Thunderfunk Amp club!

[sratas]

Originally Posted by michricker

Hey all. Just got a mint shape 750a. Amp is great however I can't get the line out/head phone jack to work. I did write to Dave funk however thought I would write the TB thunderfunk experts. Any special settings to activate the front line out for using headphones?

I have a 550 and think that the 750 has the same connections. There is no way to switch on and off the line out. The line out is always working and I just plug in to play trough headphones (one of the best phones out, by the way).
Contact a technician or Mr. Funk itself and have your 750 serviced, I think there is a little problem

[Bassist30]

Originally Posted by michricker

Hey all. Just got a mint shape 750a. Amp is great however I can't get the line out/head phone jack to work. I did write to Dave funk however thought I would write the TB thunderfunk experts. Any special settings to activate the front line out for using headphones?

Did Dave get back to you yet cause there may be a problem.

[mrclavet]

Hi can I get a number?

I dont have my amp yet (just bought it used off of TB and it hasn't arrived yet) but it is a Thunderfunk 550 and Ill be pairing it with an Avatar TB153 cab.

Thanks!

[michricker]

No not yet I did write Dave. I love the headphone feature wish I could use it! I need it for those late night practice sessions. Frustrating to get a brand new shape amp and find something not working!

[emart]

I've tried to contact Dave Funk several times by email over the past 2-3 months and he hasn't responded. Not sure what's up. He used to be prompt and very helpful in his email responses. I was actually searching for comments by anyone else who had the same difficulty, and stumbled onto this thread.

I suppose I could call him, haven't done that yet. Has anyone heard from him recently?

[Bassist30]

I just emailed him myself a minute ago. Waiting for his response. I did mention the people who are trying to contact him.

[Bassist30]

Daves Mom is in Chicago at a Hospital. Dave is currently with her. He is trying to work from his Droid. I will try to get your information as well as Dave contacting all those who need his assistance.

[michricker]

Thanks much. That's very understandable. I hope all is well with daves mom. He did write me with some instructions to check. I'll have to check it tonight. Thanks for your help.

[5StringPocket]

Could anyone described how the tone and feel of the new TFB800-B2 compares to the Genz Shuttle Max 9.2?
Both amps are quite versatile but perhaps things like low end focus, heft and push to the notes, timbre and harmonic quality of the mids, ability to nail both modern and old school tones, transparency and smoothness in the treble, etc... I have a pair of mid-loaded Baer ML112's, a dual Eminence 3012HO + Selenium HF cab, and a sealed 610 as potential match-ups. Thx.

[5StringPocket]

The ML-112's are transparent but still warm and sound good with a little overdrive; great speakers. The SM9.2 is clear and punchy with plenty of headroom and both amps have very flexible eq sections. I own an SM9.2 but have never played a Thunderfunk and was curious (among other things) about whether the transformer versus micro class D output section makes a difference in the perceived push of a note and dynamic headroom available at mid to high volume to help drive the rhythm section. Also, the timbre control and hi/lo voltage switch looks like they would add a lot of voicing potential outside of the eq already on tap. Comments?

[Bassist30]

Originally Posted by emart

I've tried to contact Dave Funk several times by email over the past 2-3 months and he hasn't responded. Not sure what's up. He used to be prompt and very helpful in his email responses. I was actually searching for comments by anyone else who had the same difficulty, and stumbled onto this thread.

I suppose I could call him, haven't done that yet. Has anyone heard from him recently?

Try 847-257-3788

[Bassist30]

Originally Posted by 5StringPocket

The ML-112's are transparent but still warm and sound good with a little overdrive; great speakers. The SM9.2 is clear and punchy with plenty of headroom and both amps have very flexible eq sections. I own an SM9.2 but have never played a Thunderfunk and was curious (among other things) about whether the transformer versus micro class D output section makes a difference in the perceived push of a note and dynamic headroom available at mid to high volume to help drive the rhythm section. Also, the timbre control and hi/lo voltage switch looks like they would add a lot of voicing potential outside of the eq already on tap. Comments?

I tried to micro's as I needed a small amp for certain gigs. I personally chose the TK MB fusion 500. It was the closest to the sound i wanted. But with the TF550B and 750A I can always eq it to fit the room.

[DrumsAndBass]

Originally Posted by 5StringPocket

Could anyone described how the tone and feel of the new TFB800-B2 compares to the Genz Shuttle Max 9.2?
Both amps are quite versatile but perhaps things like low end focus, heft and push to the notes, timbre and harmonic quality of the mids, ability to nail both modern and old school tones, transparency and smoothness in the treble, etc... I have a pair of mid-loaded Baer ML112's, a dual Eminence 3012HO + Selenium HF cab, and a sealed 610 as potential match-ups. Thx.

Yes, I'd like to know about that amp comparison too.

[jastacey]

I'd check this thread out .... specifically post #27

2 New Thunderfunks!!!!

[5StringPocket]

From the man himself. Thanks that's helpful.

[KJung]

Originally Posted by 5StringPocket

Could anyone described how the tone and feel of the new TFB800-B2 compares to the Genz Shuttle Max 9.2?
Both amps are quite versatile but perhaps things like low end focus, heft and push to the notes, timbre and harmonic quality of the mids, ability to nail both modern and old school tones, transparency and smoothness in the treble, etc... I have a pair of mid-loaded Baer ML112's, a dual Eminence 3012HO + Selenium HF cab, and a sealed 610 as potential match-ups. Thx.

I can only comment on the TF750a and the Max 9.2. From what I understand, the primary upgrade with the TF800 concerns cooler 2ohm operation, so I assume that the 750 and 800 sound pretty similar at 4ohms.

Right out of the box, the Max is much brighter up top, and a bit thinner down low. However, I could get the Max 9.2 to sound VERY similar to the inherent 750 tone with EQ (primarily bumping low mids and cutting upper mids), but could not replicate the brightness and articulation of th Max 9.2 with the TF750, which always sounds pretty relaxed and warm. Both are great heads. At 4ohms, the Max 9.2 definitely has more wump, and with the variable hi pass filter dialing in more deep low end, it will outperform the 750 in open, non-compressed low end down low at high volumes.

Both are great and have similar EQ power. The TF will work at 20hms while the Max 9.2 has more wump and heft at 4ohms but will not do 2ohms (that is what the Max 12 is for).

Both top notch. I found the Max 9.2 more capable of a wider variety of 'voices' with the powerful variable filters, the FET and Tube preamps, etc. I'd be pretty happy with either.

IMO and IME.

Edit: Given that the '800' puts out 630 watts at 4ohms, and the Max 9.2 achieves its max power rating through some pretty slick circuitry/power management, neither performs at their 'nameplate wattage of 750watts and 900 watts respectively IMO and IME. However, both wump pretty hard, with the Max 9.2 having the edge at 4ohms. Interestingly, as an example, my Glock Blue Soul uses a 1000 watt class D module (can't remember the make... not the typical ICE module) and is rated at 650 watts, and it buries almost every other amp I've tried in open, wide, clean, pure, non-compressed low end (of course, you might or might not like the tone, like with any amp, just talking about pure performance below 100hz). So, more going on than the pure power spec's of all these heads.

[Bassist30]

Originally Posted by KJung

I can only comment on the TF750a and the Max 9.2. From what I understand, the primary upgrade with the TF800 concerns cooler 2ohm operation, so I assume that the 750 and 800 sound pretty similar at 4ohms.

Right out of the box, the Max is much brighter up top, and a bit thinner down low. However, I could get the Max 9.2 to sound VERY similar to the inherent 750 tone with EQ (primarily bumping low mids and cutting upper mids), but could not replicate the brightness and articulation of th Max 9.2 with the TF750, which always sounds pretty relaxed and warm. Both are great heads. At 4ohms, the Max 9.2 definitely has more wump, and with the variable hi pass filter dialing in more deep low end, it will outperform the 750 in open, non-compressed low end down low at high volumes.

Both are great and have similar EQ power. The TF will work at 20hms while the Max 9.2 has more wump and heft at 4ohms but will not do 2ohms (that is what the Max 12 is for).

Both top notch. I found the Max 9.2 more capable of a wider variety of 'voices' with the powerful variable filters, the FET and Tube preamps, etc. I'd be pretty happy with either.

IMO and IME.

Edit: Given that the '800' puts out 630 watts at 4ohms, and the Max 9.2 achieves its max power rating through some pretty slick circuitry/power management, neither performs at their 'nameplate wattage of 750watts and 900 watts respectively IMO and IME. However, both wump pretty hard, with the Max 9.2 having the edge at 4ohms. Interestingly, as an example, my Glock Blue Soul uses a 1000 watt class D module (can't remember the make... not the typical ICE module) and is rated at 650 watts, and it buries almost every other amp I've tried in open, wide, clean, pure, non-compressed low end (of course, you might or might not like the tone, like with any amp, just talking about pure performance below 100hz). So, more going on than the pure power spec's of all these heads.

Thunder funk has a nice thread about power and ratings that you should read. Many things here can be debated. Dave stated below.





The prototype TFB600-B2 is owned by the Deputy Attorney General for the State of California. He and I are the only ones who have heard it. Anyone else's comments are just guesses.

Amps have to deliver a voltage into an impedance to generate power. Ultimately the max power is the max available voltage. When you try to short out the amp (2-ohms) the voltage collapses as the voltage drop through the windings increases. If you can double the power by reducing the impedance, why not run at 1-ohm? Or 0-ohms!!! Wow, a ton of power right before it blows up!

The comment about the 550 delivering "significantly less power than a 550", uh, 530 is significantly less than 550? I've said this before (many times) twice as loud as 550-watts is 5,500-watts. Significantly less?? It's the difference between 46-volts (530-watts), and 46.9-volts (550-watts). Barely a difference, but guys get all concerned "It might not be enough power!" That’s why I make the 800. Speed is just a question of money. How fast can you go?

But you hit on something that most guys don’t know about. How many watts at what distortion level? I measure mine at the level that the tip of the wave starts to change. If I measured it at the level that it started to show flatness you could easily add 50 to 100-watts to the rating which wouldn't even be noticeable as to "loudness."

The 550 has 4-output transistors. The 600 has 6-output transistors. This lowers the output impedance, spreads the current load and heat load. A lower output impedance means the amp has a better damping factor which means the amp controls the cone movement better, which means lower distortion, ringing, etc. I never thought that adding two more transistors would affect the tone so much, but it does.

As to ratings it actually puts out 650-watts at 2-ohms. And it can actually hold that power level continuously. Digital amps cannot. This is a rarely discussed fact that almost ALL digital amps don't have any significant amount of power filter caps. No reserve energy. They are designed for 600-watts of Peak Power with the assumption that the demand for 600-watts will be fleeting. That;s why they don’t thump. I've heard one engineer say that if you try to test a 600-watt digital amp at a continuous 600-watts, it'll last for less than 1 second before it blows, and another engineer said it’s 300-milliseconds. The comment was also made that in order for a certain brand of amp to deliver its rated power it'd have to be 125% efficient. Obviously someone’s lying.

And there's another factor that I mention in my demo video. Phase coherence. When the preamp is delivering a signal to the power amp that's all jumbled up due to the use of electrolytics in the signal chain, the amp self-cancels itself. You get 600-watts of a signal that can't penetrate the room.

B&O says the average power is 13% of the peak. I estimate it’s more like 10%. So with an 800-watt amp you’re actually only using 80-watts. The rest is dynamics. That’s why a tube guitar amp can be loud at 100-watts. If it lacks power and distorts and compresses (sings/sustains) guitar players love it. Bass players hate it.

And finally, the last thing rarely thought of is amps are typically tested at 1,000 Hz, but what's the power rating at 50 Hz? I don't mean power fall off due to EQ. I mean the ability of the power amp to deliver power at a low frequency.

So, how much power?

1. At what distortion level?
2. For how long?
3. In phase?
4. At what frequency.

Without mentioning brands () I have two more comments.

A famous digital amp was brought in for service in Australia, and the tech said he already had five of them in storage that couldn't be fixed because the part numbers were all removed and the builder won't give out schematics.

And when production of a world famous brand was moved to China the warranty was changed from 3-years to 1-year. It may be the same schematic but it's not the same quality of parts.

And finally, I have to laugh at how threatened large international corporations feel by one guy building amps at home in America. I don't do anything they couldn't do. I've worked for more than 30 companies in my career as a designer, and I'll tell you what happens. An engineer designs a power supply, someone else designs a preamp, and another engineer designs a power amp. They put them all together and the bean counters take the money out of it. Whereas I do whatever I want to do. The only one I compete with is myself.

[sratas]

wow, too much brain for me...but I'm only a passionate player.
It could be interesting hearing also the opinions of better aknowledged guys...

I own a TF 550 B (my main amp) and a class D SMPS hi-power-rated amp (GB streamliner 900). I must admit that I have never pushed them towards their absolute limit volume-wise (only when experimenting by myself, not in a band context) so I can't compare, but, whereas I love and prefer the T-funk tone at low-medium volume, I find myself liking the STM 900 better when serious power and volume is required (very rare occasion...). Talking about low-end reproduction, I never felt the STM lacking balls or thump in a band context.

having said that.....There is a sort of surgical coldness in the STM, in spite of the wonderful true tube preamp, that I find curious and in some circumstances I find the T-Funk more tubey, and "enveloping"(!!!).
Without having deep experience with many other amps, I am tented to attribute the solid, warm, ballsy but coherent midrange of the TFunk to its poweramp, at least partially...maybe I'm wrong, but who knows

there is a sort of modern "lightness" even into the massive STM tone, that, by the way, seems more bold and tough side by side , but with that sort of surgical, modern, rigid, stiff feel to it. Only a matter of nuances, never felt bad with either in the middle of a performance. I tend to focus more on my technique and my way of playing...bah, yesterday night I drunk a bit, sorry...

[KJung]

Originally Posted by sratas

wow, too much brain for me...but I'm only a passionate player.
It could be interesting hearing also the opinions of better aknowledged guys...

I own a TF 550 B (my main amp) and a class D SMPS hi-power-rated amp (GB streamliner 900). I must admit that I have never pushed them towards their absolute limit volume-wise (only when experimenting by myself, not in a band context) so I can't compare, but, whereas I love and prefer the T-funk tone at low-medium volume, I find myself liking the STM 900 better when serious power and volume is required (very rare occasion...). Talking about low-end reproduction, I never felt the STM lacking balls or thump in a band context.

having said that.....There is a sort of surgical coldness in the STM, in spite of the wonderful true tube preamp, that I find curious and in some circumstances I find the T-Funk more tubey, and "enveloping"(!!!).
Without having deep experience with many other amps, I am tented to attribute the solid, warm, ballsy but coherent midrange of the TFunk to its poweramp, at least partially...maybe I'm wrong, but who knows

there is a sort of modern "lightness" even into the massive STM tone, that, by the way, seems more bold and tough side by side , but with that sort of surgical, modern, rigid, stiff feel to it. Only a matter of nuances, never felt bad with either in the middle of a performance. I tend to focus more on my technique and my way of playing...bah, yesterday night I drunk a bit, sorry...

The Streamliner does have a MUCH more extended low end, and a MUCH more crisp, extended top end, and a much more relaxed mid mid response than the TF. This can be tightened/warmed up by pushing the gain control of the Streamliner, which results in a significant warming/revoicing of the amps.

That being said, while I wouldn't use the words you did, I understand and agree with what you are saying. An amp with a more attenuated deep low end, combined with a nice bump in the mid mids, and a top end that does not include that 6K+ sizzle will sound more organic, warmer, and punchier than a more widely voiced head. IMO, that is the beauty of the TF550, and to a lesser extent, the 750a (havent' played the 800).

The human ear is very good at 'hearing midrange', and if you have an amp/rig that puts out a higher proportion of midrange and that midrange is voiced to 'sound good' (i.e., warm and fat), that is going to be very impressive in a mix for many contexts!

[sratas]

Originally Posted by KJung

The Streamliner does have a MUCH more extended low end, and a MUCH more crisp, extended top end, and a much more relaxed mid mid response than the TF. This can be tightened/warmed up by pushing the gain control of the Streamliner, which results in a significant warming/revoicing of the amps.

That being said, while I wouldn't use the words you did, I understand and agree with what you are saying. An amp with a more attenuated deep low end, combined with a nice bump in the mid mids, and a top end that does not include that 6K+ sizzle will sound more organic, warmer, and punchier than a more widely voiced head. IMO, that is the beauty of the TF550, and to a lesser extent, the 750a (havent' played the 800).

The human ear is very good at 'hearing midrange', and if you have an amp/rig that puts out a higher proportion of midrange and that midrange is voiced to 'sound good' (i.e., warm and fat), that is going to be very impressive in a mix for many contexts!

well said Ken, this was exactly what I was saying