Ultrasound AG-50 DS3 amp opinions?

Discussion:

(too old to reply)

Michael L Kankiewicz

2007-04-11 14:49:05 UTC

Hi everyone. I normally hang out over in rmmgj. For acoustic stuff I own
a Roland AC-60 and a Fender Acoustasonic Jr. I like the extreme
portability and flexible features of the Roland, but The Fender has more
bottom and power. I'm trying to find something that is a
combination/compromise of both. Does anyone here have any experience
with the Ultrasound? It's rated at less watts than both the Roland or
Fender, but the reviews I've read say it's really loud with a lot of
clean headroom. Thoughts/opinions/advice are very much appreciated.

Thanks,
MK

Ed Edelenbos

2007-04-11 15:09:58 UTC

Permalink

Post by Michael L Kankiewicz
Hi everyone. I normally hang out over in rmmgj. For acoustic stuff I own
a Roland AC-60 and a Fender Acoustasonic Jr. I like the extreme
portability and flexible features of the Roland, but The Fender has more
bottom and power. I'm trying to find something that is a
combination/compromise of both. Does anyone here have any experience
with the Ultrasound? It's rated at less watts than both the Roland or
Fender, but the reviews I've read say it's really loud with a lot of
clean headroom. Thoughts/opinions/advice are very much appreciated.
Thanks,
MK

I have (limited) experience with my DS2 (same amp, earlier model with
slightly different routings). It is very natural sounding (to my ear.) Of
course, YMMV. I don't however, have experience with either the Fender or
Roland. The best advice I could offer is to try to find a local shop that
has one of the Ultrasounds. See if they'll let you bring in your Fender
and/or Roland and a/b them.

Ed

Misifus

2007-04-11 16:06:20 UTC

Permalink

I haven't played with the Roland or that Fender, but I have the DS2 and
I like it a lot. I use it as a PA in small venues, and I never have to
turn the master volume up over a half to be heard with acoustic music.
It's very clean and natural sounding, both for voice and acoustic guitar.

-Raf

madgamer

2007-04-12 02:14:38 UTC

Permalink

If it is an Ultrasound is a good one. There are nome better IMO.

Larry

Bill Benzel

2007-04-12 23:09:08 UTC

Permalink

madgamer <***@mchsi.com> wrote:
: Michael L Kankiewicz wrote:
:> Hi everyone. I normally hang out over in rmmgj. For acoustic stuff I own
:> a Roland AC-60 and a Fender Acoustasonic Jr. I like the extreme
:> portability and flexible features of the Roland, but The Fender has more
:> bottom and power. I'm trying to find something that is a
:> combination/compromise of both. Does anyone here have any experience
:> with the Ultrasound? It's rated at less watts than both the Roland or
:> Fender, but the reviews I've read say it's really loud with a lot of
:> clean headroom. Thoughts/opinions/advice are very much appreciated.
:>
:> Thanks,
:> MK
:>
:>
: If it is an Ultrasound is a good one. There are nome better IMO.
:
: Larry

Seconded! I have an AG50-DS2 and I'm very happy with it. Set flat it's
very natural sounding and I like having the Alesis chip built in -- I
only need the amp -- no need to have a rack as well.

--
Bill
AT DOT
reply to bbenzel adelphia net
http://www.myspace.com/billbenzel

Ed Maier

2007-04-13 00:24:49 UTC

Permalink

Post by Bill Benzel
:> Hi everyone. I normally hang out over in rmmgj. For acoustic stuff I own
:> a Roland AC-60 and a Fender Acoustasonic Jr. I like the extreme
:> portability and flexible features of the Roland, but The Fender has more
:> bottom and power. I'm trying to find something that is a
:> combination/compromise of both. Does anyone here have any experience
:> with the Ultrasound? It's rated at less watts than both the Roland or
:> Fender, but the reviews I've read say it's really loud with a lot of
:> clean headroom. Thoughts/opinions/advice are very much appreciated.
:>
:> Thanks,
:> MK
:>
:>
: If it is an Ultrasound is a good one. There are nome better IMO.
: Larry
Seconded! I have an AG50-DS2 and I'm very happy with it. Set flat it's
very natural sounding and I like having the Alesis chip built in -- I
only need the amp -- no need to have a rack as well.

I hate "me too" posts, but ditto on everything Bill said. Also it
doesn't dislocate your shoulder carrying it around.

Ed Maier

madgamer

2007-04-22 01:35:42 UTC

Permalink

Mine is a pro 100 that I traded a 63 fender bassman for plus $400. I
would not give it up for anything. My new T****r sounds great with Baggs
adjustable volume pickup I had installed.

Larry

p***@petegreenwood.com

2007-04-13 04:34:40 UTC

Permalink

Michael, I'm on my second Ultrasound amp. I had an AG50DS2 for
several years, and now I use a CP100.

I think they're fantastic amps. Nice, natural sound, super reliable
and solid build.

But if it's power you're looking for, you might be disappointed with
the 50-watt model. And, to describe it as "really loud with a lot of
clean headroom" doesn't jibe with my experience at all.

dansar

2007-04-13 13:42:30 UTC

Permalink

Post by p***@petegreenwood.com

Michael, I'm on my second Ultrasound amp. I had an AG50DS2 for
several years, and now I use a CP100.
I think they're fantastic amps. Nice, natural sound, super reliable
and solid build.
But if it's power you're looking for, you might be disappointed with
the 50-watt model. And, to describe it as "really loud with a lot of
clean headroom" doesn't jibe with my experience at all.

Pete,
How does the CP100 compare tonally to the AG50DS2?
Does it have the same features?

p***@petegreenwood.com

2007-04-13 18:08:31 UTC

Permalink

Post by dansar
Pete,
How does the CP100 compare tonally to the AG50DS2?
Does it have the same features?

Dansar, the CP100 sounds a lot like my old AG50DS2, but with more bass
and punch, and a lot more volume. The cabinet, which houses a very
stout single 8-inch speaker instead of the lighter-duty 2x8's, is
about 20% smaller, but also about 10 lbs. heavier. It's a whole lot
of power for such a small package.

Like the 50-watt amps, the CP100 uses a coaxial speaker setup, but it
has a horn instead of the dome tweeters. The horn has a much wider
dispersion. In other words, the tone isn't nearly as dependent on
where you're standing.

Features-wise, they're pretty similar, except the CP100 doesn't do
stereo [a feature that I don't need]. Instead, it adds RCA inputs on
the back [don't really need those either], which the DS2 didn't have.
Also, the CP100 lets you assign the effects to either channel [or
both], where the DS2 only had effects on channel 2.

Ther only negative I can say about both the DS2 and the CP100 is that
neither one of them has a whole lot of preamp headroom. They clip out
with a really hot input signal. Perhaps more-so on the CP100, but the
power section makes up for that in spades.

For a coffee-houser, the 50-watter is ideal. But it can't keep up
against a rock band. The 100-watter can hold its own for all but the
loudest band settings.

Hope this helps.

PG

Sherm

2007-04-13 18:31:20 UTC

Permalink

Post by p***@petegreenwood.com

Post by dansar
Pete,
How does the CP100 compare tonally to the AG50DS2?
Does it have the same features?

Dansar, the CP100 sounds a lot like my old AG50DS2, but with more bass
and punch, and a lot more volume. The cabinet, which houses a very
stout single 8-inch speaker instead of the lighter-duty 2x8's, is
about 20% smaller, but also about 10 lbs. heavier. It's a whole lot
of power for such a small package.
Like the 50-watt amps, the CP100 uses a coaxial speaker setup, but it
has a horn instead of the dome tweeters. The horn has a much wider
dispersion. In other words, the tone isn't nearly as dependent on
where you're standing.
Features-wise, they're pretty similar, except the CP100 doesn't do
stereo [a feature that I don't need]. Instead, it adds RCA inputs on
the back [don't really need those either], which the DS2 didn't have.
Also, the CP100 lets you assign the effects to either channel [or
both], where the DS2 only had effects on channel 2.
Ther only negative I can say about both the DS2 and the CP100 is that
neither one of them has a whole lot of preamp headroom. They clip out
with a really hot input signal. Perhaps more-so on the CP100, but the
power section makes up for that in spades.
For a coffee-houser, the 50-watter is ideal. But it can't keep up
against a rock band. The 100-watter can hold its own for all but the
loudest band settings.
Hope this helps.
PG

Hi Pete:

Even after I bought my Mackie SRM350 pa speakers, I kept my old Ultrasound
AR50 thinking I'd use it if I ever had to sit in with a band again. But
now I think I'd be much more likely to just take one of the Mackies for that
application. The U/S is a little beamy, as you say.

Sherm

p***@petegreenwood.com

2007-04-13 21:02:40 UTC

Permalink

Post by Sherm
Even after I bought my Mackie SRM350 pa speakers, I kept my old Ultrasound
AR50 thinking I'd use it if I ever had to sit in with a band again. But
now I think I'd be much more likely to just take one of the Mackies for that
application. The U/S is a little beamy, as you say.
Sherm

Sherm, I've never heard the SRM350, but I have a bit of experience
with its bigger brother, the SRM450, and have used it as an acoustic
guitar amp. To my ears, the tone of the Ultrasound is much smoother
and warmer. But it's definitely not nearly as capable of cutting
through the mix as the Mackie.

I got my CP100 for a steal. Otherwise, I would have probably gone for
the SRM350 myself.

There was one thing that did bug me about the 450's I've used. They
had a very sensitive thermal shut-off. Does the 350 have this issue?

PG

Sherm

2007-04-14 14:32:13 UTC

Permalink

Post by p***@petegreenwood.com

Sherm, I've never heard the SRM350, but I have a bit of experience
with its bigger brother, the SRM450, and have used it as an acoustic
guitar amp. To my ears, the tone of the Ultrasound is much smoother
and warmer. But it's definitely not nearly as capable of cutting
through the mix as the Mackie.
I got my CP100 for a steal. Otherwise, I would have probably gone for
the SRM350 myself.
There was one thing that did bug me about the 450's I've used. They
had a very sensitive thermal shut-off. Does the 350 have this issue?

I've never had them shut down. That would stink.

Sherm

hank alrich

2007-04-14 15:46:23 UTC

Permalink

Post by Sherm

Post by p***@petegreenwood.com

Post by Sherm
Even after I bought my Mackie SRM350 pa speakers, I kept my old
Ultrasound AR50 thinking I'd use it if I ever had to sit in with a
band again. But now I think I'd be much more likely to just take one
of the Mackies for that application. The U/S is a little beamy, as you
say.
Sherm

Sherm, I've never heard the SRM350, but I have a bit of experience
with its bigger brother, the SRM450, and have used it as an acoustic
guitar amp. To my ears, the tone of the Ultrasound is much smoother
and warmer. But it's definitely not nearly as capable of cutting
through the mix as the Mackie.
I got my CP100 for a steal. Otherwise, I would have probably gone for
the SRM350 myself.
There was one thing that did bug me about the 450's I've used. They
had a very sensitive thermal shut-off. Does the 350 have this issue?

I've never had them shut down. That would stink.
Sherm

The SRM350 is way ahead of the SRM450 in terms of sound. The 450 was an
earlier design from RCF, at the time a Mackie subsidiary that they have
since sold. The 350 was all in-house design work, with the serious parts
off-loaded to the Mackie subsidiary EAW.

The early SRM450's were thermally sensitive. The heatsink wasn't
adequate and its orientation was such that certain positions, especially
on its side for a stage monitor, rendered it ineffective and shut-down
followed. This is no longer a common problem with SRM450's and hasn't
been for several years.

However, I'd not personally buy SRM450's because they don't sound so
great to me. I prefer something from Yorkville, like the NX55P.

--
ha
Iraq is Arabic for Vietnam

Cams

2007-04-14 05:45:11 UTC

Permalink

I have the AG50 DS3, the only one in Luxembourg I'm quite sure! I use it
at an open mic in a bar room of about 30 people and it copes admirably
well. I hate when I'm coerced into using one of the Fenders and crappy
vocal mics when someone just happens to be on before me, plug into my
amp and then stay on. Grrrr. (mine's an SM58, FWIW).

I brought mine back from Artisan Guitars in TN as they're not easy to
find in Europe (and expensive when you do). I've been happy with it
since I got it. YMMV.

Cams in Lux