What's the difference between them? I know the VR has some extra switches on it. Is there a big difference in tone between them? Would it be worth it to spend the extra money on the VR?
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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 SVT-CL vs. SVT-VR
- Thread starter jman890202
- Start date
Wow. If that is not a paraphrase, I don't know what is. I suggest you do a search on this forum, there have been extensive, vast, and exhausting discussions on all things SVT. They are not a similar head at all.
What I was really wondering about was what all the knobs were on the front of the VR. I did some looking and found that the VR doesn't have a master volume knob, but I don't know what all the controls are (anyone have close-up pics?).
I was just curious about the difference because when you look at the information about the CL, Ampeg talks about how it sounds like amps from the '60s and '70s, and how other companies try to reproduce that sound. But when you look up the VR Ampeg says that it's the real deal from the past. It just seemed funny to me how there would be a big difference from Ampeg between "the real deal" and a modern equivilant.
Sorry for being a n00b, I probably should have done more research.
I was just curious about the difference because when you look at the information about the CL, Ampeg talks about how it sounds like amps from the '60s and '70s, and how other companies try to reproduce that sound. But when you look up the VR Ampeg says that it's the real deal from the past. It just seemed funny to me how there would be a big difference from Ampeg between "the real deal" and a modern equivilant.
Sorry for being a n00b, I probably should have done more research.
I don't have a close up... but the rocker switches are for ultra hi and ultra lo boost, and a 3 position mid selector that varies the frequency of the mid control. Similar to the CL's push button for the ultra hi/lo and knob for mid selector... voiced a little different but I think ya get the idea.
and a master volume? who needs a master volume?
and a master volume? who needs a master volume?
Okay, since I'm a Nazi, I will search for you.
http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showpost.php?p=3771019&postcount=10
http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showthread.php?t=306957&highlight=svt-vr
http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showthread.php?t=106170&highlight=svt-vr
Those should answer your question. In short, it is a completely different amp than the CL. The fact that they are both 300 watt all tube heads, whose name starts with SVT, and both weigh as much as a 10 year old child is about all they have in common.
http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showpost.php?p=3771019&postcount=10
http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showthread.php?t=306957&highlight=svt-vr
http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showthread.php?t=106170&highlight=svt-vr
Those should answer your question. In short, it is a completely different amp than the CL. The fact that they are both 300 watt all tube heads, whose name starts with SVT, and both weigh as much as a 10 year old child is about all they have in common.
I tried it. This amp is really good, because gives you a variety of colors. The SVT Classic is very closed, it's poor, you just can experiment simples sensations. Instead, VR is most exprimental for your tone. It helps you find the perfect sound, because you have more options. Simply is perfect. I prefer SVT-VR.
I used to believe that too, until I was tipped off to turning the master all the way up and only using gain to control your volume. Sounds about the same to me now.
I agree with JimmyM. If you dime the master on the Classic and use the gain for volume there is very limited difference in tone; however, you know what they say about opinions.
Opinions are like Fenders, everybody has one...
[/QUOTE
Well stated. I happen to have a few.
I deleted my response last night. But IMO. The VR's lack of a master volume, the second channel and implementation of the mid range makes it sound like a whole different and *better* sounding amp to me than the CL. I've tried the whole cranking the master on the CL and use your gain for volume but the CL would stay stupid clean and the other way around the preamp in the CL is buzzy sounding with unsatisfying tonal breakup.
Yeah, I know some folks have strong preferences. It's all good.
I was going to buy a second hand SVT-CL, even though I liked the VR (and the Hiwatt DR-201).
It's impossible to try both SVTs in one store, even find one.
The DR201 it's too expensive, so...which kind of sound should I expect from a SVT-CL? It looks like to be a 2006, made in Vietnam under LOUD tech inc (serial EFTUUxxxxx).
It would be plugged in to a 1996 USA 810 classic (single jack input, silver grill).
It's impossible to try both SVTs in one store, even find one.
The DR201 it's too expensive, so...which kind of sound should I expect from a SVT-CL? It looks like to be a 2006, made in Vietnam under LOUD tech inc (serial EFTUUxxxxx).
It would be plugged in to a 1996 USA 810 classic (single jack input, silver grill).
I was lucky to try the two of them in a shop, one next to the other, with a svt410hlf cab. Two different beasts...the VR was more brilliant, mids focused. The CL more closed, "modern" (I preferred the CL, just a matter of taste, they are both awesome). I think the others already gave you more useful information.
Ah, making a bridge with a jack cable between two of the four inputs, you should be able to expand the EQ, using all the front panel, if I remember correctly.
Ah, making a bridge with a jack cable between two of the four inputs, you should be able to expand the EQ, using all the front panel, if I remember correctly.
Latest posts
-
Post a funnier picture than the one above - Parallel Universe Edition
- Latest: BassicJazzy
-
-
-
