Why are amps still dinosaurs?

[micguy]

I have a couple of pedalboards. For most of the gigs I do, my pedalboard is my amp - I think of the different pedals as stages in an amplifier - there's a gain stage (a boost pedal), an overdrive/saturation stage (an overdrive pedal), some eq (an eq pedal). There's also a power supply (all amps have those, too), and a DI. People complain about the price of a Kemper, but by the time you add up all the pedals on my bigger pedalboard (there are only half a dozen), the power supply, the DI, the cables, etc.....yep, it costs....a bit more than a Kemper. If you count all the pedals I have that are on the shelf (you gotta try a bunch to find the real keepers), there are several Kempers worth of dollars in my pedals.

 

[Michedelic]

People prefer dinosaurs

View attachment 4431113

No, it’s because that Bose System
didn’t exactly solve everyone’s problems across the board.

 

[dbsfgyd1]

Two reasons:

1. Generally bass players don't like excessive complication and the products on the market meet their needs just fine. All these things you are talking about are already available in floormount multi-effects boxes as well.

2. Long term digital sucks, let me tell you about it. I have about $3,000 invested in my studio in Universal Audio UAD-1 cards and software and they walked away from the first generation cards about 10 years ago, essentially tanking the value of my hardware.

All I have left is the ability to move my existing licenses to their NEW platform but that's easily a kilobuck right there, and that platform is long in the tooth, probably going away soon as well.

You can buy Sony DMX-R100 digital mixers all day long for under $1,000, these were over $20,000 originally. The reason they are so cheap is Sony abandoned the market and no longer offers service and support. You have to download the last OS from people on the internet, Sony doesn't have it.

If you care about owning your equipment for any length of time, digital sucks. Sure it is kind of necessary for a lot of things (recording on analog tape is frighteningly expensive these days) but for something for which there are clear and easy options, which sound great.....it's a trap into obsolescence.

The worst crossroads is hardware in a box that runs on software; which is basically what you are describing. This requires some form of OS, and then you have updates to that OS and then later on said hardware gets replaced with the NEW stuff with the NEW OS and your hardware is no longer compatible with the new OS.

If you really want to do what you want to do, just buy an audio interface, a laptop and one of the software packages that allow emulation of various bass amps or even roll your own bass amps, then run that into a Class D power amp.

OR run one of the modeling setups (Kemper is one I believe) that allow you a fair level of customization.

Trust me I LOVE to spin me some knobs and program some things but not with my bass, I just want to set it to get a great tone (which is bonehead easy quite frankly) and go with that.

If I want to go down a rabbit hole of programming something I will just play with my Waldorf Q or the Waldorf XT-K, or a bunch of the other synths I own.

Analogeezer

p.s. I have a four channel, digital compressor/limiter/gate that was sold by Mackie about 15 years ago. Mackie bought Acuma labs and then basically ported their software compressor into a hardware box, exactly like you describe.

Then Acuma went under, Mackie went through several hands and you can't even get the manual for this device anymore. It still works and it's actually pretty cool (one neat trick it does is it has LFP and HPF filters on the gate section, no need to sidechain it to be able to do that) but if the OS craps out I pretty much have to throw it away.

I don't have this problem with my analog Drawmer DL-241's (of which I own five)

Great post. From another Analogeezer: Give me tubes, or give me death!

 

[JRA]

I had a nice old analog one for a while but her maintenance cost was too high for a humble toaster tech.

 

[BassNugget]

Reliability and longevity are reasons for going low tech. Your cell phone can process stuff better than the computers that ran the Space Shuttle, but your cell phone is not as reliable in a harsh, vibration filled, radiation soaked environment. The shuttle crews brought laptops but had to change memory modules often due to radiation. The dinosaur shuttle GPC (General Purpose Computers) had no issue.

If you have money for new digital software stuff, awesome, but manufacturers have to look at price points and profit. Proprietary software development is not cheap. Makes sense to make the amp bombproof and keep the software in a module, pedal, or other connection. I think software driven amps are super cool, but I would prefer my money to be in separate boxes.

Just my thoughts.

 

[Analogeezer]

Because magic words such as vintage, warm, classic, tube, old school and other mumbo jumbo have been indoctrinated into the guitar and bass crowd as being key to getting a good sound.

So naturally gear that checks those boxes is going to sell regardless of price or value because we need it to sound good.

Why would I want the newest most sophisticated digital power section and features if it can't reproduce the sounds from 50 years ago that are the benchmark of good sound?

It's not like most recordings and big show audio equipment is going to run my bass DI in the cleanest possible way through the most sophisticated digital equipment available now. Right? Over my dead body.

Maybe you should take a look at the synthesizer market, which makes bass players look like troglodytes.

Back in the 1980's digital (Roland D-50, Korg M-1) became all the rage and they took the knobs and sliders off the keyboards because well you just programmed in what you needed to do right?

Well then the knobs started to make comeback, albeit on digital keyboards.

Then (late 1990's) physical modeling of analog became a big deal, big big deal and became a big part of the market.

Well at the high end of the market people started coming out with ACTUAL ANALOG synthesizers and those were successful.

Now there is quite a business in real analogs, to the point where the guy from Sequential Circuits (Prophet 5) bought the rights to his company name back, and now he has teamed up with the Oberheim guy and that company (the new Sequential) has a wide variety of mostly analog products.

The thing is the old school guys want to go back to that, and the new guys with new styles of music figured out the analog stuff not only sounded good, it allowed a greater interaction with the gear in real time.

Given the vast majority of bass players are using tones that have been around for 25 - 65 years, and the fact that all the styles of playing have evolved to a standard set of styles, there is no big market or desire to create a bazillion ways of doing things when the existing interfaces and amp designs work just fine.

The departure from this of course is Class D, but that's more a weight and power convenience factor.

The existing amp companies could have put really complex programmable front ends on these products and gave players the ability to create a million and one sounds, but the nature of bass does not really require that.

As far as the PA systems with their "sophisticated digital processing" go, well those systems are just replicating what the analog systems before them did. Obviously with greater control and precision but you are mixing a band in a venue which is WAY more complex than just playing bass on stage.

A modern Porsche 911 is in most ways (well besides the weight) far superior to an old school air cooled 911 but guess what people want? That old school air cooled 911 because it rewards the drivers in ways a modern, do it all with computers 911 cannot.

That's why people will pay $500,000 for a 2.7 RS from 1973 because what it brings to the party the modern car and try and replicate but frankly it does not.

Too much gingerbread for when all you want to do is drive an engaging sports car on a nice twisty road.

Analogeezer

 

[Meaculpa]

Im happy with my Gk RB400.
Its my dream amp.
That head and a Helix Hx Effects.

 

[DonaldR]

That's why people will pay $500,000 for a 2.7 RS from 1973 because what it brings to the party the modern car and try and replicate but frankly it does not.

Yep, bring me back my modded 1986 VW Scirocco please!!!!!!!

 

[Killing Floor]

Why don’t you commission a custom build? Or better yet, build your own?

 

[Killing Floor]

Yep, bring me back my modded 1986 VW Scirocco please!!!!!!!

That was a badass rocket sled! I had a white metal flake one with a red rainbow pinstripe. It tried to kill me a few times!

 

[sawzalot]

I use a pedalboard into the house PA and IEMs to counter this issue--I have a very particular compressor, preamp, etc so I can get exactly what I want. All I need are a power amp and cabs for on-stage.

Markbass had a modular system like you describe. Also the other alternative is to go with something like a Helix, which can supply and endless number of digital representations of eqs/amps/compressors/effects. Connected to a power amp and cabs it might be just the ticket.

 

[two fingers]

I've been low-key searching for a 'forever' bass amp and I'll be danged if I can't find at least a couple things about most every head that I don't like. Anything from EQ points, to general tone, to lack of features, build quality, price, etc... That got me thinking. If I were to design/build my own amp from the ground up (or have someone else do it), how would I spec it out and what options would I include in it? Shortly after that, I got to wondering why we actually need 'hard wired' amps anymore in the first place.

Why can't manufacturers put in a digital software EQ section where we can set eq points, change the type (shelf, paramatric, 'Q' of the parametric, etc), add/remove high pass filters, even dynamic EQ would be easily possible (EQ that changes based on how hard you play), noise gate, compressor, etc. Then, once you've gotten up a sound you like for whatever gig, you can save it to a handful of storage slots for easy recall later.

Seems that would be super easy to put in a solid state amp for sure, but why hasn't anybody done it? It would open up a whole world full of additional tone options and dramatically increase the versatility of the amp! Plus, that component could be fairly copy+paste throughout several models, so perhaps they could either lower the pricing of the amp or reinvest that money back into the power amp section....?

I think thearket is going in two directions.... splitting if may.

One side is going amp-less. Many of the rigs in this category are much like you describe. Line 6 and others have gone to great lengths to give you whatever you want with twaekable models.

The other side it sticking with amps. Generally, those of us who want to stay with tone sculpting AND power in the same box prefer simplicity (at least relatively speaking).

I'll also throw in that Line 6 tried the modeler combo in the Spider series for guitar. Several of my friends tried them and they are horrible.

It seems as though your best bet would be something like a Helix with a power amp for your cab.

Let amp manufacturers stick to what they do best, and modeler companies stick to what they do best. And if you need power after a modeler, you're market segment is well covered by TINY little awesome power amps.

Maybe our illustrious @agedhorse can correct me about the market if I'm way off.

 

[Analogeezer]

Im happy with my Gk RB400.
Its my dream amp.
That head and a Helix Hx Effects.

Yes the effects thing, given the vast number of stompboxes, programmable all in one pedals, etc. putting all that stuff into an amp only does three things:

1. Gets your crap off the floor so you don't stumble on it or have to use it on a beer soaked stage.

Now I HATE having a bunch of extra crap on the floor (the only pedals I have ever used were a Fulltone BassDrive and a volume pedal, and the BassDrive was used on three specific songs) but most people do not mind having a forest of crap at their feet

Someone mentioned having more money in their pedals and amps than a Kemper; while in a way that's kinda insane (well to me since I hate pedals on the floor) that approach allows one to mix and match pedals to decide what suits their tone and their situation.

While these modeling type amplifiers (Kemper uses a different buzzword but I wonder if it's actually different from physical modeling) are software updatable, you are still dealing in the same design universe with the same people; with different pedals you are not stuck with what one design group's idea of the perfect pedal set and amp(s) are.

2. Let's you adjust things at the amp on stage, instead of bending down, fiddling with your pedals and looking like a dork tying your shoes

3. Makes it fully programmable, which is a plus if you switch tones and effects as often as a keyboard player but how many bass players actually do that?

Unless you are Doug Pinnick or Billy Sheehan, etc. chances are if you are constantly changing your sound because you have a bunch of programs to do that the rest of the band might start throwing crap at you; followed by the audience

But most people will accept the downsides of a floor full of pedals over the all built into the amp thing; programmable guitar amps have been around for years now, but most guitar players......pedals on the floor.

I guess this means we are as big of dopes as the guitar players are LOL.

Analogeezer

 

[Dominic D]

The first thing that came to mind was the Markbass Bass MULTIAMP.

A few companies have put out these highly configurable digital amps but they never catch on. IMO, it makes more sense to use a digital pedalboard with a power amp.

 

[SLPimp]

Solid head and a modeler out front. Works for me.

 

[pfschim]

Yep, bring me back my modded 1986 VW Scirocco please!!!!!!!

I had one too ... 1979 in Cedar Green metalic with a Callaway turbo/intercooler kit bolted in. Sweet ride, much fun to drive!

Some drunk dumba** rear ended the car as it was parked in front of a pub gig I was doing in the Chicago area. Really ruined that car. Sad day.

 

[Pings Bass]

Plug your bass into an interface to a DAW, out of the interface to a powered FRFR cab. The DAW could run on a tablet and give you everything: EQ, effects, amp and cab sims, etc.

For my purposes, that's too much that can go wrong for my stage monitor. I'd rather send a dry signal to the mix desk and have a dead simple head+cab on stage

 

[JohnnyChatter]

I see the Kemper rack with the power amp built into it is a $2,200 piece.

I'm not quibbling about the price (if you price top shelf hardware effects processors or synthesizers they are expensive) but I have to figure given you can buy a really nice Mesa or other higher end amp for a kilobuck or so most people opt for that.

Or if a lot of people who have $2,200 to spend on a bass head and want to spend that just buy a SVT Classic head for even less money.

The being able to program a bazillion sounds and tweak the amp to the Nth degree only matters if you actually USE that functionality.

Analogeezer

p.s. I think the other factor (if these other brands are also that expensive) is bass players and guitar players look at say the POD type products and go "why does this boutique digital thing cost three times as much?"

I have considered buying a Kemper being that I have like 10 pricey amps at home but decided against it because I only use one when I play live and I have heard Mixed reviews. The only reason I could see myself buying one is if I could model my guitar players amps and my amp from the same head and run it instead of bringing all the heads just so we could always have a consistent sound and mix to send to the board and our cabs. Until someone makes a profiler that does that I probably wont buy one unless its a screaming deal. I have seen Kempers for 1100 used but that was also before the pandemic.

 

[JW56789]

Why?

How many times have you seen a band PA, you look in the rack, and no matter where or what size room, the BL ALWAYS has a 'smile' EQ dialed in to the 31 band and will not change it at gun point, or bass players with a head with a graphic doing exactly the same thing ?

The mind shudders at the possibilities . . . .

 

[agedhorse]

No they are not, those things suck hard ballz. Bose tries to get into the pro sound market about every 20 years and the results are always the same.

These things (the Bose system) were all the rage for a while, when they advertised the crap out of them incessantly but they quickly fell off the market when people realized how bad they sounded.

They could do "ok" in a coffee house type format, but you could spend 1/3 of the cost on a coffee house rig and sound just as good.

Like most Bose stuff they were also insanely overpriced for the quality of the stuff and lacked power.

If you want to get a chuckle out of an old timer pro sound guy, ask them about those "pro touring" power amps Bose came out with in the late 70's to compete with Crown and BGW. Most failed within six months.

If you want to buy a $500 table top radio from the Bose Store at the outlet mall that might be a thing but their pro sound stuff has always sucked.

Analogeezer

Don't short sell Bose on technology. They are a very capable company with engineers recruited from other top technology companies. The stick PA is very good for what it is, where they went (very) wrong IMO is in marketing is as a 1000 seat rock and roll capable solution (complete with pictures) and IMO absurd claims that set the pro audio guys off into a laughing stupor. Had they marketed it based on what it is (ie. listened to the engineers and neutered the marketing department), with realistic expectations, the market perception would have been entirely different.

Bose has made significant inroads with their Tone-Match pro audio products, they are well designed, well executed, reliable, well supported and were designed by the same guys that designed similar products for their competitors.

The original 1800's were about the same reliability of other amplifiers of the day, the challenge was the limitations of output devices that required a totem pole output stage topology and the cooling was not ideal for high duty cycle use inside a rack. The 1800-VI was much more advanced, designed and manufactured by another well known US based pro audio amp company using more advanced technology and parts. These amps were built for ~20 years (maybe a lot longer) and many were installed in installations where they ran for years trouble-free.

Modelers do that since long ago. I'm using an Avid Eleven Rack for the last 10 years, doing what the OP is asking for. Not using any software, everything's done from the front panel, way easier
Emulating 2 bass amps (SVT and a variation), plus parametric/graphic EQ, booster, OD, distortion, fuzz, flanger, chorus, etc. Add a power amp + cab or use the XLR to FOH.

The Eleven Rack was a fairly elegant and well engineered (IMO) product, but I recall that it required subscription based software that had to be renewed. This might have been its single biggest stumbling block.

Why don’t you commission a custom build? Or better yet, build your own?

This would certainly give the OP a HUGE appreciation for the amount of effort that goes into even a modestly simple product, and how "impossible" what he is asking for might be in reality.