• 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.

Official Ampeg Micro-VR Club

#221
Great club and great information. I'm just surprised there aren't more members or more NAD posts. This thread is I think 7 years old! I'm glad to see @RoadRanger and @mapleglo chime in recently. I just bought an SVT210av and have a PF-350. I also have two Gallien Kruegers-- MB200 and MB500. Honestly as another poster noted, the 210 sounds excellent with my MB200. It seems to have a lot more "punch" than the PF-350. I know it's harsh to say that, but there just seems to be a more growly defined sound from the MB200.

Also, there's kind of an "edgy tone" coming out of the PF-350 that I have to dial out with the tone controls. To get rid of a kind of clunky tone I have to turn the PF-350's treble to 9:00, mid, 3:00, and bass, 3:00. Gain is 12:00 and master on 12:00. And this is in the living room! Now, the MB200, I'm looking at the settings: gain volume at 9:00, bass and mid at noon, midbass and bass at 1:00. It's not only punchier, but louder than the PF-350.

I like to use all my tone controls nearly flat, including my active basses. I'm not used to having to manipulate the tone controls so much as I am on the PF-350. But maybe that's the nature of the beast and maybe I'm not giving it a fair chance yet. It has had moments where it did sound nice.

I'm wondering-- any of you have both the PF-350 and the SVT Micro head? Besides the obvious power differences, what do you think of the differences in tone and controls? I'm thinking if I don't keep the PF-350 I might pick up the SVT micro. But boy, the MB200 sounds nice through the cab...
 
  • Like
Reactions: chupacerveza and Hnz
#222
alaskaleftybass said:
Great club and great information. I'm just surprised there aren't more members or more NAD posts. This thread is I think 7 years old! I'm glad to see @RoadRanger and @mapleglo chime in recently. I just bought an SVT210av and have a PF-350. I also have two Gallien Kruegers-- MB200 and MB500. Honestly as another poster noted, the 210 sounds excellent with my MB200. It seems to have a lot more "punch" than the PF-350. I know it's harsh to say that, but there just seems to be a more growly defined sound from the MB200.

Also, there's kind of an "edgy tone" coming out of the PF-350 that I have to dial out with the tone controls. To get rid of a kind of clunky tone I have to turn the PF-350's treble to 9:00, mid, 3:00, and bass, 3:00. Gain is 12:00 and master on 12:00. And this is in the living room! Now, the MB200, I'm looking at the settings: gain volume at 9:00, bass and mid at noon, midbass and bass at 1:00. It's not only punchier, but louder than the PF-350.

I like to use all my tone controls nearly flat, including my active basses. I'm not used to having to manipulate the tone controls so much as I am on the PF-350. But maybe that's the nature of the beast and maybe I'm not giving it a fair chance yet. It has had moments where it did sound nice.

I'm wondering-- any of you have both the PF-350 and the SVT Micro head? Besides the obvious power differences, what do you think of the differences in tone and controls? I'm thinking if I don't keep the PF-350 I might pick up the SVT micro. But boy, the MB200 sounds nice through the cab...
Click to expand...

I don't have a PF-350, but I do have the PF-800 which feature a similar tone stack? I don't know.

When I first got the Micro VR stack, I was playing with a loud rock band - two guitars and a hard hitting drummer. The amp/stack kept up, but just barely. I had the main and gain nearly dimed, but had to lower the bass and boost the mids to prevent the speakers from farting. So yeah, there's some power there, but I couldn't get the low end I wanted. I picked up the PF-800 (Amazon special for $400) and a used 810e, and frankly, it blew away the VR stack, which I suppose is expected. I remember the first time I brought the 800/810e to practice, the neighbors called the cops. Heh.

Anyway, if the "edgy" tone you speak of is that classic Ampeg sound, then yeah, you need to reduce the treble to get rid of it. I personally like that sound, and the nice mild break up of the 810e speakers at higher volumes really defines the sound in my head for a rock bass guitar. I don't hear that same kind of mild breakup with the 210 AV speakers. I do get it with the custom 2x10 cabs I built. That is literally half an SVT. The 210 AV cabs are not. I have had the PF-800 hooked up to the 210 AV cabs, but was afraid to push it as it can easily over power them.

For my current band, we do mostly country, so I prefer a deeper, less grindy sound for the bass. So yeah, less treble, more bass. The Micro VR head can do it, but the cabs are not up to the task IMHO.

I believe @JimmyM prefers the PF-350 to the Micro VR with the 210AV cabs, if memory serves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jwindham and alaskaleftybass
#223
For home use only, here is my Micro VR Stack and my trustworthy P Bass strung with TI's. I just love the tone that I am getting with the VR and the P Bass!

C360_2017-12-29-23-13-15-873.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hot Rats, Hnz, Wild at Heart and 4 others
#225
The Micro VR stack is a lovely low volume solution but even with two SVT210AV cabs has proven twice not to be loud enough for my bands. The Micro VR head however can drive an Ampeg 810 cab louder than I need. I don't think any of my heads could drive the SVT210AV cabs appropriately as the cabs are the limiting factor. Give the Micro VR enough cone area at 4 ohms and it is very capable. I know it looks like a toy but it's a genuine 260 watt class AB head.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Son of Wobble, mapleglo and alaskaleftybass
#226
Sparky Mark said:
The Micro VR stack is a lovely low volume solution but even with two SVT210AV cabs has proven twice not to be loud enough for my bands. The Micro VR head however can drive an Ampeg 810 cab louder than I need. I don't think any of my heads could drive the SVT210AV cabs appropriately as the cabs are the limiting factor. Give the Micro VR enough cone area at 4 ohms and it is very capable. I know it looks like a toy but it's a genuine 260 watt class AB head.
Click to expand...
Cool about the head, too bad about the cab. I just bought a 210 for home rehearsal and it sounds very nice and full, now that I know that i need to crank the bass and cut the highs to get the sound I want.

What do you think causes the limitations to the cab? Inferior speakers? Small cab? I read that @mapleglo gave it her all and even gigged with 2 x 210's but eventually reverted to using two specially built 210 cabs that were literally identical chambers to the SVT810 cab. If Ampeg really wanted to up the game, maybe they could offer one more variety of 210's-- Actual SVT810 chambers like Mapleglo had made. That would really add another level of portable pro equipment to their line.

@mapleglo if you don't mind me asking-- how did you come up with that idea and who built your cabs? Seems like a million dollar idea to me...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Son of Wobble
#227
alaskaleftybass said:
Cool about the head, too bad about the cab. I just bought a 210 for home rehearsal and it sounds very nice and full, now that I know that i need to crank the bass and cut the highs to get the sound I want.

What do you think causes the limitations to the cab? Inferior speakers? Small cab? I read that @mapleglo gave it her all and even gigged with 2 x 210's but eventually reverted to using two specially built 210 cabs that were literally identical chambers to the SVT810 cab. If Ampeg really wanted to up the game, maybe they could offer one more variety of 210's-- Actual SVT810 chambers like Mapleglo had made. That would really add another level of portable pro equipment to their line.

@mapleglo if you don't mind me asking-- how did you come up with that idea and who built your cabs? Seems like a million dollar idea to me...
Click to expand...

Thanks, I built the cabs. I had a second SVT-810e that I got from CL at a great price, but wanted to be able to move the cab myself in my (then) car, a Honda Civic. I found a couple of empty Ampeg S-210 cabs from the classifieds here, and they measured out to almost exactly the volume of the interior SVT chambers. So I plugged the port, and loaded the cabs. They sounded great. I built a second pair to match. I used Duratex which provides a bit more protection than the Ampeg tolex on the S210 cabs, and have been using them ever since, except for that one gig.

The build thread is here.

Regarding the limitations of the SVT-210AV, I believe it is the very thing that makes the cabs attractive - their size. They are smaller than the SVT chambers, and that limits their bass response. Perhaps the speakers are also somewhat limited, though further testing would be required.

Here's a comparison pic:

210scomparewd.jpg


My cabs are taller, wider, and deeper (and heavier).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hnz, Wild at Heart, Sparky Mark and 2 others
#228
mapleglo said:
Thanks, I built the cabs. I had a second SVT-810e that I got from CL at a great price, but wanted to be able to move the cab myself in my (then) car, a Honda Civic. I found a couple of empty Ampeg S-210 cabs from the classifieds here, and they measured out to almost exactly the volume of the interior SVT chambers. So I plugged the port, and loaded the cabs. They sounded great. I built a second pair to match. I used Duratex which provides a bit more protection than the Ampeg tolex on the S210 cabs, and have been using them ever since, except for that one gig.

The build thread is here.

Regarding the limitations of the SVT-210AV, I believe it is the very thing that makes the cabs attractive - their size. They are smaller than the SVT chambers, and that limits their bass response. Perhaps the speakers are also somewhat limited, though further testing would be required.

Here's a comparison pic:

View attachment 3097885

My cabs are taller, wider, and deeper (and heavier).
Click to expand...
Thank you @mapleglo. I believe there's some expression about having two out of three, but you can't have all three? I think that might apply to the SVT210av's-- weight and size but now volume. I dunno. I like the little 210. I'm thinking of keeping it just for what it is.

EDIT: For my lower volume band needs, maybe one of those S210's would be enough with my PF-350. But it seems they're hard to find. And I would listen to the cab with/without ports before making a permanent change. I kinda like out of control deep! :laugh:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Son of Wobble and mapleglo
#229
alaskaleftybass said:
I like the little 210.
Click to expand...

I like my Micro VR stack too. I love the portability, and at the right volume, they sound great. If I ever join an acoustic band, I will totally use the Micro VR. And it's perfect for practice.

And yeah, the S210's do not come up very often. These were the only pair I ever saw.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sparky Mark, Rumbledore and alaskaleftybass
#230
mapleglo said:
Thanks, I built the cabs. I had a second SVT-810e that I got from CL at a great price, but wanted to be able to move the cab myself in my (then) car, a Honda Civic. I found a couple of empty Ampeg S-210 cabs from the classifieds here, and they measured out to almost exactly the volume of the interior SVT chambers. So I plugged the port, and loaded the cabs. They sounded great. I built a second pair to match. I used Duratex which provides a bit more protection than the Ampeg tolex on the S210 cabs, and have been using them ever since, except for that one gig.

The build thread is here.

Regarding the limitations of the SVT-210AV, I believe it is the very thing that makes the cabs attractive - their size. They are smaller than the SVT chambers, and that limits their bass response. Perhaps the speakers are also somewhat limited, though further testing would be required.

Here's a comparison pic:

View attachment 3097885

My cabs are taller, wider, and deeper (and heavier).
Click to expand...


These are so rad!

I want you to build ME a pair! :-)

I have of course been reading your threads on the micro and 210 cab, as I was considering the setup for portability. But your observations talked me off the cabs, as did Ampeg's own demo video of a V-4B with a pair of SVT210avs, wherein it is clear the cabs are distorting at relative low level.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mapleglo and alaskaleftybass
#232
Here's my little corner of the band's practice space.

Practice space

Practice space

gear at practice space

I have the MicroVR stack there, and today brought my Precision and Rickenbacker. We don't practice that loud, but I was having trouble hearing myself. The guitarist actually had a 4x10 Ampeg cab there, and asked if I wanted to use that, so I hooked up the Micro VR amp to it. The difference is night and day. And this is nothing against the 2x10 cabs - they are designed for easy moving and lower volume settings, but the head really shines through a full size cab.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hnz, Wild at Heart, Yetiparty and 3 others
#234
mapleglo said:
Here's my little corner of the band's practice space.

Practice space

Practice space

gear at practice space

... a 4x10 Ampeg cab there, and asked if I wanted to use that, so I hooked up the Micro VR amp to it. The difference is night and day. And this is nothing against the 2x10 cabs - they are designed for easy moving and lower volume settings, but the head really shines through a full size cab...
Click to expand...

Well, it ìs actually night and day. The SVT 210 AV is a sealed cab which is not particularly famous for it's bottom end. The 410 you have there is the SVT410HLF, if my eyes don't deceive me. Which is a front ported cab that is the one from Ampeg with the most bottom end there is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: High Camp and mapleglo
#235
Hi, I have2x112 AV cabs and I run these as my main rig with an SVT pro3. It can be overkill at some smaller venues and as I prefer a driven punchy sound and like to crank my head/s fairly hard to achieve this, though not to the point where I totally run out of headroom. I was wondering if anyone runs the Micro VR with 2 AV112 cabs and what could I expect tonaly as well as any comparisons to the SVT pro3?
 
#237
rickbass1 said:
Hi, I have2x112 AV cabs and I run these as my main rig with an SVT pro3. It can be overkill at some smaller venues and as I prefer a driven punchy sound and like to crank my head/s fairly hard to achieve this, though not to the point where I totally run out of headroom. I was wondering if anyone runs the Micro VR with 2 AV112 cabs and what could I expect tonaly as well as any comparisons to the SVT pro3?
Click to expand...
Micro VR sounds great but operates a little different from the 3 Pro, and with all the tubes in the 3 Pro as well as its more deluxe EQ section, you may prefer it. And honestly, you should prefer it considering that it's $1100 new and the Micro VR is $300 :D But the Micro VR darn sure has a sound, and if you like drive, you can turn the gain knob past 1:00 and get it. I think that for an extra hundy, a PF500 will be a little closer to your tonal goals with the 3 Pro since it has a very similar EQ section and base tone with all knobs at noon, but I do love that Micro VR. Hard not to love a head that weighs 10 lbs and looks like a mini SVT!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 12BitSlab, rickbass1 and mapleglo
#238
JimmyM said:
Micro VR sounds great but operates a little different from the 3 Pro, and with all the tubes in the 3 Pro as well as its more deluxe EQ section, you may prefer it. And honestly, you should prefer it considering that it's $1100 new and the Micro VR is $300 :D But the Micro VR darn sure has a sound, and if you like drive, you can turn the gain knob past 1:00 and get it. I think that for an extra hundy, a PF500 will be a little closer to your tonal goals with the 3 Pro since it has a very similar EQ section and base tone with all knobs at noon, but I do love that Micro VR. Hard not to love a head that weighs 10 lbs and looks like a mini SVT!
Click to expand...
Thanks JimmyM, much appreciated. I owned the GK mb200 for awhile and am looking for that sort of volume vibe. I sold it because it was ever so slightly underpowered through a 8ohm GK neo 212. I’m thinking now that I own 2x 112AV cabs and can run at 4ohms I should be able to get a little extra juice. Either side of 1oclock is usually about where I like to run the gain usually btw 12&3oclock depending on different genres/bands. Im assuming the PF500 would probably get me in similar volume ranges with the SVT pro3 so also need to think about not overpowering other musicians volumewise when trying to get a driven sound. Leaning towards the microVR given discussion so far re volume, sound and tone.Cheers
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JimmyM
#239
Beware Mr Rickbass! If you love the sound of your pro3 and dig that of the Micro VR, you might find the classD pf500 is not giving you quite that.
It is just my two cents, but of all the classD bass amps out there in the mid price range only the GK MB200 gives you a decent sound. Not the svt pro7, not the pf350, 500, not Markbass, Genzbenz or TC... I have played and gigged them all and they all lacked dynamics and a good response to your fingers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rickbass1

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back