Bergantino B/Amp at NAMM

[mwbonsall]

You want to hear what your new bass will sound like? This is what your bass sounds like.

That is the best part of this amp for me. With the proper profile for you speakers you can hear so much more the voicing of your bass, or basses. Just a great piece of gear.

Mark

 

[kjones]

That is the best part of this amp for me. With the proper profile for you speakers you can hear so much more the voicing of your bass, or basses. Just a great piece of gear.

Mark

Yep. I also noticed today that when I did just a tad of knob-twisting on my bass, it was clearly apparent coming through the speaker. It is indeed a clear portal (if you want it to be). Tomorrow, though, it will be a warm tubey-sounding groove machine!

 

[Kirk Bryant]

I had 5 B cabs now I'm down to 4 so I'm a fan of the newer lines. They make previous iterations more affordable to more people, like me. So that's a good thing. I should shed at least 2-3 old heads and spring for this one. It's probably just a matter of time. I'm like that ad on TV, I have a hard time letting go!

 

[Stu_Bass]

Hi Stu,

Glad to hear you're enjoying the amp. To answer your questions, first, if you power the amp down while mute is engaged, it will power up engaged. As for the assignable Q's for the tone controls, I am giving this some serious thought and there's a reasonable chance of it coming to fruition in a future firmware release. And finally, the profiles are very specific to our measurements and algorithms and therefore will not be open to B|AMP owners.

Hope everyone has a Happy, Safe, and Enjoyable Thanksgiving!

Jim

I would like to suggest another approach to the tone control scheme. Shelving type EQ for the bass and treble with variable knee points plus peaking EQ for the high and low mids with variable Q and frequencies. One could dial in a general sound with the bass/treble while allowing the user to cut/boost mids as needed for room/instrument/feedback.

 

[Jim Bergantino]

I would like to suggest another approach to the tone control scheme. Shelving type EQ for the bass and treble with variable knee points plus peaking EQ for the high and low mids with variable Q and frequencies. One could dial in a general sound with the bass/treble while allowing the user to cut/boost mids as needed for room/instrument/feedback.

Hi Stu,

Thank you for sharing your thoughts regarding the tone controls for the B|AMP. Yours and other's suggestions are always welcomed and appreciated. In fact, players' suggestions have helped the B|AMP evolve into the amp it is today. And with the upgradable architecture, as Tom eluded to in his very thoughtful post above (Thank you Tom), it has allowed all B|AMP users to enjoy these upgrades, regardless of when they purchased the amp, and best of all, at no additional charge.

That being said, please allow me to share my thoughts as it pertains to shelving filters. Hopefully it will help offer some insight as to why I've made the decisions I did for the B|AMP.

First, bass shelving. I believe these filters cause more problems than they solve. Why? Because the maximum boost is below the shelving frequency (or knee as you refer to it) which means you will be applying the full boost to the amp and speaker below 40hz or so, which, IMO, waste amp power and headroom, and woofer excursion and maximum overall output, not to mention muddying up your sound. So if you're trying to fatten up your sound by applying more boost say in the 60-80hz range, you can only do so by applying 3db more boost to the 30 to 40hz range and below with a shelving Eq. Putting some real numbers to this, say you need around 3-4 db of boost at 80hz to fatten up your sound to your liking, with a shelving filter this would equate to a 6-7db boost below 40hz and still not achieve your end result because from a relative perspective, the 60-80z region is now even 3-4db less than the sub 40hz region before you touched the tone control! Raising the knee or shelving frequency doesn't solve this problem and only introduces another one. The shallow roll off of the shelf is now interfering with the low mids and mids. Sound familiar to the knob twisters who when changing one tone control often find themselves adjusting adjacent ones to offset these effects?

To go one step further, most manufacturers use the Baxandall circuit to achieve these shelving-type tone controls. While a very cool circuit and very cheap to implement (one op amp, two pots, and a couple resistors and caps) they have an even a shallower roll off (4.5db/octave vs. 6db/octave) which makes them stretch even further into midrange territory. And all of this doesn't even account for the response of the speaker you're trying to Eq!

Treble shelving type tone controls operate the same way on the top end of the spectrum, but conversely reach down into the upper mid region and then have maximum boost above 8khz or so, which really isn't too relevant for bass guitar and will most likely add more noise than musical information.

Anyway, hope this helps explain why I don't use or like shelving filters. They do have a place in some areas such as the studio for general, moderate tone shaping, but to Eq a speaker, which is essentially what they are used for in the majority of bass heads (even though they are called "tone" controls), they offer no real benefit once you take into account and understand the relationship between the acoustic response of the speaker and the electrical response of the filter. This is the premise for the profile system of the B|AMP, btw.

Hope this helps and thank you for your suggestion. They are always welcomed and appreciated!

...On a side note, I sometimes believe that as an industry we have become complaisant to old habits, not understanding or considering that maybe, just maybe, they were more of a short coming or misunderstanding of the problem than an intentional, well thought out solution to it.


Jim

 

[kringle77]

Jim is spot on here.

 

[rockinbilly]

Mine is dead silent.

Mine is also dead silent, even at volume !!!!

 

[rockinbilly]

UPS sais I will receive my second Ref 112 tomorrow, I am pumped already with just one, can't wait to hear it with two. And that's with the Schecter Omen 5. I should be receiving my Dingwall by the end of the month, can't imagine how amazing this rig, and bass combination will sound !!!!!!

 

[JGR]

Hi Stu,

Thank you for sharing your thoughts regarding the tone controls for the B|AMP. Yours and other's suggestions are always welcomed and appreciated. In fact, players' suggestions have helped the B|AMP evolve into the amp it is today. And with the upgradable architecture, as Tom eluded to in his very thoughtful post above (Thank you Tom), it has allowed all B|AMP users to enjoy these upgrades, regardless of when they purchased the amp, and best of all, at no additional charge.

That being said, please allow me to share my thoughts as it pertains to shelving filters. Hopefully it will help offer some insight as to why I've made the decisions I did for the B|AMP.

First, bass shelving. I believe these filters cause more problems than they solve. Why? Because the maximum boost is below the shelving frequency (or knee as you refer to it) which means you will be applying full boost to the amp and speaker below 40hz or so, which, IMO, waste amp power and headroom, and woofer excursion and maximum overall output, not to mention muddying up your sound. So if you're trying to fatten up your sound by applying more boost say in the 60-80hz range, you can only do so by applying 3db more boost to the 30 to 40hz range and below with a shelving Eq. Putting some real numbers to this, say you need around 3-4 db of boost at 80hz to fatten up your sound to your liking, with a shelving filter this would equate to a 6-7db boost below 40hz and still not achieve your end result because from a relative perspective, the 60-80z region is now even 3-4db less than the sub 40hz reason before you touched the tone control! Raising the knee or shelving frequency doesn't solve this problem and only introduces another one. The shallow roll off of the shelf is now interfering with the low mids and mids. Sound familiar to the knob twisters who when changing one tone control often find themselves adjusting adjacent ones to offset these effects?

To go one step further, most manufacturers use the Baxandall circuit to achieve these shelving-type tone controls. While a very cool circuit and very cheap to implement (one op amp, two pots, and a couple resistors and caps) they have an even a shallower roll off (4.5db/octave vs. 6db/octave) which makes them stretch even further into midrange territory. And all of this doesn't even account for the response of the speaker you're trying to Eq!

Treble shelving type tone controls operate the same way on the top end of the spectrum, but conversely reach down into the upper mid region and then have maximum boost above 8khz or so, which really isn't too relevant for bass guitar and will most likely add more noise than musical information.

Anyway, hope this helps explain why I don't use or like shelving filters. They do have a place in some areas such as the studio for general, moderate tone shaping, but to Eq a speaker, which is essentially what they are used for in the majority of bass heads (even though they are called "tone" controls), they offer no real benefit once you take into account and understand the relationship between the acoustic response of the speaker and the electrical response of the filter. This is the premise for the profile system of the B|AMP, btw.

Hope this helps and thank you for your suggestion. They are always welcomed and appreciated!

...On a side note, I sometimes believe that as an industry we have become complaisant to old habits, not understanding or considering that maybe, just maybe, they were more of a short coming or misunderstanding of the problem than an intentional, well thought out solution to it.


Jim

Just a caveat - using a tube preamp as an example, there are multiple points throughout the circuit to shape the low and high end response which in turn affects how shelving filters respond; if the voicing is done skillfully, you can end up with some very pleasing and musical results while simultaneously mitigating the issues mentioned above.

 

[Jim Bergantino]

Just a caveat - using a tube preamp as an example, there are multiple points throughout the circuit to shape the low and high end response which in turn affects how shelving filters respond; if the voicing is done skillfully, you can end up with some very pleasing and musical results while simultaneously mitigating the issues mentioned above.

I could be wrong, but it sounds to me that you could be essentially using some high pass and low pass filtering elsewhere in the circuit which essentially turns the shelving filters into peaking-type filters. I am not privy to your design and am only speculating here.

That being said, there's no doubt we're approaching this from two completely different and philosophical perspectives. I look at the amplification system as a whole (amp and speaker) and know through very careful and specific acoustical measurements, the response I want to correct for with the profile filters. Given this, there's only one place in the system where I need to shape the response and then I prefer to let the end user use the tone controls as creative elements to decide for themselves how they want to create their tone. As far as I know, we are the only company I know of who is approaching it this way, so you're certainly not alone, but with the majority(i.e. everyone else ;-}) !

Also, congratulations on your amp. I have read nice things about it here on TB from one of our customers.

 

[JGR]

I could be wrong, but it sounds to me that you could be essentially using some high pass and low pass filtering elsewhere in the circuit which essentially turns the shelving filters into peaking-type filters. I am not privy to your design and am only speculating here.

That being said, there's no doubt we're approaching this from two completely different and philosophical perspectives. I look at the amplification system as a whole (amp and speaker) and know through very careful and specific acoustical measurements, the response I want to correct for with the profile filters. Given this, there's only one place in the system where I need to shape the response and then I prefer to let the end user use the tone controls as creative elements to decide for themselves how they want to create their tone. As far as I know, we are the only company I know of who is approaching it this way, so you're certainly not alone, but with the majority(i.e. everyone else ;-}) !

Also, congratulations on your amp. I have read nice things about it here on TB from one of our customers.

Thanks Jim!

I also approach amplification using a total systems approach, though using more conventional means. There is still a lot of room for improvement IMO using conventional - or obsolete (tube!) technology in the amp realm, and one can avoid a lot of the typical pitfalls if they stop rehashing old designs. Same goes for moving beyond conventional ported and sealed designs on the speaker side.

All that said, I've been using the AxeFX for years, so I have a pretty good understanding of the B|Amp's platform and what it can offer, and I'm really glad to see you bringing it to us in a bass-specific application. The features are exciting, and I'd certainly love to pick one up at some point!

 

[Edgar]

Mine is also dead silent, even at volume !!!!

I would really like to "hear" that.

 

[rockinbilly]

That did sound funny, didn't it

 

[bebass]

Mine is also dead silent, even at volume !!!!

I would really like to "hear" that.

That did sound funny, didn't it

I understood what you were saying and didn't even think about it until I read the response above. But you guys gave me an idea for a new band name "Silent Noise"

 

[Stu_Bass]

Hi Stu,

Thank you for sharing your thoughts regarding the tone controls for the B|AMP. Yours and other's suggestions are always welcomed and appreciated. In fact, players' suggestions have helped the B|AMP evolve into the amp it is today. And with the upgradable architecture, as Tom eluded to in his very thoughtful post above (Thank you Tom), it has allowed all B|AMP users to enjoy these upgrades, regardless of when they purchased the amp, and best of all, at no additional charge.

That being said, please allow me to share my thoughts as it pertains to shelving filters. Hopefully it will help offer some insight as to why I've made the decisions I did for the B|AMP.

First, bass shelving. I believe these filters cause more problems than they solve. Why? Because the maximum boost is below the shelving frequency (or knee as you refer to it) which means you will be applying the full boost to the amp and speaker below 40hz or so, which, IMO, waste amp power and headroom, and woofer excursion and maximum overall output, not to mention muddying up your sound. So if you're trying to fatten up your sound by applying more boost say in the 60-80hz range, you can only do so by applying 3db more boost to the 30 to 40hz range and below with a shelving Eq. Putting some real numbers to this, say you need around 3-4 db of boost at 80hz to fatten up your sound to your liking, with a shelving filter this would equate to a 6-7db boost below 40hz and still not achieve your end result because from a relative perspective, the 60-80z region is now even 3-4db less than the sub 40hz region before you touched the tone control! Raising the knee or shelving frequency doesn't solve this problem and only introduces another one. The shallow roll off of the shelf is now interfering with the low mids and mids. Sound familiar to the knob twisters who when changing one tone control often find themselves adjusting adjacent ones to offset these effects?

To go one step further, most manufacturers use the Baxandall circuit to achieve these shelving-type tone controls. While a very cool circuit and very cheap to implement (one op amp, two pots, and a couple resistors and caps) they have an even a shallower roll off (4.5db/octave vs. 6db/octave) which makes them stretch even further into midrange territory. And all of this doesn't even account for the response of the speaker you're trying to Eq!

Treble shelving type tone controls operate the same way on the top end of the spectrum, but conversely reach down into the upper mid region and then have maximum boost above 8khz or so, which really isn't too relevant for bass guitar and will most likely add more noise than musical information.

Anyway, hope this helps explain why I don't use or like shelving filters. They do have a place in some areas such as the studio for general, moderate tone shaping, but to Eq a speaker, which is essentially what they are used for in the majority of bass heads (even though they are called "tone" controls), they offer no real benefit once you take into account and understand the relationship between the acoustic response of the speaker and the electrical response of the filter. This is the premise for the profile system of the B|AMP, btw.

Hope this helps and thank you for your suggestion. They are always welcomed and appreciated!

...On a side note, I sometimes believe that as an industry we have become complaisant to old habits, not understanding or considering that maybe, just maybe, they were more of a short coming or misunderstanding of the problem than an intentional, well thought out solution to it.


Jim

Hi Stu,

Thank you for sharing your thoughts regarding the tone controls for the B|AMP. Yours and other's suggestions are always welcomed and appreciated. In fact, players' suggestions have helped the B|AMP evolve into the amp it is today. And with the upgradable architecture, as Tom eluded to in his very thoughtful post above (Thank you Tom), it has allowed all B|AMP users to enjoy these upgrades, regardless of when they purchased the amp, and best of all, at no additional charge.

That being said, please allow me to share my thoughts as it pertains to shelving filters. Hopefully it will help offer some insight as to why I've made the decisions I did for the B|AMP.

First, bass shelving. I believe these filters cause more problems than they solve. Why? Because the maximum boost is below the shelving frequency (or knee as you refer to it) which means you will be applying the full boost to the amp and speaker below 40hz or so, which, IMO, waste amp power and headroom, and woofer excursion and maximum overall output, not to mention muddying up your sound. So if you're trying to fatten up your sound by applying more boost say in the 60-80hz range, you can only do so by applying 3db more boost to the 30 to 40hz range and below with a shelving Eq. Putting some real numbers to this, say you need around 3-4 db of boost at 80hz to fatten up your sound to your liking, with a shelving filter this would equate to a 6-7db boost below 40hz and still not achieve your end result because from a relative perspective, the 60-80z region is now even 3-4db less than the sub 40hz region before you touched the tone control! Raising the knee or shelving frequency doesn't solve this problem and only introduces another one. The shallow roll off of the shelf is now interfering with the low mids and mids. Sound familiar to the knob twisters who when changing one tone control often find themselves adjusting adjacent ones to offset these effects?

To go one step further, most manufacturers use the Baxandall circuit to achieve these shelving-type tone controls. While a very cool circuit and very cheap to implement (one op amp, two pots, and a couple resistors and caps) they have an even a shallower roll off (4.5db/octave vs. 6db/octave) which makes them stretch even further into midrange territory. And all of this doesn't even account for the response of the speaker you're trying to Eq!

Treble shelving type tone controls operate the same way on the top end of the spectrum, but conversely reach down into the upper mid region and then have maximum boost above 8khz or so, which really isn't too relevant for bass guitar and will most likely add more noise than musical information.

Anyway, hope this helps explain why I don't use or like shelving filters. They do have a place in some areas such as the studio for general, moderate tone shaping, but to Eq a speaker, which is essentially what they are used for in the majority of bass heads (even though they are called "tone" controls), they offer no real benefit once you take into account and understand the relationship between the acoustic response of the speaker and the electrical response of the filter. This is the premise for the profile system of the B|AMP, btw.

Hope this helps and thank you for your suggestion. They are always welcomed and appreciated!

...On a side note, I sometimes believe that as an industry we have become complaisant to old habits, not understanding or considering that maybe, just maybe, they were more of a short coming or misunderstanding of the problem than an intentional, well thought out solution to it.


Jim

Thanks for taking the time to answer this in such a thorough and informative manner Jim. All points well taken. The fact that you are active on this site means a lot. Many manufacturers can't be bothered. (BTW:I still hope that you update the software so users can choose different Q's for each band of EQ, many would find it very useful). Anywho, carry on making fine gear......

 

[Jim Bergantino]

Thanks for taking the time to answer this in such a thorough and informative manner Jim. All points well taken. The fact that you are active on this site means a lot. Many manufacturers can't be bothered. (BTW:I still hope that you update the software so users can choose different Q's for each band of EQ, many would find it very useful). Anywho, carry on making fine gear......

Thanks Stu. As for choosing different q's for each of the tone controls, I was thinking of doing something a little different on a future update. Since it appears many players say they prefer to boost wide and cut narrow, I was thinking more along the lines of allowing you to determine your boost Q (gain > 0db) and your cut Q (Gain < 0db).

Thoughts?

 

[tombowlus]

Thanks Stu. As for choosing different q's for each of the tone controls, I was thinking of doing something a little different on a future update. Since it appears many players say they prefer to boost wide and cut narrow, I was thinking more along the lines of allowing you to determine your boost Q (gain > 0db) and your cut Q (Gain < 0db).

Thoughts?

Man, that's a great idea!

 

[kjones]

That would be fine as far as I'm concerned. I can't think of a single occasion in all my time playing where I wanted to cut wide. I'm sure some have, and for good reason, but I never have.

 

[Dragonlord]

I don't have a B|Amp yet, I'm at the point of devouring all info I can get at the moment... But it seems to me that narrow cut mainly refers to the mids. Whenever I want to cut treble for example, I definetely want to cut wide.
I do get that the interface must stay as simple as possible on the other hand for those who don't need many options. I would like the idea of an "extra options unlock" option. If you don't mess with that, the amp has the options it has now. If you choose to unlock it, then sky is the limit: Variable Q for every knob's boost and cut, and I would even unlock the frequency bands, for example Lo Mid is no longer limited to 150hz to 800hz, this way you can have overlap between frequencies, for example if someone wants to boost 200hz and cut 600hz it doesn't seem possible with the current design. Or maybe someone wants a wide mid boost and a narrow cut at some frequency, this would make it possible. This might be overkill, but since it seems possible, why not? And since the interface won't flood you with options unless you choose to "unlock".

 

[Stu_Bass]

Thanks Stu. As for choosing different q's for each of the tone controls, I was thinking of doing something a little different on a future update. Since it appears many players say they prefer to boost wide and cut narrow, I was thinking more along the lines of allowing you to determine your boost Q (gain > 0db) and your cut Q (Gain < 0db).

Thoughts?

I think it's a good idea but would opt for individual control of each band as it allows more options. I would be okay with it and think you should follow the overall consensus but my vote goes for maximum versatility.