Fender Bassman 135 Questions

[gb2]

I found a nice Fender Bassman 135-Amp on eBay, but read several different reviews, and now I don't know what to think about it...already send a mail to the seller, but his answer didn't help me that much...maybe you can help:

1) Is ist usable as bass-amp? Cause I read that Fender Bassmans tend to fail as bass-amp and only be useful as guitar-amps
2) How is the basic character of the tone? low, low-mid, high-mid, highs, whatever? And am I able to get "my" sound out of it?
3) How works the distortion? I've read they are pretty clean, but I going for that tube-own-distortion.

finally, 4) "My" bass sound is punchy low-end, crankend-up high-mids and clear highs, through a Nash '62 P-Bass and an Eden-410 CL cab. Can the Fender Bassman 135 get me to the sound I'm searching for?

Thanks for help in advance

 

[ogar]

Hi,
I used to have it for 2 years and would say YES, it is quite usable as a bass amp. Definitely could compete with moderately loud drummer, Marshall half stack and Fender Bassmann 4x10 reissue. We played 60'-70' blues/hard rock (LedZep, Cream, Free, Hendrix) and the tone the amp produced fitted the music nicely. It has the classic Fender preamp, which is a bit mid-scooped when set "flat" (in other words, you have to crank mids and "cut" the bass and treble to approximate the flat response, think it is 2-10-2). From what I recollect, it has nice deep and very clean tone to it. The bass was punchy, the mids, when cranked, could fit your description too, but the highs were somewhat muffled (but cab with tweeter will probably do the job). You really have to crank the gain to get the tubes saturated though and even then, you would not get full distortion. So if that is what you are after, maybe you should look for old Ampeg V4 or Orange OR120 head (the latter one gets driven fairly easily).

Cheers

Ales

 

[LowOrbit]

I've never owned one of those, but I would think it would make a great bass head.
All tube - 135 Watts

To specifically answer your questions:
1) The tone circuit is probably voiced for guitar. But, it's a passive circuit, so I don't think it would be so out of range for bass.
2) (see above) ...and I think you are going to get "its sound". It just depends on whether you like it.
3) It probably is clean-ish, but very warm and with the master volume you should be able to dial in preamp gain.
4) It should really deliver mids and highs, and I suspect that it has massive transformers which will be great for low-end.

Check out the specs:
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
And some reviews:
http://reviews.harmony-central.com/reviews/Guitar+Amp/product/Fender/Bassman+135/25/1

Also expect to get it serviced after buying which will add to the cost.
So, don't overpay...

Good luck!

 

[JTE]

A different perspective, based on selling them when they were new (I was a Fender dealer from 1977-1988) and revisiting one a few months ago.

I hate 'em. First, the 135 WRMS is mostly wishful thinking from Fender. They upped the power rating from 100 WRMS to 135 as a response the the Music Man amps that were 130 WRMS. They were still using four 6L6 tubes and went with a different "ultra-linear" output transformer. It's still not really miuch more power than the earlier 100 WRMS version.

The pre-amp doesn't do the overdrive thing very well. The Bassmans that guitar players like are either the earliest ones from the '50s (combo amps) or the black-faced 45 WRMS piggy-back head versions. By the time the 135 came out, they'd tried to clean up the bass amp pre-amps to get rid of distortion. They're not the classic Bassman sound by any stretch.

They do an OK version of the tube bass amp thing, but avoid the stock 4x12 cabinet- it was horribly inefficient, prone to coming apart at the seams, wimpy speakers, and it was big and bulky. My experience is that an Ampeg V4b or a B25 or a Music Man HD-130 from the same era is a much better bass amp. If the price is right (and I have no idea what the market is these days) it'd be OK, but I think there are better choices out there for classic tube amp sounds.

jte

 

[gb2]

thank you all very much for your help.
I was expecting these answers, but they helped me make my decision. I think I'm going to let the amp go without bidding, and wait some more for an affordable v4...in germany you have to pay prices up to 950€ (=1500$) for a vintage v4. and buying them in the usa isn't cheaper at all after shipping, duty, and transformator change...

 

[Bassmec]

A different perspective, based on selling them when they were new (I was a Fender dealer from 1977-1988) and revisiting one a few months ago.

I hate 'em. First, the 135 WRMS is mostly wishful thinking from Fender. They upped the power rating from 100 WRMS to 135 as a response the the Music Man amps that were 130 WRMS. They were still using four 6L6 tubes and went with a different "ultra-linear" output transformer. It's still not really miuch more power than the earlier 100 WRMS version.

The pre-amp doesn't do the overdrive thing very well. The Bassmans that guitar players like are either the earliest ones from the '50s (combo amps) or the black-faced 45 WRMS piggy-back head versions. By the time the 135 came out, they'd tried to clean up the bass amp pre-amps to get rid of distortion. They're not the classic Bassman sound by any stretch.

They do an OK version of the tube bass amp thing, but avoid the stock 4x12 cabinet- it was horribly inefficient, prone to coming apart at the seams, wimpy speakers, and it was big and bulky. My experience is that an Ampeg V4b or a B25 or a Music Man HD-130 from the same era is a much better bass amp. If the price is right (and I have no idea what the market is these days) it'd be OK, but I think there are better choices out there for classic tube amp sounds.

jte

You don't have to use the UL taps it does make the amp tone more hi fi hard and less fruity if you do. Not the best, So For best get a new mercury magnetics non ul bassman 100 trans.
We just fitted a bassman fifty Mercury magnetics, did this to the version of the Bassman Ten which has a 70? watt five wire primary UL trans.
Its far more fruity now. And I don't think its quieter by much if any at all.

 

[insane bass]

yeah but would it work for say thrash metal?

 

[Rhythm5]

Wow, this is sure a blast from the past. This was my first "real rig" back when I was in high school. the 135 head and the 412 cab. No problem keeping up with the band and back then I thought the sound was the bomb. No doubt that even with todays standards it is still a very usable amp.

 

[will33]

I have one, it's not a bad head, I really like the way it sounds at lower volumes. Does the old Pbass thump and bounce fairly well, just not at loud volume. As said, stay away from the old 412 cab with the speakers mounted at angles, there are much better now. I can get a really nice tone (to me) from mine for recording, small blues/R&B gigs etc. just not at any kind of louder volume. I don't like the overdriven sound for bass either, sounds harsh, nasty but produces a nice warm/clean/tube sound if played within it's limits. Also makes a good clean tube head for lap steel if you have a decent reverb effect unit in the chain somewhere and also a loud as hell guitar head with the right speakers and a couple pedals in front of it.

 

[allsidius]

I have two of them, and two 412 cabinets. The standard utah POS elements have been sold off to some vintage nerd, and I filled the cabinet with Celestion G12T-75, because they were readily available slightly used at a great price. The set up plays fantastic. I had a bunch of bassists lining up to buy it, but most are afraid it would not be reliable. That is not true, the cold solders that came as standard from CBS have been redone by now, and with a good set of tubes it has never quit on me. It is a vintage 70s sound, and the consensus around here is that it is the best sounding amp in town. It does not have a tweeter, but you won't miss it. If it is the David Foster type sound you are after, it is not for you. If you want to kick ass, it is perfect. Be prepared to replace the tubes and have the bias adjusted. And by the way, I use the Normal channel, not the Bass input.

 

[bassmangotdbluz]

I owned, played and loved a 1977 Bassman 135 for about 10 years, at first through a 1971 Fender VT-15 2x15" reloaded with EVM-15Bs. I generally used an MXR DynaComp with it and it had a nice fat low mid range punch at low to moderate volume levels but if you turned it up too loud it sounded floppy and farty. Eventually, I took those speakers and put them in a pair of small Dr Fong kit Subs and it rocked like I couldn't believe. Once again reaffirming that it is a disastrous cabinet design for bass but not so bad for a guitar or harmonica. Back to the Bassman 135 Amp; I've played it through an Ampeg 4x12, an Ampeg 8x10, an SWR Goliath II 4x10, an SWR Goliath Jr II 2x10, an SWR Son Of Bertha 1x15 and a BagEnd S15D. All of them sounded great with each lending a different flavor to the aural feast by virtue of it's inherent sound differences by design. In short, I thinks it's the very best of the Bassman series amps for amplifying a Bass.

 

[Bassnut62]

Late to this party.....I've owned my early Bassman 135 for about 30 years and will NEVER part with it. It is an awesome bass head that responds well to Leo-Fender designed instruments, including original MusicMan Stingray. I currently use it with an AVRI62 Jazz Bass and a '79 Stingray. I used the 2x15 silver-face Fender Bassman cab with it for a long time; but had to glue and screw all the seams and brace the baffle to the back panel to stop it farting out, then it became a beast, though very heavy indeed. I now use an old MusicMan 1x15 HD ported cab, loaded with a JBL D140 and have refaced/rebadged the cab to match the head. This combination is incredible for bass and would give any other tube amp a run for it's money. As a bonus, the Normal channel is great for guitar too. If you need more dirt in either Bass or Normal channel, just bridge the two channels with a patch lead, to use both sides of the pre-amp.