• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

NEW Acoustic 360/361

I don't know about that business about Flea being the boss in this matter. Not saying you're wrong, just saying I don't know. I also don't know who makes what decisions in that band about stage amps (selection and usage) and whether they're made on a scientific basis, i.e. taking the entire system into account.

Good questions. Given that he's using in-ear monitors (as seen in the vids), I wonder to what extent he's relying on the amps for monitoring. They're all seasoned pros in the band, and could also be expected to have a top notch audio crew, so I'd be surprised if excess stage volume and the corresponding FOH interference is the issue -- but who knows?

If he's mainly using the cabs to hear himself, I think they're setup improperly: Flea is moving a lot off-axis, and he's running three units side by side -- not a good combination, since the wider the array, the narrower the dispersion. The proper way would be to cross-fire.

The dispersion remark holds true for direct radiators as well, but I think more side-lobes, potentially helpful in this case, can be expected due to a different velocity distribution across the combined source surface (array of smaller pistons vs large horn mouths with non-constant velocity across the section); horns tend to have a more controlled beam. Perhaps BFM can fill us in here.

Then again, the switch could be for entirely different reasons; changing matter of taste, loyalty towards the old trusty brand after a brief love affair with the blue beauty, maybe even a renewed megabucks endorsement deal from GK (probably unlikely, but again, who knows?), logistical problems, just a taste for variation, ...

I figure that chances are that we'll hear it from the horse's mouth sooner or later. Flea is of course interviewed every now and then, and this question is bound to come up.
 
Pretty simple. If the OP has no relationship to the product or company, he is free to post any comment or review he wants as long as the usage agreement is honored. You are not required to agree with it as long as you disagree respectfully. The OP here declares no - and disavows any - relationship to Acoustic USA, Grexa, Vetchking and so forth. No one has offered any credible evidence to the contrary that I am aware of.

We are aware of this thread as well as the periodic appearance of positively worded review threads. Like most things in life, this is all likely best viewed with a healthy dose of skepticism. Go find a rig, play it, review it and post it if you have that option. If you like it, great. If not, that's fine too.

Thanks for the clarification! (Also thanks for putting things a bit into perspective. From time to time we tend to take the discussions too seriously.)

One reflection regarding reviews made on a voluntary basis:

Unless a product is really horrible, it's probably mainly the fans who go through the trouble of writing reviews. The indifferent ones just move on. This would cause a dominance of positive reviews. The mechanism might even be amplified in case of very expensive items. Few who have bought a megabucks whatever will admit to others that it was a bad purchase...
 
Thanks for the clarification! (Also thanks for putting things a bit into perspective. From time to time we tend to take the discussions too seriously.)

One reflection regarding reviews made on a voluntary basis:

Unless a product is really horrible, it's probably mainly the fans who go through the trouble of writing reviews. The indifferent ones just move on. This would cause a dominance of positive reviews. The mechanism might even be amplified in case of very expensive items. Few who have bought a megabucks whatever will admit to others that it was a bad purchase...

+1

I would add to it that way too many so-called reviews are done while the shipping cartons are still littering the floor. Most of it is a "Yay, I got my new amp" and very little of it objective or with any sort of on the gig experience behind it. Reviews matter if they're done a couple months later, after the thing has been put through it's paces, the honeymoon's over and the new wore off. Some reviews can be useful if they're done by older players with experience, and several equipment turnovers behind them. Most are done by kids playing with their new toy.
 
Talkbass folks are pretty doggone honest about their experiences with gear. I don't think people are being dishonest when they open a carton and say they love something, nor do I think they're being dishonest when they complain about it and sell it a year later. I've done it, others have done it, it happens sometimes.
 
Talkbass folks are pretty doggone honest about their experiences with gear. I don't think people are being dishonest when they open a carton and say they love something, nor do I think they're being dishonest when they complain about it and sell it a year later. I've done it, others have done it, it happens sometimes.

You're right, but this place is one of dozens on the web that pop up when someone googles an amp or whatever gear. Liking it when you open the box and not liking it later may both be honest opinions but neither tells a prospective buyer much of anything useful. Actually a "why you sold it" review may be more informative than a "why you bought it" one.
 
If he's mainly using the cabs to hear himself, I think they're setup improperly: Flea is moving a lot off-axis, and he's running three units side by side -- not a good combination, since the wider the array, the narrower the dispersion. The proper way would be to cross-fire.

There is an expectation at a big rock show to see a row of big amps behind the band. On one hand, Kiss took it to an absurd level and had rows of empty cabs. On the other hand, Geddy Lee has the sausage maker...which is brilliant and very Dada.

IMHO, I think the equipment you see rock stars used on stage has more to do with endorsement deals than personal preference. Do you really think Flea "bought" 12 amps? Think of the marketing you get from having Flea tour the world with your rig. If it was my company, I would GIVE him 12 rigs just to get the exposure.

There are a lot of pros with endorsement deals on TB...anyone willing to pull the curtain back on the practice?
 
Talkbass folks are pretty doggone honest about their experiences with gear. I don't think people are being dishonest when they open a carton and say they love something, nor do I think they're being dishonest when they complain about it and sell it a year later. I've done it, others have done it, it happens sometimes.

True. I usually also choose to discount most reviews that are by people who have JUST purchased a new piece of gear. Until they've put some gigs in, played it in a bunch of rooms, gotten to know it well in a rehearsal setting, positive feedback means nothing.

I do like the part about having a great manual though...At this point I'd like to offer up some amps that also have great manuals.

The 'Original' Hartke 3500. I still have mine from 1993! Makes for good bedtime reading and explains ALL the knobs!

The MarkBass Little Mark II: It explains all the features in detail and give some suggested settings. Lovely layout and design too.

Bad manuals:
Mesa 400+: Light on info, heavy on misinformation, scant at about 2 pages.

Any other manuals y'all would like to recommend?
 
The one possibility I may have missed based on having read what 77PBass wrote: The amps might merely be "up there," as opposed to actually doing any meaningful work. I mean volumes set super low. In that case, the delay-related problems they'd cause might be tolerable.

Another possible scenario I might have missed: Maybe the sound man is delaying the mains by X milliseconds to compensate for the distance between the 360s and the mains' bass bins. Doing things like that is a piece o' cake these days. More I think about it, that option seems to make the most sense. Betcha that's what they're doing. It's still got some rough edges to it, but it might be workable.
 
The manual for my old SWR SM400S was a pretty good read. It explained how to work everything, and that thing had a lot of controls on it, including a cable patching scheme for biamping. It was a good manual but I don't recall it ever being featured in an advertisement (which is exactly what this thread was started as), other than perhaps to say, "comes with owners manual".
 
The manual for my old SWR SM400S was a pretty good read. It explained how to work everything, and that thing had a lot of controls on it, including a cable patching scheme for biamping. It was a good manual but I don't recall it ever being featured in an advertisement (which is exactly what this thread was started as), other than perhaps to say, "comes with owners manual".

I've been thinking, do you think George would knock off a few hundred bucks on the end price if I asked him not to include the manual? I usually can figure that stuff out pretty easily by myself.
 
IMHO, I think the equipment you see rock stars used on stage has more to do with endorsement deals than personal preference. Do you really think Flea "bought" 12 amps? Think of the marketing you get from having Flea tour the world with your rig. If it was my company, I would GIVE him 12 rigs just to get the exposure.

I think you're right in that some (or even many) musicians chose equipment primarily based on endorsement deals. However big stars such as Flea, who've had successful careers spanning decades, should have the means to buy any amp they want, whereby getting a good endorsement deal is not crucial at all. If you're already rich, why refrain from playing the rig you really love just because you don't get it more or less for free? It's another matter e.g. for up and coming bands or players active within genres with smaller audiences. Likewise it's probably different for a mature, large company vs a small startup, where the latter obviously has less marketing muscles.

So yes, I think Flea actually payed for his rigs. However, firstly anyone who buys 12 rigs should certainly qualify for paying wholesale prices. Secondly, at that level I would guess that a production company owned or co-owned by the artist is the buyer, rather than the star spending his pocket money. From that POV, it's "just" one expense among many in a huge budget for the world tour.

BTW, it's now clear that he's been going back and forth between GK and Acoustic during the autumn. I have a hunch that if he'd be given the amps for free (and that goes for both brands), it'd at least been under the condition the he plays them exclusively for a year or the entire tour or something.

YMMV.