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

Need help: Epifani

Discussion in 'Amps and Cabs [BG]' started by Geoff St. Germaine, Jul 12, 2004.


  1. Well, I've been able to try out a some Epifani gear and I am looking at picking up a cab or two. I'm wondering if anyone can compare a setup such as a 410 vs two 210s. Two 210s are quite a bit more expensive than a single 410, so are there any advantages other than portability?

    Also, how would you compare the 310 to these two? That is another choice I guess and I see that it is a pretty popular configuration. Maybe two of the 310s would be the way to go.

    I am going to be going with the UL series, but I imagine any suggestion you have based off of the NYC stuff would be just as relevant.

    Thanks,
    Geoff
     
  2. inazone

    inazone

    Apr 20, 2003
    Colorado
    If it were me, I would go with a 410 + 210. More options. If I was just going to get two 210s, I would get a 410, for cost effective reasons and add a 210 later if need be. The ul410, to me, is about as easy to move as a 210. Most of my events require a 410 or larger though.
     
  3. jobu3

    jobu3 Artist formerly known as Big Joe

    Feb 17, 2002
    Mountain Top, PA
    I just sold a NYC 210 because of the weight. I found the 310 to be easier to move despite the 11 lb. difference because of how the handles were set in comparison to the center of gravity/not having to bend over as much, etc.

    IMO the regular 310 keeps up and/or surpasses every 410 I have played and I have played just about all of them (except an Epi 410 that is). I haven't played a UL of any denomination yet, but I have a 210-UL ordered and hopefully it will be here by the weekend. Joker has some good comparisons of the UL- vs. T- series cabs.

    I think that two 310's of any type would be monstrous and murder just about ANY room you needed to fill if you can give them the juice they need to REALLY sing! :eek:
     
  4. I've played the 410UL and the 410NYC. I loved them both, but the UL had a little different midrange that I prefered. Hmmm... I think it will be either a 410 & 210 or two 310s. That's how I'm leaning anyway.

    Thanks guys,
    Geoff
     
  5. Jerry J

    Jerry J Supporting Member

    Mar 27, 2000
    P-town, OR
    I have the leaded version of the t310 and I just luuuve it. I'm with Big Joe on this t310 viewpoint. It sure gives my Aggie GS410 a run for it's money.

    I'm leaning toward snagging a t210ul to couple with my 310. The 210ul is absurdly light in weight but sounds quite good.
     
  6. That'd be another idea, the 210 with the 310.

    Has anyone tried the "advanced projection" 210? Looks interesting.

    Geoff
     
  7. brianrost

    brianrost Gold Supporting Member

    Apr 26, 2000
    Boston, Taxachusetts
    1. you can run in stereo

    2. you can do smaller gigs with just one cab

    3. if a speaker blows in one cab you can keep going with the other cab

    4. You can run one cab on each side of large stage for better coverage

    Etc.

    There's no real SONIC advantage, it's all in the flexibility.
     
  8. Hmmm.... well, I have no need to run in stereo. Points 2, 3 and 4 are good. I'll probably go with two cabs, either 310s or 210s.

    Has anyone used the 210 with the 310? What impedence was the 210? Any problems with volume matching between the two?

    Thanks,
    Geoff
     
  9. inazone

    inazone

    Apr 20, 2003
    Colorado
    I havent tried the 210/310 combo but the 210 is wider than the 310. So when you go to stack them, you wont have a clean look. stacks nice on the 410. I tried the 210ul ap (the slanted cab) and to honest, it farted out in the low end at upper mid volume. I was a little disapointed with that, I would assume the the reg 210ul is the same. It did sound nice with the 210ul ap/410ul stack though. I used a stewart 2.1 for power.
     
  10. IvanMike

    IvanMike Player Characters fear me... Staff Member Supporting Member

    Nov 10, 2002
    Middletown CT, USA
    i belive the 210 is available in 8 and 4 ohms but dont quote me on that. the 310 is noticably louder than the 210
    for my $, the 310 is the way to go - it has more apparrent low end than the 210 and is rediculously small and portable
     
  11. jobu3

    jobu3 Artist formerly known as Big Joe

    Feb 17, 2002
    Mountain Top, PA
    I will see how the 210 UL (4 Ohm) pairs up with the NYC-310 on Friday when I take the UL home... I was wondering the same thing myself just a few days ago. :cool:

    Also, I contemplated the APUL but it wasn't worth the extra dough to me. I'd rather be able to stick the regualr 210 on its side for a smaller footprint and have the ports facing where they should be facing. ;)
     
  12. Jerry J

    Jerry J Supporting Member

    Mar 27, 2000
    P-town, OR
    Big Joe, please keep me posted on the outcome, if you would.
     
  13. jobu3

    jobu3 Artist formerly known as Big Joe

    Feb 17, 2002
    Mountain Top, PA
    Got it today. Carried it upstairs with one hand. 4-Ohm version run with my iAmp 800. EQ bypassed, EQ'ing only from my Benavente... It does have a slightly more pronounced midrange than the NYC-210 I had and a little more punch without losing a lot of "oomph" and smoothness that I love from Epi cabs, it still sounds Epifani-esque enough though for my tastes. I think it sits a little better in the mix (against CD only so far) than its NYC-210 counterpart. It has a bit more definition than the NYC with a tighter bottom, IMO. I think Joker put it best when he said the mids were "chewy." It was not honky or brittle or cold as with some other Neo-equipped cabs. Handles a low B more than adequately at good volume.

    Tomorrow:
    Direct A/B with the NYC-310 and pairing with the NYC-310 which should knock my house apart! If its not raining, I might take everything out into the garage and get some outdoor testing in just to further tick off the neighbors whose ears are still ringing from the Fourth of July... :smug:
     
  14. jobu3

    jobu3 Artist formerly known as Big Joe

    Feb 17, 2002
    Mountain Top, PA
    The NYC-310 and the 210-UL paired together very nicely! The cushy bottom of the 310 really rounded out the punch of the UL. The defined middle midrange of the UL added some presence and character the already tight 310. There was no power dispersion issues because of the impedance differences (5.3 of the 310 and 4 of the 210), or because of size. There were no phasing issues either.

    The tone was strong, thick but articulate, and very deep with the signature Epifani wamth/smoothness. My low B-string has never sounded so good! The NYC-310 + 210-UL gets a big thumbs up. I'd imagine that any Epifani 310 + 210 combo would be killer for really loud stage volumes/bigger venues, but I do think that the 210 UL is a better all around cab than the NYC-210 which just can't keep up with the NYC-310's volume, depth, and size/weight/cost factors. I don't have the NYC-210 to A/B directly, but I think that the UL's overall voicing (with the more distinct midrange) handles lows better than the NYC-210's not-quite-pillowy bottom (it would be a great match with a 112, 212, or 115 though IMO). It just wasn't quite enough for me and the fact that the UL is only 38 lbs. makes it leagues ahead of the regular 210 in my book. I can strap on my rack bag nd my gig bag and carry my cab into any place, one trip! Also, I think the mixture of a UL- and NYC-310 would be a truly amazing thing to hear (and see)!!!

    :hyper: :bassist:
     
  15. Jerry J

    Jerry J Supporting Member

    Mar 27, 2000
    P-town, OR
    Outstanding reviews, Joe. Thanks for taking the time to put down your thoughts. This is extremely helpful. ;)

    - Did you use your iAmp with this setup?
    - How was it stacking the two cabinets since they are different sizes? I figured that the 210 would be the logical one for the bottom of the stack.

    So this sounds like it's a keeper setup for you? Would you be more inclined to use the 310 or the 210 for future gigs?

    Now I just have to find a reasonably priced, used t210ul for me.
     
  16. jobu3

    jobu3 Artist formerly known as Big Joe

    Feb 17, 2002
    Mountain Top, PA
    I used the iAmp, it's all I have right now... I kept the 310 on the bottom. The 210 is a little wider but not so much that it seems unstable. As a stand alone, I prefer the 210 on it side for a smaller foot print and to get the speakers a little closer to ear level. I would stick either/or on the bottom depending on boom of the room (plus I ahve a GRAMMA pad which helps as well). I would prefer to take just the 210 as necessary especially if I don't need to fill up a room with my rig but I think that in reality, the 310 will be my main gigging cab. I am not opposed to bringing both if a situation arises where both were necessary (outside/etc.). The band I just spent the last three months or so learning covers for has actually dissolved in this last week. :spit: :mad: So it looks like the UL will come in handy for the auditions I will hopefully have coming up and at least this way I have all my amp needs met for whatever may be in my future. ;)
     
  17. Jerry J

    Jerry J Supporting Member

    Mar 27, 2000
    P-town, OR
    Wow, that must be a good feeling? ;) No GAS :D

    Joe, thanks so much for all the info on the Epi's. I'm really happy with my t310. And I feel pretty confident in getting a t210ul in the near future.

    Bum deal on the band. I hope an opportunity comes up that will work out better. More gigs, better pay, classier places, groupies... :bassist:
     
  18. jobu3

    jobu3 Artist formerly known as Big Joe

    Feb 17, 2002
    Mountain Top, PA
    Hey, thanks! It could have been worse, we could have already had some planned dates and had some of the less reliable members not show or had to cancel the whole thing after getting with a managing/promotion group. That said, I do hope something cool comes up soon... I have a very rare form of GAS (Gig Acquisition Syndrome) right now, and that's much harder to accomodate than the regular version for gear! I don't get out to the bars much during the week anymore so my sit-ins have been pretty minimal, that was always a nice fix. :meh: :help:
     
  19. jokerjkny

    jokerjkny

    Jan 19, 2002
    NY / NJ / PA
    yup,

    loved my UL3x10, but needed something smaller and stoopidly sold it. :rolleyes:

    i dont really play in anything that needs it, but i loved the 3x10 + 1x15 setup i tried at Nick's shop. awesomely punchie, with a tighter than a drum low end. ate up every bit of the power my DPC-1400x was putting out (500 watts @ 4ohms, each channel). and was STOOPID loud!!! can only imagine what a PLX3002 does. :cool:

    but yea, i'd go with the 3x10. its a smaller footprint, yet just as capable as a 4x10. also, much louder, with a nicer natural low end than a 2x10.

    and cool setup, Biggie! :bassist: