carry on folks!
from here:
www.talkbass.com/forum/f15/jule-amps-monique-part-4-a-1000579/index63.html
from here:
www.talkbass.com/forum/f15/jule-amps-monique-part-4-a-1000579/index63.html
Last edited:
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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.
Jule Amps Monique part 5
- Thread starter Chef
- Start date
I have a question about the DI. I've been using a REDDI for some time now, and love the fatness it adds to the FOH tone. How exactly does the DI on Monique function? (pre, post etc) If it is pre, is the signal to FOH just passive, or does it have some tonal characteristics built in?
- Jan 7, 2008
- 2,196
- 224
- 39
- Disclosures
- Endorsing Artist: Olinto, La Bella, JuleAmps, Epifani
I got in the last thread shortly before it closed. Wrote (here and here) about my initial impressions trying a Monique Tardis through the effects returns of a few different amps in the very non-gig environment of my modest living room. There are all sorts of things I like about Monique but the top end to me seems to roll off a bit early -- at least in comparison to what I'm used to. I might feel different playing in a group setting. (Depending on the mix, I sometimes roll the tone back farther live than at home.)
I got some good feedback, including a comment from BurningSkies about how even the "power amp" section of bass amps is pretty "voiced" (as opposed to a dedicated power amp that's supposed to reproduce any of a variety of sources). This was news to me. Last night I again tried Monique through the effects returns of the Aguilar TH500, Markbass F500, and Genz GBE 1200 and, indeed, there were significant differences: The Aguilar was more relaxed/less bright than the Genz (the most open and, to me, least "voiced" sounding power section) and the Markbass was still unmistakably itself. In a previous post I noted that the effects return on the Aguilar and the master effects return on the Genz seem to bypass all front end EQ (gain and EQ controls have no effect) while this isn't true of the Markbass (gain has no effect, but EQ and filters do). With Monique in front, the F500 still retains much of its signature sound.
Dialing in highs at the F500 (the HI control is voiced audibly higher than Monique's) did make some difference and I imagine that the resulting tone, while not what I'd call airy, would be plenty bright and cutting for just about any live use but you can still hear that the top ends are voiced differently. In every other respect (and maybe with regard to the high end, too, depending on your preference), the F500 + Monique is a more attractive amp than the F500 without -- it's warmer, fuller, smoother, more organic sounding while remaining very, very quick and articulate -- but it's hardly a neutral platform through which to run Monique, if that's what you're looking for.
Running through the FET channel effects return on the Genz brings in the EQ section. Again, here you can add some grind/air, but the different voicing up top still makes itself felt. The sound also seemed thinner this way. Overall, I think I prefer the tone and simplicity of going through the MASTER return/power amp in and bypassing the EQ.
I don't mean to make this thread about these different heads, but if people are looking at using Monique in conjunction with a dedicated bass head they might find the above relevant.
Cheers, and happy Thanksgiving to all.
-Mark
I got some good feedback, including a comment from BurningSkies about how even the "power amp" section of bass amps is pretty "voiced" (as opposed to a dedicated power amp that's supposed to reproduce any of a variety of sources). This was news to me. Last night I again tried Monique through the effects returns of the Aguilar TH500, Markbass F500, and Genz GBE 1200 and, indeed, there were significant differences: The Aguilar was more relaxed/less bright than the Genz (the most open and, to me, least "voiced" sounding power section) and the Markbass was still unmistakably itself. In a previous post I noted that the effects return on the Aguilar and the master effects return on the Genz seem to bypass all front end EQ (gain and EQ controls have no effect) while this isn't true of the Markbass (gain has no effect, but EQ and filters do). With Monique in front, the F500 still retains much of its signature sound.
Dialing in highs at the F500 (the HI control is voiced audibly higher than Monique's) did make some difference and I imagine that the resulting tone, while not what I'd call airy, would be plenty bright and cutting for just about any live use but you can still hear that the top ends are voiced differently. In every other respect (and maybe with regard to the high end, too, depending on your preference), the F500 + Monique is a more attractive amp than the F500 without -- it's warmer, fuller, smoother, more organic sounding while remaining very, very quick and articulate -- but it's hardly a neutral platform through which to run Monique, if that's what you're looking for.
Running through the FET channel effects return on the Genz brings in the EQ section. Again, here you can add some grind/air, but the different voicing up top still makes itself felt. The sound also seemed thinner this way. Overall, I think I prefer the tone and simplicity of going through the MASTER return/power amp in and bypassing the EQ.
I don't mean to make this thread about these different heads, but if people are looking at using Monique in conjunction with a dedicated bass head they might find the above relevant.
Cheers, and happy Thanksgiving to all.
-Mark
Steubig and I did a "shootout" at my place and we both were surprised at the difference between using Minnie and the power section of the Puma 900.
fwiw I have run into the front end of the Puma and TH heads and didn't dig it. Part of that is because "just Monique" is dead-nuts on the sound and feel I want from an amp. The other amps eq/pre just mucked with that. It certainly gave more ways to push the sound around and if you want more extremes that is a way to go. Effects pedals can give you that depending on your goals as well.
No right or wrong way to use it. Whatever moves you. My next experiment will be running Monique into an Empirical Labs Mike-E in the studio for tracking. I'm thinking a bit of "toast" from the EL-9 compressor might push me right over the edge
fwiw I have run into the front end of the Puma and TH heads and didn't dig it. Part of that is because "just Monique" is dead-nuts on the sound and feel I want from an amp. The other amps eq/pre just mucked with that. It certainly gave more ways to push the sound around and if you want more extremes that is a way to go. Effects pedals can give you that depending on your goals as well.
No right or wrong way to use it. Whatever moves you. My next experiment will be running Monique into an Empirical Labs Mike-E in the studio for tracking. I'm thinking a bit of "toast" from the EL-9 compressor might push me right over the edge
Gotta agree with this.
I've been having terrible trouble getting Demeter to send me a working Minnie (see the separate Minnie 800D thread), so I tried the Monique with my TecAmp Puma 900, wow does it sound good. Makes you realise how poor the pre-amp on the Puma is, perhaps that's unfair, the Monique is so much better.
The story repeats itself with using the Monique as a pre-amp to all the other amps I've tried - Aguiar TH500, DB751, GB Streamliner 900 etc.. except for one - it makes no improvement to my HiWatt Custom 200 - which was a surprise..
Next I'm trying the Monique as the front to the new Vanderkley Aurora amp.. should be interesting...
Mark
I agree that Monique is tops but the Puma 900 pre is no slouch. It has an excellent preamp section, it's not Monique, but I think it is truly a great micro amp... Tops as far as micros go.
Jazzdogg
Less barking, more wagging!
Out of curiosity, have any of you inserted your Monique in the effects loop?
This would mean plugging your bass into the PUMA (or other bass head), taking the signal from the effects OUT to Monique, and from Monique into the effects IN.
It might not make any difference at all, but I'd be curious to find out of any of you have tried it.
This would mean plugging your bass into the PUMA (or other bass head), taking the signal from the effects OUT to Monique, and from Monique into the effects IN.
It might not make any difference at all, but I'd be curious to find out of any of you have tried it.
At the risk of asking you to repeat yourself, what differences did you note? Does the Demeter amp strike you as more or less neutral or as being "voiced" in its own way? I'm obviously still in the early stages of figuring out Monique but, after reading here and trying it with a few different heads, am curious as to how it would do with a separate power-amp. Something like a Crest Pro-Lite on the one hand, or the Demeter (installed internally if I stick with the Tardis format) on the other.
For my playing, I think the little bit of give/bounce already inherent in Monique would pair up well with something sonically hefty and articulate. Then again, maybe something that takes the tubey-ness and bounciness further would surprise me in a good way.
I'm thinking a bit of "toast" from the EL-9 compressor might push me right over the edge
Man I have played on a bunch of tracks lately with Monique and
every time we try something after it we end up pulling the comp out of the chain. We are talking cherry vintage LA2A's and the ilk BTW. The head engineer flips whenever I bring Monique to a date......
A date with Monique????
