• 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.

The Fender Bassman 100T thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
#141
+1 Freddels. I am assuming that the vintage channel has a traditional Fender preamp where flat is around 2-10-2. The modern/active channel has detents on 5 so I am assuming that 5 -5-5 is flat on that side. Bear in mind that this is all assumption and my settings depend on my bass, the room and my ears as much as anything else. The traditional flat setting is admittedly counter-intuitive but solved a lot of problems for me when I used to own a Mesa 400+ which has the same tone stack.
 
#142
Freddels said:
The Fender passive tone stack is usually 0 - 10 - 0 for "flat" with the newer amps having "flat" at 2 - 10 - 2.

Bass and treble are boost only and mids are cut only.

Please correct me if I'm wrong on this amp as I haven't actually seen one in the wild. :)
Click to expand...

The manual says the passive side is cut only. I don't know what would equate to truly flat response. Shouldn't it be thought of like passive tone controls on your bass?
 
#143
Hadn't looked at the manual. To be honest, I find it rather easy to set up and have never really given it much thought. I think I just start at 5 -5-5 on both sides and twek from there. From memory last gig I ended up with something like 4-5-6 (Bass/mid/treble) on the vintage side as it was a small, boomy room.
 
#146
Tim1 said:
You are asking the same questions as I have been, Rod. The Bergantino NV215 ain't going anywhere in a hurry, that's for sure. The Orange AD200 fits the NV215 like a glove. The Bassman has to go with the Fender 610 cab. The NV610 is the obvious partner for the ST VR - if one goes both go. Realistically one pairing is superfluous, but I often find down the track I wished I had kept something. You are right, though, I seem to have gone off the Berg NV610.
Funny thing though, all this gear buying on my part has come about while my guitarist has had his wrist in plaster for the past few months, and consequently my only gigs have been the odd sub. Must come from frustration - I supppose looking at it this way I would be saving myself money if I went out and gigged for free!
Click to expand...
:cool:
Would love to hear the 100T with the NV215.
My favorite 2x15 cab.
 
#149
Fender passive tone stack was flat at 0 - 10 - 0 or 2 -10 -2 in the early days AFAIK. Don't know about now. This topic was much discussed a few years ago by Mesa 400+ owners for whom this information helped solve a few eq problems (well, it certainly did for me).
 
#151
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.
 
#157
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.
 
#158
Can't understand why you would want both channels to sound the same, though. Surely the point of having the two is to set them up differently? Still does not help us with what is "flat" - not that it really bothers me.
I normally set up the modern channel with a bit of grind, but I seem to be using the vintage side most of the time for my clean sound.
 
#159
Finally had the chance to to mate these two babies up. I'm trying not to knee-jerk, but after sitting with this for a couple of hours I am beyond satisfied and beyond thrilled. Granted I'm coming from the now-dreaded Hartke 410XL, but I was very happy with that and the 100T. But this is such a different dimension it's not even worth comparing. This 410 neo will bark, grunt, thump, roar - I'm really excited. No, I haven't even used it in rehearsal yet much less at a gig, but unless my ears deceive me, this combo is beyond delicious. I'll try to do some tests tomorrow to determine the approximate sensitivity of the 410, since that's not in the Fender specs yet.
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
 
#160
Tim1 said:
Can't understand why you would want both channels to sound the same, though. Surely the point of having the two is to set them up differently? Still does not help us with what is "flat" - not that it really bothers me.
I normally set up the modern channel with a bit of grind, but I seem to be using the vintage side most of the time for my clean sound.
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to make the channels sound the same in practice, I'm trying to determine where flat is on the passive tone stack. If you look back a few posts you'll see that was being discussed. Don't get so excited. And btw - it very much makes a difference where flat is on any filter.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back