Another Pre/power question

Discussion in 'Amps and Cabs [BG]' started by Chris, Nov 10, 2001.

  1. Ok, this might seem like a dumb question, but I'm gonna ask it anyway. Ok; what if any, is the difference in sound going to be in getting a QSC PLX 3402 (or any other good power amp for that matter) and using it with an eden navigator preamp as opposed to getting a WT 400 with the pre/power in one unit? Is the QSC power amp going to affect the sound of the preamp? Would the Eden power amp color it in a desirable way that the QSC would not? Ok, that's it. Thanks

  2. PJR


    Jun 20, 2001
    N.E. PA
    It's the old separates vs integrated thing.

    The Wt400 (or most any other Bass head out there)is basically a pre-amp and power amp in one chassis.

    The positives here are:
    - Shared power supply, thus saving space & $$.
    - Matched components (hopefully)

    The negatives:
    - Shared power supply, thus certain comprimises made.
    - Inability to upgrade ,mix and match.

    Separates offer a higher degree of flexibility, and should spec out better .

    As far as what you would hear....real world.....and if it would be cost effective for you......would be up to you.

  3. Hey,
    I'm in a similar boat. I've been told by one store full o' experts that the new switching power source in the QSC (and other power amps) has a weak low end, and to get good low end you need the heavy transformers. While another store full o' experts told me that the QSC is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Guess which brands these stores sold? What complicates things is that I can tell that each one of these stores really believe what they're saying (both are small Bass only stores).

    I'm not a sound tech, and each music store sets up the acoustics to make everything sound great in the store, so.........

    I asked Dann Glenn why he plays through a Mackie 2600 (a heavy "lead sled") and his response was that it sounded great, had a lot of power, features & flexability, and was built like a tank.

    The QSC (and other other lightweights) are easier to carry, but Dann ain't full of sh**. So I'll take his advice (note: he didn't say anything negative about the QSC, I just asked him about the Mackie).

    So think about it, you probably already know what you want. You just need to trust yourself (this goes for most of us, eh?).
  4. FalsehoodBass


    Jul 22, 2001
    Denver, CO
    I have to argue with this.. i haven't done extensive research with Eden, but i have with ampeg, and getting an SVP-Pro (ampeg's preamp) and a carvin poweramp is cheaper than an SVP-3 (ampeg's #2 SS head) and if you're squeamish about carvin.. get a mackie (1400 was more than enought for me) and its still cheaper AND more powerful than the SVT-4PRO.. which is ampeg's top o the line head..

    ok i know you don't care about ampeg, you're an eden fan, but i'm just saying that just because the preamp and poweramp are in the same unit.. don't assume they're cheaper.. look into it yourself and i bet you'll be surprised.


    i have no qsc experience but my makcie IMO rocks.
  5. Freakapotamus9


    Jun 20, 2001
    IMO, Carvin power amps are some of the best power amps out there and very reasonable. just a suggestion...... not like you can try them out very easily .....
  6. PJR


    Jun 20, 2001
    N.E. PA
    Hey Brian....... could make that argument......

    I should clarify:

    It is more cost effective to house the pre and power amp in the same chassis.....whereby they would share not only the single chassis.....but a single power source.....thus generally less $$ to manufacture than the same components in 2 separate chassis's .....with separate power supplies.

    Therefore.......Bass heads (pre and poweramp as one unit) are generally less expensive than separates.

    ...there are exceptions...

  7. You gotta forgive PJR--he's an audiophile, where integrated components are much cheaper than separates.
  8. PJR


    Jun 20, 2001
    N.E. PA Funky !! ;)

  9. VicDamone


    Jun 25, 2000
    In a double blind test that wouldn't over load the 400 I wouldn't be a bit suprised if you couldn't tell the two apart since the preamps are very similar.

    A power amp should have as little character as possible but don't forget your amplifying a signal from a bass guitar your not trying to reproduce recorded music.

    As far as QSC PLX amps having weak low ends my 2402 holds its own very well when compared to my 350 watt 150lb Mosfet amp (in the bass, that is).

    All that headroom and limiting in a 21lb box...please.
  10. 21 lbs that QSC is VERY tempting. Thanks for the real world report.
  11. Bob Gollihur

    Bob Gollihur

    Mar 22, 2000
    New Joisey Shore
    Big Cheese Emeritus: Gollihur Music
    I'll second the QSC 2402 vote. I have a pair of them, and will be putting one up on eBay in a few minutes (only because I no longer need the second one). The "no bass" tale is BS - I've took mine to the limit at an outdoor gig on Labor Day out on a pier, driving a pair of Euphonic Audio VL-210 cabs. Even though the voltage was sagging badly, according to my Furman's readout, it still put out solid bass.

    I've also owned an Eden WT300, which I enjoyed, followed by an Eden Navigator/Crown amp combination -- unless portability is an issue, I'd go for the Navigator/power amp combination instead of one of Eden's more powerful heads any day if the Eden sound was what I preferred (and at the time, I did). The Navigator has so much more in the way of features, great onboard compressor, etc., plus a power amp gives you so much more flexibility.
  12. With the big power available from the large QSC's the low fundamentals have a depth and clarity you just can't get from a much smaller amp.

    After switching to the 2402, I stopped using 10s and went with an 18 and a 15, and with a good compressor the bottom has real punch.

    I can't imagine anyone who has used a big PLX saying that they lack bottom. They are bottom monsters, but not mud monsters.