SWR Headlite VS. Markbass TA 501

[cassius987]

I want an amp with a built-in compressor (the ONLY effect I care about enough to actually use). Which of these two is going to make a solid workhorse for me and my four-bangers?

[BigOldHarry]

The SWR is cheaper...

[cassius987]

Yeah, and has a higher input impedance which I like. Honestly that's what I'm leaning towards but I don't want just one factor to count, such as price or input impedance or wattage or what have you...

[Jeff Scott]

You know my answer, already!

[Infidelity]

Is TC RH450 not an option for you.?

[Jheake]

I actually own a swr headlite. I really like it, light weight great tone, and the marcus Aural enhancer is beast. Plus, best of all you can turn it off and just use the parametric EQ. so the tonal posibilitys are limitless.

The Mark bass amps i have have tried are very loud but they seem very linear in tone, or maybe the correct term is sterile. i dont know it seemd like i had to really tweak the knobs on the MB amp to get any variety in tone. but if its loud you want go for the MB as i think its a bit louder, and sounds a bit less modern. SWR for funk all the way tho!

[Craig_S]

Originally Posted by Jheake

The Mark bass amps i have have tried are very loud but they seem very linear in tone, or maybe the correct term is sterile. i dont know it seemd like i had to really tweak the knobs to get any variety in tone.

I haven't had the same experience with my SA450. Little changes are definitely noticeable. Sterile? I don't hear sterile.

I have nothing against SWR. I haven't tried one in a long time. I can say the Red Head (?) 210 combo I used a few times was a pretty cool little rig. I played through a silver faced SWR, not too long ago, that seemed decent. I was sitting in, so I didn't mess with the EQ at all.

I think you'll be happy with whichever you choose.

[cassius987]

Originally Posted by Infidelity

Is TC RH450 not an option for you.?

Never heard of it.

[Craig_S]

Originally Posted by cassius987

Never heard of it.

It's the new T.C. electronics head. It's really nice.

http://www.tcelectronic.com/rh450.asp

[Tim1]

I went from an SWR SM900 to a Markbass SA450 a couple of years ago. Huge improvement in tone and reliability. I would be more inclined to describe the SWR sound as "sterile" but not necessarily as a negative term - just in comparison with Markbass. They both have their own inherent sounds, to my ears the Markbass tone is warmer than the traditional SWR tone (although I have yet to plug into a Headlite). Certainly I found the Markbass controls much more useable and intuitive than the SM900 - for me it is very much a plug and play amp, as is my SVT VR. I guess it is a question of finding amps that naturally sound good to your own ears and the sound you want, then it is just a question of minor tweaks and using the volume control.

[cassius987]

I checked out the TC head, looks nice, but I'm skeptical of the SpectraComp idea. I actually use compression specifically to tame the low strings so the highs will "pop" out more. So SpectraComp may not work out for me. Have any of you that know the head used it?

[KJung]

Originally Posted by cassius987

I checked out the TC head, looks nice, but I'm skeptical of the SpectraComp idea. I actually use compression specifically to tame the low strings so the highs will "pop" out more. So SpectraComp may not work out for me. Have any of you that know the head used it?

Yes... fabulous head, and that three band compressor is very good. It is a bit old school sounding though.. the top end is rolled off at 5K in order to give it a bit of vintage, sort of 'Ampeg but better' type warm tone. I like it a lot, and the features are amazing. The cool thing about the presets is they store everything except the master volume.

Here is a clip of my RH450 with my Sadowsky, and has a quick example in the middle of the clip of a moderately compressed slap tone, with the treble and bass shelving widened (all EQ bands are semi-parametric) and boosted, and the compressor on at a low level just to control the peaks down low and a bit up top.

Skip the first minute... mostly blah blah about the bass. The clip compares the RH450 to the Markbass F1, so that might be helpful also. The slap/compression example is at around 1:50.

http://www.youtube.com/Kjungbass#p/u/7/x2lC_DUGe_o

I have no experience with the SWR Micro, but am very familiar with other SWR heads, which are quite extended and sizzly up top, and quite deep down low, for the most part. Very different philosophy versus the somewhat compressed, warm TC stuff, and the quite even and relatively flat MB voicing.

[cassius987]

Looks like the Classic 450 is the same thing, but with memory settings, a tuner, etc... stuff that appear extraneous to my needs. Am I missing something or is the Classic 450 a better deal for those like myself who are less inclined to use presets and don't mind carrying a tuner?

[JimmyM]

even though i hate all onboard comps, including the ones in these amps, the ta 501 is more like a deluxe lmii, which is a sound i like way more than any swr amps i've played. having said that, i haven't tried the amplite, but i have owned an sm-500 and played several different regular sized swr's. great amps, no doubt, but the markbass is way tubier sounding to my ears, which means it's a winner for me.

[KJung]

Originally Posted by cassius987

Looks like the Classic 450 is the same thing, but with memory settings, a tuner, etc... stuff that appear extraneous to my needs. Am I missing something or is the Classic 450 a better deal for those like myself who are less inclined to use presets and don't mind carrying a tuner?

Yes, the classic is a 'defeatured' RH450... still has the nice compressor, but no presets, no tuner, and probably most importantly from a tone perspective, fixed EQ versus the four bands of semi-parametrics. As long as you like those EQ points, the amp will work great for you at a lower price.

[cassius987]

I use EQ no more than 10% of the time so I'm not too worried about it.