Double Bass For those interested in Walter Woods Amps...

[swingfingers]

Great! Thanks all.

 

[TGforPlywood]

I don't think any laws have been broken by the pics of the insides of a WW amp. But if you'd like to self impose a punishment on yourself, give me your space in the 1yr+ waiting list.

 

[Tom Baldwin]

But if you'd like to self impose a punishment on yourself...

From the School of Redundancy School

 

[robobass]

I'm just curious, Do these things really deliver all the juice they claim? I really find it hard to believe that such a little box could output those kind of watts.

 

[Ric Vice]

Robobass,
They are very powerful for their size and since they use a switching power supply they are incredibly light. But what they do best is reproduce the acoustical tone and timber of a Double Bass. If you get beyond a reasonable volume with the Upright it's all academic anyway IMHO.


Ric

 

[brianrost]

Guitar Player magazine bench tested a WW MI-100-8 back in the late 80s. That amp is rated by Walter as 100 watts RMS at 8 ohms, 150 watts RMS at 4 ohms.

The test showed the amp actually delivered 200 watts into 4 ohms before clipping, so the review concluded that Walter's power ratings were VERY conservative.

 

[robobass]

"If you get beyond a reasonable volume with the Upright it's all academic anyway IMHO."

Yeah, well said. I've nothing against WW amps, it's just than when I have tried them, I didn't really think they were such a big deal. And, once you have to go beyond a certain volume, nothing can preserve the true sound anyway. I remember playing in the Bitter End once, back in my New York days. The house sound was so loud that my bass was feeding back in a way that it wouldn't ring if I kept the strings damped with my left hand, but any note I fingered would start sounding spontaneously. I didn't need to pluck or bow. It was interesting, but of course it was like playing a pipe organ. No decay. I hadn't thought to bring a volume pedal. To be honest it was one of those nights that made me really want to quit music altogether. Well, New York IS a loud place! I'm not sure what my point is. There is such a thing as a good amplified sound, however rare. But, as the overall volume goes up and up, it becomes less and less possible to achieve it.

 

[Akami]

I'm just curious, Do these things really deliver all the juice they claim? I really find it hard to believe that such a little box could output those kind of watts.

Any players out there familiar enough with the WW amps to tell what their take is on how much power they actually deliver in other real world situations would be most appreciated by those of us to whom actual output in non-acoustic situations is of greatest interest.

Anyone?

 

[Uncletoad]

Any players out there familiar enough with the WW amps to tell what their take is on how much power they actually deliver in other real world situations would be most appreciated by those of us to whom actual output in non-acoustic situations is of greatest interest.

Anyone?

Well its pretty darn loud. I don't know any numbers but I can tell you it's not as loud as an SVT, it's about the same as my Euphonic Audio 800 and it's much louder than an AMP BH420 or an Eden World Tour 800 or an SWR SM400 or SM900.

For bass guitars it's tone is most similar to the SVT. It doesn't have the headroom of one or the weight. I prefer its tone to all the above amps for fretted bass guitar with the possible exception of the EA 800 which has a slightly tighter bottom end and not as bright upper mids. I tend to favor the EA800 for gigs where I want lots of buttery low end with my fretted basses. I think it may have a tad more headroom than the Woods.

For Double Bass there is no substitute for the Woods in my opinion. It is voiced perfectly has tons of power and gets as loud as you'd ever want to get with a DB. I prefer it over the Acoustic Image stuff and the Euphonic Audio stuff. I can't imagine anyone who plays Double Bass amplified would dislike it after they took one out on a gig with an appropriate cabinet. It is sweet sounding quiet or loud and always ultimately musical.

Just my opinion.

 

[Ric Vice]

For Double Bass there is no substitute for the Woods in my opinion. It is voiced perfectly has tons of power and gets as loud as you'd ever want to get with a DB. I prefer it over the Acoustic Image stuff and the Euphonic Audio stuff. I can't imagine anyone who plays Double Bass amplified would dislike it after they took one out on a gig with an appropriate cabinet. It is sweet sounding quiet or loud and always ultimately musical.

Just my opinion.

I second this opinion. If you are lucky enough to be able to afford one
they are the best DB amps around.

That said, I think if you're looking for flexibility, i.e. dual input connectors, notch / and lo pass filtering, and piezo input matching, then the only amp with all those things built into one box it's
is an Acoustic Image.

The Walter Woods has such a incredible pre amp that
in all but a few cases, it's tone controls can reproduce the timber of most any Double Bass. With a pre amp that sensitive, you can dial in you're sound at very low volumes, so the power amp just doesn't have to push as hard.

Ric

 

[Uncletoad]

That said, I think if you're looking for flexibility, i.e. dual input connectors, notch / and lo pass filtering, and piezo input matching, then the only amp with all those things built into one box it's is an Acoustic Image.

Yes. Those are valid issues. You'd think Walter would dump that ridiculous effects loop, plaster the send knob to the full out position, trash the knob and then put that other stuff in it's place. Especially an XLR out, phase switch and a mute button.

Nothing is perfect is it.

 

[Ric Vice]

Uncletoad,
I've often wondered about this. The only thing I can guess is that
Walter could possibly have stockpiled a great number of parts, including the face plates to build amplifiers from, so he's got so much invested in stock that it takes him several years to modify the design. For most of the time Walter has been building those amps, the peizo was "king", and actually, it still is, for most of us working stiffs. AMT mikes are really cool, but they are really expensive.
The notch filter/ lo pass filter thing probably isn't as big a deal to Walter since he knows that pre amp can usually eq out any significant feedback. I sure wish he would put the DI back though. That's a pain. I've been told that it isn't there because Walter assumes that most individuals will opt to choose their own DI.


Ric

 

[Uncletoad]

Uncletoad,
I've often wondered about this. The only thing I can guess is that
Walter could possibly have stockpiled a great number of parts, including the face plates to build amplifiers from, so he's got so much invested in stock that it takes him several years to modify the design.

Possibly, but to be devil's advocate at $2300 or $2500 a pop whatever they go for I think he could make some changes. Moreover he's backordered until who knows when. Until we stop buying them up he's hardly motivated to change a thing.

For most of the time Walter has been building those amps, the peizo was "king", and actually, it still is, for most of us working stiffs. AMT mikes are really cool, but they are really expensive.

True but if you have a Woods, how expensive is an AMT really? And if a piezo is still in the mix (like for me most of the time) why not a phase switch to tame those puppies when it gets loud? I carry around a whole nuther preamp just for a phase switch and a DI.

I sure wish he would put the DI back though. That's a pain. I've been told that it isn't there because Walter assumes that most individuals will opt to choose their own DI.

Thats what he said to me when I brought that up. How many times do you think he has to say that before he gives up and puts it back in?

I prefer its tone to all the above amps for fretted bass guitar with the possible exception of the EA 800 which has a slightly tighter bottom end and not as bright upper mids. I tend to favor the EA800 for gigs where I want lots of buttery low end with my fretted basses. I think it may have a tad more headroom than the Woods.

In spite of all my whining above I think I may recount this statement I made earlier today. I just was fooling around in my basement with my old Jazz bass a couple VL210's, the EA800 and the Woods. The Woods just kicks its but in the tone department for me. I should find another one for when this one breaks.

 

[Tbeers]

I am so glad I bought a WW MI-100 made in 1992. It sounds fabulous for upright and has a great DI in the front! Yay! Plenty of power, too, no matter what the naysayers claim. Find a used one in mint condition like I did, it's a great purchase and you can save lots of money.

 

[KJung]

Yes. Those are valid issues. You'd think Walter would dump that ridiculous effects loop, plaster the send knob to the full out position, trash the knob and then put that other stuff in it's place. Especially an XLR out, phase switch and a mute button.

Nothing is perfect is it.

A number of us have suggested the EXACT same thing to Walter... it would make the newer models perfect. He has no interest in changing them.

Also... first time I every heard anyone say a WW sounds similar to an SVT! ... IMO.. those amps are about as tonally different as any two amps that have every been made.

 

[Uncletoad]

Also... first time I every heard anyone say a WW sounds similar to an SVT! ... IMO.. those amps are about as tonally different as any two amps that have every been made.

Yea, I should be clearer about that. Nothing sounds like an SVT except an SVT. I love SVTs and would rather use that on my Fender basses than anything else. It was my main amp rig for more than a decade and I still play with one and the matching 810 occasionally. Having said that Walter's amp is the closest solid state tone I've had that reminds me of the mids and highs from SVTs. The low end from all those Tubes is another thing entirely. Compared to all the SWR, Eden, etc. solid state amps I've tried they are all even further away from that sound to me. I obviously have not tried them all. Perhaps even more to the point. The Woods amp is the first Solid State amp that I have played out with that makes me feel comfortable leaving the SVT at home.

 

[Ric Vice]

I just was fooling around in my basement with my old Jazz bass a couple VL210's, the EA800 and the Woods. The Woods just kicks its but in the tone department for me. I should find another one for when this one breaks.

Uncletoad,
Good luck on finding your backup. I was thinking about the SVT vs the Walter Woods. IMHO ( Cause I'm Really Just Guessing' here) I have a unfounded theory that the original Walter Woods MI -100's were built with nod toward the later B-15 N's with those Ultra HIgh and Ultra Low rocker switches that changed the tone control settings. Walter took it one step further and made it a 3 way switch (-10db, Normal, and +10db). Those were also on the SVT so it stands to reason that they have a similar sound, because they EQ in a similar fashion.

Ric

 

[brianrost]

Any players out there familiar enough with the WW amps to tell what their take is on how much power they actually deliver in other real world situations

I have two WW heads, one is rated 225/350 and the other 350/450 (at 8/4 ohms). I also own two A.M.P. BH-420 heads, rated 220/400. I find the real world usable volume to be similar between all of them. I have no reason to doubt Walter's power ratings at all.

I think most of the doubt comes when seeing how small the amp is.