Eden or iamp

Discussion in 'Amps and Cabs [BG]' started by B String, Aug 31, 2004.

  1. B String

    B String Supporting Member

    Apr 11, 2002
    Los Angeles
    What are the sonic differences between the
    Eden amps and the EA iamps? Both seem to
    warm sounding with similar eq. I haven't tried
    the eden yet but the iamp 500 is not matching
    too well with my epi 112. Lots of tight lows, but
    not much punch or articulation from the upper mids
    and highs. So... what up with eden?
  2. tombowlus

    tombowlus If it sounds good, it is good Gold Supporting Member

    Apr 3, 2003
    North central Ohio
    Editor-in-Chief, Bass Gear Magazine
    In general, the iAMP would tend to be more tight, clear, articulate, and accurate than the Eden, and the Eden would be a bit more round, old-schoolish sounding. Of course, the Enhance knob can turn that distinction on its ear.

    I do hear you about the iAMP not sounding its best with your Epi T-112. My iAMP 800 just doesn't pair up well with my Epi cabs (T-110UL's and T-112's). I can get it to sound pretty good, but it takes some tweaking. The iAMP is such a full-sounding amp, the frequency blooms of the Epi cabs (which can be a godsend with a thinner sounding head, like an SWR) tend to induce a muddy, imprecise sound in the upper mids. Set flat, my Walkabout sounds better with my Epi cabs than the iAMP 800 does.

    Of course, some of this is related to the fact that the T-112 is not very articulate or present in the upper mids to begin with. This is why I love pairing it with the T-110UL.
  3. jive1

    jive1 Moderator Staff Member Supporting Member Commercial User

    Jan 16, 2003
    Owner/Retailer: Jive Sound
    Well I'm the owner of an iAmp350 and an Eden WT400.

    The Eden WT400 is a warm sounding amp. It has a smoother sound than the iAmp, whereas the iAmp is crisp with plenty of bark. The iAmp sounds more modern, whereas the Eden is easily tweaked to get a vintage sound. The Eden also seems to have a richer tone in terms of overtones and harmonics. But, the iAmp will cut through a mix like nobody's business with the right cabs.

    They're both great amps. I don't own an Epi, but I do have Aguilar GS112s. The iAmp plays with my EA CXL110s much nicer than with the Aggies. The Aggies don't put out the mids that the 10s do. But with the Eden, the GS112s get that old school thump. With a Bag End 15, it's just smooth old-school buttah baby.

    As far as versatility is concerned, they're both quite versatile.

    The iAmp is crisp, with bark, and tight lows.
    The Eden is smooth, rich and thumpy
  4. B String

    B String Supporting Member

    Apr 11, 2002
    Los Angeles
  5. tombowlus

    tombowlus If it sounds good, it is good Gold Supporting Member

    Apr 3, 2003
    North central Ohio
    Editor-in-Chief, Bass Gear Magazine
  6. B String

    B String Supporting Member

    Apr 11, 2002
    Los Angeles
    Thanks Tombowlus! I'll give the eden a try.
    I can borrow a wt400. I can get an idea of
    the tone.
  7. Woodboy


    Jun 9, 2003
    St. Louis, MO
    Please realize that the WT-400 sounds much different than the WT-550. The 550 is smoother, deeper and with less "clank". I own a 550 and dig it thru-and-thru.
  8. B String

    B String Supporting Member

    Apr 11, 2002
    Los Angeles
    They look the same from the front panel.
    Is the different sound due to the extra
    power, or is the preamp different too?
  9. Richard Lindsey

    Richard Lindsey

    Mar 25, 2000
    Metro NYC
    I sold a WT400 to buy an iAmp 500. I liked the Eden pretty well, and I wouldn't mind using Eden as out-of-town rental gear, but I like the EA better. As has been noted, the EA has a surprising amount of low end without being muddy, and the EQ flexibility is unparalleled. (Not that I've even needed to use the EQ much yet.) To my ears, the WT400 bass gets a tad woolly and unfocused when you turn it up, whereas the EA's doesn't. And the Eden's treble has a characteristic "zingy" sound when you turn it up, which either works for you or doesn't--over time, it stopped working for me so well. The EA doesn't seem to have that so much, though I'm sure I could make it "zing" if I fiddled with the EQ and found the right frequencies.

    Also, I love the tonal contour buttons on the EA; they're all usable. And the EA has a couple small features that maybe aren't earthshaking but that I love nonetheless: (1) tuner and phones jacks on the front rather than the back, (2) FX loop on the front, and (3) my favorite, speaker and DI on-off buttons so you can easily retune in the middle of a set without having to unplug or turn down anything to ensure that you're not inflicting your tuning on the public.

  10. Woodboy


    Jun 9, 2003
    St. Louis, MO
    Honestly, I don't know. I spent quite a bit of time A/B testing the 400 and the 550 thru a variety of Eden cabs. The 400 had me reaching for the treble tone control on my bass to cut some high frequency clank. The 550 was butter-smooth and just more "musical", if that is a valid term on these pages.


    Nov 24, 2001
    New York,NY
    Tried the iAMP800 & IMHO the Navigator w/Crown pwr beats it out in versatlity regarding hi's & low's. As far as a weight(lbs.) issue goes, I'd just spring for a WW Ultra & call it a day. A great sounding amp that's lighter than my bass is a major + any day...


    PS: IME & IMHO of course...
  12. NeedMoreBass

    NeedMoreBass unregistered

    Feb 14, 2003
    Couldn't agree more!
  13. JOME77

    JOME77 Supporting Member

    Aug 18, 2002
    Don't judge the Thunderfunk by the 400 watts @ 4 ohm rating. I had my doubts too until I took a chance and bought one with the 7 day satisfaction guaranteed deal. It's louder and cuts through a live mix better than most of the higher wattage amps that I've owned. That list includes the WT800 and Bridged Stewart 1.6 rated at around 1,100 watts. And even more important, you don't hear about TF's spending a lot of time in the shop being repaired! :smug:
  14. NeedMoreBass

    NeedMoreBass unregistered

    Feb 14, 2003
    My experience with the Thunderfunk is it's fine if you're running a 4 ohm load, but @ 8 ohms it's lacking.
  15. emjazz

    emjazz Supporting Member

    Feb 23, 2003
    Boston, MA
    Have you tried a different cab instead? If you're looking for more upper mids and highs I would suggest that you get a hold of a Bergantino 112 and try that with your amp first. I admittedly am not a fan of the EA amps but be sure try a different cab as well. My Berg is crystal clear from lows to highs and with a little boost in the low end will sound as big as the Epifani. I know that a few people here have had great experiences with the EA amps and Berg cabs.
  16. B String

    B String Supporting Member

    Apr 11, 2002
    Los Angeles
    emjazz. You may be right that the berg has more
    mids and highs, but most of the feedback i've had
    says the berg 112 on its own may not be enough as
    a stand alone cab. For its size, the epi 112UL is
    rediculous as a stand alone cab. Its a hard choice!
    I hate to give up walking in with a 30lb. box in one
    hand. Bass and bag over shoulder, and amp in the
    other hand, and killing the band with support and
    volume. ahhh...but the tone of the berg....
  17. jokerjkny


    Jan 19, 2002
    NY / NJ / PA

    i've taken my iAMP-800 plenty of times to the Epifani shop, and its been super articulate thru all of Nick's cabs.

    but if you can hold your breath, the Epifani 900UL head is unFREAKIN'real thru a pair of Epi 1x12's. you want upper end detail? low mid punch? like a two channel Avalon U5 w/ an EQ. :bassist: :bassist: :bassist:

    hopefully, it wont succomb to Epifani-tis... :smug:

    and as for the lower vs. higher wattage versions of certain heads, food for thought? i've had both the iAMP-500 and 800 into my pair of Acme 1x10's, and the 500 actually seemed louder than the 800. more in your face. BUT, the 800 definitely had a much tighter, punchier feel that was much better for my Low B.

    go figure...
  18. emjazz

    emjazz Supporting Member

    Feb 23, 2003
    Boston, MA
    Bstring, what kind of gigs are you doing? I've been chatting with Wilbyman who says you're all over it playing wise. Are you doing any electric jazz gigs, pop gigs, acoustic jazz? Are you just looking for an all around 1-cab-does-it-all? If that's the case you may be right about the Berg. I do use my one cab a good amount but I pull out the extensoin 12 (EX112) for other gigs that are louder. I will say that the little Berg cab really fills a room though.

    Amp wise I'm running a Glockenklang Soul Top and it's as good as it gets. With a 2 space rack it's over your shoulder and into the gig. Other than that a Woods of coarse can't be beat for power and weight. Email Wilbyman soon and ask him about the Thunderfunk that he has on the way. I have a feeling that it has enough power to do the job.
  19. emjazz

    emjazz Supporting Member

    Feb 23, 2003
    Boston, MA
    I'll bet that even the lower wattage/smaller Epifani head will be enough. I'm sure it'll be amazing sound wise..........if it ever comes out...........
  20. B String

    B String Supporting Member

    Apr 11, 2002
    Los Angeles
    I hate wilbyman! His wife lets him have a Tfunk...
    Yes, sometimes i get to an event without knowing
    how loud i need to be. For straight jazz gigs,i have
    a good rig, and for larger gigs, i'm ok. The other day
    i thought i was doing a simple pop and r&b mid volume
    gig. When i get there, its a reggae, rock gig. I had
    borrowed a Woods Ultra and had my epi 112UL. No
    one could believe the lows and volume i was getting.
    I know its blasphemy to say, but the Woods tone
    wasn't knockin me out. Kind of spongy on the lows,
    but the mids and highs were sweet. I also had an
    iamp 500. SOLID LOWS LIKE A MUTHA! Wasn't able
    to eq in enough mids and highs for slapping. This
    would all be easier with my 210UL box, i just like
    the size and weight of the 112UL. aargh!!