solid-state, class D Fender Bassman 500.
I'm not convinced that you need tubes to get that classic Fender Bassman tone.
I believe the tone is primarily in the Bassman passive stack; my solid-state
Bassman 250 has it.

I'd love a small, lightweight, powerful, affordable Fender Bassman.

Totally uninterested in such a thing.

[D.M.N.]

Hey Satori, replied to that PM. Sorry it took a week.

The Mid knob would need to be a boost or something where 5 is flat and turning it towards one cuts and towards 10 boosts (I believe this is sort of what the low and high knobs already do on the 300pro).

Also, SCRIPT LOGO. Seriously. Maybe it's just me, but I rather despise the blocky logo on them. Early models had the script, and it looks way better. The spec sheets also says the amp has a silver grill cloth, but I have NEVER seen one with it, even the early script ones.

I use the graphic as well, but just to boost the mids, which could be done with a Mid Knbo just the same. As far as the compressor, I can't even remember if mine is on or not. I could never find an appreciable difference between when it is and isn't, so I'd just have them do away with it and make the panel look cleaner.

[Sartori]

The spec sheet says it has a silver grillcloth?

But it doesn't. Even when it was the Sunn 300T, it was black. That's flat out incorrect.

I agree with the logo thing. Wasn't the script logo also off to the side rather than at the center? I think that would look better.

[eyeballkid]

i think he must be looking at a spec sheet for an old fender bassman.. not the Bassman 300 pro.

Hey D.M.N.. which logo is on yours?