Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Epifani Club! I've seen the "light"!
- Thread starter Juniorkimbrough
- Start date
- Status
- Feb 3, 2005
- 7,331
- 10,199
- Disclosures
- Endorsing artist: Bergantino Audio Systems and GHS Strings
That is a great setup! I bet it sounds as nice as those Laklands look as well!!
Not yet, but I'm sure it'd sound fantastic.dare i say,
ever try some rock like pickstyle action into the carbine/epifani setup?
I still love the MB/EpiUL combination. The LMII sounds particularly good to me with the 410UL (40hm)... a nice combination of 'warm' and 'clean'. It's still the best rig I've found for a 'classic' J bass tone (i.e., not distorted or 'tube wooly', but still warm and a bit grindy when needed). I dig it a lot for my 'pop/funk' type gigs. It's not a 'rock' rig though... it doesn't do that huge, 'punch you in the gut' low mid sort of thing. It's more wide, even, and with that nice upper mid grind that is so key for a good J Bass tone to me.
If you don't mind a little bigger size, the SA450 is also very cool, since you get all the tone and volume of the LMII, but also a more fully featured DI, and semi-parametric mids. To me, the upper mid control on the LMII/F1 is voiced just perfectly at around 800 hz to cut a bit of gank from J bass tone, for example. However, many feel the fixed low mid control on the LMII is voiced a little too high to be used to add that low mid punch, and I agree. If the low mid burp is key, dialing the SA450's low mid control down a couple of hundred hz to around 200-250 really does the trick.
I'm also TOTALLY loving the new TecAmp Puma line with the Epi410UL. It has that big, creamy low end like the Epi amps, but MUCH more even mid response, much more control over the mids (it has a GREAT low mid control for adding punch) and it is capable of a more forceful top end if you like a bit of sizzle in your tone... and around 6 pounds. It's wider, creamier, smoother than the MB heads to my ear, and while it won't do the absolute volume of the Epi502, it's tone profile seems to work better with the Epi cabs than the Epi head (which is kind of strange). It's a really nice head (the Puma500 with a 4ohm 410UL is just killer) if you like it more 'studio board clean and precise' versus a more aggressive, grindy tone. IMO and IME!
IMO!
I found a 4x10UL serie 1 and I'm thinking of add'ing it to my rig so I have two 4x10UL for big gigs
Is that with the S1 or S2 UL410 (since I believe you still have both)? I've bounced around between the LMII and F1 on my (S2) UL410 and while I like them both a LOT, I think I currently like the F1 a bit more. I'm gonna' guess you'd prefer the LMII with the S2 UL410, tho, based on what I most often read from you.
I again hear these two version more similar than you do. So, I literally use them pretty much interchangeably. However, if you want to get real subtle, the F1 matches more nicely with the slightly more mid polite Series II IMO (which it sounds like you hear also... +1 there!), since it has more going on in the upper mids than the LMII. The LMII's warmth, and that different, more organic-less intense upper mid voicing seems to work just a smidge better with the Series I, which has just a little more going on in the upper mid region than the II.
Even for me, that's getting pretty subtle
Cool. Thanks.
It sounds good, but as long as we are discussing the Epi match-ups, with the 410UL, I love the lows, I love the upper mid warmth, and I love the almost perfect tweeter. And, in many rooms, the mids sound pretty darn good also.
However, as quite a few have posted, in a difficult room, that cab can turn into somewhat of a boomy mess. I remember Nick Epifani way back in the day talking about boosting a relatively wide Q low mid control around 250 to add punch. That worked quite well with the Eden semi-parametric mids, and it sounded quite good to me. However, the Markbass fixed low mids are too high, and to my ear, the variable mids of the SA450 have too tight of a Q to really 'fill that hole'.
Enter the Puma!!!! Man, that low mid control, combined with a deep bass control (similar to the MB... a shelving control that starts very low... 40hz), you can dial in the PUNCH an dial out the boom! The Puma is, so far, the best match to the EpiUL's I've found. The down side is, you lose a bit of that aggressive mid 'grind' that the F1 seems to really transmit when using single coil pickups (interestingly, the Puma with the TecAmp cabs grinds a bit more).
Anyway, that low mid control on those amps is the bomb with the 410UL (and I assume 310UL). In a good room, it stays flat, and again, I actually dig the F1 a ton. However, in a 'bad' room, the Puma can get the 410UL out of trouble very nicely.
The Puma sounds like magic with the Epi UL-410. Wondering if you might get some of that benefit from the adjustable frequencies on the new Markbass F500?
I don't hear the same thing with my SA450 set at the general low mid freq, but the F500 has a bit more punch anyway. I have one of those on my short list. I'll let you know!
LOL! Yeah, I just keep buying all this crap, 'cause I don't know any better.
I know EXACTLY how you feel.I hope to own at least half of that rig someday (when my financial situation change)
Fear not, tho, things will get better... they always do somehow. 
I can testify to the difficult room scenario Ken referenced. On more than a few occasions I've had to sacrifice "my" sound to get rid of the boominess. The worst, as you can imagine, are really 'hard' rooms - too much marble, glass, etc., and too few people (or even soft furnishings) to compensate. I ran into this type of situation every now and then with my old Eden XLT rig (210 or 410) but not as frequently.
On most gigs, I really, really like my sound. On a few gigs, when the room is just perfect, I absolutely love it! But there are those gigs where the acoustics work against you, on those the Epi stuff I've got isn't very forgiving. To compensate I go to channel 1 on the amp and play around with the semi-parametric a bit, although I can't say I've been able to dial in any particular solution that works every time.
On most gigs, I really, really like my sound. On a few gigs, when the room is just perfect, I absolutely love it! But there are those gigs where the acoustics work against you, on those the Epi stuff I've got isn't very forgiving. To compensate I go to channel 1 on the amp and play around with the semi-parametric a bit, although I can't say I've been able to dial in any particular solution that works every time.
I hear what Ken and Jerry are saying, and yeah, they have a lot of low end for some rooms, BUT, I've always been able to adjust EQ to fit those ugly rooms just fine with the Epi cabs, and didn't have to "sacrifice my sound" to do it, either. Maybe I'm just lucky that way. Then again, you get something tight like the Berg AE's, you don't have to EQ, but the "norm" for me at least, is rooms where I still like the Epi cabs more. IMHO anyhoo.
Then again, you get something tight like the Berg AE's, you don't have to EQ, but the "norm" for me at least, is rooms where I still like the Epi cabs more. IMHO anyhoo.
I hear what Ken and Jerry are saying, and yeah, they have a lot of low end for some rooms, BUT, I've always been able to adjust EQ to fit those ugly rooms just fine with the Epi cabs, and didn't have to "sacrifice my sound" to do it, either. Maybe I'm just lucky that way.
+1
maybe i'm lucky to play mostly in rooms that were actually built for ear splitting (!!!), but yea, epi's rock, which in turn lets me rock.
I hear what Ken and Jerry are saying, and yeah, they have a lot of low end for some rooms, BUT, I've always been able to adjust EQ to fit those ugly rooms just fine with the Epi cabs, and didn't have to "sacrifice my sound" to do it, either. Maybe I'm just lucky that way.
With the AE410, I have a pretty consistent 'like very much' feeling in literally every room I play. With the 410UL, I have those 'mostly love it/sometimes kind of hate it' swings. When it's good, it's REALLY good, but when it's bad, I just want to kill myself sometimes. However, the good far outweighs the bad, and if you are primarily playing bars and clubs (i.e., smaller rooms at relatively high volume, per Joker's post), it's much less of a deal. In my world, I'm constantly in these large ballrooms on those hollow, temporary stages, and that can be just a rig killer when the rig is voiced wide and pure.
I have much less trouble with the 410UL compared to the 310UL I used to use. That was a VERY frustrating cab in some rooms, since you not only had that 'wide and pure and a bit scooped' to deal with, but also the compression that happens with a smaller cab when really pushed.
So, just wanted to put this in context. I've been gigging the 410UL for many, many years now, and 75% of the time, I totally dig it. The other thing I like about it, is I've NEVER run out of volume and a feeling of open, non-compressed low end. That's nice to know when you are heading into these freelance type gigs, not knowing how loud the stage sound is going to be, or if you have any front of house support at all.
That all being said, this is the first time in over a decade that I don't consider my Epi cabs my 'primary gigging cabs'. It's amazing how the lightweight market has expanded and caught up with the UL's, which where really the only game out there 6-8 years ago. It's nice to have some choices now!
Understood. The difference between your experiences and mine, is I've never ever hated it... or even disliked it. At worst, I've only had to use a bit of correctional EQ and that's all. FWIW anyway.
- Status
