Berg IP310. Can you add an extension cabinet?

[Big B.]

Is the Bergantino IP310 capable of running an extension cabinet? I see it is rated 1000 watts at 4 ohms but can it run at 2 ohms? I currently own an Epifani UL 310 and I have been wanting to add another. Getting an IP 310 would get rid of my power amp, always a plus, but I need to be able to use it on top of the Epifani. If anybody has an answer I would be most thankful.

[KJung]

First, I assume you know the IP's have been discontinued.

No, you cannot add an extension cab. However, the IP310 will EASILY outperfom two 310UL's with 1000+ watts going into them.

There would literally be no possible need for more volume than you get from an IP310, even playing loud outside with no PA support.

IMO and a bit of IME.

[Big B.]

Thanks, fortunately it's a used one I am looking at. Thats the other thing I was wondering about. I generally only need the one 310 but for bigger gigs I find getting a cab closer to your ear can really help cutting back on the stage volume. Perhaps I should just look into the IP310 and build a road case for it to sit on top of.

Tonally how does it compare? I like the punchiness of the Epi 310 but I assume the Berg has all those qualities as well? Last question: Does it sound as good at lower volumes. I do alot of gigs that would barely tip the needle on an amp/cab that big and some cabs dont sound so hot at lower volume levels. Thanks for the input. Valuable stuff.

[KJung]

Originally Posted by Big B.

Thanks, fortunately it's a used one I am looking at. Thats the other thing I was wondering about. I generally only need the one 310 but for bigger gigs I find getting a cab closer to your ear can really help cutting back on the stage volume. Perhaps I should just look into the IP310 and build a road case for it to sit on top of.

Tonally how does it compare? I like the punchiness of the Epi 310 but I assume the Berg has all those qualities as well? Last question: Does it sound as good at lower volumes. I do alot of gigs that would barely tip the needle on an amp/cab that big and some cabs dont sound so hot at lower volume levels. Thanks for the input. Valuable stuff.

The IP310 is wider (BIG lows, extended treble), smoother and more mid polite and more sizzly up top. It can also be a bit of a pain to match with a preamp. Given the DSP circuitry, it is a bit like feeding one preamp into another, and can be a bit tricky. It is also a heavy little bugger.

If you dig the tone of your 310UL, I would strongly consider just getting a second one and using your power amp/preamp rig for the few large gigs you do. Get a nice micro head for the single 310UL (and possibly install a tilt back bottom handle) for smaller gigs. IMO!

[Big B.]

Very interesting. Thanks so much, sounds like I need to get my hands on one before I do anything drastic. I like the Epi tone but I am always willing to change my tone if it gets "better".

[mothra2]

Originally Posted by KJung

... It can also be a bit of a pain to match with a preamp. Given the DSP circuitry, it is a bit like feeding one preamp into another, and can be a bit tricky. It is also a heavy little bugger.

IMO!

Not sure I quite follow you there Ken...

The DSP does not interfere with gain staging to create a 'gain stack' so to speak, and as such is really no different then having, say, a semi-para section of a pre followed by a "presence" knob on the pre etc. IMO, no different then the EQ'ing, shaping effect that a good passive crossover imparts (cuts and pass), just waaay more sophisticated.

Also, as the pre is easily (potentially anyway) the most colored part of the chain, I can see why people "shop around" on that front. I know I did, matching against a Crest (no DSP whatsoever).

The pre I chose sounded fantastic with the IP-153 I had, I just didn't dig that 'half empty' Class-D thing ( a shame I couldn't bypass that, GREAT cab). - That has been my experience with non-DSP Class-D as well but, I know ... another battle in these pages for another day.

IMO.

[KJung]

Originally Posted by mothra2

Not sure I quite follow you there Ken...

The DSP does not interfere with gain staging to create a 'gain stack' so to speak, and as such is really no different then having, say, a semi-para section of a pre followed by a "presence" knob on the pre etc. IMO, no different then the EQ'ing, shaping effect that a good passive crossover imparts (cuts and pass), just waaay more sophisticated.

Also, as the pre is easily (potentially anyway) the most colored part of the chain, I can see why people "shop around" on that front. I know I did, matching against a Crest (no DSP whatsoever).

The pre I chose sounded fantastic with the IP-153 I had, I just didn't dig that 'half empty' Class-D thing ( a shame I couldn't bypass that, GREAT cab). - That has been my experience with non-DSP Class-D as well but, I know ... another battle in these pages for another day.

IMO.

There are hundreds of posts of gain and EQ matching issues with the IP cabs and various preamps. The input stage of the IP seems nothing like a pure power amp, and the relatively strong voicing/compression/boost and cuts' that the DSP imparts on those cabs, to me, seems to work against the voicing of many preamps.

Not sure what you mean by 'half empty class D' thing, but like many, it seems you didn't dig the IP's much either.

That being said, the IP310 is a HAMMER... amazing low end and absolute output (I assume due to that very powerful compression via the DSP, the hi passing, etc.). It sounds quite good with a bass just plugged into the input, which kind of makes my point... not many pure power amps can do that.

Moot point since they are discontinued anyway.

[mothra2]

Originally Posted by KJung

There are hundreds of posts of gain and EQ matching issues with the IP cabs and various preamps. The input stage of the IP seems nothing like a pure power amp, and the relatively strong voicing/compression/boost and cuts' that the DSP imparts on those cabs, to me, seems to work against the voicing of many preamps.

Not sure what you mean by 'half empty class D' thing, but like many, it seems you didn't dig the IP's much either.

That being said, the IP310 is a HAMMER... amazing low end and absolute output (I assume due to that very powerful compression via the DSP, the hi passing, etc.). It sounds quite good with a bass just plugged into the input, which kind of makes my point... not many pure power amps can do that.

Moot point since they are discontinued anyway.

LOVED my IP-153 ... just felt the Class-D thing lacking.
I have one of the hottest outputting Pre's out there, and it was just fine with the IP. Still don't get that.
(you'd be surprised what one of your favorite cab designers has to say about class-D off the record )

[Passinwind]

Originally Posted by mothra2

LOVED my IP-153 ... just felt the Class-D thing lacking.

Lacking what?

Are you sure you're not disliking the power supply design, which is a completely different issue than the amplifier's class of operation?

[KJung]

Originally Posted by mothra2

LOVED my IP-153 ... just felt the Class-D thing lacking.
I have one of the hottest outputting Pre's out there, and it was just fine with the IP. Still don't get that.
(you'd be surprised what one of your favorite cab designers has to say about class-D off the record )

Again, unless you heard the IP without a class D amp, there is no way to uncouple the impact How do you know it was the class D power amp versus the DSP programming, or the tuning, or the impact of the gain structure that you 'didn't like'?

[BartmanPDX]

I haven't had all those problems matching preamps to my IP310. Mostly I found it to be relatively neutral, and as such emphasized the inherent coloration and tone of the preamp. Thus, like many, I played around a bit with a number of preamps having fun trying new tones.

Lately I've been digging it fed by just my Summit. Great pure tone.

It is however quite heavy, and overkill for most of my gigs.

[mothra2]

Originally Posted by KJung

Again, unless you heard the IP without a class D amp, there is no way to uncouple the impact How do you know it was the class D power amp versus the DSP programming, or the tuning, or the impact of the gain structure that you 'didn't like'?

Because it fell in line with every other class-D amp I have auditioned.
IMO they do indeed impart there own character, for better or worse (and as I said, I am not alone in that assessment)

[Big B.]

With all the talk of big low end this may not be the setup for me. My favorite thing about the Epi cabs is the tight, controlled low end. I do a lot of loud DB gigs as well and the UL 310 is the only larger cab I have owned that can push serious SPL's with a DB and not feedback massively. I also dont drive a ton of low end for larger BG shows either as I like it tight and punchy on stage and the sound guy can give the subharmonics to the crowd. That 89 lbs. weight is a bit of a turn off too. Thats getting to close to the Eden D410 XLT I just got rid off.

[mothra2]

Originally Posted by Big B.

With all the talk of big low end this may not be the setup for me. My favorite thing about the Epi cabs is the tight, controlled low end. I do a lot of loud DB gigs as well and the UL 310 is the only larger cab I have owned that can push serious SPL's with a DB and not feedback massively. I also dont drive a ton of low end for larger BG shows either as I like it tight and punchy on stage and the sound guy can give the subharmonics to the crowd. That 89 lbs. weight is a bit of a turn off too. Thats getting to close to the Eden D410 XLT I just got rid off.

+1 ... does not sound like the right match for you.

[chadds]

Originally Posted by Big B.

Thanks, fortunately it's a used one I am looking at. Thats the other thing I was wondering about. I generally only need the one 310 but for bigger gigs I find getting a cab closer to your ear can really help cutting back on the stage volume. Perhaps I should just look into the IP310 and build a road case for it to sit on top of.

Tonally how does it compare? I like the punchiness of the Epi 310 but I assume the Berg has all those qualities as well? Last question: Does it sound as good at lower volumes. I do alot of gigs that would barely tip the needle on an amp/cab that big and some cabs dont sound so hot at lower volume levels. Thanks for the input. Valuable stuff.

I've used it with singer songwriters playing acoustic guitar with no amplification. Unlike other medium and large cabs that have to be cranked to get to their sweet spot the IP is ideal for quiet to very large gigs. Outside with no band shell behind it will still sound full.

[chadds]

Use a real bass preamp and you won't have issues. Use a channel strip you may or may not. Go easy on your eq. is the first instruction on the user sheet. We know folks can go crazy and make anything sound bad by boosting when they should cut for example.

The IP is capable of big low end. It's not a colored boosted cab with it's own domineering sound. Many of us think the IPs are relatively blank canvasses.

But hey you got to play one to find out. Like any gear!

[mothra2]

Originally Posted by Passinwind

Lacking what?

Are you sure you're not disliking the power supply design, which is a completely different issue than the amplifier's class of operation?

+1 ... good point.
This could, indeed be what I am reacting to, as most, if not all class-D amps I have used contained SMPS.
The older ones, and the current ones on the market.

[Passinwind]

Originally Posted by mothra2

+1 ... good point.
This could, indeed be what I am reacting to, as most, if not all class-D amps I have used contained SMPS.
The older ones, and the current ones on the market.

Could be lots of things, IME. I've used the same amp the IP does on nearly every gig for years now, but it sounds almost nothing like the IP implementation really.

BTW, the price on that amp module appears to have gone through the roof, could be part of Jim B's decision to drop the line.

[mothra2]

Originally Posted by Passinwind

Could be lots of things, IME. I've used the same amp the IP does on nearly every gig for years now, but it sounds almost nothing like the IP implementation really.

I'm not picking on the IP, it just still had that Class-D SMPS signature that I perceive, which I also hear in the MB stuff, etc.

Originally Posted by Passinwind

BTW, the price on that amp module appears to have gone through the roof, could be part of Jim B's decision to drop the line.

Bummer ... but I'll bet all this weight fixation that many have drove that decision as well (those IP's are darn heavy)

[chadds]

There are folks here who love carrying 100lb heads and cabs beyond that. An SWR Goliath weighs ten lbs more and doesn't include a 7lb. 1000w amp.
I've found them easy to move. Their depth is less than the
Goliath. I don't think of the IPs as heavy.