Which rig to use - opinions?

[lowend1]

Okay here's the gig: A country club bar - maybe 25'x75' with vaulted ceilings. Classic rock four-piece 2g, b, d. Our set-up area is limited to one corner of the room, so the rig has to be manageable. The PA is vocal only - possibly one of those Bose "pole" setups. Would I best served with a Crate BT350 and Acoustic B115 (the Crate would only be putting 200W into the Acoustic's sealed-box 8-ohm load), OR a pair of Ampeg B100Rs, run stacked (200w through the internal ported 1x15s), maybe with a parametric EQ or tube preamp in front. The Ampegs are my normal rig for smaller shows. I'm not so much concerned with the wattage aspect as I am about which speaker configuration will fill the room better. The ceilings, I would think, are the hardest part of the equation.

[JimmyM]

The B100R's. No brainer as far as I'm concerned.

[kesslari]

... says the Ampeg endorsee.

But yeah... the B100R's. No brainer.

[JimmyM]

They don't make the B100R anymore, wisenheimer...I can plug it with impugnity

[fivestringgecko]

Originally Posted by kesslari

... says the Ampeg endorsee.

Given the choice, I'd take the Ampeg route too. And I'm NOT an Ampeg endorsee.

5sg.

[paganjack]

I would have to say the B100Rs too. Those amps just sound so good. I think there are enough EQ options on those to mix to just about any room.

[lowend1]

Thanks for reaffirming what I was a'thinkin', all.

[countrybass007]

All votes go to Ampeg, it is the best choice.

[LiquidMidnight]

Everything else > Crate

[lowend1]

Well, the BT350 is still Ampeg kin, and the only "pro" bass amp that Crate ever turned out. They were supposedly built on the same line as the Ampegs and share alot of the same components - I would love if somebody could confirm or deny this (Hellooo Jerrold?) Unfortunately, it only makes full power into a 4 ohm load, and I wasn't about to drag my squareback SVT or old Ampeg 4x10 out for this gig. Methinks I need a 2x10 to throw atop the Acoustic...

[NWB]

Originally Posted by LiquidMidnight

Everything else > Crate

LOL!

Agreed.

[LiquidMidnight]

Originally Posted by lowend1

Well, the BT350 is still Ampeg kin, and the only "pro" bass amp that Crate ever turned out. They were supposedly built on the same line as the Ampegs and share alot of the same components - I would love if somebody could confirm or deny this (Hellooo Jerrold?) Unfortunately, it only makes full power into a 4 ohm load, and I wasn't about to drag my squareback SVT or old Ampeg 4x10 out for this gig. Methinks I need a 2x10 to throw atop the Acoustic...

Ahh yes, I think I know what head you're talking about. I have a friend who has one. I can't confirm or deny the validity of the Ampeg claim, though.

[bassgod0dmw]

Originally Posted by fivestringgecko

Given the choice, I'd take the Ampeg route too. And I'm NOT an Ampeg endorsee.

Me too

[stiles72]

Yeah, the B-100R's.

Personally I'd run them side by side rather than stacked, and split the signal with a tuner pedal. I also wouldn't run the parametric myself, I find that between the three preset buttons and the low/hi mid knobs the B-100R has more than enough EQ flexibility.

[fivestringgecko]

Originally Posted by stiles72

Yeah, the B-100R's.

Personally I'd run them side by side rather than stacked, and split the signal with a tuner pedal.

Curiosity... Any particular reason? Stage footprint would be more manageable stacking them, but I could see maybe one on each side of the stage which would aid in filling the space (presence) at lower volumes?

I guess I've never really thought about splitting my cabs.

5sg.

[lowend1]

Originally Posted by stiles72

Yeah, the B-100R's.

Personally I'd run them side by side rather than stacked, and split the signal with a tuner pedal. I also wouldn't run the parametric myself, I find that between the three preset buttons and the low/hi mid knobs the B-100R has more than enough EQ flexibility.

I split them with a Radial Big Shot. The parametric I use is a Yamaha NE-1 - the three knobs let be adjust the overall volume without upsetting the balance of the two amps. With regard to stacking them - I do it that way because of a) the aforementioned stage footprint, and b) the amps are EQ'd differently, with the bottom amp running with the Ultra Low switch engaged (for "pant leg flap"). The top amp is more "ear friendly" and brings the sound up off the floor a bit for monitoring purposes.

[NWB]

Originally Posted by lowend1

I split them with a Radial Big Shot. The parametric I use is a Yamaha NE-1 - the three knobs let be adjust the overall volume without upsetting the balance of the two amps. With regard to stacking them - I do it that way because of a) the aforementioned stage footprint, and b) the amps are EQ'd differently, with the bottom amp running with the Ultra Low switch engaged (for "pant leg flap"). The top amp is more "ear friendly" and brings the sound up off the floor a bit for monitoring purposes.

Good idea. It's my understanding that you'll get better dispersion with the cabs stacked too.

[StuartV]

Right. Side by side or stacked (with the speaker cones in the same plane as each other) is better than separating them because separated will result in interference patterns that make the bass sound different (louder or softer) depending on where you are in the room. Stacked means the interference patterns will be minimized and what there is will be oriented vertically - so mostly not noticeable. Side by side will make what interference there is be in a horizontal plane, so somewhat more noticeable.

[Pickebass]

I'm no JimmyM but the Ampeg is the way to go...