Mesa WD-800 vs. TT-800 tone differences

[pmad_bass]

Excellent choice as a starting point IMHO. Whatever you choose to do next, my guess is that the 115 will continue to be with you for a long time...it's that good!

Yeah...nothing move air (IMHO) like 15s.

 

[pmad_bass]

Excellent choice as a starting point IMHO. Whatever you choose to do next, my guess is that the 115 will continue to be with you for a long time...it's that good!

The 115 has arrived (few days ago). Have only rune the WD and the 115 at townhouse basement/personal practice level...but man, gotta say: What a fantastic sound.

 

[Al Kraft]

The 115 has arrived (few days ago). Have only rune the WD and the 115 at townhouse basement/personal practice level...but man, gotta say: What a fantastic sound.

Glad it worked out well...and it will only get better as your explore ways to use all the tone shaping in that head and find that the cab just sings out in a new voice.

 

[LoveThatBass]

I just pulled the trigger on a TT-800 to work with my 1x12 and 1x15 or any combination of 1x12, 1x12, 1x15 cabs.
I have 450watt RMS Eminence Kappa-light 3012HO NEO’s in each 1x12 and a 650watt RMS 15” Kappa Pro LFA-2 (boat anchor magnet lol). I never play with less than 2 cabs. Used to have a Genz Benz Streamliner I should have never let go but hopefully this will do it on steroids

 

[GroovyBaby]

I just read through this full thread because I’m debating between the TT and WD and….I’m completely indecisive. I have a D800 and I love the sound, but want a more pillow-like attack, which I associate with tube bloom. I have an Ashdown Little Bastard and love the tube harmonics and slight overdrive I get with it. So, which amp should I get? I’m in a blues-rock project that will be starting with ‘50s American blues and going through to early ‘70s British blues. In other words, tracing the progression from blues to blues-rock through the US to the UK. Which amp would do that best? I’m thinking maybe the TT since it has the Fender-like tone stack and a second channel to run the ‘50s old school stuff and the early ‘60s slight tube overdrive of British Blues. Yes? No?

 

[Al Kraft]

I just read through this full thread because I’m debating between the TT and WD and….I’m completely indecisive. I have a D800 and I love the sound, but want a more pillow-like attack, which I associate with tube bloom. I have an Ashdown Little Bastard and love the tube harmonics and slight overdrive I get with it. So, which amp should I get? I’m in a blues-rock project that will be starting with ‘50s American blues and going through to early ‘70s British blues. In other words, tracing the progression from blues to blues-rock through the US to the UK. Which amp would do that best? I’m thinking maybe the TT since it has the Fender-like tone stack and a second channel to run the ‘50s old school stuff and the early ‘60s slight tube overdrive of British Blues. Yes? No?

Both the WD and TT can give elements of what you're looking for IME. The TT has a power amp damping factor (it affects both channels) that is in the tube power amp range, and the tube front end is sweet on both channels. The Boogie channel comes really close to sounding like a tube amp in a mix.

The WD is more Walkabout head focused and does a nice impression of that head with many of the frustrating aspects sorted. It has a lot of user control over the tone and voicing, but it is centered on the Walkabout sound. The TT has a channel inspired by the old Bass 400/400+ and one inspired by the original 800/800+ SW line but for folks who wanted more tube amp flavor. IMO the TT is more versatile in voicing as no one would confuse a SW D-800/800+ for a Bass 400/400+ nor would they confuse a 400/400+ for a SW head...you get two different sounds with some common features and elements.

The two channels on the TT are especially useful for working a wide range of covers. I find the SW channel to be more versatile than my D-800 - you get a semiparametric mid, bright switch, and variable HPF albeit no voicing control. On the TT the SW channel will get you some of what you felt you were missing in the D-800. This comes from the tube preamp and the lower power amp damping factor. It is not sloppy, but the notes don't develop as quite as quickly and tightly the D-800 voicing - their edges are softer. They are also a tad more harmonically busy/interesting, but still nicely focused.

I hope that's helpful.

 

[GroovyBaby]

Both the WD and TT can give elements of what you're looking for IME. The TT has a power amp damping factor (it affects both channels) that is in the tube power amp range, and the tube front end is sweet on both channels. The Boogie channel comes really close to sounding like a tube amp in a mix.

The WD is more Walkabout head focused and does a nice impression of that head with many of the frustrating aspects sorted. It has a lot of user control over the tone and voicing, but it is centered on the Walkabout sound. The TT has a channel inspired by the old Bass 400/400+ and one inspired by the original 800/800+ SW line but for folks who wanted more tube amp flavor. IMO the TT is more versatile in voicing as no one would confuse a SW D-800/800+ for a Bass 400/400+ nor would they confuse a 400/400+ for a SW head...you get two different sounds with some common features and elements.

The two channels on the TT are especially useful for working wide range of covers. I find the SW channel to be more versatile than my D-800 - you get a semiparametric mid, bright switch, and variable HPF albeit no voicing control. On the TT the SW channel will get you some of what you felt you were missing in the D-800. This comes from the tube preamp and the lower power amp damping factor. It is not sloppy, but the notes don't develop as quite as quickly and tightly the D-800 voicing - their edges are softer. They are also a tad more harmonically busy/interesting, but still nicely focused.

I hope that's helpful.

Yes it does. The TT sounds like what I’m looking for. I’m wanting to do this without pedals so the two channels allows some tonal flexibility that I might otherwise get from a preamp pedal too. Since this is my first Mesa head, the references to past ones don’t help me. Am I correct in thinking the boogie channel in the TT is modeled after the Fender tone stack?

 

[agedhorse]

Yes it does. The TT sounds like what I’m looking for. I’m wanting to do this without pedals so the two channels allows some tonal flexibility that I might otherwise get from a preamp pedal too. Since this is my first Mesa head, the references to past ones don’t help me. Am I correct in thinking the boogie channel in the TT is modeled after the Fender tone stack?

Yes, but not your grandfather's Fender Tone stack that was originally developed around electric guitar (of the day).

When designing the Boogie channel, I took into consideration the many suggestions players here on TB made about what they liked and did not like about the Fender Tone Stack, and incorporated differences that extended the midrange voicing, shifted the frequency/level of the mids, reduced the interaction between the controls and made the mid frequency range more bass friendly considering the parallel development of today's (much) higher performance speakers and player's evolving voicing preferences.

 

[Al Kraft]

Yes, but not your grandfather's Fender Tone stack that was originally developed around electric guitar (of the day).

When designing the Boogie channel, I took into consideration the many suggestions players here on TB made about what they liked and did not like about the Fender Tone Stack, and incorporated differences that extended the midrange voicing, shifted the frequency/level of the mids, reduced the interaction between the controls and made the mid frequency range more bass friendly considering the parallel development of today's (much) higher performance speakers and player's evolving voicing preferences.

The TT manual that you can access for free at the Mesa website will give you additional insights into the EQ on the two channels. To help you reconcile your Fender tone stack experience with what agedhorse described in his design approach, the specs page in the back of the manual has the settings for where the TT channel is close to flat with that frequency shift control fully clockwise and counter-clockwise.

 

[paytojt]

For what it's worth, I was able to get a pretty convincing WD-800 (para EQ bypassed, mid all the way up) tone out of the subway channel on the TT 800. I was using a pbass with Geezer EMG pickups. Basically I boosted 250ish and got surprisingly close. There's obviously more mid complexity and "snarl" on the WD-800 but I was a little surprised. If I remember I'll try to take a pic this afternoon after work

 

[sunbeast]

I just read through this full thread because I’m debating between the TT and WD and….I’m completely indecisive. I have a D800 and I love the sound, but want a more pillow-like attack, which I associate with tube bloom. I have an Ashdown Little Bastard and love the tube harmonics and slight overdrive I get with it. So, which amp should I get? I’m in a blues-rock project that will be starting with ‘50s American blues and going through to early ‘70s British blues. In other words, tracing the progression from blues to blues-rock through the US to the UK. Which amp would do that best? I’m thinking maybe the TT since it has the Fender-like tone stack and a second channel to run the ‘50s old school stuff and the early ‘60s slight tube overdrive of British Blues. Yes? No?

I think the TT sounds like your amp for that "pillow-like" part, though honestly either would work well tonally. I assume you play with flatwounds?

 

[Low Key]

Here was my take on 800+ vs WD vs TT:

NEW MESA TT 800 AMP. OH. MY. GOD.

In the end I decided to keep the 800+.

 

[paytojt]

For what it's worth, I was able to get a pretty convincing WD-800 (para EQ bypassed, mid all the way up) tone out of the subway channel on the TT 800. I was using a pbass with Geezer EMG pickups. Basically I boosted 250ish and got surprisingly close. There's obviously more mid complexity and "snarl" on the WD-800 but I was a little surprised. If I remember I'll try to take a pic this afternoon after work

This is pretty close. Really gives and idea of how much upper mid content is coming through on the WD even with parametric bypassed. There's still a small amount of grunt missing that I probably couldn't add in without some sort of EQ pedal, but dang if it's not a close imitation!

 

[morebass!]

Anyone have experience on how these heads work on upright? I have a Walkabout so know and love that tone and was initially thinking of getter the WD. But then it occurred to me that the TT might be good for doubling; P-bass through the Boogie pre and upright through the Subway pre.

 

[12bass]

If anyone has access to the D-800/+, WD-800, and TT-800, along with an audio interface, it would be awesome to see some loopback tests of the frequency response of each amp. This would provide some valuable insight into the voicing differences. THD measurements might also be informative. A program like RMAA would work.

 

[DJ Bebop]

Anyone have experience on how these heads work on upright? I have a Walkabout so know and love that tone and was initially thinking of getter the WD. But then it occurred to me that the TT might be good for doubling; P-bass through the Boogie pre and upright through the Subway pre.

I have a Kay M-1 I play through my WD using an Underwood pick-up. It rocks! I also play my solid bodies through it. When I double, I usually set amp with the para mids off with my solid bodies then, set my para mids with the upright. And switch back and forth like that. Your thoughts on the TT are good too.

 

[paytojt]

Anyone have experience on how these heads work on upright? I have a Walkabout so know and love that tone and was initially thinking of getter the WD. But then it occurred to me that the TT might be good for doubling; P-bass through the Boogie pre and upright through the Subway pre.

It's not the same as upright, but I got an almost identical acoustic tone copy of my kala ubass through the subway channel of the TT800

 

[paytojt]

It's not the same as upright, but I got an almost identical acoustic tone copy of my kala ubass through the subway channel of the TT800

Not to mention I could get even closer with the Rosette DI thru the fx loop if wanted/needed.

 

[Old Fart]

I just took delivery of a brand new WD-800. I have been GASing for this nearly three years. I'm busy today so I can't play with it until later but first impressions are these:

*Sounds amazing, like I new it would
*Tone features are generally subtle but effective, which I expected
*This amp is both LOUD and CLEAN (and can also be LOUD and GRINDY)
*At first I thought they must have made a manufacturing error and failed to install the power section. I don't know what magical voodoo was necessary to omit the transformer (I'm kidding, sort of) but this thing is light as a feather. WAY lighter than my 300W Walkabout head.

I'm pretty thrilled.

 

[morebass!]

... ended up getting the WD instead of the TT. I run my P bass without the parametric and use the parametric to tweak the upright. It works well. I do miss the ability to tweak the mids for the P bass but that's a minor issue. Overall its an excellent amp. I'm playing some outdoor shows this weekend and am looking forward to really opening it up.