GB ShuttleMax 9.2 or Epifani UL502?

[lowfreqgeek]

I have, and generally love, an Epifani UL502. It's been my main amp for about 3 years, and I haven't had a lot of desire to use anything else. I do use a VT Bass when I need more grit/drive for certain genres, but I go direct to the amp 80% of the time.

However, I'm curious about the ShuttleMax 9.2. I play a wide variety of genres and I suspect the 9.2 can give me a wider range of tones than the Epifani. But I'm most interested in the "raw" sound of the 9.2 compared to the 502.

Should I even consider swapping? My cabs of choice are 2 Epifani UL112s and a Berg HS410.

[lo-freq]

~subscribed~

I haven't played either of these, but from reports I'd think the 9.2 (when set flat) would have a tighter low end, more articulate mids & treble, and more fur when setup to overdrive the tube preamp.

It does have more versatile EQ options than the 502.

I also suspect that (based on my tone goals), the 9.2 would sound really good with those UL112 and fine with the HS410 with just a bit of EQing.

[KJung]

+1 I've owned the 502 and GTG'd the Max 9.2.

As a different point of view to the OP, I'm one who ended up absolutely HATING the 502 with my Epi410UL cabs. Massive volume (good), hammering low end (good), and a very strange mid response that I just could never dial in. It was LITERALLY the only head I've ever owned that I could not get a good slap tone and fingerstyle tone without turning knobs. Something, to my ear, very strange going on in the midrange. Almost like a 'sine wave' sort of EQ (if I have that right... like a lot of 'W's in a row!).... massive low end, very little lower mids, massive mid mids, very little upper mid presence.

This voicing was magnified (for me) by the wide and smooth voicing of the UL cabs, with all that space between the top and the driver and the tweeter, and the high ratio of deep bass to lower mids.

I will say that the 502 also ended up at the bottom of the heap in every GTG comparison we ever did.

So, as one who hates the 502, I LOVE the Shuttle 9.2. Not any louder than the 502 (that power section is very impressive), but much more even, much more controlled low end (very nice hi passing by the Genz engineers), MUCH more powerful EQ, and the two channels are voiced quite differently versus the 502's channels, giving you more options.

If you love you 502, you MIGHT find the 9.2 thin and overly bright and punchy.

IMO and IME.

[lowfreqgeek]

Thanks, Ken. I knew you'd jump in, and I appreciate it.

I'll agree that the 502 is a unique-sounding amp. Oddly enough, my SWR Bass 350 set flat with the Aural Enhancer bypassed (truly "flat" - per a schematic analysis - minus the little bit of "tube" sound) is VERY close to the 502 in terms of tone. I'm sure the 502 has some built in pre-EQ curve, but it seems pretty flat compared to many other amps, IME. That's based on comparing the preamp/EQ section to my DI's through an RME studio setup and nice phones.

I've put hundreds of gigs on the Epifani rig, and I've loved *almost* every minute of it. I do prefer mid-heavy basses with that rig, though - Pbass w/TI flats, G&Ls, various fretlesses, etc. I've used my Jazz basses a few times and I honestly couldn't dial in enough/right mids. That's where the 9.2 comes in...

The 9.2 has been on my radar for quite a while. I've used a Shuttle 3.0 a few times in a live context (jazz ensemble) and I've really dug how nicely it played with every bass I've thrown at it. It was always low volume, but I expect the 9.2 would give me what I need with my cab configuration at much higher volumes.

Then there's the *other* side of me that says "you have nice stuff - be happy with it". I am, but...

[lowfreqgeek]

Ok, well, after some time with the SWR (AE bypassed) and 502 through the Berg tonight, I can say that there is definitely something going on in the mid-range of the 502 that I hadn't noticed when A/Bing the amps through UL112s and through phones. With the 502, the notes have more punch on the front of the envelope, but the harmonics aren't quite as crisp as the SWR. I think the 502 has a little more low-end built in; you can feel it more with the Berg, though the SWR can get there with some EQ. Neither are "bright" by any means - both are very similar in the high-end when set flat.

The SWR just has a little more upper mid-range (which aides the harmonics), whereas the Epi has less upper mids, but a tad more lower mids. Again, the SWR is pretty much "flat" when the AE is bypassed and the tone controls are centered. I've gone through the schematics many times and the AE circuit is simply a (barely) modified Fender tone stack. All the "SWR Sound" is in that circuit, so when that circuit is gone, there's nothing else in the path to color the tone (except a tube).

So I'm still really interested in hearing a GB SM9.2 through the Berg, as well as my Epifani UL112 stack. I think my own perceptions of tone have changed over the past few years, as well as my needs. I have often played hard rock, classic country, and jazz duo gigs back to back, so I want an amp that can cover everything with ease.