Tone Difference Between AI and WW?

[funkyfretless]

hey guys,
lookin for my first good upright amp. is there a difference between them soundwise really?? mainly gonna be used for upright gigs but maybe alittle electric bass on the side.

gonna run with mainly 1 epi ul 122...(or 2 if its a big gig)

i know tone is a preference, but just wondering your opinions. things i dont like about a lot of amps are that they are very bommy in first position and the clarity goes away around e on the g string right before thumb position. i know it could be that my fingerboard needs replaing and my soundpost is ****** but ive noticed this thru several bass amps with other ub players and their rigs.

so looking for something that is has even tone response all the way thru. will either of these amps do this, one beter, or is there another amp is should look into??

thanks,
evan

[KJung]

From A/Bing these two with Ric Vice (Realist pickup) on DB, and my experience with them with EB, here's my take:

Walter (the relatively new, mid 90's to present Electracoustics)... very upper mid present, sparkling treble response, a little dip in the lower mids inherent in the voicing (which can be fixed with the semi-parametric mids).... very transparent sounding.. lot's of 'wood' comes through, if that makes sense... tone desciptors... light, airy, open, fast. No DI.. only a 1/4 line out.

AI... The I, II and III series sound very similar to me, as does the Focus and Clarus line... fatter in the low mids than the Walter.. more lower mid present versus the upper mid airiness of the Walter, much less powerful tone controls (more of a one sound amp IME), darker, in general, and more warmth... tone descriptors... organic, fat, full, warm, mellow... nice DI and some DB specific tone filtering... hi pass (set too high IME), and notch filtering for feedback.


Both amp lines very high quality, small and light.

[Ric Vice]

+1
Ken's nailed it with his comments. The only thing that I would add is (IMHO) that the better quality the instrument (Double Bass) the better the Acoustic Image sounds due to its EQ parameters while the Walter Woods makes just about any bass sound better.

Ric

[WillBuckingham]

The AI heads are completely transparent. What will color your tone is your pickup and the Epi cab.

-Will

[KJung]

Originally Posted by WillBuckingham

The AI heads are completely transparent. What will color your tone is your pickup and the Epi cab.

-Will

I hear neither the AI nor the Walter as completely transparent.. both sound good, both have their sound. I would agree that they are 'relatively' uncolored, but many say that about both the Walter and the AI amps... and they sound WAY different.

Edit: Another way to describe this.... when you take the feed from a high quality DI/pre like an Avalon into the amp section of the AI... it sounds MUCH different than the AI using the integrated pre. The Walter actually sounds quite similar in both modes... so in some ways, I would call the Walter the more transparant. The point is, they both sound very good, and both sound very different!

[Reefer]

I own both and the desriptions are pretty accurate. One thing I can say about the AI is "Acoustic Image" is the perfect name for this amp. My '62 Jazz bass, F Bass AC4, and my upright w/Full Circle sound marvelous with this amp due to their wonderful acoustic qualities, whereas any electric bass that is dependent on high mass bridges and active electronics to acheive its tone sound like crap. The WW works much better with those type basses. I just received 2 Wizzy 10's today, and I must say what a perfect match for my AI Focus III. sounds KILLER!!

[B String]

Ken's hammer must be HUGE! As usual he's hit the nail on
the head. I would also add that I don't use my UL112 with
the Focus for upright unless I use the highpass filter on
the AI. Too boomy. It sounds great for electric bass though.

Some guys have had good luck with the Markbass gear.
I've started using a very small MB 1x12 combo amp for small
gigs and upright. The combo is very powerfull so for bigger
gigs I can add a UL112, and it rocks. Again, it might be a little
low end heavy for upright, depending on your pickup.

[KJung]

Originally Posted by Reefer

I own both and the desriptions are pretty accurate. One thing I can say about the AI is "Acoustic Image" is the perfect name for this amp. My '62 Jazz bass, F Bass AC4, and my upright w/Full Circle sound marvelous with this amp due to do their wonderful acoustic qualities, whereas any electric bass that is dependent on high mass bridges and active electronics to acheive its tone sound like crap. I just received 2 Wizzy 10's today, and I must say what a perfect match for my AI Focus III. sounds KILLER!!

That's a great way to put it. I LOVE the AI and a piezo based instrument like an EUB or Rob Allen through a warm, organic cab like an Acme, and I would assume I would like the Wizzy also. However, not so much for magnetic pickups or a more active sound, where the Walter shines much more IME.

[Reefer]

I also need to add that the WW is a little more picky about what cabs it likes. The Berg 1x12's are the only small cab I've had luck with, but that combo is GOOD!!!!!!!!!!!

[KJung]

Originally Posted by Reefer

I also need to add that the WW is a little more picky about what cabs it likes. The Berg 1x12's are the only small cab I've had luck with, but that combo is GOOD!!!!!!!!!!!

I would agree with this also, although the smaller EA VL cabs sound quite good to me with the Walter and DB also.

Per the OP, the Walter with the EpiUL will be quite bright and alive sounding.. maybe too much so for DB (although so much depends on the instrument and the pickup). The AI works nicely with the 112UL, although as B String points out, you can run into the other problem of actually too much low end with some instruments.

You DB guys have it tough with amplification!

[Reefer]

Originally Posted by KJung

I would agree with this also, although the smaller EA VL cabs sound quite good to me with the Walter and DB also.

Per the OP, the Walter with the EpiUL will be quite bright and alive sounding.. maybe too much so for DB (although so much depends on the instrument and the pickup). The AI works nicely with the 112UL, although as B String points out, you can run into the other problem of actually too much low end with some instruments.

You DB guys have it tough with amplification!

I used the VL110 and VL208 for a while with the WW. I actually liked the 10's better for doubling. Still prefer the Bergs though.

[Uncletoad]

I have both. Have gigged quite a bit on DB with both. I really like the tone of the WWU. It's got a very sweet tone that works really well on the gig. It can get boomy in some rooms but the EQ works well at getting rid of that. I agree with the previous folks about the descriptions of tone differences. The WWU is the tone king to me.

I gig with the AI Focus 2RIII though. The Woods rarely sees work. The AI head is more practical and a tad more transparent.

With the Woods I'm dragging around DI boxes, preamps with phase switches and high pass filters, and a cheap mic adapter from Radio Shack to mix the mic with. All that stuff stays at home when I use the AI head. I just plug in and go. In addition the AI head has mute switches. Crucial to playing DB at a gig when you take a break. The Woods you have to turn things up and down and ruin your gain structure between sets.

The AI head mixes mics and pickups without adapters or outboard preamps. Takes 1/4" and XLR inputs. It's DI sounds great even though it's to hot for some mixing boards. Half the time I plug the 1/4" DI from the Woods into a DI box to the board and it hums like hell. That's annoying.

This is not an AI lovefest though. It doubles ok in a pinch. It's far from my favorite EB amp but for occasional use it works just fine. The EQ sucks for DB and EB. Thankfully I don't need it much. There are minor annoyances about not having the high pass filter separate from a phase switch/notch filter but it works decent the way they do it and it sounds good.

When they break AI is super fast at fixing them. I had mine back 5 days from when it broke. Walter you have to call for awhile until you reach him then send him the amp with postage in both directions and wait for two weeks or so to get it back.

The AI head is $1600 and you can get one in 24 hours. The Woods is $2500 and you can get one when?

So the Woods gets the award on straight tone but the AI head is a stronger gig dog and sounds better than anything else for DB besides the Woods.

[bottomzone]

Tom Bowlus has some footage from his GTG comparing an AI amd and a WW amp. This was my first time hearing either of these amps and was the spark that led me to enter the domain of separates. Thanks, tom! To my ears, the WW sounds more "open" and "unveiled" than the AI. Check out the FocusWW.wmv clip. Granted, the video camera's mic has limited fidelity, but you can still hear the difference!



Keep God First!

A Groove is a Terrible Thing to Waste!

[Reefer]

Originally Posted by Uncletoad

When they break AI is super fast at fixing them. I had mine back 5 days from when it broke. Walter you have to call for awhile until you reach him then send him the amp with postage in both directions and wait for two weeks or so to get it back.

The AI head is $1600 and you can get one in 24 hours. The Woods is $2500 and you can get one when?

.

Not exactly true about WW repair. Walter told me in the past that even when he is not answering the phone he will accept shipment of anyone's amp and get it repaired asap. Just a few months ago I sent him an amp when he was not answering the phone and it was back to me in 10 days from when I shipped it w/o ever speaking to him.

The street price on the AI Focus is a couple of hundred less than the mentioned retail price. The Clarus is a pretty good deal also now that it puts out 400 watts!

[Eric S]

Originally Posted by Ric Vice

...that the better quality the instrument (Double Bass) the better the Acoustic Image sounds due to its EQ parameters while the Walter Woods makes just about any bass sound better.

Ric

That makes sense.

I own both a WW ultra and a Focus 2 SIII. I play only fretless acoustic bass guitar (jazz). I tend to prefer the Woods in most situations. I get a rounder woodier sound with the Woods.

Since every room sounds so different, I rely on the versatile EQ of the Woods to dial my tone. I keep it very flat but a little goes a long way. In my experience, if you are not happy with the acoustics of a particular room, the EQ on the Focus is not going to be a big help.

Also, I would agree with some comments in the past that the Focus has sort of a “veiled” quality to the sound. Maybe it doesn’t color the sound but I sense a sort of diffused warmth that can be a little anemic compared to what I feel is the more transparent bloom of the woods.

Both are great really. You need to try them with your bass if you get the oportunity.

[larry]

Not a hijack, but more of a stretch of the original topic:

Can we add Markbass to the comparison? I'm really torn and want to hear since you guys know so much.

[Ric Vice]

Originally Posted by larry

Not a hijack, but more of a stretch of the original topic:

Can we add Markbass to the comparison? I'm really torn and want to hear since you guys know so much.

Larry,
The Little Mark II has a very similar sound to the older Walter Woods MI series. What's interesting about that is both of then are Class A/B amplifiers with digital power supplies (not digital power amps). Unfortunately, you would have to find a used Woods to get that sound. Fortunately, the new Walter Woods Electro Acoustic amps sound very good. The MarkBass is much less expensive but has two EQ controls that aren't very useful with DB.

Ric

[larry]

Originally Posted by Ric Vice

Larry,
The Little Mark II has a very similar sound to the older Walter Woods MI series. What's interesting about that is both of then are Class A/B amplifiers with digital power supplies (not digital power amps). Unfortunately, you would have to find a used Woods to get that sound. Fortunately, the new Walter Woods Electro Acoustic amps sound very good. The MarkBass is much less expensive but has two EQ controls that aren't very useful with DB.

Ric

Ric -
Have you played the tube Markbass? Wonder if that would be better still...

[drurb]

Just a note. Most of the differences that one hears across modern amps are likely the result of interactions between the output of the amp and the particular complex impedance function of the speaker cabinet being driven. I am assuming that we are considering amps that are not "voiced" in any way (i.e., the frequency response is deliberately tweaked-- a practice I abhor). The differences one hears between amps may or may not hold up across different cabs.

[Reefer]

Originally Posted by drurb

Just a note. Most of the differences that one hears across modern amps are likely the result of interactions between the output of the amp and the particular complex impedance function of the speaker cabinet being driven. I am assuming that we are considering amps that are not "voiced" in any way (i.e., the frequency response is deliberately tweaked-- a practice I abhor). The differences one hears between amps may or may not hold up across different cabs.

+1! My WW sounds stellar with my Berg 12 and the AI is equal with Wizzy 10. On the other hand my WW does not good at all with the Wizzy 10 and although the AI sounds good with the Berg, nothing like the WW with that cab.