ebozzz

@Al Krow, It's been a couple of years since I had the T in my care so anything I could tell you now would be strictly from memory only. If I am correct, it sounds like you are interested in tube-like characteristics or performance. Here are my disclaimers. I have never owned nor have I had any meaningful experience with a true tube amp. Due to my lack of experience, my perspectives may not be as accurate as those from someone who has been more hands on with tube amps. With that being said, I'll try to answer your question.... If a person is looking for an amp that would offer some dirt or overdriven tones to their signal the Veyron BV1001T, while warmer sounding than the Mosfet version to my ears, is probably not the one as it stays pretty clean throughout the gain structure. I do think that it sounds similar to some of the tones that Ed was achieving in his video at times but I honestly don't feel that it would get you totally there. Now, the T with a quality & less expensive pedal than the Lehle in front of it? That might work.

I kept my T for about a year and I've had an M for over three years. Never had an issue with either. Also, I know of at least two people that have had a T for longer than I've had my M.If I were contemplating the purchase of one of the Veyrons, I would just go with the one that I felt suited my tone needs best. I honestly don't think there's a drastic difference in performance or reliability......

Different, yes. Very different? I don't know that I am in agreement there. Having owned both amps at the same time, my personal experience is that the amps sound & perform in a very similar fashion. The main difference to my ears is that I felt the T was a little more darker or warmer sounding than the M. At least, that was my perception with the cabs and instruments that I was working with at the time that I had both.

There are some similarities in tone with the two but my personal opinion is that the T has more of a low mid presence than the M. The preamp sections are slightly different as well....

It's worth it! 🤣🤣🤣

👆 This......

I guess that I was attempting to find out if that was something that had changed with the EVO II line. It seems that it hasn't. As I mentioned, it's not a deal breaker for me and I love my amp....

Congratulations! Do you find that there's a difference in the volume level with the compressor engaged and without it in use? I have the RM-800 EVO and there's a definite difference with my unit. Not a deal breaker but just one of the traits of the amp.

Wrong....... 😎

I've known about and heard the Boom Bass Cabinets for over three years. About a month ago, I acquired one of the Tank 1012 models. The cabs work very well......

You folks in Europe are getting a better price than we do in the States! Every now and then I get tempted to buy the tube version again when I see a good deal but thus far I've been able to resist. I think part of the reason for that is that I purchased a different set of tubes that I planned to try to see if it had an impact on the tone. Unfortunately, I saw another deal that I had to move on fast and sold the amp before getting a chance to perform the trial....

The Veyrons are the only bass amps that are still in Bugera's product line and in production. I'd like to think that it's because that the heads must have more positive attributes than not. Mine has been with me for over three years and it's still going strong.

I love Ashdown amps. With my Rootmaster 800 EVO without using the compressor, the gain stage is pretty smooth. With the compressor engaged? It gets a lot louder much earlier than either of my other two amps.

Thanks for this explanation. It's been the one most helpful to me on this thread or other. No sarcasm here. I'm going to ask you a direct question. As frustrating as you and others seem to think I am, I'm really not trying to be that. Bugera claims that the amp is 2000 watts peak at 4 ohms. You feel that it's not near that value. Could you please elaborate on why you feel so strongly that it's not?

Oh, you were teaching? 😉

Thanks for the correction!

No Bill, I really don't.....😉

Maybe he should! The premise here seems to be 90% of the manufacturers use RMS but Bugera doesn't. They MUST be trying to mislead. That's the only reason for them NOT using what the 90% are using!

I'm not sure how you connect the dots between Bugera listing peak only and GK listing what appears to be RMS only to reach the conclusion that Bugera is purposely being misleading. The company has openly stated that they do not believe that RMS is the rating system that provides the best indication of how a bass amp should perform. From what I've read, it doesn't seem that they feel peak is the best either but it may be better for rating bass amps in their opinion. We need a NEW & improved ratings system...

Assuming that you meant the 750 watts figure is RMS, wouldn't the peak value be significantly higher?

Sometimes things drawn up on paper don't work out as well as expected when implemented and occasionally, the results are better than expected. All that I'm saying is that until there's some definitive proof, it's a little premature to accuse an entity of fraud, If there is some definitive proof, I'd love to review it....

I'm admittedly not a Physics person. Nor am I an engineer. Neither am I of the opinion that "fraud is a good thing". If fraud can be proven by testing the amp, I'm fine with the results of testing. Fine meaning that I can accept it with no qualms. Bugera claims 2000 watts peak at 4 ohms. Can that claim clearly be ruled out without testing?

With the MB Fusion 800, GK doesn't clearly specify if the rated power output is Peak or RMS on their web page or in the manual. If it is indeed RMS, wouldn't 800 watts put the Peak value in the neighborhood of 2000 watts?

Got anything else other than "ifs"?