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.
JacksonAmpworks said:The blend idea is cool but I'm giving every possible effort to keep these channels separate in order to keep the tone of each channel distinct and pure. I'm afraid that blending the two channels would defeat this effort. I'm like you, the tone has to be pure or nothing else really matters.
Akami said:With the footswitch activated blend you could have a front panel balance knob which would allow the exact level of each channel desired.
JacksonAmpworks said:The blend idea is cool but I'm giving every possible effort to keep these channels separate in order to keep the tone of each channel distinct and pure. I'm afraid that blending the two channels would defeat this effort. I'm like you, the tone has to be pure or nothing else really matters.
If the signal from both channels was properly buffered and not merged until just before being sent to the power section wouldn't that keep the purity of signal intact?JacksonAmpworks said:The blend idea is cool but I'm giving every possible effort to keep these channels separate in order to keep the tone of each channel distinct and pure. I'm afraid that blending the two channels would defeat this effort. I'm like you, the tone has to be pure or nothing else really matters.
haujobb said:So is this beat gonna be as heavy as an SVT?
tombowlus said:Right on. Gotcha. Two isolated channels it is!
But if so, is it possible on Channel 2 to blend overdriven/distorted tone with clean? Might this require a second tube on Channel 2? If it's not going to work, that's cool, but it's just that once I heard how nice I could get an overdriven tone to sound once I blended in some "clean" low frequencies, I'm kinda hooked on that tone.
Tom.
Akami said:If the signal from both channels was properly buffered and not merged until just before being sent to the power section wouldn't that keep the purity of signal intact?
It seems like such a desirable capability, to choose blend levels, that there must be some way to make it workable and, albeit expensive, preserve the signal as desired.
JacksonAmpworks said:I forgot to mention something guys.Actually this one just dawned on me while I was working on the schematic for the amp. We have been talking about adding a gain stage for a while and it just hit me.... THIS AMP ALREADY HAS A GAIN BOOST ADDED!!!
The FX loop is buffered with a tube and then sent to the FX send, the FX Return has a Tube Gain Stage that is meant to amplify the return signal back to line level. While thinking about it, I realized that all you have to do is put a patch cable between the FX SEND and RETURN and now when the FX Loop is enabled, all you have to do is adjust the send and return levels to adjust the ammount of gain boost that you want. This gain boost would apply to both channels and would make a great level boost or OD boost!!
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Now we have it all! Independant channels + a gain boost!![]()
tombowlus said:Interesting! I presume this would be just "clean" gain, meaning no additional overdrive introduced, right?
Tom.
jabberwock777 said:I just noticed how this poll is going, what with the OD channel winning at this point. Is there really that much demand for overdriven bass? Personally, hitting the first gain stage with a hot signal is enough for me about 95% of the time. I voted gain boost.
I really want to hear this amp when it's done.
jokerjkny said:yes, i'm of the four who voted for the non-OD amp, but hey, i'm actually starting to figure the benefits, especially in a trio setting.