What Sounds Like An Ampeg B-15?

[40Hz]

I feel like we as humans tend to oversell things just because they’re old. In no way am I bashing a B-15 or anything like Ike that. Trust me I WANT one too!. But we tend to put these things on a pedestal as if they’re unmatched in quality by today’s. In a 100 years time I wouldn’t be surprised if players speak glowing about the HIGHLY sought-after vintage solid-state amps from the early decades of the 2000s. It happens every time. P.S. I’m not bashing vintage instruments or equipment I’m a ‘vintage guy’ myself...just an observation.

I think a lot of the appeal of the sound of older gear gear is due to their unique individual tonal qualities. They all have imperfections. And those imperfections gave them distinct tones and timbres. The major bass amp brands back in the late 60s to late 70s (Acoustic, Ampeg, and Sunn) were as different sounding as night and day. And within the Acoustic lineup there were also dramatic tonal contrasts between the popular 360 and 370 series.

Today’s amps are arguably “better” from an engineering perspective. They give you lower lows, more power, less weight, higher reliability, and so on. Maybe it’s just my aging ears, but to me a lot of the new amps sound a little generic tone-wise. It’s like many amp companies are now engineering their products to hew to some common denominator tone that closely matches or duplicates what the recording industry has decided is the ideal bass sound. And it’s hard for me to bond with that sort of amp. I like the way they sound just fine. Or maybe more it’s more accurate to say I like some of them. But something special seems to have gotten lost or been cast aside along the road to “better” sound. Maybe Murphy was right when he said that if you work on something long enough to improve it, you’ll eventually ruin it.

 

[brianrost]

we tend to put these things on a pedestal as if they’re unmatched in quality by today’s

I don't think any of the vintage gear I own now or have used in the past is "unmatched" in any way other than the sound they provided, and that sound is different than modern gear.

People have heard the sound of old gear 1,000,000 times on recordings. If they decide they want that sound, they try all sorts of stuff, going down the rabbit hole just like this thread. The simplest way to get the B15 sound is to just buy one (or come close with a B12 or B18). Prices are still going up, but you can still find them in the $1000 range as long as you don't mind rough cosmetics, replaced speakers, etc.

The point that the Broughton pre costs $650 is interesting, that's half way to buying a B15. If the goal is to make some 1000 watt stack sound like a B15, OK, I can understand buying that pre.

 

[10cc]

I’m so glad I jumped on the Bro-Ton P-15 when he first started making them. $450.00 I think mine is number 12 made? I’d have to get my paperwork out to confirm. It sounds so good

 

[Border]

Many great suggestions for the B15 sound. I have been very fortunate to have been in the right place at the right time to score this set up. A little heavy for gigging but worth every pound. At low volumes, or up at a roar, they sound wonderful. Best of luck with your search.

 

[Ewo]

Along the line of choosing a preamp... When I first got my Noble, my reaction was that it reminded me of my first real amp, an SB-12.

Yeah, it's pricey. But I it's added a little special something on every recording session I've done since then.* IME engineers tend to automatically put an Ampeg plugin on the bass track, but I've asked them to skip the plugin and just give the Noble a good listen. They've all been persuaded so far...

* By no means am I some big-city A-list guy. But I've done a good number of sessions for local artists, with my regular working band, and at home on my own material.

 

[TrevorR]

For significantly less dosh than the Broughton one of these will get you a lot of the way there to emulating the sound. Will it be perfect? Probably not but if you want absolutely perfect you’ll need to start saving up for a B-15...

The pedal is specifically modelled round a B-15, an SVT and a modern hi-gain amp. You can blend between the three colours.

 

[Raw N Low]

I own and play a Invalid Link Removed and a Invalid Link Removed. Both amps are very close to a B-15

I second this. I own both and they can get very close.

 

[kobass]

I've heard lots of good things about Arkham...

Amp:
ARKHAM-THE BEAST OF BOTH WORLDS

Preamp:
ARKHAM-THE ORACLE

 

[Charlie Tuna]

Surprised no one has mentioned the Barber Linden pedal as an inexpensive step towards the B-15 sound. Great option worth checking out. Plenty of people here have used one.

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

 

[C-60 Bass]

Surprised no one has mentioned the Barber Linden pedal as an inexpensive step towards the B-15 sound. Great option worth checking out. Plenty of people here have used one.

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

Yeah, The Barber Linden in front of a fairly clean amp will get you damn close

 

[JimmyM]

The B100R gets pretty close as far as my ears seem to think.

True but it hasn't been made in 10 years.

 

[dbsfgyd1]

Ampeg B100R Rocket Bass combo amp. It’s 100 watts. Only available used. I think they stopped making them in the early 2000’s. But there are lots out there for sale.

Consider that part of the magic B15 tone was that is was 25 watts. When things are lower in the SPL scale, there is more subtle definition your ear can detect. When you try to push the SPL into gigging levels, those special nuances just aren’t there anymore, and you ear is busier being overwhelmed by high SPL to boot.

I’m guessing the speakers were a little more efficient as well.

 

[hennessybass]

Having a little fun... This was over the holiday - why Santa is on the amp.

I didn't really make these two rigs sound the same - which I think had more to do with the speaker cabs than the amp. But, they had a similar kind of "vibe."

The B-15 has three different ins, which all sound pretty different to me in the way they change up the voice - not to mention what you can do with EQ - not to mention what you can do by pushing the gain. My point being - "sounds like an Ampeg B-15" is a pretty nebulous thing.

I think a lot of the B-15 sound comes from the speaker... which I don't think is anything super special. It's a 15 in a kind of small box, so think about low end and high end roll off. Look at the way my Quilter is set in that photo... quite a bit of lows rolled off and highs rolled off too.

With that low and high roll off, you make a sound that just sits right where you want the bass to sit to sound good in a mix.
Same with the "SVT sound." The SVT amp is flat but the 810 cab rolls the lows and highs and makes it work.
I've been reading up about Bag End cabs and the most common thing guys say is that "they just work." - It's a 15 in a small box = high and low end roll off.

I don't think you don't need a super expensive all tube preamp - or even any tubes. I don't think that's where the magic is - unless you are going for power amp tube break up - in which case being able to push tubes to break up and not getting too loud becomes the thing (V4B, B25B, EBS T90, Little Bastard). But a overdriven tube amp is kind of a different topic.

I think a LPF/HPF (paging @Stumbo) might get you there. I think the Quilter is a fine amp. I think the Aguilar TH - set for clean with the AGS/Drive engaged does the thing (agin low/high roll off). The Ampeg Rocket Bass is a great amp, has the sound and the look.
Stay away from "room filling low end" and turn off your tweeter for starters.

 

[dbsfgyd1]

I think a lot of the appeal of the sound of older gear gear is due to their unique individual tonal qualities. They all have imperfections. And those imperfections gave them distinct tones and timbres. The major bass amp brands back in the late 60s to late 70s (Acoustic, Ampeg, and Sunn) were as different sounding as night and day. And within the Acoustic lineup there were also dramatic tonal contrasts between the popular 360 and 370 series.

Today’s amps are arguably “better” from an engineering perspective. They give you lower lows, more power, less weight, higher reliability, and so on. Maybe it’s just my aging ears, but to me a lot of the new amps sound a little generic tone-wise. It’s like many amp companies are now engineering their products to hew to some common denominator tone that closely matches or duplicates what the recording industry has decided is the ideal bass sound. And it’s hard for me to bond with that sort of amp. I like the way they sound just fine. Or maybe more it’s more accurate to say I like some of them. But something special seems to have gotten lost or been cast aside along the road to “better” sound. Maybe Murphy was right when he said that if you work in something long enough to improve it, you’ll eventually ruin it.

Spot on. “Old/Vintage” doesn’t do it for me. For me it’s all about the voice.

I’m still not sold on class D amps, and also of the opinion that most amps to day come with a baked in sound that either you like or not. Since you mentioned them and I’ve sent many many hours and gigs with them, The 370 Acoustic head is a classic example of having a baked in sound from days of yore, a Fender Rumble is more current example.

Right now I have a couple of mosfet combos and the rest are preamp tube driven solid hybrids that I am particularly fond of, designs from the early 2000s that are going to the grave with me. JMO.

 

[coreyfyfe]

The B-15 has three different ins, which all sound pretty different to me in the way they change up the voice - not to mention what you can do with EQ - not to mention what you can do by pushing the gain. My point being - "sounds like an Ampeg B-15" is a pretty nebulous thing.

The different inputs have different input impedances so they match to your instrument differently.

But beyond that, just looking at the circuit variations on the B15 you've got the early and late tone stack/volume arrangements, plus the 1969-80 four input/switches version, three versions of the cab (double, single, thiele), different rectifier designs, different power tube biasing designs, etc.

Nebulous indeed.

I have a B25 as well as a double baffle/fixed bias B15. The B25 is nice and in the same ballpark, but I think a bit more open and raw sounding than a B15 which is more round/warm. At least in my opinion. I tend to use channel 2 on the B25, just sounds better when I've plugged into that one. I think I usually use the 5.6Mohm input on my B15 (channel 1, second input).

 

[40Hz]

True but it hasn't been made in 10 years.

True. But they were pretty easy to pick up for around $350 last I looked. Being a little heavy, packing a 15, and pushing just 100 watts doesn’t put them at the top of the popularity charts.

 

[DJ Bebop]

Having a little fun... This was over the holiday - why Santa is on the amp.
View attachment 3782371

I didn't really make these two rigs sound the same - which I think had more to do with the speaker cabs than the amp. But, they had a similar kind of "vibe."

The B-15 has three different ins, which all sound pretty different to me in the way they change up the voice - not to mention what you can do with EQ - not to mention what you can do by pushing the gain. My point being - "sounds like an Ampeg B-15" is a pretty nebulous thing.

I think a lot of the B-15 sound comes from the speaker... which I don't think is anything super special. It's a 15 in a kind of small box, so think about low end and high end roll off. Look at the way my Quilter is set in that photo... quite a bit of lows rolled off and highs rolled off too.

With that low and high roll off, you make a sound that just sits right where you want the bass to sit to sound good in a mix.
Same with the "SVT sound." The SVT amp is flat but the 810 cab rolls the lows and highs and makes it work.
I've been reading up about Bag End cabs and the most common thing guys say is that "they just work." - It's a 15 in a small box = high and low end roll off.

I don't think you don't need a super expensive all tube preamp - or even any tubes. I don't think that's where the magic is - unless you are going for power amp tube break up - in which case being able to push tubes to break up and not getting too loud becomes the thing (V4B, B25B, EBS T90, Little Bastard). But a overdriven tube amp is kind of a different topic.

I think a LPF/HPF (paging @Stumbo) might get you there. I think the Quilter is a fine amp. I think the Aguilar TH - set for clean with the AGS/Drive engaged does the thing (agin low/high roll off). The Ampeg Rocket Bass is a great amp, has the sound and the look.
Stay away from "room filling low end" and turn off your tweeter for starters.

I myself find this to be true.

When I plug my B-15 into a modern cabinet. It sounds like an amp through a modern speaker, nothing unusual.
In a modern cabinet, it sounds rounder and deeper and modern.

But when I plug a modern head into the B-15 cabinet. The amp sounds more like a B-15.
To my ear, the magic is mostly the B-15 cabinet, in the room.

When I use an amp model of a B-15 without the cab model is sounds OK. But, when I add the speaker model, it sounds more like a B-15.

Even when I use the amp out on my real B-15. It sounds like a good tube preamp but, not
really like a B-15 as we know it, through the cabinet in the room.

I have a Mesa WD-800 that when I roll the HPF up kinda high. To me, it gets an acceptable B-15 tone out of my modern cabs. I also have a spare B-15 cabinet that I put an Eminence Kappa Pro 15 that can handle the wattage of my WD and that combo sounds like a B-15 to me

 

[hennessybass]

The different inputs have different input impedances so they match to your instrument differently.

I never thought of it in that way. I normally use the CH1 Bass input, but recently started using the CH2 Instrument input and actually really like CH2.

I think the only different between the Guitar and Bass input on CH1 is a 100K resistor on the bass input.
Difference between CH1 and CH2 is a 5.6M vs 2.2M resistor.

I'm not smart enough to really know what that means - but I know it sounds nice.

 

[Coolhandjjl]

I’m guessing the speakers were a little more efficient as well.

Back then? Doubtful.

 

[dbsfgyd1]

Back then? Doubtful.

I’m not so sure about that... they certainly are not as HI-Fi as today’s versions

‘Calling Dr. Aged Horse!