• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

DB750, Second impessions.

So i've had this amp for a few months now. After owning it for a couple of days I started a 'first impressions' thread. I've spent a lot more time with the amp, taken it in the recording studio, and gigged with it in a number of places. I figured i'd post my conclusions and findings, and opinions...in case my experiences happen to help anyone out.

I've come to the following conclusions about this amp:
-It's still unbelievably loud, definitely the loudest amp i've ever played by far. The sheer headroom and overall power of the amp is astonishing. It's just plain scary. However, this also means that the master volume is VERY touchy at low settings in the knob's rotation. It sounds great at low volumes...but you'll find yourself trying to turn the master a fraction of an inch to edge the volume up or down a tad so you can sit well in the mix. Annoying, but you get used to it.

-The EQ/tone stack is very powerful, and is a little decieving, as it's not as simple as it looks to dial in if the flat settings are not your deal. Less is more seems to be the theme with this amp. But don't take that to mean you'll have it dialed in in 2 minutes. If you don't like how it sounds flat...you're in for some experimenting.

-The 'Aguilar sound' that is achieved by setting the amp near flat is not really my thing, although it does sound great. It's very midrangy and lacks a little in the lows. Though extremely present and clear. Though I don't play through big cabs, so this will be different through a 15, or a big box like an 8x10.

-When venturing away from flat settings, where EQ the knobs are in relation to one another is MUCH more important then where each individual EQ knob is in its range of travel. Ie. There's a very neglegable difference in tone between Bass, Mid, and Treble all at 9:00 vs. Bass, Mid, and Treble all at 3:00. These settings, however, will differ in pre-amp output a LOT. It's best to get a feel for what frequencies the knobs bring in/out, and decide where you want them in relation to one another. Like your mids?...try the difference between Bass and Treble Flat, Mid on 10 vs. Bass and Treble at 9:00, Mid Flat.

-The amp is interesting in the sense that the EQ section is active and very powerful, like most modern bass amps. But the amp is voiced on the old school side. The tone is not modern, for the most part. If you are coming from a traditional tube amp and used to the passive FMV tone stacks commonly found in tube amps, this amp will seem VERY midrangy and flat with the EQ knobs at noon. FMV tone stacks are inherently scooped. I realized just how midrangy a 'flat' tone is to my ears when I found myself backing off the mid knob...something i'm always dialing in very high in Fenders, Mesas, Ampegs, and Oranges. The voicing of the mids is fantastic, and in just the right place. But I definitely prefer it at very low settings or it just takes over the sound. That may or may not be your deal.

-The gain knob is the most important knob on the amp. At low settings you can get just plain disgusting amounts of headroom, but the amp can be rather notchy if you're not dialed in flat. It comes alive when you venture past noon on the gain knob. The sound really evens out and compresses naturally, you loose any notchy frequency response you had at lower settings and the amp starts to growl like a cranked up tube amp. The active/passive switch is also very powerful. The active setting just plain works better with my Sterling, despite the fact that I set it completely flat so the output isn't all that different from a passive...ie the 80's Fender P i've been using as a backup lately.

-The direct out sounds fantastic. The sound engineer we recorded with agreed as well, and opted to use the amp's direct signal over the stand alone direct box he had in the studio and is familiar with. Though the only problem i've had with it is that dialing in a little grit from the pre-amp (your only choice to dirty the signal up) may make things too dirty for a good clean recording direct or to make a sound guy happy at a club.


Well, that's my take on things. I hope it helps others who are new to one of these, or possibly thinking about pulling the trigger on one.

Any commentaries are welcome and appreciated.


-Nick
 
I probably should have done this exact same thing months ago! For the most part I could not have said it better myself. I agree with everything here. The only thing I would really add is that I prefer to run my basses with the passive switch engaged, I find that it gives me just that little bit of nudge for the master volume that I need without having to really futz with it. It also lets me dial up the pre gain just a tad more as well...hope that helps!

Peace,

T
 
Great follow-up review. It's interesting to me in that I purchased a Glock Heart Rock because I was looking for the extreme headroom of the 750 in an amp with a more transparant, quick voicing (a little tighter in the lows, less 'tube warm' in the mids, and a little sizzlier up top if needed).

I think that's what I achieved with the HR, but it is interesting how close your description of the 750 is to my initial experience with the Heart Rock. Given that the HR uses a SS preamp, I was surprised at how much impact the gain control has on the tone.... similar to a tube pre. I don't know if that has anything to do with the 'Class A' design (I don't know much about that stuff) or what. Your description of the tone controls relative to each other versus any particular absolute setting matches up to what I'm experiencing with the HR, and is quite different from other amps. Also, I find the Glock flat tone nice, but a little
thin' also, as you describe the 750. The HR also has similar 'bone crushing' low end headroom, which I guess is the reward for its rather large size and weight, again similar to the 750.

Thanks for the review!

Ken
 
I've had mine just a couple months as well. I had previously liked the more modern tone for my sound but I was just looking for more headroom with the aggie. Got that covered. Still, I'm diggin' the old school rock sound.
I've got a modern tone with my Carvin pb200 combo and Lb70p but I have yet to play the lb70p through the aggie as they've always been at different locations.
 
It's funny how it's the way componenets fit together that makes for a good musical experience. KJung and I had discussed this previously, wrt a Sadowsky with its naturally bright sound, mixing well with an Accugroove cabinet, which Ken says is a little less present in the upper frequencies than he prefers.

Similarly, the humbuckers on a Sadowsky do tend towards a mid-scoop to some extent, which, IMO, fits perfectly with the big mid sound of the Aguilar.

When you combine all three, it's like chocolate and peanut butter, baby.
 
kjones said:
It's funny how it's the way componenets fit together that makes for a good musical experience. KJung and I had discussed this previously, wrt a Sadowsky with its naturally bright sound, mixing well with an Accugroove cabinet, which Ken says is a little less present in the upper frequencies than he prefers.

Similarly, the humbuckers on a Sadowsky do tend towards a mid-scoop to some extent, which, IMO, fits perfectly with the big mid sound of the Aguilar.

When you combine all three, it's like chocolate and peanut butter, baby.

+1 in a big way... it's amazing how great some combinations sound, and how others, even based on wonderful individual compenents, do not quite work.
 
Like others I play NYC Sadowksy basses. They can be on the bright side this is true. I find the DB750 to have lots of power and headroom also. I prefer using the passive mode too. Curiously, I find the low end to be plenty. I would only attemp to make it tighter, and have not found out how yet. It has a bit of a 'whoosh' to it.

My regular setting for live performances are
gain: 12:00 to 1:00
treble: 12:00 to 1:00
Mids: 12:00 up to 3:00
Lows: 11:00 to 12:00

Instrument: touch of bass added. Vintage knob 60%, pickups equal mostly.
Cab: Berg NV215

Somtime I engaged the bright switch and never engage the low boost unless I'm at a whisper quiet setting. Seems many of you guys like more low end than me. I find it to almost run away if the bass boost is engaged. Of course this is taste and room accoustics too.
 
Big String said:
Curiously, I find the low end to be plenty. I would only attemp to make it tighter, and have not found out how yet. It has a bit of a 'whoosh' to it.

Actually, I think this is what a number of us are saying, that the 750's low end is almost too much once you engage the bass control... too wide (for some), just like you are mentioning. The Glock seems to have the same 'ooomph' but sounds a little more compressed and tight... almost like the difference between a shelving bass control at 40 hz (750) and a non-shelving but moderate Q bass control centered at 50 hz (Glock)... if that makes sense.

Kjones hit the nail on the head.... matching the 750 with a more mid tight cab like the NV610 can be a wonderful way to 'tighten it up'.