I've never heard anyone wish they had less wattage.Just Did!!
Thank you for the Number!!
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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 free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Scenario, endorsement, suddenly you are playing high profile gigs on a regular basis on big loud stages, and fender is ready to get involved. Hypothetically of course.
What do you think of this as a monster rig:
Super Bassman300 on top of 4 rumble 210s turned on their sides?! I would say bassman800 but that won't do 2 ohms.
Or is that an accident waiting to happen with a heavy head like that?
Fender Y u no 2 ohm class D? Guess that leaves subway D800, peavey minimega, orange terror500 etc...
I just like the idea of 4 rumble 210s sideways as an alternative to the traditional bass fridge.
What do you think of this as a monster rig:
Super Bassman300 on top of 4 rumble 210s turned on their sides?! I would say bassman800 but that won't do 2 ohms.
Or is that an accident waiting to happen with a heavy head like that?
Fender Y u no 2 ohm class D? Guess that leaves subway D800, peavey minimega, orange terror500 etc...
I just like the idea of 4 rumble 210s sideways as an alternative to the traditional bass fridge.
Yeah, that rig would be 76 or so inches tall without the head, maybe stack them the regular way and 2 stacks side by side? Probably easier to lift the head up there. I think it would sound GLORIOUS.
I thought about that, but I would think dispersion would be better without speakers in the same horizontal plane as they would be side by side. Perhaps a 3x rig at 2.6ohms.
Edit: actually 72" is cool, no head, just 2 500c and 2 210s, more power, and flexibility for split rig for clean/dirty. Speaking of clean/dirty, a 500c/210 on the bottom, and my 200c on top of that with the 112 on top, have the 15 and 12 handle the dirt and mid push with the lows rolled back a bit for maximum headroom. And I wouldn't be trying to get 2 rigs at deep discount at first, just one to add to mine. Counting chickens, ensuring they never hatch lol
Last edited:
Who am I kidding, I would be happy just rocking rumble 500s. Heads make more sense for easy flexibility in a touring situation. If a combo goes bad you lose a cab at the same time technically, unless they are @Erik B modded.
I'm counting chickens, been doing it my whole life. Probably why my eggs don't hatch
I'm counting chickens, been doing it my whole life. Probably why my eggs don't hatch
From a post way backI thought about that, but I would think dispersion would be better without speakers in the same horizontal plane as they would be side by side. Perhaps a 3x rig at 2.6ohms.
Edit: actually 72" is cool, no head, just 2 500c and 2 210s, more power, and flexibility for split rig for clean/dirty. Speaking of clean/dirty, a 500c/210 on the bottom, and my 200c on top of that with the 112 on top, have the 15 and 12 handle the dirt and mid push with the lows rolled back a bit for maximum headroom. And I wouldn't be trying to get 2 rigs at deep discount at first, just one to add to mine. Counting chickens, ensuring they never hatch lol
Check this out, they'd still be sort of side by side:
Last edited:
I liked it better when it didn't work, I already have one and I don't even want the temptation of having a 'back-up'
Buy it and run both. Make the audience feel the air in their beer bottles move. Crack the Earth. The possibilities are endless !I liked it better when it didn't work, I already have one and I don't even want the temptation of having a 'back-up'
Hey fellow Rumble members, looking to upgrade from my 40 to either a Rumble 500 combo 2 x 10 or... a Rumble 500 head paired with a Rumble 500 1x12 cab or a rumble 115 600 1x15. Pro's and cons of each? Given those choices, what would YOU go with and why? Looking for something gig worthy. Thanks in advance for the advice.
I went with a separate head and cabinet (210) my reasoning was:
- I already have a GK MB combo a didnt want two.
- Flexibility of adding different cabinets, switching them out, swapping, etc.
- If one component breaks I would not loose the whole rig while it's being repaired.
I went with the 500 combo for several reasons:
1. Size and weight. The 500c is way lighter than a 500 head and 210 cab, and just as powerful. Plus it's one less item to schlep around.
2. Price. The 500c is way cheaper, too.
3. I wanted a one-piece rig. The much-touted flexibility of a head/cab combination is a little overrated, IMO. Since I live in a city and don't drive, ease of transport is paramount.
Maybe this has been answered to your liking but I went with the 500 head and 210 cab because of the high power rating of the 210 and figured since that was what was in the combo I'd be less likely to pop them. Do not think that the 210 is bass shy, it puts out a lot of low end. Later you could add the 12 or 15. Folks here say they pair up very well.
Edit:I could not get 2 cabs at the time, now I have 2 210s and this thing is a monster.
Firstly: Keep your Rumble 40. Secondly: Rumble 500 head if you really need the wattage and high SPL plus a pair of Rumble 115 cabinets. Why? HUGE sound. Wide smooth mids with superior dispersion. Super solid bottom end definition and punchy attack. I get the same thing with my Rumble 200 combo. I just don't need the wattage and high SPL.
True this, after hearing the rave up on the Rumbles here I played a 200c. I was convinced before the B string stopped vibrating.
Plus the front-facing controls on the head make it easier to adjust on the fly.
