new mesa all tube amp ?????

[tombowlus]

Originally Posted by Sartori

I know that early D-180's came without a graphic EQ. I wouldn't buy one of those. Fender tone stack by itself? No thanks.

In the YMMV or "different strokes for different folks" spirit of things, I'll say that I love my graphic-EQ-less D-180, and I don't ever use the graphic on my Bass 400. But then again, I'm pretty familiar with using the Fender tone stack.

[Calaverasgrande]

Originally Posted by sunbeast

I was going to point that out- there are PLENTY of all tube heads around that seem to fit your basic needs re: simplicity, lack of "extraneous" circuitry, gain, etc. Orange, older Sunn, and of course the vintage and newer Ampeg offerings could also be added to the list, as well as a handful of other smaller boutique builders. I personally am intrigued with a design that does something different than what is already available, whereas you seem to want something that already exists in a handful of different flavors. I'm happy that both options are readily available (though some are unfortunately outside of my comfortable price range at the moment).

I will be interested to see what this "Limiter" really is. There are plenty of stories of employees (customer service reps on the phone at that) at Mesa having little or no technical knowledge about their existing products, so I would not be even a little surprised to find out that a Mesa employee is misrepresenting products that don't even exist yet!

Actually I don't watn what already exists. Nobody (to my knowledge) makes a channel switching all tube bass amp with a good gainy channel on it.
I would prefer to buy a Mesa. I have been playing Mesa amps and cabs for quite a while now. I used to live in Petaluma and work across the street from Mesa.
I was essentially hoping they would come out with the "Dual Recto" of bass amps. Something with vast tonal options based on what a tube can do. I mean, look at a Recto or a mark V. PLENTY of tonal modifiers beyond simple eq.
Wouldnt it be nice to have the bold or spongy switch on one channel of your bass amp?
Instead it seems to me that they are making tube amps for the solid state amp market. Features like compression/limiting, graphic EQ. I wouldn't say that they don't belong on a tube amp. But rather that they are more at home on an amp designed to be run clean and precise. Not on an amp that breathes fire and smites orcs.
Now I know the smoting of orc may be a stretch, but is breathing fire too much to ask?

[Chef]

You're mixing your tenses.

It should be
"Now, I know the smiting of an orc may be a stretch..."

just sayin'..."

I don't believe I'm smitten by this amp, but, I haven't played it either.

Originally Posted by Calaverasgrande

Not on an amp that breathes fire and smites orcs.
Now I know the smoting of orc may be a stretch, but is breathing fire too much to ask?

[Caca de Kick]

Originally Posted by Calaverasgrande

a channel switching all tube bass amp with a good gainy channel on it.

Wouldnt it be nice to have the bold or spongy switch on one channel of your bass amp?

is breathing fire too much to ask?

I agree +1million there. Those are features I can really use and would have really loved to see.

[Sartori]

Originally Posted by tombowlus

In the YMMV or "different strokes for different folks" spirit of things, I'll say that I love my graphic-EQ-less D-180, and I don't ever use the graphic on my Bass 400. But then again, I'm pretty familiar with using the Fender tone stack.

For one of my bands (the old school folk rock one), it'd be fine.

But I need that raunchy mid-boost for when I play metal. Band doesn't sound quite right without it.

[tombowlus]

Originally Posted by Sartori

For one of my bands (the old school folk rock one), it'd be fine.

But I need that raunchy mid-boost for when I play metal. Band doesn't sound quite right without it.

Gotcha. Generally, 0-10-0 gets me enough mids (2-10-2 is my more typical setting, or even 3-10-5-ish on my Mesa heads), but if you need a significant mid boost, then yeah, I can see where you might not get all you want out of that tone stack.

[Sartori]

I mean, both at 2-10-2 (or 4-10-1, which is what I use for the folk rock band), it sounds good, and with the graphic engaged and the mids boosted, it sounds really awesome (with the rest of my metal band playing), I just wish I could get it there without having to use the graphic.

[Calaverasgrande]

Originally Posted by Caca de Kick

I agree +1million there. Those are features I can really use and would have really loved to see.

I was hoping that one of the other boutique builders would do this. The AG500 comes close, but NOT tube.
There are a couple tube heads that have some kind of channel switching going on, but it is usually vintage/modern.
There is of course the Peavey classic 400 but...pardon me if I have a hard time going from Mesa to Peavey in my quest for tone.

[KwinS]

Since this is all just speculation about something that doesn't exist (according to some), I predict that we will all be surprised (or not) when we discover that the purpose of the limiter (which will probably be on the face of the amp) is, in fact, to reduce the grind that is inherent in tube amps, when you would like a clean tone. I would not be totally shocked (or I might be) if there was a hard bypass on that function, so that you could have all the extra tube goodness when you want it when you really dig in.

I totally believe that they will probably floor us with the addition of electrolytes into the power amp tubes. That's more likely than the whole limiter thing, right?

[sunbeast]

Originally Posted by Kwin Smith

Since this is all just speculation about something that doesn't exist (according to some), I predict that we will all be surprised (or not) when we discover that the purpose of the limiter (which will probably be on the face of the amp) is, in fact, to reduce the grind that is inherent in tube amps, when you would like a clean tone. I would not be totally shocked (or I might be) if there was a hard bypass on that function, so that you could have all the extra tube goodness when you want it when you really dig in.

I totally believe that they will probably floor us with the addition of electrolytes into the power amp tubes. That's more likely than the whole limiter thing, right?

Thanks for the info, but why so sensitive? Have one on me...I'll try to remember to keep my mouth shut the next time I have any doubts about something on an internet discussion forum, lest I might hurt some feelings.

[sunbeast]

Originally Posted by Calaverasgrande

I was hoping that one of the other boutique builders would do this. The AG500 comes close, but NOT tube.
There are a couple tube heads that have some kind of channel switching going on, but it is usually vintage/modern.
There is of course the Peavey classic 400 but...pardon me if I have a hard time going from Mesa to Peavey in my quest for tone.

There is also the Sunn/Fender 300T, which I thought sounded pretty good to me when I played through one years ago though I don't know if it would fit your needs. What's the problem with Peavey? Also made in the US, and that particular amp has a great reputation on here...

My personal thought with the Trip. Rectifier style amps is that it is just a bunch of preamp tube shaping and overdriving, most of which is reproducible with external pedals (and certainly much more customizable with external pedals). The backbone of a good tube amp is obviously the power section, and the likelihood of hitting the nail on the head for a large number of people with the channel switching options would be fairly small in my opinion. Why not just have a very versatile EQ section in the preamp that can help mold the overall voicing under power tube saturation then use a boost or dynamic playing to hit the power section harder for heavier parts? This is what I loved about my 400+ after using SVTs for a couple years, as I could set to the right clean volume then tweak like crazy to find that "perfect" overdriven tone when I would hit a boost or light overdrive pedal. My guitarist owned a Triple Rectifier for a short time, as well as a handful of tube or SS pre/tube power component rigs and ended up getting the best (or "purest" sounding) clean and drive tones by just using a cleanish boost into a fairly bare-bones boutique hot-rodded Mesa Plexi clone. The M9 EQ section is much more straightforward from the get go than the 400+, so it seems like it will not over-complicate finding "that" tone much more than a simpler Bass/Mid/Treble setup would.

[KwinS]

Originally Posted by sunbeast

Thanks for the info, but why so sensitive? Have one on me...I'll try to remember to keep my mouth shut the next time I have any doubts about something on an internet discussion forum, lest I might hurt some feelings.

Don't worry about my feelings. I had a great time typing that up. It was amusing. Like your assertions that there must be a mistake, or misunderstanding on my end...because you said so. :-)

[sunbeast]

Originally Posted by Kwin Smith

Don't worry about my feelings. I had a great time typing that up. It was amusing. Like your assertions that there must be a mistake, or misunderstanding on my end...because you said so. :-)

I never said that it was definitely or even must be a mistake, just that it seemed very unlikely to me. My first question anytime I hear information passed down that seems unlikely is whether or not there was a miscommunication or misunderstanding somewhere along the line. Mesa has a history of false advertising and questionable knowledge among their customer service staff that is evidenced by years of posts that I have read here (and have experienced myself on the telephone and through authorized salespeople) as a Mesa fan/user, so I said so. The problem with the internet is that I don't know you from Adam or vice-versa, so everything said here is open to speculation and criticism. I worry about your feelings because for all I know we could be great friends in the real world, and I don't think the vagueness of the internet should prevent that.

[Sartori]

Like I've said before, I always have wondered why Mesa never used the D-180's interesting volume/master setup again. It's amazing for getting great overdriven tones at reasonable volumes. I basically never play that amp completely clean.

[tombowlus]

Originally Posted by Sartori

Like I've said before, I always have wondered why Mesa never used the D-180's interesting volume/master setup again. It's amazing for getting great overdriven tones at reasonable volumes. I basically never play that amp completely clean.

+1 Man, I love that cascading gain!

[Calaverasgrande]

Originally Posted by sunbeast

There is also the Sunn/Fender 300T...

My personal thought with the Trip. Rectifier style amps is that it is just a bunch of preamp tube shaping and overdriving, most of which is reproducible with external pedals (and certainly much more customizable with external pedals). The backbone of a good tube amp is obviously the power section, and the likelihood of hitting the nail on the head for a large number of people with the channel switching options would be fairly small in my opinion. Why not just have a very versatile EQ section in the preamp that can help mold the overall voicing under power tube saturation then use a boost or dynamic playing to hit the power section harder for heavier parts? This is what I loved about my 400+ after using SVTs for a couple years, as I could set to the right clean volume then tweak like crazy to find that "perfect" overdriven tone when I would hit a boost or light overdrive pedal. My guitarist owned a Triple Rectifier for a short time, as well as a handful of tube or SS pre/tube power component rigs and ended up getting the best (or "purest" sounding) clean and drive tones by just using a cleanish boost into a fairly bare-bones boutique hot-rodded Mesa Plexi clone. The M9 EQ section is much more straightforward from the get go than the 400+, so it seems like it will not over-complicate finding "that" tone much more than a simpler Bass/Mid/Treble setup would.

300T has both a compressor and a graphic so...no.
In my experience with multiple different tube amps, the best sounding ones where the ones with the most straightforward signal path. Old Traynors like the YBA1a are kind of my gold standard in that regard. 4 knob eq plus bright and deep switches.
As far as Rectos go, a while back a guitarist for a band I was in picked up a dual rec. This was not too long after they came out. I got his permission to check it out while he was antiquing with his girlfriend or somesuch. I was less blown away by the gainy sounds than I was by the cool tonal options that you get by choosing diode or tube rectification(which is not just preamp shaping or something you can find in a pedal). I also really dug the different voicing options vintage/modern etc.
These are the kind of things I would love to see incorporated in a bass amp. Stuff that Mesa does better than anyone else.
The other one is the now discontinued Vtwin pedal. If you have never played bass through one you should. Can I just get that preamp with a higher watt (8x6550?) power stage? Maybe throw some kind of rectification options in there.
No compressors, no graphic eq.

I also am pretty sure that whatever dynamics they see fit to include will not be true bypass. That isn't the way most amplifiers are built. From what I understand (which isnt much) it is kinda hard to make it true bypass without causing it to pop when it is switched.
I also am kind of skeptical of a tube preamp that can have solidstate junk like compressors and graphic EQs inserted willy nilly. It just seems to me that it would constrict the voltages to what is safe for the solidstate components.

I agree about the SVTs and Mesa Bass 400s. I like to gainstage mine so that I can go from almost clean to rampaging overdrive with just a varying of finger pressure.

[Caca de Kick]

Originally Posted by Calaverasgrande

The other one is the now discontinued Vtwin pedal. If you have never played bass through one you should.

I haven't found a Vtwin pedal to try, but I tried a V1 pedal...LOVED IT! Been trying to find someone selling one since.
Hmmm, now you got me thinking though, because Vtwin pedals pop up way more often.

[sunbeast]

I have used a Vtwin, and the EQ didn't really do nearly enough for me unfortunately- same problem I had with my old non-graphic D-180. As far as simple front ends, I don't really find anything much intrusive about an easy to use EQ. I think graphics get alot of flack because they are associated with the solid-state 80s, but they are super simple circuits (I was able to build one with ease) that don't tear your signal to pieces just by the virtue of being there (I imagine they could be done really badly, but Mesa already has done it right several times, so...)- In my opinion the 400/400+ are great evidence that the graphic EQ and tube circuitry can work hand in hand, do you notice a huge tonal difference flipping the Graphic on your 400 in and out of the circuit when set flat? I certainly didn't on my 400+ apart from a negligible gain change.

The preamp in my Carbine seemed to output a very strong gainy signal, though admittedly mostly clean running which is why I think this amp is a great idea. Being able to push the tube power section with a strong clean signal makes it an ideal preamp to me for getting non-brittle tube saturation. This was something I couldn't get from something like an SVT Classic (to really push the power section I also found the need to push the preamp to distortion, which never sounded quite right to me). Older SVTs didn't seem to have the same problem, though you have to get REALLY loud to get the big saturation with those in my experience. The 400+ was also quite capable of pushing the power amp adequately without preamp overdrive, especially when using the Graphic to boost some low-mids.

Like I mentioned earlier in this thread, I plugged the pre from my Carbine into both my D-180 and 400+ and thought it sounded just about perfect (though I wish I would have had an M9 vs. and M6 for the graphic EQ). I posted about this experiment and a TB'er PM'ed me that just such an amp was actually in the early conception stages (a couple years ago now!). If it had been available then I wouldn't have thought twice about ditching two of those amps for it, though I no longer have the assets for it at the moment I can't wait to try it out!

[spector_boogie]

Sooooo any ETA on the cabs?? If they are sealed, line me up the first 610 they put out!!

[Calaverasgrande]

I don't think they would be. Back in the heyday of the Bass 400(+) the default cabninets were all TL606 derived shelf port boxes. Like the infamous 2x15.