Note the sensitivity issue in an earlier post.
5.3R version on the 4R tap as in the real world the inpedances of both lots of cabs will drop in the midrange to their apprx DC resistances and so be nearer to a correct match with the 4R tap.
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.
Peavey Classic 400 - Mega Thread - Part II
- Thread starter WillPlay4Food
- Start date
5.3R version on the 4R tap as in the real world the inpedances of both lots of cabs will drop in the midrange to their apprx DC resistances and so be nearer to a correct match with the 4R tap.
The output transformer on the Classic 400 is a strange animal, and by that, I mean that the impedance settings don't mean a whole lot, especially after you change the tubes from stock...especially when using Sovtek 6550s!
If I had to run a 2.7 ohm load, I'd use (and have used) the 4 ohm setting.
If I had to run a 5.3 ohm load, I'd still use the 4 ohm setting.
You would be safe whichever route you choose. Try them both and see which one you think sounds the best.
BTW...if you have Sovtek 6550WE or WD, the 5.3 route would probably be the closest match. I believe the OT wants to see a 6 ohm load on the 4 ohm setting with the Sovteks. You'd still be safe either way.
If I had to run a 2.7 ohm load, I'd use (and have used) the 4 ohm setting.
If I had to run a 5.3 ohm load, I'd still use the 4 ohm setting.
You would be safe whichever route you choose. Try them both and see which one you think sounds the best.
BTW...if you have Sovtek 6550WE or WD, the 5.3 route would probably be the closest match. I believe the OT wants to see a 6 ohm load on the 4 ohm setting with the Sovteks. You'd still be safe either way.
Cool info.... FYI: I'm running the Sovtek KT88 design that is now being sold as reissued Tung Sol 6550.
Could I run a C400 with a Berg NV215 + NV610 with those cables that you referenced earlier Mr.Hart??
If so, from your experience - how do you think that would sound.
I know I like the cabs, but I'm not sure how these cabs would sound in combination with this head?
Comments if you would, from all of you valve addicted gents, especially C400 owners.
Dale.
If so, from your experience - how do you think that would sound.
I know I like the cabs, but I'm not sure how these cabs would sound in combination with this head?
Comments if you would, from all of you valve addicted gents, especially C400 owners.
Dale.
- Apr 3, 2003
- 35,515
- 19,942
- Disclosures
- Editor-in-Chief, Bass Gear Magazine
The Classic 400 sounds very good, IME/IMHO, through either the NV215 or NV610, and both at once is definitely an experience you won't soon forget!!!
Hey Dale, I had mine made to connect a pair of 4 ohm Schroeder cabinets.... it worked flawlessly.
Having heard a NV215 AND a NV610 separately but in the same room the other weekend.... I'm sure the C400 would be a religious experience!
Excellent excellent, glad to hear that it should work - it's my idea of a dream rig of doom.
I won't be able to get both cabs at once without having to pay for a divorce lawyer at the same time.
Contrary to the most peoples feedback here, I think that I'm going to get the NV215 first, from what I know and from my own evaluations listening to this cab, I think it would be my main squeeze with the addition of the NV610 for "super gigs". I still suffer from pipe dreams at 38!!!
I should have my C400 next week and then I need to get to ClubBass in TO to order the NV215.
I'll post some pics if everything works out - thanks for your feedback Tom and James.
I won't be able to get both cabs at once without having to pay for a divorce lawyer at the same time.
Contrary to the most peoples feedback here, I think that I'm going to get the NV215 first, from what I know and from my own evaluations listening to this cab, I think it would be my main squeeze with the addition of the NV610 for "super gigs". I still suffer from pipe dreams at 38!!!
I should have my C400 next week and then I need to get to ClubBass in TO to order the NV215.
I'll post some pics if everything works out - thanks for your feedback Tom and James.
- Apr 3, 2003
- 35,515
- 19,942
- Disclosures
- Editor-in-Chief, Bass Gear Magazine
I have a Classic 400 I use with an NV 610. The amp has tremendous low end. Personally I have never heard an amp with more slam in the bass.
Based on 215 vs 610 comparisons that generally say the 215 is a bit deeper sounding and the 610 a bit more punchy I would recommend the 610 first. Seems to me that the 215 would be a better cab to add as a second. I should mention I have never heard the 215 but I suspect the 610 would be a better standalone chioce with the Classic due to the very bassy natural voice of the amp.
Tom do people think you are an engineer because you own so much bass gear?
the NV215 is my dream big cab, too. though my next cab purchase will be an HT/EX-112, probably used, and with the chrome grille if i can find one.
i say why not go the distance, though. if i'm getting two huge cabs for an über-rig, it's going to be two NV215s. i've played them both. i don't need any 10s.
robb.
That'd be my first choice, too.
I played through both open minded... both really nice cabs. Honestly I much prefered DEVILMAN's 2x10 sitting on a 1x18 (both ported
)
Good advice too - thanks. I really like the low end and the high end of the NV215 though, it seems to have an extended range compared to the NV610......NV610 has that great punch though.....thinking......thinking......
He's what I would call an "engineerly" - gives excellent advice without legal responsiblities
I played through both open minded... both really nice cabs. Honestly I much prefered DEVILMAN's 2x10 sitting on a 1x18 (both ported
I hear ya, I'm on a ported cab hiatus however - after using them steady for 15yrs I have spent the last year considering this monster rig and my passion right now is definately with sealed cabs.
I used to run a 210 and 118 with an old trace ss head back in the UK, great, no scratch that, fantastic sound IMO.
Then again if you are set on getting both I guess it doesnt matter. I have been considering an NV 215 too but its not necessary!
- Apr 3, 2003
- 35,515
- 19,942
- Disclosures
- Editor-in-Chief, Bass Gear Magazine
LOL! No, that is actually an honest disclaimer. I do tend to get somewhat technical in my posts sometimes, and I'd like to be clear that while I do my best to post accurate comments, I am not an engineer, and I definitely endorse that whole 'take my comments with a grain of salt' business.
- Apr 3, 2003
- 35,515
- 19,942
- Disclosures
- Editor-in-Chief, Bass Gear Magazine
He's what I would call an "engineerly" - gives excellent advice without legal responsiblities
Heh, now I may have to change my signature line!
i think i keep everything pretty close to 6. mids are at 400, i think, and gain is near 3. sometimes i blend. i think i keep the presence pretty low, and i know i keep resonance at 0. it's just not wise with a single HT-112.
robb.
robb.
You'll pretty much always want to defeat DDT on a 400.
I use the blend a lot.
I don't use the 400 a lot, but here's what I usually do...
CLEAN:
PRE-2.5
LOW-6
LOW CUT-IN
LOW BOOST-OUT
MID-4
MID SHIFT-400
HIGH-8.5
HIGH BOOST-OUT
CRUNCH:
PRE-10
LOW-6.5
LOW BOOST-OUT
MID-10
HIGH-6
HIGH BOOST-OUT
POST-3
RESONANCE-4
PRESENCE-0
DDT-DEFEATED(IN)
I use the blend a lot.
I don't use the 400 a lot, but here's what I usually do...
CLEAN:
PRE-2.5
LOW-6
LOW CUT-IN
LOW BOOST-OUT
MID-4
MID SHIFT-400
HIGH-8.5
HIGH BOOST-OUT
CRUNCH:
PRE-10
LOW-6.5
LOW BOOST-OUT
MID-10
HIGH-6
HIGH BOOST-OUT
POST-3
RESONANCE-4
PRESENCE-0
DDT-DEFEATED(IN)
