Genz Benz Streamliner; Part 4

[Musicman20]

Jimmy - No probs We all have different tastes and there is so much choice now we can all have what we want! Id be interested to see what you make of the SL as you know your tube sound.

 

[Musicman20]

I have a Streamliner arriving anytime now and have briefly owned a RH450. I can't believe it is getting bashed for having features. It wasn't a complicated amp and if you don't want compression and you don't want to experiment with different EQ points then just don't press the shift button. You can use it just like any other amp without those features.

I was hoping the RH450 was going to become my main amp as it has a lot going for it, all the above plus built-in tuner. However, for my needs I thought some of my other stuff (with real tubes) sounded better and more authentic (for me). It sounded great on some demos I saw on youtube though. That is why I am excited about the Streamliner. Seems to be the lightweight amp I am looking for, has a simple but well-thought out EQ and with a serious tube path, not some token 12AX7.

Bashing it for features would indeed be odd. Dont want them? Well get the Classic. The features for me are the icing on the cake. Ive owned Trace amps with SO many features and graphic slider eqs that put me off heavily features amps, as I never needed them and didnt like what they did so much, (although the amp itself sounded great) but TC got it 'right' as they seem to do with pedals/effects and studio gear.

I mainly want the Streamliner as its like my now ex-LM3 (hopefully) but with more to it. Not fussed about losing the VLE and VPF, but I still want the crystal clear warm 'almost tube like' clean tone. From what I have heard the highs are very nice on the SL, and as my RH450 is restricted up top, thats where the SL fits in....and it is a different vibe I guess.

Im awaiting it anxiously!

 

[hensonbass]

I just spent a couple of hours with my SL900 into a Thunderchild cab. I like this amp a lot so far.

There is some magic texture to the tone in the gain control around 12 o'clock with the gain adjust switch pushed in. That's where I'm hearing the '3D' thing. So far I'm also running the bass knob at 10 o'clock - too bassy to me beyond that with the Thunderchild. Mid EQ is cool although more subtle than the typical micro amp eq. Compared to the Walkabout head I own the SL900 has way more defined/tight bottom end and headroom power. The WA has a more complex midrange voicing character IMO and obviously way more eq variations too. If your instrument has an unbalanced tone you are going to have a hard time 'fixing' it with the Streamliner. But it does add a sweetness and warmth to a good bass signal and makes it loud as your cab will handle.

My gut tells me I want to choose a cabinet that is not too low end heavy. I'm thinking about getting a Berg AE410 because I think I'm going to want as much upper mid information out of this amp I can get. You will never lack in low end with this amp with a decent cab.

In general, I think this amp offers great value for bassists.

 

[loopee]

 

[wateroftyne]

My gut tells me I want to choose a cabinet that is not too low end heavy.

Yeah - reading different views, this seems to be the case.

My HS210s should be a nice match, I think..

 

[lomo]

For those thinking about cabs , the SL900 plays exceptionally well through nEarful 15-6s. Exceptionally well.

 

[KJung]

I hate to stick my oar in, but I suppose I can because I have the SL coming as well, but the RH is SO far away from Line 6 its unreal. Absolutely NOTHING like it, tone wise especially.

I dont even hear any type of processed sound. If I didnt know it was a digital amp, I would think there were real tubes in it.

Ok, the drive may not be to everyones tastes, I understand. But a little goes a long way.

Anyway, back on topic. Ill be able to compare the two very soon. The RH is going nowhere, I love it. The SL is going to be its best buddy and say 'hey look at me, I have three tubes!'.

+1 My RH450 isn't going anywhere. It is NOT a modeling amp (thank god), and its 450 watts sound like 700 watts... it is a hammer. It is a very warm, fat sounding amp to me, and other than a bit too much attenuation for some up top (again, it is voiced to really try to bring out the 'sealed 10' thing in any cab you use it with) it is pretty top notch.

Actually VERY easy to operate, and once you get your sound dialed in and saved, the front end is quite simple. Fantastic compressor, and a suprisingly accurate and fast tracking tuner.

As I've posted before, the RH450 has a lot of the 'entire vintage type' rig tone built into it... that kind of sealed multi10 compressed punch. Many of the users of the RH450 seem to be 'ex Ampeg guys'. I view the RH450 more as 'the hybrid amp that Ampeg should have made but never did' even though it doesn't have any tubes.

Regarding the 'tubetone' overdrive, just as we are hearing with the SL900, everybody's idea of a good overdrive tone is quite different, and there are many positive and negative reports on the RH450 (and now the SL900's) overdriven tone. I can't really comment, since I don't really use that sort of tone in my playing.

The TC RH450 definitely has the edge on quality feel over the Genz IMO... it is more substantial, heavier metal casing, etc. The SL900 definitely has the volume advantage (as you would expect), but not nearly to the extent that you would think given the published ratings. The RH450 uses a conceptually similar power management system that allows the amp to greatly exceed the rated output of its class D module, but still sound good.

Anyway, I think my comparison clip is relatively accurate... the RH450 is more compressed, tighter, and more mid chewy (again, kind of like what a fridge does to the tone of an SVT IMO). The SL900 is more open and seems to be vibing an all tube amp vibe, versus the 'entire classic rig vibe' of the RH450.

Both are great, and IMO when TC does the update of the RH450 eventually, my guess is they will include a variable lo pass filter (they call it a tweetertone control) that will 'fix' that top end issue that some have. I was lucky enough to serve as an 'update/tweaker' tester for the RH450 revision with a few other TBers last year, and they seemed to have listened to what we were recommending (given the feature set of the new Blacksmith amp).

IMO.... lots of good stuff out there at the moment!

 

[Musicman20]

Im quite curious about the treble/high control on the Streamliner. It seems from reports it does the nice clean modern slap tone, in a smooth sense, but also allows it to act as an 'almost' passive tone control, like on a P bass. How 'pingy/bright' does the amp go?

 

[Musicman20]

PS - The mid control seems to be voiced very well. I like the demos Im hearing a lot!

 

[KJung]

Im quite curious about the treble/high control on the Streamliner. It seems from reports it does the nice clean modern slap tone, in a smooth sense, but also allows it to act as an 'almost' passive tone control, like on a P bass. How 'pingy/bright' does the amp go?

I have a clip up on my Youtube channel of the SL900 and my 70's style J with stainless steel roundwounds. There is NO top end attenuation to this amp and the treble control does a better job than most of controlling the upper treble when you want a more 'old school' vibe. Again, it has that more 'sweet tube like' treble response versus the more 'modern' top end of the Shuttle or F1, for example.

Here is the link to the clip. For comparison, I have another clip (that should come up on my Youtube channel) of the same cab, bass, and room with my Markbass F500 so you can get a bit of a feel for the difference. Both sound great IMO.

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

 

[KJung]

Just to make it easy, here is the comparison clip (same bass, room, volume, cab) with the F500.

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

You should be able to hear the bigger low end, smooth mids, and 'sweetness' up top of the SL900, versus the more punchy, immediate, bright and tight tone of the F500. They both sound good for this brighter, clean tone IMO.

 

[bthrem]

Has anyone tried the SL900 through a sealed cab? Specifically, I love my Markbass TA-501 into my Markbass CL-106 but sometimes I wish I had just a little more “umph”.

 

[Sav'nBass]

Like Ken said, not late at all.

Think of it like this. Let's say you have two basketballs. Attached to one is a steel chain. Attached to the other is heavy duty bungie chord. You remove the slack from both. When you give the chain a snag, it immediately yanks the basketball toward you hard with a sudden change in momentum. That's a solid state head typically, quick and punchy with immediate impact up front, but not necessarily as much feel after that first snap.

On the other hand, when you yank the bungee chord, the ball does start moving initially, but the bungee absorbs alot of that energy so it's not a sudden shock, but if you yank that bungee back hard enough, the energy absorbed by the bungee goes back into the basketball after a moment so that it gains more acceleration and increases speed, eventually snapping the ball forward with great velocity. This is a tube head. That increased energy on the back end is what most people describe as "heft" or "weight".

In the analogy, both examples move the ball instantly, but both feel very differently from the other from both the perspectives of the person doing the yanking, and to the ball getting yanked. The end result is that ball is moved. Which do you prefer?

That's my feeble attempt to explain it, and as with all analogies it falls apart if you try to work it out to much. For example, a solid state head can still push a note hard beyond initial punch, so "heft" isn't limited to tube heads by any means. Also, the "slowness to full acceleration" from the bungee chord happens in a matter of microseconds with tube heads. A tube rig can feel VERY punchy and snappy when you're standing in front of the right rig. So these are relative terms that really have their meaning only when used in comparisons.

For someone who has never really heard the different types of amps enough to have a place to put this in their heads that's a pretty good analogy.. especially when paired with the term "gooey tubiness" that I have heard around here so much in relation to tube amps.. It seems to follow that it would be easier to get a digital tone from a tube amp than ity would be to get a tube tone from a digital one.. so for sheer versatility tubes offer more options is that correct?

 

[pablomigraine]

I have the RH450. It packs a lot of features but it's not THAT complicated but it does have a lot of variables on hand. Totally not underpowered, I am sure it more than hangs with the SL 600. It did make for interesting comparison. I'll have both soon!

Totally not bashing this head at all!! Obviously I was venturing well into the realm of dramatic license in my description of the amount of features..... Although I like to have a lot of features, and the thought of having a truly usable on-board compression is nice, it's too complicated an interface for me, being that when we're on the road, we play a different room every night, and dialing in has to be a 10-second thing or less.... plus I'm a compulsive knob-tweaker to begin with. The more functions... the more time I'll spend twisting knobs.... and I did take care to say it was underpowered FOR ME... ( I play against a two Peavey 5150 stacks, often on stages with poor monitor mixes, or no stage monitors in some cases, so I need a LOUD amp!!)

 

[adivin]

Not a digital tone, solid state. I don't think anyone would want a digital tone.

 

[KsPiNeSh]

As I've posted before, the RH450 has a lot of the 'entire vintage type' rig tone built into it... that kind of sealed multi10 compressed punch.
...
IMO.... lots of good stuff out there at the moment!

This may have been what I didn't really dig about it and why it seemed a bit "digital" - I was looking for soemthig with a bit more give to it. You know, given a lot of the other opinions that have popped up I have to wonder if the compressor wasn't inadvertently engaged and I just didn't know it

 

[KJung]

This may have been what I didn't really dig about it and why it seemed a bit "digital" - I was looking for soemthig with a bit more give to it. You know, given a lot of the other opinions that have popped up I have to wonder if the compressor wasn't inadvertently engaged and I just didn't know it

The RH450 will sound just a touch 'boxy' when directly compared to the SL900... it is a more compressed, low mid present, top end attenuated head, no matter what you do with the EQ. That can sound great on the gig, where 90% of the time a big low end is more of a problem than a blessing. However, it is a very voiced head, and that voicing is not going to be good for some IMO.

 

[Musicman20]

Just to make it easy, here is the comparison clip (same bass, room, volume, cab) with the F500.

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

You should be able to hear the bigger low end, smooth mids, and 'sweetness' up top of the SL900, versus the more punchy, immediate, bright and tight tone of the F500. They both sound good for this brighter, clean tone IMO.

Thanks! Ill give these a proper listen later on.

 

[Musicman20]

The RH450 will sound just a touch 'boxy' when directly compared to the SL900... it is a more compressed, low mid present, top end attenuated head, no matter what you do with the EQ. That can sound great on the gig, where 90% of the time a big low end is more of a problem than a blessing. However, it is a very voiced head, and that voicing is not going to be good for many IMO.

Ken, your clip of the RH450 and Streamliner demo this very well. The lo mid kick of the RH450 is definitely noticable. When you have the Streamliner on, its more 'open' and I can see where they are coming from with the comments of 'heft'.

 

[Tunaman]

I have to listen to these again. Someone offered a RH450 used for $550 to me the other day, I passed waiting on the SL900