Ampeg PF500/PF350 Pt II.5

[TheCush]

Something important to remember about the PF-350 XLR line output is that it is different than the average DI box you would use on stage. The average DI box outputs a Mic level signal.

While the PF-350 uses an XLR connection for this output (which allows for longer cable runs with less noise than a 1/4'' cable), it sends out a Line level signal which is much hotter than a Mic level signal.

It's imperative that the FOH guy knows what's up with this signal level. Obviously, he would come into a XLR input on the board. Most boards can switch this channel to Mic or Line level with a switch. Or, often times, the normal setting for a Line level signal will be to have the preamp gain all the way off. This is not unusual.

AND sometimes...the FOH mixer will not have a Mic/Line switch for a channel with an XLR input. In these cases, you (or the FOH engineer) will want to use an XLR-to-1/4'' adapter in order to get your Line level signal into channel on that board that is ready for a Line level signal.

I hope that helps to demystify this a bit. Line level signals are hot, that's for sure.

This is very helpful - thanks for the quick response. There's been a fair amount of traffic on the DI on these here, so I'm sure others will appreciate it, too. I'll check this out next rehearsal, and look into an adapter should it turn out I need one.

 

[PaperbackRyder]

Decided to keep my Walkabout after all...but just got to check out the new Ampegs at GC today. PF350, PF500, and PF210. First grabbed a Mexican PBass with stock strings and a poor setup. No shock there...plugged into the 350/210 and very quickly got that round, creamy goodness that I've always loved Ampeg for. Twiddled the knobs for a while. But came back that beautiful tone. Richness up and down the neck. Swapped in the PF500. It was easy to hear the additional headroom, but no matter what I did, could not achieve the same gorgeous tone. I have read somewhere here that the basic pre-amp design and eq points are different. shows up in the tone to my ears. It was very good, just not my cuppa. The 2x10 was very B15 like with the PF350.

Overall very impressed that Ampeg has come through with low cost classy designs, that sound so good. Very gig gable setup. Love my Walkabout cause i can get that sweet sound.
If I was in the market, this would be the hands down favorite.
YMMV / IMHO etc.

 

[fivestringgecko]

Figured I'd post this here and see if anyone had any "real world experience" before emailing Ampeg...

I finally had a chance to test out my PF500/PF115/PF115 rig this weekend and ran into an something interesting. I got it all hooked up and when we started jamming, I had problems with the amp cutting out. I didn't have any crazy settings: gain was at about 1:30, volume about 2:00, EQ settings weren't far from 12:00 across the board, had compression dialed up to just over noon. The fault light never came on, but the amp would cut out for a 2-3 seconds at a time and seemed to do it more with lower notes in particular. I checked cables, swapped speaker cables, even went so far as to swap lids and cabinets around.

Nothing really seemed to make a difference, but after about 15-20 minutes of being turned on, the problem just seemed to go away and it didn't do it again in almost 3 hours of jamming.

Has anyone else experienced this? Does the PF500 (or any solid state amp for that matter) need to "warm up?" I've never run into this before.

Thanks for any info!

5sg.

 

[tombowlus]

Figured I'd post this here and see if anyone had any "real world experience" before emailing Ampeg...

I finally had a chance to test out my PF500/PF115/PF115 rig this weekend and ran into an something interesting. I got it all hooked up and when we started jamming, I had problems with the amp cutting out. I didn't have any crazy settings: gain was at about 1:30, volume about 2:00, EQ settings weren't far from 12:00 across the board, had compression dialed up to just over noon. The fault light never came on, but the amp would cut out for a 2-3 seconds at a time and seemed to do it more with lower notes in particular. I checked cables, swapped speaker cables, even went so far as to swap lids and cabinets around.

Nothing really seemed to make a difference, but after about 15-20 minutes of being turned on, the problem just seemed to go away and it didn't do it again in almost 3 hours of jamming.

Has anyone else experienced this? Does the PF500 (or any solid state amp for that matter) need to "warm up?" I've never run into this before.

Thanks for any info!

5sg.

Hmm.... that does not sound right. Are you running much bass boost on an on-board preamp? Even if you were, though, the clip light should come on. That happened to me at practice last night. I was playing the PF500/PF115, and I had the Gain on about 2:30, and the EQ set fairly flat, but I was running a bit of bass boost on my Celinder VP4, and it did not like it and cut out. I dialed back the Gain and turned up the Volume, and it was fine.

 

[fivestringgecko]

Hmm.... that does not sound right. Are you running much bass boost on an on-board preamp? Even if you were, though, the clip light should come on. That happened to me at practice last night. I was playing the PF500/PF115, and I had the Gain on about 2:30, and the EQ set fairly flat, but I was running a bit of bass boost on my Celinder VP4, and it did not like it and cut out. I dialed back the Gain and turned up the Volume, and it was fine.

Nope... I didn't have any pedals and had the EQ on my Stingray V HH flat.

5sg.

 

[Wes Whitmore]

If you can get it to do it again, unplug 1 cab to see if it makes a difference. Also, was the air coming out of the back of the amp hot? For the record, mine has been rock solid.

 

[jmattbassplaya]

I'm sure this has been discussed already, but with so many pages and responses to search through I'll just go ahead and ask - How does the PF500 compare to an SVT-CL tone wise? I'm thinking of unloading my Markbass LMIII in order to get the PF. Also, how does the PF compare to the LMIII volume wise?

 

[fivestringgecko]

If you can get it to do it again, unplug 1 cab to see if it makes a difference. Also, was the air coming out of the back of the amp hot? For the record, mine has been rock solid.

Checking for heat was my first instinct as well, but nope... nice and cool. No problems with just one cab, why would two (which the amp is built for) cause something like that? My PF500 has been rock solid up to this point too... I use it weekly at church, have taken it to a few auditions, etc, but all with only one cab.

Very strange.

5sg.

 

[johnnyvon]

There was a post in one of these threads that talked about the clip issue. I think they took a cord and plugged it in and out of the effects loop (send/return) and it possibly fixed it.

 

[carl h.]

There was a post in one of these threads that talked about the clip issue. I think they took a cord and plugged it in and out of the effects loop (send/return) and it possibly fixed it.

Not this amp, I don't think.

 

[JimmyM]

I'm sure this has been discussed already, but with so many pages and responses to search through I'll just go ahead and ask - How does the PF500 compare to an SVT-CL tone wise? I'm thinking of unloading my Markbass LMIII in order to get the PF. Also, how does the PF compare to the LMIII volume wise?

Volume wise, about the same IMHO, except the PF heads will do grind and the LMIII won't. The sound is very comparable to an SVT-CL, except not quite the same level of oomph of an all-tube head.

 

[jmattbassplaya]

Volume wise, about the same IMHO, except the PF heads will do grind and the LMIII won't. The sound is very comparable to an SVT-CL, except not quite the same level of oomph of an all-tube head.

Thanks for the response, Jimmy.

I actually ran to GC today and gave them both a go. To be perfectly honest, I think the Markbass sounds more tubey! Not only that, but I think the MB sounds deeper and fuller in the low end.

For some reason I was unable to make the PF500 capture a similar tone as my SVT. I wasn't expecting it to be perfect, but I honestly think my old Pro-3 sounded closer to my SVT than the PF500.

I was really hoping this amp would beat out my MB, but the MB honestly beats the PF500 in almost every way. The only thing the Ampeg wins out on is having a headphone jack.

 

[rodl2005]

Get the 7 pro for a lightweight SVT sound. To my ears, it's the closest non All Tube Amp to an SVT II(non pro)-what I had to compare- that I've come across.
Has the monstrous thickness that I had with my SVT, but in a pretty light package.

 

[JimmyM]

Thanks for the response, Jimmy.

I actually ran to GC today and gave them both a go. To be perfectly honest, I think the Markbass sounds more tubey! Not only that, but I think the MB sounds deeper and fuller in the low end.

For some reason I was unable to make the PF500 capture a similar tone as my SVT. I wasn't expecting it to be perfect, but I honestly think my old Pro-3 sounded closer to my SVT than the PF500.

I was really hoping this amp would beat out my MB, but the MB honestly beats the PF500 in almost every way. The only thing the Ampeg wins out on is having a headphone jack.

Whatever.





But seriously, it's a choice everyone has to make for themselves. I used to own an LMII and I liked it but I'll take the PF350 or 500 these days.

 

[disasterline]

i got my pf350 last week, i dont have a cab yet, but i have been playing it with headphones and i gotta say i love it. im really liking the sound im getting.

im sure im going to be even more happy one i get the matching 210 in a few days. hooray for being single almost no bills.

 

[coreyfyfe]

For some reason I was unable to make the PF500 capture a similar tone as my SVT. I wasn't expecting it to be perfect, but I honestly think my old Pro-3 sounded closer to my SVT than the PF500.

I was really hoping this amp would beat out my MB, but the MB honestly beats the PF500 in almost every way. The only thing the Ampeg wins out on is having a headphone jack.

100% disagree. I've found I can get similar tones to my SVT with the PF-500, but it's certainly more low-mid focused. I think it's lower/smoother in it's inherent voicing but it can get the same grunt when really pushed. Especially with a hot P-bass. The MB stuff I've always found to stiff and not responsive enough, but I've never owned one so that's really only based on in-store trails

 

[bass dan]

To each there own. I've owned the markbass LmII and currently have the pf500. I no longer have the LMII. Found it really loud and clean. The pf500 to my ears is way fatter and tube like than the markbass. Both are great amps but I'm a Ampeg guy so to me the 500 is a way better amp for me.

 

[dogmeat08]

Figured I'd post this here and see if anyone had any "real world experience" before emailing Ampeg...

I finally had a chance to test out my PF500/PF115/PF115 rig this weekend and ran into an something interesting. I got it all hooked up and when we started jamming, I had problems with the amp cutting out. I didn't have any crazy settings: gain was at about 1:30, volume about 2:00, EQ settings weren't far from 12:00 across the board, had compression dialed up to just over noon. The fault light never came on, but the amp would cut out for a 2-3 seconds at a time and seemed to do it more with lower notes in particular. I checked cables, swapped speaker cables, even went so far as to swap lids and cabinets around.

Nothing really seemed to make a difference, but after about 15-20 minutes of being turned on, the problem just seemed to go away and it didn't do it again in almost 3 hours of jamming.

Has anyone else experienced this? Does the PF500 (or any solid state amp for that matter) need to "warm up?" I've never run into this before.

Thanks for any info!

5sg.

i had the same problem last week , i thought it was a tip from a speaker cable that broke off in my cabnet causing it to cut out ...

 

[60bass]

i had the same problem last week , i thought it was a tip from a speaker cable that broke off in my cabnet causing it to cut out ...

Dogmeat is your amp still cutting out even after getting that broken tip out?

 

[Freddels]

Thanks for the response, Jimmy.

I actually ran to GC today and gave them both a go. To be perfectly honest, I think the Markbass sounds more tubey! Not only that, but I think the MB sounds deeper and fuller in the low end.

For some reason I was unable to make the PF500 capture a similar tone as my SVT. I wasn't expecting it to be perfect, but I honestly think my old Pro-3 sounded closer to my SVT than the PF500.

I was really hoping this amp would beat out my MB, but the MB honestly beats the PF500 in almost every way. The only thing the Ampeg wins out on is having a headphone jack.

What cab did you use? I did the same thing when the PF500 arrived at my local GC. I compared both the LMKIII and the PF500 into a Markbass 102P cab. I figured I was used to using the LMKIII and I wanted to do a straight comparison. With that cab, I absolutely preferred the LMKIII over the PF500. Then last month I was able to try the PF500 and the SVT 7 Pro into a 610HLF and they both sounded great through that cab. I now have the 7Pro and running it with my markbass cabs (102HF and 104HF) and it sounds great. So, I think the cab choice has a lot to do with the results.