Are the big amps history?

[Deak]

It's not about the reproduction of 30 or 40 Hz - I'm with @JimmyM on this - there's no replacement for displacement.

However, my situation is a unique one. I play exclusively for my church, and in our theater we set up our gear and it seldom moves. When our old bass amp fried, my pastor bought my entire rig - a Mesa 400 and a PR810h cab (I think it's the heaviest 810 in existence - 220 lbs!) So, without a good place to store the cab, I added it to the stack (quite literally) and powered the Hartke cabs with a power amp we had.

My pastor is an old rock-n'-roller and as such is old-school. Our guitarists play through full Marshall stacks. The drum kit is ginormous. He likes good stage presence, and he was a bassist himself. That said, the rig 'is what it is'. For shows we travel to, I take the 400 and the fridge, which is plenty for any venue really - but even bigger road shows get the full treatment. And it helps when we're outdoors.

I'll admit we have a stage volume much louder than required, but we try to balance our volumes to match without frying the folks on the front row of seats. I do use earplugs (mainly for the drum kit next to me) but the full rig idles most of the time. Sounds awesome though!

(Please refrain from mixed-cab flame posts! )
View attachment 1172148

Hmmmm . . . . . Looks a bit weak to me.

 

[aborgman]

+1
More xmax and increased displacement doesn't automatically equate to better tone. All it means is that it has more xmax and increased displacement.

Yet the more displacement sounds better argument is exactly the one JimmyM is making.

The only difference between one Ampeg 8x10 and two is... increased displacement.

 

[Deak]

I'm 66 and play in a ten piece horn/soul band, and we always have a dedicated sound man on our payroll. I play through a Peavey Minimax and Avatar SB112, run through the FOH and have no problem being heard. Our sound guy once said to me, "you need less up there than you think." Just my two cents.

That quote from your sound guy has to be the most open ended comment on this thread. Just itchin' for a smarse (sp) response. I shall refrain due to the fact that I respect you for having the hangers to post it. So true on so many levels. Thanks for the humor.

 

[JimmyM]

You would debate whether a fEarful 15/6 sounds better than a crappy 1970s Peavey 2x15? Yikes... that is one of the crappiest sounding cabs, of ANY size, I've ever played.

Probably not that one An 810e, though...definitely.

 

[aborgman]

Probably not that one An 810e, though...definitely.

I might agree with you there... I do love a good 8x10.

 

[JimmyM]

+1
More xmax and increased displacement doesn't automatically equate to better tone. All it means is that it has more xmax and increased displacement.

Yet the more displacement sounds better argument is exactly the one JimmyM is making.

No it isn't. Not even a little. I'm assuming we are talking about cabs that we like the sound of. Of course if you double up on a crappy sounding cab, it's still going to sound crappy.

It'll still sound better than the single crappy cab.

 

[aborgman]

No it isn't. Not even a little.

No...

Of course if you double up on a crappy sounding cab, it's still going to sound crappy. It'll still sound better than the single crappy cab.

Yes...

Holy contradictions Batman

 

[Fishheadjoe]

I have three amps in my stable, well ok more, but only three that I would consider giggable...
I keep the Class D amp handy as a back up to my tube amp. I don't even notice it in my gig bag and I hope to never have to use it again. I have a SS amp that I leave at practice, well because it's handy.
I'll NEVER be without a tube amp! Nothing feels the same and nothing moves air like a tube amp and big cab. If I wanted an anemic sound, I'd take up guitar.
Fishheadjoe

 

[Mastermold]

I really don't care what other players like or use. I prefer the tone my SVT makes.

 

[aborgman]

I have three amps in my stable, well ok more, but only three that I would consider giggable...
I keep the Class D amp handy as a back up to my tube amp. I don't even notice it in my gig bag and I hope to never have to use it again. I have a SS amp that I leave at practice, well because it's handy.
I'll NEVER be without a tube amp! Nothing feels the same and nothing moves air like a tube amp and big cab. If I wanted an anemic sound, I'd take up guitar.
Fishheadjoe

I tend to find you need more power with Class D stuff... but it can certainly be overcome.

I went from:

Ampeg B18 head - > fEarful 15/6

to:

B15 based tube preamp -> 1000W class D power amp -> fEarful 15/6

...and the class D setup moves a LOT more air and sounds a lot less anemic than the tube head did.

 

[jwilson67]

To answer the original question of the entire thread - No.

Maybe someday they will though. The days of the "Unobtainable except for the rich touring musician bass tone" days are over. I remember when I first started playing bass in the early 80's The Guitar Store in Pomona, CA had a Trace Elliot rig and a Status headless bass in a glass display case - like they were works of art to be touched only by the chosen few. LOL

 

[FNHScar17s]

Regarding your questions:
1) Big amps are still getting sold. There are some very boutique tube amp builders who seem to be doing enough business to keep themselves afloat. Reeves etc. The big tubes still work really well; and many bassists prefer them.

2) That said, the Class D amps have now gone a fair way up the development curve, and offer a very attractive combination of cost, performance, and portability. Looking at market share, Class D's are making inroads into the bass amp overall market. So, you could say that a smaller fraction of players are choosing the big tube gear.

3) if you find a good deal on an amp that works for you, then buy it.

Regarding some of the further discussions about analog and digital technology in this thread: gosh, I wish folks could just be nice to each other. If someone prefers what comes off of a stylus on a vinyl track to digital files, then great; they should just use that equipment. I'm not sure that the comparison of silver emulsion photography or vinyl records to their digital counterparts is relevant or teaches anything; except that you can see where those markets have gone. Getting into technical discussions, when the folks involved lack the appropriate training to hold that kind of discussion is laughable. And, further, making arguments which essentially imply that my ears or eyes are better than your ears or eyes, therefore my conclusions are superior is pathetic and insulting. I suggest we just be nice to each other. If someone really prefers the fidelity of their 78rpm projected from that 1923 gramophone, then yay; no justification is required. But, please don't waste time on here criticizing someone else's views to support your own. That's flawed logic. Just sayin'

There is plenty of factual information being presented here. The issue is that some are unwilling to go read up on the subject and learn from it instead they choose to argue. There are plenty of people here presenting valid points that are based in science and in doing so have qualified answers. It is getting absurd tho how some continue to argue something that has been studied for decades.

 

[HolmeBass]

Digital doesn't rely on analog to work. I can generate/synthesize and process audio and visuals using my computer, then write it to a file or stream it to another device without ever converting it to an analog signal. What "100% reliance" on analog do you see in this scenario?

First off, I am on your side.

BUT... At the micro domain, all of that digital hardware, all of those chips, are just electrical circuits. Analog circuits. The zeroes and ones are represented at the most basic level by voltages. Deep in the guts, computers are actually still analog machines, using analog tech (voltages) to define the zeroes and ones. Ideally the voltage would be either 0 or 5 volts (for example) but often in practice it is either 0.6 or 4.2 volts. No problem there! But what about when it is 2.6 volts? Or fluctuating continuously between 2 volts and 2.7 volts. Yuck.

If you've ever dealt with flash memory as it goes bad in an embedded system you would have lived through this particular slice of technological hell.

 

[Coolhandjjl]

To answer the original question of the entire thread - No.

Maybe someday they will though. The days of the "Unobtainable except for the rich touring musician bass tone" days are over. I remember when I first started playing bass in the early 80's The Guitar Store in Pomona, CA had a Trace Elliot rig and a Status headless bass in a glass display case - like they were works of art to be touched only by the chosen few. LOL

I thought I read somewhere that when Acoustic came out with that massive 360/361 thing, it was the equivalent of $10,000 in today's dollars

 

[Fishheadjoe]

I tend to find you need more power with Class D stuff... but it can certainly be overcome.

I went from:

Ampeg B18 head - > fEarful 15/6

to:

B15 based tube preamp -> 1000W class D power amp -> fEarful 15/6

...and the class D setup moves a LOT more air and sounds a lot less anemic than the tube head did.

If you were closer, i would run by with my VBA400 and hook it up to your fEarful and I bet you would have a different opinion, as long as I moved the amp! LOL
Fishheadjoe

 

[aborgman]

First off, I am on your side.

BUT... At the micro domain, all of that digital hardware, all of those chips, are just electrical circuits. Analog circuits. The zeroes and ones are represented at the most basic level by voltages. Deep in the guts, computers are actually still analog machines, using analog tech (voltages) to define the zeroes and ones.

...and at the micro, micro level - all those analog voltage are actually digital.

 

[HolmeBass]

...and at the micro, micro level - all those analog voltage are actually digital.

I am interested to hear how so - or do you mean quantized? Which is different than digital.

 

[aborgman]

If you were closer, i would run by with my VBA400 and hook it up to your fEarful and I bet you would have a different opinion, as long as I moved the amp! LOL
Fishheadjoe

I'd probably prefer an SVT over my current rig - but I prefer 1000W class D rig over my previous 50W tube head.

In semi-equivalent power situations, I'm likely to prefer a tube head... but an adequately powered class D rig will win over an under powered tube rig.

 

[Bassquest]

Hmmm...I wonder how much an empty 810 would weigh?

 

[andruca]

As much as I'd prefer a class D head instead of the SS I've had for so many years (and have tried many that really rock) I can't seem to find any small cabs that don't sound either middy or farty. For my requirements I simply can't gig with less than a 4x10 or 1x15. I know driver technology evolves but still not to the point where I'd use any 1x12" or 2x10" beyond home practice.