• 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.

Acoustic bass 361 amp reissue question

#22
I had the acoustic 370 bottom. The 1x18 that didn't have the power amp built in. It was just a 1x18 cab that worked with any head. I used it with a peavey head and I ran a crossover into a 2nd cabinet for better high end response. The second cab was specifically designed to fit on top of the 370 cab. Then I put the head on top. The whole Rig was 7 feet tall and totally kicked ass.
 
#23
There are 2 Acoustic amp lines - one already in GC that tops out with the '70s style 600 watt head and 8x10 - and the other that's US made and is an update on the 360/361 done by the original designer. These amps are just about to hit the market. Do a search and you'll find threads that go into detail.
 
#25
KJung said:
:confused: Duh! You need to compare this stuff 'apples to apples'...
Click to expand...
Ken, was that "duh" to me?? I was just trying to politely respond to one of the earlier posts.

The OP had asked a reasonable question, especially in light of the pending reissue, which IF done faithfully, could be quite desirable for some players. I was just trying to balance some of the comments.
 
#26
bucephylus said:
Ken, was that "duh" to me?? I was just trying to politely respond to one of the earlier posts.

The OP had asked a reasonable question, especially in light of the pending reissue, which IF done faithfully, could be quite desirable for some players. I was just trying to balance some of the comments.
Click to expand...

The 'duh' was concerning using a '112 micro combo' as your representation of 'modern amps' and them comparing it to a very large box like the 360 or 370 series. That didn't make sense to me. Even a very poorly designed large box will be louder by many times than a 112, much less a small 112:)

That was a 'friendly duh' by the way... not a 'you're stupid and don't know what you are talking about duh'!
 
#29
NecroticImbecil said:
In any case, as everyone knows, modern technology has rendered these dinosaurs as obsolete as tube amps.
Click to expand...

Wow. Sometimes a name's just a name, and then other times...

Anyway, I'm surprised nobody's said anything about the Acoustic 360 head / preamp, and how sonically pleasing it, as a stand-alone preamp, is. Long story short, I was in a touring band in the 90s, relegated to using an old Carvin PB200 SS head (all I had at the time). Through only the Carvin, my tone was sterile, boring, and lifeless. But using the 360 as a preamp brought my tone to life and warmed it up beautifully. And then there's the built-in FUZZ circuit - sicker than sick.

A gentleman in Canada (to which I have no affiliation) has gone to great lengths researching and consequently cloning the preamp's Class-A circuit. Here's a link to his Acoustic 360 page:

http://www.lynx.net/~jc/pedals360.html

By the way, Mr. Imbecil, I've watched ebay auctions for the 360 head ALONE finish at $600+; whatever the motivation, there's still a demand for this amazing tone box.
 
#31
Reading this thread brought back an old memory....I saw James Gang at Saratoga Performing Arts Center back in '71 or so...(they were opening for Three Dog Night, what's up with that?), and Dale Peters was using three Acoustic rigs, I don't remember if they were 360's or 370's, but they were side by side.....Holy Cow, you should have heard that sound!!! I believe that's the rig he's using on the "James Gang Live In Concert" album....never heard anything like it!!
 
#33
Hey, alright! I think that's my first time being quoted!:hyper: Thanks Green!

And no, I didn't play or eq like Mr. Babbit...not a whole lot of "funk brother-ing" going on in that band of mine from so long ago...it was a tech-metal paradigm.:bassist:
 
#35
KJung said:
The 'duh' was concerning using a '112 micro combo' as your representation of 'modern amps' and them comparing it to a very large box like the 360 or 370 series. That didn't make sense to me. Even a very poorly designed large box will be louder by many times than a 112, much less a small 112:)
Click to expand...
Exactly; we were both saying the same thing. I didn't think that was a reasonable comment either.

Anyhow, moving forward...
 
#36
I did a gig over a year and a half ago and the club had one of those old Acoustic 1x18 cabs (the rear firing one) and they asked me to try the cab out. Someone gave one of the owners the cab and they wanted to use it as a house cab to keep the amount of gear in the club down (small club).

I was little dubious of it till I plugged my rig in and after about 5 minutes of playing through it I said no sweat, I'll use it. Did the show and the whole set up sounded so good the bass players from the next 2 bands asked if they could use my rig with that cab. I'm not sure if it was the original speaker that was in the cab but whatever it was it sounded great.

I loved that cab but the size of it would be prohibitive. If someone wanted to give me that cab or one like it, I'd take it in a heartbeat.

I have one of the new GC Acoustic B200 heads, should have thought that purchase out more. Only 250.00 but I could have gotten something better for sure.
 
#37
A quick WWW search produced the scaned schematics for the 360 series. Like a blast from the past seeing all those semiconductor part numbers. The drawings are dated 1969, how on earth you could think to "replicate" this circuitry composition is beyond me. If you could do that then the Saturn 5 reissue cannot be far off....

In the 60's we basicly had germanium transistors, npn were almost non exsistent. So circuits were done with pnp only type devices. FETS were around though soooo expensive, MOSFET's were supposed to"emulate" valve sound....laughable these days i know, however it was a reality back then for makers or so they thought. We even used logic gates in linear circuits to emulate "valve/tube" sounds...desperate people do desperate things...

To me there is nothing magical about Acoustic circuitry, inovative for the period yes, relevent these days? Not a word of it....god bless the days of germanium thermal runaway in power stages...i do not miss that technology one bit....doffs me hat to RCA for the 40411 as the 2N3055/MJ2955 were taking a beating in amps all around the world....ah then there was the MJ10003/4...NAD amps used those...old timer fading away into the sunset.....:-)) Regards John
 
#39
As with many things, past events can be viewed from many standpoints. Today and times past in amp technology are no different. We used what ever amps we found had a good name and worked reliably for major gigs FOH 10-50kW, lights 120-150kW. Name amps of the day were Crown DC300A, a lab servo amp actualy that did work well and took the harsh treatment we handed out. Phase Linear 700B was a mediocre amp, the Crown DC300A blew it into the weeds. We ran double W's with 2 or 4 15" JBL drivers cut off at 250hz from memory driven by the Crown's. The Phase Linear was out of its depth in that application.

There will always be amps of worth and amps of lesser than...valve or SS. Valves/Tubes for my Bass rig each and every time. Try the new amps as i get a chance, though i did my time on 1kW SS bass rig in the 70's.....happy with tube amps until my end.
Regards John
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back