Micro Bass Heads, why doesn't everyone use them?

[GregT]

I have gone from carrying the 8x10 SVT and full Marshall stack of my younger days to a Deluxe Reverb and an Ampeg PF500/PF115. That is it in a nutshell for me. I don't want to carry that stuff any more. If I were younger I probably still would. It doesn't mean the lighter stuff is for us old guys. They just keep making it better and better and lighter and better. My B100R's are looking heavy now. For a bass cabinet, only so small can be done and still perform......for now. I am so glad for the new technologies. My QSC K12 PA mains are the same newer technology. If they keep getting better and smaller and lighter. But then again...Tubes Is Good! I always wonder what the new electrical inventors will come up with next.

 

[lsabina]

...and they are small and light...

I would be afraid of someone simply swiping it because of this. So easy to conceal under a jacket, etc.

 

[brotherbassj]

I have done the whole lightweight amp/head and speaker cabinet thing and appreciate it for what it is and giged extensively with a markbass little mark 2 and two 102p 2x10 cabs. They get te job done...........

However.......I still find my thunderfunk 550B and a pair of aggie db112's to sound more pleasing to my ears and pack a deeper punch. I think KJUng gave Thunderfunk a mention earlier.
Now in playing big 1000 seat gigs I LOVE the Carvin B1500 and The Bergantino NV215.....but also as someone mentioned We have help.......a trailer......a nd that cab/amp head are in rolling rack cases. I think the whole thing boils down to this:

personal opinion and ear + willingness to huff your own gear (and ability)=what you play????????

Now.......I still have yet to play the streamliner 900........thats my unicorn right now.....LOL

 

[NoFretsNoWorry]

...To me, micro amps are still where cd's were when they first came out. They were convenient and relaible. They had low noise floor. But they just were missing something when compared to records....They do really cool stuff. Many are better than the EA in terms of actual output. For me, though, there is a certain "something" with power transformers, et al..

TWO CENTS on my micro experience:

I agree that there is something "lost" in the digital/analog translation that is similar in comparison to:

1) CD vs LP vinyl
2) solid state vs tube

Yet merely adding a tube (outboard) to the micro mix did not entirely restore what I believe is missing from the digital aspect of some micros.

http://www.talkbass.com/forum/f15/tc-rh750-part-ii-836993/index4.html

It seems to me that some micro amps do not capture the entire dynamic, harmonic, and nuance ranges of the bass as an instrument in whole.

The micro digital "dynamic" (or lack thereof), in my opinion, has added a compression element (non-musical; bit rate resolution limitation?) not previously expressed in amp design.

Even simple string scrub noises sound radically different on the micro I owned.

This being said, the practical "range" of dynamics the micros do represent is great! And if your playing fits comfortably in that micro dynamic range you will LOVE these amps!

I honestly look forward to the evolution of micro design....especially the partially herniated disc in my back! LOL! I will be trying more micro gear in the near future!

For me though, I find that the current micro experience limits/masks/compresses some crucial musical nuances I have grown to identify as my "sound" over the years.

PEACE

 

[nysbob]

When they come up with one that sounds remotely as good as my old ampeg tube amps I'll consider it.

 

[R Baer]

I totally understand that. However, it is amazing how little information most players have (are or even interested in) regarding available products in the bass amplification category.

I have had multiple, multiple situations of bassists coming up to me after a gig and saying 'my god, that sounded great, what the heck IS that thing'. I then explain it is an LMII that has been on the market for 5 years, and is available at Guitar Center

Also, to be fair, gigging is a tough business now, and there are a lot of guys still gigging those SVT3Pros and Eden WT800's that sound absolutely fine, and that have no cash to even make it worth 'keeping up with things'. So, +1 to your point that TBers represent a the population of what are called 'early adopters' in the new product marketing/R&D literature. Kind of the 'edge of the sword' as to predicting where the market is going in the future IMO.

Of course, there will ALWAYS be room for a product like yours, or the Thunderfunk or whatever from high quality, specialized, boutique manufacturers. That is a good thing!

We are planning on our next amp being smaller and lighter, because I totally get that a lot of players have that need. It's just that for me personally, I like a full size amp. I had one experience using another bassist's rig with one of the very small micros on stage and I just found the very small knobs crammed together and labeled with #4 font a pain to operate.

Part of it too, is I'm admittedly old fashioned when it comes to amps. Kind of like cars. I get that a company like Porsche can get amazing performance out of a little 4 cylinder engine through the use of technology, but I would still rather drive a 1970 Camaro with a big block V8!

 

[jnewmark]

After using the B15 and the Fender Bassman, back in the day, I've been pretty much an SS amp guy, and lately a micro amp guy, although I don't know if you classify the Carvin BX1500 as a micro amp. It is very light ! I never got the whole Tube vs SS thing, I guess I'm not as sophisticated as some others are. If I can get close to my tone goals in a lightweight package with enough volume, then I'm all about it.

 

[Jrussblues]

The micro's just don't sound right to me, played a bunch of em on different set ups in different stores through a variety of instruments. I didn't get clear notes out of lower frequencies, on several I started hearing other harmonics come out and rough up the note coming out. Maybe I'll find one I do like some day but till then I'll keep lugging the heavy stuff around.

 

[Faderoktopus]

Power supplies are not designed equally, and a very effective one will usually make the most people happy. I have no idea how much of a audible difference the type of power supply will do, aside from tubes of course, but I assume that it isn't much and can be easily remedied in the design of the preamp section.

As it is, we still have subjective sonic preferences, regardless of size, and amps models do have different sonic qualities. I have no qualms saying that I chose my amp for sound over practicality, since I much preferred it to the micros I've tried. Note, however, that I also preferred it to the other big, heavy SS, Hybrid as well as tube amps I tried, but would have gone heavier if I hadn't. Such is my taste, and if Eden made a lightweight amp that has the sound and features of mine, I would consider getting it if I had the cash to spare. As for TC, Orange, Ampeg, Markbass and many more small, lightweight amps I tried, they are good, but to my ear not as good. Very much IMO.

I guess you could say that it's not the size of the enclosure, it's the quality of the interior, and quality is still subjective.

Martin

 

[WingKL]

Remember, there are quite a few 'mix and match' designs out there. For example, the iAmp800 is a class D amp with a toriodal power suppy (as is the Epi502 and I believe the AG500). The Markbass LMII is a class A/B amp with an SMPS.

I'm aware that there are different mix and match designs out there. I think Class D and SMPS is the common mix for what people consider Micro bass heads.

It is not wise to use amp or power supply topology (other than wanting an all tube signal chain) as buying criteria IMO. Yes, each amp made, regardless of topology, sounds a bit different. No other amp I've ever heard, for example, will give you that open, airy, beautiful upper mid and treble response of the Walter Woods.

It would be if your tonal goal was the non-linearities (GK Growl, tube power amp response and breakup) particular to a specific topology.

Also, for example, both the GK RB series and the EBS HD and TD series use class H power amps (as far as I know), and they sound TOTALLY different.

I agree. I'm trying to put out an answer to the original question of why not all go micro heads. Because there are certain things micro heads can't do. I'm not generalizing that all class H amps can growl like a GK. I am saying a micro head probably can't. Case in point, even GK can't make their MB series growl like their RB series when pushed. Don't you think they would want to? They might if they used their class H output section and a split level SMPS to closely mimic their conventional power supply. It's be lighter and somewhat smaller but not much micro. Just like that heavy output transformer in a tube amp gives a tube amp it's "magic", the non-linearities and power response of a class H amp as it goes into clipping is hard for a micro head to emulate with a class D topology.

Also as far as I know, class D works by pulse width modulation, so in a way it's either fully on or off, so it's "hitting it's rails" all the time but not in the way that a GK class H implementation would.

 

[BurningSkies]

TWO CENTS on my micro experience:

I agree that there is something "lost" in the digital/analog translation that is similar in comparison to:

1) CD vs LP vinyl
2) solid state vs tube

Yet merely adding a tube (outboard) to the micro mix did not entirely restore what I believe is missing from the digital aspect of some micros.

http://www.talkbass.com/forum/f15/tc-rh750-part-ii-836993/index4.html

It seems to me that some micro amps do not capture the entire dynamic, harmonic, and nuance ranges of the bass as an instrument in whole.

The micro digital "dynamic" (or lack thereof), in my opinion, has added a compression element (non-musical; bit rate resolution limitation?) not previously expressed in amp design.

Even simple string scrub noises sound radically different on the micro I owned.

This being said, the practical "range" of dynamics the micros do represent is great! And if your playing fits comfortably in that micro dynamic range you will LOVE these amps!

I honestly look forward to the evolution of micro design....especially the partially herniated disc in my back! LOL! I will be trying more micro gear in the near future!

For me though, I find that the current micro experience limits/masks/compresses some crucial musical nuances I have grown to identify as my "sound" over the years.

PEACE

Class D aren't 'digital' nor do they work with any 'bitrate'...the compression that we talk about isn't digital compression as would be discussed in computerland.

 

[seamonkey]

For the vast majority of Amplifiers.
The same signal is presented to the drivers from Class-H, Class-AB, Class-D
The same power delivered from SMPS or 60hz transformer supplies to the amplifier.

Not accounting for golden ears the main difference is the pre-amps. i.e. The signal processing.

Most the head makers figured this out.

I think GK gets this and understands where to add in their growl to their pre-amp, so you can get the growl at any level you drive the amp at.

Some people may never find a sound they like because they don't spend the time to tweak the controls and EQ. Or get it out of the store to give it a try in real life.

 

[NoFretsNoWorry]

Class D aren't 'digital' nor do they work with any 'bitrate'...the compression that we talk about isn't digital compression as would be discussed in computerland.

Really?

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

Found this on the TC site link above.

"Digital Recording out: Balanced XLR, AES/EBU, (24 Bit)"

I am referring to the micro amp as a whole.

And I disagree with your precluding bit-rate digital technology from micro amps entirely.

Class D (usually MOSFETS) are operated as binary switches; either fully on or fully off. My "digital" reference is in the BINARY comparison of switch function much like the gates within a microprocessor.

The Truth About Digital (Class D) Amplifiers — Reviews and News from Audioholics

Digital controlled or analog controlled class D?

In general, the lines are becoming blurry in this micro tech when it comes to digital/analog interpretation. There are inherent digital aspects to this micro amp tech that require a new way to think about it.

PEACE

 

[Dave W]

I'm sure it's been said as I did not read the thread, but everyone doesn't use them because not everyone has the spare cash to purchase one.

 

[KJung]

I'm aware that there are different mix and match designs out there. I think Class D and SMPS is the common mix for what people consider Micro bass heads.



It would be if your tonal goal was the non-linearities (GK Growl, tube power amp response and breakup) particular to a specific topology.



I agree. I'm trying to put out an answer to the original question of why not all go micro heads. Because there are certain things micro heads can't do. I'm not generalizing that all class H amps can growl like a GK. I am saying a micro head probably can't. Case in point, even GK can't make their MB series growl like their RB series when pushed. Don't you think they would want to? They might if they used their class H output section and a split level SMPS to closely mimic their conventional power supply. It's be lighter and somewhat smaller but not much micro. Just like that heavy output transformer in a tube amp gives a tube amp it's "magic", the non-linearities and power response of a class H amp as it goes into clipping is hard for a micro head to emulate with a class D topology.

Also as far as I know, class D works by pulse width modulation, so in a way it's either fully on or off, so it's "hitting it's rails" all the time but not in the way that a GK class H implementation would.

+1 to most of the above. I guess I would continue to suggest that, other than wanting a full tube signal chain, better to think of various amps by their brand and model number (i.e., judging the entire tonal package of the unit), versus trying to parse out what tonal impact the amp and power supply topology has on the tone.

That, of course, will result in some liking full size amps better than the smaller ones.

 

[BurningSkies]

Really?

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

Found this on the TC site link above.

"Digital Recording out: Balanced XLR, AES/EBU, (24 Bit)"

I am referring to the micro amp as a whole.

And I disagree with your precluding bit-rate digital technology from micro amps entirely.

Class D (usually MOSFETS) are operated as binary switches; either fully on or fully off. My "digital" reference is in the BINARY comparison of switch function much like the gates within a microprocessor.

The Truth About Digital (Class D) Amplifiers — Reviews and News from Audioholics

Digital controlled or analog controlled class D?

In general, the lines are becoming blurry in this micro tech when it comes to digital/analog interpretation. There are inherent digital aspects to this micro amp tech that require a new way to think about it.

PEACE

First off, TC isn't known as a purveyor of truth around here. But to get beyond that, just because an amp has a digital send on it and it has a class D amp inside doesn't make it a digital amp. And just because class D is a switching amp, doesn't make it a digital amp, although there are some similarities between a 1/0 binary and a on/off voltage/current output.

 

[jasonbraatz]

Right, the TC's preamp involves digital conversion and does some of the tone shaping digitally, which is why there's a digital out. It's a special case, though.

 

[NoFretsNoWorry]

The only practical "functional" difference between a class D binary switching amp (with switches either fully on or fully off), and a computer microprocessor (either gates fully open or fully closed), is that the class D amp is thousands (millions?) of times bigger. This is a function of practical scalar comparison.

Both share either "fully on" or "fully off" switches in class D amps, and gates in microprocessor.

Binary states, ON/OFF. 1/0's......are digital. Period.

Because of its digital-like function of switches, I imagine that class D amps often neglect the continuous analog signal of musically pleasing waveforms and amplitudes (the vibration of a bass string is a classic analog waveform).

Although this greatly improves efficiency in power, it potentially sacrifices continuity of tone.

This would maybe explain the tapering compression I heard when I played my fretless through the RH 750, as well as the altered string scrub sounds.

The amp switches act almost like a gate in a compressor (QUESTION: What determines the threshold of these class D switches?)

Hence, a digital-like compression.

I believe class D amps behave very digitally.

Defining class D amps is another can of worms all together!

FWIW: I loved the RH750 for thumping and aggressive rock!!

Not-so-much for expressive finesse.

PEACE

 

[KJung]

The only practical "functional" difference between a class D binary switching amp (with switches either fully on or fully off), and a computer microprocessor (either gates fully open or fully closed), is that the class D amp is thousands (millions?) of times bigger. This is a function of practical scalar comparison.

Both share either "fully on" or "fully off" switches in class D amps, and gates in microprocessor.

Binary states, 1/0's......are digital. Period.

Because of its digital-like function of switches, I imagine that class D amps often neglect the continuous analog signal of musically pleasing waveforms and amplitudes.

The vibration of a bass string is a classic analog waveform.

Although this greatly improves efficiency in power, it sacrifices continuity of tone.

This would explain the tapering compression I heard when I played my fretless through the RH 750, as well as the altered string scrub sounds.

The amp switches act almost like a gate in a compressor.

Hence, a digital-like compression.

I believe class D amps behave very digitally.

Defining class D amps is another can of worms all together!

FWIW: I loved the RH750 for thumping and aggressive rock!!

Not-so-much for expressive finesse.

PEACE

This gets over my head, but many an EE on this site has debunked the relationship between a computer chip and a class D amp or SMPS.

More importantly, I would NEVER use the RH750 as in any way an example of 'how a class D amp or how an amp with SMPS' behaves or sounds. That is a unique execution (I too like it quite a lot for what it is) that gets much of its performance and unique tone from the power management system which includes pretty complex compression circuits and some other DSP processing, versus having anything to do with amp or power supply topology.

 

[NoFretsNoWorry]

...but many an EE on this site has debunked the relationship between a computer chip and a class D amp or SMPS.

I am just now kinda figuring this stuff out!

I am no EE, but do enjoy doing my best to wrap my brain around this as best as I can.......mistakes and all!

Could you please post some links or PM some links to me re: computer chip vs Class D debunking?

Thanks KJung!

PEACE