SWR/Epifani side by side

[carvinbassplyr]

I just thought this would be useful to some who maybe be torn between these 2 companies and not have a chance to personally compare them b4 purchasing them. It is the same player (Andrew Gouche) playing the same tunes on nearly identical (very similar maple top American MTD) basses with the same band. One set is done with Epifani PS410 cabs and the other set is done with SWR GIII cabs. Enjoy...

Epifani
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjNif...e_gdata_player

SWR
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=biJVc...e_gdata_player

[Jim Carr]

Both sound great, but surely there are more variables than the bass cabs AG is using?

[carvinbassplyr]

Not really, at least IMO. The mixes are about as close to identical as you can get. Even the bass tone is nearly identical except for the extra "clank" coming from that foster horn in the SWR's. I've owned and stood in front of a GIII rig and a PS410 rig. These videos very accurately represent what I experienced tone-wise from each rig. It's about as good a comparison as you can get for a documented "real world" scenario.

[chadds]

The safe conclusion is that AG can get his sound out of either system.

[lowfreqgeek]

He is using an Epifani head with the Epi cabs, and an SWR head with the SWR cabs. Those are vastly different voiced amps. I owned both simultaneously for about 4 years, so I'm well aware of their differences. The Epifani rig definitely has the "Epifani" sound, and the SWR likewise. It's hard to compare *just* the cabs or amps from these.

Both videos are pretty dang cool, though.

[jerry]

Originally Posted by chadds

The safe conclusion is that AG can get his sound out of either system.

+1, Most bass players that come through here have to play though various back lines, they always sound like themselves.

[carvinbassplyr]

Originally Posted by lowfreqgeek

He is using an Epifani head with the Epi cabs, and an SWR head with the SWR cabs. Those are vastly different voiced amps. I owned both simultaneously for about 4 years, so I'm well aware of their differences. The Epifani rig definitely has the "Epifani" sound, and the SWR likewise. It's hard to compare *just* the cabs or amps from these.

Both videos are pretty dang cool, though.

Still, I'm pretty sure the adjustments he makes to either amp would be minimal as he uses his pedal board for most of the eq and the amps basically as a power amp. I still think it's a good comparison between the 2 rigs.

[carvinbassplyr]

Originally Posted by chadds

The safe conclusion is that AG can get his sound out of either system.

I will say that the SWR head does not have the typical SWR sound. Either that one has the aural enhance bypass mod done to it or he's bypassing the preamp and just using the power amp. He's getting way too thick (mids) of a sound which is contradictory of SWR's scooped voicing built into the preamp.

[wvbass]

Originally Posted by carvinbassplyr

I will say that the SWR head does not have the typical SWR sound. Either that one has the aural enhance bypass mod done to it or he's bypassing the preamp and just using the power amp. He's getting way too thick (mids) of a sound which is contradictory of SWR's scooped voicing built into the preamp.

Nah. The aural enhancer is pretty evil, and there is some inherent mid scoop going on with SWR, but there is no reason to think the amp has been modified. I used SWR for a long time. The secret to a good sound, for me, was to not be afraid of the EQ knobs and to have at least four tens to produce enough low end. The SWR sound is one of many sounds an SWR is capable of.

Some of the best, midrange-y toes I have heard have come from SWR amps. (whether or not I was the player) To suggest otherwise could mean you haven't spent enough time with the EQ section. On the other hand, some of the worst, boomy, scooped tones I have heard have also come from SWR gear. Great tones are in there, but there is a lot of potential for poo as well.

[carvinbassplyr]

Originally Posted by wvbass

Nah. The aural enhancer is pretty evil, and there is some inherent mid scoop going on with SWR, but there is no reason to think the amp has been modified. I used SWR for a long time. The secret to a good sound, for me, was to not be afraid of the EQ knobs and to have at least four tens to produce enough low end. The SWR sound is one of many sounds an SWR is capable of.

Some of the best, midrange-y toes I have heard have come from SWR amps. (whether or not I was the player) To suggest otherwise could mean you haven't spent enough time with the EQ section. On the other hand, some of the worst, boomy, scooped tones I have heard have also come from SWR gear. Great tones are in there, but there is a lot of potential for poo as well.

I owned, and worshipped, an SWR SM900 for a LOOOOONG time. I used it with 2 GIII cabs and also with my PS410 before letting it go. Yes, I agree, the tone could be "brought out" of that amp thanks to the 2 channel, merge-capable semi-parametric eq section. My point is that, IMO, you will find yourself having to do more tweaking and boosting a fair share of mids, more so than other rigs, to overcome/counteract that scoop from the aural enhance. So, in essence, you're trying to make an SWR not sound like an SWR lol.

[chadds]

Not to argue YMMV and it always does. I had two SM-400s with 4 GII Jr.s. Then two Bass 750s with two GIIIs. I used a GIII Jr. for awhile and tried both a Henry and a Sr. Those are now gone but I've kept the BBII and LA-8.
I found the secret to a good fat sound with SWR was no more aural e than 10:00, cranked pre, reduced treble just a hair and eq flat. Tweeters barely on.

Don't crank that pre and your tone is never realized.

These settings work well with active basses. Passive basses require all kinds of eqing. That eqing though, narrowed the tonal variety that comes from touch and hand placement. I liked that an SWR can get out of the way so the color you want you bring.
I sure could get a fat Motown sound even without flats.

It was said years ago that the settings the music stores would have on SWRs favored slapping & popping and not anything thick or warm.

Also the wrong cabinet selections like two GIIs with one SM-400 was a thin tepid mess because each cab was getting 135 watts.

Again our mileage varies.

[carvinbassplyr]

Originally Posted by chadds

Don't crank that pre and your tone is never realized.

True, SWR's preamp is a high gain design. If you don't drive it hard enough you won't load the tube enough to take advantage of it's tonal characteristics.

Originally Posted by chadds

It was said years ago that the settings the music stores would have on SWRs favored slapping & popping and not anything thick or warm.

I guess that would apply if you liked a thinner (think smiley face eq) slap tone. The slap tone in those two videos is what I prefer. It's clean and clear, but is by no means deficient of mids. If anything, there's a mid boost that makes the fingerstyle notes jump off the speakers and add warmth to the popped notes.

[Jim Carr]

Originally Posted by carvinbassplyr

I will say that the SWR head does not have the typical SWR sound. Either that one has the aural enhance bypass mod done to it or he's bypassing the preamp and just using the power amp. He's getting way too thick (mids) of a sound which is contradictory of SWR's scooped voicing built into the preamp.

I don't know about that. I have used Epifani and SWR gear for years, and still use Epifani. I could get tons of mids out my SWR 350 silver face and GII 410, as I can also with Epi UL410 4 ohm, or a UL210 + UL410, or even two Epi 210s. I use either an M9 carbine, a CA6/ART pre, GK MB800, or Shuttle 6.0.

The scoop in the SWR pre can be dialed out. Plus, if you are using an active bass or outboard pre, you are pretty free to get what you want. Also, the SWR horn can be turned down or even off.

[carvinbassplyr]

Originally Posted by Jim Carr

The scoop in the SWR pre can be dialed out.

Yes, but my point is that if you're trying to overcome a built in tone shape by "dialing it out" or eq'ing around it, you are, in essence, trying to make the amp not sound like itself. Can you get nice mids from SWR gear? Sure, with an active bass and time spent turning some knobs. Are SWR's known for having thick, chewy mids? No, or at least they're not the first to come to mind. This was the predication for my opinion that AG is getting tone out of that rig that is not typical of the "SWR sound".

[chadds]

Okay.

[MeLikeDaLowNote]

I know this thread is about the difference in amps, but I bet that guy would sound like a million bucks playing through just about anything. Wow, he's tight.

[carvinbassplyr]

Originally Posted by MeLikeDaLowNote

I know this thread is about the difference in amps, but I bet that guy would sound like a million bucks playing through just about anything. Wow, he's tight.

YOU AINT LYIN! He's not affectionately named the "godfather of gospel bass" for nothing lol. He'd probably kill through a Roland keyboard amp!

[jmattbassplaya]

Originally Posted by carvinbassplyr

Yes, but my point is that if you're trying to overcome a built in tone shape by "dialing it out" or eq'ing around it, you are, in essence, trying to make the amp not sound like itself. Can you get nice mids from SWR gear? Sure, with an active bass and time spent turning some knobs. Are SWR's known for having thick, chewy mids? No, or at least they're not the first to come to mind. This was the predication for my opinion that AG is getting tone out of that rig that is not typical of the "SWR sound".

So what you're saying is that SWR with its mids cranked sounds very similar to Epifani?

[carvinbassplyr]

Originally Posted by jmattbassplaya

So what you're saying is that SWR with its mids cranked sounds very similar to Epifani?

I don't know if I would put it that way EXACTLY. The SWR's eq section is very powerful so the tone possibilities should be in there and with the Aural Enhance bypass mod done you'd be even more in the ballpark. My point is that even an Epi amp through a GIII cab would probably sound more SWR than Epi and vice versa. The cab is the filter through which you get to hear the amp so it has the greatest effect over the "final product". My SWR SM900 through my GIII cabs vs my SWR SM900 through my Epi PS410 were 2 COMPLETELY different animals. When I a/b'd one of my GIII's and my PS410 side by side using my SM900, I found the PS410 sounded true the tone coming from amp's DI signal where as the GIII cab was very colored with an exaggerated upper register. I then ditched both GIII cabs and played the SWR head/Epi cab combo until I ran into a 60 cycle hum problem that, despite $100's of $$$'s thrown at it, could not be cured and forced me to dump the amp. So, I guess my opinion would be that while the bypass mod helps, the voicing of the amp isn't the greatest part of the issue with SWR when it comes to getting deep, phat mids from the gear...it's the cabs (with the exception of the sealed Marcus Miller cabs which were obviously voiced for "mid-city" lol).

[frpzxvaa]

The mixes are about as close to identical as you can get.