• 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.

TecAmp Puma 1000 : reviews , opinions?

#42
N. Kentucky Bass said:
I've owned several Carvin amps and several TecAmp amps. They are not the same. Nor are they even in the same league. Buy a Carvin and pray it works. Buy a TecAmp Puma and you'll know it works with second-to-none tone. How dare that Carvin guy invade this Puma thread! :D
Click to expand...

Ok ok, I'm not doubting the tone and quality of the PUMA, I have the extensive Bass Gear review of it along with the 212 cab. However, I read that the first configuration of the head was 1000w into 8 ohms ONLY, which could be a problem for a lot of people because you could easily fry your cab unless it's loaded with the best drivers.. and even then is has to be designed REALLY WELL to make use of more than half the power. Today I see they changed the head to be 1000w at 4 ohms, which is great, but it's only 2 x 500 watts a 2 ohms. The Carvin has more power in dual mode. The Carvin also has more control over the mids because of it's EQ. It also has a defeatable graphic EQ and an active crossover for bi-amp mode.
For around the same price as the PUMA 1000 and the 212, you can drop the BX1500 on this cab (link) and which amp would sound better? Keep in mind many of these fEARFul owners use the BX1500 or the B1500.
Invalid Link Removed
I won't post here anymore cuz I've made my point. ;)
 
#43
KJung said:
PS Can't comment on EU tech support, but I assume it is fine.

Tonally, the new 500/900 are a bit tighter down low and a touch more mid present than the original line of Puma amps (like the 1000). Much smaller, less expensive, no fan needed, same amazing preamp... pure, clean, crystal clear.
Click to expand...

Back to the original scheduled program-

anyone care to weigh in on if the Puma 1000 is voiced differently than the 900 and how the 900 and the 1000 compare tonally?
 
#46
I have not used a Puma 1000., sorry I cannot comment ...but I can say that my Puma 900 and M212 (8ohm) is a killer rig...the only thing on hit list might be a Monique cage?
Also, I have emailed Tec Amp directly...and had a response within 24 hours...I thought it was very good considering time variations....is it a lot of money...Yes...but do you get world class quality...Yes...YMMV
 
#47
I owned an original Puma 1000. Really loved the amp, but had pot problems, in fact the master volume pot almost disintegrated internally at a rehearsal and I had to jam a piece of paper between the knob and the faceplate to get it to work. (the amp was only used by me and looked after carefully, with Puma soft bag). Tecamp were very good and replaced the pot, but it took a couple of months to get it back….so not too happy. After its return it was fine for a while, then I got crackling at a gig…one of the switches (think it was the mute) was the culprit, back to Tecamp, yes repaired free of charge, but another X week wait to get it back (they replaced all the pots and switches at my request). While it was away I bought a GB Shuttle 9 which I still have and use, because the only other amp I had was an iamp micro, which just wasn't loud enough.

Having said all that, I loved the sound from the Puma, and given Genz aren't made any more, if I had to buy another powerful micro amp, I think I'd give the Puma 900 a go.

I had good e-mail contact with one of the Tecamp staff, he was very helpful
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: AlexanderB
#48
jeff7bass said:
Found a manual.
Power:
2 x 500 w/2 ohms
2 x 350 w/4 ohms
Bridged:
1 x 1000 w/4 ohms
1 x 700 w/8 ohms
Click to expand...

I have one of these - current spec - the pre-amp section is outstanding! I can get tones I want, easily, and while I rarely use compression, I've started playing around with this capability. I almost feel guilty about having such a great unit available.

What I'm wrestling with is use into one high-power 4-ohm cabinet: an Audiokinesis TC115. So far I've not need to use this rig in a high-volume context but that 350-watt rating concerns me as I already note that there is not a lot of volume increase as I swing the master past noon. I can bridge, but then am concerned that I'll need to make sure that I don't overtax the cabinet with 1000 watts, and I may be imagining this, but the tone seems a bit sweeter when running just one side. I guess this is why Kjung advised that most of us would be happy enough with the Puma 500 or 900! But I'm probably over-thinking this, and should just shut up and practice.
 
#49
Great information guys. Was looking closely at Glockenklang Blue Soul - but reading through the threads, sounds like Puma 900 is really worth giving some heavy consideration.

Currently running 3 8ohm cabs 2x210 +1x212 with Staccato 51 - great lows, sizzling highs, find it lacks the clear definition in the lows, and ringing upper mid's (which clearly come through with online recordings of Glockenklang, and PUMA)

Has anyone ran Puma 900, or 1000 with TC Electronics RH210 @ RH212 cabs?
Your thoughts?

Cheers!
 
#50
I have owned a Tecamp Jag for some time. It is my favorite amp. I have always gotten very fast response from Tecamp to inquiries so was surprised there had been a problem. I recently purchased a Puma 1000 because I was looking for something that sounded like the Jag but smaller. Glenn at Tecamp said the Puma 1000 is voiced similar to the Jag, the 900 less so. It indeed sounds like the Jag and is smaller. Came with a manual that I did not read. I have used it with a 4ohm and 8ohm cab and there have been no problems.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back