Acoustic 220? or Randall RBA-500 Es?

[Lemming16]

Hi guys.

I just saw on a pawnshop here in Mexico (Where new amp prices are ridiculously high, total ripoff), an Acoustic 220 Bass Head, i've read in some places that it is 120 watts, and in other places that it is 170 watts. (Here's the full info [url="http://acoustic.homeunix.net/twiki/bin/view/Acoustic/BassHead220)"]http://acoustic.homeunix.net/twiki/bin/vie...ic/BassHead220)[/url]
It is $110 USD. I am planning on getting it with a Peavey 15" Cab for $130 usd from other pawnshop It would be a total of $240.

Thea Acoustic 220 is like this one

I'm also being offered for $150, a Randall RBA-500 Es, which is 300 RMS on two different channels i think.
He says for $320, i can take both the Randall RBA-500 Es with a 2x15 cab with Randall Jaguars.
It's exactly this one. The thing is, i havent found almost any info about this amp.




Which one do you think it would be better? in terms of sound and value? I would use it with an Aria Pro II TSB-550.
I am just starting. Also, what kind of cab do you recommend using these heads with? Thanks.

P.S: Do you guys think the Acoustic 220 would give me enough volume for a gig?

P.S2: I am planning on using it with a POD X3 (It has pretty good bass amps)

Edited November 8, 2010 by Lemming16

[icastle]

[quote name='Lemming16' post='1015941' date='Nov 8 2010, 01:52 AM']Hi guys.

I just saw on a pawnshop here in Mexico (Where new amp prices are ridiculously high, total ripoff), an Acoustic 220 Bass Head, i've read in some places that it is 120 watts, and in other places that it is 170 watts. (Here's the full info [url="http://acoustic.homeunix.net/twiki/bin/view/Acoustic/BassHead220)"]http://acoustic.homeunix.net/twiki/bin/vie...ic/BassHead220)[/url]
It is $110 USD. I am planning on getting it with a Peavey 15" Cab for $130 usd from other pawnshop It would be a total of $240.

Thea Acoustic 220 is like this one

I'm also being offered for $150, a Randall RBA-500 Es, which is 300 RMS on two different channels i think.
He says for $320, i can take both the Randall RBA-500 Es with a 2x15 cab with Randall Jaguars.
It's exactly this one. The thing is, i havent found almost any info about this amp.




Which one do you think it would be better? in terms of sound and value? I would use it with an Aria Pro II TSB-550.
I am just starting. Also, what kind of cab do you recommend using these heads with? Thanks.

P.S: Do you guys think the Acoustic 220 would give me enough volume for a gig?

P.S2: I am planning on using it with a POD X3 (It has pretty good bass amps)[/quote]


Acoustic Corp went bust quite a while back and this amp is probably getting on for 40 years old.
The difference in quoted output power is related to the impedance of the speakers attached to it - a 2 ohm cab gives you 165W and a 4 ohm cab will give you 125W.
The Peavey cab will be either 4 or 8 ohms - so you will never get 165W output using that particular rig.

Randall still exist.
As far as I can make out it's 250W + 250W into two 4 ohm cabs (a 2 ohm total load).
I'd say that this is going to be marginally louder than the Acoustic.

I'd probably go for the Randall based purely on the fact that they still exist.

HTH

[Lemming16]

[quote name='icastle' post='1015949' date='Nov 7 2010, 08:35 PM']Acoustic Corp went bust quite a while back and this amp is probably getting on for 40 years old.
The difference in quoted output power is related to the impedance of the speakers attached to it - a 2 ohm cab gives you 165W and a 4 ohm cab will give you 125W.
The Peavey cab will be either 4 or 8 ohms - so you will never get 165W output using that particular rig.

Randall still exist.
As far as I can make out it's 250W + 250W into two 4 ohm cabs (a 2 ohm total load).
I'd say that this is going to be marginally louder than the Acoustic.

I'd probably go for the Randall based purely on the fact that they still exist.

HTH[/quote]


Hi Icastle, thanks for your answer, i've just found that the Randall head is 2 ohms.

[DirkThrust]

[quote name='Lemming16' post='1015951' date='Nov 8 2010, 03:10 AM']Hi Icastle, thanks for your answer, i've just found that the Randall head is 2 ohms.[/quote]


Do you mean it only delivers it's rated output into 2 ohms? If so that will be almost impossible to achieve. If it's a twin channel amp you would need 2 x 4 ohm cabs per side which may be problematic for you.

Ultimately though it's how it sounds to you that matters. Have you been able to fire them up in the shop?

Edited November 8, 2010 by AndyMartin

[bumnote]

I currently have 4 acoustic amps including a 220, and gig them regularly.

I wouldnt be over worried about the age because they are built like tanks, and because they are older technology can be fixed by any reputable tech. BUT make sure the graphics work because they can be damaged through mishandling and they are the only thing that is difficult to repair

$110 USD is a steal for a great amp with super tone

I use mine witha variety of 4 and 8 ohm cabs and never found it lacking in volume.

As Andy said, the best thing is to see which one sounds best to your ears,

[4-string-thing]

My Acoustic 220 is 30 years old and has been my ONLY amp until I thought I may need another just in case. In those 30 years, it has never let me down. I've used it for hundreds of gigs!

If used with an Acoustic cab, or two (they are usually 4 ohms each) It is more than loud enough for any band, its certainly as loud, if not louder, than my Ashdown 300w head.

As Bumnote said, as long as the graphic works, $110 sounds like a real bargain!

Randall are pretty good amps, but if its a 2 channel (stereo) amp, wouldn't you need 2 cabs?

[bumnote]

[quote name='4-string-thing' post='1016006' date='Nov 8 2010, 08:52 AM']My Acoustic 220 is 30 years old and has been my ONLY amp until I thought I may need another just in case. In those 30 years, it has never let me down. I've used it for hundreds of gigs![/quote]

Hi 4 str have you had your 220 frrom new then?

[casapete]

Acoustic are great amps, louder than their rating too!
I had a 120 and it was a fine bit of kit. The 220 should be enough to gig with with a decent 4 ohm cab.

[Lemming16]

Thanks everyone for your replys. Do any of you know if the acoustic 220 has a “loop effect” input? (I’m not sure about the name, i dont speak english well, but it’s the input that bypasses the preamp, so i can connect a POD X3 into it and not be affected by the preamp ).

I would also appreciate if you could tell me how would this amp take digital effects (The POD X3 is what im gonna use).

Thanks in advance.

[4-string-thing]

[quote name='bumnote' post='1016280' date='Nov 8 2010, 12:57 PM']Hi 4 str have you had your 220 frrom new then?[/quote]

Hey Bumnote,

yes, I bought it new with a 404 1x15 cab in 1980. It cost me £440 (about 3 months wages at the time) from Loughborough Music Centre. The amp and the cab are still pretty much in 'as new' condition. A couple of years ago I bought a 2x15 cab and have been known to use both cabs with the head, some serious air-moving goes on then!

[4-string-thing]

[quote name='Lemming16' post='1016512' date='Nov 8 2010, 04:10 PM']Thanks everyone for your replys. Do any of you know if the acoustic 220 has a “loop effect” input? (I’m not sure about the name, i dont speak english well, but it’s the input that bypasses the preamp, so i can connect a POD X3 into it and not be affected by the preamp ).

I would also appreciate if you could tell me how would this amp take digital effects (The POD X3 is what im gonna use).

Thanks in advance.[/quote]

Yes, the 220 has a pre-amp out and a power amp in, so you could use a pod and plug it into the power section!

[4-string-thing]

[quote name='casapete' post='1016467' date='Nov 8 2010, 03:29 PM']Acoustic are great amps, louder than their rating too!
I had a 120 and it was a fine bit of kit. The 220 should be enough to gig with with a decent 4 ohm cab.[/quote]

I have a 120 head too, but its not working, I paid £52 for it with a 402 cab. Its a completely different power amp inside, but the pre-amp and graphic are the same as the 220.

I hope to get it repaired one day.

[bumnote]

[quote name='4-string-thing' post='1016589' date='Nov 8 2010, 05:14 PM']Hey Bumnote,

yes, I bought it new with a 404 1x15 cab in 1980. It cost me £440 (about 3 months wages at the time) from Loughborough Music Centre. The amp and the cab are still pretty much in 'as new' condition. A couple of years ago I bought a 2x15 cab and have been known to use both cabs with the head, some serious air-moving goes on then![/quote]

good for you keeping it. I bought a 450 in 77 with a 406 cab for about £700 from Kingfisher in fleet. Sold it for peanuts inthe 90s, biggest mistake I ever made, great amp, I prefer it to the 220 and one day!!!!!!!!

I am currently in love with the 370 I recently bought, I thinks thats even better. Works a treat with my ashdown 4x8.

I wont upset you about how it sounds with the 18 incher

[4-string-thing]

[quote name='bumnote' post='1016628' date='Nov 8 2010, 05:44 PM']good for you keeping it. I bought a 450 in 77 with a 406 cab for about £700 from Kingfisher in fleet. Sold it for peanuts inthe 90s, biggest mistake I ever made, great amp, I prefer it to the 220 and one day!!!!!!!!

I am currently in love with the 370 I recently bought, I thinks thats even better. Works a treat with my ashdown 4x8.

I wont upset you about how it sounds with the 18 incher[/quote]

Ha ha...there you go with your 18 incher again!

I'm looking forward to the day when the new Acoustic stuff comes to the UK!