• 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

#121
The FDeck definitely had some kind of tech mojo between the Monique and the power amp. Its a unity gain device, so if anything I'd guess that it was an impedance matching situation between the fdeck and the front end of my power amp. I also found that the Monique was dynamic enough to run into headroom problems with the FDeck unit. It ended up being another gain stage I didn't want to have to worry about clipping.
 
#122
dmrogers said:
These comments got me thinking and I had to test the theory out. I have been running the fdeck on the front end of the pre since I got Monique.

I tested it last night and tonight (not ultra scientific, switching cable from fdeck to straight in to the pre). Tonight I tried it with the Sensitivity at various settings. Sure enough, I could tell a significant difference. I didn't believe it was a big deal last night, but tonight making sure the line level was set the same and with various Sensitivity setting, it was pretty noticeable.

It's not that the fdeck sounds bad, but my initial feeling is that the sensitivity without the fdeck is smoother, more musical and more responsive to right hand attack. Almost like the fdeck is driving the front end pretty hard.

I have taken the fdeck out of the chain for now and am going to play it this way for a while to make sure my initial feelings are correct and that my ears are not playing tricks on me.

Now, the only problem is, placing the fdeck between the pre and the power amp does weird things to the pre level going into the power amp. Like the fdeck is not at unity. You have to turn the line level way down for the same volume setting. Burningskies discovered this very early in his research.

I was using a new passive P bass. I also tested with my J. I would like to hear other peoples response that have the fdeck as well and passive basses.
Click to expand...

Yeah, makes no sense to put that little battery operated filter between the Monique and amp. And, unfortunately as you found, a buffer is a buffer and once you put that device between your bass and amp, your bass is 'active'.

While the FDECK is a useful device, I find the Monique's bass control is sensitive enough for me to find a very nice balance between a big low end and 'overextending the drivers' (i.e., too much pistoning due to sub bass). So, see if you can get away without it.

I again find that sensitivity control much more impactful with a passive bass, which is beautiful. Given that part of its effect is impedance, this makes total sense to me. The good news is that a passive P or J doesn't send significant sub bass into the system, compared, for example, to my active Roscoe, which can get quite unruly down there. Of course, putting another active buffer in front of an already buffered signal would have little impact, and the entire function of the sensitivity control is much more subtle anyway with an active signal chain.

So, no FDECK with passive and FDECK with active seems to be a good rule for me.
 
#123
For reasons like this I've been considering for some time rehousing the FDeck pre in a more pedalboard friendly layout (jack/knob layout is fine for use on a DB or strap, but useless otherwise) and at the same time adding a bypass switch so I can have both options without plugging/unplugging cables.
 
#124
Jeff Moote said:
For reasons like this I've been considering for some time rehousing the FDeck pre in a more pedalboard friendly layout (jack/knob layout is fine for use on a DB or strap, but useless otherwise) and at the same time adding a bypass switch so I can have both options without plugging/unplugging cables.
Click to expand...

If you are thinking pedal board, be sure to also check out the [sfx] Micro Thumpinator. I have one and love it, and in fact, it (and another one of Max's pedals) will be reviewed in BGM #13 (which goes to print, today).
 
#125
tombowlus said:
If you are thinking pedal board, be sure to also check out the [sfx] Micro Thumpinator. I have one and love it, and in fact, it (and another one of Max's pedals) will be reviewed in BGM #13 (which goes to print, today).
Click to expand...

I've owned one in the past and they're fantastic. I'll see how I get on with the FDeck but selling and buying another [sfx] is an option.
 
#127
KJung said:
Yeah, makes no sense to put that little battery operated filter between the Monique and amp. And, unfortunately as you found, a buffer is a buffer and once you put that device between your bass and amp, your bass is 'active'.

While the FDECK is a useful device, I find the Monique's bass control is sensitive enough for me to find a very nice balance between a big low end and 'overextending the drivers' (i.e., too much pistoning due to sub bass). So, see if you can get away without it.

I again find that sensitivity control much more impactful with a passive bass, which is beautiful. Given that part of its effect is impedance, this makes total sense to me. The good news is that a passive P or J doesn't send significant sub bass into the system, compared, for example, to my active Roscoe, which can get quite unruly down there. Of course, putting another active buffer in front of an already buffered signal would have little impact, and the entire function of the sensitivity control is much more subtle anyway with an active signal chain.

So, no FDECK with passive and FDECK with active seems to be a good rule for me.
Click to expand...

Yeah Ken, it was quite a significant change without the fdeck in the signal chain. This little experiment explains why I was struggling so much with the sensitivity on live gigs. It was just one of those "Duh" moments. I guess it was because I never experienced this with the Thunderfunk, so I never gave it a second thought until the discussion in this thread.

Currently the fdeck is bypassed and will probably stay in my rack for instances like the last show when a bassist with an active 5'er used my rig.

Live and learn.......
 
#128
dmrogers said:
Yeah Ken, it was quite a significant change without the fdeck in the signal chain. This little experiment explains why I was struggling so much with the sensitivity on live gigs. It was just one of those "Duh" moments. I guess it was because I never experienced this with the Thunderfunk, so I never gave it a second thought until the discussion in this thread.

Currently the fdeck is bypassed and will probably stay in my rack for instances like the last show when a bassist with an active 5'er used my rig.

Live and learn.......
Click to expand...

Yeah, there is no similar control to the sensitivity control on any amp I've ever owned or played. Learning curve for me also.
 
#129
Yeah so I did it. I was trying my crest pro lite versus the puma 900 fx return and again was reassured that there is a big difference. So after reading the post about the difference between the crest and Minnie, I just ordered the Minnie. :)

And now I'm listing my walkabout in the classifieds. Sorry to see it go but I have to recoup some cash on this purchase!

Can't wait for it to arrive.
 
#131
dmrogers said:
Yeah Ken, it was quite a significant change without the fdeck in the signal chain. This little experiment explains why I was struggling so much with the sensitivity on live gigs. It was just one of those "Duh" moments. I guess it was because I never experienced this with the Thunderfunk, so I never gave it a second thought until the discussion in this thread.

Currently the fdeck is bypassed and will probably stay in my rack for instances like the last show when a bassist with an active 5'er used my rig.

Live and learn.......
Click to expand...

I'll have to bring my Dingwall passive Afterburner 1 into the practice room to try this out. For a minute I was trying to think if I noticed a difference in dynamics with or without the HPF3, then I realized that It doesn't matter since my Z/V Dingwall is active anyway. To me the trade off of what the HPF3 does would probably still outweigh the difference, but my playing situation isn't the same as others here, and I need to keep the deep lows while minimizing over excursion. If anyone wants to know where the excursion limit is on several 3015LF's I can tell you, because I'm acquainted with it. ;)
 
#133
BurningSkies said:
I'll have to bring my Dingwall passive Afterburner 1 into the practice room to try this out. For a minute I was trying to think if I noticed a difference in dynamics with or without the HPF3, then I realized that It doesn't matter since my Z/V Dingwall is active anyway. To me the trade off of what the HPF3 does would probably still outweigh the difference, but my playing situation isn't the same as others here, and I need to keep the deep lows while minimizing over excursion. If anyone wants to know where the excursion limit is on several 3015LF's I can tell you, because I'm acquainted with it. ;)
Click to expand...

Yeah, I can see where you would need the fdeck with your genre of music. For the longest, I thought the P bass and Monique were a bad match. That's why I found the lower setting of the sensitivity a better match.

Just got through practicing a few songs with the P. Had the sensitivity between 10:00 and 1:00 on different songs. Sounded great.

Now, I feel like I am getting re-acquainted with the Monique controls.
 
#134
dmrogers said:
Yeah, I can see where you would need the fdeck with your genre of music. For the longest, I thought the P bass and Monique were a bad match. That's why I found the lower setting of the sensitivity a better match.

Just got through practicing a few songs with the P. Had the sensitivity between 10:00 and 1:00 on different songs. Sounded great.

Now, I feel like I am getting re-acquainted with the Monique controls.
Click to expand...

Its funny, because I find that I really love the sound with the Sensitivity dialed back these days...but then I crank it up to the 2 o'clock position and find myself falling in love with that big fat squished tone too.

I actually hear a fair amount of difference between both tones with my active bass...although it may have something to do with the tubes I use, and that I run my bass with the pickups in series (both internal coils and between the pickups).
 
#135
BurningSkies said:
Its funny, because I find that I really love the sound with the Sensitivity dialed back these days...but then I crank it up to the 2 o'clock position and find myself falling in love with that big fat squished tone too.

I actually hear a fair amount of difference between both tones with my active bass...although it may have something to do with the tubes I use, and that I run my bass with the pickups in series (both internal coils and between the pickups).
Click to expand...


I notice a difference with my active bass as well. As I crank the sensitivity, the mids and highs become more pronounced and there seems to be some more tube compression going on too. It also seems that more of the resonance of the bass (especially the neck) starts to become noticeable the more you crank it.
 
#136
Now that we got more people on board, have any of you guys played around with tubes at all? I just ordered a matched set of RCA red plates 6SL7. I have black plate RCA's in there now that I love, but I wanna hear what the reds are all about. Im super curious about the rectifier tube, and if any of you have swapped it out with good results. I got a Mullard EZ81 but found the stock tube to be more to my liking - I think I remember someone using a EZ80 awhile back - could be wrong though
 
#137
If you're talking about RCA red base 5691's, I was strongly warned against using them. They do not have the same specs as 6SL7's no matter how they sell them.

I'm currently running a Tung-Sol brown base in V1, which won out over a RCA black plate. It wasn't as 'pretty' sounding as the RCA, but it was a bit punchier and I liked its mids.

I also had a Mullard EZ81 that I tried, but I switched back to the JJ that it came with because the Mullard was too smooth and 'soft' and lost some of the punch and attack on the front side of the note envelope.

Also, Jule*** I see they're using your amp to help sell these?!?
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
 
#139
http://www.talkbass.com/forum/f15/jule-amps-monique-part-iii-960541/index29.html#post14221970

Originally Posted by juledude http://www.talkbass.com/forum/f15/jule-amps-monique-part-iii-960541/index29.html#post14221970
Ran across something important today during upgrade work on a Dove Cage that has been with the customer for about three years.

The customer replaced the stock 6SL7 tubes with JAN 5691 tubes.

It worked. Sounded kinda sweet. Kinda compressed. The levels were a bit low, but it worked.

Upon closer inspection I confirmed that the military issue JAN 5691 tubes were drawing twice as much current (as per the specifications) from the filament supply as the stock tubes. Not good.

This additional current puts an unusual burden on the power transformer and components in the DC filament supply. This builds up heat and heat is not a good thing. Obviously, after three years Monique handled it, but I do not recommend these tubes.
Click to expand...
 
#140
An update to my experiences trying Monique through different amps.

I mentioned earlier that there are things about Monique that I dig more each time I play through it (the subtle, lively bounce and the touch responsiveness more than anything), but I miss a bit of the top-end air and texture that I'm accustomed to. I was advised to wait 'til I tried Monique on a gig (good advice) and that I might find things different playing through a dedicated power amp (versus the effects returns of different bass heads).

I haven't played Monique out yet (took her to one jam but that didn't work out, and two other jams weren't places I'd want to take her -- not sure when the next "proper" opportunity will be), so I can't report on that, but I did just pick up a Crest Prolite 2.0. Spent a couple of hours today going back and forth between it and the Genz, with Monique in front. At the end, I had the bright idea to run my bass straight into the Crest, and straight into the POWER AMP IN of the GBE. I also tried Monique through the FET channel effects loop (which goes through all the EQ stages but not the GAIN) of the GBE again.

Observations:
  • The Prolite has a more open top end than the POWER AMP IN of the Genz. Some of the air and texture I missed before was there, and even the more "out there" harmonics rang clearly. Heard a little more of a difference in the first little bit of rolling off the tone knob playing Monique through the Crest, too.
  • Running the bass straight into the Crest and straight into the POWER AMP IN of the Genz was enlightening. The signal was considerably weaker than that from Monique (which I expected -- volume had to be turned up a good deal higher, and I suspect that it would drive neither amp to full output), but I liked the sound through each amp a good deal more than I expected. (Yay! I like the sound of my bass.) It was considerably brighter than through Monique -- had to roll back the tone vs. running it full open most of the time with Monique -- but the sound I was getting through Monique and the Crest would be bright enough for just about anyone, I think.
  • The Crest felt different running through one side vs. running bridged, even at the low, apartment-safe volumes I played at. Subtle, but I preferred it bridged. Will doublecheck this impression later.
  • The Genz felt more solid down low and more immediate than the Crest, while the Crest felt more open and a little more detailed up top. Not night and day, but noticeable. That doesn't mean the Crest felt weak but, in this limited test at low volume, the Genz felt more solid. Another impression that will bear rechecking, especially live.
  • Tone is largely relative... Sometimes I play Monique and wonder why I wanted any more high end -- it seems plenty clear and detailed to me, especially on the bridge pickup, even through the Genz. Sometimes I miss the air. A lot depends on what I was playing just before. I think you adapt aurally, but also with your technique. I noticed myself varying my touch between the Genz and the Crest, no question.
  • The FET side of the Genz is definitely not flat with the EQ at noon -- big difference between that and the power amp in. The EQ is powerful, though, and you can dial in some pretty slamming tones with Monique in front of it, but if you start messing with the controls on both they interact in a weird way. You gain something but lose something -- I still prefer the feel and tone of Monique through the power amp in.
  • Slap transients are more forceful with the bass straight into either power-amp or through the front end of the Genz than through Monique. With Monique there is some compression, even with the Sensitivity dialed down, but Monique still does very well and I suspect that most people will really dig the slap sound -- for reference, I never run a compressor. I don't like most that I've tried and when I've found one tolerable I've had it barely on. I like the bit of compression from Monique more than that of any compressor I can recall trying (to be fair, mostly built-in ones on amps).

I might be the only person running Monique through a GBE, but I think it's got the potential to be a pretty respectable power amp for bass. Feels super-solid. It colors the tone, but it's less colored and more clear than the other bass heads I've tried. It will be interesting to try the Pro Lite at volume and with some EQ from Monique (almost all of today's playing was done with Monique flat).

If the Crest can be assumed to be pretty flat, Monique has a more open top end than I initially thought.

This has me wondering about the Demeter, or an old iron power amp like the CA series. I think my brain and my wallet have had about all they can take for the moment, though. ;)
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back