Just curious if someone has volume matched and played both through the same cabinet. I know aspects of the Terror Bass are built on the AD200, but i'd like to know what that translates to in terms of actual tone and playing experience. I'd love an AD200, but it would be complete overkill for me, even if it was affordable. Could the Terror be thought of as a 'tiny AD200' or are there too many differences that they have to be thought of as their own thing?
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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.
Terror Bass vs. AD200 tones
- Thread starter 53Rockets
- Start date
They get pretty close. The AD200 to me always sounded more full/deep into the same cab with the same/similar settings. Close enough that I wasn’t upset to run the terror on gigs when I didn’t want to carry the AD200.
This is perfect, thanks for including this video. It seems unreasonable to think they'd sound exactly the same, but if the Terror is in the ballpark that's good enough for me. I appreciate the response.
The above is my experience too. However, as the TB is 500W, there's plenty of power available to boost the low end a tad to get even closer to the AD200B tube power amp sound.
This may not help, but here goes. I have both, the 2nd gen Terror Bass, and an AD200 MK3. I have gigged the Terror Bass a lot, and the AD200 once. I’m only using the AD200 for gigs where it’s easy to get to the stage. I play both through my OBC-112’s. I agree that the AD200 sounds “fuller”, and I hope to gig it more in the coming months. The Terror Bass is still a great amp.
All opinions from people that actually have or have played both definitely help. It's the little, real world tidbits that help me make decisions.
I only have actual experience with the AD200B Mk 3. My understanding is they typically make about 170W clean which is a good amount of power but not a lot. IME the lows tend to mush out pretty early if you need both high volume and heavy lows. IMHO the amp sounds a lot better at the limit with modest or lean lows. This is in contrast to my old Matamp GT120 which sound great with output tubes slammed with fairly heavy lows.
I would expect a TB500 to have significantly more clean headroom than an AD200B when both amps are pushing the same type of 4 ohm cab. AFAIK the TB500 output section does not get particularly tubey when it's pushed to the edge.
Although the TB and AD200B use similar preamp circuits, not everything is in the same order. There were a lot of complaints with the original TB amps being a bit too gainy. There are similar complaints for the AD200B, but I think there may be less of them; possibly due to differences in preamp architecture. Some people swapped in different tube types so the Gain control could be turned a bit higher before preamp drive comes on. I don't feel the need for this with my AD200B. I bought the amp previously loved and never have felt the need to crack it open. Perhaps the previous owner swapped tubes.
The mk2 TB amps were updated to address the gain issue.
I would expect a TB500 to have significantly more clean headroom than an AD200B when both amps are pushing the same type of 4 ohm cab. AFAIK the TB500 output section does not get particularly tubey when it's pushed to the edge.
Although the TB and AD200B use similar preamp circuits, not everything is in the same order. There were a lot of complaints with the original TB amps being a bit too gainy. There are similar complaints for the AD200B, but I think there may be less of them; possibly due to differences in preamp architecture. Some people swapped in different tube types so the Gain control could be turned a bit higher before preamp drive comes on. I don't feel the need for this with my AD200B. I bought the amp previously loved and never have felt the need to crack it open. Perhaps the previous owner swapped tubes.
The mk2 TB amps were updated to address the gain issue.
I’ve had a V2 Terror Bass and a MK2 AD200 I would agree with everything above the one thing I found was if saturating each amp, the Terror bass kind of fell apart at a certain point like the overtones were getting too fizzy in comparison to the AD200 which stayed really nice sounding.
Personally if I stayed playing Orange I would have probably kept the Terror Bass for the DI and the small foot print. Now it wouldn’t matter if the head had a DI or not to me since I got one at the end of my pedalboard.
At the time I had a Bergantino NV610 and a pair of CN112 cabs they pretty much responded the same to whatever cab I was playing through.
Also the difference in how the amps saturate really only matters if you plan on using it that way, which I always use pedals for dirt, my amps are are just pedal platforms
Personally if I stayed playing Orange I would have probably kept the Terror Bass for the DI and the small foot print. Now it wouldn’t matter if the head had a DI or not to me since I got one at the end of my pedalboard.
At the time I had a Bergantino NV610 and a pair of CN112 cabs they pretty much responded the same to whatever cab I was playing through.
Also the difference in how the amps saturate really only matters if you plan on using it that way, which I always use pedals for dirt, my amps are are just pedal platforms
I own and play both.
They are similar enough so the Terror does the job.
I once tested it with my then girlfriend (who is a non-musician) and her verdict was when playing them side by side through the same cab (a Barefaced Big Baby II) - and I'm parafrasing: the big one (Orange AD200) sounds rounder, softer, the small one (Terror) has a bit of harshness to it.
This is when playing side by side:; if you only play the Terror, chances are you will not pay attention to it.
They are similar enough so the Terror does the job.
I once tested it with my then girlfriend (who is a non-musician) and her verdict was when playing them side by side through the same cab (a Barefaced Big Baby II) - and I'm parafrasing: the big one (Orange AD200) sounds rounder, softer, the small one (Terror) has a bit of harshness to it.
This is when playing side by side:; if you only play the Terror, chances are you will not pay attention to it.
Last edited:
sometimes it takes a non-musician to just listen and not over analyse.
I’ve used both a lot. I prefer the terror bass. The ad200 doesn’t produce a full 200w and in my opinion it sounds squashed and “feels” missing in a full band setting. Terror bass has way more firepower. All of it depends on the band but for me the AD200 was lacking.
Agreed. I guess in a rig with sufficient loudspeakers, 200 watts could possibly cut it and maybe with the Orange 810 it could produce sufficient volume for many situations.
Lemmy famously used his 100 watt tube Marshall Super Bass with a 412 plus 415 cab pairing in Motorhead, known for being quite loud. (He could of course used additional sound reinforcement).
However, with more "normal" smaller cabinet configurations, it seems we typically need more than 200 watts to achieve sufficient SPL for moderately loud gigs.
I've read of many bassists hoping optimistically that 100, and even 200 watt all tube heads will be enough, but ultimately needing to move to 300+ watt solid state amps. In the end, watts are watts are watts.
Last edited:
I’ve gone the opposite way. If the gig is too loud for my 100-200 watt tube amp with a 210 or 212 then I generally have full FOH available, either provided by the venue or the band depending on the situation. I have/have had 500-800 watt class D amps, and use them mainly out of convenience, but have not had a gig situation where I needed that kind of power.
Unfortunately, many pubs I play at don't provide any FOH so I bring a rig to take pressure off our predominently vocal PA.
When a decent FOH with on stage monitors is provided I'll use just my Tech 21 Paradriver DI.
