TFB vs WT800B

[pickles]

I'd be curious when the last time you T-funk folks tried an SWR head was? I had been using a WT-1000 for a long time, so I figured I'd love a WT-800B ... I even went so far as to sell the WT-1000 to backfill the funding. That turned out to be a bad move, since I didn't end up digging the tone of the Eden head ... I'd rather have an SM-900!

The Eden head sounded objectively very good with my Eden cabs, but while it was slanted a bit toward a rock tone, I still felt like I needed my BDDI to get a big warm tube sound ... and with the BDDI off it didn't nail a crispy slap tone as well as the SWR can.

I also didn't feel that the Eden agreed with my P-basses. Can't quite put my finger on why, but it made them sound congested and honky.

So viva la difference!

 

[KJung]

I'd be curious when the last time you T-funk folks tried an SWR head was? I had been using a WT-1000 for a long time, so I figured I'd love a WT-800B ... I even went so far as to sell the WT-1000 to backfill the funding. That turned out to be a bad move, since I didn't end up digging the tone of the Eden head ... I'd rather have an SM-900!

The Eden head sounded objectively very good with my Eden cabs, but while it was slanted a bit toward a rock tone, I still felt like I needed my BDDI to get a big warm tube sound ... and with the BDDI off it didn't nail a crispy slap tone as well as the SWR can.

I also didn't feel that the Eden agreed with my P-basses. Can't quite put my finger on why, but it made them sound congested and honky.

So viva la difference!

+1 to the above. I used an SWR900 with GoliathIII for my 'large gig rig' for a couple of years and totally dug it. I never liked the SM400-500 thing much (too deep, wide, and sizzly on top), and was also underwhelmed with the 350/550/750 line (just bad all the way around IMO... volume, build quality, tone... everything). But the older 900's bridged into a good cab really sounded good to me.... crisper and quicker than the Eden stuff, but with some warm grit to the tone that was 'less woolly' sounding to me than the Eden warm. All good stuff though.

However, per Steve's comment of the TF being a sort of newer SWR thing... I'm not really hearing that. The TF does not have any of that signature SWR high end treble clarity, and also is totally clean sounding to me. However, maybe Steve has a point, since I was happy with the SWR900 tone and am now very happy with the TF tone.... both are quicker and more 'precise sounding' to my ear than the Eden WT series heads.

That being said, as I always post, I could be very happy playing a WT800 and 410XLT... that to me is the magic combination for that brand, and I guess there's no surprise that it's been one of the most popular backline touring rigs for many, many years!

K

 

[bugbass]

+1 to the above. I used an SWR900 with GoliathIII for my 'large gig rig' for a couple of years and totally dug it. I never liked the SM400-500 thing much (too deep, wide, and sizzly on top), and was also underwhelmed with the 350/550/750 line (just bad all the way around IMO... volume, build quality, tone... everything). But the older 900's bridged into a good cab really sounded good to me.... crisper and quicker than the Eden stuff, but with some warm grit to the tone that was 'less woolly' sounding to me than the Eden warm. All good stuff though.

However, per Steve's comment of the TF being a sort of newer SWR thing... I'm not really hearing that. The TF does not have any of that signature SWR high end treble clarity, and also is totally clean sounding to me. However, maybe Steve has a point, since I was happy with the SWR900 tone and am now very happy with the TF tone.... both are quicker and more 'precise sounding' to my ear than the Eden WT series heads.

That being said, as I always post, I could be very happy playing a WT800 and 410XLT... that to me is the magic combination for that brand, and I guess there's no surprise that it's been one of the most popular backline touring rigs for many, many years!

K

THe SM900 is a really good amp IMO, it always sound good without thouching the eq.
With the wt800b I was always tweaking eq, and often ended up playing very loud to hear myself.
The Eden has now been replaced with a MarkBass LMII, and this little amp makes me very happy.

 

[nad]

I'd be curious when the last time you T-funk folks tried an SWR head was?

I sold my SWR head to fund a ThunderFunk and have never looked back, except maybe in subdued anger.

 

[chiplexic]

The other bass I brought, a new to me G&L SB2 is a great bass, much brighter and harder cutting than the L2Ke...sweeeet.

For sure...I can't think of an amp-cab combination out there that a SB-2 couldn't rip you through the mix. I find with my 84' L2k that what pickup setting sounds nice ,rich and smooth in a home practice setting(say, just neck pickup) usually won't cut through in a load jam. I find myself switching to both pickups in series and dropping some bass boost on the L2k.

 

[joegeezer]

I think all the wooliness is the tube pre. I wish you guys could try my rig. I use the WT-405. I think the Eden SS pre is much better than the tube pre. If I need more push, I have it hooked to a Carvin DCM2000. 700 per channel at 4 ohms. Then it wakes right up. Very tight. Very EQable. I haven't gotten to try a Thunderfunk, but as I have read here, they sound very similar to the WT405. The little WTX260, is the same pre. I'm sure they would make a great set-up also. Just my 2 cents. I love the fact that the setup is so modular, in the fact that I can use any cab setup I need , and any power arangement I need for any situation, from 250 to 2000 watts all in one package.