Genzler Magellan Pre... looks tasty

[agedhorse]

I just got back from a vacation (Oaxaca, Mexico - wonderful people, food, sights, music - highly recommended!) and had a chance to play around with the Genzler Pre some more. This was at home, strictly living room volume, but this time I used the Pre in front of my older Hartke Kickback 12 (KB), 120 watt version with a paper cone speaker.

I have used the KB for many, many years in theater pits and for lower volume gigs of all sorts. While I prefer my Shuttle 6.0 or NeoPak into my Bergs, the KB is a pretty good and useful tool. I set the amp to my normal default settings: bass, 2:00; mid, 12:00; treble, 10:00; Shape (mid-cut), about 350 hz. I gain matched the Pre so that it was close to unity with the volume of the bass plugged directly into the front of the KB. I, once again, was using my Roscoe Beck V with TI Jazz Rounds.

I played around with the eq settings on the Pre and ended pretty much with the settings I had reported in my previous post: bass, 1:00; mid 2:00; mid frequency, 2:00; treble, 12:00. I then adjusted the Contour channels.

I noodled around for a couple of hours playing various grooves, walking bass, melodic arrangements, and the Bouree I and II from Cello Suite 3 and the Prelude from 1, both at pitch and an octave lower. I found myself gravitating more towards Contour B set between 9:00 - 12:00, although Contour A also sounded good.

Once again, I found the Pre to add a certain je ne sais quoi. Hard to describe precisely, but it is an added presence and musicality, a forwardness, with authority and fullness. Since this was at low volume, I really wasn’t going for punch. There is a subtle but different feel while playing. I continue to be very impressed with the Pre.

A big caveat is that I haven’t done any blinded A/B testing with the Pre. Maybe I can when my brother, who is also a bassist, comes to visit next week. I’ll see if I can rig something with my Radial AB or Morley ABY pedals for fast switching between using the Pre and not to see if I can reliably and consistently tell the difference in a blinded test.

I would love to understand, in general terms without compromising proprietary information, what aspects of preamp design contribute most to this. I find that some preamps and amps have this and some don’t. An example of an amp that did, in my experience, was the old Epifani UL901. My real old Ampeg SB-12 also had it as well (an open and airy quality, but not “heft” or “weight”), but only at low volume, my Ampeg B-15S, not quite (though it had “heft”) My old Yamaha B100-III with dual full parametric controls, while sounding good, did not. As much as I love my Shuttle 6.0 and NeoPak 3.5 - they aren’t going anywhere - the Genzler Pre adds to them to bring out these qualities even more.

The words “authority,” “heft,” “airy,” “open,” “presence,” “musicality,” “fullness,” “weight.” “oomph,” etc. are really hard to define and are subjective, but to paraphrase Justice Potter Stewart, I know it when I hear it, or at least think that I do (see above comment about need to do blinded tests).

How does it do that? Inquiring minds want to know. Is it mostly the shape of the equalization curves? But if that is the case, why does the Pre still have some of this when set flat and the Contours off? Why can’t I recreate it with other preamps, say my Fishman Pro Platinum with 5 bands of graphic eq? My Sansamp BDDI and VT Bass can add fullness and punch, but there is a “compressed” sound and lack of openness seemingly always there. Are there differences in op amp responsiveness? Again, respecting intellectual property, are there general answers to these questions understandable to an educated lay person? My graduate degrees, training and career were in biochemistry and molecular biology, not electronics.


Thanks,
Dennis

The differences are due to many aspects of the design, including (but not exclusively) the voicing.

 

[biobass]

The differences are due to many aspects of the design, including (but not exclusively) the voicing.

Thanks, Andy. I kind of assumed that might be the answer. ;>)

 

[odarellmc]

Thanks, Andy. I kind of assumed that might be the answer. ;>)

I know you would prefer to hear from Genzler. Just watched a vid they posted here about what makes certain bass amps and cabs sound different. The test was very interesting. A very thought out vid. Maybe someone needs to do a test on why certain pres sound different here's the vid.:

 

[Mojo34]

This preamp is #1 on my GAS list, but I'm waiting patiently for more videos/good sound samples.

 

[biobass]

I know you would prefer to hear from Genzler. Just watched a vid they posted here about what makes certain bass amps and cabs sound different. The test was very interesting. A very thought out vid. Maybe someone needs to do a test on why certain pres sound different here's the vid.:

odarellmc, thanks!

I have seen this and other of his videos. I find them informative to an extent, and humorously done. He does make some good points that many (most/all?) of us do sometimes listen with our eyes and buy in to some very specious marketing.

As someone who spent my career as a research scientist studying complex biological systems, I do also appreciate some of the limitations of his approach. While it is true that, in isolation, switching one component may not have much of a demonstrable effect, specifically under a single condition such as gain levels, as he points out in the section on overdrive and eq, the ordering of components does have a noticeable effect. Since preamps and other electronic devices are composed of tens to hundreds, maybe thousands, of components that can be arranged in exponentially increasing ways, with near infinite increments of levels (assuming Newtonian mechanics for simplicity) the whole can be greater than the sum of the parts. Also, there are things like “feel” that are hard to quantitate, but qualitatively experienced, at least I think that it is. All of this needs multiple blinded testing in order to be sure.

it would be interesting to see what would happen if he were able to shift one sound sample to be out of phase with another, akin to what noise cancelling headphones do, then see what remains of the signal from additive and subtractive interference. I believe that would require some very sophisticated equipment.

Again, thanks for sharing. His videos do demonstrate that some of what we think we need we might not, in reality. Maybe old Shakespeare tackle “black boxes” would fit the bill in many situations!

Cheers,
Dennis

 

[odarellmc]

odarellmc, thanks!

I have seen this and other of his videos. I find them informative to an extent, and humorously done. He does make some good points that many (most/all?) of us do sometimes listen with our eyes and buy in to some very specious marketing.

As someone who spent my career as a research scientist, I do also appreciate some of the limitations of his approach. While it is true that, in isolation, switching one component may not have much of a demonstrable effect, specifically under a single condition such as gain levels, as he points out in the section on overdrive and eq, the ordering of components does have a noticeable effect. Since preamps and other electronic devices are composed of tens to hundreds, maybe thousands, of components that can be arranged in exponentially increasing ways, with near infinite increments of levels (assuming Newtonian mechanics for simplicity) the whole can be greater than the sum of the parts. Also, there are things like “feel” that are hard to quantitate, but qualitatively experienced, at least I think that it is. All of this needs multiple blinded testing in order to be sure.

it would be interesting to see what would happen if he were able to shift one sound sample to be out of phase with another, akin to what noise cancelling headphones do, then see what remains of the signal from additive and subtractive interference. I believe that would require some very sophisticated equipment.

Again, thanks for sharing. His videos do demonstrate that some of what we think we need we might not, in reality. Maybe old Shakespeare tackle “black boxes” would fit the bill in many situations!

Cheers,
Dennis

Great insight, my next question to someone like him or some other manufacturer, can you design something from and sound perspective as opposed to a functional one. Meaning, before you put everything together do you know how it would sound or do you design in terms of functionality and hope everything comes together sounding great...???

 

[biobass]

Great insight, my next question to someone like him or some other manufacturer, can you design something from and sound perspective as opposed to a functional one. Meaning, before you put everything together do you know how it would sound or do you design in terms of functionality and hope everything comes together sounding great...???

Good question. I suspect that it is a bit of both. Once you become familiar with how complex systems tend to work, you can then build on that and experiment. The good Antiquated Equestrian Engineer, @agedhorse, might answer that more authoritatively.

I’m reminded of a two-year project that I embarked on more than twenty years ago. In the early days of genetic engineering (long before CRISPER/Cas9 technology that is widely reported in the popular press these days) I genetically modified mouse embryonic stem cells by deleting one specific gene in a glucose metabolic pathway, and went on to grow them into full mice. I, and most everyone in the field, thought that we understood the system well enough to be able to confidently predict the outcome as being anti-diabetic, thus proof of concept for targeted pharmaceutical intervention. To my amazement, the result was 180 degrees from what was expected. The mice were severely diabetic when both copies of the gene were deleted, and moderately diabetic when only one copy of the gene was present. It was a fascinating scientific finding, but brought the drug discovery project to a crashing halt in my company as well as in others that were working on the same target.

 

[agedhorse]

Yes, the combination of experience and education is very helpful in predicting the outcome of a design. There have been unexpected surprises too, it goes with the territory IME.

 

[Mojo34]

I don't know if this has already been answered, but can you use the line out and DI at the same time? I assume the answer is yes, but that can come in quite handy.

 

[Jeff Genzler]

I don't know if this has already been answered, but can you use the line out and DI at the same time? I assume the answer is yes, but that can come in quite handy.

@Mojo34 --- Yes, both outputs can certainly be used at the same time. For a compact pedal/pre, the MG-PRE-PEDAL is a very versatile option for a lot of players. Hope you get a chance to check it out soon.

 

[Mojo34]

@Mojo34 --- Yes, both outputs can certainly be used at the same time. For a compact pedal/pre, the MG-PRE-PEDAL is a very versatile option for a lot of players. Hope you get a chance to check it out soon.

Yes, thanks, I thought so. I ordered mine at Thomann !!

 

[Jeff Genzler]

Oh great. Let us know how it works for you. Glad you could get one from Thomann.
Thank you for using our gear.

 

[biobass]

@Mojo34 --- Yes, both outputs can certainly be used at the same time. For a compact pedal/pre, the MG-PRE-PEDAL is a very versatile option for a lot of players. Hope you get a chance to check it out soon.

This brings up a question that I had. In the Magellan general thread, you suggested that the Pre/DI could effectively be used as a second channel to an existing integrated amp (Magellan) by running it into the aux in. That most certainly works for stage sound, but the aux in isn’t generally sent to the DI, thus to the board. I am pretty certain that is the case for my Shuttle 6.0. I could, of course, use the DI of the integrated amp for one channel, and the DI from the Pre/DI as the second, but as a lowly bass player, I usually only get one channel on the board. Is there an easier way of truly using the Pre/DI as an effective second channel and getting the signal through the amp’s DI?

 

[agedhorse]

This brings up a question that I had. In the Magellan general thread, you suggested. That the Pre/DI could effectively be used as a second channel to an existing integrated amp by running it into the aux in. That most certainly works for stage sound, but the aux in isn’t generally sent to the DI, thus to the board. I am pretty certain that is the case for my Shuttle 6.0 and NeoPak 3.5. I could, of course, use the DI of the integrated amp for one channel, and the DI from the Pre/DI as the second, but as a lowly bass player, I usually only get one channel on the board. Is there an easier way of truly using the Pre/DI as an effective second channel and getting the signal through the amp’s DI?

The aux in on the Shuttles were post DI as well, actually they are on most amps.

For running a second channel, the DI on the Magellan would be for the main signal path, the DI on the aux signal path would need to come from a passive DI. Out of the RE/Q into the DI, thru out of the DI into the AUX in on the amp, and the second channel's balanced out would go to the board.

The most common use for this would be for upright, and the FOH eq is likely going to be quite different for this compared with the electric bass channel. Therefore, it's more useful to most players using this feature to have separate DI paths.

 

[biobass]

The aux in on the Shuttles were post DI as well, actually they are on most amps.

For running a second channel, the DI on the Magellan would be for the main signal path, the DI on the aux signal path would need to come from a passive DI. Out of the RE/Q into the DI, thru out of the DI into the AUX in on the amp, and the second channel's balanced out would go to the board.

The most common use for this would be for upright, and the FOH eq is likely going to be quite different for this compared with the electric bass channel. Therefore, it's more useful to most players using this feature to have separate DI paths.

Thanks, Andy.

Using it for upright was the specific application that I was thinking of. What I have done in the past was to set my Shuttle (or NeoPak) for my electric, then put my upright with a Copper Realist through my Fishman Pro Platinum Bass preamp, adjusting that so that the eq for stage sound was coupled with that of the Shuttle. Both the electric and upright/Fishman were input into a Radial A/B switch box going into the front input of the Shuttle. The DI (usually pre EQ) would then serve for both.

Maybe, I need to play better houses! I’ve never been offered a second channel on the board. I’ve also never had a sound engineer ask for anything different.

Dennis

 

[agedhorse]

Thanks, Andy.

Using it for upright was the specific application that I was thinking of. What I have done in the past was to set my Shuttle (or NeoPak) for my electric, then put my upright with a Copper Realist through my Fishman Pro Platinum Bass preamp, adjusting that so that the eq for stage sound was coupled with that of the Shuttle. Both the electric and upright/Fishman were input into a Radial A/B switch box going into the front input of the Shuttle. The DI (usually pre EQ) would then serve for both.

Maybe, I need to play better houses! I’ve never been offered a second channel on the board. I’ve also never had a sound engineer ask for anything different.

Dennis

That's another way to do it if you can deal with a single bass channel to FOH.

When I mixed touring jazz acts, it was common to have an acoustic and electric channels at FOH. It makes things much easier and more consistent. I mixed ~50 shows for the syndicated NPR show Riverwalk Jazz, Live from the Landing (remotes) that way. It also made set changes smoother. I never had to worry about running out of channels.

 

[Mojo34]

Well, I got my preamp from Thomann Germany, delivered to France in just a few days. Note: their service is amazing. So of course, I waited a few hours before plugging it in because I was working. Just kidding, of course I dropped everything and played for an hour and a half.
Spoiler: it's a keeper.
Also: I used the preamp DI out straight to a Tech 21 Deuce Deluxe, so it's a very clean setup. Using a 1990 Zeta Prism bass with Piezo pickups, this preamp tamed the sound perfectly. Settings I could never use on that bass sound great. My main Fender Jazz with Lollar pickups is being adjusted at the shop, I can't wait to try it.
The controls are all pretty subtle and it's incredibly easy to get a great sound. It's just what I was hoping for to replace my 20 year old other preamp pedal, which pretty much only had one sound (albeit a great classic sound for the Jazz bass). I wanted something with a slightly more modern feel to it, but really as transparent as possible. The Magellan Pre seems to be just that.
Note: I only tried with with a 9V power supply. I'm going to plug it into my Cyoks and give it the full 18V to see what difference that makes.
In any case I have been researching the hell out of preamp pedals in all price ranges for at least the past 9 months. It's not realistic for me to spend $1,000, and the tube preamps in the Magellan range never convinced me. The Magellan is priced respectably, and it does what it's supposed to do beautifully. After 2 hours of ownership, I love what I'm hearing.

Edit: If it sounds good, I plan on feeding the preamp into a Two Notes Cab M+ to go into our band's mixer. I live an ampless life when playing outside the house!

 

[Jeff Genzler]

@Mojo34, thanks so much for the quick review. We're so glad it fits your needs and helps your tone so quickly and easily.
Also, good to know that Thomann had it in stock and was able to get it to you so quickly.
Thanks again.

 

[Calebmundy]

@agedhorse my tech is re-wiring my board and asked about 9v vs 18v. I understand the idea of headroom, but can you give me an idea of what to expect my ears might hear differently at 18v?

 

[agedhorse]

@agedhorse my tech is re-wiring my board and asked about 9v vs 18v. I understand the idea of headroom, but can you give me an idea of what to expect my ears might hear differently at 18v?

Probably nothing unless you have a very hot bass and need more headroom. About 90% of the basses out there work fine with 9V