• 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.

Show your Epifani setups!!!

#265
The Diaper Geni said:
Can you hear me now??
Click to expand...

Awesome!!! Some really nice Epi setups.

I've been playing my UL2/PS112 cabs this morning doing some side by side using my Focus 2. UL2 is more articulate in the mids but has great low end too. The PS has less mids but nice low mids. Main difference is the UL2 projects more. Also, the UL2 has more 'grind' to the sound, while the PS is smoother sounding. Maybe it's the neo, maybe the mids, maybe both.

edit: I love both of these cabs.
 
#266
jokerjkny said:
wow,

very cool rigs! and yea, like Hou asked, how do the bergs stack up (no pun!) to the epifani (1x12)x2 rig?
Click to expand...

Thanks! Now that I've had them for a while I feel like I can really give an informed opinion. Like so many others here, I too have found the WWU to be a great match for the Bergs. They like the Quest/2.1 setup too but not as much as the Woods. With the Bergs, I either use both or none at all. Just one of them by itself has always sounded harsh to me for some reason. When there's two of them there's plenty of the whole spectrum coming through but there's still a remnant of harshness that I can't seem to dial out.

With the Epifanis, there's none of that harshness that I find in the Bergs. I like to be able to add the edge to my sound rather than have to subtract it. There's also something very different going on in the low end. The Epi's sound pretty consistent over their volume range where as the Bergs' low end tends to shine only once they're fed a respectable amount of volume. The Bergs seem more midrange-y and direct in comparison, with a narrower dispersion pattern which is especially noticeable (and sometimes bothersome) on stage. The Epi's are fuller at all volumes and seem to have a more neutral midrange response. Their dispersion also seems wider and on stage, I hear pretty much the same sound regardless of which direction I'm facing and I like that.

Not only do I like the sound of the Epifani Neos but I also like their weight too! Once or twice a week I have to schlepp amplification to rehearsals and gigs and that has made me and the UL-112 best buddies. In fact, unless I'm playing a huge stage and/or I'm outdoors or something, a single UL-112 covers every gig I do, both acoustic and electric. In rehearsal/jam situations I go even smaller and take a UL-110 when I just need to be heard. The UL-110 is also my choice for DB-only gigs. Being that I often hand-carry my gear to gigs, I must weigh the tone vs. volume vs. weight issue regularly and the Epifani UL's get the job done.
 
#269
Epifani2.gif

EpifaniFull.gif

DSC014292.gif




Finally got some pics up.

I might direct you here as well......

http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showthread.php?p=3879885#post3879885




:hiding:
 
#275
savinggrace said:
Well I am actually thinking about adding a 310UL or 410UL to my T-212! The only problem is that my current amp cant handle it. (At least not until Dave Thunderfunk puts out a pre-amp!) I think a 310UL would be more balanced and wouldn't override the T-212's tonal characteristics...
Click to expand...

Or just may add a 115. Not gigging tons right now, so I'm even getting ahead of myself here! ;)
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back