• 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.

Old Acoustic amps vs modern power amps

#41
I bought this 320 back in 85. When I got out of playing in bands in 89. I just could not sell it. I put it in it's home made raod case, shut the lid and it stayed in there until 2 years ago when an old buddy and I just desided to start jamming together for kicks. I went out and bought this Hartke Cab and hooked the 320 to it. Fired it up and turned right on. That was 19 years of it not being use and sealed up and dust free. It pretty much still had all of my old setting too. WOW! Only thing is when I went to shut it off. The power switch did not shut off anymore. LOL! This baby never let me down and still sounds great!
I wondered how many bass players still use these today.
mycharvelbass007.jpg
 
#43
I've somewhat recently fallen in love with the vintage Acoustics (who could resist that awesome baby blue colour?). I'm not super fond of the typical "modern" tone and I like a warm, middy tone which seems to be looked at as vintage. The old Acoustics deliver in this department as far as I can tell. My 140 sounds absolutely killer and it held its own for power when tested against an SVT-3 Pro through an Ampeg 8x10" and my 140 sounded better to my ears. I can't wait to get my 300 fixed up (it's the power section of the 370) so that I can finally experience the pant-flapping volumes that 370 owners always talk about. I don't know how other people like it, but I love the ACC sound and it's loud enough (should be moreso soon), so I love it.
ZiggyDude said:
Oh - just to add a thought. These old Acoustics are old. If they don't sound right then don't blame the amp. I just had mine serviced and they replaced the output transistors. OH MY GOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...
Is that a bad OMG or a good OMG? :hmm:
 
#44
KJung said:
Having lived through that era, and also somewhat regularly playing the older Acoustics that come through Low Down Sound on consignment, most of the comments are based on 'fond, wistful memories' than reality IMO and IME.

The Acoustics sounded great, and just like the old GK400/800, they still sound great, and they have a signature tone that many like.

Do the huge, heavy, low wattage Acoustics match up to the much smaller, much lighter, much more powerful current SS amps... not even close. However, the Acoustics do have a meaty, mid punchy tone to them that still sounds good (as do the GK's.) However, the low end response when pushed at high volumes brings me back to reality with these heads, and quickly reminds you that these are much lower powered than the wonderful SS heads currently available.

That being said, many of the new modern SS heads are voiced to be very wide, even and clean, and this can be a turnoff to those looking for the 'dirty grind' of some of the earlier SS executions.

IMO and IME.
Click to expand...

hmmmmm. my old '81 Acoustic 320 is as loud and capable of playing as clean as my Avalon VT737SP/crown xti 2000 (2K watts bridged). it's not that heavy either, but yes, it's heavier than the new micro heads. it can have an ultra wide frequency response, or have the vintage vibe type of tone, and anything in between. it feels twice as loud as my Eden WT550-B and louder than my GK 1001RB (700 watts), so i would say that the Acoustic's wattage was way under-rated, as well as their tone.
 
#47
johnk_10 said:
hmmmmm. my old '81 Acoustic 320 is as loud and capable of playing as clean as my Avalon VT737SP/crown xti 2000 (2K watts bridged). it's not that heavy either, but yes, it's heavier than the new micro heads. it can have an ultra wide frequency response, or have the vintage vibe type of tone, and anything in between. it feels twice as loud as my Eden WT550-B and louder than my GK 1001RB (700 watts), so i would say that the Acoustic's wattage was way under-rated, as well as their tone.
Click to expand...

No one said they weren't loud... but again, the mid range distortion is just brutal on those things. Those big old folded horns that these heads were paired with back in the day masked most of that.

And, I've typically been unimpressed with preamps (especially studio channel strips not designed for bass) powering PA amplifiers. The tone is so wide, and most of the time the input and output gain structures between the pre and amps are not matched well, that I've rarely heard one of these that keeps up volume-wise with a simple bass head with a preamp optimized for the bass guitar, and the gain structure matched through the entire signal chain. That's kind of the other end of the spectrum from the mid present and high distortion Acoustic heads IMO.... just the opposite issue... to wide and pure.

Don Oatman of LDS has a collection of old Acoustic heads. They have a unique tone, and were really something in their time. However, hearing them now does not make me very happy.... lots of mid grit, attenuated low end.... but... still pretty darn loud!

IMO and IME.
 
#48
KJung said:
And, I've typically been unimpressed with preamps (especially studio channel strips not designed for bass) powering PA amplifiers. The tone is so wide, and most of the time the input and output gain structures between the pre and amps are not matched well, that I've rarely heard one of these that keeps up volume-wise with a simple bass head with a preamp optimized for the bass guitar, and the gain structure matched through the entire signal chain. That's kind of the other end of the spectrum from the mid present and high distortion Acoustic heads IMO.... just the opposite issue... to wide and pure.
Click to expand...

i completely disagree with this and think it's absoulte nonsense. i've owned more than 12 bass specific preamps and my channel strips blow them all out of the water in every way for bass.

bass preamps:

12preamps.jpg


channel strips:

Avalon-UA-ISA.jpg
 
#50
John, you've got the facilities -- measure the wattage and let us know. I for one will weigh in saying that I find the supposed mojo behind those old 70s solid state heads to be dubious, but I've also played through a Peavey Megabass and a Mark VI and those things FELT way louder than their rated wattages.
 
#51
Back in my full time playing days in the late 70's, I had an Acoustic 370 head paired with a Sunn Concert Bass 2x15 bottom loaded with JBL K-140s. It most certainly screamed (although I suspect that my hearing acuity was a bit better back then). ;^) It was kind of crude sounding, though. I later replaced the 370 with an early 70's Ampeg SVT which, along with that Sunn box loaded with JBLs, was the best sound I ever had ... before or since. I later tried all kinds of high end rack preamps and poweramps which were quite good, but never quite achieved the tone I got with that SVT. However, I was young, dumb and full of you-know-what and was willing to lug that bad boy all over the place. The back problems I have now that I'm in my 50's can probably be attributed to that SVT head. I've never actually heard the Thunderfunk heads, but they are a modern part of the Acoustic lineage having been modeled after (and are a "hot rodded" version of) the venerable A.M.P. BH-420 which was designed (in part, anyway) by Russ Allee who was a principal designer @ Acoustic during the golden years we are discussing here and was in on the Acoustic 360 and 370 heads (along with Steve Rabe who started A.M.P. and later SWR and most recently Raven Labs.
 
#52
believe me, my xti2000 is one LOUD mutha.
i think what Ken is saying is nice in theory, but in reality it just doesn't work out that way. IME, most bass preamps have more noise than high end channel strips, due to most of them having lesser quality preamp circuits, and it has nothing to do with gain structure, level matching, frequency response or eq.
 
#53
I think if the XTI2000 is not any louder than an Acoustic 370, then your cabinet must be a limitation there. Either that or you're hitting sound levels where you can't tell the difference.

I've used a bridged power amp of a level like the XTI2000 and I was worried about pushing my speakers out through the grill long before I ran out of juice.

I don't think I'd be afraid to crank the 370 to the max through my 15/6.
 
#54
johnk_10 said:
believe me, my xti2000 is one LOUD mutha.
i think what Ken is saying is nice in theory, but in reality it just doesn't work out that way. IME, most bass preamps have more noise than high end channel strips, due to most of them having lesser quality preamp circuits, and it has nothing to do with gain structure, level matching, frequency response or eq.
Click to expand...

Never said that channel strips aren't a bit quieter regarding noise. That's a separate issue.

Also, never said the Acoustic amps aren't loud as heck. 20 watt guitar amps are loud as heck. When you add complex midrange distortion, and you aren't generating a lot of low end, 200 watts or so can be SCREAMING loud. However, there is a cost in clean, open low end.

The old GK amps were the same way (the new ones actually have a hi pass filter switch to cut low end so that you can kind of make the new ones sound like the old ones).
 
#55
rpsands said:
I think if the XTI2000 is not any louder than an Acoustic 370, then your cabinet must be a limitation there. Either that or you're hitting sound levels where you can't tell the difference.
I don't think I'd be afraid to crank the 370 to the max through my 15/6.
Click to expand...

the cab is a whappo jr and it doesn't have much in the way of limitations, but i'd be afraid to push the xti or the acoustic 320 at max power thru it.

other amps that the 320 is easily as loud as, are my Ampeg SVT's. the SVT's actually break up earlier (in a great way though), although i use my SVT's way on the 'clean' side.
 
#59
BassmanAd said:
I have a theory that amps aren't actually any louder than they were 30 or 40 years ago, the companies just tell us they are so we keep buying them ;)
Click to expand...


HEHE!!!!

Not a bad theory..but I have to be honest here...the 370 really does seem MUCH louder than a "modern" amp of the same wattage. Now, is it? Hell, I can't say for sure, but it surely seems to be...
 
#60
KJung said:
And, I've typically been unimpressed with preamps (especially studio channel strips not designed for bass) powering PA amplifiers. The tone is so wide, and most of the time the input and output gain structures between the pre and amps are not matched well, that I've rarely heard one of these that keeps up volume-wise with a simple bass head with a preamp optimized for the bass guitar, and the gain structure matched through the entire signal chain. That's kind of the other end of the spectrum from the mid present and high distortion Acoustic heads IMO.... just the opposite issue... to wide and pure.
IMO and IME.
Click to expand...
I understand what your getting at, a stand-alone head takes a lot of the variables out of the equation. Being someone who uses, and appreciates both types of set-ups my opinion is this:

Having a preamp/channel strip with input and output level control is important. Having the ability to dial-in how hard you want to hit the front end of your preamp, how hard you want to hit the front of your power amp, and lastly how hard you want to hit your speaker cab(s) gives a whole lot of flexibility. If you add the ability to choose between Tube and SS on the front end you've got even more variations in character. The more headroom the better in this situation, I run a PLX3102, it's as loud as any bass head on the market IMO.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back