1. Please take 30 seconds to register your free account to remove most ads, post topics, make friends, earn reward points at our store, and more!  
     
    TalkBass.com has been uniting the low end since 1998.  Join us! :)

SVT-CL vs SVT-VR

Discussion in 'Amps and Cabs [BG]' started by danbass007, Aug 12, 2007.


  1. Ampeg SVT-CL

    36 vote(s)
    25.2%
  2. Ampeg SVT-VR

    36 vote(s)
    25.2%
  3. Higher end GK( 700 or 1001 rb)

    42 vote(s)
    29.4%
  4. Stick with my old GK (400rb)

    8 vote(s)
    5.6%
  5. Other (please post which one)

    21 vote(s)
    14.7%
  1. danbass007

    danbass007

    Jun 11, 2007
    Hey everyone,
    recently I have been thinking about trying testing out these 2 heads. First of all, if I were to purchase one of these heads, I would be going form a gallien krueger 400rb (about 250 watts which just doesn't cut it for my band) to 300 watts. I've heard that the ampeg head can get crazily loud but with only 40 more watts than my old SS head, will I get the volume increase I need? I know tube amps are a bit louder..
    Also what are the main differnce between these to heads? which one is better for a loud, mostly clean, flat response tone with a GL jazz bass and a musicman stingray. Please tell me your experiences with these amps and what one you prefer.
     
  2. Masher88

    Masher88 Believe in absurdities and you commit atrocities

    May 7, 2005
    Cleveland, OH
    Since when is a GK "Higher End" than ampeg tube amps? Maybe you meant "Hi-Fi"?

    Yeah, tube amps can get crazy loud...however they do add distortions (overdrives) that a lot of people like in their sound. A 300 watt Ampeg SVT-CL is about equivalent in loudness to my 3000 watt QSC-PLX 3002 amp (bridged into 4 ohms). I own both.
     
  3. NKUSigEp

    NKUSigEp

    Jun 6, 2006
    Bright, IN
    Well...I wouldn't consider the GK 700RB higher end anything, maybe the 1001RB, but you missed the 2001RB which is my favorite GK (though I'm not a fan of the brand). The Ampeg VR is supposed to be the closest thing to an actual vintage 70's SVT while the CL I guess has more of an 80's vibe? I honestly don't know the difference besides price and cosmetics.

    So I voted "other". There's a whole world of Aguilar, Mesa, Peavey, and Traynor tube or hybrid heads that seem to fit what you're wanting to accomplish.
     
  4. 300 tube watts are as loud as you'll probably ever need. Believe me, you can definitely get the volume equivalent of a 600-900 watt solid state head. Although the headroom won't be as clean, most people like the sound of a pushed tube amp, and with the right cab and depending on your band's general volume, the SVT shouldn't get too distorted, either. I'm rarely able to push it to distortion without completely drowning out everything else.
     
  5. Koobler

    Koobler

    Mar 30, 2007
    Buffalo, New York
    I use some gnarly overdriven tones on my '72ish SVT. it can get awesome fat cleans as well if you roll back on the mids. honestly, the drive is almost entirely controlled by the midrange on SVT's, or at least on the old ones. I refuse to use the new ones because I really don't like them whatsoever in comparison to what I'm used to. I owned a SVT-Cl for a while while I had my vintage SVT, and it sounded pretty decent, but it just didn't have the same sound, so I got rid of it.

    basically, what I'd suggest is just trying them out. you have to understand that the EQ on a tube amp is going to react totally different than what you'd be used to on a SS amp. be careful about cranking the bass knob too high, it won't just add more fat low end especially if you have ultra lo on, it'll just break up at a certain point and actually cause less clean low end to reside. higher mids will give you more cut and more drive, but it'll also steal some of the natural real low end bass tone. it's best to try to settle into a good balance for what sound you're attempting to achieve.
     
  6. matt11

    matt11 Supporting Member

    May 19, 2006
    Montreal
    If you like the SOUND of your 400rb, and you can afford a GK2001rb (about the same as the Ampegs?) get the GK. I play Eden and Mesa/Boogie rigs, but I've gigged the 2001rbII and it's a great head if you want a high-headroom clean sound (one of the very best, I'd say), plus you can dial in some interesting (if very GK-specific) grind if you want. On the other hand, if you want a CLEAN tube sound, get a used Mesa/Boogie 400 or 400+--stays clean at louder volumes than the Ampegs in my experience, although I also love that driving SVT tone.
     
  7. BassOverflow

    BassOverflow

    Jul 12, 2007
    Western NC
    Eden WT-800
     
  8. I think he meant a higher end GK model, compared to his current rb400.
     
  9. MikeBass

    MikeBass Supporting Member

    Nov 4, 2003
    Royal, Oak, MI.
    Thunderfunk or Eden WT800
     
  10. I VOTED -VR just coz its a 70's 'clone' But if U want a bit of grit at lower vol's p'raps the CL is the go.
    BUT re the 'extra 40 watts' Believe me going from a 250w solid state amp to a 300w Ampeg/Fender/etc.. ALL TUBE will be like going from 250w to 1400w solid state!!!!!! I've never had the opportunity to 'push' a Ampeg 300w tube amp, but MY Fender 300PRO(all tube-300w) will go STUPIDLY LOUD- I A/B'd it with a bridged SVT4PRO-(1200 or 1400w s.s. IIRC!!!!) & the 300w Fender ATE it! at about 1/2 volume too! So VOLUME will be the least of yr worries. I think you'll find the Ampeg(either CL or VR) will just SOUND right in a BAND setting-on it's own U may/may not be THAT impressed- but when U get it pumping IN A BAND gig or rehearsal-BLISS-PURE BASS ECSTACY!!! EXTASY ...ESTCASIE,,,EXTAZY...EX TAXI----woteva- SOUNDS BLOODY GOOD!!!! AL IMHO of course!
     
  11. One Drop

    One Drop

    Oct 10, 2004
    Swiss Alps
    +1 on an Eden WT-800. An SVT would not be my first choice for clean and very loud.

    And I always recommend a '70s SVT if you want one. Cheaper, better built and they'll only go up in value.
     
  12. casio

    casio

    Aug 1, 2007
    Croatia
    MESA MESA MESA MESA MESA MESA MESA MESA MESA MESA:D

    If I would have to pick between the ampegs, I'd go with the CL, cause I owned one and I know it's a good enough head!
     
  13. cnltb

    cnltb

    May 28, 2005
    Glockenklang...In terms of "Bass gear" I knbow of nothing cleaner.:hyper:
     
  14. lavaman67

    lavaman67 Supporting Member

    Feb 13, 2006
    Ypsilanti, MI
    It all depends what sound you're going for? The Mesa 400+ is going to be more hi-fi and have more clean headroom than the SVT-CL without a doubt. I've owned both. It's not even really close. The SVT-CL has really nice low mids, especially the E and A in the higher registers, but I would never consider it hi-fi. I've never heard the SVT-VR, but I've owned an MTI era SVT that's probably pretty close and I will still say in my experience, the Mesa 400+ is still more hi-fi and will give you more clean headroom. As far as solid state, I would consider the Eden 800 and Thunderfunk like MikeBass suggested. I have tried the Eden 800 a few times and it has real nice punch a lot of versatility. The Thunderfunk, though I have never tried one, was something I was considering before buying my 400+. I am just a tube guy and that's probably never going to change. I have never been a fan of either GK or Hartke, they just been too sterile for my ear and playing style.
     
  15. tieftonservices

    tieftonservices

    May 12, 2007
    Cologne, Germany
    Endorsing Artist: Moollon, Glockenklang, Dunlop/MXR, VoVox, Basswitch
    aguilar db 750, the fattest tone ever!
     
  16. AMPEG SVT II (NON-PRO) IVOTED FOR THE SVT-VR AND BOTH OF THESE ARE GOOD TO GO FOR CLEAN ROCK TONE.

    YOU CAN'T GO WRONG WITH A GK 1001RB OR 2001RB EITHER DEPENDS IF YOU WANT TUBE OR SOLID STATE
     

Share This Page