Seymour Duncan Powerstage 100 Stereo Pedalboard Amp

la szum

la szum

Goatlord
TGF Recording Artist
Messages
14,538
Hmmmmm........ stereo???

Could run wet/dry pedalboard setup, or run a modeller/digital device in stereo.

1700156542012.png
 
Saw this today. Earlier versions had some QC issues and it was reported they didn’t sound that great at loud volume. I’d say give this a shot with a good return policy.
 
Something about me losing control of my faculties and out of nowhere kicking the volume and treble knobs from 9 oclock to 5 oclock has me permanently scared of using a pedalboard amp.
 
SD are so weird. People have been asking for a smaller stereo PowerStage forever, so they finally make one and instead of at least 200 per side, they do this!

Every version of their PowerStage products ticks some of the boxes but never all of them. Frustrating.

EDIT: Just realised that it's 100 watts at 4 ohms. So it's only 50w at 8. Ugh.
 
Last edited:
laxu said:
I do the same with my BluGuitar Amp 1. I could fit it on a board, but it's just easier to put it on top of a cab.

The SD stereo poweramp seems a little underpowered. Using at least the 200-300W ICEPower stereo modules would've been nicer.
Click to expand...

It’s a little hard for me to tell, I’m mostly using it with my Mesa 2x12 with C90’s, that cab has so much balls in it that once you open up the volume things start shaking in the room. :rofl

But I’d imagine the ICE limitations certainly kick in right around where a tube amp starts showing it’s marvels.
 
The output power might also have an effect on how it handles short peaks, which in turn might have an effect on how big and punchy it sounds. Would be interesting to compare it to the SD Powerstage 700.
 
I had the 170 for a while, sounded fine until you started cranking it up, then it kinda fell apart, would be interedsted in trying the 700 indeed.
 
jellodog said:
SD are so weird. People have been asking for a smaller stereo PowerStage forever, so they finally make one and instead of at least 200 per side, they do this!

Every version of their PowerStage products ticks some of the boxes but never all of them. Frustrating.

EDIT: Just realised that it's 100 watts at 4 ohms. So it's only 50w at 8. Ugh.
Click to expand...

Their 700 watt powerstage is so obnoxious. It has a great feature set but it's in just about the worst of all possible formats. The inputs are on the front and the power switch is on the back, so it's awful at being both an amp or cab top unit AND a rack unit because the front inputs force spaghetti cable management AND it's annoying to power on/off (especially not great for poweramps which best practices recommend turning on last and off first), and they made it exactly 1.5U tall, so there's no way to make it look not-obnoxious in a rack.
 
Last edited:
GreatGreen said:
Their 700 watt powerstage is so obnoxious. It has a great feature set but it's in just about the worst of all possible formats. The inputs on the front and the power switch is on the back, so it's awful at being both an amp or cab top unit AND racks because the front inputs force spaghetti cable management AND it's annoying to power on/off, and they made it exactly 1.5U tall, so there's no way to make it look not-obnoxious in a rack.
Click to expand...

Indeed. I believe it's because they literally built the enclosures around the various different sizes of ICEpower module so the unit heights are constrained by that physical property of the 3rd party power amp circuit. Still dumb though!
 
jellodog said:
Indeed. I believe it's because they literally built the enclosures around the various different sizes of ICEpower module so the unit heights are constrained by that. Still dumb though!
Click to expand...

Man that seems like such poor, lazy design. Seems like they could have made the enclosures like a quarter inch larger to accommodate for that, so just large enough to internally run lines around the unit for better I/O and power switch organization.
 
GreatGreen said:
Man that's dumb. Seems like they could have made the enclosures like a quarter inch larger to accommodate for that, so just large enough to internally run lines around the unit for better I/O and power switch organization.
Click to expand...

Ah, so you mean 2U instead? - yeah that would have worked.
 
jellodog said:
Ah, so you mean 2U instead? - yeah that would have worked.
Click to expand...

Sure, they could have just made the enclosure slightly taller to cleanly fit a 2U space.

They could also have made it maybe an inch deeper internally as well to accommodate running the input lines from the front of the ICE board to the back of the housing, and from the back of the ICE board to the front of the housing for the power switch.

Seriously, it's like the unit was designed by somebody who has never given a single thought about how music equipment is actually used by human beings. I wonder if it was made by the same weirdo who did the Apple mouse, who put the charger on the bottom so you couldn't use the mouse and charge it at the same time.
 
GreatGreen said:
Seriously, it's like the unit was designed by somebody who has never given a single thought about how music equipment is actually used by human beings. I wonder if it was made by the same weirdo who did the Apple mouse, who put the charger on the bottom so you couldn't use the mouse and charge it at the same time.
Click to expand...
Amen. They do apparently use basically the ICEPower modules as is, so that's an all in one thing with a separate preamp board for the EQ etc. So that puts some limitations on the form factor but I totally agree, the Powerstage 700 design really sucks.

I guess the idea behind it is that you put it somewhere, run speakers cables to your cabs, then run from e.g a floor modeler or pedalboard cables to the inputs in the front. Which kinda makes sense for a live rig where your floor modeler is at the front of the stage and the Powerstage in the back. But since you have to connect the speaker outputs, maybe XLR outs as well, why not just put all of it in the back and move the power switch to the front panel instead? And make it 2U with support for rack ears too.
 
I'm quite interested in the Orange Pedal Baby, because it is class A/B. Might feel a bit more valve like.

Still... 100watts solid state STILL makes me think it won't be as loud as a tube amp. Even though a watt is a watt, like.
 
Orvillain said:
I'm quite interested in the Orange Pedal Baby, because it is class A/B. Might feel a bit more valve like.

Still... 100watts solid state STILL makes me think it won't be as loud as a tube amp. Even though a watt is a watt, like.
Click to expand...

Orange Pedal Baby / other Class A/B + Modeller (FM3) ?

The Pedal Baby I've done the Class D power amp thing for a while and that's okay. Still doesn't quite have the dynamics, although they're not too bad... and I'm not sure I love the high end. So I'm also interested in trying out a Class A/B with my FM3 Fasbox. Question for @JiveTurkey : At The...
thegearforum.com thegearforum.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

TSJMajesty
W/D-D/W- How Would You Do This?
Replies
5
Views
286
GreatGreen
GreatGreen
J
Stereo Headphone Output to Amp?
Replies
3
Views
489
jsgordon
J
N
Metallica tones with a Mesa Boogie Quad into a Rectifier Stereo 2:100 (added dual tracked clip)
Replies
6
Views
399
EOengineer
E
N
“In the Room” high gain amp series: New Video Up: Dual amp setup of VHT Sig:X and Mesa Boogie Quad
Replies
17
Views
834
nightlight
N
A
valeton gp200 wet dry setup
Replies
0
Views
261
aftermoon
A
Back
Top