The Fender Bassman 100T thread

[Freight Train]

After finally being able to sit down with the 100T and a 410 neo cab for a couple of hours, here's what I'm hearing. Regardless of old curve, new curve, manual says or not or whatever, these are the settings that make the two channels sound pretty close to the same tonal balance-wise with my passive G&L L-1000, 410 neo tweeter level (arghhh!) at 11:00.

Passive Channel -
Volume 5
Bass 10
Mid 10
High 6.5

Active Channel -
Blend 1
Volume 6
Tone controls in center detent position

Now I don't know if the gain stage of the two channels are the same, but if so, then setting the passive channel volume at 6 to match the active channel volume, it's probably going to be more like 6-6-3 or so. I'll play with that next, but I was working from passive tones at 10 to start on this go round.

After more testing today, this is what I found. With both channel volumes set at 5, active channel blend on 1, active channel eq's in center position, the vintage channel eq and level seems to match with all the tone controls on 6. That being said, if you look at my numbers above, it's exactly the passive stack interaction that makes the high frequencies considerably hotter with everything on 10, where they're pretty much equal with everything on 6. That still doesn't mean that they're not in they're supposed neutral position when they're on 10 like the manual says, it still could be the characteristics of the 3 passive circuits that causes this, but for what it's worth that's what I found. Of course I don't have anything here that I can scope it with, this is strictly by ear. Also, we don't know if the gain staging of the two channels is the same, so the fact of the volume knobs being set the same may not be a factor at all.

 

[adivin]

After more testing today, this is what I found. With both channel volumes set at 5, active channel blend on 1, active channel eq's in center position, the vintage channel eq and level seems to match with all the tone controls on 6. That being said, if you look at my numbers above, it's exactly the passive stack interaction that makes the high frequencies considerably hotter with everything on 10, where they're pretty much equal with everything on 6. That still doesn't mean that they're not in they're supposed neutral position when they're on 10 like the manual says, it still could be the characteristics of the 3 passive circuits that causes this, but for what it's worth that's what I found. Of course I don't have anything here that I can scope it with, this is strictly by ear. Also, we don't know if the gain staging of the two channels is the same, so the fact of the volume knobs being set the same may not be a factor at all.

Yea we are getting really close. I don't hear a huge difference between 10 10 6 an 6 6 6 (oh no the sign of the beast) The vintage side does seem to have more highs with these settings. I'm digging the flat settings with my Lull PJ4 with GHS Tapewounds played through GB Uber 410 with tweeter on .25.

You know the wild card may be the mid frequency setting on the active side? The manual says the detent is flat but doesn't mention frequency setting. I guess we are assuming 6?

 

[Freight Train]

Yea we are getting really close. I don't hear a huge difference between 10 10 6 an 6 6 6 (oh no the sign of the beast) The vintage side does seem to have more highs with these settings. I'm digging the flat settings with my Lull PJ4 with GHS Tapewounds played through GB Uber 410 with tweeter on .25.

You know the wild card may be the mid frequency setting on the active side? The manual says the detent is flat but doesn't mention frequency setting. I guess we are assuming 6?

No, the frequency setting will only adjust the center frequency of the bell-shaped peak or dip when you boost or cut it. But it doesn't matter where it is if the mid control is in the center detent.
A problem that everyone has to get out of, both with your instrument, in recording, even your stereo system, is that just because there's processing available, that doesn't mean you need it, and in all cases with eq or any processing, no matter how good it is, you will gain something, and you will lose something. So you shouldn't feel compelled to use eq just because a channel has it. If you have a good instrument, it's not going to need much if you also have a good rig that can reproduce it's sound. Some bass/rig combinations you couldn't stand to listen to without a bunch of eq if not fx, but that's not a sign that you need to use eq and fx on your rig, it's a bandaid to try to pull a diamond out of a goat's butt.

 

[Freight Train]

I don't hear a huge difference between 10 10 6 an 6 6 6 (oh no the sign of the beast)

The only difference I'm hearing is the level of the channel. When you put everything on 6, the vintage channel is the same volume as the active channel with the two volume controls set the same. At 10-10-6 on the passive, the tonal balance matches the active channel, but you have bring the active channel up 1 to match the volume. But again that may not even mean anything if the two channels have different front-end gain structures - the volume control settings wouldn't match anyway in that case.
All of that is basically minutia, but especially in a recording environment knowing the neutral settings and working from there would make a huge difference.

 

[adivin]

No, the frequency setting will only adjust the center frequency of the bell-shaped peak or dip when you boost or cut it. But it doesn't matter where it is if the mid control is in the center detent.
A problem that everyone has to get out of, both with your instrument, in recording, even your stereo system, is that just because there's processing available, that doesn't mean you need it, and in all cases with eq or any processing, no matter how good it is, you will gain something, and you will lose something. So you shouldn't feel compelled to use eq just because a channel has it. If you have a good instrument, it's not going to need much if you also have a good rig that can reproduce it's sound. Some bass/rig combinations you couldn't stand to listen to without a bunch of eq if not fx, but that's not a sign that you need to use eq and fx on your rig, it's a bandaid to try to pull a diamond out of a goat's butt.

Ah yes. You are right. If center detent you are 0db. Now how can I get diamonds out of a goat's butt? Very carefully.

 

[hdracer]

I just pulled the trigger on one of these!!!

If anyone is interested, Musicians Friend will let you use the coupon code cinco2012 for $150 off on these. If it doesnt go through on the web site call it in and they will apply it. $1299.95 shipped

 

[Freight Train]

Ah yes. You are right. If center detent you are 0db. Now how can I get diamonds out of a goat's butt? Very carefully.

Sometimes that's what people expect me to do at my job. Not only difficult, usually can't be done.

 

[Freight Train]

I just pulled the trigger on one of these!!!

If anyone is interested, Musicians Friend will let you use the coupon code cinco2012 for $150 off on these. If it doesnt go through on the web site call it in and they will apply it. $1299.95 shipped

That's a good deal. You're gonna love it. I think.

 

[Tim1]

Just read all the latest information here on eq - very useful and when I started the thread I hoped it would go this way so that we could share such information. The interaction of the tone stack with the gain is something I hadn't considered. Freight Train makes a good point that just because the capacity to eq is there doesn't mean we have to use it, which with hindsight I must admit invalidates my earlier post and justifies the search for a flat setting . My stereo has no tone controls for exactly that reason. Freight Train, your logical approach to this is enlightening and refreshing, many thanks.

 

[Freight Train]

Just read all the latest information here on eq - very useful and when I started the thread I hoped it would go this way so that we could share such information. The interaction of the tone stack with the gain is something I hadn't considered. Freight Train makes a good point that just because the capacity to eq is there doesn't mean we have to use it, which with hindsight I must admit invalidates my earlier post and justifies the search for a flat setting . My stereo has no tone controls for exactly that reason. Freight Train, your logical approach to this is enlightening and refreshing, many thanks.

Hey, I"m always happy to confuse in any way possible.

 

[David A. Davis]

Anybody know where these are made?

 

[adivin]

Anybody know where these are made?

By Mexican elves in the North Pole

 

[Tim1]

Just had a friend round who was interested in trying the 100T/610 neo combination. For comparison I lined up the Orange AD200 on the Bergantino NV215 and the SVT VR on the Bergantino NV610, alongside the Fender rig. All different shades of excellence, and the 100T/610neo certainly did not disgrace itself. The SVT won the headroom battle as you would expect and the Orange as we all know was voiced with a lower frequency emphasis than the other two - but the Fender rig was tight, punchy and controlled across the frequency range. Plenty of clean grunt I thought and possibly a little more emphasis up top with the horn, without being harsh or "clicky". I also feel I could eq the fender rig to get it close to the other two if I wanted. I am fast realising that for me the vintage channel will be home - don't think I will even bother taking the foot pedal, horses for courses.

 

[chrisan2]

I use it with a fender 610 or 215 with 2 guitarists who each crank a 100 Watts of tubes into distortion and a heavy drummer doing Stoner rock and it totally hangs.... But I dont mind my tone getting some break up when rockin it out.

what volume settings do you use on the 100t when your hearing the break up , and is there any speaker distortion involved in the 610 when your cranking it?
i went the super bassman and 810 as my guitarist runs a bassman 135 at 6 and 6 into a 2x 12 cab. i used his 135 into a 810 and had to run it at 7 and 7 to reach the right volume , and it was breaking up to much for my liking, i run the super at 4 vol and 5 master

 

[eyeballkid]

Thats right about where I run it. no real noticeable speaker breakup except maybe on harder notes. I use a rather flat low end eq so for me Im gettin a good 70s drive going on that just gets growly/dirty when I dig in...like a good rock amp should.

 

[Freight Train]

--snip-- I also feel I could eq the fender rig to get it close to the other two if I wanted. I am fast realising that for me the vintage channel will be home - don't think I will even bother taking the foot pedal, horses for courses.

Totally with you there Tim. Of course I've only used the head in rehearsals and practice so far as the the new band doesn't gig for another couple weeks, but I hang on the vintage channel. Got two big fuzz bass songs songs plus one other with a fuzz punch or two that I go to the active channel for, but that's it.

 

[Tim1]

Chrisan, years ago I had a Bassman 135 and got rid of it precisely because of the breakup issue. IMO, as I have posted before, the 100T is a significant improvement over the 135 in this area - I don't know how they do it as the power amp tubes are the same, but do it they do. It was a significant factor in my purchasing the 100T and returning to Fender amplification after a couple of decades.

 

[chrisan2]

tim, if you had your svt volume set on 5 what would your 100t need to be to match it, and would it still be clean?

 

[Tim1]

Haven't tried it directly, Chrisan, but I have no doubt that my SVT volume on 5 would blow the 100T out of the room. The 100T simply wouldn't be able to match it. At five on the SVT it would be starting to develop that lovely SVT grind which is so appealing. In fact, it is difficult to think of a gig where I could get away with the SVT on five short of an outdoor stage - and even then I was once asked to turn down my onstage volume by the sound guy (playing Blues, Brews and Barbecues in Blenheim on a wooden stage - the cab coupled to the stage wonderfully ).
Not knocking the 100T, but if you want heaps of clean power and headroom the SVT VR is on a different level altogether. They are both excellent amps but the SVT excels on the large stage, although at the cost of significantly less portability. The 100T has heaps of bells and whistles that the SVT lacks though, but is aimed more at the studio and medium/largeish rooms. A fairer comparison for clean volume would be the Super Bassman 300 head with the SVT I suppose.

 

[Freight Train]

Just got kind of a shock, but I should have known since Fender isn't giving out any sensitivity specs on the new neo cabs. Just did a cursory but fairly accurate test, and it turns out the Fender neo is 2dB LESS efficient than my Harke 410XL, which specs at 98dB spl @ 1 watt @ 1 meter, meaning the Fender is like 96dB spl. That's only 1dB over what's considered inefficient. I shouldn't be drawing conclusions before I get to use it in actual gig conditions, but I begin wondering about 100 watts with an inefficient cab. I realize it's tube watts, so I'm thinking it'll be more than plenty. But still I'm kinda surprised that they wouldn't come up with something very efficient to complement their lower wattage head. Are Fender cabs traditionally inefficient? I've never owned one before the neo.