Fender Rumble 40 vs 100 for home practice

[Cannon1]

I am looking at these two amps for home practice. I would just buy the 40, as I know it will be loud enough, but the 100 is only 20 Euro more where I live. Is there much disadvantage to spending the very little extra and getting the bigger amp? Thanks!

 

[Balog]

They're so close in size/weight/price that the additional feature of effects send/return and the future capability for non-purely home use make it worthwhile.

 

[rllefebv]

What @Balog said... if they were priced that closely when I got my 40, I would have sprung for the 100... just makes sense.

-robert

 

[west al]

In the next couple of days, I'm doing the 100 for home playing myself.

 

[levis76]

So for an extra 20 quid you can score more than double the power? Yeah, go for it. You will not regret having the extra bit of headroom.

 

[CallMeAl]

If you see yourself wanting to jam with others, get a 100. They get quite loud if needed. I use one for all my rehearsals and most of my gigs.

 

[Cannon1]

If you see yourself wanting to jam with others, get a 100. They get quite loud if needed. I use one for all my rehearsals and most of my gigs.

Will I find the 100 too loud? I guess I can just turn it down but in a way it feels like overkill.

 

[jallenbass]

I played both of them side by side when I was looking for a small combo and I preferred the sound of the 40 better. Your experience may differ.

 

[buldog5151bass]

All amps have a volume knob, and the 100 can be used for rehearsals and small gigs. I would get that.

 

[Plastalmonus]

I played both of them side by side when I was looking for a small combo and I preferred the sound of the 40 better. Your experience may differ.

This was my experience also. I tried the 25, 40, 100, and 200 and walked away with the 40. I'd recommend trying them first as I found them to be fairly different amps.

 

[cm3ohana]

I use a Rumble 40 at church as a monitor and have a 100 at home. I like both. If the 100 is affordable, I would get the 100. I’ve heard others who have said they prefer the tone of the 40. Quite frankly, for me, the difference in tone isn’t enough to make me prefer one over the other and with the prices being close I would opt for the 100 for the additional wattage.

 

[CallMeAl]

Will I find the 100 too loud? I guess I can just turn it down but in a way it feels like overkill.

Not at all. Between your bass volume knob and amp volume knob, you can keep it as low as you like.

my point is, if you think you’ll be jamming with a drummer in the near future, you’ll be glad you got the 100

the alternative would be to get the 40 for now, and get something even bigger (than the 100) when it comes time to get out and mingle

 

[Gremson]

I vote the 100.
It's my only amp right now. Perfectly acceptable for solo practice in my poopy apartment with thin walls. And I use it for every gig I play. Mostly small to medium venues around Austin TX.

 

[Samatza]

No disadvantage in getting the 100. I know you want to use it for practice at home but the time may come when you want to go to rehearsal or a small gig and it will cope with all that too. For the extra cost I'd go with the 100.

 

[2F/2F]

Normally, I would say to get the 40 as a true practice amp. But in your situation, with such a close price, get the 100.

The 100 is only four pounds heavier, two inches taller, and two inches deeper. But it is usually $100 more (50 percent more), which is significantly more money if you are shopping in the sub-$200 range.

I got the 40, but the 100 was never in the running for me. I was looking at 15 vs. 25 vs. 40. I wanted something very small, but still "bassy" sounding, to quietly noodle through when not in my studio (and for playing quiet electric bass along with fully acoustic instruments). The 15 and 25 didn't cut it for me. They have no low end, and the 40-and-up's e.q. controls are superior. I didn't consider the 100 because I liked the $200 and under price point for my intended use. If money had been no consideration at the time, I would have got the 100.

I have pushed the 40 to the max for gigs before, and it barely worked (not well) against a drum kit and two electric guitars (not played that loudly in a small bar). If I wanted an amp I could sometimes gig with a drummer, I would go for the 100. If I truly just wanted a practice amp, I'd get the 40. The slightly smaller dimensions, weight, and cost are preferable for a true kick-around bedroom amp, IMO. But as I said, your situation is different, because you appear to have a good deal on the 100 (either that or the 40 is overpriced there compared to here).

 

[Low profile]

I own a 40. As @rllefebv said, at the time of purchase the prices were quite different between the 40 and the 100 and the question was not raised.
Remember that jamming with a savage drummer even the 100 can be short on wattage.

 

[CAILLOUX]

the 40 has a punchier and clearer sound than the 100. the volume does not matter between the 10 "and the 12" of the speakers. The 40 body is better suited to its 10 ".

 

[Oddly]

For that extra 20, I'd get the 100.
It'll absolutely do for your home practice needs, and quite a lot of applications in live settings.
Sure, it won't compete that well un-aided with a heavy rock drummer, but it's got a DI out, so if you're getting into louder gigs there's always the option of going to the PA.

 

[Bolsyo]

Had the same dilemma last year, went with the 100 since the price difference was so low, haven't regretted it for a second. I only play it at home, and it sounds great at lower volumes too!

Also, If I ever need to sell it, the 100 will keep it's value better and be a lot easier to sell, since most people are looking for a more powerful amp than a 40.

 

[DuluthDank]

I owned both but sold the 100. The 40 just sounds better and is more compact. Id go with the 40 for home practice even it cost more.