WW vs. Aguilar DB 750
Hi all.....seeking input on these two amps. I am in the financial position where I could own only EITHER of these amps, a WW 1200 watt blue light, or an Aguilar DB 750. I have been an owner/user of the WW 1200w head for about 10 years now, so I am not seeking a description of that amp and it's qualities. Unfortunately, I live in a place where I cannot go play through an Aggie, so it is that one which I am curious about, in comparison to the WW. If the Aggie is something which I feel would be a good alternative (sonically speaking), then I would sell my WW.
I know about the weight issue, and that structurally these are two very different animals. What I want to understand is the difference in sound. If anyone has any input/concept/idea about what my experience will be as a player when I am on the gig and I plug into an Aggie, I would appreciate your response.
Can't think of any two amps that are more different. You know how the Walter newer models (electacoustic) sound.... quite solid state, very airy upper mids and top end, not a ton of low mid/upper bass meat, clean, clean, clean.
DB750, just take the exact opposite of the above:D
Both are fabulous and do what their designers had in mind. However, their designers seemed (to my ear) to have completely different things in mind.
I have read many of your posts over the years, and I appreciate your input and opinion.
So you are saying the Aggie is more low-mid, bottom oriented. Since the WW can be described as clean, other than "not clean", what would describe the Aggie? Louder?
It is so frustrating I can't actually try one of these and my position is that in order to have one I need to sell my WW. If I wanted the WW back it would be very tough to get one. Honestly, I am not sure owning a WW nowadays is a great bet, if you care about its value and trade-off appeal, but that is another thread.;)
Yes, the Aguilar can have a huge, deep powerful, massive low end, and will also operate safely into 2ohms. The midrange is not nearly as articulate as the Walter (few amps are actually), and the top end is much more relaxed on the DB750. Quite frankly, if you are looking for the more fat, chewy Aguilar tone, and don't need 2ohm operation, the Aguilar TH500 is quite impressive, and will give you that fat, chewy, 'midrange character' tone in spades, and with a decent 4ohm cab, will handle pretty much any gig you might have.
If you are power hungry, and still want that crips, clean Walter type tone, the new GK MBFusion800 is quite impressive. Yes, it will grind and grunt, but you can set it clean, dial out a touch of top end brightness, and that will probably make you quite happy. Of course, you will lose the 'fully functional' dual channel thing, but with all these heads, you will gain a DI (imagine that!).
The Puma900 (TecAmp) would also be a VERY nice replacement for an Electracoustic. In the same tone universe as the newer Walters (the old ones are a totally different story, and actually do vibe the DB750 just a touch... the ones made before the Electracoustic line came out in the 90's). Very clean, but also with a bit of midrange character. GREAT EQ.
However, if you do want a 180 degree change in your tone (and a massive increase in schlep poundage!), the DB750 is a classic, loved by many. Beautiful amp for a classic passive P or J to my ear, in gigging contexts where having the bass put a nice pillow of support under the band is more important than clean, upper register note articulation. IMO, IMO, IME, and IMO!!!!
|All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:47 PM.|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.