• 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.

Genz-Benz Streamliner Part 5

Status
Not open for further replies.
#341
Update on my STM900 experience. Received my replacement one yesterday, plugged it in and checked noise level and guess what... it is quiet, unless you boost the gain/volume to absured levels. So, I was pleased with that and knowing the issue with the first one was not user error KJ:D.

Took the replacement to church and plugged into my AE410 with my Valenti alder/RW JJ with nordstrand single coils and preamp and played by myself with no DI for quite awhile. I had the tweeter around 10 oclock on the cab and had the bass on the head around 10 oclock as well. I really like the thickness or girth on the A,D,G strings, but I am still struggling a bit with that same thickness on the E and B strings. It is fat and supportive, but I am used to kick you in the nuts punch with the M6/AE410. Cutting the bass and boosting the mids at 600 helps for my tone goals on the j bass, but I need more time. I still maintain this thing opens up and punches more with the gain button in and I believe you can still can control the grit with the gain button in. So by myself and just through my rig I found a tone I liked.

When everyone arrived and we did sound checks with FOH, I really struggled. Guitarist who knows my tone pretty good complained most of the sound check as something did not sound quite right. He even said your not punchin':eek:. I am sure it had to do with FOH and monitoring, but just to be sure I unplugged the STM 900 and plugged in the MB200. I had the same issues with hearing myself, so not sure what gremlins were in the system but it has never been that bad. After rehearsal, I went and talked with the sound guys to try to figure out the problem and then switched back to the STM900. Found out between switching the STM900 and MB200 the DI is quieter on the STM900 than the MB200 so that is a positive. They said the MB200 was a bit hissy.

So for me the verdict is still out. Maybe I am just so used to my M6/AE410 tone that I am going to have hard time with having several different flavors. I do know that I will not pair the STM900 with the AE212 anymore. Just does not work for me and my tone goals. This head makes me wish I still had my HS210s. IMO they would kill with this head. The AE410/STM 900 sounds good to my ear and I need to try it with some different basses and settings.
 
#343
Have you tried rolling back the bass and boosting the 220? That's why we selected that frequency and band width.....punch. Also, as you play around with the gain vs. volume knobs, you'll find the character of the lows changes a lot. This is something KJ alluded too.

Saluki said:
Update on my STM900 experience. Received my replacement one yesterday, plugged it in and checked noise level and guess what... it is quiet, unless you boost the gain/volume to absured levels. So, I was pleased with that and knowing the issue with the first one was not user error KJ:D.

Took the replacement to church and plugged into my AE410 with my Valenti alder/RW JJ with nordstrand single coils and preamp and played by myself with no DI for quite awhile. I had the tweeter around 10 oclock on the cab and had the bass on the head around 10 oclock as well. I really like the thickness or girth on the A,D,G strings, but I am still struggling a bit with that same thickness on the E and B strings. It is fat and supportive, but I am used to kick you in the nuts punch with the M6/AE410. Cutting the bass and boosting the mids at 600 helps for my tone goals on the j bass, but I need more time. I still maintain this thing opens up and punches more with the gain button in and I believe you can still can control the grit with the gain button in. So by myself and just through my rig I found a tone I liked.

When everyone arrived and we did sound checks with FOH, I really struggled. Guitarist who knows my tone pretty good complained most of the sound check as something did not sound quite right. He even said your not punchin':eek:. I am sure it had to do with FOH and monitoring, but just to be sure I unplugged the STM 900 and plugged in the MB200. I had the same issues with hearing myself, so not sure what gremlins were in the system but it has never been that bad. After rehearsal, I went and talked with the sound guys to try to figure out the problem and then switched back to the STM900. Found out between switching the STM900 and MB200 the DI is quieter on the STM900 than the MB200 so that is a positive. They said the MB200 was a bit hissy.

So for me the verdict is still out. Maybe I am just so used to my M6/AE410 tone that I am going to have hard time with having several different flavors. I do know that I will not pair the STM900 with the AE212 anymore. Just does not work for me and my tone goals. This head makes me wish I still had my HS210s. IMO they would kill with this head. The AE410/STM 900 sounds good to my ear and I need to try it with some different basses and settings.
Click to expand...
 
#344
hasbeen said:
Also, as you play around with the gain vs. volume knobs, you'll find the character of the lows changes a lot. This is something KJ alluded too.
Click to expand...

Yes, that was a revelation to me. I initially had the gain low, around 9-10, and the Pre volume at around 2-3 in an effort to get it super clean. It sounded grittier than I wanted. After reading Ken's post (thanks Ken!) I moved both to 12 and it went Super Duper clean.
 
#345
hasbeen said:
Have you tried rolling back the bass and boosting the 220? That's why we selected that frequency and band width.....punch. Also, as you play around with the gain vs. volume knobs, you'll find the character of the lows changes a lot. This is something KJ alluded too.
Click to expand...

I have, but I settled with bass at about 10ish and boosting 600 to about 2oclock. I thought that had a bit more clarity for the alder/RW bass I was using. I would probably boost 220 with my ash/maple J, but haven't tried that bass yet. I have heard the variation in tone with gain controls and I am going to spend more time with that. I do feel the mids push a little more with the gain button in. I am not saying this thing cannot be punchy, but it seems in default settings it is fat and supportive. I just need to find the right balance of fat, supportive, punchy, and clarity for my tone goals. With multiple basses and cabs, there are lots of variables. Ya it sounds good straight up like Ed says, but I am a tweaker and not afraid to turn a knob if it sounds better to my ear. Just my 2 cents again.
 
#346
Saluki said:
I have, but I settled with bass at about 10ish and boosting 600 to about 2oclock. I thought that had a bit more clarity for the alder/RW bass I was using. I would probably boost 220 with my ash/maple J, but haven't tried that bass yet. I have heard the variation in tone with gain controls and I am going to spend more time with that. I do feel the mids push a little more with the gain button in. I am not saying this thing cannot be punchy, but it seems in default settings it is fat and supportive. I just need to find the right balance of fat, supportive, punchy, and clarity for my tone goals. With multiple basses and cabs, there are lots of variables. Ya it sounds good straight up like Ed says, but I am a tweaker and not afraid to turn a knob if it sounds better to my ear. Just my 2 cents again.
Click to expand...

Sounds good. Next week, if you want, tell me the settings on your M6 that you're trying to replicate. I have an M9...I can mess around with the M9 and the STM-900 and see if I can get you where you want to be.
 
#348
hasbeen said:
DO NOT worry about the peak light. One reason we when with fewer lights on this amp and changed it from red to amber, is because people "fixated" on the lights. When the peak light is on, it means you're engaging the 3dPM.

If it sounds good, it is good.
Click to expand...

I am a very satisfied STL-900 owner,great amp,full of unique and inspiring tones.I have not been too concerned with the peak light but, based in part upon hasbeens' response above, I am curious to understand more about the 3dPM feature.Having run the amp at only moderate volume levels I have yet to get a peak at the peak light in action.Is the peak light THE indicator of the 3dPM engaging or can it be "on" without the peak light?I am trying to not have this be a peak light centric question but a desire to understand more about the3dPM feature,how it works,what it provides and how it is accessed.Thanks
 
#349
len13 said:
I am a very satisfied STL-900 owner,great amp,full of unique and inspiring tones.I have not been too concerned with the peak light but, based in part upon hasbeens' response above, I am curious to understand more about the 3dPM feature.Having run the amp at only moderate volume levels I have yet to get a peak at the peak light in action.Is the peak light THE indicator of the 3dPM engaging or can it be "on" without the peak light?I am trying to not have this be a peak light centric question but a desire to understand more about the3dPM feature,how it works,what it provides and how it is accessed.Thanks
Click to expand...

+1 to this I would love to know more about how to get the most out of this 3dPM thing as well. It says very little in the manual.
 
#350
Well, I have some egg on my face today. My problem seems to be........my headphones. I've used this same pair of headphones for ages, but only to rehearse with at home. They are a bit thick on the bottom end, but I had forgotten about that because I haven't compared them to anything else at all. I decided late last night to plug my Westone's into the headphone amp instead, and I was literally shocked how much thinner the sound was. I actually had to dial some bass back up from where I had it set on the SL900 (from 9 o'clock to around 10:30 or so). Sounded MUCH better.

So then I decided to get out some other headphones that I've got stashed away in a closet that I never use, an older pair of Sennheiser's (can't remember the model) and some Bose Triports. Both of those sounded really good with the SL900 as well. The problem was only with my "rehearsal" phones. These are not only a bit thick in the lows, but they also have a bit of natural scoop to them apparently. No wonder I loved them with my Shuttles all these years, pretty much running things flat when using the headphones, but always boosting some bass when on the gig. The combination of the headphones along with the voicing of the SL900 was REALLY exacerbating the issues I thought I was having. Going to something a bit more flat really brought out more of the tone I wanted to hear.

I mentioned that the SL900 seemed to sound fine through my AE212, and now it seems to sound like that through these other headphones also. Lesson learned big time on this.

That said, I still have to see how things work for me on a gig. But for now, I'm not afraid to take the SL900 and use it as a post-EQ DI at my in-ear gigs next weekend. After I got the headphone thing figured out, I wound up hooking my Boss rhythm machine to the Aux IN on the SL900 and goofing around till around 1 a.m. this morning. It sounds really great to me for a lot of the loops that require a thick, vintage style tone.

Still hope to scope this head out over the weekend, but I don't think the issue is nearly as drastic for me as I thought it was originally. I should know better on something like this, really, but this practice setup I have at home hasn't changed in years, and I just took it for granted.
 
#351
Oldtimer said:
How would one do this? I have the True Audio RTA software on my computer using a Presonus Firepod interface. I would be willing to give it a try but don't want to publish false or misleading info if I'm doing it wrong.
Click to expand...

Basically, just patch the output of the Firepod into the input of the Streamliner, then hook the output of the Streamliner to the input of the Firepod. There is some question regarding which output to use. Don't use the speaker output, obviously, as it will be waaaaay too hot! So, that leaves the D.I. (post-EQ) and the headphone jack as likely candidates.

The next part is getting the SL's input and output levels set so that the SL is delivering approximately unity gain. A frequency sweep or pink noise may be used to check the relative frequency response. You might set TrueRTA to display both channels and run one as a straight cable, with the other through the SL. That will show the difference between the flat sound and the response of the device under test. It may sound tricky, but is actually quite straightforward once you understand what you're doing.

Looking forward to the results!
 
#353
Eublet said:
Well, I have some egg on my face today. My problem seems to be........my headphones.
Click to expand...

Glad that's been recognized. I had been wondering about the somewhat anomalous results you'd been having with headphones. They certainly do vary a lot in terms of bass response. I tend toward more accurate/flat phones. However, a lot of consumer models have exaggerated bass, which would not give a reliable representation when auditioning an amp.
 
#356
Eublet said:
Well, I have some egg on my face today. My problem seems to be........my headphones. I've used this same pair of headphones for ages, but only to rehearse with at home. They are a bit thick on the bottom end, but I had forgotten about that because I haven't compared them to anything else at all. I decided late last night to plug my Westone's into the headphone amp instead, and I was literally shocked how much thinner the sound was. I actually had to dial some bass back up from where I had it set on the SL900 (from 9 o'clock to around 10:30 or so). Sounded MUCH better.

So then I decided to get out some other headphones that I've got stashed away in a closet that I never use, an older pair of Sennheiser's (can't remember the model) and some Bose Triports. Both of those sounded really good with the SL900 as well. The problem was only with my "rehearsal" phones. These are not only a bit thick in the lows, but they also have a bit of natural scoop to them apparently. No wonder I loved them with my Shuttles all these years, pretty much running things flat when using the headphones, but always boosting some bass when on the gig. The combination of the headphones along with the voicing of the SL900 was REALLY exacerbating the issues I thought I was having. Going to something a bit more flat really brought out more of the tone I wanted to hear.

I mentioned that the SL900 seemed to sound fine through my AE212, and now it seems to sound like that through these other headphones also. Lesson learned big time on this.

That said, I still have to see how things work for me on a gig. But for now, I'm not afraid to take the SL900 and use it as a post-EQ DI at my in-ear gigs next weekend. After I got the headphone thing figured out, I wound up hooking my Boss rhythm machine to the Aux IN on the SL900 and goofing around till around 1 a.m. this morning. It sounds really great to me for a lot of the loops that require a thick, vintage style tone.

Still hope to scope this head out over the weekend, but I don't think the issue is nearly as drastic for me as I thought it was originally. I should know better on something like this, really, but this practice setup I have at home hasn't changed in years, and I just took it for granted.
Click to expand...

I was looking up different studio sets last night and thinking how bizarre some of the frequency response graphs look, and thought I should bring it up here, but I'm glad you figured it out already! I'm contemplating a Streamliner and I was a little less certain after reading your experiences before.
 
#357
Re headphones for bass monitoring: I strongly advise the use of OPEN BACK hd ph. This lets the unwanted bass response "out the back door". (not to mention saving your hearing from damage). I use Sennheiser HD600's for recording monitors. IMO the BEST available for any music - even better than the HD650's. Bass Player mag even did an Avalon U5 review using them some time ago. Sennheiser has a number of more affordable open back phones that are very decent. LISTEN before buying!!! They all sound quite different.
B.
 
#359
Auditioning the Streamliner via headphones makes a lot of sense in a noisy music store.

In a noisy store, I think I'd take my GK Ultraphones because they do such a good job blocking extraneous noise. But, in a reasonably quiet store, like Bass San Diego, I think I'd use a my Sennheiser open-backed HD 590s because I'm so familiar with their sound, or take one of my own bass cabs; it makes no sense to audition a head with a cab (or headphones) I'm not familiar with.
 
#360
Mooch said:
For anyone who is a metal head. I'm about to start practice and we are just going to jam on our new song. Think woe, is me, meets slipknot, meets deftones, meets korn and I'm going to push this head with the peak to see what I can get.

Post to come.
Click to expand...

Looking forward to this. While 99% of the gigs I play are pop/jazz/funk/soul, etc. what gets my listening time 99% is metal (I'm not a metalhead, though, depending on one's definition). More in the vein of Hypocrisy, In Flames, Dark Tranquility, Katatonia type stuff though, mostly European. But since I've got another side project in the works, I'd sure love to hear how this head performs in that environment.

Speaking of which, I've got a rehearsal coming up this Sunday with a Top 40's cover band. It's new stuff like Katy Perry, Lady Gaga, etc. It's beyond mind-numbingly simple, but hey, if the gig pays, it pays. I'll toss in a word or two about how that turns out as well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back