Class D and Neo cabs are the future!

[YellowJacket]

you really think that's the reason? i always thought the reason was that the 400+ was kind of an albatross with 12 6L6's powering it. i think they publicly say that's the reason, but i'm sure nobody enjoys having to replace power tubes in the 400+.

That is RIDICULOUS. Why not run 6 KT77s instead?

I think solid state / hybrid / tube debate is much less of an issue with bass gear because really, only solid state distortion is an artifice. The cleans really aren't that bad, ESPECIALLY with a good instrument and a good set of speakers. If you want a clean, punchy MODERN tone solid state delivers the power in spades without prohibitive cost, weight, or even maintenance. I really think that I would pick tube or diode, depending on what the gig required.

 

[KJung]

paul mccartney bought a couple

That's a sale of two

It is simple economics with these companies. If the product is profitable margin-wise, and sells enough volume to make it worthwhile, they will keep it in the product line. If not, they won't. That Sadowsky tube amp was one of the few mistakes I've seen Roger make, and he quickly took action (i.e., removing it from the market). That's the way a good business should be run.


Again, to be clear, I totally agree with most of what you are saying. Solid state amps will never replace that final 10% or so of the market that all tube amps are holding onto (again, guessing there...5%, 15%... don't know) that really likes what only tube amps can give you, whether that be super fat low volume performance, or screaming, grinding, grunting break-up. Totally agree, they will always be around.

However, I would be VERY worried if I was a company built on selling 20-35 pound solid state heads. Those IMO will continue to migrate to the very low end of the market, and will have a hard time competing in the top end of the market in the future. I would also guess that ceramic driver based speaker cabs will continue to command a smaller and smaller part of the market as more neo voicings are made available and as the price keeps coming down (although there is much talk of the neodymium rare earth or whatever it is becoming more rare, and hence more expensive.

 

[Swift713]

I have to admit that I have no experience with tube bass amps but I like my class D AI Clarus and fEarful cab's tone much much better than the GK and Trace Elliot amps and Eden and Peavey cabs that I previously used. I have owned a couple tube guitar amps and while the Fender Champ was very nice indeed(I never warmed up to the Mesa Boogie) I would still prefer a Roland JC for clean tones.
I'm sure tube amps will not go away. Hell, they've been "obsolete" for like 40+ years and people still want them. Tape and vinyl died off much quicker than that.

 

[mothra2]

IMO, yes Compare it to a lower powered amp of any size and weight, and it will have more headroom and girth. Compare it to a TecAmp PUma1000 or Markbass SD1200... not so much.

Doesn't mean its not a great amp, but it surely doesn't sound 'better' because it happens to weigh a ton.

IMO and IME on that one!

Here's the problem I have had (and I've had the F500 and the 1200).... Both amps take say, six characteristics of my main bass and waters them down to two or three. Is this problem just the pre ... maybe, but I have yet then to hear a class-D amp that invests in a proper pre .... I don't know. One could argue that this won't be missed on the gig, but if that is the measure of a successful amp, the bar is being set pretty low IMO.

All I know is that I would love to sell my Millennia pre and Crest CA-9, move into one of these class-D jobs and keep the change, but to my ears, that box just does not exists yet.

Sorta like IPods ... convenient, but for serious listening ... a compromise. I mean, it's fine if you like the sound, but anything that takes away from the characteristics of my instrument(s) ... I just can't move on it.

The SA-200 ... I found that it exaggerated (or 'doubled up') the characteristics of my basses, but did not add or subtract from what was already there acoustically, just doubled what was there ( a tube amp characteristic IMO, not unique to just the SA). Unbelievable amp, but that doubling up in the lowest end was a bit too much for me (still miss it, though).

 

[KJung]

Here's the problem I have had (and I've had the F500 and the 1200).... Both amps take say, six characteristics of my main bass and waters them down to two or three. Is this problem just the pre ... maybe, but I have yet then to hear a class-D amp that invests in a proper pre .... I don't know. One could argue that this won't be missed on the gig, but if that is the measure of a successful amp, the bar is being set pretty low IMO.

All I know is that I would love to sell my Millennia pre and Crest CA-9, move into one of these class-D jobs and keep the change, but to my ears, that box just does not exists yet.

Sorta like IPods ... convenient, but for serious listening ... a compromise. I mean, it's fine if you like the sound, but anything that takes away from the characteristics of my instrument(s) ... I just can't move on it.

The SA-200 ... I found that it exaggerated (or 'doubled up') the characteristics of my basses, but did not add or subtract from what was already there acoustically, just doubled what was there ( a tube amp characteristic IMO, not unique to just the SA). Unbelievable amp, but that doubling up in the lowest end was a bit too much for me (still miss it, though).

I guess I've had a different experience. Never was impressed with 'studio gear' live... both from personal playing experience, and listening to bassists that used that stuff. Always sounded stunningly amazing in the basement, and less than impressive on the gig. IMO there.

I was not particularly impressed with the SA-200. Sounded like a tube amp trying to sound like a transistor amp... cleaner and punchier and more modern than the old school tube amps, but none of the classic character of the SVT. IMO there again... all this stuff is SO good in its own way that it becomed pure 'personal tone goal'. I've owned just about everything, and the F500 just generates my 'perfect tone'. Of course, my perfect tone is probably the definition of 'suck' for many others.

 

[mothra2]

I guess I've had a different experience. Never was impressed with 'studio gear' live... both from personal playing experience, and listening to bassists that used that stuff. Always sounded stunningly amazing in the basement, and less than impressive on the gig. IMO there.

I was not particularly impressed with the SA-200. Sounded like a tube amp trying to sound like a transistor amp... cleaner and punchier and more modern than the old school tube amps, but none of the classic character of the SVT. IMO there again... all this stuff is SO good in its own way that it becomed pure 'personal tone goal'. I've owned just about everything, and the F500 just generates my 'perfect tone'. Of course, my perfect tone is probably the definition of 'suck' for many others.

I compare equipment to the sound of my bass late at night un amplified, and hope to preserve it thru the electronics that I choose, with what ever the pickups add. Getting the right cutting sound live is just then a matter of E.Q. and a good cab (which has IMO been the biggest culprit to bad sound...thank god THAT has improved lately). The room ... all bets are off there, just gotta have the controls. Some rooms just don't work.

Loved that SA-200 , but, viva la differance!

 

[naturalkinds]

However, I would be VERY worried if I was a company built on selling 20-35 pound solid state heads. Those IMO will continue to migrate to the very low end of the market, and will have a hard time competing in the top end of the market in the future.

And this is what troubles me about Glockenklang as a company. The Heart-Rock is unquestionably one of the finest amps I've ever played, but it's a pretty hard sell. About as heavy as a DB 750, and no more powerful than a handful of micros out there at a quarter of the weight and half the price. Unbelievable tone, but nothing -- in my opinion -- better than a great studio setup in isolation, and no obviously detectable difference on the gig from a Little Mark II.

Now if they made a 500W 8 lb head for $1000, then we'd be talking... But, until then, I have no idea how they'll continue to last. It's not just a shortage of dealers that have made them uncommon over here; it's also interest. (Though, of course, the two are related.)

 

[seamonkey]

yep....someone must have forgot to inform audio research and macintosh that they are wasting their efforts on ancient technology.....tubes were supposed to die in the 60's when solid state came out....

McIntosh has also been making SS amps since the mid 1960's.
They cater to many markets. Why the even seem to have some new fangled technology in their new amps.

 

[seamonkey]

Sorta like IPods ... convenient, but for serious listening ... a compromise. I mean, it's fine if you like the sound, but anything that takes away from the characteristics of my instrument(s) ... I just can't move on it.

iPod's have a lot of memory these days. You can load songs in lossless formats. Good earbuds or headphones and there is absolutely no compromise.

You can buy modelers for iPods like Amplitube iRig, it's catching on like crazy.

 

[s_mcsleazy]

That's a pretty keen set of wheels!

I will say the paperweight amp comes in handy when I don't care what I sound like, just popping over to the neighbor's for an evening of drunken musical fun. For that, the convenience wins out. Similarly, if I just need to run to the store for something real quick I won't bother taking the sports car out of the garage, unlocking, folding, and stowing the cover etc., I'll just jump in the old beater economy car.

what do ya meen

the ford capri was the peoples coupe and the fact you can get one that still runs for 800 id say thats pretty economy

plus back in the day it was only a little more than a cortina wich meny called the peoples car because it wasnt expencive to own/run/buy new and they went around forever. so much so that in the 60's to the 80's they were pretty much used as police cars as was the capri

 

[seamonkey]

Let's see:
1) aluminum cones will replace paper

Aluminum costs more.

2) graphite will replace wood

Graphite costs more

3) all basses will be active

Costs more

4) no more need for headstocks

Costs more

5) four string basses will die out

Costs more

6) the Internet will ruin the music biz

Only the last one happened, and regressives weren't to blame

non-sequitur

Transporting/shipping costs more. Power line costs actually do add up. Class-D and Neo's will win out just on cost.

 

[Staccato]

Found this thread on my quest for a first outdoor rig.

Research/definitions revealed:
Class D = Small, Neo = Small

 

[rodl2005]

iPod's have a lot of memory these days. You can load songs in lossless formats. Good earbuds or headphones and there is absolutely no compromise.

You can buy modelers for iPods like Amplitube iRig, it's catching on like crazy.

I STILL think they COMPRESS the sound/music & I can hear that- even with great ($$$$) earbuds etc...

I STILL like the sound of vynyl over CD's too

 

[seamonkey]

CD's don't need to be compressed.

You may like Vinyl for other reasons, Like the other artifacts - crackle, hiss, ...
There is special EQ for vinyl. It's an endless debate.

Blind studies - an audio group recorded vinyl to CD, the listeners couldn't tell a difference from real vinyl.

iPod lossless has much better specs than CD's, but there's only so much that human hearing can actually hear. DVD audio has better specs also. It never caught on.

Class-d is has great specs but when it comes down to it, no human could possible hear a difference between major brand power amplifiers no matter what the class.

 

[Musicman20]

To join the CD/Vinyl brigade, I LOVE my quality home stereo, and I definitely hear a HUGe difference with a real CD over mp3s. But, mp3s are convenient!

If you like tube amps, get a tube amp, and have a high quality sub 10 lbs solid state for those days you dont want to lug it. Best of both worlds. Nothing sounds like tubes...they get close, but never exactly right.

 

[edwinhurwitz]

I STILL think they COMPRESS the sound/music & I can hear that- even with great ($$$$) earbuds etc...

I STILL like the sound of vynyl over CD's too

There is a compromise in that the d/a converters of ipods aren't that great. However, lossless streaming from an ipod into a great converter can sound quite good and way better than CD. Even high bitrate carefully converted mp3s through my Metric Halo ULN-8 sound wonderful.

One of the big ironies of CDs is that they have the potential to sound better than vinyl, for a variety of reasons, but as the "loudness wars" have taken over, the mastering process has absolutely ruined the edge gained by CD digital audio. So, vinyl product in many cases can sound much better than CD. It's weird when we have to go to an obsolete technology capable of only 50 to 6db db or so of dynamic range to hear punch and impact in the music, while the format that can reproduce most of what we would at least want to hear (I'm not interested in 120db in my living room) ends up delivering only 10 or 20 db of range, if that, with many modern releases squished to within an inch of their lives. No wonder you like vinyl better!

 

[naturalkinds]

iPod lossless has much better specs than CD's, but there's only so much that human hearing can actually hear.

Sorry man. You don't understand what lossless compression is. Lossless refers to the fact that it has the same linear pulse code modulation format a CD is in, so, in fact, the fidelity is identical to the 44.1k/16-bit playback from a CD.

 

[JimmyM]

you know what format i think sounds the best? the kind where the performances and songs are good.

 

[R Baer]

Class-d is has great specs but when it comes down to it, no human could possible hear a difference between major brand power amplifiers no matter what the class.

I've heard this stated before on TB and I have to disagree. We auditioned half a dozen different power amps mated to our preamp when deciding on our power section and every combination sounded different. Some I liked, some I did not.

I would be very surprised if someone could run the preamp from a GB Shuttle into a Crest CA9 and not hear and feel any difference at all.

 

[seamonkey]

Sorry man. You don't understand what lossless compression is. Lossless refers to the fact that it has the same linear pulse code modulation format a CD is in, so, in fact, the fidelity is identical to the 44.1k/16-bit playback from a CD.

Yes - thanks
I meant it's not compressed mp3 - with losses