Ampeg tube amp for home recording

[FronTowardEnemy]

Power soak?

 

[Dirk Diggler]

You don't want to send colored sound into your DAW.
Once you color your sound on the way in, you stand little chance of controlling/changing things later.

For the very same reason you don't want to use distortion or overdrive on the way into your daw.

Unless you have the ultimate tone and have no desire to change things later, try the other options already suggested. And I agree an attenuator/power soak sounds like a good idea.
You can pick one up for sub $100.

Just because you think the bass track sounds great now, when you start mixing things can change radically.

Good luck,
Dirk

 

[Jim C]

Or, you can find the tone you like, make a decision, print it, and not play the fix it in the mix game.
Just like the classic records that everyone compares great bass tone too.

 

[micguy]

My current rig for recording (I'm doing virtual services for churches, so I'm doing this on a regular basis) has a Pork 'n Pickle for a bit of tubish drive, an Xotic Bass RC booster for a it of eq, and a Broughton audio low pass filter as my speaker emulation. It sounds pretty convincing - even the noise floor (mostly from the Pork "n Pickle) sounds like a tube amp.

 

[logdrum]

Get a plugin. I use an Apollo interface and their software comes with a free SVT-CL plugin with 8X10 cab models mic'ed. It works better than a preamp for recording

 

[nilorius]

I think any Ampeg tube amp would do for home recording.

 

[Deleted member 271037]

Actually, this is the perfect use for those severly underpowered V4BH heads. Not the current V4B but the ones they made just before production was moved offshore. The ones that look more or less exactly like SVT Classic heads but has V4BH in capital letters on the front.

It's 100w but actually delivers closer to 50w. At least that's what my tech told me. I could never get enough volume out of that amp at rehearsals or on stage but for recording it can be pretty sweet.

It's basically an SVT Classic preamp (or so I'm told) with a 6L6GC-based output stage.

The fact that it's so underpowered is actually an asset when using it for recording. It means you can crank it up to where it SNARLS without breaking any windows.

It can still be a bit too loud for home recording I guess but the fact that it's "only" 100w, and a pretty anemic 100w at that, means you can easily use it with a single speaker cab (provided that you find a suitable speaker of course). And THAT means isolation cabs are suddenly an option.

I actually use one in my own home recording setup. I've had great results with a Grossman iso cab, a Sennheiser MD421 and a single Emininence Legend BP122A. Those speakers work surprisingly well in smaller cabs for bass. Blended with a DI the recorded sound is comparable to what I get in my proper studio with all the expensive stuff available there. Make sure to read up on phase issues/comb filtering when using mic+DI though!

Being only 100w means that many power soaks/attenuators can be used with it too. Iso cab + attenuator = hardly any leakage at all. I got one of those cheap Harley Benton ones for my home setup and it works fine.

There's also the added bonus that the V4BH isn't a very popular amp due to being so underpowered so it should be possible to find one for a decent price used.

But "underpowered" is a relative term of course. It's still pretty loud for home recording... Just not loud enough to deliver the goods in a loud band.

Of course it does have gain+master volume and both doesn't HAVE to be cranked to sound good. With the right settings it can sound pretty cool at lower volumes too.

Or you can just get a Sansamp... They do sound pretty good, especially when blended with a clean DI signal.

 

[jbhaugh]

Your stated preferences suggest you need to reamp at your practice space and record with miked cabs. You can get the takes you want at home recording direct, then reamp through your rig when you can get loud to get the tone you want.

 

[JimmyM]

You don't want to send colored sound into your DAW.
Once you color your sound on the way in, you stand little chance of controlling/changing things later.

For the very same reason you don't want to use distortion or overdrive on the way into your daw.

Unless you have the ultimate tone and have no desire to change things later, try the other options already suggested. And I agree an attenuator/power soak sounds like a good idea.
You can pick one up for sub $100.

Just because you think the bass track sounds great now, when you start mixing things can change radically.

Good luck,
Dirk

First off, good luck finding an attenuator that works with an SVT. Second, I'm not a fan of the "always record clean" approach. My dirt sounds are as easily workable as my clean, I know when I want dirt vs when I don't, playing clean makes you play differently than playing dirty, and it's been my experience that when they tell you they can add it in the mix, they never do.

 

[Bantopodu]

You don't want to send colored sound into your DAW.
Once you color your sound on the way in, you stand little chance of controlling/changing things later.

For the very same reason you don't want to use distortion or overdrive on the way into your daw.

Unless you have the ultimate tone and have no desire to change things later, try the other options already suggested. And I agree an attenuator/power soak sounds like a good idea.
You can pick one up for sub $100.

Just because you think the bass track sounds great now, when you start mixing things can change radically.

Good luck,
Dirk

I'm planning on having a mic'd track and a Di track. I've mixed with some really hot mix tracks before and my preference is to get it right coming out of the cab. I know it's not really the done thing but if I'm listening to myself through the amp, I find my playing fits a bit better than when I track dry and try to reamp or start using plugs.

 

[Bantopodu]

First off, good luck finding an attenuator that works with an SVT. Second, I'm not a fan of the "always record clean" approach. My dirt sounds are as easily workable as my clean, I know when I want dirt vs when I don't, playing clean makes you play differently than playing dirty, and it's been my experience that when they tell you they can add it in the mix, they never do.

First off, good luck finding an attenuator that works with an SVT. Second, I'm not a fan of the "always record clean" approach. My dirt sounds are as easily workable as my clean, I know when I want dirt vs when I don't, playing clean makes you play differently than playing dirty, and it's been my experience that when they tell you they can add it in the mix, they never do.

I know exactly what you mean. When I'm tracking, I need to hear a raw sound as close to my final, mixed tone as possible. I've got a sansamp and I've used it with my SVT and it sounds great but recording directly, I've literally spent hours and not really got the sound I'm looking for. I've got the UA Ampeg plugins and whilst they're very good, I don't seem to be able to dial them in to a cranked SVT tone, either tracking or mixing, even when I'm using the SVT plugin with a 57 and cab sim that matches my own kit. A good engineer can undoubtedly get closer than me with plugs but to me it sounds wrong.

 

[Deleted member 271037]

You don't want to send colored sound into your DAW.
Once you color your sound on the way in, you stand little chance of controlling/changing things later.

For the very same reason you don't want to use distortion or overdrive on the way into your daw.

Unless you have the ultimate tone and have no desire to change things later, try the other options already suggested. And I agree an attenuator/power soak sounds like a good idea.
You can pick one up for sub $100.

Just because you think the bass track sounds great now, when you start mixing things can change radically.

Good luck,
Dirk

I respectfully disagree. I mean, sure you can get a great sound by recording a clean DI signal and do all processing in the box. Plugins have become really good these days. There are lots of great sounding amp/speaker sims + eq's compressors etc. So I'm not saying there's anything wrong with your approach.

But that doesn't mean it's wrong to do it any other way!

You would have to mess up the sound considerably to have "little chance" of correcting it later. Sure it you set a high pass filter at 100Hz while recording bass there's no return but unless you do something really extreme things can always be tweaked in the mix. And usually have to. And what's an un-colored sound anyway? EVERYTHING will color your sound, starting with your bass, pickups, choice of strings, choice of DI, etc.

There's a lot to be said for committing to "tape" rather than the "fix it in the mix" approach. After all that's how records were made in the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s and (at least to some degree) still today in the best studios around the world. Are you saying Motown got it all wrong? Abbey Road? Capitol Studios? The Beatles? Frank Sinatra? Pink Floyd? Led Zeppelin? Etc. etc. Pretty much every classic album or hit single recorded until the last couple of decades were recorded the way you say should be avoided.

And even when using real amps/pedals/mics/rack gear there is LOTS of room to tweak the sound in the mix. After all, they did mix things back in the analog days too. They didn't just release the raw recordings.

It will of course depend on the available gear. Great sounding amps/cabs/studio rack gear is obviously a lot more expensive than plugins. If budget is limited you approach makes a lot of sense. Good quality plugins can certainly sound better than a cheap practise amp and Behringer rack gear.

But some analog gear can deliver sounds that simply isn't available in plugin format. And as good as plugins are there's always something special about running the signal through a burning hot tube amp in a real room and process the signal in the analog domain using classic rack gear.

Like I said, there's absolutely nothing wrong with your approach but to say you shouldn't record a "colored sound" is simply wrong IMO.

YMMV of course.

 

[Pdaddy1978]

This.......

The B25 is enormously popular for recording, and will start getting crunchy and Ampeggy at about 5 on your dial. Far less volume than an SVT, but still probably to loud for midnight in your house recording.
Unless your neighbors are Sid and Nancy.....

 

[pbassnut]

Hi Everyone

I've got a question. I'm looking to do some home recording and I want the Ampeg tube sound. I play punk with a pick and I already own an SVT CL but it's impossible to get that driven sound at home, without my neighbour complaining his glasses are rattling in his glass cabinet. I need something which will achieve a similar sound but not blow the windows out. I'm considering the PF20t and a flip top cabinet - either a 1X15 or a 2X10. Does anyone have any experience of this amp or for that matter, had to solve this problem in the past?

Sam

I've played a PF50t at a GC and thought that it sounded really good so I wouldn't be at all surprised if it recorded well. I would get the 50 versus the 20 as you could actually play with people live with the 50 in conjunction with an efficient speaker. There are all kinds of Ampeg SVT/B15 emulation pedals out there that could be used to get that classic Ampeg sound on tape ... the Tech 21 VT Bass DI, any of Arkham's preamps or pedals, the Broughton P15 or SV Pre and, of course, the Ampeg SCR-DI.

 

[J.D.B.]

My PF 50 can be ran direct in without a cab hooked up at all and it records well that way. It's a nice feature that I lately really like. Endless choices, really.

 

[lucas303]

Unless you're cutting a record that's expected to sell missions of copies, aNAmpeg plugin or even a SansAmp will get your there in a mix. I think Amplitude makes a good plugin suite?

So the amount someone should care about their music fitting their vision is proportional to their expected album sales?

Your stated preferences suggest you need to reamp at your practice space and record with miked cabs. You can get the takes you want at home recording direct, then reamp through your rig when you can get loud to get the tone you want.

In addition to this, you could explore finding someone to reamp for you. You send them the clean track, they set up the cab and amp you want, then record it at their location.

 

[JSandbloom]

If the vision of a song is trivialized by the subtle difference between a Plugin and a real amp then you should probably rework the vision.

So the amount someone should care about their music fitting their vision is proportional to their expected album sales?



In addition to this, you could explore finding someone to reamp for you. You send them the clean track, they set up the cab and amp you want, then record it at their location.

 

[JimmyM]

If the vision of a song is trivialized by the subtle difference between a Plugin and a real amp then you should probably rework the vision.

Says the guy with a DB751...

Nothing I record is ever trivialized in any way, shape or form. I will always take the best sound route possible with what I have to work with and the conditions I have for recording. And that includes adding a plugin if I think it needs it. But I'm always going to start out with the very best raw signal I have at my disposal, and that ain't my plugins.

 

[JSandbloom]

Says the guy with a DB751...

Nothing I record is ever trivialized in any way, shape or form. I will always take the best sound route possible with what I have to work with and the conditions I have for recording. And that includes adding a plugin if I think it needs it. But I'm always going to start out with the very best raw signal I have at my disposal, and that ain't my plugins.

I've sold 100's of MP3s so I should get a pass! If not, I'm sure this isn't the first case of hypocrisy coming from my suggestion pool!

Plus, no matter what wattage tube head you get, if you crank it to get that grit you're likely gonna be getting some cranky neighbors. So a plugin that gets you well in the ballpark for like 30 bucks over buying a new head seems reasonable.


Also Jimmy, you know as much as the next guy that most mix engineers are gonna just take the dry signal and reamp it through a 1073 and a 1176 to make it sound like a record anyway!

Addition: If you mic a cab you need to make sure you're using a mic that can capture the sonic space of the cab well. If you use a 57 you might as well record a PorkPie amp! Also, need to make sure you have a interface with good converters like some of the stuff from UA or Apogee. Using a plugin helps with some of this.

 

[Bantopodu]

I've sold 100's of MP3s so I should get a pass! If not, I'm sure this isn't the first case of hypocrisy coming from my suggestion pool!

Plus, no matter what wattage tube head you get, if you crank it to get that grit you're likely gonna be getting some cranky neighbors. So a plugin that gets you well in the ballpark for like 30 bucks over buying a new head seems reasonable.


Also Jimmy, you know as much as the next guy that most mix engineers are gonna just take the dry signal and reamp it through a 1073 and a 1176 to make it sound like a record anyway!

Addition: If you mic a cab you need to make sure you're using a mic that can capture the sonic space of the cab well. If you use a 57 you might as well record a PorkPie amp! Also, need to make sure you have a interface with good converters like some of the stuff from UA or Apogee. Using a plugin helps with some of this.

I'm not bothered if I sell anything or not. I'm not an engineer either but I do have the UAD 1073 and 1176 plugins. I will undoubtedly be using the 1176 during mixdown but it's not going to colour tone much.