My Dirt Bender - Another Jounal

[sloppy_phil]

I fully understand this, but I love to have the best possible bass tone(s) for MySELF on every occasion.

Oh, 100%! It's not like I don't bring any pedals, or a suboptimal amp, to the bar gigs. But, for example, if I don't have the exact modulation effect that was used on the original recording, well, that's fine, I'll use what I have to get close enough. Or if the song uses a heavy distortion/fuzz, I'll get as close as I can with my overdrives, but won't lose any sleep about not being exact.

I'm not trying to imply that tone doesn't matter, btw! If I don't like the sound coming out of the amp behind me, I tend to not be so "in the moment" and focused on the performance. But whereas I'll get really into the weeds on my sound with the touring band, that tends not to happen on these lower stakes pub gigs.

 

[sunbeast]

I definitely see the utilitarian function of this (ostensible) Jounalistic repudiation; there are times, when playing out in the wild, where you wouldn't trust going for a quick pee break without someone you know well keeping an eye on your gear. And there are other times where drunk, rowdy shenanigans are likely to abound, and you can't guarantee the safety of gear on the floor, either from errant beverages, errant humans, or (realistically) both.

In those turbulent times, I can see the benefit of having a tidy all-in-one solution that you don't have to be precious about in the slightest. If we're being TRULY honest with ourselves, digital/modelling tech has gotten, conservatively, 90% of the way there in terms of replicating analog function and sound. While studio time, high quality gigs, or sheer cork sniffing call for using the "real" toys in order to eke out the most toanz one can, I cannot say the same for the audience in most dive bars. They either like the songs or they don't, but none of them will be able to tell if it's a Noble supplying the bass sound, or a low-to-mid-market digital modeller. That is, if they even notice the bass at all...

I don’t wish to say anything negative, but no (someone is going to remind me who said that first) .

I get it, but 90% doesn’t cut it when I have 98% available, and I don’t really give a rat’s ass about the audience. This is, of course, very easy for me to say (even with tongue planted firmly against the buccal mucosa), as I don’t really play much for audiences these days, but even when I did, those knuckle-dragging ingrates were not my target.

I actually think the best digital stuff is far better than 90%, and most of the time, I wouldn’t back myself to be able to pick the difference in most cases as a listener. It’s often different as a player, as the feel can be quite different, but even then, I believe things are becoming nearly indistinguishable from either side of the instrument.

For myself, I prefer the analogue stuff precisely for its limitations. I’m too prone to obsession over the minute details of an infinitely tweakable tone, and find it liberating to be presented with just a few dials and switches and adapt to what it has to offer, or discard it and move on. Much of the older digital stuff is like this — I still enjoy my TCE Nova delay, which by current digital standards is very limited. I’ve resisted the cutting edge stuff because I don’t think I’d ever get around to just playing.

I think the power of digital is still very over-exaggerated and over-hyped when it comes to accurately reproducing the time dynamics of analog devices, stuff like tube amps and speaker cabinets (and plenty of simple drive pedals for that matter!) and I don’t think any of those representations are anywhere close to 90% because they fundamentally lack the non-linear time-based responses necessary to replicate those things. The whole world of “neural captures” in particular is a lot of hype for something still quite limited- Getting pretty good at replicating the sound at a single point in time from a given device, but completely lacking the non-linear over-time dynamic responses that it can’t model. Sure that stuff can be quantified and eventually modeled using component-based modeling and other similar approaches alongside the capture tech, but IME with existing modeler pedals it still is quite a ways off and even more resource-intensive computer plugins are often only moderately better. There is a reason most pro studios I’ve seen still stick with analog gear alongside their computer and DAW, and it’s because the digital versions of all that gear still aren’t up to the level yet. And when that day does come, it will come at the expense of extreme processing power requirements.

All that said, it is absolutely true that most audiences couldn’t give a damn one way or the other as long as people are making music and performances that speak to them in some way. The potential simplicity of a digital signal path can definitely help some people focus on a good performance. It’s also true that there is nothing objectively better about the analog devices, and plenty of great musicians have at this point made entire careers creating sounds with nothing outside the digital sphere.

 

[sloppy_phil]

@sunbeast As ever with your posts down the years, you are eloquent, informative, and making good points!

While we could pedantically argue what percentage digital stuff can emulate its analog components, I guess the larger point I was trying to make, perhaps without much success, is that the digital stuff has gotten "close enough" now that, in a full mix, especially a live show (as opposed to a polished studio recording), most, if not all, of the sonic discrepancies between the analog and digital units tend to get smeared out by all the other noise. Except maybe during moments where the bass is prominently featured in a song, or perhaps for those folks with the most hyper-sensitive hearing, which is surely not a group I belong to.

 

[GrowlerBox]

I think the power of digital is still very over-exaggerated and over-hyped when it comes to accurately reproducing the time dynamics of analog devices, stuff like tube amps and speaker cabinets (and plenty of simple drive pedals for that matter!) and I don’t think any of those representations are anywhere close to 90% because they fundamentally lack the non-linear time-based responses necessary to replicate those things. The whole world of “neural captures” in particular is a lot of hype for something still quite limited- Getting pretty good at replicating the sound at a single point in time from a given device, but completely lacking the non-linear over-time dynamic responses that it can’t model. Sure that stuff can be quantified and eventually modeled using component-based modeling and other similar approaches alongside the capture tech, but IME with existing modeler pedals it still is quite a ways off and even more resource-intensive computer plugins are often only moderately better. There is a reason most pro studios I’ve seen still stick with analog gear alongside their computer and DAW, and it’s because the digital versions of all that gear still aren’t up to the level yet. And when that day does come, it will come at the expense of extreme processing power requirements.

All that said, it is absolutely true that most audiences couldn’t give a damn one way or the other as long as people are making music and performances that speak to them in some way. The potential simplicity of a digital signal path can definitely help some people focus on a good performance. It’s also true that there is nothing objectively better about the analog devices, and plenty of great musicians have at this point made entire careers creating sounds with nothing outside the digital sphere.

I’m actually quite relieved to read this — I haven’t played any high-end, let alone neural capture digital stuff, so perhaps it’s been somewhat inflated by my imagination. The closest I’ve come is using the standalone Amplitube Max, which is … fine, for headphone or studio monitor practice when I need to be quiet or I’m travelling.

I’m also pleased to see that everyone got the joke(s), and noone seems to be offended, or are seething in silence. TB (and this Jounal in particlar) may be the one corner of the internet that still pretty much works. I’ve noticed a few surprising suspended accounts recently, and I had started to wonder.

 

[sunbeast]

I’m actually quite relieved to read this — I haven’t played any high-end, let alone neural capture digital stuff, so perhaps it’s been somewhat inflated by my imagination. The closest I’ve come is using the standalone Amplitube Max, which is … fine, for headphone or studio monitor practice when I need to be quiet or I’m travelling.

I’m also pleased to see that everyone got the joke(s), and noone seems to be offended, or are seething in silence. TB (and this Jounal in particlar) may be the one corner of the internet that still pretty much works. I’ve noticed a few surprising suspended accounts recently, and I had started to wonder.

Neural captures just grab a moment of audio and compare various inputs with their respective outputs to create an algorithm to explain A to B. Most analog devices on the other hand have some dynamic component to what they do to sound over time, and many that we guitar/bass players tend to love don’t function completely linearly so can’t really be replicated using a capture of a single moment in time (for example, the decay of the clipping from many fuzz pedals or the sag of a power tube in an amplifier are both non-linear responses). Neural captures can be great to get the basic tonal character of a certain circuit (probably the best option for recreating the tonal character of something that any modeling pedals currently have), and an approximation of the way it distorts the signal in a moment of time- but any specific non-linear time-based dynamics of either of those are lost. Not to mention that because a capture is just a single moment of time, you don’t have the option of adjusting the device parameters after making the capture.

 

[el murdoque]

Regarding this topic, I wanted to post the video from the Anderton's YT channel where the Captain and Chappers do a blind test where they compare their own favorite tube heads against the Kemper. They had an A/B switch and could go forth and back without pause - and both of them were pretty much unable to tell their amp from the Kemper.

But my google-fu is weak this morning and I did not find it.

 

[el murdoque]

What is it with cab sims that get people drooling with excitement that I don't get?

I tried a bunch of amps in the Headrush - well, actually I tried the two SVT's, the B15, the Hartke and a Fender.
Next, I tried a bunch of cabs, and went to my preferred setup yet again: A low pass filter.
It was the exact same thing I experienced on my real-world pedal board. Replacing the cab sim with a LPF felt like the harness around my torso was loosened and I could breathe again.
The differences between the amps became more apparent, and I feel there's more character from them.


IMHO, a cabinet is a burden you have to deal with. It is a device with a baked-in sound. Instead of turning knobs on the EQ, you can influence the outcome by moving it around the room - and you have to EQ in another place to make the sound work.
I usually have all my tone done on the pedalboard and use the amp EQ for that purpose - to marry the cab to the room.
For me, it often feels like a hurdle to overcome - getting the sound in my head out of the output jack of the pedalboard, and then bend the cabinet to my will.

 

[gillento]

+1 on digital cabsim/IR. To my ears they make the bass tone too dull, less audible in a mix. I prefer an analog HPF/LPF.

 

[el murdoque]

I know I'm walking a narrow line here.

This is the Flex Prime on top of a PT nano.
You can see that there's room left and right. Okay, I pushed it back a little for increased dramatic effect, but the Nano is among the smallest commercially available pedalboards, and it came with that bag that can be fastened to your gig bag.

In order to make it a proper jam session board, It would need to be populated with a tuner and a preamp with DI output - so there would be room for two more pedals.

Compression plus dirt?
The Origin Trifecta comes to mind. Cali76, DCX and Bassrig.

The Headrush offers tuner, Preamp/DI, and a bazillion options on top - none of which are as good as their analog counterparts, true.

The one thing that drives me here is to have as much versatility as possible in a small and light package.

I scanned through the available effects and tried out many of them, taking note of what works for me and what does not.
I can lean down, add an effect to the chain and map it to a foot switch in about 25 seconds.
That's where the Headrush system is a win for me, the UI is so simple and fast.

When the job is "You have to fix something", you take your truck to the shed and load in all your tool boxes, because you don't know what to expect, so you come prepared.
When the job is "You have to fix something, but it is at the end of a 5 mile hike through uneven terrain", you'll pack a backpack with essential tools, because there is a clear limit on how much weight you can have.
And when the job is "You have to fix something, but you need to squeeze through a narrow hole and then climb a rock wall" You'll pocket a Leatherman.

Your truck with a workshop's worth of quality tools is worth zilch when you can't get it to the place the tools are needed, and when the size and weight of the stuff you can bring gets less and less, the versatility of the things you pack becomes more and more important. You don't want to arrive in that place with a high quality Wera Phillips #2 screw driver only to realize they used Torx screws all over the place.


Now, the counter argument is "pah, just load up that Nano with the Noble, the Cali76 and a tuner and you've got a killer clean tone, and a good bassist will be able to make do with a killer clean tone in any environment." And that's right. Everything looks like a nail when your only tool is a hammer.

 

[sunbeast]

Regarding this topic, I wanted to post the video from the Anderton's YT channel where the Captain and Chappers do a blind test where they compare their own favorite tube heads against the Kemper. They had an A/B switch and could go forth and back without pause - and both of them were pretty much unable to tell their amp from the Kemper.

But my google-fu is weak this morning and I did not find it.

Those guys are far from what I would consider unbiased reviewers, but to that point I would also reiterate that tonally things can get quite close with modeling its everywhere else that it tends to lack. I suspect if either of those guys had actual skin in the game and had to choose one or the other that they would only be choosing a Kemper because of ease of transport, versatility, and sounding “good” and not because it actually felt the same as the rig they were replacing. There is nothing wrong with that either (I have more or less done the same with my shrinking rig over the years), but no point in overselling what the tech is actually capable of IMO.

Of course your critique of IRs fits right in there with that- an IR can only recreate a relatively small sliver of time along with EQ of a cab and a certain colored microphone that then becomes baked in to that sound. I actually quite love the character of certain cabinets I’ve played through, to the point that I’ve come to realize that it is the tonal character and feel of my cab that is often my favorite part of a distorted big rig often enough (usually back when I was using my Bergantino NV610 for 80-90% of live shows, the amps and settings I was using would have sounded like a hornets nest without that can to glue it all together). I’ve tried and tweaked tons of IRs and never found anything to even reasonably replicate that sound without significant additional EQ and squinty-eyed imagination (meaning that I’ve given in to using plugins and IRs regularly in recording environments just to avoid having to deal with the absurdities of having to record a mic’d big rig in a studio again, which in itself requires a lot of trial and error to get right).

So my overall take is that we are willing to make sacrifices as long as we can arrive at a positive outcome- using digital stuff in some cases might even sound better than analog stuff we were using before, and in all the other cases there will be a weighing of pros and cons that will often favor digital tech simply for convenience’s sake. “Convenience” will incorporate lots of things- ease of transport, ease of load-in/out, and ease of setup all being pretty huge pros that probably benefit your overall state of mind and can let you focus on playing well. In your use case that wouldn’t even be much question from my perspective!

 

[el murdoque]

Small gig report.

This is what I took:


It all fit conveniently into my gig bag, no extra luggage.
Setting up was a matter of about a minute:
Drop the Headrush on the floor, connect the TRS to XLR adapter cable to the XLR cable and run that to the mixer, connect power and rig up the wireless, done.


I tried my best to construct a sound at home that will work in a live environment, but ....

I want to quote Helmuth von Moltke the Elder:

No plan of operations extends with any certainty beyond the first encounter with the main enemy forces. Only the layman believes that in the course of a campaign he sees the consistent implementation of an original thought that has been considered in advance in every detail and retained to the end.

And for good measure Michael Gerard Tyson:

Everybody has a plan, until they get punched in the mouth.

While playing, I realized that my bass was a little bit too boomy and lacking top end. I added a HPF and raised the frequency of the LPF to 5,5 kHz.
Then, I found that when the mix gets a bit more dense, the bass takes a step back, so I quickly dropped in a parametric EQ and boosted 555Hz by 7dB.
I made some other small changes through the course of the evening, but ended up with a sound that I really liked.

...and all the changes I made, I did on the fly, mid song, while fretting root notes with my left hand.


The synth setup worked a lot better than anticipated and I used it quite often.

I ran a bitcrusher into a volume pedal (set that heel position is about 20% volume) into the Mu Tron filter, followed by a compressor that was set to steamhammer the signal into uniformity. That way, the volume pedal controlled how much the Mu Tron gets triggered - a weird mix between a wah pedal and a true LPF, because it's of course still an envelope. It's a bit like stepping barefoot on worms on soft earth vs. stepping on them on concrete while wearing ski boots. In the ski boot scenario, there is a definite and sharp end to the worms. In the barefoot scenario, there's a lot of wiggling going on under your foot, and that happens when you control an envelope with a volume pedal instead of using an expression pedal on a LPF.
Further down the line there was one more EQ pedal, that adds a bit more heft to the bass and softens the top some, and a phaz0r, just to further increase the experience. I usually drop a chorus there, but the phaser worked better to get more chaotic.


After the jam finished, my tiny setup disappeared in my bag in no time and I was ready to leave before the people that wanted to congratulate the musicians on a great show were done heaping praise on us.
My conscience was so bad, I actually helped the guy tearing down the drum kit.

 

[gillento]

Where did you place the sun shades in the chain?
Pre or post comp?

 

[el murdoque]

Ah, of course I did walk all over the place a lot, because I was being off the yoke that is the instrument cable.

 

[el murdoque]

Where did you place the sun shades in the chain?
Pre or post comp?

Shades go on first.



I included them in the picture because I actually took them, knowing I'm gonna play a west facing stage with a clear view of the sunset - so for the first half, I'm gonna have the sun straight in my face - and that was the only gig outfit I wore.
The rest of my attire was just the stuff mom laid out in the morning.

 

[GrowlerBox]

Small gig report.

This is what I took:
View attachment 7311636

It all fit conveniently into my gig bag, no extra luggage.
Setting up was a matter of about a minute:
Drop the Headrush on the floor, connect the TRS to XLR adapter cable to the XLR cable and run that to the mixer, connect power and rig up the wireless, done.


I tried my best to construct a sound at home that will work in a live environment, but ....

I want to quote Helmuth von Moltke the Elder:

And for good measure Michael Gerard Tyson:


While playing, I realized that my bass was a little bit too boomy and lacking top end. I added a HPF and raised the frequency of the LPF to 5,5 kHz.
Then, I found that when the mix gets a bit more dense, the bass takes a step back, so I quickly dropped in a parametric EQ and boosted 555Hz by 7dB.
I made some other small changes through the course of the evening, but ended up with a sound that I really liked.

...and all the changes I made, I did on the fly, mid song, while fretting root notes with my left hand.


The synth setup worked a lot better than anticipated and I used it quite often.

I ran a bitcrusher into a volume pedal (set that heel position is about 20% volume) into the Mu Tron filter, followed by a compressor that was set to steamhammer the signal into uniformity. That way, the volume pedal controlled how much the Mu Tron gets triggered - a weird mix between a wah pedal and a true LPF, because it's of course still an envelope. It's a bit like stepping barefoot on worms on soft earth vs. stepping on them on concrete while wearing ski boots. In the ski boot scenario, there is a definite and sharp end to the worms. In the barefoot scenario, there's a lot of wiggling going on under your foot, and that happens when you control an envelope with a volume pedal instead of using an expression pedal on a LPF.
Further down the line there was one more EQ pedal, that adds a bit more heft to the bass and softens the top some, and a phaz0r, just to further increase the experience. I usually drop a chorus there, but the phaser worked better to get more chaotic.


After the jam finished, my tiny setup disappeared in my bag in no time and I was ready to leave before the people that wanted to congratulate the musicians on a great show were done heaping praise on us.
My conscience was so bad, I actually helped the guy tearing down the drum kit.

I can't look ...

 

[el murdoque]

I can't look ...

I understand.

If you looked at the picture, you'd see a six string bass, a Headrush Flex Prime, an adapter cable (1/4" TRS to XLR), an XLR cable, a box containing the NUX wireless system, a strap and a pair of Ray Ban shades. Ah and the power brick for the Headrush.

 

[el murdoque]

Back to analog devices.

Two Notes Le Bass Preamp:

Unless you're willing to take huge compromises, you will have two sounds at your feet. If you want to utilize A, B and one of the Fusion modes, you will have to somehow balance the levels - heavy compression afterwards, or really weird settings on the pedal.
If you use A and B, you are limited to the amount of gain that B can provide on its own.
B on its own roars like a tiger - with a healthy dose of xylazine in the bloodstream.

Yet again, I feel reminded of gentleman dirt sound.
This does not sound like Lemmy Kilmister.
This is more like Carol Kaye would sound if she had Lemmy Kilmister's breakfast.
It sounds like an amp with a brown'ish cloth grille and tweed cover, and probably an open back.
A nice, warm vintage growl that does not really threaten, bite or maim.
It's really great for that.

Should you require a little more fervid rage, your best bet is to use the hot fusion and feeding B a very hot A, to push the gain over the edge.

 

[el murdoque]

And since we're talking analog again, Carl Martin Bassdrive:


The manual says that in this day and age, of ultra modern digital amps (I guess they mean class D, which is analog), with the bass sounds being clear as crystal, the Bassdrive can get a fair bit of vintage vibe back into your playing, drive a little soul and mojo into the soul- and mojoless rigs of today's world.
I am very inclined to agree. I'm not old enough to have been around the music scene in the 60's and 70's, but gear from the 70's was considered "old" and not "vintage" when I started out. Running on a low budget, I used lots of gear from the 70's and 80's all through the 90's - let's just give me the pass and allow me to claim "I know what the old gear sounds and feels like".


Let me tell you that this claim is true and easily validated. When you have a modern amp setup (I have) that is capable of spitting out the sonic equivalent of crystal shards - so clear that you can hardly see them and the edges so sharp you could use them for a shave. (Mine is). It sits there idling, and apart from the cooling fan that hums so softly you need to concentrate to make it out, there is absolutely no sound, even though your bass is plugged in and ready to go.
Hook up the Bassdrive, and this room with a floor of polished marble will get a nice, comfy rug (one that really ties the room together). That rug is made of floor noise, and everyone who played in a loud band back in the days before class D and neo magnet speakers knows about that. I'm sure either you or your guitarist would get Russian short wave radio on one of the amps in the room when you turned it up and held the instrument cable just right. I'm pretty sure the Bassdrive can do that, too.
Also, that amount of articulation that comes with the newer gear and tweeters and such, being able to produce high frequency content is taken care of. I kid you not, but the Bassdrive with the treble maxed sounds more muffled than my dry sound. All of the tone feels like someone has taken every single note and wrapped it into a rag to protect it from being scratched up.
Activating the Bassdrive feels like traveling back in time, to the good old days.
When I play a vintage SVT head, or an Orange AD200, or a Fender Bassman, I understand the magic of those. The way they can make a note bloom with just a hint of hair, and only when you pluck hard. The way the power tubes saturate when you turn up loud enough for the amp to break a sweat. The sheer heft of those slightly compressed, heavily saturated notes and how they spread in the room.
It's great. However, I'm not getting much of the above from the Bassdrive. What I get from it is everything that sucked on vintage amps and very little of the greatness. Luckily, I'm still talking about the baked in sound and the EQ. There still is that gain knob to be turned up high enough so it leaves the clean territory and offers some dirt. That's what it is made for, after all.
The dirt produced by the Bassdrive has some things going for it.
There is no clean blend, and there is no need for a clean blend. That's a very good thing in my book. There is enough bass on tap at all times, the low end does not feel like it gets neutered - neither by cutting low frequencies, nor by boosting mids and treble until you get the feeling of missing low end.
The muffled feeling does continue, though. There is a certain lack of an open feeling and there is also a certain lack of precision and note definition. I get the feeling that my ears have adjusted to what modern bass amps and bass cabinets, along with PA systems are capable of. I also do think that in my special case, as the guy playing old flats in any context, I have more need of equipment that does the upper registers well to give my notes a sharper edge, something that happens naturally when you play fresh rounds. In that context, I feel like the Carl Martin Bassdrive is a time machine that lets me travel back to the good old days. The good old days? No, actually I want to say the old days. Activating the Bassdrive instantly gets me a searing pain down in my lower back, because that tone carries the weight of a set of 90lbs cabinets with a 95lbs head on top.
In this modern day and age, you can look at the old days and decide what was good and what was bad about them, and then build your gear, focusing on the good, while keeping the bad and the ugly in the past, where they belong. Carl Martin did no such thing - the Bassdrive is pure nostalgia. You get the lack of top end, you get the floor noise, you get the mushy and muffled feeling, along with the drive of a tube.
Looking at the tube driven devices I really liked in the recent past, the Effectrode Tube Drive comes to mind. Comparing these two, there are significant differences. The Effectrode is made by hand with top shelf components, and the retail price of the unit is nearly three times of what Carl Martin asks for the Bassdrive. But. I've said it before and I'll probably say it again before too long. Tubes have a reputation of being the upper crust, the best you can use - and that reputation is justified when your whole process meets the highest standards. Look at the Noble preamp (or the ravings of the owners of a Noble), the Doc Lloyd DLA-2A compressor, the Jule Amps Simone .... all that shiny, modern and super expensive gear. They utilize tubes to get that certain tube mojo, and they do it extremely well, but they charge a king's ransom for their devices, too.
There IS a reason why tube technology has been replaced in every single field apart from instrument amplifiers and audiophile hardware.
When you couple tube technology with cheap manufacturing, you learn why solid state has taken over that sector. Compare the Bassdrive to a Tonehammer or a Bassrig Super Vintage, and the latter devices will sound more tube-like than the Bassdrive itself, but show none of the side effects.

 

[GrowlerBox]

I understand.

If you looked at the picture, you'd see a six string bass, a Headrush Flex Prime, an adapter cable (1/4" TRS to XLR), an XLR cable, a box containing the NUX wireless system, a strap and a pair of Ray Ban shades. Ah and the power brick for the Headrush.

Aaargh! Now you're making me think it. Make it stop ....

 

[GrowlerBox]

Back to analog devices.

Two Notes Le Bass Preamp:

Unless you're willing to take huge compromises, you will have two sounds at your feet. If you want to utilize A, B and one of the Fusion modes, you will have to somehow balance the levels - heavy compression afterwards, or really weird settings on the pedal.
If you use A and B, you are limited to the amount of gain that B can provide on its own.
B on its own roars like a tiger - with a healthy dose of xylazine in the bloodstream.

Yet again, I feel reminded of gentleman dirt sound.
This does not sound like Lemmy Kilmister.
This is more like Carol Kaye would sound if she had Lemmy Kilmister's breakfast.
It sounds like an amp with a brown'ish cloth grille and tweed cover, and probably an open back.
A nice, warm vintage growl that does not really threaten, bite or maim.
It's really great for that.

Should you require a little more fervid rage, your best bet is to use the hot fusion and feeding B a very hot A, to push the gain over the edge.

And since we're talking analog again, Carl Martin Bassdrive:


The manual says that in this day and age, of ultra modern digital amps (I guess they mean class D, which is analog), with the bass sounds being clear as crystal, the Bassdrive can get a fair bit of vintage vibe back into your playing, drive a little soul and mojo into the soul- and mojoless rigs of today's world.
I am very inclined to agree. I'm not old enough to have been around the music scene in the 60's and 70's, but gear from the 70's was considered "old" and not "vintage" when I started out. Running on a low budget, I used lots of gear from the 70's and 80's all through the 90's - let's just give me the pass and allow me to claim "I know what the old gear sounds and feels like".


Let me tell you that this claim is true and easily validated. When you have a modern amp setup (I have) that is capable of spitting out the sonic equivalent of crystal shards - so clear that you can hardly see them and the edges so sharp you could use them for a shave. (Mine is). It sits there idling, and apart from the cooling fan that hums so softly you need to concentrate to make it out, there is absolutely no sound, even though your bass is plugged in and ready to go.
Hook up the Bassdrive, and this room with a floor of polished marble will get a nice, comfy rug (one that really ties the room together). That rug is made of floor noise, and everyone who played in a loud band back in the days before class D and neo magnet speakers knows about that. I'm sure either you or your guitarist would get Russian short wave radio on one of the amps in the room when you turned it up and held the instrument cable just right. I'm pretty sure the Bassdrive can do that, too.
Also, that amount of articulation that comes with the newer gear and tweeters and such, being able to produce high frequency content is taken care of. I kid you not, but the Bassdrive with the treble maxed sounds more muffled than my dry sound. All of the tone feels like someone has taken every single note and wrapped it into a rag to protect it from being scratched up.
Activating the Bassdrive feels like traveling back in time, to the good old days.
When I play a vintage SVT head, or an Orange AD200, or a Fender Bassman, I understand the magic of those. The way they can make a note bloom with just a hint of hair, and only when you pluck hard. The way the power tubes saturate when you turn up loud enough for the amp to break a sweat. The sheer heft of those slightly compressed, heavily saturated notes and how they spread in the room.
It's great. However, I'm not getting much of the above from the Bassdrive. What I get from it is everything that sucked on vintage amps and very little of the greatness. Luckily, I'm still talking about the baked in sound and the EQ. There still is that gain knob to be turned up high enough so it leaves the clean territory and offers some dirt. That's what it is made for, after all.
The dirt produced by the Bassdrive has some things going for it.
There is no clean blend, and there is no need for a clean blend. That's a very good thing in my book. There is enough bass on tap at all times, the low end does not feel like it gets neutered - neither by cutting low frequencies, nor by boosting mids and treble until you get the feeling of missing low end.
The muffled feeling does continue, though. There is a certain lack of an open feeling and there is also a certain lack of precision and note definition. I get the feeling that my ears have adjusted to what modern bass amps and bass cabinets, along with PA systems are capable of. I also do think that in my special case, as the guy playing old flats in any context, I have more need of equipment that does the upper registers well to give my notes a sharper edge, something that happens naturally when you play fresh rounds. In that context, I feel like the Carl Martin Bassdrive is a time machine that lets me travel back to the good old days. The good old days? No, actually I want to say the old days. Activating the Bassdrive instantly gets me a searing pain down in my lower back, because that tone carries the weight of a set of 90lbs cabinets with a 95lbs head on top.
In this modern day and age, you can look at the old days and decide what was good and what was bad about them, and then build your gear, focusing on the good, while keeping the bad and the ugly in the past, where they belong. Carl Martin did no such thing - the Bassdrive is pure nostalgia. You get the lack of top end, you get the floor noise, you get the mushy and muffled feeling, along with the drive of a tube.
Looking at the tube driven devices I really liked in the recent past, the Effectrode Tube Drive comes to mind. Comparing these two, there are significant differences. The Effectrode is made by hand with top shelf components, and the retail price of the unit is nearly three times of what Carl Martin asks for the Bassdrive. But. I've said it before and I'll probably say it again before too long. Tubes have a reputation of being the upper crust, the best you can use - and that reputation is justified when your whole process meets the highest standards. Look at the Noble preamp (or the ravings of the owners of a Noble), the Doc Lloyd DLA-2A compressor, the Jule Amps Simone .... all that shiny, modern and super expensive gear. They utilize tubes to get that certain tube mojo, and they do it extremely well, but they charge a king's ransom for their devices, too.
There IS a reason why tube technology has been replaced in every single field apart from instrument amplifiers and audiophile hardware.
When you couple tube technology with cheap manufacturing, you learn why solid state has taken over that sector. Compare the Bassdrive to a Tonehammer or a Bassrig Super Vintage, and the latter devices will sound more tube-like than the Bassdrive itself, but show none of the side effects.

Aaaah, that's better. All the jounalistic metaphors and flourishes are back, the sun is out and I can breathe again.