• 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.

Ampeg SGT-DI

#621
MikeNL said:
About the compressor on the SGT-DI, that only makes sense when using it as a stand alone pedal, correct? I will use the SGT on the last position in my pedal chain, preceded by 5-6 tuner/ dirt/ wah/ modulation pedals. And probably still a separate compressor at the begin of the chain.
Click to expand...
7k7ukm.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: jimb213, NC_Rob, speedball3 and 7 others
#630
TexasEdition said:
For the price of it, I can get a 200W rocket bass and basically have the same thing +amplification.
Click to expand...

I see your point. The SGT-DI does have some redundancy with a Rocket Bass amp. (I have the RB-110). If you do not alter the mid sweep knob and just use the treble and bass controls (and no amp or cab circuit) then you have close to the Rocket Bass tone. I tested by listening to the headphone outputs of each. The SGT circuit is slightly different in the SGT-DI vs. the RB-110 when I listen with the headphone outputs of each. I actually prefer the SGT circuit in the Rocket Bass as it seems to respond to the use of a pick when the grit setting is set fairly low. I find that the SGT-DI's circuitry modeling the SVT and B15 to be rather dark but the SVT has "authority" the B15 has "warm and smooth". I use the IRs that came stock in the SGT-DI as they are brighter (and better sounding, IMO) than the cab models that are hard-wired. My RB-110 is lean, articulate, and tight. The SGT-DI is a great complement to the RB-110 in that respect. If you need an amp then, yes, get the Rocket Bass of your choice. If you want a flexible and capable box then get the SGT-DI.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iagtrplyr, Heady, Murch and 1 other person
#631
Good discussion, folks. Everyone has different wants and needs, and while I’m very happy with my RB-112, I’d like to add the “warm and smooth” of the SGT-DI’s B15 tone. Also, I have a 20T/PF-112 studio rig and I believe the SGT would enhance that setup better than the SCR that’s currently on my pedal board.

As Akiyama so smartly put it, if ya need an amp then you should definitely go that route first, but if you’re recording at home or giggling sans amps, then the SGT-DI is the pedal to get if you ‘re an Ampeg fan. :hyper:
 
  • Like
Reactions: BluesOnBass, Murch and 2saddleslab
#632
I like my SGT a lot. It sounds like an Ampeg, and cops a pretty convincing SVT or B15 tone.

I run it through a Jay Ganz Straight Ahead power amp (sans cab sims) into an Ampeg PF115he cab and it sounds darn good. I have a PF50-t and a PF800 as reference - I get the same tones. I’ve tried and have several Ampeg preamps (Sans Amp BDI, Broughton SV-Pre) and the SGT is all that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raw N Low, morrisonhendrix, Murch and 3 others
#633
TexasEdition said:
For the price of it, I can get a 200W rocket bass and basically have the same thing +amplification.
Click to expand...

TexasEdition said:
Who needs sab sim when you have a built in cab?
Click to expand...

Who needs a cab when you're on IEMs? ;);)

If a cab is what works for you and the gigs you're playing, then definitely go for it. Even if any of my gigs used amps, a single 200W 15" wouldn't keep up volume-wise.

But also as @3toes mentioned, the SGT is a different circuit.

EDIT: Also for the record, I've only tinkered with the cab sim section of the SGT a little bit at home, I actually don't care for it (or cab sims in general) for live use even with IEMs.

5sg.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: morrisonhendrix and 3toes
#634
franvarin said:
Curious question. For those that use modulation effects, has anyone tried a chorus with the sgt-di? I assume it needs to go before the pedal since there's no fx loop.
Click to expand...

I think this needs some real world exploration and some answers.

I am considering cancelling my SGT preorder, lack of FX loop on the SGT looks and sounds like a deal breaker for me. I really don’t understand some manufacturers choices/omissions. I have said this before on other DI threads, so many pedals falling short due to one compromise or another. How much effort would it really have taken to include an FX loop? By the sounds of it Ampeg would have been better off including an FX loop and ditching the compressor, because most feedback here suggests it isn’t fantastic. Not going to wait for a V2 that likely won’t cater to my unique whims :D

I had a Darkglass Microtubes Infinity for a short while. Its lack of FX loop meant my chorus and delay/reverb were muddy and bleh. That and I was battling to not sound so DG flavour.

I am running a Two Notes ReVolt Bass, which is in some ways better, since it has an FX loop, but it has too many other compromises for me, most notably the shared EQ between dirt and drive channels and a very severe 810 cab emulation.

For aeons I have been running an MXR M-80 Bass DI+ which although it doesn’t have an FX loop it didn’t seem to muddy modulations etc quite as bad when the grit was engaged. That said, I did only run a light drive to spice things up. I made the choice to upgrade because I would like more control and cab sim etc. The MXR has its own quirks I wanted to get away from.

I am now leaning toward a DSM Humboldt Simplifier paired with specific drive and fuzz pedals - with the rest of my pedals in their correct and most musical order. I will seek a light grind OD and maybe get a mini Big Muff of some sort.

Unless I can be convinced otherwise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PatrolOfStroll, eric_kiser, franvarin and 1 other person

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back