|
no dad im not gay! posted:I tell everybody looking for a Fender amp to just check Craigslist until you find a late 70's ultra-linear Twin. This is great advice, and they can still be had for reasonable money. Unfortunately they're pretty heavy to lug around. Anyone ever play a Morgan? http://www.morganamps.com/amps.php
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2014 20:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 08:28 |
|
|
jwh posted:This is great advice, and they can still be had for reasonable money. Unfortunately they're pretty heavy to lug around. Absolutely. They overbuilt amps then. It's the price you pay for better tone and less maintenance. If the weight kills you save up and get some neodymium speakers to shave off 7-8 pounds. It makes a big difference, trust me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 07:41
|
|
|
Twins in particular are heavy as gently caress. If you don't need a combo with reverb, consider a silverface Bassman and a cabinet. Much easier to haul. Or a Super Reverb, which is still heavy, but not as bad as a Twin.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 08:09
|
|
|
For most people a Twin is just too much amp, in terms of both weight and volume.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 09:52
|
|
|
Gorgar posted:Twins in particular are heavy as gently caress. If you don't need a combo with reverb, consider a silverface Bassman and a cabinet. Much easier to haul. Or a Super Reverb, which is still heavy, but not as bad as a Twin. Another pro for Bassmans is that they made so many of the damned things from the blackface era forward that, even though prices have risen, they're still startlingly affordable, for vintage gear. Just make sure you know the differences between different versions so that you don't accidentally end up with a 50W'er that breaks up quickly when you intended to get a 100W'er that stays clean unless driven quite hard. I love, love, love the sound of a good 2x12 Twin, but a Bassman head is the working man's Fender and a heck of a lot easier to kit out to do what you need it to without some of the hassles of lugging a (incredibly heavy - seriously, old Fender and Vox Twins are some of the heaviest feeling amps ever) combo around.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 14:35
|
|
|
Bassmans, silverfaces (although this is rapidly changing), and the Reeves-era/red knob Fenders are all affordable, reliable, excellent amps. It's also fairly simple to mod them to whatever particular Fender spec you're into.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 16:38
|
|
|
pre '72 silverfaces have been getting more and more expensive every year, it seems like. They're still much more affordable than the blackfaces. A lot of those amps were sold to overseas collectors, surprisingly. In the 90s, the Japanese market was buying up blackface Fenders at an alarming rate, and for top dollar. You can still find mid '70s Twins (without the UL transformer) for about $700, which is a really great price for an American built, point to point wired, ~100 watt amplifier. With respect to Bassmans, just be careful about the Bassman 10. I never liked them for guitar, though you could get some bright snappy bass sounds out of them- about as far away from an Ampeg sound as humanly possible.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 21:07
|
|
|
I managed to find a cheap KPC12P powered 100w Kustom 12" PA amp on Craigslist to pair up with my Pod XT. Not the best rig ever, but it's loud and sounds ok. I plan on eventually upgrading from the Pod to an Eleven Rack and it should serve me well as a practice amp/small gig amp/stage monitor. The tinker in me wants to add a switch so I can disable the tweeter (I still want to use it for music and other non-guitar stuff), but I wonder if I should just get an EQ to bring down the highs instead.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 21:39
|
|
|
Agreed posted:At least they do have a good clean channel. A quick once-over by a competent amp tech can bring a lot out of a HRD, though - both in terms of making the dirt channel actually usable, but also in improving the general responsiveness of the clean channel, replacing the linear pot with a more appropriate taper pot, a little bit of adjustment to the tone stack to help with some flub in the mid-bass frequencies that is amplified (no pun intended) by the speaker choice and construction...  I just modded a JCM 2203 to accept EL34s instead of the 6L6s it came with to great satisfaction from my guitarist buddy so I feel like I can take on anything. Friend of mine has a HRD 410 and he uses the overdrive channel a lot. While it sounds way better than his SS Marshall half stack, I agree that the dirty channels could use some work.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 02:10
|
|
|
scuz posted:Tell me more about this sort of thing There's the Nick Mondy mods, but they're a little heavy on the mojo side of things. Arguably does have some good suggestions for stabilizing the PCB, which IS a serious problem with the HRDs and the reason most of them fail over time... Here's a three part series with schematics that can be easily adapted to whatever revision your amigo has: http://www.tangible-technology.com/schematics/fender/hrd/hrd-1.htm http://www.tangible-technology.com/schematics/fender/hrd/hrd-2.htm http://www.tangible-technology.com/schematics/fender/hrd/hrd-3.htm That does good things to them, imo. You being a qualified technician, I'd look for ways to stabilize the PCB because seriously things will eventually either fall the gently caress off or it will break at the minimally secure connections if the amp is moved regularly, it's a major design flaw that has never to my knowledge been addressed. Agreed fucked around with this message at 13:57 on Mar 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 13:52
|
|
|
Just saw a Hughes and Kettner Tubemeister 36 head pop up locally for $900. Anyone got any time with one of these? I tried out a Tubemeister 18 in a store a while ago and it sounded pretty badass from what I remember, and I think was going for around 700 new. Curious if this would be something decent to grab up and maybe flip for an interesting trade down the line.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2014 21:05
|
|
|
nrr posted:Just saw a Hughes and Kettner Tubemeister 36 head pop up locally for $900. Anyone got any time with one of these? I tried out a Tubemeister 18 in a store a while ago and it sounded pretty badass from what I remember, and I think was going for around 700 new. Curious if this would be something decent to grab up and maybe flip for an interesting trade down the line. I've had one for a couple of months now, it's been a pretty fun amp. Can either be reasonably quiet or loud as gently caress. The gain on the lead channel is a little bit on the fizzy side of things when you crank it. Very hi-fi sounding clean channel. Plays nicely with pedals.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2014 08:43
|
|
|
Any thoughts on the red knob Fender Super 112? There's one on CL locally for not a lot, and my Vibro Champ sounds *incredible*, but just plain isn't loud enough. The internet tells me it really isn't a Rivera, but there's a lot of conflicting information out there otherwise. Right now I'm really enamoured of Fender cleans and to a lesser extent spring reverb, and can add dirt with a pedal if I need to. My ideal amp now would be a 50-or-so watt Vibro Champ (or just Champ) with spring reverb and an effects loop, and it seems like this might be a reasonable approximation. Remulak fucked around with this message at 20:25 on Mar 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2014 20:01
|
|
|
Sven posted:I've had one for a couple of months now, it's been a pretty fun amp. Can either be reasonably quiet or loud as gently caress. The gain on the lead channel is a little bit on the fizzy side of things when you crank it. Very hi-fi sounding clean channel. Plays nicely with pedals. Cool man, thanks. Do you know what the deal is with the footswitch, he's saying it's not included and cost him $300?
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2014 22:45
|
|
|
nrr posted:Cool man, thanks. Do you know what the deal is with the footswitch, he's saying it's not included and cost him $300? I don't have one for it, but there is a few routes you can go down with footswitches for this thing. There is the option of going with a 2 button (i think) traditional kind of footswitch for selecting between the three different channels, and another 2 button switch to turn on/off the reverb and effects loop. The other option is to get some kind of fancy midi footswitch, there is a hughes and kettner branded midi-footswitch, but maybe any old stomp panel with midi would work to control things (there is a "learn" button on the back of the amp to program things but i havent read too much into it). Basically having a midi footswitch allows you to program presets with combinations of channels, output power level, effects loop on/off and reverb on/off and just switch between them all on the fly from the one unit (this is most likely the one that costs the guy 300 bux). The midi option seems complicated and scary compared to the two seperate switches, but would save you reaching for the buttons on the back of the amp all the time i guess.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2014 08:51
|
|
|
Remulak posted:Any thoughts on the red knob Fender Super 112? There's one on CL locally for not a lot, and my Vibro Champ sounds *incredible*, but just plain isn't loud enough. The internet tells me it really isn't a Rivera, but there's a lot of conflicting information out there otherwise. Red knobs are cool amps. I'd probably be playing that or a Bandmaster if I hadn't gotten a crazy deal on my Jet City combo. I'd say go for it (try it out first of course)
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2014 17:50
|
|
|
So I did indeed buy the Red Knob Super 112 from the grieving widow in the trailer park, as her grandkids were running around. Goddamn CL is weird. loving sounds terrific, and is loud, which I wanted, louder than I expected. The following issues are present: 1 - The reverb either didn't work is is really subtle, and I'm not sure which. I have pedals for reverb, so this isn't a killer, but I did want spring reverb! 2 - Footswitch was to a Princeton Chorus, so it's two button, but only the drive channel button works. Do I need a special cable to use the effect button? 3 - First input jack is wonky. Easy fix, don't care, one of me. 4 - Smells like a trailer park, I think they were ex smokers, as I didn't really notice the smell until I was driving home. Don't see a lot of residue, should I just clean it and hit the tolex with Fabreze or is there somthing else? Edit - new pics!   
Remulak fucked around with this message at 22:58 on Mar 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2014 02:46
|
|
|
The output on my AC30 was almost inaudible when I turned it on one day, and then a couple days later I got no output except for a faint hum that is affected when turning the volume up or down. Does this mean only a preamp tube failed and that I'd only have to replace that section? Or should I be replacing all of them when one fails?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2014 22:00
|
|
|
Chalets the Baka posted:The output on my AC30 was almost inaudible when I turned it on one day, and then a couple days later I got no output except for a faint hum that is affected when turning the volume up or down. Does this mean only a preamp tube failed and that I'd only have to replace that section? Or should I be replacing all of them when one fails? Check and make sure everything's connected first (speaker leads to speaker, speaker cable to speaker out, etc.) because I had that same problem with an amp, swapped the tubes, did more or less a complete workup on it and then found out that nope, loose cable I tend to replace all my tubes at once anyways (or just the preamp section or the power section etc.)
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2014 22:11
|
|
|
I got a stupid deal on a Celestion G 12 V type. I love it! Hopefully I'll love it even more when the speaker is broken in.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 18:06
|
|
|
Got my replacement preamp tubes, but I've run into an issue. The last of the four screws on the bottom of the unit holding the chassis in place is the wrong screw, because it's extremely short and was jammed up the chamber where the long screw should have been. I'm guessing the previous owner did so with a drill, because the diameter of this hole is twice that of the others. The odd thing is that I can't see the screw when looking down the chamber, yet I can see where it penetrated and secured the chassis when looking through the rear panel access. I've tried fishing around in there with a screwdriver but can only hear and feel the wood - no sign of this screw at all, nor another entry point. Is there anyone who's encountered this sort of thing before?
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 02:35
|
|
|
Remulak posted:So I did indeed buy the Red Knob Super 112 from the grieving widow in the trailer park, as her grandkids were running around. Goddamn CL is weird. I see your problem: you need a 3 conductor (Stereo) 1/4" TRS cable in order for both buttons to work.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 02:56
|
|
|
I've got Princeton Reverb that I absolutely love the sound of, however I started to notice that it sounds a lot better to me at home playing lower than when I crank it in the studio or out. I suspect it's because the speaker is small and inefficient by design. I really dig the break up when played loudly but it makes my dirt pedals sound like rear end. So the solution I'm think about is taking 2x8 cabinet I have sitting around and throwing in some better speakers, something that doesn't breakup quite so low. I'm thinking it will take some load off the built in speaker and also get me a hair more volume. Is this the right idea or should I just replace the speaker in the combo?
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 21:51
|
|
|
Remulak posted:So I did indeed buy the Red Knob Super 112 from the grieving widow in the trailer park, as her grandkids were running around. Goddamn CL is weird. The red knob Fender amps are cool for the price. The way the boards are laid out are nightmarish for techs to dissemble and re-assemble from inside the chassis. Same with the more recent Supersonic-series of Fender tube amps. The spring reverb tank may be broken. The transducers on Accutronics units from the past 20 years are hilariously fragile. Change the input jacks for metal ones if you intend on swapping them out. If you got it for under $200 then you stole it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 07:14
|
|
|
Confirmed almost stolen then, still sounds amazing, even if it's confined to the garage until the Fabreeze does its work. Also found the schematics online, and they seem to only show a single button in the foot switch. The reverb talk is ok, it's intact and ohms out roughly correctly. Repeated listening confirms that the reverb is present, just incredibly subtle. I guess this means chasing it into the tube or circuitry, something I'm not looking forward to. Because unlike other amps I've owned it isn't obvious how this thing comes apart. Which is to your point I guess. Remulak fucked around with this message at 12:46 on Mar 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 12:40
|
|
|
Should I buy a bad cat 15 watt cougar combo for $450? Am I wrong in thinking this is too good a deal to pass up?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 13:26
|
|
|
Are there any weird examples of 4x12 cabs meant to accommodate two heads? The guitarist in one of my favourite bands outputs his signal to two heads and two cabs via an ABY pedal. I had to ask him what everything was doing because it didn't make sense just watching and listening, but it was a huge AHA moment for me after he'd explained it and I thought about it a bit more... The main A signal goes to one head (Sunn Model T hell yeah), and the B signal has some effects AFTER the ABY pedal e.g., thick echo/chorus/reverb. He stomps the A/B button on the pedal to switch to the echo head for a brief solo flourish in the middle of a song, and then stomps it again to go back to main signal while the echo head writhes for a while longer on its own and completely separate from the the A signal. For a three-piece it's a clever way to produce the illusion of a second guitarist, or at least a second unique guitar palette. ANYWAY, I have a 4x12 cabinet with a single 8ohm input. What I'm thinking about is adding two more input jacks to separate it into a 2x2x12 to accommodate two heads to experiment with something similar to the aforementioned. The three input jacks would have to be: In 1: 2x12 No. 1 (two of the four speakers) In 2: 2x12 No. 2 (the other two speakers) In 3: 4x12 (all speakers) In this way I would like to leave 3 amps hooked up, but only use either inputs 1/2 or 3. I'm imagining some sort of way to add a 4-way switch... Pos 1: 2x12 No. 1 (only) Pos 2: 2x12 No. 2 (only) Pos 3: 4x12 (As connected to In 3) Pos 4: 4x12 (Combining Input 1 and Input 2) Am I out to lunch in thinking this is possible? I realize there would have to be concessions made in dealing with impedances and possibly some crafty switching involving huge power resistors to get all of the input jacks to accept the same impedance, but I have a hunch that it's doable. I'm just wondering if there are any examples of companies or gearheads who've done this kind of thing before, and where I might find out more information about it. K thanks bye.  Edit: in ≠ out 
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 21:44
|
|
|
I don't think you'd be able to wire it as both a 2x2x12 and a 4x12 simultaneously without a switch, but maybe I misunderstand what you're saying. You certainly could wire it two sets of two speakers, that's not unusual. If they're sixteen ohm speakers, they're probably wired in some kind of series-parallel right now, so you'd just have to rewire them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 22:08
|
|
|
Well, it's easy enough to wire a 4x12 as a 'split' stereo 2x12, Marshalls have had this option for years now. Just flip a switch on the back to go from stereo to mono, 2 inputs and all. Like jwh said, rewiring the cab itself isn't a big deal, you just might hit up the impedance limitations based on what speakers you have in there now, but it probably won't be a huge deal either way. The issue that pops up to my mind regarding adding a 3rd head/input is that at some point ONE of those heads is going to have no load on its output unless you wire in some kind of dummy load switching system to shunt off the load for whatever head isn't in use, otherwise you're going to chew up your OTs if not worse.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
jwh posted:I don't think you'd be able to wire it as both a 2x2x12 and a 4x12 simultaneously without a switch, but maybe I misunderstand what you're saying. No, you're dead on. I figure I would need a switch to make this happen, and I'll be drawing out some weird diagrams with some likely rear end-backwards switching operations to try and make it functional with each input being the same impedance. Is it possible? I don't know, but to me it would be worth finding out just so I could say I pulled it off.  I'm just curious if it's been done before.iostream.h posted:The issue that pops up to my mind regarding adding a 3rd head/input is that at some point ONE of those heads is going to have no load on its output unless you wire in some kind of dummy load switching system to shunt off the load for whatever head isn't in use, otherwise you're going to chew up your OTs if not worse. The third input would be more of a convenience consideration thing than a functionality thing. I wouldn't ever have three heads all powered on into the cab, it would be more for having amps A+B (likely two 50w heads) into the 2x12 No. 1 & 2x12 No. 2 inputs, and then having a 100w head plugged into the 4x12 input. A/B and C would be mutually exclusive, and I would use either/or depending on the kind of show I'm playing. (If I want to use two heads tonight, I can use the two separate input circuits. If I'm playing one head, I can use the single input circuit. That kind of thing.) And then to avoid the danger of someone turning on three amps, the switch could shunt extraneous signal to a power resistor in the cabinet or something to that effect... I'll take some time to draw out a few wiring diagrams and post them here in the event that anyone more knowledgeable about this notices a problem with it before I try it out. Edit: OTs? Output transformers? Operating thetans? XYZAB fucked around with this message at 00:06 on Mar 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 23:33
|
|
|
Handen posted:No, you're dead on. I figure I would need a switch to make this happen, and I'll be drawing out some weird diagrams with some likely rear end-backwards switching operations to try and make it functional with each input being the same impedance. Is it possible? I don't know, but to me it would be worth finding out just so I could say I pulled it off. There are 2 ways of wiring 2 speakers together: Parallel or Series. 1. Parallel results in ½ the impedance of one speaker: 2x16 ohm speakers = 8 ohm impedance. 2. Series results in 2x the impedance of one speaker: 2x8 ohm speakers = 16 ohm impedance. (You CAN mismatch the impedance of the speakers in the cab, but it gets a little weird, if you want me to do the math I will.) With a 4x12 you can go either: Parallel, Series or Series/Parallel: 1. Parallel results in quadruple the impedance of one speaker: 4x4 ohm speakers = 16 ohm impedance. 2. Series results in ¼ the impedance of one speaker: 4x16 ohm speakers = 4 ohm impedance. 3. Series/Parallel results in the total impedance being equal to the impedance of one speaker: 4x16 ohm speakers = 16 ohm impedance (this is the 'classic' Marshall configuration.) Handen posted:The third input would be more of a convenience consideration thing than a functionality thing. I wouldn't ever have three heads all powered on into the cab, it would be more for having amps A+B (likely two 50w heads) into the 2x12 No. 1 & 2x12 No. 2 inputs, and then having a 100w head plugged into the 4x12 input. A/B and C would be mutually exclusive, and I would use either/or depending on the kind of show I'm playing. (If I want to use two heads tonight, I can use the two separate input circuits. If I'm playing one head, I can use the single input circuit. That kind of thing.) And then to avoid the danger of someone turning on three amps, the switch could shunt extraneous signal to a power resistor in the cabinet or something to that effect... I'll take some time to draw out a few wiring diagrams and post them here in the event that anyone more knowledgeable about this notices a problem with it before I try it out. I'm honestly not sure how feasible the switching method you're describing actually IS. I'm sure it exists, but I'm also kind of sure it'd require either an additional hardware switch or a powered relay of some sort, and if you're talking about gigging this cab, I'd shy away from that just because you're almost guaranteed to gently caress it up at some point (not you personally, just during all the poo poo that goes on pre/during/post gig). Interesting thought, I think I'd still prefer a couple of smaller 2x12 or 2x10 myself. Edit: Yes, OT = Output Transformer.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 01:12
|
|
|
Decided to run my v4 into an acoustic 320 head. I know I can do it two ways, one running the v4 preamp out into the 320 preamp in or run it into the channel input. What are the advantages and disadvantages of each way. Will running it into the pramp in keep the volume even in both rigs considering the 320 is about 3 times as powerful as the v4? And why dont more people do this? Seems like I am basically turning the 320 into a glorified, more powerful reverse hybrid head ala the Musicman HD series?
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 14:51
|
|
|
Smash it Smash hit posted:Decided to run my v4 into an acoustic 320 head. I know I can do it two ways, one running the v4 preamp out into the 320 preamp in or run it into the channel input. The Musicman HD series were solid state pres into tube power amps, this would be the opposite. This would also be a bad idea because you should still have the power amp of the V4 connected to a speaker or otherwise you risk damage.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 15:05
|
|
|
Smash it Smash hit posted:Decided to run my v4 into an acoustic 320 head. I know I can do it two ways, one running the v4 preamp out into the 320 preamp in or run it into the channel input. Assuming you have loads hooked up to everything it's completely safe. The big issue is that this kind of rig weighs a ton, otherwise more people would do it. The difference between the two is that if you run the V4 into the front of the amp, then you still end up going through the Acoustic's preamp section, which will color the tone. This can be good or bad, but if you just want the tone of a V4 through the Acoustic's power section then you'll want to go through the effects loop. You'll probably be missing something from the power tubes of the V4 but you might like it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 15:14
|
|
|
DrChu posted:The Musicman HD series were solid state pres into tube power amps, this would be the opposite. Oh yeah duh. Youre right, I had it backwards. Not reverse hybrid, just regular hybrid. And, of course, I have the V4 hooked up to one cab and the 320 to another. I knew I would not have the grit of the tubes but, I figured if I am running dirt that I will have both distorted and when I run clean, maybe running a slightly cranked tube distortion with clean with a super clean with the bass head, could sound rad. It's for a stupid loud band, stupid loud drummer, stupid loud bass - just wanted to make sure it wasnt a horrible no-no. But going back to one of the questions, I if I run the preamp out into the preamp in then they should stay relatively the same volume by just dialing the V4? (since the knobs on the acoustic will be useless)
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 16:07
|
|
|
Smash it Smash hit posted:Oh yeah duh. Youre right, I had it backwards. Not reverse hybrid, just regular hybrid. And, of course, I have the V4 hooked up to one cab and the 320 to another. Basically, yes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 16:31
|
|
|
FWIW, even when you put a lot of R&D into designing solid state power sections that can clip without sounding like poo poo (pretty much exclusively the domain of bigass MOSFETs), you still have to have a ton of wattage and usually a tube wired into it to make it sound even remotely usable and it still won't sound at all like a tube power section run above its nominal (clean) headroom. Hence most solid state amps going back as far as like the Randall Century 200 using 200W+ power sections. Off the top of my head, the old Randalls used that 200Wer for awhile - it was in the Warhead too, iirc - then today we get the above described MOSFET power section which is, frankly, really noise prone and kind of crap, but at least they're trying (it's still 400W-500W though). Fender's underrated but also "who the gently caress thought this was GOING to sell" Metalhead amplifier ran a 400W-500W transistor power section, aim was to be very loud and very clean. ISP's Theta solid state head runs a 300W-ish power section for the same reason. The point of the story being that even though it is the year of our lord Jesus Christ 2014, we still haven't found a very good approach to making solid state power sections clip in a musically useful way compared to the output section of a tube amp, and that's why any good sounding hybrid gets the order right: the preamp hardly matters, all sorts of stuff can sound great and responsive in the preamp section, but you really want a tube output section if your intent is to involve it in the clipping at all. Otherwise, loud and clean solid state power section and hopefully your preamp sounds awesome because it needs to be responsible for pretty much everything.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 16:31
|
|
|
Would be as massive a tonal difference? Would it be better hypothetically to just run both cabs from the v4? I am going for a wall of sound type thing and was just worried that the v4 by itself with 2 cabs wont be able to achieve it quite as well? (I will test both but always look for other's opinions)
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 16:58
|
|
|
Smash it Smash hit posted:Would be as massive a tonal difference? Would it be better hypothetically to just run both cabs from the v4? I am going for a wall of sound type thing and was just worried that the v4 by itself with 2 cabs wont be able to achieve it quite as well? It really depends on what it is, exactly, that you're trying to do. How it sounds, in the end that comes down to your ears. Big, high-powered output sections (tube or solid state) will generally keep the bass frequencies together with more consistency than flimsier ones. I was relating the state of tech re: hybrid amps and how they're usually done, compared to SS amps and how they're usually done, but that doesn't necessarily mean you should definitely do this or that as it's going to depend on what it is you're after. What sound are you not getting now that you want to get? Have you actually tried just using the V4 itself before getting creative with stuff? What are your cabinets looking at in terms of speaker efficiency? I can't remember off the top of my head so fill me in, what model is your V4 exactly? Even at 100W, some of them are loud as all hell. You mentioned "stupid loud bass," so are you playing guitar through it? Are you saying that your band has really loud stage volume? That's frowned upon to varying degrees depending on the venue, and usually unnecessary, too - is there no FOH support and you're relying on the actual band mix to carry the show? Do you have insufficient monitoring and so it's everyone trying to hear themselves? I don't know enough about your situation to make specific recommendations, but I figured you might want to know what the conventions are for "hybrid" amp setups. Bass amps can defy convention - they were the first to adopt Class D amplification for the pretty awesome ability to use an 8 pound box to run 600W+ of power, and bassists have conventionally been waaaay less averse to solid state amplification in general, but I'm not sure if you're playing guitar through a bass amp or what the deal is there, to begin with... Need more info, will help if I can.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 17:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 08:28 |
|
|
Its going to be heavy-hardcore/doom type band think - tragedy or thou. I am running the V4 into a v2(oversized 412) cab. It is a 1978 master volume ( no distortion channel though ) I will be pairing it with an emperor 610 and debating whether to run it with the v4 (412/610 stack  ). Or running the preamp out of the v4 into the acoustic 320 (it is a 1970s model with the largest power section of all vintage acoustic control)Bass player will be using a svt4 pro with an 810 stack. Drummer hits hard. The emperor 610 is actually a bass cab, loaded with emience 10 betas and is ported. Was worried about the loss of perceived directional volume with the ports in there. Hence why I wanted to add more power with the 320. We will mostly be playing in venues without a supporting pa ( only for vox ) houses/basements/bookstores/community-spaces ect.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2014 17:26
|
|