zarezare wrote:Does anyone use Fender Bassman 100 ('72)?
I have an opportunity to buy one for only 500 eur with original 4x12'' box.
I think it will be nice tandem with my 4001 V63.
Buy it, if it's in good shape. That's very cheap. The major things to check for if it looks OK are blown speakers - the originals are quite ****** and only just handle the power barely, but you can upgrade them easily anyway - and whether the amp has been serviced at all, it's of an age where the filter caps MUST be changed if they haven't been already and you want it to sound its best and not risk a failure. This happens to all old amps, it's not a fault with this model. Old tubes on the other hand (and contrary to popular myth) are usually no problem at all as long as the amp hasn't been thrashed hard for years.
mdeayton wrote:...But there's really no point going there, since these type of threads only end up with people mentioning their own amps in response to the question. For example nobody is going to say, "I own a GK rig, but Rics sound best through Eden".
Not necessarily. I own a Trace Elliot head and an old Mesa cabinet, and I
do think it sounds great, but I wouldn't say it's the definitive 'Rick bass' tone... especially as one of the reasons I use it is because it works well with the fuzz pedals I use, which of course change the tone a lot.
I also like the sound of some well-known brands of amp, that I would not personally own because as a professional amp repairer the build quality and reliability (lack of) puts me off ever wanting to. I'm not sure I want to name the names because I'm bound to offend someone that's 'never had any trouble with theirs', but remember that even a lot of fairly unreliable gear works perfectly well for
most owners - it's just that the percentage of failures is higher than with other brands.
mdeayton wrote:serpentdan wrote:It seems bass players are not as adverse to solid state amps as guitar players; several of you recommended solid state models, and some recommended tube models. Why are solid state bass amps more acceptable by bass aficionados?
Because much of the time our bass signal is sent direct to the front of house via a DI or the balanced out of a preamp, which means our rig is merely a stage monitor so we can hear ourselves over the drummer and Marshall stack guitarist. In live rock situations, the audience would be hard pressed to hear the difference between an Ampeg tube amp and a solid state preamp driving a digital power amp.
I find that approach very odd. I don't mind DI'ing the amp - but the
output of it, and post-EQ. Certainly not the input - what's the point in using your nice amp with the tone you choose and dial in for yourself as nothing more than a stage monitor, and let the soundman give you something in the hall which may bear no relation to it at all? (Not to mention never sounding as rich or full, to me.) It just completely baffles me why bassists are willing to let soundmen get away this... try the same thing with a guitarist and they will immediately be told where to go!
The main reasons bassists are tolerant of solid-state are:
First, bass needs a lot of power. Low frequencies require more energy to deliver, and especially if you want the sound to remain clean you need a LOT more power to keep it that way than a guitarist with a midrange overdriven sound does - typically at least four times as much for equivalent volume, and that's not even accounting for transients. Tube amps get very heavy, very quickly once you get up to the sort of power a bass player needs - because they are less efficient and use two transformers, both of which are larger than the one you'd typically find in a similar solid-state amp - and expensive, both for the amp and the tubes which need replacing every now and again. A set of tubes for an Ampeg SVT can cost more than some entire solid-state amps.
Second, the type of natural sound characteristic of solid-state amps are more suitable for bass - they generally have much higher 'damping factor' (the ability of the amp to control the speaker movement, roughly) and better transient response, which makes them sound tighter and more punchy, which most bass players like. Tube amps are softer, overdrive more easily and have a more compressed response. One of the reasons Ampeg developed the sealed 8x10" cab was to give the SVT the punch and control that tube amps driving the traditional 12"- and 15"-speaker cabs don't have, they can get very wooly and indistinct which further lowers the perceived volume. Solid-state amps driving 15s don't have this problem as much because the amp itself supplies more damping. (Modern 15s and even 18s are much better in that respect, too - but these weren't available in the 60s and early 70s.)
But if you really think that even a non-musician can't tell the difference between a tube Ampeg and a solid-state/digital amp, I have to ask whether you've ever heard an SVT properly... the difference is absolutely huge, and very obvious. That isn't a better/worse thing, some people prefer the solid-state sound, and not just because the amps are smaller, lighter and cheaper. Each can do sounds that the other can't. There is a good reason why the SVT is still widely popular among (mostly rock) bass players, more than three decades after solid-state amps of at least equivalent power and much lower weight have been available.