Double Bass Trickfish mini 500

[basss]

Hey, I can't remember, but at some point we had some kind of conversation about something. We went to Berklee together and played together in some orchestral thing. I don't remember what it was. Anyway, I played with Dave a lot in NY and am on one of his CD's. Good guy.

Hey Dylan, Apologies, Berklee was a long time ago and my memory... (are we getting old?), I can't seem to place where we met. It's good to reconnect with you anyway. I'll say hi to Dave next time I see him!

 

[dylanjohnson]

@basss I wouldn't expect you to remember that. Yes, we are getting old! That was back when there was only a handful of upright players at Berklee so I remember most of them. @Jeremy Allen @basss How would you compare this amp to a Woods?

 

[basss]

Never owned a WW. I've used one a handful of times over the years but they're not an amp that shows up in backlines or rehearsal spaces. My limited impression is that the Woods is more neutral and maybe more mid forward but in truth I don't have enough experience to say for sure.

 

[Jeremy Allen]

@Jeremy Allen @basss How would you compare this amp to a Woods?

I would say the Trickfish is much more clear, sparkling, wide-open when set flat, and has less of a particular character when the EQ starts getting involved.

I've made comparison recordings between the flat Trickfish and a couple of different high-quality DI's, the REDDI and the Neve RNDI. The flat Trickfish sounded nearly identical to the RNDI to my ears, which is an amazing thing to say. Engaging the tone shaping controls makes very effective, somewhat neutral but somehow still musical, changes. It never gets out of control, and I always feel like the sound of the bass itself is still in there.

The WW amps I've had demonstrated much more character of their own than does a Trickfish. And of course Walter specifically voices the two channels of his amps differently, or at least he did on the older models, so I can't quite say what THE sound of a WW is. My current Woods (early 1980s) is badly in need of new capacitors, so the values have probably changed quite a bit, and it absolutely has a particular and distinct tone (different on each channel). It sounds AMAZING but it's just a little too, I don't know, eccentric to be my daily driver of an amp.

In my hazy recollection, the late-1990s Electracoustic WW amp I had was indeed more neutral sounding than the older ones, and it may have been more similar to the Trickfish vibe.

 

[dylanjohnson]

I would say the Trickfish is much more clear, sparkling, wide-open when set flat, and has less of a particular character when the EQ starts getting involved.

I've made comparison recordings between the flat Trickfish and a couple of different high-quality DI's, the REDDI and the Neve RNDI. The flat Trickfish sounded nearly identical to the RNDI to my ears, which is an amazing thing to say. Engaging the tone shaping controls makes very effective, somewhat neutral but somehow still musical, changes. It never gets out of control, and I always feel like the sound of the bass itself is still in there.

The WW amps I've had demonstrated much more character of their own than does a Trickfish. And of course Walter specifically voices the two channels of his amps differently, or at least he did on the older models, so I can't quite say what THE sound of a WW is. My current Woods (early 1980s) is badly in need of new capacitors, so the values have probably changed quite a bit, and it absolutely has a particular and distinct tone (different on each channel). It sounds AMAZING but it's just a little too, I don't know, eccentric to be my daily driver of an amp.

In my hazy recollection, the late-1990s Electracoustic WW amp I had was indeed more neutral sounding than the older ones, and it may have been more similar to the Trickfish vibe.

I have an early 80's one channel, and a late 90's amber light Electracoustic. The newer one definitely is more transparent and by that time he started making both channels the same voicing. I hear you on the older ones. Very colored sound. I think when it works with a particular instrument and pickup it can be amazing, but I've had less than stellar experiences with my instrument. I'm likely too conservative with my knob twisting. Thank you for chiming in.

 

[Jeremy Allen]

Compared to AI, I agree that the Trickfish EQ is more intuitive and useful. The AI is more flat and sterile, but the Trickfish needs less EQ to sound right, if that makes sense, and the EQ is in the right place.

Agreed!