• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Ampeg PF350/500 Part V

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm not having issues with the new head now: even with the clip light on the pre-gain going on frequently. The clip light also functions how I expect and shows my peaks. The first amp did not, it would peak HARD and then get softer in volume.

Feeling better about it now. I love the way it sounds, and I hear it does well on upright from a bass professor (of jazz) who also owns one.

One PF500 slaved to another each driving two 8 ohm cabs is my fallback position there.

Never had a cut out with either of my PFs so far. I'm guessing a bad run of solder connections on the main circuit board might be a good part of the cause with those. Lead free solder fractures more easily than leaded. Couple that to gig shaking and abuse and it shows up fast. MarkBass had some troubles with that but cured them.

That might be true as well about the solder. I'd love to explore that theory with amplifier engineers in the know. Two PF-500's is way uber, I should know. :) Those slave outputs are handy. Shipping back the warranty one already though :ninja:
 
If that were true, nobody could amplify synths or use a fuzzbox without constantly blowing speakers.

Jimmy I always find your posts both interesting and informative but I have to disagree with you on this one.

In the case of a synth or fuzzbox, you would be amplifying a preamp level signal of the "square wave" sound. That's entirely different from the output of the poweramp.

If the power output from the amp is clean (no clipping) your speaker is receiving the clean sine wave coming from the output of the amp "reproducing" the square wave sound from the synth or fuzzbox. That's a big difference from an amp whose output is clipping sending out a DC square wave to your speaker.

Clipping amps send out DC square waves from the output to the speaker. It's a fact and is talked about all over the web in various forums and documents. Below is one example of many out there.

The following quoted from Peavey's "The Weakest Link"

Invalid Link Removed

"Please remember the loudspeaker must absorb the power output of the amplifier. Numerous factors combine to make the speaker’s task difficult. It should be remembered that cone type loudspeakers….(even the best of them) are very inefficient. Most cone type loudspeakers are significantly less than 4% efficient…. Because of the “law of conservation of energy,” power applied to the speaker (that is not converted into sound) has to “go somewhere”….usually as HEAT! Consider this, if the loudspeaker is 4% efficient, this means that only 4% of the power applied to the speaker is converted into sound, and the remaining 96% is dissipated as heat… This isn’t a problem at 10,15, or 20 watts… At 100 watts or greater, it becomes an evermore serious problem as the power level increases. At 100 watts, 96 watts must be dissipated.
At 1,000 watts, this is 960 watts of heat that must “go somewhere” or remain within the voice coil, thus causing destructive heating effects! It is well known that most materials expand as heat builds up. This is true of metal, plastic, and most other materials. What isn’t generally known is that, as that heat energy is absorbed by the speakers voice coil wire, its RESISTANCE tends to INCREASE, thus causing what some people call “POWER COMPRESSION”…. Simply put, as the heat rises, sodoes the “DC resistance of the voice coil.” This is one of the factors that contributes to musicians having to “turn up their amps” after 20 or 30 minutes of playing time. Of course, as power is further increased, so does the heat, and so does the “power compression,” thus “the stage is set” for loudspeaker failure.

While HEAT is the major destroyer of loudspeakers, the "waveform” fed to the loudspeaker can also be problematic. Normal sinewave type “clean” program material is what a loudspeaker usually encounters, but if the amplifier is allowed to clip (square off) then square waves are fed to the speaker, which are severely destructive in several ways. First of all, when an amplifier “clips” and delivers a “square wave” to the speaker, the portion of the waveform that is “square” represents DIRECT CURRENT (DC) which tends to heat up the voice coil very rapidly. As an additional negative, the “G forces” involved with the loudspeaker trying to follow a square wave are significant because the amp is telling the loudspeaker to move FULLY forward or backward (instantaneously) which of course is impossible for any device having mass and air resistance With a square wave input, the loudspeaker is subject to the two most destructive forces imaginable SIMULTANEOUSLY (i.e. maximum “G forces” that strain the structural elements of the speaker, such as the cone and its attachment points to the Spider and to the voice coil AND maximum heating caused by the square wave applying D.C. (for the majority of the “time domain”) to the voice coil causing maximum heating affects"

Not really trying to argue but rather point out that it's a well known fact that a clipping amp regardless of wattage is tossing a DC square wave to the speaker which can and does damage speakers.

I agree with you that with small wattage amps and good speakers this isn't a major issue. However as you can see in the quoted article, at anything over a 100 watts it begins to become an issue.

When shredhead68 asked about a further explanation of clipping with his PF-500, I mentioned the fact about heat buildup in case he wasn't familiar with what might happen if you crank up an amp till it clips.

Now my fingers are tired from all this typing. I'd better go exercise them with some bass thrashing :hyper:

Keep Low :bassist:
 
joelb79 said:
I'm not having issues with the new head now: even with the clip light on the pre-gain going on frequently. The clip light also functions how I expect and shows my peaks. The first amp did not, it would peak HARD and then get softer in volume.

Feeling better about it now. I love the way it sounds, and I hear it does well on upright from a bass professor (of jazz) who also owns one.

That might be true as well about the solder. I'd love to explore that theory with amplifier engineers in the know. Two PF-500's is way uber, I should know. :) Those slave outputs are handy. Shipping back the warranty one already though :ninja:

Cool I'm glad the replacement head is working fine. I would like to see some bench readings from the replacement just for comparison.
 
As an upright doubler (although definitely not in the league of a college professor who plays it), I can vouch for the PF heads sounding awesome with upright. It always bewilders me when upright players say things like, "You can't use Ampeg with upright." Of course you can! Sounds great, too. People forget that the B-15 was designed around upright.
 
I've had my PF for about a month now and love it! The first one had a bad hum coming out of the DI so I took it to GC and they replaced it. Honestly now that I have it dialed in, there's nothing I don't like about it!! Traded in my 24lb Ashdown Mag300 for 12lb's of 500W cleanness!
 
Jimmy I always find your posts both interesting and informative but I have to disagree with you on this one.

In the case of a synth or fuzzbox, you would be amplifying a preamp level signal of the "square wave" sound. That's entirely different from the output of the poweramp.

If the power output from the amp is clean (no clipping) your speaker is receiving the clean sine wave coming from the output of the amp "reproducing" the square wave sound from the synth or fuzzbox. That's a big difference from an amp whose output is clipping sending out a DC square wave to your speaker.
Sorry bro, but I'm failing to see the difference. Also, if your amp is putting out DC, I'd get it checked, because that means it's broken. Now I can't argue that on a technical level, but I know there are many on here who can, so don't leave me hanging, you geniuses!

When shredhead68 asked about a further explanation of clipping with his PF-500, I mentioned the fact about heat buildup in case he wasn't familiar with what might happen if you crank up an amp till it clips.
I still say that's overpowering, and I'm sticking to it ;) Have fun playing...I should be getting to work, too.
 
Cool I'm glad the replacement head is working fine. I would like to see some bench readings from the replacement just for comparison.

This ^^

Congrats!!

I have the PF500 and PF210HE as my rehearsal rig also and have never had an issue since I purchased it over a year ago. I've used it at a few smaller sized shows before and it's performed great. I am considering either adding an additional 210 or selling mine and opting for the PF410 if I can find one to demo.

I don't believe anyone has said much about the pf410 in this thread. I'd love to hear how it performs.
 
PaperbackRyder said:
NAD - PF500 w/PF210...
Always been an Ampeg tone guy. So I jumped in despite the fear and trepidation over the reliability. Preferred the inherent tone of the PF350, but with multiple basses plus upright, I opted for the flexibility of the 500.
...
Thanks!:hyper:
=JR=

Congrats! My PF500/115E combo have been my go to amp with no reliability issues since April 2011, both for electric (Pbass and G&L L2000) and upright (old Kay with K&K Bassmax), which I play most. I can dial in what I need for either. I wouldn't call my live upright sound HiFi or recording quality, but it sounds decent and gets that upright out there with just silly levels of volume and punch. If this kind of amplification had been available for upright in 1952, Leo wouldn't have needed to invent electric bass.
 
ddbassGA said:
Congrats! My PF500/115E combo have been my go to amp with no reliability issues since April 2011, both for electric (Pbass and G&L L2000) and upright (old Kay with K&K Bassmax), which I play most. I can dial in what I need for either. I wouldn't call my live upright sound HiFi or recording quality, but it sounds decent and gets that upright out there with just silly levels of volume and punch. If this kind of amplification had been available for upright in 1952, Leo wouldn't have needed to invent electric bass.

Sounds great! But I thought it was 1951?
 
I apologize for not perusing this entire thread (I am at work / did a search) but I am getting a bonus today and was considering the PF350 and the TH350.

I am more steered towards the Ampeg flavor, but was wondering if there were reports of the 350 having intermittent "shutdown" problems like the 500? I need a good portable mid-size giging head and I need it reliable.

I apologize for any muddying up of this thread with a redundancy.
 
I apologize for not perusing this entire thread (I am at work / did a search) but I am getting a bonus today and was considering the PF350 and the TH350.

I am more steered towards the Ampeg flavor, but was wondering if there were reports of the 350 having intermittent "shutdown" problems like the 500? I need a good portable mid-size giging head and I need it reliable.

I apologize for any muddying up of this thread with a redundancy.

+1 on the question. I have a PF350 I'm running through a 410 no name cab and love the sound. I'm also running the B3 through the effects loop rather than inline. I like the control and the reach where it is. I'm not gigging but if/when I do it will probably be mostly at church and anything larger I'm likely to run through the PA from the xlr out on the PF350. So I'm not wanting to be looking for problems but if they are tendencies maybe I can head them off.

Here is a pic to prove it exists....or does it? kind of fuzzy like bigfoot....
Ampeg%2520pf350%2520with%2520zoom.png
 
If memory serves, the shutdown issue was specific to the 500.

I've used my pf350 for both gigs and rehearsals with 4 ohm loads and not had any problems.

I thank you kindly. My group is not so loud onstage, and feel the 350 would more than suit my needs. I too run a 4 ohm load with a 410HLF. My curious side is intrigued by the TH350, but my tone jones side simply loves the "round sound"...
 
I thank you kindly. My group is not so loud onstage, and feel the 350 would more than suit my needs. I too run a 4 ohm load with a 410HLF. My curious side is intrigued by the TH350, but my tone jones side simply loves the "round sound"...
I have only played the TH heads once, but my initial impression was I don't hear a whole lot of difference between them and the PF heads. Honestly, I thought they sounded pretty close to each other. And this is not meant as a slam on Dave Boonshoft and the great work he does at Aguilar, but the TH500 worked fine and the TH350 was broken. It worked fine when plugged into the DB410 they had, but would distort badly and shut down when plugged into the SL112.

Now I don't expect that to be the norm with all TH350's, but it does go to show that any amps can break regardless of who makes them. You just don't hear as much about them because Ampeg sells a whole lot more. Last year, the PF500 represented over 10% of the sales of solid state amps, which is phenomenal sales. But the downside is that even if the proportion of good ones to bad ones is the same as Aggie, it seems like a whole lot more simply because of sales volume.

Anyway, I think both the PF350 and TH350 are killer little heads and very much up my tonal alley. But I've had my PF350 for over a year now and it hasn't even blinked off and on quickly. I've used it with 4 and 8 ohm loads and it's done great with all of them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts