Why do micro lovers get so testy during these types of discussions? If you want to use a micro, use it. I do. But you can't fault people for having an opinion, and it's certainly not based on voicing alone, I can tell you that.
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.
Agreed. My ab of the th500 vs db750 concluded there is still a considerable gap the advantage going to the big head for dynamics, tone, tightness, lack of compression in the low end. The micro heads are great and if you don't ab gig both you will be happy with the micro. Once you try the big head at a typical medium gig you will feel and notice the difference. For super low volume coffee shops or in your basement at low vol not much difference.
I'm also not advocating using heavy rigs. I'm wondering out loud, what is the advantage to hauling something that weighs a few pounds less and half the size?
If the harmonics were odd, they wouldn't be very musical either
A 3rd harmonic sounds musical to me. Not surprising as it's an octave above a perfect 5th.
I'm quite happy with the sound and reliability of my micros, but I'm starting to appreciate traditional solid state with an iron transformer more these days. I've done a handful of gigs with a traditional solid state BA110 recently, and OK, it's an inexpensive practice amp, but I can tell a difference in the response of it and my micro rigs. It comes across as a little tighter. I still dig the micro rigs a lot, but I get why some folks haven't made the switch from heavy SS to light SS.
I guess that means I disagree with Ken, but what else is new?![]()
Until you start playing chords and double stops. This could shed some light on the "roughness" that KJung and others have reported with the TH500.
Don't see how it's relevant to this discussion, though, unless all micros have that much built in grit, and all lead sleds don't.
Why do micro lovers get so testy during these types of discussions? If you want to use a micro, use it. I do. But you can't fault people for having an opinion, and it's certainly not based on voicing alone, I can tell you that.
Again, I totally agree, all should use the amp they want, and all amps sound different. There is not a 'class D' tone or a class A/B tone. There is not a 'specific low end tone or perfomance' associated with the type of power supply. Again, if their were, the top of the line PA companies would be using the 'type of amp' that was the 'best'! ALL of them use class D/SMPS amps. All of them.When you take a look at THD+N of the power amplifier used in the TH500 its easy to see why at a medium gig there was a perceivable difference between the db750 and the TH-500. At 8-Ohms Stereo, the amplifier specs good THD until the power reaches around 60 Watts Per channel (120W bridged), at which point the amplifier shoots up to 10% THD. But they don't run these amplifiers in stereo, they are bridged mono, where the THD spec goes up. I don't know about anybody else, but when you have audible distortion, (at 10% it is audible), however subtle you get a squishy feeling to your strings and the volume seems to peak out and not get louder.
![]()
If the harmonics were odd, they wouldn't be very musical either.
The spec sheet also states 10% THD @ 550w. It's got great bang for the space it uses, and produces little heat of its own, but the distortion is off the charts to me.
I have golden ears (somewhat), I can hear this stuff. Its tangible. Its real. It has an effect on your tone, and it also changes how the speaker cones move. All of these things should be somewhat perceivable to the player, as pointed out. Especially in an A/B situation at a gig. If both amplifiers were set to 300w; and given a clean signal from the same preamp I am positive the difference could be easily heard and felt. Most certainly the db750 does not carry the same high distortion specs at 300w output.
I'll not make a specific comment about the quality of your 'golden ears' on this one! You might want to remove that post, since that is the kind of stuff that perpetuates these type of beliefs.Maybe it's the big transformers contributing to the note feel and heft? Watts in amp ratings I have not seen correlation.
Quite the opposite here. I find my Peavey IPR 1600 tighter and more transparent than my just-retired Yamaha 2200 ... which doesn't owe me anything after 25+ years ...
), and you get this re-occuring mess of opinions based on limited and/or faulty info (like trying to guess which power module is being used in an amps, etc.)Sorry, but I'm going to cry foul on the "big is good" camp.
The OP tries to replace a large, expensive rack rig with an entry-level $400 Ampeg micro. He finds that it doesn't compare to his big rig, and he draws the inference that therefore, all micros suck.
My comparison was a PF-500 to a Crown XLS 1500, both can be found for $399 or less, not including a preamp needed with the power amp. I'm sorry, but I did not say all micros suck, as a matter of fact, I placed an order for one. The one particular model had several references to problems people were having, so I cancelled my order. If you read through the various postings on the smaller amps, many people have issues with them. Others love them, varied opinions just like you have on TB over any other item on here. I never said that I needed to run 4 810cabinets, or have a volume war, or that only heavy stuff is better, or that everyone should do what I do.
