Fractal - Missing Bass Freq?

[DrewJD82]

THIS IS TOO MUCH GEAR!! SOMETHING HAS TO GO!!!!!!!!!! *grabs tiniest little power amp*

Hahahahhahahahha this is 90% true.

That said, I did decide to sell my Peavey XXL head and the Line 6 2x12 that have served me very well for about 20 years. I’ve got more 2x12’s than I know what to do with and that head has only served as a backup amp for quite a while now, I’m pretty sure other people have gigged it more than I have. That’ll basically make room in my amp rack so I can put all the pedals I don’t use on the shelf instead of the head……I’m trying to be a better person.

 

[mbenigni]

I think we’re on parallel paths. Having both the Stadium XL and AM4 here has definitely encouraged me to re-explore the modeler -> poweramp -> guitar cab route. It’s more curiosity than anything.

From what I’m reading, all these class D amps are using the same power amp module wrapped in a different box. I’m starting to look at old crown rack power amps, I think they may be better candidates for reproducing all the transient content class D can’t quite handle.

I've been doing the modeler -> power amp -> 4x12 thing (AKA "cheating" LOL) for a quite a while. But recently I've gone through a couple of tube amp heads. I'll run these for a couple of days, and then wind up in 4cm for a couple of weeks, and then strip down to modeler -> tube amp FX return... and then after a few weeks of that I get curious ("Why did I buy a big, heavy, arguably overpriced amp at all??") and swap the BAM200 back in to see whether there's a difference.

And I think there is a difference, but it's not necessarily of the better/worse variety. And it's not clear that I couldn't dial the BAM or modeler that's driving it to sound more like the tube power section that I vaguely prefer. (My preference is probably down to what you'd technically call inaccuracies imparted by the tube amp - but we guitarists fondly call them compression, bloom, halo, etc.) People have focused a lot on the BAM's EQ settings, but I'm also finding that running it's Gain relatively high helps to make it sound a little less clinical. Or maybe I'm just fooling myself with variances in SPL. Very hard to say.

 

[DrewJD82]

I've been doing the modeler -> power amp -> 4x12 thing (AKA "cheating" LOL) for a quite a while. But recently I've gone through a couple of tube amp heads. I'll run these for a couple of days, and then wind up in 4cm for a couple of weeks, and then strip down to modeler -> tube amp FX return... and then after a few weeks of that I get curious ("Why did I buy a big, heavy, arguably overpriced amp at all??") and swap the BAM200 back in to see whether there's a difference.

And I think there is a difference, but it's not necessarily of the better/worse variety. And it's not clear that I couldn't dial the BAM or modeler that's driving it to sound more like the tube power section that I vaguely prefer. (My preference is probably down to what you'd technically call inaccuracies imparted by the tube amp - but we guitarists fondly call them compression, bloom, halo, etc.) People have focused a lot on the BAM's EQ settings, but I'm also finding that running it's Gain really high helps to make it sound a little less clinical. Or maybe I'm just fooling myself with variances in SPL. Very hard to say.

Nah, I agree with you and I suspect that’s the exact thing I’m noting as being “sweeter” in the BAM over the PS170. I’m recognizing it as something to do with treble but that’s just my interpretation of it, it’s more of a difference I can’t put my finger on.

 

[mbenigni]

Nah, I agree with you and I suspect that’s the exact thing I’m noting as being “sweeter” in the BAM over the PS170. I’m recognizing it as something to do with treble but that’s just my interpretation of it, it’s more of a difference I can’t put my finger on.

Pulling the power section of the MkV out of my rig and replacing with the BAM200 made the highs a lot more pronounced and clean (or "clinical", as I put it earlier.) But there's a lot of room to sculpt that with the BAM's EQ and Gain. If the PS170 is less "sweet", then it's probably not the droid I'm looking for.

But there's a lot of redundancy in the way we approach these things. The PS170 may be more "accurate", and it may properly be the modeler's (or the modeler's programmer's) job to add the correct amount of sweetness.

Round and round we go LOL.

 

[Chocol8]

I'd be very interested in hearing your thoughts on these. The Fryette is outside my price range, but the PS170 is an upgrade (from BAM200) I'd consider - if it were warranted.

I would look at other class AB options unless size and weight are extremely important. There are a lot of pro audio power amps in 1u to 3u rack sizes that would be much better and they don't need to be rack mounted if you don't want to. Also plenty of home audio amps that have more power and are much flatter. Many available used for little $$$.

Even an outdated stereo receiver from Craigslist can work better than the ps170 or BAM with 1/4" to RCA cables (or adapters) and bare wire/banana plugs to 1/4" speaker cables. It will be bigger, heavier, and uglier, but most will sound better, and can be found cheap!

 

[JiveTurkey]

Try the Pedal Baby.

 

[jay mitchell]

But recently I've gone through a couple of tube amp heads. I'll run these for a couple of days, and then wind up in 4cm for a couple of weeks, and then strip down to modeler -> tube amp FX return... and then after a few weeks of that I get curious ("Why did I buy a big, heavy, arguably overpriced amp at all??") and swap the BAM200 back in to see whether there's a difference.

If you do this without adapting your presets - ideally you should disable power amp modeling when you use a tube amp - of course there's a difference, a yuuuge one. With the tube amp and power amp modeling enabled, you're double-dipping two areas: source/load impedance interactions (assuming your modeler accounts for that) and power amp nonlinearities.

Edit: I just took a look, and there's no way the BAM200 approaches neutral behavior or has enough headroom to do loud and clean simultaneously. When the manufacturer of a "power amp" won't provide even the most basic specifications, there's a reason....

 

[mbenigni]

Try the Pedal Baby.

I had just noticed earlier today that this was class A/B. But I thought I'd previously read some negative reviews - insufficient clean headroom or something? Maybe I'm mixing it up with one of the little EHX power amps.

Have you had good experiences with the Orange?

 

[mbenigni]

I would look at other class AB options unless size and weight are extremely important. There are a lot of pro audio power amps in 1u to 3u rack sizes that would be much better and they don't need to be rack mounted if you don't want to. Also plenty of home audio amps that have more power and are much flatter. Many available used for little $$$.

Even an outdated stereo receiver from Craigslist can work better than the ps170 or BAM with 1/4" to RCA cables (or adapters) and bare wire/banana plugs to 1/4" speaker cables. It will be bigger, heavier, and uglier, but most will sound better, and can be found cheap!

I'll admit, I do get kind of fixated on size weight as part of the overall appeal of a modeling rig. Once I get into anything too bulky or heavy, full-blown guitar amps with FX loops start to draw my attention. :)

That said, "little $$$" is always a consideration!

 

[mbenigni]

If you do this without adapting your presets - ideally you should disable power amp modeling when you use a tube amp - of course there's a difference, a yuuuge one. With the tube amp and power amp modeling enabled, you're double-dipping two areas: source/load impedance interactions (assuming your modeler accounts for that) and power amp nonlinearities.

Yes, absolutely. Although disabling power amp modeling is not an option on every modeling solution, so I'm left to kind of "read between the lines".

 

[jay mitchell]

I would look at other class AB options

I'll caution against reliance on mythology about output stage class. The important distinction to make is in the power supply design, with switchmode types being almost universally underdesigned for the application. A Class AB output with a typical switchmode power supply will have all the same headroom issues as a similarly-specified Class D. In fact, one of the Class AB 1-ru amps initially marketed to modeler users has the exact same issue: it is rated at 1kW but clips at 156W into an 8 ohm load.

The thing that adds the greatest weight and size to better power amps is the power supply.

Edit: in case this isn't evident, if your power amp uses a wall wart type power supply, it won't have much, if any, headroom for gig/rehearsal use.

 

[JiveTurkey]

I had just noticed earlier today that this was class A/B. But I thought I'd previously read some negative reviews - insufficient clean headroom or something? Maybe I'm mixing it up with one of the little EHX power amps.

Have you had good experiences with the Orange?

No.






I just saw people suggesting class AB and thought I'd throw it out there given the form factor and price not being too insane? It was ok but like the Katana, had some definite coloration on the proceedings. It was a solid power amp but had a bit too much sauce for my taste.

 

[EOengineer]

I definitely have not read a ton of positive sentiment about the orange pedal baby. Kind of a bummer because it initially looked perfect. Honestly somewhat perplexed at the lack of well executed designs tailored towards this space.

Sure, there are poweramp all over the place, but maybe I’m not totally comfortable pumping 2000 watts into my 1960A. FFS just give me something that can handle the transients and compete sonically with what we are used to from our traditional gear. Why does every modeling power amp need to be 3lbs and made from ritz crackers duct taped together.

 

[JiveTurkey]

I definitely have not read a ton of positive sentiment about the orange pedal baby. Kind of a bummer because it initially looked perfect. Honestly somewhat perplexed at the lack of well executed designs tailored towards this space.

Sure, there are poweramp all over the place, but maybe I’m not totally comfortable pumping 2000 watts into my 1960A. FFS just give me something that can handle the transients and compete sonically with what we are used to from our traditional gear. Why does every modeling power amp need to be 3lbs and made from ritz crackers duct taped together.

The One Trip Zombie mentality has really poisoned our brains, imo.


I'm probably going to end up with a ToneBlock202 this year as my final experiment with SS power amps.

Spoiler

 

[MTB1973]

The One Trip Zombie mentality has really poisoned our brains, imo.


I'm probably going to end up with a ToneBlock202 this year as my final experiment with SS power amps.

Spoiler

 

[eon]

Kemper

Kemper has too much mids.

 

[Boudoir Guitar]

The big fork in the road for me on the power amp shopping was this:

Choose a path

to the left: "getting a rig that maximizes my sonic bliss"
to the right: "I trust my modeler; I like my modeler; now I just need a power amp that I trust"

On the one hand the left branch seems the obvious one -- who cares about technology/accuracy/blah-blah-blah, if it sounds good it is good and I want to sound as good as good can get. The challenge is that I found it led to constant GAS, a lot more "this sounded really good yesterday, why does it sound kinda crappy today?" and a whoooooole lot more getting lost in the tone while playing the same nonsense note cluster 30 times. It turns "if it sounds good it is good" into "if it sounds good...there must be something that sounds even more good." I feel like at the end of that branch I'd find GASP, ejecta standing with his arms crossed while talking to a woman about pentatonic notes and the superiority of tubes to fractalfanbois all while thinking this conversation is going to get her to uncross her legs (iykyk), some dude surrounded by 30 boutique Deluxe Reverbs with notes about his next "commission" from someone that does TRUE point-to-point and makes his transformers on the same machine Leo did so will finally Be The One and Golem off in the corner mumbling about his precious.

The right branch isn't as easy as it should be because holy crap is it easy to stop trusting something. Especially in this scenario -- the whole point of using a modeler for me is to play at significantly lower SPL than the "real" amps would require. So in that regard, no matter what power amp I use, its going to sound/feel "less dynamic" than the amp because lower SPL will do that to ya.

One solution is to use a 40+ pound power amp with capacitors the size of your forearm of known reputation. Nothing wrong with that approach at all.

The other is to REALLY put in some time with a solid reference point. I've been using Samson Servo 120a as my main power amp for a couple years -- fairly compact, silent (no fan), and when I first got it and ran it through its paces, I felt that it was great for my typical sub-90dB use; couldn't quite get as loud as I'd need for a drummer, and definitely started to sound worse at higher volume levels.

Over the last 1.5 years or so I've played through a Headstrong lil' king a lot. Great sounding amp. The one I've been playing through has the same speaker I've got in my 1x12 at home (12"Eminence Allesandro). All of the playing through the Headstrong was at ABOUT the same volume I play at home -- maybe a taaaad louder. The Headstrong is completely clean at that volume. I've played the Fractal + Samson + 1x12 clean a lot (also dirty; but clean a lot) and -- at the volumes I play at home, I'll be damned if I'm missing any sort of transients - others might have a different experience (the other challenge with trust), but my ears, hair follicles, chest-cavity, and whatever sensory organs might impact our experience playing through an amp -- there's just not much difference at all, especially with regard to transient response. I'm not asking a lot of the system -- standard tuned telecaster playing blues/country/jazz/American-y stuff at reasonable volumes. I'm not always running a clean Princeton reverb model at home, but I'm also not running/playing anything that is more demanding re: transients/dynamics/feel. So if I trust the modeling in the Fractal to be preeeeeeeetty darn close, and I trust the power amp to handle what is probably the most transiently-demanding stuff I do at the volumes I play -- I've grown to trust it generally, even if I've got a moment where I'm not excited about the tones I'm experiencing.

If you're trying to find a power amp that "sounds better" or one that can make playing your modeler at 80-100 dB feel the same as playing an amp at 100-120 dB then be ready to hop on a carousel.

Sadly, the Samson 120a I paid $75 for has some intermittent problems (as well as a rack ear that is bent beyond home repair) and so I need to find something to replace it...and I'd be lying if thoughts of an old Crown macro-tech weren't tempting.

 

[banned]

I'm just using a SD170 set completely flat and I think it works well - pretty true. Most recently, I compared to a Victory Deputy and a PRS 30 Head - modeler (HX and Fractal) both sounded great and very comparable to both tube heads through different cabs at decently loud volumes.

That said, I don't do very heavy music - so yeah, if you're absolutely slamming it, you may need a different power amp.