• 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.

Anyone still prefer Class A/B amps over Class D?

#381
agedhorse said:
Many of the older amps were heavily voiced, that's one part (and an important one) of the old school equation. Just look at some of the Ampeg, Fender, Alembic and even Mesa amps of 30+ years ago as examples. Some voicings were more extreme than others, but hardly flat response. That's the tone profile that many early designers gravitated towards.
Click to expand...

I very much agree. For my style, I have a much easier time hearing myself live, on a smaller stage, using speaker cabinets with a "Baked In" tonality that emphasizes the midrange.

Although I definitely understand why a lot of Players prefer a speaker cabinet that offers as close to a flat audio response as they can get.

My guess is that it's my inability to properly eq my rig for each room. :D I'd much rather plug in and play, set it and forget it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Al Kraft
#382
Arthur U. Poon said:
I'd much rather plug in and play, set it and forget it.
Click to expand...
This is exactly why I only tend to buy amps that sound good to me with all controls set in a neutral position (even if that is not a flat response). That way I have lots of room to cut or boost as necessary to adjust to the acoustics of a particular venue. When an amp or amp/cab can only get your preferred tone with some extreme EQ settings (because its inherent voicing isn't your preferred voicing) you can find yourself without sufficient control authority to adjust to a difficult room.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ballynally, murphy and Arthur U. Poon
#383
Al Kraft said:
This is exactly why I only tend to buy amps that sound good to me with all controls set in a neutral position (even if that is not a flat response). That way I have lots of room to cut or boost as necessary to adjust to the acoustics of a particular venue. When an amp or amp/cab can only get your preferred tone with some extreme EQ settings (because its inherent voicing isn't your preferred voicing) you can find yourself without sufficient control authority to adjust to a difficult room.
Click to expand...

That makes really good sense. And also to be able to adjust your EQ throughout the night as the room will "change".
 
  • Like
Reactions: Al Kraft
#384
i read in the subway thread re: the 800+s advanced mid controls to the 800s. made sense...live, it's better to have a well voiced amp (like the 8) than one with advanced controls...you may overthink levels. I like flat on the 8, maybe throw the ultra low on, and the voicing about straight up too. It's just very well designed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: murphy
#385
MJ_Sotti said:
i read in the subway thread re: the 800+s advanced mid controls to the 800s. made sense...live, it's better to have a well voiced amp (like the 8) than one with advanced controls...you may overthink levels. I like flat on the 8, maybe throw the ultra low on, and the voicing about straight up too. It's just very well designed.
Click to expand...
I actually think the first version of the D-800 still has a lot of appeal for those of us who prefer simple over infinite tweaking capability. In 40 years of bass playing I've had a lot more gigs that were plug and play with a small adjustment or two than those where I had to completely re-voice my amp. When I do find difficult acoustic environments beyond my amp's EQ to handle, a HPF is the one tool I almost always turn to first.

I guess it comes down to how satisfied you are with the locked-in designer's choices versus how much you need/want to be abale to create a wide variety of tonal profiles. The D-800 hits my tonal preferences pretty well with nicely chosen EQ points for my taste. While the HPF on the D-800+ would be a great addition and the semi-parametric mid controls would be useful on occasion, the simplicity of the base model is actually a plus for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: murphy
#387
MJ_Sotti said:
i read in the subway thread re: the 800+s advanced mid controls to the 800s. made sense...live, it's better to have a well voiced amp (like the 8) than one with advanced controls...you may overthink levels. I like flat on the 8, maybe throw the ultra low on, and the voicing about straight up too. It's just very well designed.
Click to expand...
Yeah I know what you mean, I play the M9 carbine which is A/B power and in terms of mid-range options it only has the one mid-range control. I really would like if it had the mid-range separated between low mids and high mids as I feel that that is something that allows you to tweak how your sound sits in the mix a lot more easily. The M9 has Mesa's standard voice preshape filter which gives you five different options fir voicings ranging between scooped mids to boosted low and high mids. I tend to use this control to get my Baseline sound depending on the room I'm playing, and then use the bass mid and treble controls to further tweak what I'm hearing. Also the onboard compressor with ratio and threshold is a great tool for shaping the sound being heard on stage.
 
#388
interestingly enough my friend used a new natural guitar center rick through my vintage mesa d180 head into my orange 115s at our last show, because he didn't bring his rig

at maximum clean volume it is actually possible to get pretty hi fi sounding and clear tones out of a medium wattage tube head usually associated with sludge metal, stoner doom, and thrash metal, this kind of convinced me that i'm going to stay with it even though i have tones of respect for the subway d800 and quilter big block 800
 
#390
Pbassmanca said:
Yeah I know what you mean, I play the M9 carbine which is A/B power and in terms of mid-range options it only has the one mid-range control. I really would like if it had the mid-range separated between low mids and high mids as I feel that that is something that allows you to tweak how your sound sits in the mix a lot more easily. The M9 has Mesa's standard voice preshape filter which gives you five different options fir voicings ranging between scooped mids to boosted low and high mids. I tend to use this control to get my Baseline sound depending on the room I'm playing, and then use the bass mid and treble controls to further tweak what I'm hearing. Also the onboard compressor with ratio and threshold is a great tool for shaping the sound being heard on stage.
Click to expand...
With the M9's graphic EQ I haven't found too many situations where I was lacking for mid (or any band) control capability. However, I'd be happy to trade that excellent graphic EQ for the 800+ HPF and semi-parametric mids...the M9 compressor is a non-negotiable keeper. :thumbsup:
 
Last edited:
#392
I would think that it is very hard to do a direct oranges to oranges comparison between the two so that you can definitively say what you prefer. I'm not positive, but I don't think there is an amp out there where there is a Class D translation of an existing class A/B, and vice-versa. Beyond just the power components, IMO, you would have to give up other features to fit in the smaller package. If I'm wrong here, let me know. I know some are close, but I'd say there is still significant enough differences.
It has been so long since I had a SS class A\B that I can't make a comparison in my head. The Peavey 400 I had was a ungodly POS, and old AF when I got it, so that's not fair. I had a Mesa 400 for years, but had crap cabs that never really let it do its thing. I've had class Ds for the last 5 years, and I'm pretty happy with them. My D-800 is definitely an improvement over the Shuttle 9.0 I replaced with it. Better, fuller, lows. Maybe class D amps will catch up with creative EQs.
 
#394
Al Kraft said:
With the M9's graphic EQ I haven't found too many situations where I was lacking for mid (or any band) control capability. However, I'd be happy to trade that excellent graphic EQ for the 800+ HPF and semi-parametric mids...the M9 compressor is a non-negotiable keeper. :thumbsup:
Click to expand...
Yes you're right! I've had a couple occasions where the graphic straightend things out room wise. I hardly ever use it, but it's great when you need it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Al Kraft
#395
Al Kraft said:
With the M9's graphic EQ I haven't found too many situations where I was lacking for mid (or any band) control capability. However, I'd be happy to trade that excellent graphic EQ for the 800+ HPF and semi-parametric mids...the M9 compressor is a non-negotiable keeper. :thumbsup:
Click to expand...
And yes, the compressor is totally a keeper!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Al Kraft
#396
Al Kraft said:
With the M9's graphic EQ I haven't found too many situations where I was lacking for mid (or any band) control capability. However, I'd be happy to trade that excellent graphic EQ for the 800+ HPF and semi-parametric mids...the M9 compressor is a non-negotiable keeper. :thumbsup:
Click to expand...
Actually, now here's an idea......Mesa needs to put that compressor on a pedal! That would be wicked.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Iristone and Al Kraft
#398
I have just gone through the first 10 pages and maybe my 2c has been touched upon:with a valve amp it's not only the pre that makes the tone but also the PI and the OT.
And to answer the OP: valve amps have actually slower attacks and a more compressed sound than ss amps.
Im not saying anything about tone or what i prefer.thats been done..
 
#399
ballynally said:
but also the PI and the OT
Click to expand...

Makes it kind of sad that so many makers moved away from transformer as PI's ;)
Must be a missed opportunity that transformer coupling isn't used in every stage of a tube amp.
At least some got them in the DI.
Well, good news, there are all kinds of transformer modelers around. Wait - no there's not. And no capacitor or carbon composite resistor modelers. Maybe with luck technology could catch up. ;)
 
#400
seamonkey said:
Makes it kind of sad that so many makers moved away from transformer as PI's ;)
Must be a missed opportunity that transformer coupling isn't used in every stage of a tube amp.
At least some got them in the DI.
Well, good news, there are all kinds of transformer modelers around. Wait - no there's not. And no capacitor or carbon composite resistor modelers. Maybe with luck technology could catch up. ;)
Click to expand...
I actually used a transformer phase inverter is several tube power amps, done right they work phenomenally well IME. There are also MANY ways to do this, some much easier than others.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back