TecAmp S212/Puma500 Ultra Light Rig

[Jared Lash]

I'm still waiting on my LDS 15/6/1 to be finished, but still loving my Puma 1000 through my existing cabs. The voicing through my GK Neo 212 is perhaps a bit too tight sounding in the mids and highs, but what a pure, smooth bass tone.

Can't wait until I hear from Don that my cab is finished!

 

[MOSCOWBASS]

I got my UL2 410 today and while trying it at home I noticed that the input gain control on my Puma doesn't reduce the signal to zero when it is turned completely down. Has anyone else noticed this? It's not a problem, but I would like to know if it's just my amp or do they all do it.
A/B ing the 8 ohm UL410 with my EA NL210 bridged ( at low home level!) shows a similar sound, the 410 having a bit more depth as you would expect from a bigger cab with twice the speakers....but not a huge difference. Gigging on Sunday, so better test then.

Iain H

 

[greenboy]

Someone just started a New Tecamp Rig/Puma 1000 thread today, you might ask there.

 

[MOSCOWBASS]

Thanks!

 

[pbasswil]

Question re. TecAmp LINE IN / Insert patch points:

The Line In doubles as the Return. If you don't use the Send:
- Does a signal plugged into the Return/Line In replace the signal from the amp's regular input? -- like, so you can patch in a different outboard preamp?

- Or does a signal plugged into the Return/Line In get added to the signal from the amp's regular input? -- like, so you can plug in an iPod or drum machine?

Also: is the Send/Return/Insert Pre or Post the TecAmp's EQ??


Thanks in advance; hope this thread's still alive!

-- pw

 

[KJung]

Question re. TecAmp LINE IN / Insert patch points:

The Line In doubles as the Return. If you don't use the Send:
- Does a signal plugged into the Return/Line In replace the signal from the amp's regular input? -- like, so you can patch in a different outboard preamp?

- Or does a signal plugged into the Return/Line In get added to the signal from the amp's regular input? -- like, so you can plug in an iPod or drum machine?

Also: is the Send/Return/Insert Pre or Post the TecAmp's EQ??


Thanks in advance; hope this thread's still alive!

-- pw

I have not used the 'line in/return', but according to the manual, it is 'post everything except the master volume'. So, it will 'replace' the preamp section of the Puma, while still allowing the master volume to control the volume of the amp. So, it isn't an 'aux in' like some amps have, that allow you to mix an MP3 in with your bass, etc. It is a true 'effects return'.

 

[pbasswil]

I have not used the 'line in/return', but according to the manual, it is 'post everything except the master volume'. So, it will 'replace' the preamp section of the Puma, while still allowing the master volume to control the volume of the amp. So, it isn't an 'aux in' like some amps have, that allow you to mix an MP3 in with your bass, etc. It is a true 'effects return'.

Aw, drag. Can anyone who has used the Line In confirm the above?

I'd much prefer there was a switch to switch between the 2 behaviours -- maybe incorporated into the Send jack, wherein it detected a plug.
An extra non-EQ'd input is so useful for rehearsals and practice, and something I miss on my current little combo.

Thanks KJung!

-- pw

 

[KJung]

Aw, drag. Can anyone who has used the Line In confirm the above?

I'd much prefer there was a switch to switch between the 2 behaviours -- maybe incorporated into the Send jack, wherein it detected a plug.
An extra non-EQ'd input is so useful for rehearsals and practice, and something I miss on my current little combo.

Thanks KJung!

-- pw

I'll hook mine up and check it for you in a minute to make sure I'm interpreting the manual correctly.


Edit: I was correct. It is a standard 'effects return' that is 'post everything except the master volume'. So, it is a direct in to the power amp that 'disconnects' the Puma preamp (i.e., it is NOT an aux in).

If this feature is key for you, the Genz Benz amps and some of the EA iAmps have a true aux in. Also, the new Markbass LMTube has a second input with its own volume control that can be used for this. The TC RH450 has a true 'stereo in' RCA jack input for an MP3 player, but will only work with the headphone out for silent practice.

K

 

[MOSCOWBASS]

Aw, drag. Can anyone who has used the Line In confirm the above?

I'd much prefer there was a switch to switch between the 2 behaviours -- maybe incorporated into the Send jack, wherein it detected a plug.
An extra non-EQ'd input is so useful for rehearsals and practice, and something I miss on my current little combo.

Thanks KJung!

-- pw

I can confirm that, I tried using my iamp550 pre into my Puma 1000 and vice versa to see how the power amps compared

 

[B String]

I think its much more useful to have the effects return bypass
the internal preamp. Much more flexability. And yet again, if
the made the Puma 500 with a little more headroom, I'm there.

 

[pbasswil]

...
If this feature is key for you, the Genz Benz amps and some of the EA iAmps have a true aux in. Also, the new Markbass LMTube has a second input with its own volume control that can be used for this.
K

Hey, thanks for your trouble Ken (and Ian).

Just to be positive: So the extra In on the rear of the Shuttle 6.0 sums with the signal from the main In?
Is it also Post EQ?

I didn't realize the LMTube had that, good to know.

-- pw

 

[KJung]

Hey, thanks for your trouble Ken (and Ian).

Just to be positive: So the extra In on the rear of the Shuttle 6.0 sums with the signal from the main In?
Is it also Post EQ?

I didn't realize the LMTube had that, good to know.

-- pw

Yes, the Genz has a true aux in so that you can play along with MP3's, etc. The LMTube and LMTube800 just have a second input (it is an XLR/1/4" combo jack) with a volume control, so that would work fine also for what you need (as well as any two channel amp). The iAmp design (500/800/pro) is cool, since they actually have a mini plug stereo in with a volume control (if I remember correctly).

And again, the new TC RH450 has RCA ins (so stereo ins) that feed directly to the high quality headphone amp.

Lot's of different executions that can get you there!

 

[pbasswil]

Yup, We're mighty lucky to be bass consumers in these times. :^> Thanks again.

- pw

 

[Shiveringbass]

First Tecamp M212 review on page 30 of that thread.

OK, so a Puma 500 has just joined my M212 on yesterday.


First, let me update my review of the Tecamp M212 used with the Glockenklang Soul head.

A strange thing happened during the few days after the cab arrived. I’ve never realy believed in the breaking period of cabs or hifi speakers since I never heard a significant difference.

But well, I have to admit that this cab that I found not thick enough at the begining is now quite comparable to my Glock 4x10 » that I still have.

The strangest is that the change was not progressive. One day I found this cab thin, and the day after when I switched on the amp, the change was jaws dropping. My first reaction was to check the eq but everything was like I left it the day before.


Now the cab has a beautiful round tone in the low end region with that kind of subterranian frequencies that you don’t realy hear but can feel in the room.

Nethertheless, the thing that hasn’t changed is that « nasty » upper mid bump that I definitly couldn’t stand.

It seems that the Glock high mids eq point
Was not exactly at the good frequency to calm thing down without sucking the presence.

So to be fair, I’ve never realy fell in love with that cab combined to my Soul head.

But…

The absolute necessity of a light cab and a killing deal on a Puma 500 convinced me to try that full Tecamp setup.

So after only an hour spent with the Puma+M212 stack the only thing that I can say is « this is a hell of a rig! »


Everything seems smoother, fatter, creamier. Now I realy understand Ken’s speaking of eveness. I still have to cut a bit of high mids but realy slight adjustment and the Puma eq frequency is perfect for that. The Puma tames the agressive voice of the cab just perfectly.

I’m realy impressed by the sound coming out of that box so small and so light that it may be taken for a toy amp.


I still have to spend some more time with it and make some comparison with the Glock stack I still own but this time, this rig is a real winner.


On the aspect side, I must admit I’m not exactly blown by the construction. Everything seems sturdy but not overly sturdy and I find the knobs a bit easy to move. In just an hour I’ve moved accidentaly some knobs on two or three occasions and I would not want it to happen on gigs.

Glock still has the advantage on that point and realy seems to be made for life time whereas I wouldn’t want the Puma to fall accidentaly.


As for the soft bag, is greatly ingeniered and well made. I can’t wait to see the face of my band mate when they will see me coming with that little bag and the second shot when they will hear the tone coming out of it.


To sum up, the M212 was not my thing with the Glock head but the full Tecamp rig is just beautiful.
Mix and match is just the key of a good setup and you can have very bad surprises when mixing brend.


I’ll post up after a few time and some hours spent with the Glock setup and the Tecamp setup side by side.

Regards

 

[KJung]

Very cool!

Yeah, I too dial back just a touch of upper mids with my s212 cabs, so +1 there. However, as you found, the Puma upper mid control is in the exact correct spot for this. While the cabs are quite voicied, the Puma head match-up with a slight upper mid cut results in a relatively 'flat' and VERY transparent rig. Mix and match, as you say!

Also +1 that the Puma knobs, while smooth feeling, would benefit with a touch more 'resistance' in the feel of the taper, but minor deal for me.

Just FYI (I'm sure you've figured this out), the tapers on the Puma gain and master are the exact opposite of the Glock. The Glock has a very sensitive input gain that reaches 'full gain' at a reasonably low level, but you really have to crank the master to get the amp wumpin (IME). With the Puma, it is the input gain that has that 'audio taper' feel to it. There is a LOT of volume in that control in the last few smidges prior to the clip light coming on. Even with a hotter bass, I have that input gain between 2 and 4 o'clock on that head. The master starts wumpin' pretty well approaching noon.

So, make sure you have that input gain 'just under clip light'. You will be surprised at how high the gain knob has to be set to get there. I like that... lot's of 'micro control' to that long taper.

Glad you are diggin' it. I'm still diggin' mine a lot, although I have found that the little s212 is more of a '210 killer' than a '410 killer' as I originally hoped.

 

[Shiveringbass]

Very cool!
...
Just FYI (I'm sure you've figured this out), the tapers on the Puma gain and master are the exact opposite of the Glock. The Glock has a very sensitive input gain that reaches 'full gain' at a reasonably low level, but you really have to crank the master to get the amp wumpin (IME). With the Puma, it is the input gain that has that 'audio taper' feel to it. There is a LOT of volume in that control in the last few smidges prior to the clip light coming on. Even with a hotter bass, I have that input gain between 2 and 4 o'clock on that head. The master starts wumpin' pretty well approaching noon.

So, make sure you have that input gain 'just under clip light'. You will be surprised at how high the gain knob has to be set to get there. I like that... lot's of 'micro control' to that long taper.

+1. When you come from Glock it is quite surprising. My yesterday's test bass was a Bacchus passive jazz bass and I had to crank the gain up to 3 o'clock to see the clipping led start to flash. It should allow a large palet of adjustment.


Did I say that this all rig weights less than 50lbs.

 

[KJung]

+1. When you come from Glock it is quite surprising. My yesterday's test bass was a Bacchus passive jazz bass and I had to crank the gain up to 3 o'clock to see the clipping led start to flash. It should allow a large palet of adjustment.


Did I say that this all rig weights less than 50lbs.

Weight to performance ratio is simply amazing on this gear IMO and IME!

 

[Shiveringbass]

Hello,

I had a few time this week-end so I compared the Glock rig and the Tecamp rig and made all the possible mixing of head and cab.

1) Full Glock VS full Tecamp.

While the two rigs are clearly in the same general philosophy, you can hear some evident differences when everything is flat. The Glock rig seems far more unforgiving about your technic. You can hear absolutly every single fret noise or harmonic Made by your left hand. It is quite surprising after a few days exclusively passed on the Tecamp rig. Anyway the Glock rig does that without being honky in the high mids like the Tecamp rig if you don’tback off a bit of hig mids

The Tecamp rig has those realy low bass frequencies that put a pillow under the band but that can be unwanted in certain venue or simply to cut through the mix.

With a slight cut of the bass, small boost of the low mid and a small cut of the high mid, the Tecamp sounds quite close to the Glock but with less of that hyper revealing articulation of the Glock.

On the tweeter side, the Glock tweeter seems closer to the hard attack positions of the Tecamp tweeter.

2) Tecamp Puma 500 + Glockenklang Quattro.

I was realy curious of that association since I had not been convinced by the Glock head + Tecamp cab.

So to sum it up, if you want super fat, ragaeish tone, this is the way to go. This match helped me to understand that the Puma 500 is realy a super fat sounding head and why it sounds so good with the quite mid oriented Tecamp M212, bringing it the bottom it needs to become a even cab.

With everything flat, this fat pillowy, boomy tone is realy not my thing. But if you turn the taste knob toward the dry side (anti clockwize) about to 11 o’clock, the Puma sounds pretty similar to the Glock Soul. The Quattro instantly turn into the articulate groovy machine it is with the Soul.

Finaly you already read about my experience with the Soul + M212 that I realy don’t recommand together. Too much of high mid that you can’t tame efficiently with the Soul eq.

That was realy some fun to compare and match those two incredible rigs and I consider myself a happy man.

My conclusion is still that based on that comparison, Glock cabs and heads are realy designed to work together and Tecamp cabs and heads are realy designed to work together too. Mix and match of those two brand does not instantly work to my ears.

Regards

 

[KJung]

Here's a video clip I just recorded with my new Zoom video recorder and the Alleva-Coppolo LM5 (an aggressive ash/maple 70's style J with stainless steel roundwounds).

I'm still totally digging this rig (Puma500 and s212 4ohm).

Just FYI... the amp is set flat except for a slight reduction (11 o'clock) in the upper mids.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k38TVOqOW60

 

[Shiveringbass]

Thanks Ken.


Exatly the tone I get when I plug my Bacchus ash/maple JB into my Tecamp Puma/M212 rig.


First gig yesterday with the Tecamp rig and the Roscoe. The place was a small bar where you have the rig behind your knees.

Having used a 4x10" for six years it was at first a bit difficult to find something I was totaly happy with but I finaly found a tone that serves the band.

This morning, when I heard the recording of the gig, I was quite happy with my tone up front.