• 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.

Fender Rumble Club

Your assumptions as to hardware similarity may be in error.

A. The power amps differ with the 100 being an SMPS and the 200 being an ICEpower module.

2. The speakers are probably not so similar either, since, I believe, the 12" has been identified (right or wrong) as a 75 watt driver and the 15" as a 300 watt! Yes, neither of those are very close to the nameplate wattage, but that has been explained as "design criteria" for one and "manufacturing logistics" for another.

π. The R&D and design goals that went into the Rumble line of amps, cabs and combos did most certainly include working well together, at least in the traditional sense. Probably even with their sibling Bassman line. But, whether that includes chaining of such dissimilar combos is open to conjecture.

First, I like your bullet points... A. 2. π. LOL!

I understand that each of the Rumble combos is engineered and optimized as a "system", and that they are designed to be compatible with other models when connected.
But it is obvious to me that they're not all designed to work optimally together when different models are connected.

It would be cool if, when you chained a R200 with a R100, they would each hit their full output/clipping/limiting points at about the same input level!
 
First, I like your bullet points... A. 2. π. LOL!
... ... ...


Mahalo! That's my special "dissimilar items" bullets, in somewhat sequential order, first, second and third.14159! :)

... ... ... I understand that each of the Rumble combos is engineered and optimized as a "system", and that they are designed to be [tonally] compatible with other models when connected [used simultaneously and separately].
But it is obvious to me [anyone] that they're not all designed to work optimally together [with identical functionality curves] when different models are [physically] connected. ... ... ...


I, uh, ... fixed it to what you, or I, shoulda, or woulda, said. I think ... , or do I? :wacky:

... ... ... It would be cool, if [inefficient,] when you chained a R200 with a R100, they would each hit their full output/clipping/limiting points at about the same input levels!


Yes, that would, indeed, be extremely cool! But, of course, such very limited 1% use case "coolness" must always be sacrificed for the 99% use case practicality's sake. ;)
.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Miles_ONeal
... ... ... I understand that each of the Rumble combos is engineered and optimized as a "system", and that they are designed to be [tonally] compatible with other models when connected [used simultaneously and separately].
But it is obvious to me [anyone] that they're not all designed to work optimally together [with identical functionality curves] when different models are [physically] connected. ... ... ...

I, uh, ... fixed it to what you, or I, shoulda, or woulda, said. I think ... , or do I? :wacky:

No, by "compatible" I simply meant they are ELECTRONICALLY compatible, able to be connected (EFFECTS SEND > RETURN) as per the manual, with no surprises!

You're right about the rest...
 
... ... ... the daisy chain seems to be a super fan hack; IDK if they necessarily expect/want us to be doing that....

... ... ... I understand that each of the Rumble combos is engineered and optimized as a "system", and that they are designed to be [tonally] compatible with other models when connected [used simultaneously and separately].
But it is obvious to me [anyone] that they're not all designed to work optimally together [with identical functionality curves] when different models are [physically] connected. ... ... ...

I, uh, ... fixed it to what you, or I, shoulda, or woulda, said. I think ... , or do I? :wacky: ... ... ...​

No, by "compatible" I simply meant they are ELECTRONICALLY compatible, able to be connected (EFFECTS SEND > RETURN) as per the manual, with no surprises!

You're right about the rest...


Uh, ... but, ya know, ..., like, ... the Rumble manual doesn't say anything about connecting FX Send of one combo to FX Return to another!?? Heck, at least one Rumbler thought this was "a hack" that we shouldn't be doing (per top quote above)!

But this "electronic compatibility" is not unique to Rumbles! Lots of different brands with FX Loops have been doing this since long before the first all-tube Rumble in the '90s! And many such amp users are able to do it just fine without any surprises. Yours is the first surprise I've heard of about this.​
 
Last edited:
Uh, ... but, ya know, ..., like, ... the Rumble manual doesn't say anything about connecting FX Send of one combo to FX Return to another!?? Heck, at least one Rumbler thought this was "a hack" that we shouldn't be doing (per top quote above)!

But this "electronic compatibility" is not unique to Rumbles! Lots of different brands with FX Loops have been doing this since long before the first all-tube Rumble in the '90s! And many such amp users are able to do it just fine without any surprises. Yours is the first surprise I've heard of about this.​
Nice to see my 5 year old posts are still being read :woot:
 
I still haven't hit the button on my second 200. Want it to daisy chain when needed, but mostly to keep at another location.

Curious about the love for the vintage setting.

Sounds great at home, but in a band wouldn't you loose too much definition to the sound? My own experience is that what sounds good at home doesn't go the same in the band. Need some high mids and treble. I dont like bright strings though, currently got flats.

Is vintage popular with folks who have the 12 and 210 speaker combos (100 and 500)? The 15 in the 200 seems to have plenty of fat without vintage.

I do like the compression of the vintage setting though. Bit tubey. Dialing up the high mids seems to be a nice balance? Thoughts please, these are the big issues that keep me awake at night.
 
I still haven't hit the button on my second 200. Want it to daisy chain when needed, but mostly to keep at another location.

Curious about the love for the vintage setting.

Sounds great at home, but in a band wouldn't you loose too much definition to the sound? My own experience is that what sounds good at home doesn't go the same in the band. Need some high mids and treble. I dont like bright strings though, currently got flats.

I do like the compression of the vintage setting though. Bit tubey. Dialing up the high mids seems to be a nice balance? Thoughts please, these are the big issues that keep me awake at night.
It's a very individual thing. I recently used the vintage setting for musical theater ("Pal Joey") in a small community theater and it worked out great. The music director liked it, the rest of the musicians could hear me just fine, and it gave a very old-timey vibe to a musical score that was written in the 1940's for upright bass.

On the other hand, if you're playing Yes's greatest hits, or metal, or other, it may not be the thing for you. All depends on what you want.
 
It's a very individual thing. I recently used the vintage setting for musical theater ("Pal Joey") in a small community theater and it worked out great. The music director liked it, the rest of the musicians could hear me just fine, and it gave a very old-timey vibe to a musical score that was written in the 1940's for upright bass.

On the other hand, if you're playing Yes's greatest hits, or metal, or other, it may not be the thing for you. All depends on what you want.

Good point JS. Traditional soul, R&B, blues based rock, and selected country is what I like. We jam on a wider range of stuff though, some of which would benefit from a bit of overdrive, and other more modern stuff. Not into slap as a musical style. The "sound" that makes me happy is fat, warm and focused. And clear articulation.
 
I still haven't hit the button on my second 200. Want it to daisy chain when needed, but mostly to keep at another location.

Curious about the love for the vintage setting.

Sounds great at home, but in a band wouldn't you loose too much definition to the sound? My own experience is that what sounds good at home doesn't go the same in the band. Need some high mids and treble. I dont like bright strings though, currently got flats.

Is vintage popular with folks who have the 12 and 210 speaker combos (100 and 500)? The 15 in the 200 seems to have plenty of fat without vintage.

I do like the compression of the vintage setting though. Bit tubey. Dialing up the high mids seems to be a nice balance? Thoughts please, these are the big issues that keep me awake at night.

It depends on the band, the music, the sound system, the mix, the venue, and just what you want. Vintage is good when things sound hollow, or when I want an early Allman Brothers or Lynyrd Skynyrd sound. In a boomy room, forget it.
 
It depends on the band, the music, the sound system, the mix, the venue, and just what you want. Vintage is good when things sound hollow, or when I want an early Allman Brothers or Lynyrd Skynyrd sound. In a boomy room, forget it.
One size does NOT fit all.

Mar19_05_88046286.jpg
 
At least it's got a woofer.
True story. Years ago, a friend with no background in music or electronics took a job at a stereo shop because his friend the manager needed help quickly. A week later they found out they’d sold enough Bose gear to get a free trip to Bose. Nobody else could / wanted to (yikes!) go, so a week later, off Will went. After the grand tour, the Bose guide asked, “Any questions?” Will said, “yes. What’s a woofer (pronounced “woo’ fur”). After the laughter died, they realized he was serious. The Bose rep for Will’s shop was mortified. I started working there shortly after because Will quit. “There’s just too much I don’t know -and don’t care about.” Sure wish I could have taken that trip!
 
Last edited: