Tonehammer vs AG = Eden vs SWR?

[The Golden Boy]

I'm still dithering about what amp to get.

For the sake of an old person comparison that I can sort of wrap my head around - is this sort of right in the neighborhood of the difference between the AG and Tonehammer heads would be sort of like the difference between old Eden vs SWR heads?

 

[57pbass]

IME.. The AG will get you a clean sound and the TH will get you some grinding if you want it. Both great heads but each with different features.

 

[Sparkl]

I'm still dithering about what amp to get.

For the sake of an old person comparison that I can sort of wrap my head around - is this sort of right in the neighborhood of the difference between the AG and Tonehammer heads would be sort of like the difference between old Eden vs SWR heads?

What music do you play?

 

[Nebadon2000]

I'm still dithering about what amp to get.

For the sake of an old person comparison that I can sort of wrap my head around - is this sort of right in the neighborhood of the difference between the AG and Tonehammer heads would be sort of like the difference between old Eden vs SWR heads?

In your perception what was difference between Eden and SWR?

 

[SC Bassboy]

In your perception what was difference between Eden and SWR?

Dude... that's like trying to describe the difference between shades of white paint. One was interior grade, one was for exterior, but bass-ically the same color

 

[Nuisance]

Cabs make the bigger difference in sound. IMHO the difference between the TH and AG are:

1. Four band EQ versus Three band with a para
2. TH has a drve circuit, AG is clean only.

Most heads you can EQ to your liking one way or another. The big differentiator is the cab.

 

[31HZ]

Sorta. TH sat a bit better in the mix than AG for me, but the Eden can do anything whereas the SWR (SM-400) didn't have nearly as powerful an EQ or as good a midrange as the Eden heads.

 

[dfp]

TH is famously attenuated in the highs, for some it’s critically lacking in top end, but to some it’s key to the “warmth” of its sound. The AG is more “full range” by comparison, but to my ear is still somewhat attenuated in the highs vs an Ampeg or GK or Fender amp.

 

[Thumpin6string]

Not sure what the Eden vs SWR comparison is, but they are NOT even similar in tone at all IMHO. Edens have their own baked in tone while the SWRs seemed to be more sterile (for a lack of a better word). For the record, my main amp is an Eden WT550. As for the other 2, I owned an AG500 for a short time but not a Tone Hammer. I found the AG to be an average sounding amp, but not my cup of tea. If you want to compare the 2 Aguilars, there are some videos on YouTube.

 

[Mastiff_5]

No. To my ear, that’s 4 different tonal pallets. I appreciate the wizened perspective that engenders this question/comparison though!!
The Eden is (imho) the most unique and recognizable of the 4. It’s mid-freq qualities just ARE that Eden sound, particularly when using Eden head and cabs. I don’t find any of the others to be in the same flavor category.
If I were to say any two of the three you put forward were in a similar/same category of bass flavor goodness, I suppose the AG and the SWR would be. But frankly, if the reliability (due to age) were not an issue, I’d take most SWR front ends over any Aggie unit. I think May of them had a special sauce to them that made them powerful and sculpt able. I have played most everything over the years (aside from Eich and a few others), and for what it’s worth, Mesa is king for me. A Subway head is prime in my book, and if I were playing solely blues or blues-flavored rock, I would still be playing a Genz Benz Streamliner 900.
I believe the newer tube-front Mesa head likely combines the two.
I run a Subway D800 (still my fav) through a pair of GK Neo IV 1x12 cabs and I couldn’t be happier.
The GK gets me the clarity of my old SWR cabs, the Mesa gets me the presence and power of old Eden heads with a specifically ‘Mesa’ tonal authority. If any of that makes sense.
I don’t know anything about the new Eden gear. But I do know I’ve never been keen on the Aggie heads.

 

[Pocket Dave]

As mentioned, 4 different animals, though with some overlap.

SWR's I've played were clear sounding - almost clinical - kind of like a GK without the growl when pushed hard.

Only Eden I've got experience with was a WT - almost Hi-Fi, tight upper mids. Cut through a band mix nicely while providing authority to support the bottom.

I've used an AG-700 as backline - dialed in close to the Eden WT, maybe not as much ultra high end reach for slap as the Eden.

Aguilar Tone Hammer 500/700 - probably the least like the other three. Does the vintage, driven Ampeg B-15 and SVT thing well, though much more modern attack/mid forward capable. While it can get close to the AG-700 by completely rolling off the gain, its high frequencies don't have the same reach. Think Jaco-cranked-Acoustic-360+361PP tones at any volume.

 

[bigdaddybass12]

Sorry, this not the answer you want, all sound like good amps, I have owned a few SWR’s. But all of these cabs are getting old. Plus could be heavy. If you play out be sure to have a backup.

 

[RomanS]

ToneHammer - vintage tube tone, slightly compressed, soft attack, slightly less treble; slightly "woolly"; perfect for the "classic" tones of the 50s, 60s and 70s, no matter whether it's country, soul/R&B, rock'n'roll, blues, jazz,... One of very few contemporary non-tube amps that can do that tone convincingly, perfect if you want to sound like that, but don't love having to carry around heavy SVT, Fender Bassman or Orange heads.

AG - just another flavor of a modern, neutral, transparent solid state amp; I never really understood the reasoning behind this model, there are a ton of other contemporary bass amps that can do this type of tone out there already, it isn't as unique as the ToneHammer at all. You might just as well get a GK, MarkBass, Genzler, Eich, Trace Elliot, Peavey, Hartke, whatever, whereas you'd have a hard time finding another solid state amp that does tube tones as well as the ToneHammer (maybe Quiler, never had a chance to try one?)

Yeah, I'm a huge ToneHammer fanboy...

 

[The Golden Boy]

What music do you play?

My main gig these days is a Stones tribute band.

My main amp is an SWR SM-900 and my main cab is a late 80s/early 90s SWR Triad which I sometimes combine with a matching Goliath. For "festival" type outdoor stages without backline I have an SWR 2x15 cab which I use less and less these days. Bottom line is I like the sound of 15s pushed hard.

I've had the Goliath and Triad since the mid 90s, the SM-900 and 2x15 around the turn of the century...

 

[The Golden Boy]

In your perception what was difference between Eden and SWR?

In my perception- back in the day- you had tube amps, you had clean solid state amps (SWR) and you had "warm" solid state amps (Eden). I think "wooly" was always the word used to describe the Eden WT amps. I liked the SWR "glassy" sound breaking up speakers.

 

[SJan3]

ToneHammer - vintage tube tone, slightly compressed, soft attack, slightly less treble; slightly "woolly"; perfect for the "classic" tones of the 50s, 60s and 70s, no matter whether it's country, soul/R&B, rock'n'roll, blues, jazz,... One of very few contemporary non-tube amps that can do that tone convincingly, perfect if you want to sound like that, but don't love having to carry around heavy SVT, Fender Bassman or Orange heads.

AG - just another flavor of a modern, neutral, transparent solid state amp; I never really understood the reasoning behind this model, there are a ton of other contemporary bass amps that can do this type of tone out there already, it isn't as unique as the ToneHammer at all. You might just as well get a GK, MarkBass, Genzler, Eich, Trace Elliot, Peavey, Hartke, whatever, whereas you'd have a hard time finding another solid state amp that does tube tones as well as the ToneHammer (maybe Quiler, never had a chance to try one?)

Yeah, I'm a huge ToneHammer fanboy...

I own both Tonehammer and AG heads. I agree with your assessment of the Tonehammer but you cut the AG short, IMHO. The AG is warmer than other amps you mentioned and can get thick when pushing the Gain. It also does a great job of producing fat Lows and smooth Highs. The Mids are well chosen for shaping. The Treble and Bass boost buttons really work.
And it has major headroom. If you love the tone of your bass, you'll love the AG. Extremely flexible amp.

 

[The Golden Boy]

Cabs make the bigger difference in sound. IMHO the difference between the TH and AG are:

1. Four band EQ versus Three band with a para
2. TH has a drve circuit, AG is clean only.

Most heads you can EQ to your liking one way or another. The big differentiator is the cab.

And this is where I get into the analysis paralysis...

I use a "clean" head to play not clean stuff. Will I be able to do that with the AG? Is it "warm" enough?

Like you said- I'm sure I could make it do what I want it to do. But...

 

[The Golden Boy]

Not sure what the Eden vs SWR comparison is, but they are NOT even similar in tone at all IMHO.

Which is exactly the gist of the thread.

They're relatively dissimilar sounding amps-

Are the AG and TH relatively dissimilar sounding?

 

[JamesGrant]

Easy - SWR - heavy and big and tall. Nice knobs.
Eden, heavy, not as tall, but sharp edges. Plastic knobs look like cheap plastic junk but somehow have charm.

Does that help?

 

[Pocket Dave]

Which is exactly the gist of the thread.

They're relatively dissimilar sounding amps-

Are the AG and TH relatively dissimilar sounding?

Yes. Same bones, different muscle mass - definitely different attitude.

The AG is clean, fast, no cushion - tells the truth whether you like it or not.

The TH has a little give - mids forward, slight hair when you lean in.

I’m in the TH camp. Could still gig the AG and have a good night.

Most pick a side and stay there. .