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.
Is anyone else using their Le Bass with the Torpedo Cab M?
I bought my Cab M a while back and have been using it sporadically in my duo for certain gigs. To be honest, I was kind of "meh" about it until I starting downloading and experimenting with impulse responses. Last night was a duo gig at a local microbrewery, cramped space, just playing through a single QSC K10. I combined a Mesa Powerhouse 6x10 with a Celestion Pulse 15 IR, used channel B on the Le Bass for some grit and EQ, and it was tonal bliss with my 75 PBass with flats.
The learning curve is kind of steep and I never use it in conjunction with a real amp, but I'm glad I stuck with it. I think the payoff is worth it in the end.
I bought my Cab M a while back and have been using it sporadically in my duo for certain gigs. To be honest, I was kind of "meh" about it until I starting downloading and experimenting with impulse responses. Last night was a duo gig at a local microbrewery, cramped space, just playing through a single QSC K10. I combined a Mesa Powerhouse 6x10 with a Celestion Pulse 15 IR, used channel B on the Le Bass for some grit and EQ, and it was tonal bliss with my 75 PBass with flats.
The learning curve is kind of steep and I never use it in conjunction with a real amp, but I'm glad I stuck with it. I think the payoff is worth it in the end.
The weird thing about the passive control knobs that if they are at the 0 position, it sounds like the bypassed signal with out any tube shaping. When you turn them clockwise they start to add bass/treble.
I really wish we had two banks of a 4 band EQ. They should be active with cut and boost with the dent for 0. It could have done with concentric pots with Bass/Low-Mid on one and Treble/High-Mid on the other. This would free up one knob where you could have a blend on one (instead of volume for cold fusion) and a 2nd Volume A (for hot fusion).
This way we can have more control over the sounds and really skip the EQ pedal.
Cheers.
I really wish we had two banks of a 4 band EQ. They should be active with cut and boost with the dent for 0. It could have done with concentric pots with Bass/Low-Mid on one and Treble/High-Mid on the other. This would free up one knob where you could have a blend on one (instead of volume for cold fusion) and a 2nd Volume A (for hot fusion).
This way we can have more control over the sounds and really skip the EQ pedal.
Cheers.
I see what you saying. Regardless I say that for the money this unit is fantastic all the other stuff you can find it in other preamps but you pay for that stuff. The Le bass has a lot of things it could improve hopefully if we see another iteration or V2 we’ll see some of these things solved, but as of now I’m really happy with it.
When I upgraded my EMG controls to the BQC from the old Volume/tone/blend three pot system, I checked out how much the BTS was. It was about a $60 difference.
The cost of the pots themselves are about 50% more retail. For example you can buy a standard pot for about $7 and a dual concentric pot for $11. So for hardware it would cost only about $25 or so (that is retail and not volume pricing). The design could have been incorporated from the start and it would have cost little more. The cost would have not been much of an increase
The function of the device would have been more key. They probably figured out that most people would have another dedicated pedal or device for EQ and they really focused on only rough shaping the tone.
Personally, I usually do not need too much tone control when I use my PJ with EMG with the BQC system. When I use my fretless jass that is passive, that is when I wish I had more tone control.
The cost of the pots themselves are about 50% more retail. For example you can buy a standard pot for about $7 and a dual concentric pot for $11. So for hardware it would cost only about $25 or so (that is retail and not volume pricing). The design could have been incorporated from the start and it would have cost little more. The cost would have not been much of an increase
The function of the device would have been more key. They probably figured out that most people would have another dedicated pedal or device for EQ and they really focused on only rough shaping the tone.
Personally, I usually do not need too much tone control when I use my PJ with EMG with the BQC system. When I use my fretless jass that is passive, that is when I wish I had more tone control.
I keep a separate EQ for more precise tone shaping. Lately I’ve been bringing my 75 PBass and just using Channel B on the Le Bass, and the three bands tend to get me where I need to be. The MXR 10 band is usually off, or I’ll set it for a boost in the upper mids and use it as a boost for solos, or ossasionsly I use it for additional tone shaping.
The other handy thing about the MXR EQ is that it has two outputs. One goes to my Cab M for amp simulation out to the PA and to my Rolls PM351 for my in ears, and I can leave all of that connected and still have a second output for when I’m using my amp.
The other handy thing about the MXR EQ is that it has two outputs. One goes to my Cab M for amp simulation out to the PA and to my Rolls PM351 for my in ears, and I can leave all of that connected and still have a second output for when I’m using my amp.
Last edited:
I'd say lots of Channel B, not a lot of gain. Take it easy on the bass knob and try to dial in some thump with the mid control, keep the high control down just a touch. Either just channel B, or use Cold Fusion and add a bit of channel A into the mix if you feel like you need more lows.
I use a 76 P with flats for most of my gigs, that tone is pretty accessible.
I would say the Cold Fusion. You can also use channel B with a right cab sim in the loop of the effects if you are going DI.
I don't disagree, but, as of late, I've realized that a whole lot of the character of a PBass with flats sits in the lower mid range (like 250hz-ish), and too much low end can kind of steal a lot of that character. Cold Fusion definitely adds some dimension, but I'd blend in Channel A very sparingly. I definitely rely on Cold Fusion for all of my other basses.
Your right of the Pbass. When I use mg PJ I just use channel A with the tones only a third up at 3 to 5 on the left side. Too much will muddy it up. I us my BQC system shapes it right and I need just the tube warmth from channel A.
My fretless jazz sounds best with cold fusion as you said or just channel B with the cab.
My fretless jazz sounds best with cold fusion as you said or just channel B with the cab.
Hi guys and girls,
Thinking about grabbing one of these. I went thru the thread and couldn't seem to find what I'm looking for.
Question: Can a MIDI switcher control the foot switches alone, or can I change all the EQ / knobs as well?
Thinking about grabbing one of these. I went thru the thread and couldn't seem to find what I'm looking for.
Question: Can a MIDI switcher control the foot switches alone, or can I change all the EQ / knobs as well?
I've got a LeBass coming tomorrow and can't wait to use it.
One question for current users. I play clean or with a little distortion 90% of the time, but am getting a Line 6 HX Effects for compression, LPF/HPF and those times when I actually need effects. Would you suggest running through the effects loop or just straight into the input of the Le Bass?
One question for current users. I play clean or with a little distortion 90% of the time, but am getting a Line 6 HX Effects for compression, LPF/HPF and those times when I actually need effects. Would you suggest running through the effects loop or just straight into the input of the Le Bass?
