SVT vs. V6: Market feedback request

[fdeck]

For instance, if we made an SVT or similar clone, why would we expect anybody to use it vs. Ampeg? I call the Harley syndrome- as a Harley rider what you could do to build a better bike than Harley. If you go build it, he still won't buy it because it isn't a Harley. The customer is already "owned". In the amp business, Marshall and Ampeg have that. And, Ampeg is a classic and plain and simple, it works.

Good analogy. I think it also applies to tube gear in general. The tube customer is "owned" by tubes. A tube doesn't have to prove that it sounds like a tube.

One idea is an all-tube parametric. Challenge your engineers. AFAIK it would be a first in bass amps.

 

[oddio]

One final thought on versatility. As mentioned, I have found that the SVT (and some other tube heads, to be sure) seem to sound their best at a given volume, but aren't so hot at other volume settings.

I think that you really hit the nail on the head with this comment, and have observed the same with a number of vintage heads.

I would love it if someone would offer an overdrive (either onboard or as a standalone unit) which allows you to blend in clean lows with the full range overdriven tone. Ideally, I'd also like to have control over the low-pass frequency of the clean signal.

Not to get off-track, but FYI Tom: This is what the Character switch on the Fafner does.

 

[tombowlus]

Not to get off-track, but FYI Tom: This is what the Character switch on the Fafner does.

Really? Nice!!! I just may have to get me one of those some day (or a Genz Benz with the same feature! ).

Tom.

 

[hasbeen]

hey guys, you've all given excellent feedback and I sincerely appreciate it. I'm still a professional bassist but with my job that can be a handicap.....in other words, I KNOW WHAT I REALLY LIKE so I have to take extra care that we don't just build an amp for ME. That's where your input is wonderful.

A couple of things you guys have mentioned:
* Two channels....one modern and one vintage. Excellent.
* Two channels...one to EQ for slap and the other fingers. That's exactly what I use the channels for now in my GBE1200. The "tube" pre channel I use for fingers and/or fretless. My DBX compressor is stereo so I run different levels of compression for each channel too.
* Two band parametric for the mids- another excellent tip. We're actually doing this on our new 350 watt, 8.5 pound NeoPak amp. I was working with a bunch of URB players two weeks ago, Ron Carter included, and they love the parametric.
* Putting "our spin" on it- yes again. That's what we've always tried to do so this is a great suggestion. ....mute switch via foot control. We were the first to bring ports to the front of cabs and to have a five button footswitch. We notice now that some of our top competitors are starting to do it.

Disclaimer- when ever I say we were the first, well, the first that we know of so no disrespect to our esteemed competitors...seriously.

 

[hasbeen]

a couple of PERSONAL observations now on the V6 vs. SVT vs. solid state thing: this is just for haha's and gear chat, not the opinion of the "Genz Benz Product Manager".

Tube amps- well, if I were to go back to these I would go back to 10" speakers vs. 12"s. They seem to tighten up some of the sub-tone-woof that I hear in tube amps. I would also go with a "modern" cab design. I played both these amps through some well respected, major brand cabs that weren't "modern" and man, did it sound woofy.

Tube amps again- I'm still more of a solid state guy because of my style but I do have to tell you, both the SVT and V6 do something "special" for fretless- a real nice growl and warmth...complex mids.

SVT- what can you say...it's a classic. For both slap (Lull MV4 with barts and aggie three band) I had to EQ more than I like but once there, very nice.

V6- I was able to get my tone with everything straight up at 12:00. For whatever reason, I always like that.

SVT vs. V6: The V6 is supposed to be 600 watts but it didn't seem any louder then the 300 watts of the SVT.....head room included. Also on the V6, the deep switch sounded really like a mid-scoop so I found it unusable. Then again, the V6 has so much more bottom end, I didn't need it. Again, with the V6, I didn't find the push/pull mid voicing useable but again, I didn't need it. MAN, THE V6 RUNS HOT!!!!!!! Lastly, did I mention that THE V6 RUNS HOT?????

With the SVT I really liked that I can't get a tone that is "too over the top".....can't really find a bad tone in it. I find the rotary mid voicing very usuable. I really dug my fretless (Zon Sonus 6 string) through it. I did find myself boosting lows for slap with the fretted though....boosted them quite a bit but, the "extra bass" switch I found very useable for this. MAN, THE SVT IS HEAVY!!!!!!!!!

side note: I messed around with running both amps through THD HotPlates so I could crank them. Man, that is fun. Not "my" sound but I definetly plan on using it on some recordings here and there for effect.

 

[DEVILMAN]

...the V-6 IS rated @300w IIRC. Six 6550's...

~S~

 

[hasbeen]

...the V-6 IS rated @300w IIRC. Six 6550's...

~S~

oops...sorry, meant to say 400 watts. My finger was "head" was stuck on the 6 because of V6. Anyway, it is six KT88's for a disclosed 400 watts RMS, 800 peak.

 

[Fealach]

A few generic comments.

I like tube heads. Can't really quantify it, but there's something that just isn't there with even the best hybrid or SS. Even clean, but also I can't get a distortion I'm happy with from just a tube pre. I slap maybe twice (as in number of notes) a night so a slower response isn't an issue. Is it possible that the slower response of the power section could actually be responsible for some of what is perceived as "fullness," like the way an almost imperceptable amount of delay mixed in with your dry signal fattens things up? I could be talkin outta my hat here.

Although I love em, it's tough to get certain sounds out of them. Most tube amps have a pretty simple feature set. Tough to do a good clean "scooped" tone when you need to. Some seem to be a little shy in the lows also. My favorite distortion will always be a cranked amp of 200 or less watts, for a guitarish sort of tone - think Live at Leeds. Not that I have that, but that's my ideal. I like the Ampeg sound, but everybody has that and I like different.

I like features. The more that are on the footswitch, the better. Ideally - impractical, but again an ideal - everything that is switchable with a button on the amp, on the footswitch. I'd rather have a button I don't use than a feature I wish I had! Two channels would be KILLER.

Honestly, the best non-tube amp I've owned is my GBE 600. The only thing I thought it lacked was independent EQ sections for the 2 channels. When I saw the 1200 I was flabberGASted. Not that the extra power was needed - the 600 can move small buildings - but I wouldn't complain. As much as I like the 600, I'm mainly using tube amps. The 600 is almost there, but still something missing for most of my applications. However, my 5 string loves it, and I do use it to power subs when I am using a small tube amp for distortion.

Speaking only for myself - the front of the 1200 mated to a tube power section sounds friggin spectacular. I love the deep/scoop/high switches, the 2 channels, etc. I usually don't touch the EQ much when I am using it by itself, as I use multiple basses, I rely on those switches to go from middly vintage to scooped clacky clack. I would like to see a footswitchable effects loop. Not enough bass amps do this. Stick with Rackmount!!! Personally I wouldn't worry about onboard extras like a compressor. There are plenty of companies making great compressors, and the people likely to be considering this amp are likely to have already found their favorite, which they will prefer to any onboard one. That's just me; I don't hate on board compressors, but I don't buy an amp because of it either.

I really like the idea of putting your spin on the "big tube amp" genre. No point in you doing the R&D an manufacuting costs, just to make an amp that's similar to something that's already out. It'll also appeal to people with the $ to have more than one amp, even if they might own an SVT already. It's exciting to hear about the development of 2 new high powered tube heads that are still going to be very different from one another. I hope this thing gets made. Personally I'd go with this one over any other tube head on the market, judging from past G-B products.

OK a lot of comments. Some generic, mostly just ramblings.

 

[James Hart]

We were the first to bring ports to the front of cabs

what year did you start? I gigged a mid 70s tuck and roll Kustom 4x12 in the 80s that had 2 big round front ports... I'm pretty sure it wasn't unique.

 

[hasbeen]

what year did you start? I gigged a mid 70s tuck and roll Kustom 4x12 in the 80s that had 2 big round front ports... I'm pretty sure it wasn't unique.

well, that would beat us as we've been building cabs for only 21 years. That's why I always put in my disclaimer. But, since I don't want people thinking like an attorney, there are so many people experimenting with different things at different times, many of which don't make it to market that saying you're the first can get tricky.

I should have said "we popularized it". If you take a look at how many pro level cabs had ports on the front before GB came out the options are slim to none. A couple of years later they were quite available. I think some of this so due to the fact that Genz designed cabs for a few, influential pro bass amp companies.

Jame...PS- two things I've always wanted to post/mention to you:
* That maple board fretless has to be one of the sexiest basses I've ever seen.
* Your last name- what part of the country does your family originally come from.....Mass by any chance?

 

[hasbeen]

Fealach- great input....thanks a ton. A couple of things on your post:
* First, thanks sincerely for your kind comments on our product.
* slow response of tubes adding to fullness? Could be...really could. Some electric guitarists like this....what they call sag. I think though they really just like the feel. IMO, the fullness of tube amps comes from the complexity that tubes offer ...also, some of the "unheard" distortion. Both of these add to warmth. Sill, I can see how a little sag can add to a percieved fullness.
* You liked the two independent eq's on the GBE1200 but don't need all that power. We're taking care of that with a new amp we'll be showing at NAMM.......same exact cosmetics and pre sections as the GBE1200 but less power and in a two space rack sized.

I do love the pre and have enjoyed running it through these two tube amps.

 

[James Hart]

Jame...PS- two things I've always wanted to post/mention to you:
* That maple board fretless has to be one of the sexiest basses I've ever seen.
* Your last name- what part of the country does your family originally come from.....Mass by any chance?

Thanks, Chris B really outdid himself with my bass. It's so perfect for me that my other one from him barely gets played.

Not to derail the thread much more... but I'm a Jersey Boy. My Father and Grandfather both James' and Jersey boys as well. We are of Irish soil beyond that generation.

 

[hasbeen]

Thanks, Chris B really outdid himself with my bass. It's so perfect for me that my other one from him barely gets played.

Not to derail the thread much more... but I'm a Jersey Boy. My Father and Grandfather both James' and Jersey boys as well. We are of Irish soil beyond that generation.

ahh...thanks, yes, there are lots of Irish Harts. I'm a Scottish and English Hart. Just an fyi, in case you didn't know, a Hart is a wonderfully majestic "Red" stag found on the isles of Ireland and Britain. See, now I've really derailed it.

Back to the issue of the Kustom with the ports and an apology to the community- saying you're the first is dangerous as my disclaimer said. When I do my in-person demos I say things such as "influenced the market"..."popularized" etc. In posting I sometimes use "e-shorthand" and really shouldn't. So, James' call is a good one and my apology.....wasn't trying to deceive.

 

[Psycho Bass Guy]

Good analogy. I think it also applies to tube gear in general. The tube customer is "owned" by tubes. A tube doesn't have to prove that it sounds like a tube.

I don't think that's always true. The main reason I didn't like the Sunn 300T aside from its laughable reliability was that it DIDN'T sound like a 'tube amp.' to me. Its failure in the marketplace and some conversations I've had with others also lead me to suspect I'm not the only one who feels that way. The most successful tube amps are popular because they sound good, not because they've got tubes in them. The reason there are so relatively few "faliures" with tube bass amps is that the complexity involved in building a tube bass amp with enough power for most recent era musicians ensures that a LOT of design and R'n'D goes into it and given the cost of production, most manufacturers can't afford to build a dud.

One idea is an all-tube parametric. Challenge your engineers. AFAIK it would be a first in bass amps.

You're not going to get THAT without a significant amount of weight. Even the Pultec EQP1A is not completely parametric and it is pretty heavy. The inductors required for frequency sweep are expensive AND heavy. The Ampeg SVT with its active midrange is the best compromise I've seen.

A couple of things you guys have mentioned:
* Two channels....one modern and one vintage. Excellent.
* Two channels...one to EQ for slap and the other fingers. That's exactly what I use the channels for now in my GBE1200. The "tube" pre channel I use for fingers and/or fretless. My DBX compressor is stereo so I run different levels of compression for each channel too.
* Two band parametric for the mids- another excellent tip. We're actually doing this on our new 350 watt, 8.5 pound NeoPak amp. I was working with a bunch of URB players two weeks ago, Ron Carter included, and they love the parametric.
* Putting "our spin" on it- yes again. That's what we've always tried to do so this is a great suggestion.

Don't get so caught in in making the amp so "versatile" that it loses a good basic tone. The feature set you've listed sounds similar to the previously mentioned Sunn 300T/Bassman 300, and that is an almost IMMEDIATE turnoff for me because in trying to do too much that amp ends up not doing anything particularly well, IME.

I like the para-midrange and dual channel idea as well as onboard compression. I'd LOVE to see someone do a split frequency band compressor like Trace Elliot's old SMX. I suggest two completely different types of tone stack for eack channel, with a Baxandall type for the "clean" and a Fender type for the the other with a switchable active s/s parametric midrange assignable to both as well as a GOOD assignable split band compressor. I'd also suggest a fixed tone shaping driver stage common to both to give the amp an ever-present signature tone regardless of which channel is used.

a couple of PERSONAL observations now on the V6 vs. SVT vs. solid state thing: this is just for haha's and gear chat, not the opinion of the "Genz Benz Product Manager".

Tube amps- well, if I were to go back to these I would go back to 10" speakers vs. 12"s. They seem to tighten up some of the sub-tone-woof that I hear in tube amps. I would also go with a "modern" cab design. I played both these amps through some well respected, major brand cabs that weren't "modern" and man, did it sound woofy.

It depends on the cab. MOST bass cabs, regardless of vintage, are voiced low-mid heavy to make up for a lack of real bass and that doesn't work well with a warm tube sound. Having all kinds of cabs, I prefer "modern" 12 cabs. My Fender 400PS goes through three Bag End D12E cabs (without the processor of course) for tight, loud, clean bass tone. The same amp through most other bass cabs is boomy and indistinct. The Bag Ends are sealed with high excursion drivers. In using smaller drivers to compensate for a tube amp's inherent tone, you're shortchanging the amp and limiting its volume. (I have four SVT's and a V6, BTW)

Also on the V6, the deep switch sounded really like a mid-scoop so I found it unusable. Then again, the V6 has so much more bottom end, I didn't need it.

Try it with a cab that has an accurate low end. I use an Acme 4x10 series I with my V6, and the difference in tone using the deep switch is MUCH more usable.

Again, with the V6, I didn't find the push/pull mid voicing useable but again, I didn't need it. MAN, THE V6 RUNS HOT!!!!!!! Lastly, did I mention that THE V6 RUNS HOT?????

Mine gets warmer than an SVT. The faceplate and backplate can get uncomfortable, but it's not THAT hot overall.

With the SVT I really liked that I can't get a tone that is "too over the top".....can't really find a bad tone in it. I find the rotary mid voicing very usuable.

Are you speaking of the SVT Classic? There is a HUGE difference between the SVT Classic and the REAL SVT. All of my comments are based on the real one and if you've never played one, you NEED to check one out.

 

[Fealach]

My Fender 400PS goes through three Bag End D12E cabs (without the processor of course) for tight, loud, clean bass tone.

Oh no, now you've done it. I know where I can get 2... I've read (here) that using them without an integrator will cause a portal to open to the land of Cosmic Suckage and the demons who step through will flay you alive with whips of molten suck. But I'm itching to try it now.

Sorry for the derailing... I'd like to try a real SVT someday, but since I can't afford to buy one I probably shouldn't.

 

[Psycho Bass Guy]

Oh no, now you've done it. I know where I can get 2... I've read (here) that using them without an integrator will cause a portal to open to the land of Cosmic Suckage and the demons who step through will flay you alive with whips of molten suck. But I'm itching to try it now.

Sorry for the derailing... I'd like to try a real SVT someday, but since I can't afford to buy one I probably shouldn't.

The Bag Ends are my PA subs. They're VERY midrangey without the ELF (I have it, too), but you can compensate using the amp's EQ, and they respond VERY well. Since they're 400 watts apiece, I figure the 135 of the 400PS won't hurt 'em, especially since they're made for mega-excursion anyway.

BTW, I missed the discussion on using them without the integrator. Got a link?

 

[Fealach]

http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showpost.php?p=2590799&postcount=7

http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showpost.php?p=2591048&postcount=8

Here's a couple recent posts

 

[el_Kabong]

Don't get so caught in in making the amp so "versatile" that it loses a good basic tone.

I couldn't agree more with that statenment. There's plenty of super versatile amps around, including the GBs! There's plenty of light weight, decent sounding amps. A tube amp is always going to be comparatively heavy so there has to be a reason to chose it over the other options and (for me at least) that reason is tone/feel. I'd like a more comprehensive feature set than what an svt provides but wouldn't buy a heavy product that sacrificed it's basic tone to get it.

Regarding the dual channel option there seems to be a lot of interest in that. I swap from fingers to slap quite a bit but don't feel the need for two channels. I guess everyone's different but once I've got a good basic tone happening I'm not looking to radically alter it via the amp. I find it's volume and mids that I manipulate most on a gig, hence my comment on a footswitchable gain and contour control. My reasoning for being 'anti' a separate channel is just cost. Assuming the basic tone quality is preserved, either the price of the amp is going to rise, or if it's aimed at a particular price point some 'cost saving' measures are going to be implemented. I guess the fact that the GBE1200 preamp has already been developed might counter that point of view though.

Dual band compressors always sound like a good idea but I haven't been that impressed in practice. I had one of TE SMX jobs the PBG mentions and while it was pretty good, it wasn't brilliant (imo). Same with an ebs, I prefer the tube simulator mode over the dual band. I'm applying the same reasoning here as with the dual channel option. I'd rather have a simpler setup that really kicks rather than more 'just ok' options. I mean an 1176 isn't dual band but that's a great compressor.

So my basic point is that while I'd like lots of features too, if the amp is too expensive or doesn't sound good enough to justify it's weight it won't sell well, at least in the long run (imo). So being selective with which features to incorporate is important.

Off the GB topic a bit, I find my svt to be the exact opposite of 'slow'. The only thing I've played that's close to it's responsiveness is a ca9. The svt doesn't have the sheer grunt but it absolutely jumps under my hands, that's one of the things I love about it. It's funny how people's experiences vary so much.

 

[Scutterflux]

Great, a chance to contribute an idea.
As for me I would greatly desire a really good D.I. hear's the catch! One that offers a post-powertube signal like that of the mesa 400+. Ideally one with a 3-way switch that could switch from pre/post/output signal with a level controll. I think this is an inovative idea when approaching a tube amp design, because as far as I know it hasn't been done yet, and would be great for recording and knowing what you're sending to the board in a live situation.

Also the big bottom of the v-6 is very desireable in my books. Just keep it fast and tight.

 

[Stubb]

Important features in a GB tube amp to me would be:

A great plug and play tone with the ability to change it with a good EQ. Whether or not this requires parametric, I don't know, but I think that perhaps one channel with a tube-driven 3 band EQ and the other being something different enitrely would broaden the appeal of the amp to almost anyone with the dough.

Not ludicrous weight - as long as it isn't any heavier than an SVT, it'd be fine with me. But if I'm going to carry an 80 pound tube amp, I better not have to put it in a rack and it better have 300 watts or more.

A nice DI would be great.

Don't make the thing look stupid. Perhaps cover the head in duratex rather than ratfur or tolex, though tolex would be better than fur.

Price: street price of less than $1800 would be ideal.

Hope all of this helps. My interest is piqued for sure.