Psst... Ready to join TalkBass and start posting, make new friends, sell your gear, and more?  Register your free account in 30 seconds.

Eden power: realistic or inflated?

Discussion in 'Amps and Cabs [BG]' started by Richard Lindsey, Jul 6, 2001.


  1. Richard Lindsey

    Richard Lindsey

    Mar 25, 2000
    Metro NYC
    This isn't a poll, nor is it an attempt to dog Eden. It's just that I'm considering buying an Eden now that I haven't been able to get my Carvin R600 fixed to my satisfaction (great amp in almost all settings--it just does not want to run when bridged into my 4 ohm Acme). It's more money, but I have to do something, and I'm not into Ampeg, GK, Hartke, Ashdown, or SWR.

    I know the WT-400 is rated at 400 W @ 4 ohms. My question is, for any experienced users, has that 400 W felt like a real 400 watts (whatever that means), or does it feel as if the maker is being a bit optimistic? I realize this is highly subjective, and dependent on other gear being used, and so on, but I'd still be interested in some impressions. The dang thing looks so small (a not unimportant issue for a 45-year-old guy living in a walkup), it's hard to believe it could kick some serious booty. Andy Lewis of Acme suggests that a number of people find this a good match with the Acme, and I don't play stoopidly loud, so right now this is my top candidate.

    I'm also somewhat considering the separates route (e.g., used Demeter or Kern and a power amp), but there's the portability issue. I'm really getting into the easy-to-carry thing these days.

    Thanks for any input.
     
  2. boogiebass

    boogiebass

    Aug 16, 2000
    I own a WT400 as well as the WT800. IMO, the 400 is a fantastic amp with plenty of power for all but the largest rooms I play. Running into two 8 ohm cabs (D115XL and D210XLT) the thing sounds phenomenal and has all the volume, tone and presence I've ever needed in a small to medium sized club. I normally have the master vol. set at about 9 maybe 10 o'clock and it kicks butt! The Edens have tone that I love and they are, as you know, very portable. The 800 is essentially two 400's, by the way. To directly answer your question, I have found Eden's power ratings to be right on the money. If anything, they're conservative. I cannot imagine anyone being disappointed with the WT400 unless they're playing outdoors or in a situation where extreme high volume is required.
     
  3. Chasarms

    Chasarms Casual Observer

    May 24, 2001
    Bettendorf, IA USA
    I promise that Eden will be much louder than the Carvin. I played an R600 Series II for a couple of years. Servicable, but if there is any one overrates the output of their amps, it is Carvin. Funny, I couldn't bridge mine at 4 ohms either without it protecting.

    I just bought a Nemesis NC210P. IT is only supposed to be 200 watts. That Combo is easily as loud as my R600 paired with a RL410T.

    But the best thing about Eden is the tone. You will appreciate it for that for sure.
     
  4. I talked to a tech at Eden and he indicated that their power ratings are continuous power. Peak power is somewhat higher. I think twice the continuous power rating. So, a 400 watt head could generate short bursts of 800 watts to cover the high power transients. I have looked at waveforms of my bass' output and the initial peak can often be twice as high as the rest of the note.

    - Dave
     
  5. MikeyD

    MikeyD

    Sep 9, 2000
    I think it isn't so much that Carvin's wattage numbers are incorrect as that they are measured at 1 percent THD and 1 kHz. If Eden measures their wattage over the whole 20-20kHz range and at a lesser THD, the wattage is a truer measure of clean output for the application. This, coupled with Carvin's speakers not being that efficient, reinforces your point about how loud things are. For the money, Carvin *does* give you volume, but it isn't quite what you'd expect looking strictly at their wattage figures alone.
    - Mike
     
  6. Richard Lindsey

    Richard Lindsey

    Mar 25, 2000
    Metro NYC
    Volume wasn't the problem with my Carvin. For those magical minutes when the amp was working bridged and giving me 600 W (or its version thereof), I had *plenty* of oomph, even into a little Acme, and even on an outdoor stage. If the Eden is even close, I'm cool. If it gives me more, even better. I found there's a place within driving distance of me that has a WT-400. I think I'll go up there tomorrow and take my Acme with me to try the Eden out. That way, I can really be sure.

    Thanks for your input, folks.
     
  7. I can't say whether Edens are accurately rated, but they're certainly more accurate than Ampeg. Their "350-watt" power section is more like 250.
     
  8. j.s.basuki

    j.s.basuki Supporting Member

    May 14, 2000
    asia/australia
    I use Eden WT 400 with Acme Low B2, and Eden has alot of power. Usually when practicing with the gig, I tweak the gain 12 o'clock and the volume at 9'oo it can compete with the drum.
    I compare with my SM 400s or my Ampeg SVT2, Eden is the loudest ,and the weakest is SVT2.
     
  9. Munjibunga

    Munjibunga Total Hyper-Elite Member Gold Supporting Member

    May 6, 2000
    San Diego (when not at Groom Lake)
    Independent Contractor to Bass San Diego
    I have an Eden WT-300 and have never lacked power. C'mon, man. Carvin vs. Eden? There's no comparison. They're in two different leagues. Get the Eden. You'll never go back to sheep.
     
  10. boogiebass

    boogiebass

    Aug 16, 2000
    That's right, Munji. Which do you choose, Nicole Kidman or Paula Poundstone?
     
  11. Richard Lindsey

    Richard Lindsey

    Mar 25, 2000
    Metro NYC
    You know, no offense, man, but I hear this "two different leagues" stuff all the time, and I think some of the time it's based on little more than snob appeal. I'm in no way impugning your personal opinion, please don't think that, but you have no idea how many times I, as a person who's used a lot of Carvin gear, have heard that kind of stuff from people who seemingly listen with their eyes rather than their ears. That is, if something is more expensive or is just what X from Y band uses, it has to be much better.

    Just to illustrate, I did go ahead and buy a WT-400 today. It's a fine-sounding amp, and I think it will work for me. Eden is great stuff and worth the money. However, by what I can only think of as a bizarre coincidence, the store also had a used Carvin R600 there. Not exactly like mine (series II vs series III), but close enough. I had brought in my own bass and cabinet to check out the Eden, so I thought it would be fun to A/B it with the store's Carvin.

    To cut to the chase, my conclusion after some A/Bing was that the two amps were NOT in two different leagues, just different. First of all, despite an earlier prediction in this thread, the Eden was not louder at equivalent settings, the Carvin was. Second, the Eden was distorting slightly on me at higher volumes, whereas the Carvin wouldn't. (I realized when I got home that I hadn't engaged the input pad, so that may be it. Also, I'll consider trying different tubes.) Third, the Eden did indeed seem to have more presence in the upper mids and highs. In particular, the Eden "spoke" very nicely in the higher portions of my bass (I play 6-string). However, and this surprised even me a bit, the Carvin really seemed to put out the lows with more authority. Even when I added some bass to the Eden, it didn't have the weight and authority that the Carvin had down there. The Carvin had better definition and more phatness on the low end.

    I still feel that I'll be happy with the Eden, though I won't really be positive until I get it on the gig. And I love some of the new things I'm hearing. But it's more of a tradeoff than a no-contest thing. I've definitely lost something going from the Carvin to the Eden, as well as gaining something. It's not like a Michael Jordan vs Brent Price kinda thing, more like a Peja Stojakovic vs Elton Brand kinda thing. Both good, depending on what you want.

    BTW, I also checked out an Ampeg head for fun. I think it was an SVT-III Pro. Two spaces, preamp tube. If that was supposed to be at the same power level as the Eden, I'm a monkey. Noticeably less power than either the Carvin or the Eden.
     
  12. j.s.basuki

    j.s.basuki Supporting Member

    May 14, 2000
    asia/australia
    If the differences between both are so little, I would not trade the amps just for the sake of portability.
     
  13. Richard Lindsey

    Richard Lindsey

    Mar 25, 2000
    Metro NYC
    j.s., you're right, I wouldn't have made the switch *just* for portability either. BUT, as you remember from the original post above, the biggest problem I had with the Carvin was not the sound--which was fine--or the weight--which wasn't excessive--but the fact that it would shut down on in me in the middle of the gig when I bridged it into a 4 ohm load!! I know you can understand how frustrating and embarrassing that was. If the Carvin hadn't misbehaved this way, I honestly wouldn't have swapped it for the Eden. Though I'm sure I would have swapped it for, say, a top-flight preamp into a top-flight power amp. That just wasn't in my budget.

    I'm hopeful that the Eden won't shut down on me like the Carvin did. I'll find out on the 14th, when I have another outdoor gig.
     
  14. Brad Johnson

    Brad Johnson Commercial User

    Mar 8, 2000
    Gaithersburg, Md
    Boom Bass Cabinets, DR strings
    Richard, I swear I'm not trying to tweak you but...shutting down when bridged is something that doesn't seem to be all that rare in Carvins. That would put it in a different league.

    I've a/b'd a bunch of Carvin gear and besides (or because of) the power issues and their Achilles heel, speaker cabs, I simply found their sound lacking. This may not be an issue with a four string bass but when pushed with a good 5, I could easily make Carvins break up. They simply didn't have the heft of other cabs, whether biamped, bridged, or full range.

    Given the choice between new Carvin and pre-owned Eden gear, for me it's no contest. That whole bang for the buck thing never worked for me, especially at resale time. If I had to buy new and had only these two choices...I'd buy the Eden. I think, in the long run, it's less money. I've also never found them to be underpowered.

    Disclaimer: I haven't tried pushing Eden cabs with a Carvin. I don't own an Eden amp. Until I bought Eden D210XLTs I used modified Yorkville cabs (that might rule out the snob/name appeal thing).
     
  15. Richard Lindsey

    Richard Lindsey

    Mar 25, 2000
    Metro NYC
    Hey Brad, no problem, we just see things differently. As far as the different league thing goes, I separate sonic quality from mechanical reliability. Sonically, the Eden just ain't better *across the board*, to my ears. As I said, in some ways yes, in others no. Mechanically, well, we'll see: I hope so. And you know, most if not all of the bridging problems I've seen with Carvins have had to do with the R600/1000. I had an older PB500 that you literally could not kill. (I ran it through an Eden 210, too, and got many compliments on the sound--in addition to the occasional covert sneer at my hopeless unhipness in playing Carvin.)

    My sneaking suspicion is that if Carvin had never said you could bridge the Redlines into a 4 ohm load, you wouldn't hear some of these stories, and the reliability picture might look a little different. As I recall, they never claimed you could bridge the PB500 into 4 ohms, and that was probably smart. Inappropriate ratings may be a partial factor here too. And also, it's quite possible that if you tried to bridge, say, an Eden WT-800 into 4 ohms (which it's not rated for), you might get shutdowns too.

    I don't claim any particular expertise with Carvin cabs, 'cause I've never owned one. Though I have played them at length in CA stores many times. But anyway, don't judge the amps by the cabs if you haven't really checked them out. Who knows, even if you do A/B Carvin amps with competitors, you still might not like them, and that's totally cool. All I'm saying is, a brand name doesn't necessarily mean everything that maker makes is better or worse than anything else. As I'm sure you know (hey, you played Yorkville, not much of a hipness factor there, certainly!). As I said, I owned an Eden cab for years, and on the basis of that experience and of playing both Eden and Carvin cabs in stores on numerous occasions, I'd take an Eden D210XLT over a Carvin 210 any day. But on the basis of what I heard today, with the same bass through the same (very accurate) cab, I probably wouldn't swap a Carvin amp for an Eden amp *if the shutdown thing weren't an issue* (which of course it is). And of course, if I'd gotten an 8 ohm Acme to begin with, I'd probably still have the Carvin and not be feeling any Eden envy at all!

    As always, mileage varies. I guess, to be honest, what sets me off sometimes is not differing opinions, but opinions that seem to be based on assumptions rather than experience. If I like X better than Y on the basis of my experience, and someone says to me, I know you like X, but I actually tried them both, and I feel exactly the opposite, I like Y way more than X, then I have no problem with that and I can't see why any sane person would.

    On the other hand, if someone says to me, oh, it's obvious that Y must be better than X *without having tried them both in some depth*, well, that just seems like sloppy thinking to me, and I admit that I let that kind of thing push my buttons more often than I ought. I don't put you in that category BTW, because your posts have generally struck me as thoughtful and helpful, even when my own perspective differs.
     
  16. MikeyD

    MikeyD

    Sep 9, 2000
    This has been my viewpoint as well. I have both the R600 and R1000 heads, and have used Carvin's 2x10 and 1x18. I was happy enough with the performance and quality of the R600 that I added an R1000 to my rig. However, I was disappointed with the overall efficiency and low end of the Carvin cabinets, so I decided to get an Eden 2x15 to take over for the 1x18. It is a big improvement. I agree with your view about Carvin's cabinets. They are nothing to write home about, but they do an adequate job for someone on a budget. They certainly handle tons of power. I just wish Carvin would offer a premium line of bass guitar cabinets as an option to their cheaper ones. But I think all of their cabinets are based on a very limited set of raw drivers - and those raw drivers are what ultimately constrains the performance. With regard to the amp heads - they seem to be in a better "league". They aren't the best one could buy, but they are of high quality and the value per dollar is excellent. I played through an Eden head or two at a local store and they are nice, but I wouldn't say they are that much better. Any further upgrades to my rig would probably involve replacing the Carvin 2x10 with an Eden 2x10 or 4x10.
    - Mike
     
  17. Brad Johnson

    Brad Johnson Commercial User

    Mar 8, 2000
    Gaithersburg, Md
    Boom Bass Cabinets, DR strings
     
  18. Munjibunga

    Munjibunga Total Hyper-Elite Member Gold Supporting Member

    May 6, 2000
    San Diego (when not at Groom Lake)
    Independent Contractor to Bass San Diego
    Richard ~

    Don't get so excited, man. It's all just 1's and 0's, you know. Nonetheless, I used to live two miles from the Carvin factory, and spent a lot of time playing a lot of basses through a lot of their amps. They're OK, but they're not even close to Eden in sound and certainly not in quality. I'm astonished that you couldn't get sufficient bottom out of the Eden. When I just boost the bass shelf to one o'clock, set the bass semi-parametric at about 60 hz, and boost it to one o'clock, it just about blows the sheetrock off my walls.

    Don't you suppose it would be just as easy for the pros to get free Carvin gear as to get Eden? Couldn't touring pros order Carvin back lines instead of Eden? People don't choose Eden for its "snob appeal." They choose it for its sound. Next time you watch a band on TV, look for the bass amp. Most often, it's going to have a gold face. Maybe there's a little "reverse snob appeal" happening here, eh?
     
  19. Richard Lindsey

    Richard Lindsey

    Mar 25, 2000
    Metro NYC
    Hey, it's cool, Munji, I wasn't excited, and I didn't mean to give that impression. Just opinionated, and I admit I like being a contrarian sometimes. You've obviously done some hard listening, which says to me that your opinion is based on something other than mere hearsay, and I can respect that. As far as the Eden's bass, what can I tell you? Side by side, into the same Acme cab, the Eden just didn't have what the Carvin had. That may seem weird to you, but there it was. That's what *my* ears tell me. Dunno if you've ever had a chance to A/B a Carvin and an Eden into the same cab. It's hard to compare an Eden into an Eden cab with a Carvin into a Carvin cab, because the Eden cabs are IMO significantly better. That's why it was instructicve to do it into the Acme, which has relatively little speaker coloration and good bass extension. Anyway, no biggie, mileage varies.

    As far as pros, sure, they could get Carvin as easily as Eden. I know for a fact that a lot of pros love Edens. I sure haven't seen them dominating with bands I've seen on TV, though. Keep in mind, also, that one factor that helps determine what gear people play at *some* gigs is what the local rental company has available. Not every touring band carries all their own gear.

    But see, even getting into the issue of what the pros play misses my point. I don't *care* what the pros play, and I don't see why anyone else should either. As far as I'm concerned, my taste is as good, for my purposes, as any of theirs is for their purposes, so I only care what my ears tell me. 500 bassists could tell me they prefer Eden, but it makes no difference to me if I don't. Know what I mean?

    As for snob appeal, I never said that's the only reason for choosing Eden. But you know as well as I do that some people buy gear purely on the basis of a name, without really much of a sonic assessment. I live in a somewhat affluent area (though I'm not), and more than once I've seen a moneyed teenager come into a guitar store and ask for a PRS, when at his current stage of playing it's doubtful whether he could tell a PRS from a DeArmond sonically. All I'm saying is it happens. Like I said, in a couple decades of playing, I've encountered too many folks who would assume my rig sucks just on the basis of the nameplate--until they hear it, that is.

    Reverse snob appeal? OK, you got me, maybe a little bit. I'm one of those guys who likes to see the dark horse, the underdog, win. But I'm a player first, and if the dark horse didn't sound good, it would be outta here in a hot second. I use the gear I use because I like it. When I like something else better, I get that if I can. (That's how I let go my Eden cab in favor of the Acme.)

    Peace,
    Richard
     
  20. Richard Lindsey

    Richard Lindsey

    Mar 25, 2000
    Metro NYC
    Instead of having specs that ride the edge of reliability why not just spec it at where it can perform comfortably?

    Bingo, Brad. I agree entirely, and I've bent their ears about this several times, both on their BBS and in conversations with the customer service people.