• 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 UL-410 VS UL2-310

#101
Schlepping aside:

I cannot decide on which cab to go with. I am leaning towards selling one of the UL2-112's i have and going with either a UL2-310 or a UL2-410. My big goal is to get something with a big throat sound that will work well with whatever head I choose to use.

Subscribing.
 
#102
joelb79 said:
Schlepping aside:

I cannot decide on which cab to go with. I am leaning towards selling one of the UL2-112's i have and going with either a UL2-310 or a UL2-410. My big goal is to get something with a big throat sound that will work well with whatever head I choose to use.

Subscribing.
Click to expand...

IME... if you find that your 2x112UL stack is plenty loud, the 310UL will be perfect. It puts out about the same volume as the 2x112 stack IME. If you feel the 2x112UL stack is 'pushed' at times, IMO you will also run into the same thing with the 310UL.
 
#103
Joel,
Looks like we're in similar boats, man. I'm thinking of either another 112 (or a 210), or just going with one big cab. I'm leaning towards the UL2-310.


KJung said:
IME... if you find that your 2x112UL stack is plenty loud, the 310UL will be perfect. It puts out about the same volume as the 2x112 stack IME. If you feel the 2x112UL stack is 'pushed' at times, IMO you will also run into the same thing with the 310UL.
Click to expand...

That's great information, Ken. Would you say the 310 has a comparable low end to the 2x112 stack? Does is go as low, just tighter?
 
#104
well I would think the 310 would be louder than a 212. When I had my T-212 at the Bowlus Bass and Jason/Vision fired up his 310, the 310 had a noticeable bigger stance: more highs, slightly less lows, but a mid girth that the 212 didn't have.

Looks like I'm saving up for a UL410 (and in the future possibly a DB750 + another UL410) :D
 
#105
joelb79 said:
well I would think the 310 would be louder than a 212. When I had my T-212 at the Bowlus Bass and Jason/Vision fired up his 310, the 310 had a noticeable bigger stance: more highs, slightly less lows, but a mid girth that the 212 didn't have.

Looks like I'm saving up for a UL410 (and in the future possibly a DB750 + another UL410) :D
Click to expand...

What swayed your decision for the UL410 instead of the UL310?
 
#106
Not that i've even decided yet... but I think the factor is that my 212's cannot keep up with my playing in terms of mids. I think that its going to take more than one more cone to get me there, and recently i've been very happy playing through a beater 410 which is further pushing me towards the 410 design.
 
#107
joelb79 said:
Not that i've even decided yet... but I think the factor is that my 212's cannot keep up with my playing in terms of mids. I think that its going to take more than one more cone to get me there, and recently i've been very happy playing through a beater 410 which is further pushing me towards the 410 design.
Click to expand...

Gotcha. I've been playing with my 112 stacked on a 410 and I've been digging it. That's what made me rethink I might want a 210 under the 112. This lead to the 310 idea as a single cab. A UL2-410 would be sweet.

I might get a beater 115 or 112 to stack until I can decide and save the skreds.
 
#112
Man, I'm literally standing at this crossroads right now. Either cab will fit in the back of my Element and I currently live in a one-story house (no toting upstairs). But we are seriously planning on moving to VA/DC by the end of next year (probably Alexandria, so I'll be checking out Jong at Jive Sound ;) ) and will get a 2-story house - with a basement, God willing. So I would be either going up or down stairs. Future vote for the 310.

I play with good PA support at the louder shows right now. But this is a big investment and I would hate to drop the cash on the 310 and then need the 410 later. The extra 10 lbs and approx 1.2 cf of extra cabinet isn't a huge deal. Vote for 410.

Given the size/weight of the UL310, I could see myself bringing it to the smaller shows too. It's not much bigger and only 9 lbs heavier than my PS112. Vote for 310.

I'm also worried about the S2 voicing for the 310, but like what you guys are saying about the new 410. I like good low mids and not as much high mids at moderate volumes. I start bumping up the mids and high mids when the volume gets louder so I can sit in the mix better. Vote for 410.

Dern! So its tied 2-2 right now.:help:
 
#113
jmain said:
Man, I'm literally standing at this crossroads right now. Either cab will fit in the back of my Element and I currently live in a one-story house (no toting upstairs). But we are seriously planning on moving to VA/DC by the end of next year (probably Alexandria, so I'll be checking out Jong at Jive Sound ;) ) and will get a 2-story house - with a basement, God willing. So I would be either going up or down stairs. Future vote for the 310.

I play with good PA support at the louder shows right now. But this is a big investment and I would hate to drop the cash on the 310 and then need the 410 later. The extra 10 lbs and approx 1.2 cf of extra cabinet isn't a huge deal. Vote for 410.

Given the size/weight of the UL310, I could see myself bringing it to the smaller shows too. It's not much bigger and only 9 lbs heavier than my PS112. Vote for 310.

I'm also worried about the S2 voicing for the 310, but like what you guys are saying about the new 410. I like good low mids and not as much high mids at moderate volumes. I start bumping up the mids and high mids when the volume gets louder so I can sit in the mix better. Vote for 410.

Dern! So its tied 2-2 right now.:help:
Click to expand...
If the 410's extra size is not a concern, and you want one cab that will be most assured of doing it all, then there's no question. UL410 S2. No contest. It will significantly outperform either version of the 310. The 310 is much easier to carry by yourself, but you do sacrifice output.

I totally love my 310's, but I'd never bet the bank on one alone. On the 410, I could.
 
#114
Vic said:
If the 410's extra size is not a concern, and you want one cab that will be most assured of doing it all, then there's no question. UL410 S2. No contest. It will significantly outperform either version of the 310. The 310 is much easier to carry by yourself, but you do sacrifice output.

I totally love my 310's, but I'd never bet the bank on one alone. On the 410, I could.
Click to expand...

I hear ya man. I am a little concerned about the size of the 410. I could probably get by with the 310 at my big gigs b/c we have good PA support. I was gonna go a cheaper route b/c the gigs are about 1-2x/mo. Thinking of the future, I will more than likely have to carry equipment up or down stairs. This has me leaning towards the 310.

I for one, agree with you about the impedance of the cabs or the capability of the LMII going to 2 ohms. Although I really dig the LMII and it would cost more to get another amp instead of running the 410, I might go the stereo pwr amp setup and then run a 112 with the 310 if I need more.

edit: just saw the MB studio pre. Looks interesting!
 
#115
jmain said:
I hear ya man. I am a little concerned about the size of the 410. I could probably get by with the 310 at my big gigs b/c we have good PA support. I was gonna go a cheaper route b/c the gigs are about 1-2x/mo. Thinking of the future, I will more than likely have to carry equipment up or down stairs. This has me leaning towards the 310.
Click to expand...
I will say despite the "modest" weight difference, there's actually a very significant diff between the 310 and 410 in "carry-ability". The 310 is actually quite easy to carry around by one's self. The 410, IMHO, is actually fairly difficult without an extra set of hands.

However, as a "cart" rolling on a set of the removable casters, the 410 wins again, so it really boils down to how much actual carrying of the cab you'll have to do.
 
#116
Vic said:
I will say despite the "modest" weight difference, there's actually a very significant diff between the 310 and 410 in "carry-ability". The 310 is actually quite easy to carry around by one's self. The 410, IMHO, is actually fairly difficult without an extra set of hands.

However, as a "cart" rolling on a set of the removable casters, the 410 wins again, so it really boils down to how much actual carrying of the cab you'll have to do.
Click to expand...

+1... the cool thing about the very light weight of the 410 is that you can very easily get it out in front of you on stairs (i.e., grab the cab by its handles and then extend the cab horizonally from your chest). It makes stairs quite easy. It still is pretty shocking to pick up the 410UL... feels like some 112's. As one who is almost a fanatic about 'easy to schlep', there are very few downsides to the 410UL. However, I'll take an extra pair of hands where I can get it on either of those cabs (and almost any cab!) up and down stairs. It's just nice to know that you can do it on your own when need be, versus the more typically 85-100 pound 410's, that IMO would kill most up and down stairs.

The other cool thing about the 410UL is that it has so much ooomph, you never have to worry about coupling it to the floor (the 310UL can really benefit from that in some situations where the low end can start to compress at high volumes). So, you can just leave the 410UL on its wheels all the time. Talk about an easy schlep, quick, easy set-up and take down (no carts to load, store, etc.).

However, as I've posted before, if you do gigs where a 210 is not quite enough... but 'almost enough', and of course, like a relatively articulate and modern tone, the 310UL is just smokin', and will fit in almost any back seat, if you are stuck with that kind of vehicle for hauling your gear.
 
#117
Vic said:
I will say despite the "modest" weight difference, there's actually a very significant diff between the 310 and 410 in "carry-ability". The 310 is actually quite easy to carry around by one's self. The 410, IMHO, is actually fairly difficult without an extra set of hands.
Click to expand...

+1 This has been my observation as well.
 
#118
Vic said:
I will say despite the "modest" weight difference, there's actually a very significant diff between the 310 and 410 in "carry-ability". The 310 is actually quite easy to carry around by one's self. The 410, IMHO, is actually fairly difficult without an extra set of hands.

However, as a "cart" rolling on a set of the removable casters, the 410 wins again, so it really boils down to how much actual carrying of the cab you'll have to do.
Click to expand...

I don't have that extra set of hands at the house. Right now its one level and I can put my cab on a hand truck, so I only lift in and out of my Element (which will fit either cab no problem).

If the 310 is as loud as many 410's, I think I'd be alright with the current gigs.
 
#120
jmain said:
I don't have that extra set of hands at the house. Right now its one level and I can put my cab on a hand truck, so I only lift in and out of my Element (which will fit either cab no problem).

If the 310 is as loud as many 410's, I think I'd be alright with the current gigs.
Click to expand...

It's a great cab. I am not one who hears the 310UL as 'loud as most 410's', and when I had mine, I always had a 410 on hand for the big gigs where I needed the wump. It's an amazing cab and sounds like...a really good 310:D ... significantly louder than a 210, not quite there with the 410 (which of course is a much larger box). Is it louder than some lower end 410's... I'm sure it is). However, it will not keep up with a Goliath III, 410UL, Eden410XST or XLT, etc.

I have not heard the PS series of cabs. The 310UL is about the same volume as two 210UL's.... the 310 has a little more low end extension and slightly less mid punch compared to the 112's IME.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back