Chaining/slaving several identical combo amps

[H K]

Hey! So, I am trying to downsize my amp collection, while still maintaining the flexibility of owning an amp or two for every occasion.

So I was thinking about slaving/chaining combo amps. I've gone through posts of people doing it with 2 amps, but I havent really gotten to the bottom of how one would use, let's say, 4.

This is my idea so far: Bass/effects into AMP-1, then FXsend to AMP-2 (input, not FX return), FX send (from AMP-2) to AMP-3, FX send to AMP-4, FX send from AMP-4 back to FX return on AMP-1.

Will this just make the line hotter and hotter? Will it be enough to set the EQ on AMP-1, or do I have to do them all? Will it all spontaneously combust?

For this example, lets use 4 standard Fender Rumble 100's.

Heres a very professional diagram of what I mean:

Small gig? Bring 1, larger gig? Bring 4.

 

[el murdoque]

You need to confirm that once you use the FX Send, something arrives at the power amp - There are amps that will be silent unless there is a signal at the FX return once you have plugged into FX send.

 

[chris_b]

IMO 4 combos is not a logical move when downsizing. I have a bad back so my solution to your problem was to buy a 2.67ohm 800 watt amp and 3 112 cabs.

I have 2 different amps and can bring either with 1, 2 or 3 112 cabs depending on the requirements of the gig. I get more consistency of tone and a wide range of volume in a package that takes up less room, weighs less, is easier to transport and is modular when upgrading either amps or cabs.

I started with a Thunderfunk amp and Berg 112 cabs. Then moved to Aguilar amps and finally Barefaced cabs. I can play from a whisper to being the loudest guy in the band, and all with great tone and a happy back.

 

[el murdoque]

From what google tells me, the FX loop on the Rumble works that way, the amp will be silenced when you have a plug in the FX Send.

The wiring diagram looks a bit weird to my eye. It seems entirely possible to use the DI out of amp1 to plug into the FX return of amp2 and daisychain from there.
I do not have any idea how hot the DI out signal will be,though. The Master knob is, for some reason, placed before the FX loop, not after.

 

[Old Garage-Bander]

Hey! So, I am trying to downsize my amp collection, while still maintaining the flexibility of owning an amp or two for every occasion.

So I was thinking about slaving/chaining combo amps. I've gone through posts of people doing it with 2 amps, but I havent really gotten to the bottom of how one would use, let's say, 4.

This is my idea so far: Bass/effects into AMP-1, then FXsend to AMP-2 (input, not FX return), FX send (from AMP-2) to AMP-3, FX send to AMP-4, FX send from AMP-4 back to FX return on AMP-1.

Will this just make the line hotter and hotter? Will it be enough to set the EQ on AMP-1, or do I have to do them all? Will it all spontaneously combust?

For this example, lets use 4 standard Fender Rumble 100's.

Heres a very professional diagram of what I mean:
View attachment 4895776

Small gig? Bring 1, larger gig? Bring 4.

I don't think you want to be connecting your "FX send" to the amp's instrument inputs "normal inputs".
Levels may not be compatible. The send/return levels can be much higher than what the amp expects at the instrument inputs.

 

[agedhorse]

Yes, the level will try to grow to the point that it will become problematic. It will start out too high and get worse.

A 1:4 active splitter into the 4 inputs is one option, another is to take the effects send on the master amp and split it into 3 signals (one for each effects return on the slave amps)

All of this works better if the combos are identical.

 

[G-Dog]

.
@H K, why do you want to send amp 4's signal back to amp 1? It's not necessary to "close the loop." Just getting the signal to each amp is sufficient. However, agedhorse is certainly correct about that long a chain growing the level(s) to problematic proportions.

1. Fender has acknowledged that running the FX Send of one Rumble to the FX Return of another Rumble is the recommended and preferred method to "chain" two Rumbles.

1.a. Fender has also verified that it's OK to run one Rumble's FX Send to another Rumble's Input without fear of damage. But "the line level signal at the SEND may overdrive the input stage, so you will need to reduce the GAIN on the second amp. And re-amping the signal this way will allow one to use the second preamp controls, but may not produce the desired results so it is up to the individual."​

1.ii. IMHO, I would feel more comfortable chaining just 1 Rumble's Send to just 1 Rumble's Return (or Input only if it doesn't have a Return) . For a total of 4 Rumbles, I would use a 1:2 splitter for a pair of such 2-Rumble chains.​

B. The Fender Rumbles do not turn off their speakers when you plug into their FX Send. Only plugging into a Rumble's Headphone jack does that.

♧. The Rumbles from 15, 25, up to 500 have the Master before the FX Send, so it controls the Send level, also. The Rumble 800s have the Master after the FX Send, so it does not control the Send level. So, ... ...

♧. 1. Chaining a 500 Send to an 800 Return bypasses the 800's EQ, but gives Master volume contol to both combos!!

♤. b. Chaining an 800 Send to a 500 Return gives no volume contol on the 500, it'llbe wide open!!!
​

Happy Rumble chaining!
.

 

[KidAmnesia]

Downsizing to four identical combos doesn't make much sense to me. I'd rather have a small amp and a big amp, or even one nice head and a couple different cabs to go with it that can accomodate all your needs.

That wiring diagram does not seem very functional. It will work if the fx loops are paralell, but all tonestacks will be active and the signal will get hotter for every preamp involved. A splitter would be way more practical. But anyway, I don't see much sense in going that way.

 

[GregT]

As a Rumble owner/user who daisy chains a Rumble 100 and 200 on stage, I can certainly tell you what works for me. I plug my bass into the 100 and insert a 1/4 inch cable from its effects send directly to the normal input on top of the Rumble 200. I think it sounds amazing. It is no different than using a preamp. I find I still use identical EQs and both Rumbles sound as they should. Others might tell you to go into the effects return of the second amp and that also works well. I can only tell you what I actually do with my two Rumbles in a live situation to excellent results.

Several people in the Fender Rumble Club daisy chain two 100s on stage all the time.

If I were going to plug in 4 Rumbles, I'd use a Radial Twin-City ABY pedal to go to two amps and then daisy chain each to two more amps. That would actually work well and hopefully, it answers your question.

 

[GregT]

From what google tells me, the FX loop on the Rumble works that way, the amp will be silenced when you have a plug in the FX Send.

The wiring diagram looks a bit weird to my eye. It seems entirely possible to use the DI out of amp1 to plug into the FX return of amp2 and daisychain from there.
I do not have any idea how hot the DI out signal will be,though. The Master knob is, for some reason, placed before the FX loop, not after.

Just to clarify, when you plug a cable into the effects send of a Fender Rumble, the amp still works as normal. Unlike a lot of gear, you don't need to complet the circuit by plugging into the return.

 

[dbsfgyd1]

Hey! So, I am trying to downsize my amp collection, while still maintaining the flexibility of owning an amp or two for every occasion.

So I was thinking about slaving/chaining combo amps. I've gone through posts of people doing it with 2 amps, but I havent really gotten to the bottom of how one would use, let's say, 4.

This is my idea so far: Bass/effects into AMP-1, then FXsend to AMP-2 (input, not FX return), FX send (from AMP-2) to AMP-3, FX send to AMP-4, FX send from AMP-4 back to FX return on AMP-1.

Will this just make the line hotter and hotter? Will it be enough to set the EQ on AMP-1, or do I have to do them all? Will it all spontaneously combust?

For this example, lets use 4 standard Fender Rumble 100's.

Heres a very professional diagram of what I mean:
View attachment 4895776

Small gig? Bring 1, larger gig? Bring 4.

Possible to slave? Yes, even 4 of them, but you may not be able to plumb it up that way. I had two Eden combos, a 210 and a 115 and each rated for 320 watts and it was pretty loud. I can’t imagine why I would need four of them, but I digress.

I’d,probably get a signal splitter fed from the line out on combo one, then feed the other three from the signal spitter into their effects return. This way you will be bypassing the preamps of the 3 slaves units (I’m guessing running a signal through 3 preamps per your diagram that combo #4 might not produce the most clean sound) , and you would be able to control volume and tone from combo 1.

You are probably going to have to be choosie on which combos to buy to accomplish your goal as they could be different from one company to another.

If it were me, I’d just by a good integrated head or power amp to power up however many cabs you need.

 

[G-Dog]

Just to clarify, when you plug a cable into the effects send of a Fender Rumble, the amp still works as normal. Unlike a lot of gear, you don't need to complet the circuit by plugging into the return.

Yes, that is how Rumbles work. The FX Send just takes a split off the signal, which then just continues on to the power amp and speaker(s) as normal. And, no, IME that split does not noticeably affect the signal level.

I dunno about a lot of gear, but that seems fairly inflexible to require "closing the FX Loop." That implies, to me, a switch in the FX Send jack that "closes off" (actually opens the circuit of) the normal signal flow.

In the Rumbles there is a switch in the FX Return jack to keep the combo's preamp signal from mixing with the Return signal plugged in, which goes on to the power amp and speaker(s).
.

 

[Ric Vice]

Ampeg B-15N's could be combined but their was a Ex Amp input/output jack that allowed you to slave one amps power section to the other's preamp

 

[Boundary Effect]

That's probably way more headache then it'll ever be worth. A 1:4 active splitter or Link Removed would be good. If they are different bass amps, you'll probably want gain adjustment on the outputs. To adjust those you'll probably want to use a sound level meter and suss out the SPL of each bass amp and match their output levels. But this means the maximum SPL output of the whole rig is limited by the weakest bass amp, and we're not just talking watts but total gain including efficiency. And if these are not identical bass amps, in all likelihood they will not add together 1 to 1 and in some instances and frequencies any amp pairing may subtract SPL from each other.

 

[FugaziBomb]

Anyone can chain 4 amps together. Be different. Chain 4 bass guitars together.

 

[Ken R]

Why?

As was said before, One small amp (2ohm stable with the extra cabs), two, three or even 4 small neo 1x12 cabs. Will be easier, smaller and lighter and a good bit louder, I would assume.

 

[H K]

Yes, the level will try to grow to the point that it will become problematic. It will start out too high and get worse.

A 1:4 active splitter into the 4 inputs is one option, another is to take the effects send on the master amp and split it into 3 signals (one for each effects return on the slave amps)

All of this works better if the combos are identical.

Ok, seems like the best option to achieve the goal. Thanks! If I'm right, it should look something like this?:

What does an ACTIVE splitter do, compared to just a splitter/ABY? boost the signal?

 

[Discount Bassy]

Just get a bigger bass.

 

[AlexanderB]

@H K ..... As a gigging musician, I join the group that question the logic of your decision here. Bringing up to four entry/mid level combos on a gig is neither very cost efficient, nor technically great.
3× identical cabs, one bass head will be more bang for the buck, louder, more features and better sounding as well. Fewer things that can fail, and probably better reliability in amp and cabs.
Then there is also the user friendliness, risk for groundloops, needing 4 outlets and special cables etc.

 

[agedhorse]

Ok, seems like the best option to achieve the goal. Thanks! If I'm right, it should look something like this?:
View attachment 4896426

What does an ACTIVE splitter do, compared to just a splitter/ABY? boost the signal?

Yes, that will work.

An active splitter will buffer the input and each output. When using with the effects return, passive is fine.

Be sure your amps are all the same, which guarantees that the polarity will be the same with a passive splitter. Otherwise, you may need a splitter with polarity reverse.