svt 50th VS svt vr

[bon viesta]

i’m saving up for an svt, and i’m going into this assuming that i’m probably going to be using this amp for everything. a few stores still have new VR amps in stock, and they’re a bit cheaper, so i’m wondering what big differences exist between the 50th and the VR.

ones i know about but i would like elaborated on: the 2nd channel on the 50th having a different voicing (i read a thread that said it still sounds like a channel 2, perhaps it just has more gain than normal) and a “much quieter” fan. also obviously the cosmetic differences. is it safe to assume 50th svt units are much more “up to scratch” in terms of QC and other functional things?

either way, any experience with either is much appreciated. i currently only use a v4b reissue head and i use it quietly in my room and occasionally for jamming with musicians and so quieter fans do sound appealing to me, but i’m also aware that cab choice and volume knobs can make an svt sound amazing anywhere at most any volume. i just love clean tube bass tone.

 

[Wasnex]

I have not played these amps. I have read quite a bit about them. I do have experience with vintage SVTs. The first bass amp I ever bought was a new MTI era SVT and 810, and I currently own a 69 and 87.

My advice...before buying an SVT and 810, you need to play one and make sure it's actually the sound you want. After doing a bunch of research, I had my MTI rig special ordered without ever playing an SVT or even seeing one in person. Within seconds of playing through it the first time, it became clear that it was not my sound. I actually thought it might be damaged or a fake. But every SVT and 810 I have played through since then sounded pretty much the same.

Both the VR and 50th AV have a potential problem with the preamp card being too close to the standby switch and picking up hum. Some techs have fabricated shields to mitigate the problem.

A surprising number of people seem to have received 50th AVs with serious QC problems.

You have identified the most notable difference...the voicing of channel 2.

I actually like the original voicing of channel 2. In fact I prefer the basic voicing of channel 2 to channel 1. However, because channel 2 only has a two band tone stack, I was not able to dial in a usable sound when playing with a band. So I always used channel 1. AFAIK, most players only use channel 1.

Some players like to run a jumper from channel 1 to channel 2 and use both. I tried this and it does allow you to get a bit more tonal variety, but it's pretty subtle, and I did not ultimately feel it was worth the extra effort.

Some say the original channel 2 was designed more for guitar. My observation with the SVTs I have owned. For level matching, channel 2 must be turned up more. This varies from amp to amp. The level difference between channel 1 and 2 on my 69 is much more extreme than the 87. Also the bass control on channel 2 must be run at a higher level.

I don't really consider this a problem. Channel 2 has enough gain and headroom to push the amp to full power, and there is plenty of lows available, you just have to crank the control more.

I believe mid 70s amps are known for having a bit higher gain in the preamp. My guess is this was due to a change in the value of resistor that feeds voltage to the preamp. This change raised the working voltage.

Since the 50th AV channel 2 is based on mid 70s, it makes sense that it would have a bit more gain, and I believe Ampeg revoiced it slightly as well, so you don't have to crank the Bass control as high.

Have you played either amp? IMHO, if you can't play both, play whichever you can. This is really the best way to form an opinion and decide if the revoicing of channel 2 has any potential value to you. If you decide the revoicing of channel 2 holds value, then you have to decide how much you are willing to pay for it. My guess is the difference in pricing is pretty big.

 

[bon viesta]

I have not played these amps. I have read quite a bit about them. I do have experience with vintage SVTs. The first bass amp I ever bought was a new MTI era SVT and 810, and I currently own a 69 and 87.

My advice...before buying an SVT and 810, you need to play one and make sure it's actually the sound you want. After doing a bunch of research, I had my MTI rig special ordered without ever playing an SVT or even seeing one in person. Within seconds of playing through it the first time, it became clear that it was not my sound. I actually thought it might be damaged or a fake. But every SVT and 810 I have played through since then sounded pretty much the same.

Both the VR and 50th AV have a potential problem with the preamp card being too close to the standby switch and picking up hum. Some techs have fabricated shields to mitigate the problem.

A surprising number of people seem to have received 50th AVs with serious QC problems.

You have identified the most notable difference...the voicing of channel 2.

I actually like the original voicing of channel 2. In fact I prefer the basic voicing of channel 2 to channel 1. However, because channel 2 only has a two band tone stack, I was not able to dial in a usable sound when playing with a band. So I always used channel 1. AFAIK, most players only use channel 1.

Some players like to run a jumper from channel 1 to channel 2 and use both. I tried this and it does allow you to get a bit more tonal variety, but it's pretty subtle, and I did not ultimately feel it was worth the extra effort.

Some say the original channel 2 was designed more for guitar. My observation with the SVTs I have owned. For level matching, channel 2 must be turned up more. This varies from amp to amp. The level difference between channel 1 and 2 on my 69 is much more extreme than the 87. Also the bass control on channel 2 must be run at a higher level.

I don't really consider this a problem. Channel 2 has enough gain and headroom to push the amp to full power, and there is plenty of lows available, you just have to crank the control more.

I believe mid 70s amps are known for having a bit higher gain in the preamp. My guess is this was due to a change in the value of resistor that feeds voltage to the preamp. This change raised the working voltage.

Since the 50th AV channel 2 is based on mid 70s, it makes sense that it would have a bit more gain, and I believe Ampeg revoiced it slightly as well, so you don't have to crank the Bass control as high.

Have you played either amp? IMHO, if you can't play both, play whichever you can. This is really the best way to form an opinion and decide if the revoicing of channel 2 has any potential value to you. If you decide the revoicing of channel 2 holds value, then you have to decide how much you are willing to pay for it. My guess is the difference in pricing is pretty big.

I have not played these amps. I have read quite a bit about them. I do have experience with vintage SVTs. The first bass amp I ever bought was a new MTI era SVT and 810, and I currently own a 69 and 87.

My advice...before buying an SVT and 810, you need to play one and make sure it's actually the sound you want. After doing a bunch of research, I had my MTI rig special ordered without ever playing an SVT or even seeing one in person. Within seconds of playing through it the first time, it became clear that it was not my sound. I actually thought it might be damaged or a fake. But every SVT and 810 I have played through since then sounded pretty much the same.

Both the VR and 50th AV have a potential problem with the preamp card being too close to the standby switch and picking up hum. Some techs have fabricated shields to mitigate the problem.

A surprising number of people seem to have received 50th AVs with serious QC problems.

You have identified the most notable difference...the voicing of channel 2.

I actually like the original voicing of channel 2. In fact I prefer the basic voicing of channel 2 to channel 1. However, because channel 2 only has a two band tone stack, I was not able to dial in a usable sound when playing with a band. So I always used channel 1. AFAIK, most players only use channel 1.

Some players like to run a jumper from channel 1 to channel 2 and use both. I tried this and it does allow you to get a bit more tonal variety, but it's pretty subtle, and I did not ultimately feel it was worth the extra effort.

Some say the original channel 2 was designed more for guitar. My observation with the SVTs I have owned. For level matching, channel 2 must be turned up more. This varies from amp to amp. The level difference between channel 1 and 2 on my 69 is much more extreme than the 87. Also the bass control on channel 2 must be run at a higher level.

I don't really consider this a problem. Channel 2 has enough gain and headroom to push the amp to full power, and there is plenty of lows available, you just have to crank the control more.

I believe mid 70s amps are known for having a bit higher gain in the preamp. My guess is this was due to a change in the value of resistor that feeds voltage to the preamp. This change raised the working voltage.

Since the 50th AV channel 2 is based on mid 70s, it makes sense that it would have a bit more gain, and I believe Ampeg revoiced it slightly as well, so you don't have to crank the Bass control as high.

Have you played either amp? IMHO, if you can't play both, play whichever you can. This is really the best way to form an opinion and decide if the revoicing of channel 2 has any potential value to you. If you decide the revoicing of channel 2 holds value, then you have to decide how much you are willing to pay for it. My guess is the difference in pricing is pretty big.

i haven’t played either amp, but i’ve been listening to them since i’ve started being a bass player and my current v4b alllmost hits the perfect spot for tube ampeg bass glory but i think a little bit of inherent midscoop is keeping it back from where a b15n or an svt would dwell.

i’m probably going to pair the amp with a much smaller cab, like a 1x15 (if i can find one capable of handling the power) or a 4x10.

the difference in price i believe also wouldn’t be as drastic as you might expect, i’d be buying from new old stock that i’ve seen online a few places. the fazing out of the svt vr was a bit quiet and slow and i don’t think it’s been really announced hugely that they’re now a discontinued product, so a few smaller sites still have them available probably in some warehouse.

 

[Killing Floor]

I find hope for the future of all bass-kind in that this thread isn’t just some dude crying about size or weight but singularly focused on quality of output.
Color me impressed.

 

[bon viesta]

i can’t quite put my finger on it but there’s something, something making the v4b sound a bit colder than any example i’ve heard of an svt. there’s a video on youtube of a guy comparing a ton of different ampeg bass amps and you can hear the difference between an, albeit, vintage v4b VS the many variations of svt over the years as well as a few b15 models.

 

[Wasnex]

i haven’t played either amp, but i’ve been listening to them since i’ve started being a bass player and my current v4b alllmost hits the perfect spot for tube ampeg bass glory but i think a little bit of inherent midscoop is keeping it back from where a b15n or an svt would dwell.

i’m probably going to pair the amp with a much smaller cab, like a 1x15 (if i can find one capable of handling the power) or a 4x10.

the difference in price i believe also wouldn’t be as drastic as you might expect, i’d be buying from new old stock that i’ve seen online a few places. the fazing out of the svt vr was a bit quiet and slow and i don’t think it’s been really announced hugely that they’re now a discontinued product, so a few smaller sites still have them available probably in some warehouse.

AFAIK the price difference (today) is about $600. I believe the 50th AV list price was higher than the VR because it's a Heritage model. It's assumed Heritage amps have a higher level of QC during their build. But as I mentioned, it seems like a lot of people have had problems with the 50th AV amps. So you're basically paying an extra $600 for a slightly different voicing in channel 2.

SVTs sound great with a variety of different cabs. Keep in mind, it only has 2 and 4 ohm outputs, and ideally you will show the amp the expected impedance.

AFAIK most 115s are 8 ohms.

The designer of the original SVT said the amp is safe at 8 ohms. However, running 8 ohms on the 4 ohm output is harder on the tubes and it reduces how much power the amp can make.

I have a PF50T which is supposed to be closer to the V4B than the SVT. Clean it's a bit sweeter and more focused than my SVTs. I don't think it responds quite the same when pushed. SVTs get sort of grindy or growly before they break over into audible OD. I don't really hear this with my PF50T and the character of the OD is also a bit different.

AFAIK, V4Bs are actually slightly flatter than SVTs. SVT have a very small, but wide band bump in the frequency response centered around 400hz. I believe this little bump is what make the SVT sound a bit bigger/fatter/warmer. Whether the extra fat is good or bad is up to you...and your response could vary depending on the circumstance.

 

[Wasnex]

Although the V4B and SVT have slightly different tone and OD characteristics, probably the most audible difference in a live setting is an SVT will have more headroom. I think this will be a lot more noticeable than the differences in how the amps sound and respond to your playing.

 

[JeezyMcNuggles]

i’m saving up for an svt, and i’m going into this assuming that i’m probably going to be using this amp for everything. a few stores still have new VR amps in stock, and they’re a bit cheaper, so i’m wondering what big differences exist between the 50th and the VR.

ones i know about but i would like elaborated on: the 2nd channel on the 50th having a different voicing (i read a thread that said it still sounds like a channel 2, perhaps it just has more gain than normal) and a “much quieter” fan. also obviously the cosmetic differences. is it safe to assume 50th svt units are much more “up to scratch” in terms of QC and other functional things?

either way, any experience with either is much appreciated. i currently only use a v4b reissue head and i use it quietly in my room and occasionally for jamming with musicians and so quieter fans do sound appealing to me, but i’m also aware that cab choice and volume knobs can make an svt sound amazing anywhere at most any volume. i just love clean tube bass tone.

The 50th is cream.

But me, I'd get a heritage cl

 

[Vincent Van Low]

I have the SVT VR(2012), SVT CL(1997) and V4b(2018)...I cannot tell the difference between channel 1 on VR and CL...the channel 2 on VR quieter, and has a cool unique sound, but I use channel 1. I play through the svt 212 av( I have two), or the heritage 810...they all sound amazing....like mentioned the difference in a live setting is 100W versus 300W and that is clean headroom...and the SVT's has more balls

 

[semiprohooker]

Can't speak to the 50th, but after demoing both a VR and a CL I went CL. This is despite going into it thinking I wanted the VR. Ran that thing for years through hundreds of gigs and absolutely loved it. Nothing before it and nothing after it ever did what it did.

 

[sgiacomo]

I own a 50th Anniversary SVT and absolutely love it. I prefer channel one (1969) but both channels sound great, and jumping the channels produces a different tone altogether. Paired with the matching 810 it’s a force to be reckoned with.