Ampeg PF20T vs. PF50T

[el jeffe bass]

PF-20T owner here.

I use it in the following three ways:

1. as a preamp (without a cab) for either recording or IEM gigs

2. with a cab for gigs or rehersals

3. as a preamp with another amp feeding the cabinet

Ad 3: I came up with this arrangement to be able to lay loud gigs. However, most often I use it this way in order to be able to achieve tube saturation without playing too loud. In other words, feeding the signal into another amp allows me to play quieter than I would have to play in order to achieve tube saturation.

As regard the comparison with PF-50T: I have never A/B them. However, I remember trying PF-50T in a store before I bought my PF-20T. From what I remember, I like the sound of my PF-20T better.

As regards whether PF-20T is loud enough: it is loud enough for any of my three bands feeding Berg CN112 cab (all three bands use acoustic drums). I remember being told to turn it down during an outdoor gig. Yes, it will not be powerful enough for some players, under certain circumstances.



It depends... First, there are some who prefer the sound of PF-20T (including myself). I would say that the extra 30 watts plus padded input might be viewed as an advantage for some applications. I wouldn't consider the ultra-hi and ultra-lo controls as an advantage because I don't use them on Ampeg amps. I have my doubts about usefulness of the mid selector as well.



PF-20T would suffice for your application, IMHO. I am using it with Marbass Little Mark III as a power amp sometimes. This combination can get very loud.



How do you know that it would be inadequate? Have you tried it?



It is loud enough on its own for my bands. Whether it would be loud enough for your bands...I can't say.

 

[txhawaii]

I haven't compared those actual two but I was using an amp with a similar power section to the PF-20T last year (2 6v6 power tubes). IME it was fine for mellower settings such as drummerless cocktail Jazz. Add drums with sticks, or even just assertive vocals & guitar and it runs out of power pretty quickly onstage.
IME the greater wattage of the PF-50T expands the utility window appreciably. (Won't get *loud* loud but it can do loud-ish - especially with a bigger 4 ohm cab.)
I also routinely use the extra padded input (for my extra-hot upright bass signal) and the ultra hi & ultra lo switches (to add acoustic "sizzle" or old-school "thud"), all of which are absent from the 20T.
All those things are worth the extra money and weight to me. YMMV/HTH

curious...the ampeg classic pedal has an ultra hi ultra low selection. get the 20t, use the pedal? save $?

 

[el murdoque]

curious...the ampeg classic pedal has an ultra hi ultra low selection. get the 20t, use the pedal? save $?

The 20T has a different build. It's not only a different EQ. The 20T uses 2 12AX7 preamp tubes and two 6V6 in the power section. The 50T has one tube more (12AU7) and uses 6L6 tubes in the power section.

 

[txhawaii]

The 20T has a different build. It's not only a different EQ. The 20T uses 2 12AX7 preamp tubes and two 6V6 in the power section. The 50T has one tube more (12AU7) and uses 6L6 tubes in the power section.

I see so it’s different sounds all together. I’m thinking the 50t will have more versatility but the 20 is reported to have better sound. I guess pedals can help w overdrive.

 

[OldogNewTrick]

For the 20T it is also worthwhile to play with different preamp and phase splitter tubes, to generate a bit more headroom for high output bases

Just to report back - tried out my newly arrived JJ's 5751, ECC832 and AT7 together with the other ones I had tried out earlier.
Settled on the 5751 on V1 and the AT7 on V2.
Pretty close to the original tonality of the amp, but with more manageable gain and master volume ranges.
The ECC832 was IMO unsuited to V1 but great on V2, made the amp a bit louder than the AT7, however soundwise pretty much the same.

Happy for now.

 

[txhawaii]

For the 20T it is also worthwhile to play with different preamp and phase splitter tubes, to generate a bit more headroom for high output bases

What does a phase splitter do? Is that a pedal?

 

[OldogNewTrick]

nothing to do with that. Simplified version:

You have two output tubes (or sections) and each side handles half of the signal curve (push-pull or AB).
The Phase splitter allocates the positive to the one output tube and the negative phase section of the signal to the other.
How much gain the phase splitter tube has, determines how hot the signal going into the output section is.

The 20T uses as stock the AX7 tube, which has the highest gain of this tube family.
You can read up more starting from here [URL="https://www.talkbass.com/threads/any-experience-with-the-ampeg-pf-20t-all-tube-bass-head.1363814/page-9#post-22090261"]Any experience with the Ampeg PF-20T all tube bass head?[/URL]

 

[el murdoque]

Between starting this thread 4 years ago and today, I've owned both the 20 and the 50.

Short summary:
The 20 is too weak for a 5 string when you want to EQ in a bit low end and play at anything more than bedroom volume levels.
I'd say it has a warmer, rounder sound than the 50. Less options, but super easy to dial in something that sounds the way the amp looks - warm, tubey, timeless classic. It is a velvet blanket for your earballs.

The 50 has more oomph, more low end and more clean headroom. It has the typical ampeg EQ thing going with the Hi and Lo switches and the rotary selector for the mid frequencies. In direct comparison it sounds a bit more direct, a bit more technical and less warm. I'm not saying that it's not a warm tubey sounding amp - just that it's less warm compared to the little brother.

In my environment, the 20 would more or less instantly sound like an amp that's pressed - which can be a good thing.
The 50 sounded like an amp that had a little more wiggle room and you could make it sound like a tube amp that plays effortless up to a certain volume - with enough cabinets it could get quite loud.

 

[marchone]

Between starting this thread 4 years ago and today, I've owned both the 20 and the 50.

Short summary:
The 20 is too weak for a 5 string when you want to EQ in a bit low end and play at anything more than bedroom volume levels.
I'd say it has a warmer, rounder sound than the 50. Less options, but super easy to dial in something that sounds the way the amp looks - warm, tubey, timeless classic. It is a velvet blanket for your earballs.

The 50 has more oomph, more low end and more clean headroom. It has the typical ampeg EQ thing going with the Hi and Lo switches and the rotary selector for the mid frequencies. In direct comparison it sounds a bit more direct, a bit more technical and less warm. I'm not saying that it's not a warm tubey sounding amp - just that it's less warm compared to the little brother.

In my environment, the 20 would more or less instantly sound like an amp that's pressed - which can be a good thing.
The 50 sounded like an amp that had a little more wiggle room and you could make it sound like a tube amp that plays effortless up to a certain volume - with enough cabinets it could get quite loud.

The emphasis above is mine.

I play 4-string basses. With any amp/cab I'm always concerned about the definition of an open E. If it's anywhere near muddy I don't want it. A quick run up of the Peter Gunn theme exposes it quickly.

When I researched the 20T vs 50T I found most opinions on the side of the 20T tone when recording. Many feel the 20T underpowered for gig use with a loud drummer. My concern was that it would be muddy in the lowest registers when playing live.

I chose the Ampeg PF-50T driving a Mesa Boogie Ultra-Lite Subway 210. I had the TB favorite SW115 before that and felt the open E was muddy at the bottom with the 50T/SW115 combination. I also felt the SW115/SW210 stack was overpowered by the 115. The SW210 alone added the mids I sought to balance the 50T to a tee for me.

If the recording tone of the 50T is somehow less than a 20T I don't know it, but I do know the 50T is far more versatile both in tone and use.

 

[el murdoque]

If the recording tone of the 50T is somehow less than a 20T I don't know it, but I do know the 50T is far more versatile both in tone and use.

Yeah, the 20T basically sounds like a 20T and that's it.

The 50T has a variety of options which gives you ample room to change your tone to your preferences.

In a nutshell: It can sound like anything you want - the only exception is, it can not sound like a 20 T.

 

[marchone]

Yeah, the 20T basically sounds like a 20T and that's it.

The 50T has a variety of options which gives you ample room to change your tone to your preferences.

In a nutshell: It can sound like anything you want - the only exception is, it can not sound like a 20 T.

I think as a dedicated recording amp the 20T makes a lot of sense. The 50T clearly has a different market niche. In a way they’re not very comparable. Hence, they both exist in the small PF catalog.

 

[txhawaii]

Between starting this thread 4 years ago and today, I've owned both the 20 and the 50.

Short summary:
The 20 is too weak for a 5 string when you want to EQ in a bit low end and play at anything more than bedroom volume levels.
I'd say it has a warmer, rounder sound than the 50. Less options, but super easy to dial in something that sounds the way the amp looks - warm, tubey, timeless classic. It is a velvet blanket for your earballs.

This is probably the best description I have read over the time I have been researching the amps. This pushes me solidly into the 20t camp.

The 50 has more oomph, more low end and more clean headroom. It has the typical ampeg EQ thing going with the Hi and Lo switches and the rotary selector for the mid frequencies. In direct comparison it sounds a bit more direct, a bit more technical and less warm. I'm not saying that it's not a warm tubey sounding amp - just that it's less warm compared to the little brother.

In my environment, the 20 would more or less instantly sound like an amp that's pressed - which can be a good thing.
The 50 sounded like an amp that had a little more wiggle room and you could make it sound like a tube amp that plays effortless up to a certain volume - with enough cabinets it could get quite loud.

Another good description...but not as "warm." It appears the neither 20/50 would is not adequate outside the bedroom or small, rather tiny venue minus loud band members. The 50 seems an odd fit so much Ampeg should have combined the two marketing the combo tube amp as a recording device (with limited live applications) and left live music to start with the V4B.

I would consider the V4B for the reasons that is more than useful amp but does not seem to be meant for "bedroom" use.

 

[txhawaii]

The emphasis above is mine.

I play 4-string basses. With any amp/cab I'm always concerned about the definition of an open E. If it's anywhere near muddy I don't want it. A quick run up of the Peter Gunn theme exposes it quickly.

When I researched the 20T vs 50T I found most opinions on the side of the 20T tone when recording. Many feel the 20T underpowered for gig use with a loud drummer. My concern was that it would be muddy in the lowest registers when playing live.

I chose the Ampeg PF-50T driving a Mesa Boogie Ultra-Lite Subway 210. I had the TB favorite SW115 before that and felt the open E was muddy at the bottom with the 50T/SW115 combination. I also felt the SW115/SW210 stack was overpowered by the 115. The SW210 alone added the mids I sought to balance the 50T to a tee for me.

If the recording tone of the 50T is somehow less than a 20T I don't know it, but I do know the 50T is far more versatile both in tone and use.

Oddly I read the 50t is more problematic for many with the 20t having overall consensus of having nice sound but sorely underpowered. The 50t seems to be the more useful amp but if I played live I would think the V4B would be the more useful amp outside of a home studio use.

 

[txhawaii]

I think as a dedicated recording amp the 20T makes a lot of sense. The 50T clearly has a different market niche. In a way they’re not very comparable. Hence, they both exist in the small PF catalog.

It really seems the 50t is a misfit with the 20t being warm and cozy for home use and the V4B being right for live applications.

 

[Wasnex]

It really seems the 50t is a misfit with the 20t being warm and cozy for home use and the V4B being right for live applications.

IMHO the bold text is not accurate. The PF50t has a really strong Ampeg character and is very sweet sounding. A lot of people say it sounds very similar to the reissue V4B. Potential advantages over the V4B. The PF50t has one more frequency center for the mid-range control and also a built-in dummy load, so it can be used without a speaker for silent recording.

I haven't played the PF20t. A common complaint I have read is it does not have enough gain to push either the preamp or output section into drive. Pretty sure this can easily be remedied with a clean boost, but still something to consider.

The PF50t has enough gain to easily push both the preamp and output into drive territory. The PF50t also has a more versatile/flexible tone stack than the PF20t. As far as the quality of the PF50t's OD, I think it sounds pretty awful when you play solo. But it seems to sound really good in the context of a mix. To be honest, Ampeg OD is not my favorite, but YMMV. To my ears Ampegs sound best pushed right up to the edge, but not over it. If I wanted serious drive, I would pull out my vintage Matamp. For the record, my other Ampegs are 69 and 87 SVTs...these get a bit more grindy than the PF50t when pushed, but I think the PF50t is bit sweeter and more focused/controlled which are qualities I prefer.

I recently bought several "low-wattage tubesters." Ashdown LB30 Mk1 and Mk2, Ashdown Little Stubby, and Ampeg PF50t. Each of these amps have a unique voice and also unique overdrive characteristics. They are all just barely above the power level I consider useful for noodling around in my basement. To my suprise the Ashdowns all seem a bit louder than the PF50t, and some of them sound better pushed further into OD. They are all more than loud enough to serve as a personal practice amp if you want to keep the volume to the minimum. Probably plenty loud for most jazz trio gigs, but I would want more power for any sort of cover band situation, unless I was playing in a coffee shop.

While some seem to think the PF20t is a bit sweeter sounding than the PF50t, that is a matter of taste; and some prefer the PF50t. I consider my low-wattage tubester collection complete and feel no GAS for a PF20t or a V4B. Now my focus returns back to the opposite end of the power spectrum "monster tubesters."

All IMHO and YMMV. It's best to actually demo the amps you are interested in and make your own informed decision.

 

[txhawaii]

IMHO the bold text is not accurate. The PF50t has a really strong Ampeg character and is very sweet sounding. A lot of people say it sounds very similar to the reissue V4B. Potential advantages over the V4B. The PF50t has one more frequency center for the mid-range control and also a built-in dummy load, so it can be used without a speaker for silent recording.

I haven't played the PF20t. A common complaint I have read is it does not have enough gain to push either the preamp or output section into drive. Pretty sure this can easily be remedied with a clean boost, but still something to consider.

The PF50t has enough gain to easily push both the preamp and output into drive territory. The PF50t also has a more versatile/flexible tone stack than the PF20t. As far as the quality of the PF50t's OD, I think it sounds pretty awful when you play solo. But it seems to sound really good in the context of a mix. To be honest, Ampeg OD is not my favorite, but YMMV. To my ears Ampegs sound best pushed right up to the edge, but not over it. If I wanted serious drive, I would pull out my vintage Matamp. For the record, my other Ampegs are 69 and 87 SVTs...these get a bit more grindy than the PF50t when pushed, but I think the PF50t is bit sweeter and more focused/controlled which are qualities I prefer.

I recently bought several "low-wattage tubesters." Ashdown LB30 Mk1 and Mk2, Ashdown Little Stubby, and Ampeg PF50t. Each of these amps have a unique voice and also unique overdrive characteristics. They are all just barely above the power level I consider useful for noodling around in my basement. To my suprise the Ashdowns all seem a bit louder than the PF50t, and some of them sound better pushed further into OD. They are all more than loud enough to serve as a personal practice amp if you want to keep the volume to the minimum. Probably plenty loud for most jazz trio gigs, but I would want more power for any sort of cover band situation, unless I was playing in a coffee shop.

While some seem to think the PF20t is a bit sweeter sounding than the PF50t, that is a matter of taste; and some prefer the PF50t. I consider my low-wattage tubester collection complete and feel no GAS for a PF20t or a V4B. Now my focus returns back to the opposite end of the power spectrum "monster tubesters."

All IMHO and YMMV. It's best to actually demo the amps you are interested in and make your own informed decision.

alas...no stores carry any of these amps locally. I have to depend on experiences such as yours from TB and youtube. Neither are perfect but what can you do?

Thank you for the clarity on the misfit notion. I've also read the v4b and the 50t sound similar with little difference noticed with eyes closed.

What exactly is a clean boost? Are you referring to an overdrive pedal?

I am chasing down a vintage tone akin to an overdriven (is that the right word) b15 (yes a tired reference) where the low notes break up giving off a slight "rattle." This sound might be more attributed to the speakers breaking up a tad but I can get very close to that sound with my pf 350 and zoom b3n with the fliptop patch.

The sound is here starting around .50 sec in



However, comparing the vintage amp to the new one played here give off very different tones. yes the artists and technique along with bass and strings all contribute.



I do think the 20t will allow me to achieve this but fear I will be in want for the additional tone controls of the 50t but think pedals (overdrive, HPFs, etc.) can bring me up to the latter amp but why add pedals when you can just go straight there?

I would prefer to have more of the heritage sound but i'm unsure how to even get close.

 

[Wasnex]

@txhawaii

An OD produces distortion, a clean boost just bumps the signal level up. The idea is to push the circuits in the amp hard enough to get some tube drive, rather than creating the drive with a pedal. You can use an OD pedal too though. I am by no means a purest.

As far as the two videos, yes they sound different. Choice in EQ, technique, newness and type of strings, the speaker, mic, and mic technique are some of the possible reasons for the differences.

Ampeg PF-20T - Feature Overview - YouTube

I totally get the hassle and difficulty with finding amps to try. But really that is the only way to know exactly what you will get.

Both reviews and demos can be misleading. Lot's of reading and viewing can help give you a more informed opinion, but you may still get burned.

 

[txhawaii]

@txhawaii

An OD produces distortion, a clean boost just bumps the signal level up. The idea is to push the circuits in the amp hard enough to get some tube drive, rather than creating the drive with a pedal. You can use an OD pedal too though. I am by no means a purest.

As far as the two videos, yes they sound different. Choice in EQ, technique, newness and type of strings, the speaker, mic, and mic technique are some of the possible reasons for the differences.

Ampeg PF-20T - Feature Overview - YouTube

I totally get the hassle and difficulty with finding amps to try. But really that is the only way to know exactly what you will get.

Both reviews and demos can be misleading. Lot's of reading and viewing can help give you a more informed opinion, but you may still get burned.

INDEED!

 

[txhawaii]

@txhawaii

An OD produces distortion, a clean boost just bumps the signal level up. The idea is to push the circuits in the amp hard enough to get some tube drive, rather than creating the drive with a pedal. You can use an OD pedal too though. I am by no means a purest.

As far as the two videos, yes they sound different. Choice in EQ, technique, newness and type of strings, the speaker, mic, and mic technique are some of the possible reasons for the differences.

Ampeg PF-20T - Feature Overview - YouTube

I totally get the hassle and difficulty with finding amps to try. But really that is the only way to know exactly what you will get.

Both reviews and demos can be misleading. Lot's of reading and viewing can help give you a more informed opinion, but you may still get burned.

I listened very closely to the video link above along with finding the 50t ampeg video as well. The only major difference my ears hear is volume control and a more mid presence. You can see the volume is pushed on the 20 where as its not so much on the 50.

Strangely enough, when Dino dials in the motown tone into the 20, he dials down the mids altogether. With the 50, he leaves a touch in. They both break up nicely with apparently the 20 falling much quicker.

I did talk to ampeg some time ago and they did say the 20 (and 50) do follow the b15 path but to me, with the mid control apparently playing less of a roll in the 20, it seems to be more in line with what you would expect if you played without a true mid control feature on the vintage amp.

In a perfect world owning both amps would be ideal. But I can only assume pedals can bring the 20 up to the 50 minus the inherit lower wattage/volume.

 

[grouse789]

PF20T in driven just to the edge of control..... This great guy is on TB too. He has a bunch of pf20T vids.