more streamliner 900 tone voicing tests

[johnk_10]

Really great work, John! As usual, your work is well thought out and meticulously done. Always great stuff.

To my ears, the UA track sounds amazingly like the Lakland recordings on their website - ultra clean, deep and bright. Pure tone goodness leaning to the cool side.

I actually was more impressed with the straight Streamliner than the EQ3B version.
Both the EQ3B and straight Streamliner were warmer and more "hairy" (or grindy as some people say) in the uppermids/highs. I thought the plain Streamliner was a bit smoother and more balanced.

The EQ3B seemed less balanced across the eq spectrum to me - slightly weaker in the bottom end with peaks in the range where the D and C notes reside, although I'm sure this could be tweaked out. And anyway, that's just one man's ears and mine have certainly been affected by years of loud volume, so in the end it's all relative to the individual.

With the volume of a gig situation where nuances are lost, I could see how any of these would work.

thanks for the kind comments.

i get what you're saying about the balance, but when using the STM900 front end, i actually prefer the EQ3B with it. mostly because there's less string noise and 'clack' when i do some of my 'rests', which is how it sounds when playing thru the UA, but i wouldn't have a problem at all running the 900 without it using the 'flat setting'. for me, when using the EQ3B, it also makes it match the same harmonics and overtones as the UA.

 

[Jim C]

JK
Forgot to add in my previous post:
I've tried a number of para and semi para EQ's going stright into a power amp
The list includes SVP-CL, Pre Sonus, TC Electronics, Berhinger, AMP, Urei (graphic), and even the pre-amp out of a V4B.

While tone adjustments were strong, the response through a cabinet was not
The above have always worked very well in the studio (although the V4B, tube Pultec's and older Neve transofrmer channels are my top picks), they just didn't achieve the wide sound stage, 3D, warmth, touch sensitivity, and presence of an SVT through a speaker cabinet (assuming same cabinet & bass in an A/B test).

While I desparately want to believe that the Strmlnr with EQ3B is a magic, powerful, bullet, my own experience has not been so similar.
If your opinion stays the same, I can only assume that it is either this particular amp, or EQ, or the ineraction between these two that make it happen.
Any chance you can run the EQ3B into the Crown or the Strmlnr pre into the Crown to eliminate some possibilities?

 

[Oldtimer]

yes, and you have to remember that its eq is interactive.

here's a few quick clips that i made (excuse the clams) but i used big & long notes to show the tone and bloom of them. tis clip is with a 7 3/4lb p bass with fender 9050SL flats with all of the controls wide open:

UA set flat with STM900 poweramp

STM900 with EQ3B set to simulate the UA

STM900 using only its EQ as flat as i could get it

STM900 with all controls at noon


with all of the controls at noon you can see how 'wooly' it can get.

Couldn't help starting to hum "Season of the Witch" to your Bass tracks!
Good stuff John. I'm still struggling to get a sound "live" that cuts with my Streamliner, although part of the problem is the acoustic guitar in the band. It's taking up a lot of sonic space and the stage is small enough I can't get away from my amp.
Realistically, I need to get out in the room and hear what it sounds like.

 

[johnk_10]

JK
Forgot to add in my previous post:
I've tried a number of para and semi para EQ's going stright into a power amp
The list includes SVP-CL, Pre Sonus, TC Electronics, Berhinger, AMP, Urei (graphic), and even the pre-amp out of a V4B.

While tone adjustments were strong, the response through a cabinet was not
The above have always worked very well in the studio (although the V4B, tube Pultec's and older Neve transofrmer channels are my top picks), they just didn't achieve the wide sound stage, 3D, warmth, touch sensitivity, and presence of an SVT through a speaker cabinet (assuming same cabinet & bass in an A/B test).

While I desparately want to believe that the Strmlnr with EQ3B is a magic, powerful, bullet, my own experience has not been so similar.
If your opinion stays the same, I can only assume that it is either this particular amp, or EQ, or the interaction between these two that make it happen.
Any chance you can run the EQ3B into the Crown or the Strmlnr pre into the Crown to eliminate some possibilities?

for me, i don't think that it's really necessary to run aditional tests on the EQ3B thru my crown since i haven't found the EQ3B to degrade the signal at all with the STM900. it doesn't add any noise, and the attack and transients feel exactly the same whether i use it, or have it completely removed from the effects loop (not just using its bypass switch). i mean, i'm comparing the STM900/EQ3B in the loop to a UA 6176 connected to the aux in (with the EQ3B completely removed from the signal chain) in those first two clips, and if i'm getting results that close to a $2800 channel strip, i feel that using it in order to make the 900's front end sound that similar, makes it completely justified.

 

[johnk_10]

Couldn't help starting to hum "Season of the Witch" to your Bass tracks!
Good stuff John. I'm still struggling to get a sound "live" that cuts with my Streamliner, although part of the problem is the acoustic guitar in the band. It's taking up a lot of sonic space and the stage is small enough I can't get away from my amp.
Realistically, I need to get out in the room and hear what it sounds like.

i think that the trick is to narrow the width of the STM900's frequency range to make it 'slot' into the mix. that's what my SVT's and UA 6176 do in my band's live situation. i run my SVT's with the controls set at 12 o'clock (same with the UA) and while at home, they seem to sound mid bass heavy, it works perfect with my band. and my band has two electric guitars and a keyboardist often playing string and/or brass parts along with piano or B3, so the other guys are taking up quite a bit of sonic space as well. however, IMO, acoustic guitarsits should also make an attempt to limit their bandwidth too, since there's no need for them to have a ton of low end or harmonic overtones to bury the other instruments since that's not where the 'meat' of their tone comes from anyway.

 

[Hapa]

yes, and you have to remember that its eq is interactive.

here's a few quick clips that i made (excuse the clams) but i used big & long notes to show the tone and bloom of them. tis clip is with a 7 3/4lb p bass with fender 9050SL flats with all of the controls wide open:

UA set flat with STM900 poweramp

STM900 with EQ3B set to simulate the UA


STM900 using only its EQ as flat as i could get it

STM900 with all controls at noon


with all of the controls at noon you can see how 'wooly' it can get.

Very interesting thread, keep it everybody, it all very much appreciated. I'll have to try that with a UA 710.

 

[PDGood]

IMO, acoustic guitarsits should also make an attempt to limit their bandwidth too, since there's no need for them to have a ton of low end or harmonic overtones to bury the other instruments since that's not where the 'meat' of their tone comes from anyway.

+1

It's like when keyboard players play bass with their left hand - it affects you and there's nothing you can do to your amp to fix it. The change has to come with the other guy.

 

[4-string]

+1

It's like when keyboard players play bass with their left hand - it affects you and there's nothing you can do to your amp to fix it. The change has to come with the other guy.

+1.

The first few times we did Sting's "Seven Days" I got complaints, there was this horrible rumble. Caused by the keys of course.

 

[johnk_10]

+1

It's like when keyboard players play bass with their left hand - it affects you and there's nothing you can do to your amp to fix it. The change has to come with the other guy.

yup. exactly. whenever my keyboardist does it, i look over at him and say, "stop doing that!" (and, thankfully, he does ).

 

[Jim C]

for me, i don't think that it's really necessary to run aditional tests on the EQ3B thru my crown since i haven't found the EQ3B to degrade the signal at all with the STM900. it doesn't add any noise, and the attack and transients feel exactly the same whether i use it, or have it completely removed from the effects loop (not just using its bypass switch). i mean, i'm comparing the STM900/EQ3B in the loop to a UA 6176 connected to the aux in (with the EQ3B completely removed from the signal chain) in those first two clips, and if i'm getting results that close to a $2800 channel strip, i feel that using it in order to make the 900's front end sound that similar, makes it completely justified.

Let me ask in a different way
Would you agree that the Strmlnr pre creates the tonall pallet and the the EQ3B just allows a touch up for EQ points?

As opposed to saying that any inexpensive outboard EQ will offer the tonal depth and bredth to a bass signal w/ just a straight wire pre.

 

[johnk_10]

Let me ask in a different way
Would you agree that the Strmlnr pre creates the tonall pallet and the the EQ3B just allows a touch up for EQ points?

yes, that's pretty much it exactly. nothing is really being eq'd drastically either in bandwidth or % of cut or boost at any frequency, so it's not creating any phase issues and not changing the amp's character. it's just smoothing out a few areas and brings out my bass's inherent tone and harmonics a little more.

As opposed to saying that any inexpensive outboard EQ will offer the tonal depth and bredth to a bass signal w/ just a straight wire pre.

i can't really vouch for 'any inexpensive outboard eq' but the EQ3B works very well with it. i would assume that an ashley or furman parametric would work easily as well, but the portability and sonics of the presonus just makes it that much more attractive and easier to use for me.


as far as my top 3 amps go (that you asked about earlier), i can't see my SVT or my UA ever being dethroned and my '71 2000S is easily in their category, as is my Fender supertwin head, but i can see the STM900 2x15 setup getting as much use or more than the others.
.....of course, if i had roadies (like i used to), i'd be using an SVT/4x12 or 810 at every gig.

 

[Jim C]

Thank you sir; theory confirmed!
BTW, did try an Ashley pre into a pwer amp and thought it was OK but not super great; sounded like a decent transisitor amp nothing more.
I had forgotten the 2000S; probably because I was a dumb a$$ and gave back the loaner amp and cab to my pal even though he offered it for a great price in the 80's. :scowl:

 

[johnk_10]

i was just comparing the streamliner (with and without the EQ3B) to my SVT again today. now with the speakers getting broken in and the fact that i'm getting more used to the 900's tone, i feel that i'm able to dial in some great tones using just it's eq. it still doesn't quite have the attack/bloom of the SVT but in it's own way it feels great and almost has more punch behind each note, especially at loud volumes. but using just a tiny bit of gain/dsitortion, it even captures a bit of the SVT's growl/attack. i can't wait til the next gig to use it.

 

[f.c.geil]

i was just comparing the streamliner (with and without the EQ3B) to my SVT again today. now with the speakers getting broken in and the fact that i'm getting more used to the 900's tone, i feel that i'm able to dial in some great tones using just it's eq. it still doesn't quite have the attack/bloom of the SVT but in it's own way it feels great and almost has more punch behind each note, especially at loud volumes. but using just a tiny bit of gain/dsitortion, it even captures a bit of the SVT's growl/attack. i can't wait til the next gig to use it.

What speakers, and what settings give you these sounds? Clips? The people want to know...

 

[johnk_10]

for those clips, it was running thru a cab that i just built last week. (it has 3015's and is ported/46.5lbs):

here's a link to the thread describing how i built it:

http://www.talkbass.com/forum/f15/custom-diy-2x15-cab-build-854517/

 

[DrC]

When first reading this thread I thought that you were plugging into the EQ3B and then going into the Streamliner. Just so I am clear, you are plugging the bass straight into the Streamliner, and then running the EQ3B through the effects loop, correct?

 

[johnk_10]

When first reading this thread I thought that you were plugging into the EQ3B and then going into the Streamliner. Just so I am clear, you are plugging the bass straight into the Streamliner, and then running the EQ3B through the effects loop, correct?

yup.

 

[f.c.geil]

I got a really nice, full, fat yet growly, mid-forward tone with the following settings:
Gain: 12.45
Volume: 12.00
Bass: 11.00
Mid: 4.30
Freq: 2.5k
Treble: 10.00

In the interest of full disclosure, this is with a 2011 Highway One P Bass, DiMarzio Model Ps, Hipshot A Bridge, Sadowsky Black Label flats, running into a SWR Goliath III 4x10.

 

[johnk_10]

yep, depending on the cab, that's another setting that i use where you're boost it a 2.5Khz instead of cutting it at 220hz. that method really brings out the upper mids.

 

[f.c.geil]

Exactly. It also gives me a smooth boost through the mids, without unduly boosting (muddying) the bottom end.