it's cool, you get what you get. I'm primarily reacting to you saying something critical/negative, then saying you didn't say something critical/negative. consistency is the thing.
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.
Fender tone stack sound.
- Thread starter Drop1
- Start date
Saying something critical about something from one's own perspective in no way contradicts the concept of "play what you like/like what you play". I have no idea why we are even having this conversation.
Per the model the claimed nominal flat is not really correct.
Probably not completely true to the real world behavior. If the bass and treble are off, the mid control acts pretty much like a volume control. The frequency response contour stays consistent regardless of level. Note the contour slightly favors the treble.
Bass 0, Mid 2, Treble 0
Mid 5
Mid 10
The contour is not perfectly flat. To make it closer to flat, you need to add just a touch of bass and/or treble. The required Bass and Treble settings vary by the position of the Mid control.
Bass 0.2 Mid 10 Treble 0
Bass 0.2 Mid 2.6 Treble 0.2
Bass 0.2 Mid 1.60 Treble 0.3 (this looks flattest to my eyes)
I mean, I get pretty close to flat with the settings on my Alembic F-1X pre…
and then hit the deep and bright switches, and run it through an SF-2 superfilter where that gets blended with a HPF set at 45hz and a band pass set around 110hz.
In case it hasn't already been posted, I found this article by Rob Robinette to be accessible and useful:
TMB Tone Stack
TMB Tone Stack
I think the Alembic F-1X and the Alembic F2-B really dial in the Fender Tone Stack. I've owned my F-1X for over 30 years and a 5 - 8 - 3 setting gives a nice bit of bass and treble boost, with some mid mitigation.
Bones
Bones
- Feb 12, 2006
- 60,963
- 5
- 220,655
- Disclosures
- Development Engineer-Mesa Boogie, Development Engineer-Genzler (pedals), Product Support-Genz Benz
The most flat response of the Fender tone stack architecture depends very much on the specific implementation.
It's certainly where I start when using my Broughton SSDI, but no, I usually don't keep it there.
This tone stack is also used in the Alembic and Acoustic 360 preamps. A slightly modified version was used on Marshall Super Bass and Sunn (non-Coliseum) amps, based on the slightly earlier Bassman design.
I'm starting to think that, maybe the best way to get an Alembic preamp sound is actually the lowly Hartke. And no wonder Jaco went with them, as they share a similar tone stack with his trusty Acoustic 360.And maybe SWR had the Aural Enhancer to simulate such a tone curve while using active EQ?
The interesting thing is that, on Fender's later Bassmen, the "bass" inputs are actually less scooped than the "normal" ones with this tone stack. With Marshall, the Super Lead tone stack is slightly less scooped than the Super Bass one. Maybe Fender was seeking maximum "hearability" from underpowered amps, while Marshall was confident with their power and just slightly adjusted them for a bolder lead tone?
I'm starting to think that, maybe the best way to get an Alembic preamp sound is actually the lowly Hartke. And no wonder Jaco went with them, as they share a similar tone stack with his trusty Acoustic 360.And maybe SWR had the Aural Enhancer to simulate such a tone curve while using active EQ?
The interesting thing is that, on Fender's later Bassmen, the "bass" inputs are actually less scooped than the "normal" ones with this tone stack. With Marshall, the Super Lead tone stack is slightly less scooped than the Super Bass one. Maybe Fender was seeking maximum "hearability" from underpowered amps, while Marshall was confident with their power and just slightly adjusted them for a bolder lead tone?
I have Fender Tone Stack on both of my amps - 1x10" 100W mosfet combo and 30W class A tube head. I have treble at zero, mids full, bass 9 o´clock. Depends on bass, sometimes I turn the mids a on 3 o´clock. For me it sound kinda natural.
For more toneshaping I have Barber Linden pedal with Baxndall EQ, but I rarely use it.
For more toneshaping I have Barber Linden pedal with Baxndall EQ, but I rarely use it.
Marshalls put the tone stack after the overdrive section - they generate a lot of extra mids in that stage, so things are just…different. A bit of apples and oranges there.
Again, implemention. Just because an amp uses a "Fender tone stack" architecture doesn't mean they all sound the same.
My issue with the Fender stack is amps with no midrange control…most Bassmans, for starters.
Late 50s tweed 4x10 has a mid control plus the presence control.
Brownface early 60s has no mid control but presence works on both channels…no deep or bright switches yet.
Blackface…no mids or presence but the deep and bright switches have arrived.
Bassman 100, early 70s…mids on “normal" channel but not bass channel.
Silverface 70 watter from the 1970s…no mids again.
Bassman 10 combo, first gen…mids only on normal channel.
Bassman Ten second gen, mids on both channels
Bassman 20, early 80s…mids but no switches.
Late 50s tweed 4x10 has a mid control plus the presence control.
Brownface early 60s has no mid control but presence works on both channels…no deep or bright switches yet.
Blackface…no mids or presence but the deep and bright switches have arrived.
Bassman 100, early 70s…mids on “normal" channel but not bass channel.
Silverface 70 watter from the 1970s…no mids again.
Bassman 10 combo, first gen…mids only on normal channel.
Bassman Ten second gen, mids on both channels
Bassman 20, early 80s…mids but no switches.
There are so many factors in the signal chain that context is everything, and everything is meaningless/adrift without context....the music, the bass, etc. That said, passive tone stacks, by definition, provide more limited control of eq than a full featured, modern, active front end. I have passive tone stacks in the Fender & Hiwatt veins on my Sushi Box preamp pedals. I cherish them. They can sound amazing in the right context all by themselves, but when push comes to shove, I prefer to play all of them in a chain that has more muscular and precise eq control elsewhere, either on the head, via another active pedal, or both, because I enjoy them far more when I can push them to places they simply cannot get to on their own. The most critical frequency range for bass as I play it is the mids, and a multi (at least 2) band parametric mid eq makes my chain far better to my ear. YMMV.
Last edited:
I do exactly that, for guitar, arrived there without knowing how the fender stack works, I quickly found that is what I wanted to hear. I have been playing, doing sound and recording long enough to not listen with my eyes!
this is with a Traynor bassmaster. I used it in a band for about 15 years as a guitar player. It used to make me feel that I was an oddball until I found out that was flat for that amp.
I also run my bass amps flat. I’m Flat Stanley, MFers!
This seems like a conversation I had about 20 years ago with the guitarist in my band. He was playing through an early 60s Fender guitar amp of some kind, probably a Deluxe Reverb. He was commenting on how great it sounded.
I said it sounds great because we are all conditioned to what “great” sounds like and if 50s & 60s hits were played on a totally different amp, that’s what would sound “great” to everyone. My theory was that what became popular had a lot of ingredients, some of which had nothing to do with guitar amp tone.
He didn’t exactly agree, but our discussion ended on agreement that we have all heard what became popular & that certain “tone” has become acceptable. Tone changes over time as there becomes more variety to choose from.
It seems the Fender tone stack might have enjoyed a period of acceptability, because it was so common, but a wider variety of tone control is chipping into its “market share”.
GM once had over 60% of the automobile market in the US. Variety changed that, but GM isn’t gone (yet).
I said it sounds great because we are all conditioned to what “great” sounds like and if 50s & 60s hits were played on a totally different amp, that’s what would sound “great” to everyone. My theory was that what became popular had a lot of ingredients, some of which had nothing to do with guitar amp tone.
He didn’t exactly agree, but our discussion ended on agreement that we have all heard what became popular & that certain “tone” has become acceptable. Tone changes over time as there becomes more variety to choose from.
It seems the Fender tone stack might have enjoyed a period of acceptability, because it was so common, but a wider variety of tone control is chipping into its “market share”.
GM once had over 60% of the automobile market in the US. Variety changed that, but GM isn’t gone (yet).
This doesn't have anything to do with the topic, but I thought the MM hybrid amps had a solid state preamp and tube power amp.
Yes that's correct.
Looks like the MM Tone Stack is layed out like the Fender but the capacitor at the top of the bass pot has been replaced with wire. I don't have a model to show how that effects the sound.
Within certain bounds.
There's no universe where my first guitar amp, which was a 10watt Crate, would sound "great".
