Pondering Some New Ideas, Need Some Input

[dbase]

That’s hilarious, Bill! I worked for what was left of RCA in Camden until a couple of years ago and can confirm that it hasn’t changed.

Our instructor at Philadelphia Wireless worked at RCA during the day and taught electronics at night. He had that as a multible choice on a test. Somethng to do with capaitance reaction measurements in circuits. One of the answers was "The RCH factor".. You could tell when anyone came to that answer, you would hear a little snicker.

 

[dbase]

Did I forget to mention.. a backlit front panel so you can see what the knobs are for when your on a dark stage.

 

[agedhorse]

It should

• have the irreducible set of inputs and corresponding controls that characterize the Bass 400+

• sound and feel credibly like playing through 4 x 12AX7 and 12 x 6L6 tubes.

An FX loop is optional. (I wouldn't want it.)

The dual input feature of the Bass 400 is something that the vast majority of players aren't interested in, which is why tube heads designed after say 2000 no longer have this feature. Because of this, and the space it requires, it's unlikely to make the cut.

The FX loop is pretty much required because a good number of players use it for not just line level effects but as a post eq send (preamp output) and a power amp input.

In general, the features would need to appeal to the majority of players.

Have you played the Boogie channel of the TT yet?

 

[agedhorse]

I though mesa in the guitar world made an amp that could create most sounds of their legendary amps. So point being, a rack head bass version that could cop 400/400+ m9, titan, m pulse, wd, tt, d800/+ ect… would be on my must have list.

The problem with this conceptually is that the architecture of these amps and their corresponding feature sets are so different that it would become a user hostile front panel interface in a hurry... knobs and switches that did different things or nothing at all depending on the model.

This is probably not even slightly something that you would be interested in but I am throwing it out there just in case there could be a product fit here for MB. I know some players that are migrating to a clean 1000 watt power amp only and putting their favorite preamps ahead of the power amp.

They just run a Noble or Capo or whatever pre into the power amp. Probably not a thing but throwing in the pile just in case lol...

You can do this with the effects return (power amp input) on all of the models except the D-350 and D-800, but you can use the AUX input on these to access the power amp input.

I’m unlikely to buy an amp head at this time but I’m curious about this thread’s direction.

Any thoughts on a similar Buster influenced design?

IMO, it (and the D-180) were just a little too quirky and one trick pony-ish amps to be able to extrapolate in into an amp that has broad appeal.

 

[monsterthompson]

IMO, it (and the D-180) were just a little too quirky and one trick pony-ish amps to be able to extrapolate in into an amp that has broad appeal.

I can understand that perspective.

 

[onda'bass]

@agedhorse I thank you for the response. I was honest, but not realistic.

 

[agedhorse]

@agedhorse I thank you for the response. I was honest, but not realistic.

It's just not practical, I do appreciate your comments however because this is as much a broad information gathering exercise ans anything.

 

[sunbeast]

I put alot of my 2 cents in the TT800 thread over the years as someone who played a 400+ for years and still think of it as perhaps my favorite all-around bass amp.

I agree with @Wasnex about alot of what made those amps great to me the way I used them- the authoritative low-mid punch combined with a really cutting high-mid edge/grind and some of the best preamp overdrive I've ever heard in any amplifier (combined with a great-sounding power amp saturation on larger stages of course).

The TT Boogie channel definitely has some of the character that defined the sound of the 400+ for me (the heft and some of the upper clarity/cut), but misses some key elements which eventually led me towards trading mine for a WD (which I LOVE!):
- the push-pull "Shift" options on the 400+ took it from the typical smooth Fender-type sound to something much punchier and grindier with ease (not just when driven, also when using cleanish tones). The Shift control on the TT seemed too subtle to really match this. The Super 400 pedal by Master Effects seemed to nail this much better (getting that pedal was when I decided I could move on from the TT800).
- the graphic EQ on the 400+ allowed me to sculpt the mids in so many ways beyond the typical mild scoop of the Fender tonestack. I could use the passive tonestack to tighten the drive tone and the graphic after the gain stages to fill in what was cut in the passive stage. The TT preamp by comparison had me boosting the bass too much to fatten things up at the expense of the drive tone that could then turn too fuzzy and uneven for my taste.
- more on the drive tone- the preamp drive of the 400+ excelled at tight grindy/growly drive on the "Vintage" channel, the TT drive for me was much smoother, fuzzy, compressed, and seemed to fart out on the lower notes once the higher notes got where I liked them (uneven in a way that the 400+ wasn't). Not sure if the EQ settings contributed as described in the last point, but I did tend to set the passive EQ on my 400+ much brighter and tighter then add more chunk using the graphic EQ which really worked great. I actually find the WD800 drive/saturation much more pleasing than the TT, though neither sounds much like the 400+ drive at all.

In all, I found the TT to be much smoother and "hi-fi" than my 400+. It was a pleasing sound, but more of a mallet than the hammer that the 400+ could be. The 400+ could be smooth and hi-fi as well (particularly on the "Modern" channel) but could really do alot of things well (I used it for everything from country to punk to death metal!). Interestingly, I think the Mesa Prodigy/Strategy went far in the other direction- accentuating that "hammer" thing at the expense of the softer sides. The 400/+ were really the perfect middle ground for me, though the Prodigy I still have is a fantastic amp too and the weight and footprint made it an easy choice/compromise.

 

[tombowlus]

I know this is more of a D-180 thing, but I always really liked the cascading gain stages. One of my favorite "tube preamp overdrive" tones.

As for the Bass 400/400+, what I like is their particular level of harmonic content (suspecting it's mostly even-order). They have a very full tone, but it's also harmonically exciting, which I think as a sense of "sonic texture" that I find very desireable.

 

[MCF]

I put alot of my 2 cents in the TT800 thread over the years as someone who played a 400+ for years and still think of it as perhaps my favorite all-around bass amp.

I agree with @Wasnex about alot of what made those amps great to me the way I used them- the authoritative low-mid punch combined with a really cutting high-mid edge/grind and some of the best preamp overdrive I've ever heard in any amplifier (combined with a great-sounding power amp saturation on larger stages of course).

The TT Boogie channel definitely has some of the character that defined the sound of the 400+ for me (the heft and some of the upper clarity/cut), but misses some key elements which eventually led me towards trading mine for a WD (which I LOVE!):
- the push-pull "Shift" options on the 400+ took it from the typical smooth Fender-type sound to something much punchier and grindier with ease (not just when driven, also when using cleanish tones). The Shift control on the TT seemed too subtle to really match this. The Super 400 pedal by Master Effects seemed to nail this much better (getting that pedal was when I decided I could move on from the TT800).
- the graphic EQ on the 400+ allowed me to sculpt the mids in so many ways beyond the typical mild scoop of the Fender tonestack. I could use the passive tonestack to tighten the drive tone and the graphic after the gain stages to fill in what was cut in the passive stage. The TT preamp by comparison had me boosting the bass too much to fatten things up at the expense of the drive tone that could then turn too fuzzy and uneven for my taste.
- more on the drive tone- the preamp drive of the 400+ excelled at tight grindy/growly drive on the "Vintage" channel, the TT drive for me was much smoother, fuzzy, compressed, and seemed to fart out on the lower notes once the higher notes got where I liked them (uneven in a way that the 400+ wasn't). Not sure if the EQ settings contributed as described in the last point, but I did tend to set the passive EQ on my 400+ much brighter and tighter then add more chunk using the graphic EQ which really worked great. I actually find the WD800 drive/saturation much more pleasing than the TT, though neither sounds much like the 400+ drive at all.

In all, I found the TT to be much smoother and "hi-fi" than my 400+. It was a pleasing sound, but more of a mallet than the hammer that the 400+ could be. The 400+ could be smooth and hi-fi as well (particularly on the "Modern" channel) but could really do alot of things well (I used it for everything from country to punk to death metal!). Interestingly, I think the Mesa Prodigy/Strategy went far in the other direction- accentuating that "hammer" thing at the expense of the softer sides. The 400/+ were really the perfect middle ground for me, though the Prodigy I still have is a fantastic amp too and the weight and footprint made it an easy choice/compromise.

This is a great post. So You like the ME Super 400? I’ve waffled back and forth on getting the ME Super 800 to add that other prominent California based amp maker’s (GK) tone. I’m looking into actually finding a way to use two preamps and the effects return of the Subway channel (any switch maybe will work?) to get even more versatility from the TT.

 

[Thegreatzambini]

I think it would be cool if you could make a modern version of a lead sled, where, they use neodymium for the power transformers to reduce their weight….

 

[Thegreatzambini]

I recall somebody here mentioning those synergy amps where you can swap modules….markbass had a similar idea years ago and I don’t know why it wasn’t more popular. Momark it was

 

[agedhorse]

I think it would be cool if you could make a modern version of a lead sled, where, they use neodymium for the power transformers to reduce their weight….

It would be cool, but Neo magnetic material isn’t going to work.

That said, I typically prefer designing transformers around low loss, high efficiency magnetic steel because I can get higher performance at lower weight. Unfortunately it’s not enough to save more than about 10-15% of the component’s weight.

 

[agedhorse]

As a follow-up question, would a Carbine inspired amp along these lines be more or less interesting?

 

[Mixoso]

I may be alone but I would love a simple and not huge Mesa Boogie bass head as an extension of the Fillmore or California Tweed guitar amp lines. A mid powered all tube head with Gain, Master, Bass, Mids, Treble and one or two Mesa Boogie extras. That in the lovely California Tweed lovely would be amazing.

 

[Snaxster]

...In general, the features would need to appeal to the majority of players.

Have you played the Boogie channel of the TT yet?

Thank you, Andy. Sadly, I have yet to play the TT-800 or any Subway amp released after my D-800+.

You seem to imply that the Boogie channel of the TT-800 compares favorably to the Bass 400. So I will have to try it.

 

[MCF]

As a follow-up question, would a Carbine inspired amp along these lines be more or less interesting?

YES, YES, YES!

Now you’re talking! I’m typing this with some excitement at the prospect. My M6 started humming this past Saturday and I’m crushed. I love that amp. I’ll be sending a recording into Rich and see if it’s worth sending/taking in. The M6 voice knob just works. Five different tones with the turn of a switch. Although using a pedal with it is cumbersome with all the inputs. Design a Carbine based 800 with a simple foot switch to go through the five voicings and I can’t send you my money fast enough. FWIW, my favorite voicings are 4 and 5. Gain at 2:00, bass at 1:00, mids at 12:00, treble at 1:00. My Thunderbirds just freaking soar through that amp. And it’s not like I don’t like the way they sound through the SVT rig or the TT800. But the Carbine just has that extra something.

 

[ELG60]

I'm unfamiliar with the 400, but a really nice feature of my D800+ and WD800 is the HPF. I think that built-in compression would be interesting since I'm not a pedal guy.

 

[agedhorse]

I may be alone but I would love a simple and not huge Mesa Boogie bass head as an extension of the Fillmore or California Tweed guitar amp lines. A mid powered all tube head with Gain, Master, Bass, Mids, Treble and one or two Mesa Boogie extras. That in the lovely California Tweed lovely would be amazing.

Would you be interested at the price of say the Fillmore?

Thank you, Andy. Sadly, I have yet to play the TT-800 or any Subway amp released after my D-800+.

You seem to imply that the Boogie channel of the TT-800 compares favorably to the Bass 400. So I will have to try it.

The Boogie channel is heavily inspired by the Bass 400, but it was not intended to be a clone. That’s why playing it is important, to see it suits you tone goals.

 

[Jim C]

As a follow-up question, would a Carbine inspired amp along these lines be more or less interesting?

I never had a chance to play both amps with similar cabinets or in similar venues.
Many of us have tube amps that get somewhat close to a 400 but I remember the M series as having a bit of a unique tone. I also really like the idea of a "voice" control.
I think it might come down to which one could get closest to the original while using modern components.

Could the M series be brought back with just a modern output section or is it more complicated than that (like the Walkabout)?