What's the point of 100 watt amps?

[Duffy]

The point here being, NW, is that there "are" belligerent super loud drummers that actually are adversarial and it's nice to have that reserve power to bring to bear if needed, before you walk. It was kind of a joke actually, but in reality these guys are out there and I'm sure you have met a few and steer clear. Same thing with other superstar guitar players, and it turns into the battle of the loudest.

100 watts isn't a bad thing, even 30 watt players can be obnoxiously loud and no fun to play with.

I agree, no one likes to be drownded out and it's not fun.

[Algonquin]

A knowledable Gent I once worked for explained wattage and db levels to me like this... 'It takes 10 x's the wattage to double the decible level' From this it reasons a 100 watt amp will only be twice as loud as a 10 watt amp, but the clean headroom it gives you is incredible!

There are many amps out there that operate at half wattage like the Marshall Jubilee 2550, or the Traynor YCS50 which can run in a 15 watt mode.

I don't think either of these amps run at the lower wattage really reduce the overall volume much, but it does give them a different feel.

[bigoldron]

One thing is cool, though, about a big amph through a 4x12 cab is the WHUMP. Turn that amph up, stand in front of the cab, and hit a power chord. The feeling when the sound hits you in the chest (the WHUMP, that's the best way I can describe it) is incredible. There really is nothing like it.

Of course, there really is nothing like tinnitus either, so I like my smaller amph.

+1

[Ch0jin]

Thanks Algonquin, I was hoping that would come up. Yes, it's true, a 100W amp is actually only 23% louder than a 50W amp. Here's the formula, go nuts!

2^log10(100W/50W) = 2^log10(2) = 2^.30102999…. = 1.23. (Just 23%!)

It's fundamentally flawed to apply linear math to guitar amps when you're thinking about power ratings. As the guys here who have used 100W amps have said, it's not necessarily about being a lot louder. Frequently it's about clean headroom (sorry, I don't have a formula for that, but more power amp reserve typically equals more clean headroom, important for all those Jazz gig's we play at metal volume) and/or more low frequency grunt.

It's also been mentioned that bass guitar amps typically run massively higher wattage than comparable guitar rigs, whilst completely true, I'd like to make it clear the same theory applies to Guitar amps.

If you want more perceived volume from the lower frequencies (any 7 string players want to comment?) you'll need more power.

So yeah, if you want stomach churning, pants flapping, brass vibrating, snare rattling, ear rupturing, foundation crumbling bass response in your guitar tone. Keep shopping the 100 Watt amps.

As a personal anecdote though, I jam with another guitarist/bass player and a loud rock drummer and I usually have a 60W all tube Peavey run with the MV wide open and the clean and crunch channel volumes pretty much maxed too. All through a very old (so i'm thinking, inefficient) 4x12 and I usually leave those jams thinking of buying a 100W head. Then I get home and think "H'mm a 5 watt combo would be sweet"

There is a place for both

[Ch0jin]

Pay me enough and I'll smile and plunk root notes all day while you wank away at top volume.

Hey that sounds like heaps of fun! How much do I have to pay exactly? I hate it when bass players step all over my non-stop solo's with their fancy scales and such.

(joking)

[deeaa*]

I would take exception to this. If you feel the need to drown out another musician, then you are in an adversarial band situation where nobody is going to be happy and you won't be making good music.

If you want to be a super-loud superstar, then forget about being in a band.

When a guitar player drowns out my bass, then I figure my contribution is not needed and I pack up and walk. The only way I'd put up with that is for loads of $$$. Pay me enough and I'll smile and plunk root notes all day while you wank away at top volume.

I don't want to sound like an *** or aggravate or anything, but seriously, I don't get your approach.

Would you not play with, say Jimi Hendrix or Joe Bonamassa if they insisted on playing louder than hell? Does everybody in a band have to be equal, would it not be good to have a superstar in the band whom others accompany, more or less?

I don't think it basically matters usually - if someone is a louder player, you arrange monitoring so that you hear yourself. You talk with the others, and make a joint decision, you have a band meeting, you make the best of it. But I don't believe it's good to force everybody into some mold just for some minor detail like that, or leave because of it. I'd be concerned of ever getting to be in a good band if I was so eager to jump out at such a small trouble detail.

I've been in dozens of bands, and the best ones always were the ones that didn't have the best players or best volume appreciations of others etc. but great unity and feel and whatnot.
And despite it pains me to say this because I really don't wish to say anything annoying or insulting - but the truth is that if there's anyone in the band who's expandable, it's the bassist. Pretty much any band I've ever been in, it's been more of a case of just making sure the bass doesn't rumble too much and is about on time, that's all that is needed and cared for. Many a band of mine has swapped bassists for whatever reason, and it hardly has mattered usually overall, but you can't change any other member like a guitarist or singer or drummer without changing the band sound and feel drastically. Bass is a support instrument, and 90% of time it should only be noticed if it's missing, not as a separate instrument all the time.

Not that I don't appreciate a great bassist, but to be honest in a band meeting situation if a bass player complains about too loud a guitarist, well, he's not going to get much support from the rest of the band I fear, unless it's really really loud a guitarist. I know because I've been a bassist in a touring band. Many a time I didn't hear myself at all either, but it was rock music so the guitar is the king. I've had a superb, totally professional bassist who made his living on playing bass entirely in my band, and he was excellent, but when he had to quit we took a guitar player to spank the bass instead thru an old guitar amp, and it was just as good from band perspective and we made some of our best stuff after that.

Many times people - especially good/exceptional players - can be too loud or have some other issues. But I don't think that makes for bad music, quite the contrary. If everybody needs to be constantly happy about their sounds and volumes and overall just too much worry about such things, or change band members based on any similar issue etc, well, I don't think _that_ makes for making good music either.

Of course, it could be the bassist who's the superstar too! The friend pro who played in my band a few years has his own jazz bands, in which he's basically playing leads on bass as well and in that, HE's the star and the guitarist just supports him.

Our other guitarist drowns me quite completely at times, many a times, but I don't mind, as long as he's keeping it down at least in some spots that matter. Same with vocals, I have practically never been in a band where I could hear the vocals well in rehearsals, because the PA stuff is expensive and had to get loud in a small room without feedback.

So to sum it up...yeah it sucks if some person/persons are drowning the others with volume, but I don't see it as black and white - sometimes it's good for the band, sometimes someone needs to be loud, and in any case it's just a matter of arranging monitoring and / or talking about how to correct the problem. Maybe the guitar amp can be turned to other direction and he can play in front of it a little farther off or something, or maybe the band can get an ear monitor for the bassist...it's just technical and not a good reason to just leave a band, IMO.

[NWBasser]

Deeaa,

I see what you're saying and agree with you that the bass isn't very important in a hard rock/heavy metal context. In that genre, the bass can be inaudible.

I don't play metal though. Maybe it's for that reason that I rarely even listen to metal anymore.

From my perspective and my own opinion, in playing other less guitar-focused, music, bass is important. If I can't be heard clearly, then my presence or absence doesn't matter.

Think of what R&B, funk, soul, jazz and so on would be without a strong bass line to move the music along. I don't think you could have easily replaced James Jamerson and gotten the Motown that you hear today.

The simple fact is, there are a whole lot of nice and creative baselines in popular music where the bass player makes a huge difference. If you have some time on your hands, I can begin reciting examples...

Going back to your first point though, no I wouldn't play with Bonamossa, Hendrix, etc. unless I were being paid hansomely to destroy my hearing.

For my part, and in my opinion, everyone should be heard clearly in a band. It's my belief that the best music is made where everyone has an equal contribution.

BTW - I don't take any offense to your posting. I happen to have a fairly different musical perspective.

[Duffy]

100 watt amps can be very cool indeed, like the Blackheart 100 watt head with six preamp tubes.

As far as great contributing bass players in rock bands, in a few "rock" bands of old the bass players were key players and irreplaceable, at least in terms of the band sounding the same. Three of these being Hendrix's Experience, Noel Redding; The Who's, John Entwhistle; Led Zepellin's, John Paul Jones; and the Stones', Bill Wyman. The Stones, in particular, just don't sound the same without Bill Wyman, in my opinion. Redding, Jones, and Entwhistle had unique styles and were integral to the overall sound of the bands. Of course, Paul McCartney's bass contribution can not be discounted, although he uses a guitar player to play bass in his current band on must songs - a beautiful Gibson SG bass.

Typically though, I would agree that in average gigging cover bands that a lot of different bass players could probably do just as excellent a job in supporting the band.

One thing I noticed in most modern real heavy metal bands, screamo, etc., the bass players and drummers are generally super excellent and super loud and the guitars and vocals sound buried behind their booming rhythm - at least in my observation listening to a lot of the music my son listens to and bands he has been in. A friend of mine has a 2000 watt per channel bass power amp and he uses it in clubs: super loud, including incredibly loud head busting drummer that is proud of breaking a snare head each show. Obviously a lot of people would not want to be in a band like this but you wouldn't believe how many super loyal fans they have. They are called "Farewell Rescue".

[NWBasser]

100 watt amps can be very cool indeed, like the Blackheart 100 watt head with six preamp tubes.

As far as great contributing bass players in rock bands, in a few "rock" bands of old the bass players were key players and irreplaceable, at least in terms of the band sounding the same. Three of these being Hendrix's Experience, Noel Redding; The Who's, John Entwhistle; Led Zepellin's, John Paul Jones; and the Stones', Bill Wyman. The Stones, in particular, just don't sound the same without Bill Wyman, in my opinion. Redding, Jones, and Entwhistle had unique styles and were integral to the overall sound of the bands. Of course, Paul McCartney's bass contribution can not be discounted, although he uses a guitar player to play bass in his current band on must songs - a beautiful Gibson SG bass.

Typically though, I would agree that in average gigging cover bands that a lot of different bass players could probably do just as excellent a job in supporting the band.

One thing I noticed in most modern real heavy metal bands, screamo, etc., the bass players and drummers are generally super excellent and super loud and the guitars and vocals sound buried behind their booming rhythm - at least in my observation listening to a lot of the music my son listens to and bands he has been in. A friend of mine has a 2000 watt per channel bass power amp and he uses it in clubs: super loud, including incredibly loud head busting drummer that is proud of breaking a snare head each show. Obviously a lot of people would not want to be in a band like this but you wouldn't believe how many super loyal fans they have. They are called "Farewell Rescue".

Interesting take on bass Duffy.

I wasn't aware that there was extremely bass heavy metal.

Funny thing, I really enjoy listening to the guitars when I'm playing, but not so much if they're burying me. IMO, a great mix is where everyone is heard clearly. With my 600-watt bass rig, I could bury my guitarist's combo amp, but I enjoy hearing him too.

[Eric***]

Funny thing, I really enjoy listening to the guitars when I'm playing, but not so much if they're burying me. IMO, a great mix is where everyone is heard clearly. With my 600-watt bass rig, I could bury my guitarist's combo amp, but I enjoy hearing him too.

I think I'm somewhere between you and deeaa. I do like things best when everybody can be heard and it's balanced, but I've found good, stable musical experiences to be fleeting. I think I'd probably take a backseat for a bit or play with a less-than-great musician if it meant that the whole band/package thing worked. Maybe with time I'll have more luck WRT bands, but it's been a tricky thing for me so far.

[Ch0jin]

I wasn't aware that there was extremely bass heavy metal.

Ever hear of a little indie band from the UK called Iron Maiden?

Listening to early Maiden made me want to learn bass because the bass was so prominent in the mix in most of their songs. Have a re-listen, the bass really drives their tunes.

[deeaa*]

Yeah, LOL, Maiden would be nothing without the bass!

I have BTW also noticed that these days when I see a band on stage, the emphasis seems to be pretty heavily on the rhythm section quite often, and guitars are - especially in metal bands - often scooped-sounding, buried 'whassssshhhhh' in there that you only hear a constant steady roar of somewhere there.

My preference is absolutely in LOUD guitars, I want to hear the guitar loud, not so important about the rest :-) but that is an exaggeration, I love good bass too, but the bass I like is usually more like guitar sounding, think Maiden indeed, or Motörhead...

[NWBasser]

Ever hear of a little indie band from the UK called Iron Maiden?

Listening to early Maiden made me want to learn bass because the bass was so prominent in the mix in most of their songs. Have a re-listen, the bass really drives their tunes.

Oh boy, talk about a tangent!

I thought we were discussing 100 watt amphs! ;-)


Maiden was one of my favorite bands back in the day. The early stuff was really good.

I better revisit their older material.

Thanks for reminding me of that Chojin!

[NWBasser]

The point here being, NW, is that there "are" belligerent super loud drummers that actually are adversarial and it's nice to have that reserve power to bring to bear if needed, before you walk. It was kind of a joke actually, but in reality these guys are out there and I'm sure you have met a few and steer clear. I agree, no one likes to be drownded out and it's not fun.

LOL!

Yeah Duffy, I have run across those sort of drummers!

Unfortunately, I can't afford the two-kilowatt bass rig necessary to subdue that type. I just have to wave the white surrender flag.

Yes, it would be rather fun to lay them out with a 100-watt full-stack guitar rig!

[NWBasser]

I don't want to sound like an *** or aggravate or anything, but seriously, I don't get your approach.

Would you not play with, say Jimi Hendrix or Joe Bonamassa if they insisted on playing louder than hell? Does everybody in a band have to be equal, would it not be good to have a superstar in the band whom others accompany, more or less?

I just re-read this and thought it would be worthwhile to offer some clarification on the matter. What I was referring to earlier is getting completely drowned out to the point that the bass isn't even heard. Why bother even playing if that's that case? May as well sit around and drink beer.

I didn't mean that everyone had to be at parity volume although that's my general preference. I could handle playing with a much louder guitar as long as I could hear myself too.

Listening to Hendrix or Joe B, and you can hear some bass.

[deeaa*]

Maiden up to Somewhere in Time is all great, after that there's a song or two per album that are good. Except the bailey era...But since Dickinson came back the newest albums have been very good too - in my mind they will never top the classics but to be fair, they are bloody good albums and I totally enjoy them too, some superb songs there, only took me a while to listen to them a few times to start appreciating them...but they are worth getting to know, in some sense they can be even better than old stuff.

[marnold***]

Continuing the derailment, "Brave New World" (the first album with Dickinson back) is one of their classics, IMO.

But yeah, how 'bout them big amphs *cough* As a child of the 80s, I totally understand the "big stack(s) and a cloud of smoke" thing. It's just overkill for most of us.

[Ch0jin]

Yeah, like Marnold said, plenty of us grew up watching our guitar hero's rocking out in front of full/half stacks so that's what we naturally wanted to emulate. The music biz is massively about image, so it's unsurprising that "overkill" is the norm. Even now, I know I don't NEED another powerful amp (I have a 60w, am building a 45W) but I still WANT a 100W PTP Marshall head at some point.

[deeaa*]

Specifically, I never did understand the 100W Marshall JCM800 head too well actually...I get it well with clean amps like Twins and I also had a 120W all tube Ampeg at some point, and the JCM900 100W also behaved quite OK, but that 100W 800 series was just insanely loud when it properly opened, it really ripped at the ears even with some protection on, because it just has such a cutting midrange.