• 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.

UL 502 vs. TF 550

S

SonofJud

Dec 12, 2006
107
0
San Francisco
#1
Hi,
I constantly see these two amps brought up in similar threads, paired with the UL 410, and named "the best head you can buy". I currently use a Sadowsky UV70-5, and I wonder which of these two would be a better fit for my bass. Any info on the Ps600 would also be appreciated. Sorry this isn't a poll, I couldn't figure out how to do that yet.
Thanks
:D
 
#2
i've owned both, gigged with both, and happened to sell both. some thoughts...

overall tonally, the UL502 has a very glossy, almost glassy hifi sound to it. the TFB does an ok hifi sort of sound w/ the timbre knob, but i find its not nearly as 3D sounding. also, found the top end boosts a little harsh compared to the sweeter sounds of the 502.

on the other hand, the TFB really excels at dialing in a "warm, fat vintage" kinda sound w/ the timbre knob. just turn left and you're done. really, that's all that there is to it. w/ the 502, its really hard to find that vintage warm sound. with certain basses, i have to turn the treble knob all the way off, dial in the right para-mid EQ, and dial that almost off, AND i even have to turn down the tweeters on my cab!

flexibility wise, gotta chalk it up to the 502. having two channels is especially nice, cause you can flip btwn sounds, basses, what have you. no more unplugging when i'm going from my NS Wav electric upright to my regular bass. also, i really like the footswitch w/ the epifani. lights up real bright, and uses a simple XLR, so i can vary the lengths for small stages to really large outdoor ones.

EQ wise, while the TFB has lots of knobs to twiddle that's great for the tweaker in me, you can find a decent sound using just the enhance and timbre knobs to your liking. the only downside, sometimes i feel like the cut/boost arent quite as dramatic as i'd like. on the 502, simplicity is on the familiar 1st channel's treb, mid, bass knobs, which are voiced quite nicely. only downside on the 502 is that the 2nd channel's midrange freq. sweep knob doesnt quite go as far into the low mids as i'd like. i.e. the lows knob on the 502 gives you a room rattling low end boost, but its hard to dial in that fattening, thicker sounding bass boost.

all in all, i still love both amps, and currently am a bit more on the epifani side of things with my constant companion, the UL902.
 
#3
jokerjkny said:
i've owned both, gigged with both, and happened to sell both. some thoughts...

overall tonally, the UL502 has a very glossy, almost glassy hifi sound to it. the TFB does an ok hifi sort of sound w/ the timbre knob, but i find its not nearly as 3D sounding. also, found the top end boosts a little harsh compared to the sweeter sounds of the 502.

on the other hand, the TFB really excels at dialing in a "warm, fat vintage" kinda sound w/ the timbre knob. just turn left and you're done. really, that's all that there is to it. w/ the 502, its really hard to find that vintage warm sound. with certain basses, i have to turn the treble knob all the way off, dial in the right para-mid EQ, and dial that almost off, AND i even have to turn down the tweeters on my cab!

flexibility wise, gotta chalk it up to the 502. having two channels is especially nice, cause you can flip btwn sounds, basses, what have you. no more unplugging when i'm going from my NS Wav electric upright to my regular bass. also, i really like the footswitch w/ the epifani. lights up real bright, and uses a simple XLR, so i can vary the lengths for small stages to really large outdoor ones.

EQ wise, while the TFB has lots of knobs to twiddle that's great for the tweaker in me, you can find a decent sound using just the enhance and timbre knobs to your liking. the only downside, sometimes i feel like the cut/boost arent quite as dramatic as i'd like. on the 502, simplicity is on the familiar 1st channel's treb, mid, bass knobs, which are voiced quite nicely. only downside on the 502 is that the 2nd channel's midrange freq. sweep knob doesnt quite go as far into the low mids as i'd like. i.e. the lows knob on the 502 gives you a room rattling low end boost, but its hard to dial in that fattening, thicker sounding bass boost.

all in all, i still love both amps, and currently am a bit more on the epifani side of things with my constant companion, the UL902.
Click to expand...

So is the EQ on the 902 the same as the 502?
 
#4
joker-awesome review. i would still liek to AB these heads somehow, as they have been the 2 i was thiking about going to when i make my next move amp wise. i lie the idea of articulate and glassy highs, but i need th ability to dial in that meaty lower mid tone....thick, if you will....so that makes me lean even more towards the TF, which i was already thinking of as my next head. thanks for the review!
 
#5
I'd agree with joker's assessment for the most part.
I personally felt the TF was 'punchier', and while I never got a sound I *loved* out of the UL502 I got my sound sound out of the TF within about a minute. I tend to go more for a punchy sound more than a hi-fi sound, so I think as usual it's just different strokes for different folks - both great amps!
 
#6
I have had both....and I have had the UL410....I sold my UL502 and kept the T-Funk....:cool: The T-funk is overall the best amp out there in a lot of ways I thnk and so far seems to work well with any cab I have used it with...If I could just get the size of sound I get with a DB750 out of my T-Funk......I'd probably marry it....SERIOUSLY! LOL! :cool:

Peace,

T
 
#8
I REALLY need to try out the UL-502 sometime soon. Joker, you mentioned that it's hard to get the warm, vintage type tone out of the Epi...is this true even for jazz basses when you can use a passive treble rolloff?
 
#9
I had a 550 and currently have a PS600. I MUCH prefer the Epifani. Everybody has different definitions of "warmth" and "punch". I find the Epi to be warm and clear with a very nice top end. I can't make it sound harsh. The TF to me has more of the typical solid state "harshness" that just doesn't appeal to me. Don't get me wrong, the TF is a great amp and sounds really good but just not what I like. I'm curious about the comment about the mid-sweep of the UL502. What is the frequency range?
 
#10
I've got a 502 also, had the Thunderfunk, which is a fantastic head in its own right. I basically am just going to agree with everyone else's sentiments here, particularly Dave's "different strokes" comment. That's what it's going to come down to here, a personal preference thing, as these two amps are two different tone colors - two shades of awesome, in my opinion. I lean towards the hi-fi thang myself and couldn't quite get the pristine sound out of the TFB that I can from the 502. Jason, I'd say that you can get that vintagey vibe from the 502 with the passive tone, but I probably lean more towards a "hi-fi vintage" tone (:confused:, if such a thing exists) so for the true vintage enthusiasts (Tommixx comes to mind ;)) the 502 might not cut it on the vintage front.

My vote - sell the house, take out a line of credit and then buy the TFB, the 502, an Aguilar DB750, Glockenklang Heart Rock, a Crest CA9/Millenia pre, an SVT, a Demeter VTHF-300M/Glockenklang Bass Art Classic, and this:
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
and you should have every tone you could possibly want (and some you don't) covered.














:hiding:
 
#11
gruuv said:
...My vote - sell the house, take out a line of credit and then buy the TFB, the 502, an Aguilar DB750, Glockenklang Heart Rock, a Crest CA9/Millenia pre, an SVT, a Demeter VTHF-300M/Glockenklang Bass Art Classic, and this:
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
and you should have every tone you could possibly want (and some you don't) covered.


:hiding:
Click to expand...

LOL!!
Were you the winning bidder on that jewel? Is that the 'new' PV line of micro amps.:D
 
#13
jmain said:
LOL!!
Were you the winning bidder on that jewel? Is that the 'new' PV line of micro amps.:D
Click to expand...

Nope, the $48 winning bid was more than I wanted to spend. :smug:

TNT UL!!!
lol-003.gif
 
#18
Great review, Joker! I can definitely see how the UL-502 and TFB-550B kinda serve different needs/preferences. Both are very worthy performers, in my book.

And yes, tommixx, the Thunderfunk front end with the DB 750 output section is pretty darned amazing! I've tried the AMP SL-1 into the 750's output stage, and boy howdy! That there's got some wallop! :bassist: Hmmm... I'll have to try the Quest II into the 750's power amp in. :D Of course, either pre into the CA9 is nice as well. :cool: Heavy, but nice.

Tom.
 
#19
tombowlus said:
I'll have to try the Quest II into the 750's power amp in. :D Of course, either pre into the CA9 is nice as well. :cool: Heavy, but nice.
Click to expand...

I forgot that you have the Quest II...at the GTG we'll have to run it into the power amp in of the Thunderfunk so I can compare the two with my 310UL. I've been dying to try out the Epifani heads!
 
#20
Lots of good info and reviews on these two heads already in this thread, I'll add my 0.02 after owning a TFB-420 (which I understand to be very similar to the 550 tonally aside from 'the switch') and 502.

Both excellent amps IMO, I personally prefer the sound I was getting from the Epi UL-502. The primary thing I preferred was the hi- and lo- end: the TFunk's voicing had a prominent bump in the hi-mids (similar to my ears to an Eden or SWR - no big surprise there), while the 502 was smoother / 'cleaner' in the high end and had a bit more bottom. Note: this is with moderate EQ'ing on both amps.

And flexibility-wise, I love 2-channel design, so it was a no-brainer for me, but both are great amps.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back