• 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.

Double Bass Question for iAmp users

Phil Redman

Phil Redman

Mar 14, 2005
136
1
63
Madison, Wisconsin
www.bathtubmothers.com
#1
I'm thinking of replacing my Fishman Pro P Bass EQ/QSC PLX with one of the iAmp heads--either the Micro or the 500. I really like the adjustable high-pass filter on the Fishman for controlling low end mud however I'm a little concerned about giving this up for the iAmp that seems to lack this feature. Does the low band of EQ on the iAmp 500/800 provide good control over boominess in a live setting? I usually run the eq flat on the Fishman with some hi-pass rolloff into a Wizzy.

Also any thoughts on the 300 watt Micro vs. the 500 iAmp into a single Wizzy? I like lots of headroom and am thinking the Micro might not provide enough even though it exceeds the Wizzy rating of 250 watts.

Thanks,
Phil
 
#2
Yes, I'm able to roll out the boominess from my iAMP.

Power is relative and personal, but I use the iAMP 200 Wizzy combo and have never lacked for headroom in any sized venue with double bass. I also use it with my Fender, but have never had to push the volume much with it, so I can't really say.

Assuming they cost the same (I don't know), then I think it's a choice for you between portability and reserve power.

-tk
 
#4
The LO CONTROL of the iAMP-200 (and I believe the 500 too) provides +/- 18 dB gain control in a frequency range from 40-180 Hz. I am not sure what the bandwidth or slope or "Q" of that control is, although presumably its either 1 octave or 1/2 octave. If it is a shelving type control instead, then I guess it would act a lot like a HPF when a cut (instead of a boost) is applied. Either way I would think like Troy and Marcus said that it should be pretty effective at helping to control low-end "boom."

In my case, I actually bypass the EQ, and I move my cabinet around to try and clean up boominess in rooms where I detect it. I put the amp up on a chair or an amp stand, and/or vary the amp's position and angle relative to walls and corners.
 
#6
I bought mine intending to run it flat, but actually get much better results with the EQ for double bass.

I don't play a lot of electric bass anymore, but when I do, I like one of the pre-set voicings, I forget which one.

-tk
 
#7
I traded my EA iAmp 800 for an AI Focus 2RIII. Never looked back. The Focus is a far better double bass amp to my ear.

The iAmp would probably double better. I don't like the sound of the Focus on electric bass. Having said that most of my gigs are Double Bass only and the few electric doubling gigs I do I'm fine with the compromise tone of the Focus.
 
#8
Phil Redman said:
I'm thinking of replacing my Fishman Pro P Bass EQ/QSC PLX with one of the iAmp heads--either the Micro or the 500. I really like the adjustable high-pass filter on the Fishman for controlling low end mud however I'm a little concerned about giving this up for the iAmp that seems to lack this feature. Does the low band of EQ on the iAmp 500/800 provide good control over boominess in a live setting? I usually run the eq flat on the Fishman with some hi-pass rolloff into a Wizzy.

Also any thoughts on the 300 watt Micro vs. the 500 iAmp into a single Wizzy? I like lots of headroom and am thinking the Micro might not provide enough even though it exceeds the Wizzy rating of 250 watts.

Thanks,
Phil
Click to expand...

I strongly recommend against attempting to use the lowest frequency control on the iAmp to substitute as a good high-pass filter (HPF) if you are trying to tame infrasonics. If it is just "boominess" you are trying to tame, then, yes, the parametric eq in the iAmp is a very powerful tool and will do the trick.
OTOH, you may find that without your HPF that you will have trouble with true infrasonics if you are using a piezo pickup (especially bridge-wing mounted) with the Wizzy.

Read this.
 
#9
Uncletoad said:
I traded my EA iAmp 800 for an AI Focus 2RIII. Never looked back. The Focus is a far better double bass amp to my ear.

The iAmp would probably double better. I don't like the sound of the Focus on electric bass. Having said that most of my gigs are Double Bass only and the few electric doubling gigs I do I'm fine with the compromise tone of the Focus.
Click to expand...

+1! Both myself and one of my local buddies replaced our iAmp 800's with a Series III Focus and couldn't be happier. Works great with both upright and passive electric basses. Don't care for it with active basses however.
 
#10
drurb said:
I strongly recommend against attempting to use the lowest frequency control on the iAmp to substitute as a good high-pass filter (HPF) if you are trying to tame infrasonics. If it is just "boominess" you are trying to tame, then, yes, the parametric eq in the iAmp is a very powerful tool and will do the trick.
OTOH, you may find that without your HPF that you will have trouble with true infrasonics if you are using a piezo pickup (especially bridge-wing mounted) with the Wizzy.

Read this.
Click to expand...

I was thinking more about the audible stuff but I understand your point. I'm running a Full Circle, which could be prone to that sort of thing. I've also got a 30 hz bass rolloff on the QSC amp so I've never had to pay much attention to the infrasonic issue.

Thanks,
Phil
 
#11
Reefer said:
+1! Both myself and one of my local buddies replaced our iAmp 800's with a Series III Focus and couldn't be happier. Works great with both upright and passive electric basses. Don't care for it with active basses however.
Click to expand...

The Focus is probably not an option for me because of cost. I play a plywood bass in blues/roots music setting so I'm inclined toward something that can deliver a pretty punchy sound, which I think may be more in line with the EA stuff.

Thanks,
Phil
 
#12
#13
drurb said:
I strongly recommend against attempting to use the lowest frequency control on the iAmp to substitute as a good high-pass filter (HPF) if you are trying to tame infrasonics. If it is just "boominess" you are trying to tame, then, yes, the parametric eq in the iAmp is a very powerful tool and will do the trick.
OTOH, you may find that without your HPF that you will have trouble with true infrasonics if you are using a piezo pickup (especially bridge-wing mounted) with the Wizzy.

Read this.
Click to expand...
DRURB, I think I understand what you're saying and why.

But just for the record, when I was using the original Rev Solo, I sent an email to EA asking about how to control speaker cone dance and what I thought might be too much excursion, and this is exactly what John Dong suggested I do. Set the LO CONTROL at 40 Hz and cut.

I tried it for a tune or two, didn't like the effect on my tone, and just went back to bypassing the EQ.
 
#14
Uncletoad, Reefer, others ...

What is it about the Focus Series III that you prefer so much for DB? Tone? Features such as the HPF or the dual purpose inputs for blending a mic?

The portability of the AI sure is hard to beat too I reckon.
 
#16
Phil Redman said:
The Focus is probably not an option for me because of cost. I play a plywood bass in blues/roots music setting so I'm inclined toward something that can deliver a pretty punchy sound, which I think may be more in line with the EA stuff.

Thanks,
Phil
Click to expand...

If you decide that EA is definitely the way you want to go, I would suggest the older iAmp 350. The older power amp design has more punch than the newer Class D design they are using now.
 
#17
Phil Redman said:
The Focus is probably not an option for me because of cost. I play a plywood bass in blues/roots music setting so I'm inclined toward something that can deliver a pretty punchy sound, which I think may be more in line with the EA stuff.

Thanks,
Phil
Click to expand...
As far as I know the cost of the iAmp and the AI stuff are similar feature for feature. You may need the lower power single channel stuff to fit into your current budget but you may not like that low power stuff on the higher volume gigs.

I play a plywood bass in big loud rock/blues situations as well. I've played a ton of gigs on the iAmp, the Focus and the Walter Woods Ultra. The iAmp doesn't sound right without a preamp that will allow phase reversal and high pass filtering. These things are included in the AI stuff. The iAmp weighs 14 to 20 lbs plus you carry an outboard preamp. The AI stuff has it's own gig bag and weighs in at less than 5 lbs.

That micro amp is $530 3lbs and 175 watts at 8 ohms and will still need an external preamp with a double bass. The Clarus is $700 just under 5lbs and 250 watts at 8 ohms and doesn't need anything else.

IMO neither will do loud gigs well at all.

The Focus I is $1200 and 450 watts. The iAmp 500 is about $850 and 350 watts.

The iAmp 800 is $1200 and 500watts, the Focus 1R is 450 watts and $1200.

Buy what you want, sounds like you've made up your mind already but anyone else reading this thread may want to ask around and see how many double bassists in any genre of playing have traded out their AI amps for the iAmp and been happy about it.

bolo said:
Uncletoad, Reefer, others ...

What is it about the Focus Series III that you prefer so much for DB? Tone? Features such as the HPF or the dual purpose inputs for blending a mic?

The portability of the AI sure is hard to beat too I reckon.
Click to expand...
The iAmp is bottom heavy at the expense of midrange. The thing howls like crazy at high volumes without a preamp with good filters. I ended up carrying that 20lb pig around in a rack with another 2 lb preamp. I bought a Walter Woods Ultra and left the iAmp at home. It weighed half as much, was louder, had more musical EQ and sounded amazing.

I noticed the Focus when I A/B it with the Woods at the belchfest and the Focus was clearer, had more articulation and a truer tone. I think the Focus EQ sucks. I think the IAmp EQ sucks. The Woods EQ is amazing musical and useful. The Raven PBII has a more musical EQ than the IAmp or the Focus.

I've gone over all this before in other threads. I started carrying that Focus to all my gigs and I haven't taken the Woods back out since I got it. For me the Woods smoked the iAmp in every feature, but the Focus has more features in a smaller package than the Woods. Moreover it has more usable uncolored true to the bass tone day in and out than either the Woods or the iAmp. If the Woods had a high pass filter and phase reversal I'd probably want to use it more but I have to carry a preamp with it so I only use it on slab gigs.

These days I use the Focus a VL208, a cable and my bass at almost every gig. In and out in one trip, I'm set up in 2 minutes and I don't have to carry a bunch of extra stuff.

Not perfect but simple, loud, accurate and great sounding.
 
#19
I think it is important to try out whatever amp you are gonna get before you purchase it. I have never needed a preamp with my Iamp. I have used it mainly for straight ahead jazz gigs and the bass sound is great and natural with my old realist and Epifani Ul210. I don't turn the amp up that loud and I get most of my sound from my bass, so I mainly use the amp to boost my stage volume a little and get a very clean signal to the house. That being said, I still have not had the best of luck cranking it up really loud with my realist pickup when I am not in the house. However, with my Underwood it will get very loud and still sound good (but underwoody). I guess my point is, that every bass is different and you have to try a lot of stuff out to find out what works for you and your bass. I have found that EA amps are very natural sounding and give me the most acoustic sounding amp sound with the least amount of knob tweaking. I am waiting to get a copy of some live recordings I 've done recently so that I can attempt to post some sound clips. Good luck on your purchase.

Joel
 
#20
I certainly understand why phase-reversal and high-pass filtering are desirable features, the inclusion or exclusion of which may cause one to prefer one product or another.

Now let's discuss sonic characteristics. Uncletoad finds the iAmp "bottom heavy." Well, that's a matter of frequency response. The iAmp has an extremely useful, versatile, and flexible parametric equalizer. No offense meant to anyone, but with so much flexibility, it is well worth learning to use it correctly. Often, the presence of so many controls leads to poorer sound than would otherwise be achieved if those controls are placed in the hands of those who are not facile with them. I do understand that some would rather buy a different amplifier than deal with "all those knobs."

Given its parametric eq, there is no reason for the iAmp to sound "bottom heavy" with any cabinet you are likely to choose. I am confident that "bottom heavy" is not a characteristic of the amplifying circuit even when one considers the interactions of that circuit with the reactive load of a loudspeaker.

So often in these threads, issues that plagued the hi-fi community decades ago seem to be recapitulated. Some may be surprised to learn that the vast majority of perceived differences attributed to amplifiers are really matters of frequency response! This has been demonstrated time and time again.

===================================
Geek-speak section: Yes, I do understand the effects of damping factor and power envelope. I stand by my comments above.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back