Dismiss Notice

Psst... Ready to join TalkBass and start posting, make new friends, sell your gear, and more?  Register your free account in 30 seconds.

Aguilar DB680 VS Aguilar DB750....can anybody compare them for me?

Discussion in 'Amps and Cabs [BG]' started by tommixx, Jun 13, 2005.


  1. I have a DB750 thread going but I am curious if anyone has or has tried both of these....I would most likely pick up a QSC PLX 1602 (for the weight savings) to power the DB680 through an Accugroove El Whappo....wondering if the El Whappo would prefer the Hybrid DB750......Any ideas?

    Thanks for any comments!!

    Peace,

    T
     
  2. IvanMike

    IvanMike Player Characters fear me... Staff Member Supporting Member

    Nov 10, 2002
    Middletown CT, USA
    yes again.

    i actually tried a 680 going thru the poweramp section of the 750 to the 750 alone, as well as a 680 running thru a stewart 2.1 compared to the 750.

    When all controls are flat, the 750 sounds very close to the 680, although the 680 seems to have a bit more high end extension. The bass and treble controls sound very similar, although i felt i got a bit more range out of the controls on the 680, and the bass seemed a bit "tighter" on the 680 and the highs seemed to go "higher" in terms of frequency response. The parametric eq on the 680 makes the comparison unfair, but the 750's mid control is voiced in such a way that it is very useful for most needs.
     
  3. IvanMike...thanks for your help twice!! I was thinking that by putting up a VS thread I would get a few more takers from people who had the 680 (I have one and LOVE it just have not heard the 750 in relation to it) Thanks again for your help.....

    Peace,

    T
     
  4. BigMikeW

    BigMikeW Banned

    May 25, 2005
    Nashville, TN.
    Banned by TB Administration for refusal to account for funds

    Just my thoughts, haven't heard the 680. But isn't the 680 just a 659 with the Para? Which means your 680 and a PLX would be very close to a DB750 with a Para?

    I was told that all the Aggie high end stuff is voiced very similarily.

    T - after getting your PM about the El Whappo I am thinking that the 680 would probably be the best (though again, I have never used it) because of the Para. I could dial in some exta low mids.
     
  5. IvanMike

    IvanMike Player Characters fear me... Staff Member Supporting Member

    Nov 10, 2002
    Middletown CT, USA
    it is and it isnt. the 659 i belive uses 2 tubes, the 750 actually uses 3, the old 359 used 4, and the 680 uses 5.

    but youhave to remember that you arent always using all of the tube stages as some of them run the fx loop, di, or what have you.

    I also tried a 659 preamp into the 750 to a/b it with the 750, i found very little tonal difference, perhaps none.

    the 500 sounds different than the 659/750/680 family. i know it has no tubes but i think there may be other design differences.

    in catagorizing the aggie "silver" units i hear them as thick and assertive sounding with almost an svt vibe. the 500 sounds a bit "thinner" with an aggressive upper midrange, rather than the stern mid to lower midrange vibe of the "silver" units.

    of course, these are all my takes on them so YMMV. In any event, all of the aggie stuff sounds fantastic.

    FWIW, i actually tried out all of these on the same day along with both demeter units, ebs heads, genz benz heads, eden, swr, sans amp, alembic, and i'm sure i'm missing some others.
     
  6. IvanMike summed it up pretty nicely (see above). IMHO the DB750 has nice and thick mids, with just a miniscule hint of the wooliness that is characteristic of the DB659. It's also very tight and articulate. The DB680 is a little cleaner overall, offers more control via the EQ and does not have a tendency to get wooly when pushed. Now you're into the "which power amp" debate.

    For a lighter weight setup I've been experimenting with the Millenia Origin STT-1 / PLX3002. It has an array of options but the expense may put it out of reach for many. I posted a review in the Gear Reviews section if that's of interest.

    That said, I find myself carting the DB750 out to most gigs... extremely solid build, simple set and forget and you have to work hard to get a bad tone out of it.
     
  7. jokerjkny

    jokerjkny

    Jan 19, 2002
    NY / NJ / PA
    havent tried the 750, but when i had my Tri112, my 680/728 combo was simply orgastic.

    totally ruined all other amps, preamps, etc. with the Tri, includingthe 680/stewart combo, which did sound pretty good.

    again, the more tubes the better with Accu gear. simply eats your tone up, and craps it out as gold bullion.
     
  8. BigMikeW

    BigMikeW Banned

    May 25, 2005
    Nashville, TN.
    Banned by TB Administration for refusal to account for funds

    HUH? :confused: :help: LOL
     
  9. BigMikeW

    BigMikeW Banned

    May 25, 2005
    Nashville, TN.
    Banned by TB Administration for refusal to account for funds
    I believe one of the tubes in the 750 is a driver tube for the poweramp. And the 680 has 5 because of the EQ section.

    Hell, my old SVT-II heads had 14 tubes each including 8 6550 power tubes! LOL

    I personally love my Eden WT-1000 poweramp. Probably one of the best around. 1,000 watts bridge at 4ohms would be more than enough for El Whappo. And it is 28 lbs.
     
  10. Hahaha! :D I have to clean coffee off of my monitor now...

    You know, you keep this up and I *WILL* have to start carting around over 100 pounds of rack again. ;)
     
  11. tombowlus

    tombowlus If it sounds good, it is good Gold Supporting Member

    Apr 3, 2003
    North central Ohio
    Editor-in-Chief, Bass Gear Magazine
    You really should, oddio! That 680/728 combo into Accugroove cabs is one of the most impressive rigs around, IMHO. It adds entire dimensions to your sound, man! But then again, it could be the SPL's causing me to hallucinate... :ninja:

    Also, FWIW, I find that my 659, 359 and 680 all sound fairly different. Even with the same amp, the 659 and 680 have notably different personalities. The 659 can get more snarly and agressive (with Telefunkens, make that "wooly" with Sovteks), and the 680 is more pristine and shimmery sounding.

    Tom.
     
  12. tombowlus

    tombowlus If it sounds good, it is good Gold Supporting Member

    Apr 3, 2003
    North central Ohio
    Editor-in-Chief, Bass Gear Magazine
    I've been thinking of pairing one of those up with my Navigator some day. Have you compared it to any other SS amps, like say the Crest CA9 (my current "gold standard" among solid state power amps)?

    Thanks, Tom.
     
  13. sounds like most here prefer the 680!! Is that a fair read? I appreciate the input from everyone....it is getting harder to decide!!! Keep the 680 and add a 728??? Or pick up a lighter SS Amp to keep the weight down??? Buy the 750 and have it all in 1 box?? I do like tight and articualte!!

    Peace,

    T
     
  14. tombowlus

    tombowlus If it sounds good, it is good Gold Supporting Member

    Apr 3, 2003
    North central Ohio
    Editor-in-Chief, Bass Gear Magazine
    You don't want my vote. It costs more and weighs a ton! :p
     
  15. burk48237

    burk48237 Supporting Member

    Nov 22, 2004
    Oak Park, MI
    I know this much you WILL be impressed with the 750. With my RV5, "headroom issues" don't exist even with one 2X10 cab! And it is articulate with balls!! Serious sound. I found mine for 1295 used, there is no way I could find a pre and power amp combo for anywhere near that price and the power rating is VERY conservative.
     
  16. IvanMike

    IvanMike Player Characters fear me... Staff Member Supporting Member

    Nov 10, 2002
    Middletown CT, USA
    I'll say this, the 750 is unusual in that it has a poweramp in as well as an effects return. that essentially means you can use an external preamp with or without the master volume on the 750. The 750's power section is so impressive i wouldn't hesitate to use it as a poweramp with another preamp (like a 680).
     
  17. BigMikeW

    BigMikeW Banned

    May 25, 2005
    Nashville, TN.
    Banned by TB Administration for refusal to account for funds

    Hey Tom -

    I have compared it to several Crown and QSC's. All were good. Maybe it is just the fact that Eden made the poweramps too match a preamp. I don't know. It just seems to be more alive if that makes any sense.

    When you say pristine regarding the 680 do you mean less warm, less tubey and less punchy than the 659 or cleaner as in less grit/breakup?

    I also like that it has Tune controls. This helps to quickly tune to a bad or boomy room. I played a hall out here last January and allyou could hear was "whooooo". Even with my cabs up on Auralex Gramma pads (love them). So rather than start tweaking my pre I turned the Tune knob up a bit. Bingo.

    BTW, love the 25th Anniversary 24-5 you just got. Congrats.
     
  18. BigMikeW

    BigMikeW Banned

    May 25, 2005
    Nashville, TN.
    Banned by TB Administration for refusal to account for funds

    Burk -

    Now, how would you compare the 659 and say my Eden poweramp. Isn't that essentially what the DB750 is?

    Like Tom I have been looking at the DB750. I tried it and really liked it; and that was through Aggie cabs. Not the Accugroove which I am also considering trying.
     
  19. tombowlus

    tombowlus If it sounds good, it is good Gold Supporting Member

    Apr 3, 2003
    North central Ohio
    Editor-in-Chief, Bass Gear Magazine
    Yes, that does. Thanks. I really do need to audition one.

    Well, it is by no means sterile, thin, or dry, though I would say that it is less warm than the 659. But keep in mind, "warm" is such a subjective term. I do think that the 659 sounds more "tubey" - at least as I would have used that term before hearing the 680 and 359. Now, I have a real hard time understanding what someone means when they use the phrase "punchy", as it seems to be used to mean quite different things to different people. In general, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the 659 is the inherently more punchy of the two, but keep in mind that the 680 is more flexible tonally, and you can probably dial in whatever you define as "punch."

    Of the two, I prefer the 680, and the two bands of parametric EQ (with bandwidth control, no less!) are really great. I tend to use terms like "rich", "glossy", "musical" "complex" "beautiful" to describe the 680 and phrases like "more aggressive", "tube sheen", "somewhat wooly", and "growly" to describe the 659. Part of is is that I feel like the 680 has more clean headroom, and the 659 "overdrives" into a (not too extreme) snarly, growly, gritty tone, so I tend to use each preamp for these respective tonal goals.

    If you want tight, clean, rich, full, dynamic, concussive, and articulate, the 680 into the 728 delivers in spades.

    Thanks!
     
  20. BigMikeW

    BigMikeW Banned

    May 25, 2005
    Nashville, TN.
    Banned by TB Administration for refusal to account for funds
    Fair enough. When I use the term p[unchy I mean that the note is full and warm BUT Tight as hell. Articulatis good too.

    For instance, when I pluck that strings does the note coming out of the amp push me or shove me. I like notes to pound you in the chest a bit.