• 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 Unusual situation...Clarus/Wizzy success

#22
jgregpegleg said:
Any A/B comparison between the m line and the standard wizzy?
Click to expand...
If I ever get around to it.

The EA site has kind of a standard blurb I think, or maybe it was Bob Gollihur or Steve Clark's site - The M-line goes "deeper", and has less of an upper-mid push. To me (thus far), the real difference is in the off-axis dispersion with the M-line TL and those side "ports" or "vents". Overall it creates a tone that is a little smoother, a little more lush and full perhaps. Very cool tone - but that said, I still like the slightly more focused sound of the original Wizzer equally as much.

Tom Bowlus must have A/B'ed these somewhere. He is more eloquent and more well-qualified to compare and contrast cabs than I am. And I think Mike Childree has used both Wizzys too. I'd have to search a bit for Mike's comments though.

I betcha there might be more posts about the M-line over on the other side of TB, or maybe on thedudepit.com, but I can't say for sure. Then again, they only made 50 of them in the original limited production run, I think.
 
#24
I wanted to kinda get back on the main point here and just say I agree w/ tornado's original remarks. IME there is something that my EA cabs have that allows them to perform well even in problematic settings and perform fairly consistently from room to room.

Did a gig today in a room I had never worked in before with a rhythm section accompanying a troupe of about 40 female singers. "South Pacific", "Quien Sera (Sway)", Cole Porter, Gershwin, even a Hank Williams tune. I just set the Wizzy combo up in a corner, up on a stand, w/ the EQ flat. Lots and lots of compliments after the show.
 
#25
Okay...next up for the Clarus/Wizzy rig are two gigs on upright (rather than EUB or slab) playing old school blues with harp, guitar and shared vocals. The first is at a small restaurant with boomy acoustics (is that just the norm now?) and the second at a small art gallery during a silent auction (how do you play if it's silent?).

Just testing things out a bit at home, I'm able to get a clear, smooth sound from my American Standard with RSII pickup, no preamp (don't think the Clarus needs one...ahhhh!), bass slightly down, mids and highs slightly up, HP filter on with the knob at about 10 o'clock. I'm still deciding between using a chair or crate, or just using the Wizzy on its tilt-back handle.
 
#26
bolo said:
Tom Bowlus must have A/B'ed these somewhere. He is more eloquent and more well-qualified to compare and contrast cabs than I am.
Click to expand...

You, sir, are far too kind. :D

I'll try to find those other 'reviews', but basically, to my ears, the M-line Wizzy goes deeper and has stronger low end output, the midrange is a bit more refined and not quite as 'mid-present', and the highs (which should sound identical) seem to my ears to be just at tad more apparent and clear (though this may be just the effect of hearing relatively less midrange). The regular Wizzy, by comparison, is a bit more warm and vintagey, and a tad more punchy through the mids.

That is my take on those two in a nutshell, with a heavy dose of IME/IMHO and YMMV.

Tom.
 
#28
I did have both M-Line and regular Wizzys for a short time...about a week, so temper my comments with the fact that I did only one gig with the WizzyM and some in-home testing with both. My ears agree with Tom's...extended lows from the M-line and a tad more scooped. But in the end, I honestly didn't hear enough difference to make me want to sell either of my regular Wizzys for an M-line. At the time, the M-lines weren't being manufactured (I'd had a prototype loaner). When they decided to offer them, it had been long enough that any benefit I remembered seemed a bit inconsequential and I never bit.

I'm still very happy with my regular Wizzy pair. However, I have a set of similar-sized Bill Fitzmaurice Omni 10's in the works....
 
#29
bolo said:
There, see. What he said.

robgrow has the regular and M-line Wizzys as well (I think). I'll send him a PM and see if he wants to chime in.
Click to expand...
Thanks Steve. Sorry I haven't been around much lately. Pesky job. :rolleyes:

Recently a good friend (and an excellent bassist) and I did a mini shoot out comparing the Wizzy M, the original Wizzy, a VL 208, and his custom 1x15 cab (all driven with our Walter Woods Electracoustic amps). My friend really liked the Wizzy M, and it certainly did sound very good.

Tom Bowlus has written the best description I've read comparing the two Wizzys, however you really have to hear them for yourself to appreciate what that really means I think.

To me, the two Wizzys do sound similar, yet surprisingly different. I admit I'm very fond of the original Wizzy, including its unique "tone." The Wizzy M is more transparent with less midrange coloration and does seem to have a more extended low end as other have commented. Take your pick; they are both excellent speakers.
 
#30
robgrow said:
Thanks Steve. Sorry I haven't been around much lately. Pesky job. :rolleyes:

Recently a good friend (and an excellent bassist) and I did a mini shoot out comparing the Wizzy M, the original Wizzy, a VL 208, and his custom 1x15 cab (all driven with our Walter Woods Electracoustic amps). My friend really liked the Wizzy M, and it certainly did sound very good.

Tom Bowlus has written the best description I've read comparing the two Wizzys, however you really have to hear them for yourself to appreciate what that really means I think.

To me, the two Wizzys do sound similar, yet surprisingly different. I admit I'm very fond of the original Wizzy, including its unique "tone." The Wizzy M is more transparent with less midrange coloration and does seem to have a more extended low end as other have commented. Take your pick; they are both excellent speakers.
Click to expand...

Did you try the regular and the M-line wizzys togeather? I am wondering if the M-line will add a bit of bottom or if pairing them makes the difference too small to notice.
 
#34
robgrow said:
To me, the two Wizzys do sound similar, yet surprisingly different. I admit I'm very fond of the original Wizzy, including its unique "tone." The Wizzy M is more transparent with less midrange coloration and does seem to have a more extended low end as other have commented. Take your pick; they are both excellent speakers.
Click to expand...


+1 And I'll add that the regular Wizzy is definitely one of those cabs that shines in a mix, moreso than on its own (though I like its tone on it's own, too).
 
#35
seanm said:
Did you try the regular and the M-line wizzys togeather? I am wondering if the M-line will add a bit of bottom or if pairing them makes the difference too small to notice.
Click to expand...

If you mean as compared to two regular Wizzy's, then yes, the difference is audible, though not huge. But compared to just one cab (M-line or regular), adding a second has a tremendous impact (this is generally true with most cabs, but for whatever reason, I find the difference more pronounced with the Wizzy's).

Tom.
 
#36
tombowlus said:
If you mean as compared to two regular Wizzy's, then yes, the difference is audible, though not huge. But compared to just one cab (M-line or regular), adding a second has a tremendous impact (this is generally true with most cabs, but for whatever reason, I find the difference more pronounced with the Wizzy's).

Tom.
Click to expand...

Yes, I meant compared to two regular wizzys. I have been relatively bass rig GAS free but have been tempted by the M-line. However, I think I will just stick with my two regular wizzys. They have served me very well.
 
#37
robgrow said:
No. We didn't try the two Wizzys together. One reason is that would have been too low of a load impedance (2 ohms) for our Walter Woods amps which have minimum 4 ohm ratings.
Click to expand...

Ah, I knew there was another good reason besides price when I went for the AI Focus 2R III instead of a WW Electracoustic Ultra. It drives my Wizzy M pair at 2 ohms w/o breaking a sweat. The sound is huge.
That being said, my old mid 80's WW 2 channel MI 225-8 with one Wizzy M has a certain sweet midrange that can't be beat. :bassist: I never tried a regular Wizzy so I can't comment on the pairing of the 2 dif. Wizzy's.

BG
 
#39
seanm said:
The 4 ohm rating is the biggest problem with wizzys. When I was looking for a backup amp for the iAMP, 2 ohm stability was a requirement. I ended up with an Acoustic 370 which is stable down to at least 1.6 ohms.
Click to expand...

My backup solution at this point, were I to get the second Wizzy, is an SWR SM-400, which has two power amps, each happy to run at 4 ohms.
 
#40
seanm said:
Yes, I meant compared to two regular wizzys. I have been relatively bass rig GAS free but have been tempted by the M-line. However, I think I will just stick with my two regular wizzys. They have served me very well.
Click to expand...

Let's put it this way, as much as I am impressed with the M-line Wizzy's, I am not about to sell my regular Wizzy's. :D If you are happy with them, then continue to be so! :bassist:
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back