• 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 V4B200

Either one of those amps will get the job done. For sure.

Orange rules on asthetic and likewise doesn't push the 6550 hard

Traynor got it too and went with bigger bottle.

I'm not sure if it's a transformer or preamp thing. That settles the difference.

Either way puts good meaning into not having to push a 6550 hard and still deliver.

If you want 200 watts go KT88.
Maybe there is still magic to the good old American beam tetrode 6550.

Model T crush both of them. But the formula still there.

I'm not into counting watts. I like beam Tetrodes and 2 ohm taps.

I haven't taken measurements of my AD200B, but I found a post where operating voltages were indicated: Plate 675V, Screens 385V.

That's not all that conservative of a setup for 6550s if you ask me. The factory bias is extremely cold though. believe the spec is 18-22mA, which is around 40% dissipation. Everything I have read suggests the amp's power is limited by the transformers. The preamp and the power amp seem intentionally set up to easily transition into OD. I still think it's a fabulous sounding amp.
 
Last edited:
They have knobs! When you add distortion, you're increasing highs and upper mids by a crazy amount, so you turn up the bass knob to make up for it. Problem solved.

Turning up the bass knob when you have already pushed the power amp into saturation is not something I would recommend...unless you want to fuzz out.

Please don't take my comments as negative. I think SVTs are fabulous and I am just trying to provide an objective representation of what I have learned over the years. My Reeves 400 does have a bit more headroom and also a more extended low end than my SVTs. I am not saying I think it's a better amp, or a worse amp. It really depends upon what you want as each of these amps has it's own unique character and cannot be dialed in to sound like the other.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Arthur U. Poon
In my mind the difference in volume between a 100W amp and a 200W version is not all that much. I feel that given the choice most people would just buy the 300W SVT.

Actually there are many of us that would never buy the SVT due to its size and weight. Going on your reasoning there isn't much difference between the V4B and SVT but there is. A 200 watt 4VB would yield IMO YMMV a noticeable difference in clean headroom. Make it as easy to schlep as a 4VB reissue and you got a home run.
 
Last edited:
Actually there are many of us that would never buy the SVT due to its size and weight. Going on your reasoning there isn't much difference between the V4B and SVT but there is. A 200 watt 4VB would yield IMO YMMV a noticeable difference in clean headroom. Make it as easy or to schlep as a 4VB reissue and you got a home run.

IMHO, there is definitely a noticeable difference between my 100W and 200W tube amps.
 
For sure.

True it ain't much.
But 100 isn't enough for many.
300 is right power wise.
But transformer and weight isn't.

200 is sweet spot for good mix of overhead and breakup and weight.

Yes even difference between 100 and 150 watts is nothing SPL wise. It's just the overall feeling of the amp

I do understand what he's saying though. 100 and 200 is nothing. Likewise a Quad of 6L6 is a cakewalk. Almost just as fun to run 2 heads 2 cabs. More about cabs than wattage.

Extra head is run around the 2 ohm tap. Wattage is nothing. Most want one cab solution. Light wittle tiny weenie cab lol
 
Last edited:
I dunno about all the specs etc.... but I DO find the AD200B will, thru the same cab, have a good deal more 'clean' volume on tap than my V4B.
I've done it many times. The V4B will be dirty, mushy in the lows, where the Orange will have EASILY enough.
Now, as I've stated many times, I go for a primarily clean tube tone, so, I'm not talking about a heavily distorted sound.
I've tried this thru my single 15s, a couple of different 410s , a NV215 and an 810. Of course, they're both louder thru the larger cabs, but the ratio stays pretty much the same.
 
And, to add, I still love the V4B, just it can't come to gigs that might get up a bit louder in volume.
Also, I'm over the days of taking an 810 or even my 215 to most gigs. Usually it's just one 115 or my lovely li'l sealed AND light HG410.
So, for me, it's NOT about doing a gig with a tiny cab - 112, but my Fender Bassman 115 will do most, the HG410 almost any, and if big is needed, the NV215 will crush it.
 
I think you perceptions are a bit off. I have read many comments that the SVT is not really setup for extreme low end at full power. I believe the OTs are actually the reason. If you want extended lows you should look at a big Hiwatt.

Man, I don't know what to make of you sometimes :D You seem so knowledgeable sometimes, and then you come out with some weird stuff based on internet lore that has no basis in truth. I don't get it.


Specs don’t make music, rigs do.
Ears hear, and the brain perceives things in a manner more akin to an audio taper pot than to a linear taper pot, and each individual’s “taper” can be unique.
This is why before gear is released from a major manufacturer, after the bench testing it is beta tested in the real world by real players. Seasoned, respected end users that generally couldn’t care less about “specs”, but know what sounds good. This alpha/beta scenario can be repeated multiple times, however ultimately beta is the final stage before release.
And, unlike the posts on this thread, no one in the R&D department spouts off about how the “specs” disagree with those respected opinions.

Here’s a fact; it’s not an accident, an anomaly, brainwashing through use of marketing dollars, or “specs” that make the SVT so prolific in the pro world - for 50 freekin' years.

It’s that they do the job so well across a huge spectrum of required musical applications.
It’s pretty much the same thing for the Fender Pbass, it sits in a mix; just sounds “right” across a huge spectrum of required musical applications.

People can play/prefer/extol the virtues of what they want, myself included; I don’t personally gig an SVT, and as the saying goes, “different horses for different courses”.
However in the world of making a living playing bass guitar the two icons referred to above are “money”.

As far as a 200 watt SVT. Well, based on personal hands on experience in such matters, it’s my speculation that Ampeg’s market research has determined that the V4B efficiently covers the ground between their smaller tube amps and the “Daddy”, sonically as well as fiscally.

It ain’t cheap to launch a new product, and it seems likely that if they even contemplated such an animal they’ve determined that the tipping point for ROI in unit sales is not worth the capital investment.



Now, an unsolicited but steam releasing TB rant...

There are those that google specs, and those who have untold hours of hands (ears) on gig, studio and/or bench experience. There are those that, for some reason I can’t fathom, desperately want to be perceived as some sort of “expert” on internet forums, and those that actually have stage/studio/technical savvy and who can offer that experience to others with shared interest, that don’t give a rat’s rectum who they impress.

Rarely, if ever, those are the same person.

These generalizations are why forums like this are often frustrating. The ten posts a day, chest beating, self-proclaimed experts generally drown out the REAL persons with actual solid, useful information, and while the self-proclaimed “internet experts” are often comically entertaining, I suspect it can be cause for confusion for those who are earnestly looking for good advice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ryco and JimmyM
Specs don’t make music, rigs do.
Ears hear, and the brain perceives things in a manner more akin to an audio taper pot than to a linear taper pot, and each individual’s “taper” can be unique.
This is why before gear is released from a major manufacturer, after the bench testing it is beta tested in the real world by real players. Seasoned, respected end users that generally couldn’t care less about “specs”, but know what sounds good. This alpha/beta scenario can be repeated multiple times, however ultimately beta is the final stage before release.
And, unlike the posts on this thread, no one in the R&D department spouts off about how the “specs” disagree with those respected opinions.

Here’s a fact; it’s not an accident, an anomaly, brainwashing through use of marketing dollars, or “specs” that make the SVT so prolific in the pro world - for 50 freekin' years.

It’s that they do the job so well across a huge spectrum of required musical applications.
It’s pretty much the same thing for the Fender Pbass, it sits in a mix; just sounds “right” across a huge spectrum of required musical applications.

People can play/prefer/extol the virtues of what they want, myself included; I don’t personally gig an SVT, and as the saying goes, “different horses for different courses”.
However in the world of making a living playing bass guitar the two icons referred to above are “money”.

As far as a 200 watt SVT. Well, based on personal hands on experience in such matters, it’s my speculation that Ampeg’s market research has determined that the V4B efficiently covers the ground between their smaller tube amps and the “Daddy”, sonically as well as fiscally.

It ain’t cheap to launch a new product, and it seems likely that if they even contemplated such an animal they’ve determined that the tipping point for ROI in unit sales is not worth the capital investment.



Now, an unsolicited but steam releasing TB rant...

There are those that google specs, and those who have untold hours of hands (ears) on gig, studio and/or bench experience. There are those that, for some reason I can’t fathom, desperately want to be perceived as some sort of “expert” on internet forums, and those that actually have stage/studio/technical savvy and who can offer that experience to others with shared interest, that don’t give a rat’s rectum who they impress.

Rarely, if ever, those are the same person.

These generalizations are why forums like this are often frustrating. The ten posts a day, chest beating, self-proclaimed experts generally drown out the REAL persons with actual solid, useful information, and while the self-proclaimed “internet experts” are often comically entertaining, I suspect it can be cause for confusion for those who are earnestly looking for good advice.

If I am the target of you rant, you are misguided. I bought my first SVT in the early 80s and currently own a 69 and a Skunk. I also own a bunch of other tube amps including a couple that produce more power and have more low end extension than my SVTs.

I have a background in electronics, pro audio, and was also a full time pro touring musician for over 20 years. I am not spouting BS, and there are plenty of informed people who have commented over the years that the SVT was not set up to produce massive lows. I think SVTs are awesome, but I am not a fan boy and my comments are meant to inject a bit of objectivity and bring the conversation back to reality when the fan boys get a little too tribal. Sorry, but the success of the SVT cannot be attributed to it playing louder or lower than all other amps for all of these years. In my book that doesn't make it's staying power any less remarkable.

Pretty sure if you look at the genre's in which SVTs are commonly used, they are not considered wildly versatile by most players. Yes the loyal fanboys think they are the perfect solution for every occasion, that's a given. I actually used mine in a big band, but I didn't find the SVT and 810 a very satisfying combination in that setting. I never cared for the 810, but I think SVT are actually relatively versatile if you use them with a speaker with a wider frequency response.

Why I bother to speak up on this subject? The reason I bought my first SVT and 810 was because I fell victim to all the fan boy praise that is heaped on the amp. I had never heard or seen an SVT, but I had read lots of articles about how great they were and how articulate and clean the sound they produced was. I had my local stealer special order one for me and I paid it off with a minimum wage job. The amp came in when I had paid about half of it off and the store let me play it on the showroom floor. I honestly thought something was wrong with it...but that's just the way SVTs and 810s sound. It was a huge mistake for me to buy that rig, but lesson learned. Since then I learned that I love the amps, but hate the cabs.

To this day it sets me off a bit when I hear people gushing about how awesome these rigs are without being able to discuss why they are awesome...and make no mistake I recognize that SVTs and 810s are awesome. So sorry, I think the specs are important, because knowing the frequency response of an 810 tells me right away that I will not like it, and I am sure a lot of other players will find the information informative as well.

Glad you find this is comically entertaining.
 
Last edited:
I took my 200 watt Traynor YBA200-2 to rehearsal of my cover band tonight. Pushing the power pig that is one of my Fearless F112s, the Traynor sounded marvellous (with a bunch of fancy-pants tubes in it) but was by no means awash in excess power. I would not want to fall back to 100 watts, *nor* do I want to haul around a head any larger or heavier than that. With inefficient, full-range cabs like two F112s, this amp is just the right sweet spot for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Red Planet
This works for me, and a V4B200 with the NV610 would work for many


IMG_2297.JPG

IMG_0121.jpg
 

Latest posts