SWR 400-S vs. Thunderfunk

[KeithPas]

Originally Posted by Brad Johnson

IME and according to SWR owners I know who've checked out both the ThunderFunk's predecessor (AMP BH-420) and the ThunderFunk, yes. Back-to-back it's hard to believe they're both rated at the same power. The SWR also seems to
require more tweaking to get a good sound.

Bear in mind, it all hinges on what you want. Maybe the SWR is the sound you prefer, maybe not.

Good luck.

I do not have any experience with the Thunderfunk or its predecesor but I have played through an SM400s for about 7 years and I am always longing for more headroom. I love the tone but they do not seem loud for the amount of RMS watts they are rated at. I tried using a Yamaha PB-1 preamp with the SWR as its power amp and it was louder than the when I use the preamp section of the SM400. I also did the same thing when I owned an EBS preamp and I also felt that the EBS was louder.

[ihixulu]

Originally Posted by Lync

If these "tricks" do work, then what is the problem?

It's not so much a problem as a difference in design philosophy. Either you want the transparency (which Steve went on to pursue even further in his Raven Labs designs) or you don't give a rat's ass. That's why there are so many flavors of amps available today; there is bound to be one that rings your bell.

[tornadobass]

Originally Posted by KeithPas

I tried using a Yamaha PB-1 preamp with the SWR as its power amp and it was louder than the when I use the preamp section of the SM400. I also did the same thing when I owned an EBS preamp and I also felt that the EBS was louder.

That makes me wonder what my 400S would sound like if I used my GK 700RB's preamp and vice versa.

[Brad Johnson]

Originally Posted by Finger Blister

"Later, AMP offered the Allee-designed BH 420, a two-rackspace, solid-state head that produced 400 watts RMS into 4 ohms; it featured a slightly different 4-band semi-parametric EQ than the [SL-1] preamp..."

Thanks for finding that. And it was a 2 1/2 space amp

[Brad Johnson]

Originally Posted by KeithPas

I do not have any experience with the Thunderfunk or its predecesor but I have played through an SM400s for about 7 years and I am always longing for more headroom. I love the tone but they do not seem loud for the amount of RMS watts they are rated at. I tried using a Yamaha PB-1 preamp with the SWR as its power amp and it was louder than the when I use the preamp section of the SM400. I also did the same thing when I owned an EBS preamp and I also felt that the EBS was louder.

The PB-1 is an excellent preamp IMO. I gave Kevin Brubaker one of mine (I found two fairly cheap over the years) to replace his Navigator. No frills, just usable features and excellent sound. He's driving a QSC PLX 3k series amp into a Bag End S15-D/ Nahas 1-12 rig... in his Rock band.

[Brad Johnson]

Originally Posted by Finger Blister

*****************************




"Evolution of Design" perhaps.
Dodging copyright's, more likely.

Before Steve Rabe AMP was a Power Amp company and
didn't even make a preamp.

The SL-1 Preamp was manufactured by Amplified Music Products
under the design of Steve Rabe of SWR fame
whose original concepts and designs were incorporated
with slight variations into the the Allee-designed
AMP BH 420 and Gibson's GB440.

AMP didn't even make a preamp until Steve Rabe designed it.

Allee made changes so that his ideas barely
passed under the copyright the Steve established under SWR.
Russ Alee has been riding the Steve Rabe gravy train ever since. He never designed a preamp, he just borrows from
Steve Rabe.

Interesting. This is the first disparaging thing I've heard about Russ Alee. Didn't realize he and AMP screwed Steve, as you seem to be saying.

You're saying that the preamp you said Steve designed at AMP, the SL-1, didn't belong to AMP? Did SWR screw Groove Tubes or vice versa over the initial SWR design that was already being used by GT? This is fascinating stuff.

AFAIK Alee went on to Gibson after AMP... where else did the Steve Rabe gravy train take him?

BTW what were the two jacks on the left front panel of the SL-1? It's been a while since I've seen one, I thought they were passive and active inputs. An SWR first?

[NeedMoreBass]

Originally Posted by Brad Johnson

You're saying that the preamp you said Steve designed at AMP, the SL-1, didn't belong to AMP? Did SWR screw Groove Tubes or vice versa over the initial SWR design that was already being used by GT? This is fascinating stuff.

Steve Rabe had a agreement to let Groove Tubes sell the GT preamp under their name. It was totally Steve's design.

[Brad Johnson]

Originally Posted by Finger Blister

Does the Eden preamp look familar?

Russ Allee: Acoustic, A.M.P., Gibson, Eden

I know Russ worked as a consultant on the WT line, from what I've read. What Steve Rabe designs did he contribute on them? The tube in the preamp? 3 band EQ. The Enhance control?

How long did that relationship last? I'm just curious as to how long "ever since" is?


Care to address the rest of my earlier questions? I really am interested to know the real, full story.

[Lync]

Hey Lync, I take it your happy with your Thunderfunk I'm stoked for you

Jerry man! Thanks for your help...I'm still looking for a new cab(s) to use with it, but the Edens sound great for now.

Lync

[Lync]

Dodging copyright's, more likely.

Finger Blister, no offense, but the original question wasn't that of a moral objective...and if it was, I wouldn't be mentioning Behringer as a positive in your take on things.


Lync

[Brad Johnson]

Originally Posted by NeedMoreBass

Steve Rabe had a agreement to let Groove Tubes sell the GT preamp under their name. It was totally Steve's design.

I know. That's not what I'm getting at... but it does bring something interesting up. Was it Steve's idea to do the AMP without a tube while the GT and SWR had them? If so, why?


What I'm not clear on is what FingerBlister is intimating Steve's agreement was with AMP re: his preamp design? Did AMP not own the design they built? Sounds like he's saying they didn't. Did Steve design the BH-260? Was Russ simply a power section designer? This all sounds like Russ did something underhanded... did he?

I don't know one way or another. Since FB opened this can of worms I figured he could provide more of his insight.

[DLM]

I know the history is really interesting, but if we could re-direct back to the original question, that would be appreciated.

SWR 400-S vs. Thunderfunk

I've gotton great feedback and would like to hear others chime in.

Thanks everyone.

[jerry]

[quote=DLM]I know the history is really interesting, but if we could re-direct back to the original question, that would be appreciated.
[/QUOTE

LOL....you mean take it back to the head?

[JazzFusionB0rg]

I own a SM-400S and would like more volume - are you suggesting I should try a different preamp to gain more volume?

I *love* the sound I get out of my SM-400S - I always thought I would buy a power amp and run that after the SWR pre? This would get me as many watts as I wanted to pump into my cabs...

/confused

[Thunderfunk]

Originally Posted by Finger Blister

*****************************

"Evolution of Design" perhaps. Dodging copyright's, more likely.

This is insulting; Legally incorrect; And off point for this thread. But since it seems you are carrying a grudge, and are implying that I'm "dodging copyrights" by "evolving a design," If I didn't respond to this, you'd say I was "dodging the truth!"

The AMP BH-420, the Gibson GB-440 were not copyrighted, although they could have been. None of the circuits contained in these amps is patented. I am doing nothing illegal or immoral by building these amps. In order for AMP, SWR, or Gibson to have a legal claim against me they would have to show that I was hurting their sales by building a copy of an amp they already had in production. Since they are not in production, they are not harmed, and have no legal claim (which they wouldn't have anyway since the amp is not copyrighted or patented).

Originally Posted by SIDE NOTE:

The craze to colorize movies was based on the ability to re-copyright a work if it was significantly changed or improved, as in adding color.

Originally Posted by Finger Blister

The Thunderfunk circuit introduces a compression effect even though it is completely based upon original Steve Rabe designs which are often copied, but never duplicated.

Huh? The Thunderfunk has a "compression effect" even though it's an "exact copy" of a revered SWR design, but doesn't sound the same, or as good, or maybe even better? Pick one please.

Originally Posted by Finger Blister

Allee made changes so that his ideas barely passed under the copyright Steve established under SWR. Russ Alee has been riding the Steve Rabe gravy train ever since. He never designed a preamp, he just borrows from Steve Rabe.

This is slanderous. A copyright is rarely used in electronics, and is only used to protect the pattern of copper on the circuit board from being exactly lifted by a flagrant bootlegger. It does not protect the circuit at all. That's what a patent is for. No wonder you say "Allee made changes so that his ideas barely passed under the copyright that Steve established" as a way of explaining how he got "away with it." As you may know, I do make some of my living as a writer, and can easily spot verbal gymnastics pretending to establish "facts."

Originally Posted by Finger Blister

He never designed a preamp, he just borrows from Steve Rabe.

There's a well respected speaker company out there that hired another well respected speaker designer to design their cabs. The designer was paid; The work was done; No one would claim the buyer "borrowed" from the designer. It's the nature of business, and contracts.

Originally Posted by Finger Blister

Originally Posted by SWR Engineering
features first introduced on a production basis by SWR and developed by Steve Rabe, including: the Aural Enhancer; Side Chain Stereo and Mono Effects Loops; Tuner Send: Real Studio Quality XLR Balanced Recording Outputs (selectable for line or direct, with Adjustable Send ,Mute and Ground Lift functions); separate Independent Inputs for Active and Passive basses; EQ settings down to 31HZ; and Stereo Power Sections.

I take it we're suppose to believe that this says, "Originally invented by Steve Rabbe." It doesn't. It says "First introduced... by SWR." Steve Rabbe "invented" the 31Hz EQ circuit? I invented the 30Hz EQ circuit! He "invented" the "transformerless" DI circuit? Careful now... I believe "Aural Enhancer" is a copyrighted trademark of Aphex. The circuit is called an "Enhancer," and does not work the same way as an Aphex, or BBE unit. "Tuner Send?" Every Fender amp has a "Tuner Send." It's called the second input jack. SWR invented the stereo amp? I was the first amp to have an on/off switch!

Originally Posted by Originally Posted by Bass Player - September 1996

AMP (Amplified Music Products) was started in 1982 by two ex-Acoustic employees, Russ Allee (who designed the legendary Acoustic 360 amp) and Roger Smith. In '83, they hired Acoustic engineer Steve Rabe, who designed the SL-1 bass preamp to accompany the power amp.
Rabe left AMP in early '84 to start his own company, SWR Engineering.

So you're saying that Rabbe was hired by AMP to design a preamp and then AMP "stole" the design? And then Rabbe left AMP and started his own company to compete with them? AMP screwed up by not having SWR sign a non-compete contract!

And Russ Allee, who designed the Acoustic 360, needed to ride the SWR gravy train?

And as for the Groove Tube bass Pre, that was actually an SWR Bass Pre, you should know that if you walked out of GT's front door in Sylmar, you'd be looking at SWR's front door in Sylmar. I'll bet that SWR built the GT Bass Pre's, not the other way around.

Dave "Thunder" Funk

[JRBrown]

Who can I talk to about a Thunderfunk amp?

JB

[KB]

Dave Funk.

Though I have one you are welcome to check out, if you are ever in the Chapel Hill area.
I think they also have them at Fatsound guitars in Cary, though I am not sure