Tech 21 VT Bass 1969 head!

[hennessybass]

We all have our own experiences and needs and such... different strokes for different folks.

For me personally, I think 300watts is just about the right size for an amp. I payed a Hartke 350 and an amp 420 with 4 10s in a pretty loud band... both right around that 300 watt range. Now days I use a 100w tube head, and sometimes a 30w tube head. I can't ever see a time when i will need much more than that... but some folks do.

My understanding is that some folks love the super high watt amps because you don't have to turn them up much to get a lot of volume... that is getting more clean sound volume without introducing the flavor or noise of the amp.

That makes sense to me with tube amps (if i want a clean tone i use the 100w amp, if I want dirt, I use the 30w amp). The volume is the same either way, just a different flavor. I'm not sure about this with SS amps. My understanding is that most SS amps are usually good about 3/4 of the way up before they start introducing noise and such.

Anyway, just my thoughts - I could be way off base here. Like I said, different strokes.

 

[parsons]

"Volume is volume", what does that even mean? How does it apply to the discussion here?
You're entitled to your opinion, but to suggest the reason people don't agree with your opinion is because they don't know what they're talking about is rude.

Have you played with the Landmark 300 amp?

My only experience with a LM300 was in a store so I cannot give you a real world critique. In the store at moderate pace, it seemed ok to me.

I appreciate everyone listening to my opinion. I guess my point is no one can justify that they absolutely need a high power amp. Now if you prefer to have tons more headroom and run the power section at a lower gain, have at it. Should I say, what works for me can or could work for someone else so long as they're willing to throw out the idea of power numbers?

Well from your awesome action shot (nice jump) I can see that at least one guitarist is only using a Marshall 2x12 combo. The most recent band I was in we had 3 100 watt half stacks on 4x12 cabs. Thats a lot of speaker to compete with on a mere 300 SS watt head. If I was looking for a ss head I wouldnt settle for less than 5-600 watts, and would rather err on the side of overpowering than be caught lacking.

Not all of us that think 300watts is meek want 2000 watt heads. Just 600 or 800 would be more like it.

I understand what you're saying but have you ever heard how loud that 2x12 JCM800 can get? How loud does a groups stage volume really need to be? More often then not in today's world of PA, venue size, etc. not very loud. If I had to play with three guitarists, I'd probably bump up a bit in power if I was in a mood to buy a head but I bet I'd be better served buying a better cabinet.

 

[JimmyM]

My only experience with a LM300 was in a store so I cannot give you a real world critique. In the store at moderate pace, it seemed ok to me.

I appreciate everyone listening to my opinion. I guess my point is no one can justify that they absolutely need a high power amp.

you can find old quotes from me saying people buy 4 figure wattage rigs mainly for bragging rights, but i stop short at making people justify it. wattage is cheap and plentiful. let 'em have their fun

but between you, me and the wall, i secretly agree

 

[Calaverasgrande]

I agree that kilowatt plus heads are really only needed if you are running a cab that is just plain inefficient. For instance 18" cabs are seldom as loud as a 4x10.

About the JCM800 combo. Have you heard the diference twice the speakers makes? A JCM800 with 2x12" is actually fairly easy to get along with even at super high volume. When Marshalls are run on 4x12" or 8X12" they really start getting into bass guitar low mid area, which makes it very difficult to be heard on stage using low mids. The two tactics I know of are to use more low mids (which requires more watts or more speakrs or both) or to not depend on mids at all and emphasize high bass, mid bass which also will mean more watts, more cones.
I wish all my bands guitarists woudl stick to 2x12" combos. Those are nice! But guitarists are the last people to listen to reason when it comes to volume.

 

[mattvon]

I'd very much like to see a rackmount version of this preamp...I love Tech21 gear and this seems like a great opportunity to offer the consumer flexibility.

For big gigs, I run a RBI into a QSC PLX2 1804...I put 900 watts per side into a Schroeder 410R and a Schroeder 212R. This is great for outdoor shows, or larger gigs with no direct PA support. The DI attenuator on the RBI makes for great flexibility when I want to run the big rig at lower volumes.

For little gigs, I run a LMII into either the 212R or a Avatar 210 Neo...both rigs have served me well with no volume issues.

I feel it's just a matter of the "correct rig for the gig", so to speak...

 

[SanDiegoHarry]

...

My point is this - Why would Tech21 make a 300w amp when they can easily make a more powerful one that would be much more inclusive for a number of bassists who need that little extra headroom? It's not like adding it would stop people who don't need it from buying the amp - but by keeping it as is they ARE possibly excluding potential customers.

This is about MARKETING. They will introduce this, than they'll introduce a bigger head. This is "Product Rollout Strategy 101" folks - never give your customers EXACTLY what they need to fast.

 

[jmattbassplaya]

This is about MARKETING. They will introduce this, than they'll introduce a bigger head. This is "Product Rollout Strategy 101" folks - never give your customers EXACTLY what they need to fast.

I knew it was a matter of time before someone finally brought up the business side of this

But honestly, I've been viewing this thread as a business strategy since the beginning because I am a marketing/management major. To me, they are making a huge mistake because this amp simply isn't innovated enough to warrant a lot of sales from their key consumers. The head is gonna be a flop, I can guarantee it. They would be much better off making a more well-rounded head or rackmount unit right now.

 

[andrew]

This is about MARKETING. They will introduce this, than they'll introduce a bigger head. This is "Product Rollout Strategy 101" folks - never give your customers EXACTLY what they need to fast.

I really hope you're right, but given their track record with the Landmark heads I'm not hopeful.

 

[Calaverasgrande]

This is about MARKETING. They will introduce this, than they'll introduce a bigger head. This is "Product Rollout Strategy 101" folks - never give your customers EXACTLY what they need to fast.

I'd say that in most cases manufacturers came out with their flagship peices first then issued watered down versions for folks on leaner budgets, or meeker needs.
Another possibility occurs to me. How many of these amps are going to middle aged guys that used to be in a band when they were in their 20's-30's but now just jam with their buddies on weekends?
I'm an older dude, but most of my friends that I used to be in bands with have kids and just cant be loading out on a tuesday night to go rock a bar to the rafters. But maybe they havent entirely given up on bass.
So Tech 21 is saying you can have that SVT like you used to have, but half as big, and a quarter of the weight. Of course these weekend warriors are jamming with guitarists that are using the latest modest wattage guitar amps like the Mesa TA15. Maybe the drummer has an electronic kit that plugs into a small pa (so as not to wake the kids). So the needs for bonecrushing watts isnt as much here. I am sure that is a pretty big demographic.

 

[jmattbassplaya]

I'd say that in most cases manufacturers came out with their flagship peices first then issued watered down versions for folks on leaner budgets, or meeker needs.
Another possibility occurs to me. How many of these amps are going to middle aged guys that used to be in a band when they were in their 20's-30's but now just jam with their buddies on weekends?
I'm an older dude, but most of my friends that I used to be in bands with have kids and just cant be loading out on a tuesday night to go rock a bar to the rafters. But maybe they havent entirely given up on bass.
So Tech 21 is saying you can have that SVT like you used to have, but half as big, and a quarter of the weight. Of course these weekend warriors are jamming with guitarists that are using the latest modest wattage guitar amps like the Mesa TA15. Maybe the drummer has an electronic kit that plugs into a small pa (so as not to wake the kids). So the needs for bonecrushing watts isnt as much here. I am sure that is a pretty big demographic.

That's a definite possibility, but even then I wouldn't be too sure. Tech21 gets a lot of love around here for their SansAmp DI, but in all honesty I have only talked to maybe a handful of actively gigging bassists (and even less guitarists) who knew anything about Tech21. I'd say they are like Aguilar in a lot of ways. No one really knows anything about them unless you're active in a community like this. Tech21 simply doesn't advertise nearly as much as companies like Ampeg, Markbass, and GK, and I doubt guys just getting back into the business are going to know about them/trust them enough to warrant a purchase.

As I've said before, I hope I'm wrong. If they came out with a more powerful version I'd probably buy it, but off of my experiences alone with 300w SS amps I probably won't.

 

[12bass]

... So Tech 21 is saying you can have that SVT like you used to have, but half as big, and a quarter of the weight. ...

And Genz-Benz has a micro-amp with three times the power, a real tube preamp, at less than 1/10th of the weight of an SVT.... and for less money, too. This is what the current competition is all about. The VT head might have made sense to introduce into the market five years ago, but not now.

 

[jmattbassplaya]

And Genz-Benz has a micro-amp with three times the power, a real tube preamp, at less than 1/10th of the weight of an SVT.... and for less money, too. This is what the current competition is all about. The VT head might have made sense to introduce into the market five years ago, but not now.

It's not even that. They are competing with themselves a lot as well. Why buy the head when you can buy one of those micro amps with the VT/Deluxe and have a more powerful, lighter weighing version of the 1969 for a cheaper price?

 

[christw]

Let's just hope that this one comes out and they release a 100,000 watt micro VT 1969 class D head weighing in at 3 copper pennies to satisfy the rest of the buying public. That's about what it would take to talk me out of a Streamliner.

 

[tech21nyc]

We recently borrowed a vintage Ampeg SVT to compare to our new VT Bass 1969 amp. We wanted to do a direct apples to apples comparison.We designed our new amp to be as loud as an original SVT without the added weight. The Ampeg SVT was re-tubed and biased for the test. This is a pretty straightforward basic audio test. We calibrated the inputs of both amps with a 100mv signal (the approximate output of a passive bass guitar), set both amps flat (we used an FFT analyzer) used the same cabs (only the grills are different) at the same impedance, used the same bass guitar and just did an A/B comparison.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtF0_UpVCJM

 

[CharlieC]

We recently borrowed a vintage Ampeg SVT to compare to our new VT Bass 1969 amp. We wanted to do a direct apples to apples comparison.We designed our new amp to be as loud as an original SVT without the added weight. The Ampeg SVT was re-tubed and biased for the test. This is a pretty straightforward basic audio test. We calibrated the inputs of both amps with a 100mv signal (the approximate output of a passive bass guitar), set both amps flat (we used an FFT analyzer) used the same cabs (only the grills are different) at the same impedance, used the same bass guitar and just did an A/B comparison.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtF0_UpVCJM

Thank you for this!

My only complaint was that the demo riff was not correctly played in the key of D

Trivia Question: What classic song riff was utilized in the video?

Hint: It's from 1980, the same year that the Realistic Sound Level Meter, also used in the video, was purchased - only kidding, I think that meter is from 1982

Cheers!

 

[SanDiegoHarry]

I knew it was a matter of time before someone finally brought up the business side of this

But honestly, I've been viewing this thread as a business strategy since the beginning because I am a marketing/management major. To me, they are making a huge mistake because this amp simply isn't innovated enough to warrant a lot of sales from their key consumers. The head is gonna be a flop, I can guarantee it. They would be much better off making a more well-rounded head or rackmount unit right now.

It's hard to say. Tech21 seems have a great deal of momentum right now, so who knows. Were this amp cheaper, I'd consider it - alas, it is NOT. If it has more oomph and more features, I'd consider it - alas, it does NOT. So I'm not a potential buyer... but I'm just one dude.

I do agree that a rack-mount VT Deluxe pedal is a winner idea... but they might not do that if it would threaten their amp sales...

 

[1n3]

Jmattbassplaya: in my five minutes of omnipotence, I have just given Tech 21 years of experience in the design of Class D power amps, and I've put you in charge of a new Tech 21 product - an SVT-inspired integrated amp. What would you produce? Would the power stage be Class AB or D? How many watts? Describe the target market for your product.

I'm not trying to pick on you; I'm genuinely curious.

 

[christw]

We recently borrowed a vintage Ampeg SVT to compare to our new VT Bass 1969 amp. We wanted to do a direct apples to apples comparison.We designed our new amp to be as loud as an original SVT without the added weight. The Ampeg SVT was re-tubed and biased for the test. This is a pretty straightforward basic audio test. We calibrated the inputs of both amps with a 100mv signal (the approximate output of a passive bass guitar), set both amps flat (we used an FFT analyzer) used the same cabs (only the grills are different) at the same impedance, used the same bass guitar and just did an A/B comparison.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtF0_UpVCJM

THAT is what I wanted to hear. I'm another who is turned off by the price point (college budget) but this is really what I was hoping would be delivered.

I'm excited to see what people have to say.

One further question... when pushed farther into audible clipping, how do their wattages and volumes compare?

 

[CharlieC]

Here's my business plan worth 2 cents:

Take the VT Deluxe, the majorly upgraded VT Bass, with 3 programmable channels + XLR out

Couple it with a now common-place, Class D engine ala Crown XLS1000 or Peavey IPR 1600 (~1000 watts @ 4-ohms)

Now add the following mods that other 3rd-parties continue to successfully impart on existing VT pedals:

1. the infamous "Blend" knob
2. speaker sim defeat switch

Now fix the legacy issues carried forward from the Landmark 300 design

1. provide a front panel "Mute" switch (so that use of a footswitch is now optional)
2. provide industry-standard Speakon outs

Street price = $849

Weight = 10-pounds

Target Market = everyone who bought the previous pedals + new customers

See you at NAMM 2012 in the "Don't Hold Your Breath" booth

Sure, it could be a flop, what do I know?

 

[maevinj]

So far, I think the only I'm going to have is the prices. That new Ampeg pf500 is looking sweet for 399.99, but if this thing comes in around the same price as the landmark 300, I may jump on this.