Totally agree, but some newer amps can get some quality grit on the front end, but the power section may be different, though GB gets some good sag from their design.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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 School vs. New School Amplification
- Thread starter jazztonebass
- Start date
Totally agree, but some newer amps can get some quality grit on the front end, but the power section may be different, though GB gets some good sag from their design.
Speakers and cabs are enough to drive anyone nuts.
Again, sum of all parts.
I think the density and strength of the material, the joinery, the depth of the cab, open, ported, sealed all can affect the same speakers drastically.
You can also put lousy speakers in a great cab and be less than thrilled.
You can put very high quality speakers in the wrong cab with mixed results.
In all my messing around, I'm blending complimentary drivers for some spectacular results with guitar amps.
No crossovers, just letting them do their thing.
My British Jangle Cab - Oval Back solid cherry, dove tail joints, recessed handle 25 pound unloaded.
Toss in an 18 pound EVM-12L and a Fane AXA12 52 pounds loaded and it will beat the living snot out of a typical Greenback loaded 4X12.
My Reeves/Port City OS 2X12 is more like 70 pounds with the same two speakers, but I doubt the marine birch ply
has as much affect on the tone as the cab design with bottom porting.
I'm fine with my SVT 8X10 for bass, but an AlNiCo 8X10 also makes a remarkable guitar cab.
The sealed chamber design delivers a focused punchy sound, but the very low efficiency of those old CTS AlNiCos actually cuts volume by a good 30%.
If I needed to play a small club, the SVT cab would actually be the low volume rig.
My high efficiency 2X12's are rigged for recording and playing larger venues on guitar.
I helped Bad Cat Amps knock some serious weight off their very heavy cabs, suggesting 1" poplar with dovetail joints as opposed to much heavier marine birch ply.
I still haven't decided what I'm doing about a lighter bass cab.
Sound wise, I'm content, but it would be cool to have a 15"
Again, sum of all parts.
I think the density and strength of the material, the joinery, the depth of the cab, open, ported, sealed all can affect the same speakers drastically.
You can also put lousy speakers in a great cab and be less than thrilled.
You can put very high quality speakers in the wrong cab with mixed results.
In all my messing around, I'm blending complimentary drivers for some spectacular results with guitar amps.
No crossovers, just letting them do their thing.
My British Jangle Cab - Oval Back solid cherry, dove tail joints, recessed handle 25 pound unloaded.
Toss in an 18 pound EVM-12L and a Fane AXA12 52 pounds loaded and it will beat the living snot out of a typical Greenback loaded 4X12.
My Reeves/Port City OS 2X12 is more like 70 pounds with the same two speakers, but I doubt the marine birch ply
has as much affect on the tone as the cab design with bottom porting.
I'm fine with my SVT 8X10 for bass, but an AlNiCo 8X10 also makes a remarkable guitar cab.
The sealed chamber design delivers a focused punchy sound, but the very low efficiency of those old CTS AlNiCos actually cuts volume by a good 30%.
If I needed to play a small club, the SVT cab would actually be the low volume rig.
My high efficiency 2X12's are rigged for recording and playing larger venues on guitar.
I helped Bad Cat Amps knock some serious weight off their very heavy cabs, suggesting 1" poplar with dovetail joints as opposed to much heavier marine birch ply.
I still haven't decided what I'm doing about a lighter bass cab.
Sound wise, I'm content, but it would be cool to have a 15"
Last edited:
I am really looking forward to my M800D showing up. Mine will be paired with an Audiokinesis TC212.
That I don't know.. feel free to pm me a link.That builder didn't go on some pretentious "avant-garde" guitarist's instructional video and proclaim that tubes sound better than transistors because they can more easily survive in a vacuum than a crystal lattice, did he?
Just so you better understand my opinion about Peavy.
I truly hate the sound of my Peavy Mark III, but I can't deny the value.
I bought it as an emergency stop gap and it served me well in that capacity.
The sound has always been harsh, brittle, sterile even through my SVT cab
with very fine vintage basses.
It is gathering dust in the basement, but it still serves as an emergency backup.
I truly hate the sound of my Peavy Mark III, but I can't deny the value.
I bought it as an emergency stop gap and it served me well in that capacity.
The sound has always been harsh, brittle, sterile even through my SVT cab
with very fine vintage basses.
It is gathering dust in the basement, but it still serves as an emergency backup.
I've never had the money, space or back for a tube amp and a 8x10. I had a Mesa 400 Bass (not the "+") on top of a 4x10 and 1x15 for years that I never was happy with. That's probably because it was all mix-match gear that didn't go together. I eventually swapped the two cabs for a GK 410 Neo, which I then sold when I thought I was "done" with music for a Ampeg BA115HP. I sold the head for more than I bought it for 10 years earlier, so that was nice.
I started looking at gear again when I joined a band after years of not playing to find that the concepts behind heads and cabs had completely changed. Bass players had evolved from thinking like guitar players to all sorts of high tech gadgetry for smaller gigs. Tubes are just a pain in my backside, so if I'm going to go SS I might as well go small. My Shuttle 9.0 is stupidly powerful for something that weighs 5 lbs and fits in a bag the size of a purse.
I went with the GK 112 Neo2 cabs because they were cheap and easy to get. When I first got them I thought they were too scooped sounding, but after almost a year they have relaxed into making some serious thunder. The rig is very "modern" sounding (bright, punchy, tight lows) but is so easy to move I can't imagine anything else. If I have the $$ I'd think about Aguilar cabs for a more vintage tone, but I HATE carpeted cabs. I tried the TH500 and made it distort too quickly for my tastes.
If someone offered me an SVT with a 8x10 for a ridiculous price I wouldn't say no, or turn my nose up at it if I had to play one as part of a backline. However at the moment I'm looking for practical.
I started looking at gear again when I joined a band after years of not playing to find that the concepts behind heads and cabs had completely changed. Bass players had evolved from thinking like guitar players to all sorts of high tech gadgetry for smaller gigs. Tubes are just a pain in my backside, so if I'm going to go SS I might as well go small. My Shuttle 9.0 is stupidly powerful for something that weighs 5 lbs and fits in a bag the size of a purse.
I went with the GK 112 Neo2 cabs because they were cheap and easy to get. When I first got them I thought they were too scooped sounding, but after almost a year they have relaxed into making some serious thunder. The rig is very "modern" sounding (bright, punchy, tight lows) but is so easy to move I can't imagine anything else. If I have the $$ I'd think about Aguilar cabs for a more vintage tone, but I HATE carpeted cabs. I tried the TH500 and made it distort too quickly for my tastes.
If someone offered me an SVT with a 8x10 for a ridiculous price I wouldn't say no, or turn my nose up at it if I had to play one as part of a backline. However at the moment I'm looking for practical.
hasbeen
Commercial User
- Sep 23, 2004
- 4,808
- 2,679
- Disclosures
- Executive Vice President, The Adam Hall Group
I agree. Andy and I have set up MANY blindfold tests in product development. I would usually be the tester as he and Jeff changed things around.
I think this is a big thing. What works well for guitar doesnt work for bass. Mixed speakers tossed in a sealed cab? No thanks, that is junk for bass. 1" ply? Couldnt give me a cab built out of that. Tube amps are fine, and I love mine. That said even at 400 watts, I run out of head room from time to time. My 3,000 watt power amp is easy to tote around.
hasbeen
Commercial User
- Sep 23, 2004
- 4,808
- 2,679
- Disclosures
- Executive Vice President, The Adam Hall Group
- Feb 12, 2006
- 61,035
- 5
- 220,957
- Disclosures
- Development Engineer-Mesa Boogie, Development Engineer-Genzler (pedals), Product Support-Genz Benz
and everything would go well until we pushed the RED button sending a high voltage jolt through the tester's chair. From that point, everything always "jumped sideways"
- Feb 12, 2006
- 61,035
- 5
- 220,957
- Disclosures
- Development Engineer-Mesa Boogie, Development Engineer-Genzler (pedals), Product Support-Genz Benz
Of course gyro, communications/data logging and flight control circuits don't sound good for audio fidelity, that's not what they are designed for. I am uniquely qualified to make this point because my father designed attitude control algorithems and circuits for the Mariner (Mars) project back in the late 1960's. I asked him how his circuits would sound for audio and he just rolled my eyes knowing full well the kind of discussion this has become.
PCBs done right can be every bit as good AND even better for audio than hand wiring. There is plenty of premium studio gear built from PCB construction, where low noise, repeatability from unit to unit, and absolute "fidelity" are critical.
Your wants musically are not everyone elses. There are lots of cats who want to plug an SVT in to two 810's and then dime it.
hasbeen
Commercial User
- Sep 23, 2004
- 4,808
- 2,679
- Disclosures
- Executive Vice President, The Adam Hall Group
and everything would go well until we pushed the RED button sending a high voltage jolt through the tester's chair. From that point, everything always "jumped sideways"
I still have twitches because of that.
hasbeen
Commercial User
- Sep 23, 2004
- 4,808
- 2,679
- Disclosures
- Executive Vice President, The Adam Hall Group
[QUOTE="agedhorse, post:
PCBs done right can be every bit as good AND even better for audio than hand wiring. There is plenty of premium studio gear built from PCB construction, where low noise, repeatability from unit to unit, and absolute "fidelity" are critical.[/QUOTE]
+1000. That repeatability factor is huge.
PCBs done right can be every bit as good AND even better for audio than hand wiring. There is plenty of premium studio gear built from PCB construction, where low noise, repeatability from unit to unit, and absolute "fidelity" are critical.[/QUOTE]
+1000. That repeatability factor is huge.
Most of that fine studio gear is dedicated to the capture side and post production signal processing, more than the sound source.
Various tube and FET preamps and outboard gear are used for a very clean uncolored sound or a warmer vintage sound,
but all of that is intended to capture the sound source.
Going D/I with the right bass through the right console, can still deliver great results, but in the wrong hands,
can turn out sterile, clinical and lifeless.
The technical over-think and over the top perfection of the circuit can actually squeeze the very life out of a track or the mix.
Those same high end studios spend a fortune attempting to replicate the sounds of the 60's and 70's and sometimes forget that what made those old recordings so great were the imperfections of a live performance, fuzzy tube warmth and bleed between the tracks.
Various tube and FET preamps and outboard gear are used for a very clean uncolored sound or a warmer vintage sound,
but all of that is intended to capture the sound source.
Going D/I with the right bass through the right console, can still deliver great results, but in the wrong hands,
can turn out sterile, clinical and lifeless.
The technical over-think and over the top perfection of the circuit can actually squeeze the very life out of a track or the mix.
Those same high end studios spend a fortune attempting to replicate the sounds of the 60's and 70's and sometimes forget that what made those old recordings so great were the imperfections of a live performance, fuzzy tube warmth and bleed between the tracks.
The traditional spec's for amplifiers are usually based on steady state sine waves because they are easy to measure, RMS power, THD @ 1KHz, -3dB frequency response. I think most of the "color" that differentiates amps (especially class d audio + switching PS from Linear AB + transformer PS) actually comes from the transient or impulse response of the system. The attack and decay properties are so important, yet so hard to characterize. Maybe a standard test waveform could be adopted to provide comparisons, however it would have to be measured after the speaker, as it is in integral part of the transient response.
I may only know enough to be dangerous, but I've consulted with million dollar studios who were tearing their hair out trying to replicate every detail of the Abbey Road signal chain, the studio gear, tape decks, the amps, speakers, the guitars, the mics etc.
Beyond not having the Beatles to work with, the first mistake was trying to replicate that sound with discrete solo tracks.
The other thing they missed was that early on, the Beatles guitars were most likely outfitted with flat wound strings.
I keep telling them, stop trying to over-think rock and roll.
They were thinking as engineers dedicated to perfection, but that very perfection was killing the sound.
Beyond not having the Beatles to work with, the first mistake was trying to replicate that sound with discrete solo tracks.
The other thing they missed was that early on, the Beatles guitars were most likely outfitted with flat wound strings.
I keep telling them, stop trying to over-think rock and roll.
They were thinking as engineers dedicated to perfection, but that very perfection was killing the sound.
