• 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.

Is Ampeg done for?

#61
3bc said:
Well it's fair to say I haven't played one. But for you know what's and giggles, I just plugged my bass into my studio setup and put an 18dB filter at 68hz to simulate the effect of that cab. Obviously the E string doesn't just disappear. But you know what sounded a LOT better than playing with an 18dB filter at 68hz? Playing the same lines after turning the EQ filter off.
Click to expand...

Your rig has a rolloff in the low frequencies - all bass guitar cabinets do at some point. Adding another rolloff will change the sound, but you certain can't think that the cabinet you have is perfect, and that the filter you added perfectly replicates what the Ampeg cabinet would do. If you started with the Ampeg cabinet, and added the filter that your cabinet has, you'd likely come to the conclusion that your rig sounds like manure as well.

What you did in no way replicates what the Ampeg cabinet does - there are too many things you just don't understand about the situation to make the definitive statement you did.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Dave Neal, bassment zombie, Frankie Fender and 1 other person
#62
My first bass amp was a Yamaha (many years ago). Although it would be sdimissed as an underpowered product today, it was a well built product of its day, very reliable, and plenty loud. I agree with some of the earlier sentiments that having Yamaha ownership of Ampeg is likely a good thing. If I end up in the market for an amp (I'm mostly ampless at this point) when Yamaha starts making Ampegs, I'd certainly consider them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dave Neal, amper, 3bc and 1 other person
#63
agedhorse said:
First of all, the Q and slope around the low frequency rolloff helps define what's going on and how much low frequency energy is contained above and below each cabinet's respective and comparative curves.

also at low frequencies, a speaker's distortion increases greatly, this alters the distribution of the harmonics that you hear.

Speaking of harmonics, the lowest 1/2 octave on the bass consist of less that 50% fundamental and even less than 35-40% with round wound strings and bridge pickup.
Click to expand...

I get that. I picked an 18db slope because that got me to the same place Ampeg pegs the "usable' -10db frequency of at around 45hz. Slope was very similar to at least approximate the low end response.

Isn't 50% of the tone in the fundamental comparatively high? I've always believed bass guitar was a very harmonically poor instrument compared to many others, where the number and complexity of harmonic overtones is pretty low overall. Maybe that's not accurate.
 
#64
micguy said:
Your rig has a rolloff in the low frequencies - all bass guitar cabinets do at some point. Adding another rolloff will change the sound, but you certain can't think that the cabinet you have is perfect, and that the filter you added perfectly replicates what the Ampeg cabinet would do. If you started with the Ampeg cabinet, and added the filter that your cabinet has, you'd likely come to the conclusion that your rig sounds like manure as well.

What you did in no way replicates what the Ampeg cabinet does - there are too many things you just don't understand about the situation to make the definitive statement you did.
Click to expand...
I plugged my bass into an SSL mixer and then into good quality studio monitors. It's not a fair comparison between that and any bass amp/cabinet. But I'm not dealing with limitations in terms of sound reproduction...
 
#67
3bc said:
Variety and choice is great. No argument from me there. But would Chevy still be in business if they spent the last 50 years building their 1964 vehicle lineup without changing hardly a thing? I would doubt it...
Click to expand...

Fender is still making the same guitars and basses they made 60 years ago and seems to be working out. Tube amps are in a similar scenario, the formula works well so no reason to change it. Those who want something else can look elsewhere, no shortage of options for good gear.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lance manyon, Franksvtartover, bassment zombie and 8 others
#68
Mastermold said:
Fender is still making the same guitars and basses they made 60 years ago and seems to be working out. Tube amps are in a similar scenario, the formula works well so no reason to change it. Those who want something else can look elsewhere, no shortage of options for good gear.
Click to expand...
100%. I would argue that amplification technology and guitar technology are like comparing apples and oranges though. A centuries old stradivarius is probably the most precious musical instrument on the planet because instruments are inherently about artisan craftsmanship, and amps are inherently about the technology behind them. Ampeg fridge was designed at a time when technology limitations were everywhere - PA systems, home theater speakers, the vinyl medium, etc. People romanticize how things sounded "back in the day", but there's a reason why even old timers like a Paul McCartney are releasing modern "hi fi" sounding music and not music that is riddled with sonic limitations.
 
#70
3bc said:
Not at all, but if you think Adam S3a's are somehow limited in their ability to accurately reproduce sound, and a 1x12 ampeg cabinet is somehow not, then I'm not sure I have a whole lot else to say!
Click to expand...

It's not the speakers I was questioning, it's mostly the acoustics - how they load into the room. The best monitors in the world don't work well if they aren't loaded into the room right. Anyway, the point is that there are so many variables going on here that your "test" doesn't replicate what the Ampeg would sound like - you can't say it sounds bad until you actually hear it. I've done a lot of listening tests in my work (designing pro audio gear for 40 years), so I know a thing or two about evaluating audio gear.

Any listening test that doesn't actually have the piece of gear you're interested in evaluating in the signal chain is meaningless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GR7G5TER
#71
3bc said:
100%. I would argue that amplification technology and guitar technology are like comparing apples and oranges though. A centuries old stradivarius is probably the most precious musical instrument on the planet because instruments are inherently about artisan craftsmanship, and amps are inherently about the technology behind them. Ampeg fridge was designed at a time when technology limitations were everywhere - PA systems, home theater speakers, the vinyl medium, etc. People romanticize how things sounded "back in the day", but there's a reason why even old timers like a Paul McCartney are releasing modern "hi fi" sounding music and not music that is riddled with sonic limitations.
Click to expand...

I don't worry about what other people are using, I know what I like and what gear makes me happy. I'm also blessed with an income that allows me to have options and I have lots of great gear as a result. And yes I use my SVTS all the time, as well as some wonderful Class D amps. Life is good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Camaro69, Doug P, 88FenderPJS and 3 others
#72
3bc said:
I get that. I picked an 18db slope because that got me to the same place Ampeg pegs the "usable' -10db frequency of at around 45hz. Slope was very similar to at least approximate the low end response.

Isn't 50% of the tone in the fundamental comparatively high? I've always believed bass guitar was a very harmonically poor instrument compared to many others, where the number and complexity of harmonic overtones is pretty low overall. Maybe that's not accurate.
Click to expand...
I'm just saying that you are trying to approximate a single variable in a multi-variable environment.

The bass is more harmonically rich than some instruments and less than others. The higher the frequency, the lower the harmonic content however, and this is also true of many instruments like electric guitar for example.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bassment zombie, J_WELF, Andy V. and 3 others
#73
micguy said:
It's not the speakers I was questioning, it's mostly the acoustics - how they load into the room. The best monitors in the world don't work well if they aren't loaded into the room right. Anyway, the point is that there are so many variables going on here that your "test" doesn't replicate what the Ampeg would sound like - you can't say it sounds bad until you actually hear it. I've done a lot of listening tests in my work (designing pro audio gear for 40 years), so I know a thing or two about evaluating audio gear.

Any listening test that doesn't actually have the piece of gear you're interested in evaluating in the signal chain is meaningless.
Click to expand...
That's fair. I have a treated room but it's not professionally designed by any means. But nearly all of my playing in the 25 years I've spent playing live music has been in FAR less acoustically ideal environments! Including years spent on the "basement tour" circuit playing in punk/hardcore bands!
 
  • Like
Reactions: J_WELF and DJ Bebop
#74
I kind of get what the OP is saying, they haven't built a small lightweight class D head like the Trace elf, or the Peavey mini max, or etc..and that is true..but then I think their business model is to stick to what made them such a huge player in the industry and that is the tube stuff..yes they make some smaller stuff and the combos but mainly their money is made on SVT...

The first thing I thought of when I read the first sentence was "oh boy the pitchfork and torch crowd will gather fast for this one"..lol I gotta say on this board, the data tells me two things...a LOT of bass players are super loyal to P basses (fender products) and Ampeg amps, not surprising given their illustrious history in music, and if someone says something negative about either, get ready to face the firing squad!! lol..

Interestingly I saw on the gibson owners group on fb that Gibson is introducing their latest addition to their new offerings..a reissue of the deluxe model from the 70s with the mini humbuckers..which of course when I commented that "gibson has done it again, on the cutting edge of innovation"..ha ha..which expectedly set off a firestorm..but my sarcasm while not needed, was basically true. Someone wrote, gibson tried to be innovative and the old school people only wanted the classic gibson models, which boils down to LPs and SGs.. meh, I guess sometimes a company likes to stay with what got them there...Coke found that out the hard way in the 80s with their new formula coke..lol
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Dave Neal, J_WELF, Hammerfield and 4 others
#79
Rib 13 said:
Pitchfork Crowd: Hey, Fender, cant you do anything else besides the same instrument designs youve been doing for 50 years?
Fender : introduces the Dimension bass
Pitchfork Crowd: What the hell is this? Wheres the P basses?

Perhaps Ampeg knows their market and knows it well.
Click to expand...

Fender introduces the Dimension Bass (which was essentially a Fender Stingray) Few sold. Soon discontinued.
Ernie Ball releases their versions of P and PJ basses (cutlass and caprice). Few sold. Soon discontinued.
The Public, super fickle about their wants, gets what they deserve. Tradition.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dave Neal, amper, impulsv and 5 others
#80
Ampeg seems to have a pretty good product line up. I think they could freshen up their website, and maybe introduce something new. Maybe a more compact modern version of the SVT 3 pro / 4 pro. I personally kind of like old fashioned rack mount stuff, but the industry has trended away from that. Some people might perceive rack mount stuff as being dated and therefore the company being behind. It has been a while since they introduced an exiting new amp. I think the tube portoflex were the last new products. Or was it the V4B ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mac Morgan and impulsv

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back