Epifani 902UL....Finally

[KJung]

Now, in defense of what Ken has been saying, I also totally agree with him in that DSP aside, the SMPS in the IP cabs certainly appears to be a cut above that employed by Walter or AI, and it definitely has an inherent low frequency strength and force that seems somewhat lacking in the others.

Tom.

+1 That was really the point I was trying to make (given that this is an Epi902 thread ).... that Nick is probably using a similar 'improved' class D/switching design, which seems to be a very good thing from what I heard with the IP's.

Also, I'm sure the DSP sounds much different than the 'off' setting.. that's not the point... the point is does the DSP in the IP sound significantly different than the cab with a good high powered amp with EQ. The only reason I'm interested in this concerns how 'good' these new 'digital' amps are... or if it's just 'smoke and mirrors' with the DSP. This really has less to do with the IP's themselves as trying to determine if an amp like the Epi902 can compete with a high powered 'led sled'.

Andy (emjazz) seems to thing that a Walter with a good 'DSP tuning' would sound similar. My feeling is that the sound of the amp I heard in the IP is vastly superior to the AI and Walter power sections. Who knows though?

 

[KJung]

honestly,

if it sounds good, why question it?

Good point, but the weight and a few form factor issues make the IP's uninteresting to me as a gigging solution. However, if there is a new type of class D/switching amp out there that sounds significantly better than the current batch (which again I own and find lacking), then I'm getting interested in a big way!

I also find that 'two amp non-bridgable' design of the 902 a kind of strange decision, and am again not interested in that particular piece of gear. However... if eventually someone comes out with a 900-1000 watt class D switching amp in a small, light form factor that has the punch and crush of a Crest CA9 power amp, or a DB750 or a Glock Heart Rock, I'd be all over it (and trust me, from personal experience... the AI Focus is NOT it).

 

[emjazz]

Andy (emjazz) seems to thing that a Walter with a good 'DSP tuning' would sound similar. My feeling is that the sound of the amp I heard in the IP is vastly superior to the AI and Walter power sections. Who knows though?

Hi Ken. Actually, this isn't what I meant at all. I believe the DSP to be a big part of the IP's but I also know that the power section that Jim uses is very new and had never been done before. It's something that is a few steps ahead of the Woods, AI and anything else that had come before it. Of coarse, he's now raised the bar and many will follow suit. With that idea in mind though, with all due respect, he may never have had created the IP's if it were not for amps like the Woods. However, it is certainly a different animal and will breed many more.

 

[KJung]

Hi Ken. Actually, this isn't what I meant at all. I believe the DSP to be a big part of the IP's but I also know that the power section that Jim uses is very new and had never been done before. It's something that is a few steps ahead of the Woods, AI and anything else that had come before it. Of coarse, he's now raised the bar and many will follow suit. With that idea in mind though, with all due respect, he may never have had created the IP's if it were not for amps like the Woods. However, it is certainly a different animal and will breed many more.

+1... I really am looking forward to hearing what I hope eventually will be the upgraded 900 watt 8 pound Epi502 with the new power amp and switching power supply.... that might really be something.

 

[Fretless5verfan]

Good point, but the weight and a few form factor issues make the IP's uninteresting to me as a gigging solution. However, if there is a new type of class D/switching amp out there that sounds significantly better than the current batch (which again I own and find lacking), then I'm getting interested in a big way!

I also find that 'two amp non-bridgable' design of the 902 a kind of strange decision, and am again not interested in that particular piece of gear. However... if eventually someone comes out with a 900-1000 watt class D switching amp in a small, light form factor that has the punch and crush of a Crest CA9 power amp, or a DB750 or a Glock Heart Rock, I'd be all over it (and trust me, from personal experience... the AI Focus is NOT it).

Actually the non-bridgable design makes sense to(for) me after thinking about it for a while. Now this is just me thinking out loud here, but If the 902 has the properties that Mac has told me about sound wise, i wouldn't really want to push 1800+ watts into one cab. I mean it's an UL902 right? So this isn't designed to be run with big heavy cabs that need 1800+ watts for good headroom...i think. I'd also assume that nick is designing this with all his UL cabs in mind, so i'd bet the farm on one channel being enough for any one cab.

What you guys think of that brain fart?

 

[Fretless5verfan]

I understand what you're saying and it makes sense but I agree with Kjung. At best, for me, I'd feel like I'm paying for an amp I will only ever use half of.

Given that it's very expensive with the only remarkable (IMO) spec being the weight if those wattage figures are (or at least "feel" - again I agree with Kjung) accurate, it's all the more reason not to add, or pay for, something that won't be used.




If ever, I'll bet that'll be a very long time coming. Until then I'll save a lot of time, effort, hope, and cash by reading your reviews. Thanks in advance.

Oh i don't disagree, i was just providing another view point. I don't think the amp is made for guys like you that would only need one half of it at any time. I was debating that it was designed for guys like me that will be using multiple cabs and didn't want to carry a 40+ lb rack putting out 1800+ watts bridged to get the type of headroom we want in both cabs.

Personally, when i start playing out again with these new bands, i'm gonna have to have to play outdoor gigs with little PA support, and smaller club type settings, and what's optimal for one setting would be ludicrous in the other amp wise...until now!

 

[KJung]

Actually the non-bridgable design makes sense to(for) me after thinking about it for a while. Now this is just me thinking out loud here, but If the 902 has the properties that Mac has told me about sound wise, i wouldn't really want to push 1800+ watts into one cab. I mean it's an UL902 right? So this isn't designed to be run with big heavy cabs that need 1800+ watts for good headroom...i think. I'd also assume that nick is designing this with all his UL cabs in mind, so i'd bet the farm on one channel being enough for any one cab.

What you guys think of that brain fart?

I think we are saying the same thing in different ways. The Epifani UL line represents a total lightweight solution to me (it really did change my approach to gear when it came out a few years ago... from 'small and kind of light and not quite enough to do a gig' in the past to 'large, loud as heck, and lighter than the smaller, weaker sounding stuff I was using prior'), and I can't believe there is any gig where you would need any more than 900 watts into a 4 ohm 410UL... so why not make it really 'UL'.... and save us $800 or so and 5 or 6 pounds by putting out a mono 900 watt version.

Again.... if Nick sells a ton of the 902's.... then this is all a moot point. I just can't imagine buying an amp that is totally designed to be used with two cabs in this day and age of totally smoking single cab solutions. Just my opinion.... not making a big point or anything. Coming from a marketing perspective... I just can't imagine a ton of players buying an 1800 watt amp designed to be used with two cabs. I could be very wrong

 

[KJung]

If ever, I'll bet that'll be a very long time coming. Until then I'll save a lot of time, effort, hope, and cash by reading your reviews. Thanks in advance.

 

[Fretless5verfan]

I think we are saying the same thing in different ways. The Epifani UL line represents a light total lightweight solution to me (it really did change my approach to gear when it came out a few years ago... from 'small and kind of light and not quite enough to do a gig' in the past to 'large, loud as heck, and lighter than the smaller, weaker sounding stuff I was using prior'), and I can't believe there is any gig where you would need any more than 900 watts into a 4 ohm 410UL... so why not make it really 'UL'.... and save us $800 or so and 5 or 6x pounds by putting out a mono 900 watt version.

Again.... if Nick sells a ton of the 902's.... then this is all a moot point. I just can't imagine buying an amp that is totally designed to be used with two cabs in this day and age of totally smoking single cab solutions. Just my opinion.... not making a big point or anything. Coming from a marketing perspective... I just can't imagine a ton of players buying an 1800 watt amp designed to be used with two cabs. I could be very wrong

I'm all for a mono 900w version. That'd be great for the club gigs from small to large (and i'd buy one WITH the normal 902!). But when i'm playing outdoors on a plank of plywood to hundreds of people at a big neighborhood jazz festival, i definately need more than one cab or else the people in the front 10 rows don't hear jack from me. Not to mention if they do hear anything, it's devoid of bass. Two 3x10s (or 410s!!!) solve that problem nicely. We also have festivals outside near the river that have NO PA support at all and it's a big wide open area with no bass reinforcement, so i'm definately one of those weirdos that needs both cabs and all the players i've seen at those venues had more than one cab. So i'd be willing to bet that there's a fairly big audience for it. But as usual, i could be wrong too


I have dreams of a UL410 on top of a PS410 every night

 

[KJung]

I'm all for a mono 900w version. That'd be great for the club gigs from small to large (and i'd buy one WITH the normal 902!). But when i'm playing outdoors on a plank of plywood to hundreds of people at a big neighborhood jazz festival, i definately need more than one cab or else the people in the front 10 rows don't hear jack from me. Not to mention if they do hear anything, it's devoid of bass. Two 3x10s (or 410s!!!) solve that problem nicely. We also have festivals outside near the river that have NO PA support at all and it's a big wide open area with no bass reinforcement, so i'm definately one of those weirdos that needs both cabs and all the players i've seen at those venues had more than one cab. So i'd be willing to bet that there's a fairly big audience for it. But as usual, i could be wrong too


I have dreams of a UL410 on top of a PS410 every night

+1 Nothin' wrong with the 'big wallup and oomph' I hear you on 'loud with no PA reinforcement'. We are living similar lives I find that a single 410UL with 500-750 watts into it covers anything I need, but could see some needing more (I play more pop/funk/jazz type gigs versus slammin' rock, etc.) That's why I went from my 310UL ( a wonderful cab) to the 410UL... I was getting buried with the 310UL. The 410UL really does muscle through pretty well if you don't need earth shaking low end.

 

[Fretless5verfan]

+1 Nothin' wrong with the 'big wallup and oomph' I hear you on 'loud with no PA reinforcement'. We are living similar lives I find that a single 410UL with 500-750 watts into it covers anything I need, but could see some needing more (I play more pop/funk/jazz type gigs versus slammin' rock, etc.) That's why I went from my 310UL ( a wonderful cab) to the 410UL... I was getting buried with the 310UL. The 410UL really does muscle through pretty well if you don't need earth shaking low end.

Oh no doubt on that. The UL410 is a beast! I'm a big proponent of the earth shaking low-end type sound, and i need it in spades outdoors being that i find the outdoors to suck up alot of the really tight, low bass freqs. that defines "my sound" in my head.

 

[Fretless5verfan]

I understand where you're coming from now. Our needs and preferences differ.

What if the amp ran at 2 Ohms - you could still run two cabs and the amp would be a good fit for everyone at that point, wouldn't it? Are these types of amps capable of that? Do you normally send differing levels ?

I'm always a little skeptical of the 2ohms thing, but if it did run at 2ohms VERY safely on a 100 degree day, i'd definately still run two cabs.

Indeed it would be a good fit for everyeone! Makes me wonder what reasoning was behind not doing it that way. Maybe they couldn't do it safely? Or maybe it'd be even MORE expensive lol I'd be interested in finding out the answer.

Differing levels? No. Never felt the need to, but if i decided to bring a PS115 (8ohm) along with me to a gig to supplement my low end, then i'd need to boost it up a bit if i were using a UL410. Then again, i'd probably just be using a PS210 and 115 on that size gig anyway lol.

Edit : For those interested in this amp, what's the advantage of the Epifani over perhaps this new QSC offering at the same weight and power? [Invalid or Expired Link Removed] You'd need to add a preamp, granted, but that's only a few pounds more and thousand$ less, plus the versatility of trying different preamps ProductCode=40842&Category=Power_Amplifiers

Not trying to derail the thread here. I know not all amps are created equally even if the specs seem comperable, and were it me I'd prefer to have it integrated "just because".

I'm asking because I am trying to "get" the thinking behind the excitement for this amp - is there something fresh about it, or is it because it's Epifani people expect something better than what's out there?

Thanks.

Ahh the PLX 1804. I don't know what type of pre-amps everyone would be using, but all together the price for this and my SVP-PRO would be about $1200 Street. The UL902 street is (from a anonymous source) only going to be about 700 bucks more. Considering the worth of the pre-amp (much more than the SVP-PRO, also dual channeled), the convience of a single power plug and one less rack space (fitting everything i need in one 4 space instead of a 3 space and a 2 space) and the weight savings involved with everything accounted for (QSC + SVP = 18lbs anyway. No need for second rack now means 8lbs less than dual rack rig), It just seems like the 902 is the better deal for me personally. That's fresh enough for me

 

[MacGroove]

I'd say, without hearing the Berg IP's, but only what I've heard from TB'ers, is Jim's switching power would be simular to Nick's, but the pre (or eq'ing) of Jim's DSP and Nick's Quest make up for a lot of the backbone or chest thumping sound of their switching power supplies.
Example: When AB'ing my 1200 watt WWU and Nick's 600 watt 502 with the Epi UL410's 1000 watts, the 502 really dominated over the WWU. You could feel the bass, and that's only 600 watts vs 1200 watts, so what I'm saying is the pre has a lot to do with these switching power supplies.
I'm like you Ken, all I really need is a single channel, but like Fretless, I'd like to have the extra 900 watt channel with another cab for those outdoor gigs I've incountered without PA support.
Perhaps, at a later date, Nick might come out with a single channel 902, or call it the PS900 (like he did with the 502, the PS600).

 

[KJung]

I'd say, without hearing the Berg IP's, but only what I've heard from TB'ers, is Jim's switching power would be simular to Nick's, but the pre (or eq'ing) of Jim's DSP and Nick's Quest make up for a lot of the backbone or chest thumping sound of their switching power supplies.
Example: When AB'ing my 1200 watt WWU and Nick's 600 watt 502 with the Epi UL410's 1000 watts, the 502 really dominated over the WWU. You could feel the bass, and that's only 600 watts vs 1200 watts, so what I'm saying is the pre has a lot to do with these switching power supplies.
I'm like you Ken, all I really need is a single channel, but like Fretless, I'd like to have the extra 900 watt channel with another cab for those outdoor gigs I've incountered without PA support.
Perhaps, at a later date, Nick might come out with a single channel 902, or call it the PS900 (like he did with the 502, the PS600).

Hello there! Remember, the 502 does not have a switching power supply. It is a class D amp (from what I understand), but it has a more traditional linear power supply. That's IMO, why it sounds phatter(!) than the Walter, and also why it is twice the size and three times the weight of the Walter. The iAmp500 and 800 are similar designs from what I understand again.... a class D power amp with a traditional linear power supply. The AI stuff, on the other hand, is both class D and switching power supply (like the Walter)... hence the small size and very light weight.

Nick's new 902 is more similar to the Walter in that it has (again from my understanding) both a class D power section AND a switching power supply.... hence the lighter weight than the 502 even with the greatly increased power output. So.. the big question is... will this be a class D/switching design that really sounds like a big old linear transformer. The IP's do.... assuming Nick is probably sourcing from the same company that make's Jim's (or a company with a similar design).... this could be a big step forward.

K

 

[MacGroove]

You're quite right Ken, I stand corrected. I was beside myself not remembering the 502 is a class D amp. What I was thinking of was the comparison of watts and pre's, but that's still not fare. But when I demo'ed the 902, it's 900 watts and pre stood out by far more than the WWU's 1200 watts.
I don't think Nick and Jim are using the same source for their amps, but many European power supply manufacturers are of simular design. Like my Labgruppen FP2600, 18 lbs. and 2400 watts of my 'back bone' and your 'chest thumping' description power, the only thing that would make a difference with it is what pre to use.

 

[Akami]

The Epifani UL line represents a total lightweight solution to me (it really did change my approach to gear when it came out a few years ago... from 'small and kind of light and not quite enough to do a gig' in the past to 'large, loud as heck, and lighter than the smaller, weaker sounding stuff I was using prior'), and I can't believe there is any gig where you would need any more than 900 watts into a 4 ohm 410UL... so why not make it really 'UL'.... and save us $800 or so and 5 or 6 pounds by putting out a mono 900 watt version.

I want one too and I'm sure they've got to know that there's a huge market for them out there.

This is a really exciting proposition too for the fact that it'll set a fire under AI and WW as well to keep at the head of their game.

 

[emjazz]

I want one too and I'm sure they've got to know that there's a huge market for them out there.

This is a really exciting proposition too for the fact that it'll set a fire under AI and WW as well to keep at the head of their game.

Nah, Walter doesn't have to do anything but retire next!

 

[Christian Houmann]

Anyone heard when 902 ships?

 

[Matt Morgan]

Just wondering if this thing is ever going to appear?
Any news from anyone?

 

[jokerjkny]

902 is alive and well.

think jive1 has one at his shop, no?