Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
PF 50 T fits inside PF-115HE and PF-210HE . Sits on top of PF-112HLF . I run the PF-112 . Tried the PF-115HE and didn't like it . If I do a gig I use the SVT112AV . The PF 112 is just used in the living room . I was hoping for a B-15ish sound out of it ...not happening . The PF112 is a lot closer . The SVT112 and PF50 is as close as you can get to a B-15. As far as I'm concerned for an inexpensive amp . And everyone knows how good B100Rs sound .
With a PF-50 T it is great . I think JimmyM runs one like that also . I dig it . It actually covers most of my gigs perfect . If I need more volume , that's what DI's are made for ...
More burn? Please explain. And the tube PF heads will mount on most newish PF210he's and PF115he's, but those are the only models that do a fliptop and earlier versions of them won't hold the tube PF heads without sawing.
Yeah, Ginger's playing style is really stacatto.
Yeah, you can get those types of tones out of either one, but the PF115he has more low end than the PF112hlf. Personally I prefer the 112, but both cabs should be able to get that sound with a cranked tube amp, although I wouldn't use any more than the PF-50T with the 112.
Right on. I’m probably going to go for the 112, but if I was to get the PF-115 what’s good choice between the HE and the HLF?
I have a Micro VR and it sounds absolutely amazing. It nails the SVT tonality, albeit with a bit stiffer feel on the front-end due to being all solid-state. However, I find that it is a bit under powered for many applications. It's rated at 200 watts at 4-ohms. I think it's been substantiated at producing about 50 more clean watts than that. However, I find that even through an efficient cabinet in a reasonable volume ensemble, it's still liable to come close to running out of steam. Accordingly, I'd probably recommend a PF-350 or PF-500 over the Micro VR. Speaking for me, the VR would be suitable for rehearsals, but I wouldn't think of using it at a gig unless 1). I have PA support, 2). An efficient or large cabinet, and 3). A band playing at reasonable volume levels.
With that said, everybody's volume and headroom needs are different.
P.s. I think you mean Jack Bruce. Ginger Baker was Cream's drummer.
With that said, everybody's volume and headroom needs are different.
P.s. I think you mean Jack Bruce. Ginger Baker was Cream's drummer.
I have a Micro VR and it sounds absolutely amazing. It nails the SVT tonality, albeit with a bit stiffer feel on the front-end due to being all solid-state. However, I find that it is a bit under powered for many applications. It's rated at 200 watts at 4-ohms. I think it's been substantiated at producing about 50 more clean watts than that. However, I find that even through an efficient cabinet in a reasonable volume ensemble, it's still liable to come close to running out of steam. Accordingly, I'd probably recommend a PF-350 or PF-500 over the Micro VR. Speaking for me, the VR would be suitable for rehearsals, but I wouldn't think of using it at a gig unless 1). I have PA support, 2). An efficient or large cabinet, and 3). A band playing at reasonable volume levels.
With that said, everybody's volume and headroom needs are different.
P.s. I think you mean Jack Bruce. Ginger Baker was Cream's drummer.
Thanks for the info. That’s good to know about the volume. I’m probably going to lean more towards the PF-50T paired with either the 115 HLF or the 112 HLF. I want something that’s got that good tube tone while being able to play somewhat quieter for different situations.
Total brain fart about Jack! I knew that
I have an EBS Valvedrive that cops that Jack Bruce tone almost exactly, can go from very mild B-15ish grit to sounding like an old solid state fuzz box, it's got a 12AX7 in it, I even use it with mt SVT, sounds unreal, expensive though but worth it.
As I think more and more about the PF-50T and the Micro VR, whichever I decide to get, I’ve got to consider what I’m replacing and what purpose it’s going to serve. As I stated above, I’ve got a V4-B with the 212AV as my main gigging rig. I’m going to sell off my 2003ish Peavey TNT 115 combo and my Peavey Basic 112 50 watt combo to be replaced with a smaller Ampeg rig as I really can’t go back to peavey after crossing over to Peg tone. The thing I like about the Micro VR is how it does have a headphone jack and a line in for jamming along with a source using cans. However if I invest all that coin into getting the VR stack with possibly a second SVT-210 will I regret not going with the PF-50T?
You will regret it a lot less with that V4B you can use instead, I'll tell you that much!
Hahahahah damn straight! Maybe I can just pick up the svt-210av or the svt112 to use with the v4-b for lower volume gigs.
What would be the most noticeable difference between the 210AV and the PF112hlf? Volume? Tone? Both? Also would the PF210HE be a good choice for the PF-50T. I’ve read the PF-50T does not fit on the 210AV.
It fits but it will hang over the edges slightly. For me, the PF112 sounds like it has a little more bottom, plus it has a tweeter, which isn't all that important to me but kind of nice for when I play upright.
