Dismiss Notice

Psst... Ready to join TalkBass and start posting, make new friends, sell your gear, and more?  Register your free account in 30 seconds.

Walter Woods: FYI (Duh!)

Discussion in 'Amps, Mics & Pickups [DB]' started by anonymous0726, Sep 26, 2004.


  1. anonymous0726

    anonymous0726 Guest

    Nov 4, 2001
    I just learned how to use the danmed thing. Here's what I've found.

    In most applications with higher-end equipment where you have pre and post volumes with the preamp (or at least pre-gain into the preamp and master for the amplifier,etc.) I've always been of the school to load the preamp just short of clipping and then using the master volume to adjust the output volume.

    With the WW amp I just figured out that if you do it this way you get a mushy and overly-present (compressed?) sound. I tried setting the master volume up, to 6-7ish in my case, and then using the preamp volume to adjust output volume. Below 1 the sound is a little non-present, but in the 2-4 range I get and incredible airy and much more accurate sound out of the thing. This worked exactly the same on both the green-light and amber-light models that I had in my house the other day, through a couple of different cabinets and with different instruments (slabs and bass).

    Now my fiddle with the FullCircle, through the Woods and into the Ampeg sounds RFG and I've also gained a lot of headroom volume-wise before infinite-sustain and feedback start creeping in. I also have enough control over the tone that I can set the cabinet on the floor without uncontrollable bottom end.
     
  2. My experience has been that active electronic systems work best if the levels get progressively higher along the signal chain. True of PA systems, instrument amps, home stereos. Passive slab pickups or DB piezos, keep the initial signal level as high as possible, but gradually increase the levels through processing gear, preamps, etc., and run the final power amp stage as near wide open as possible without clipping.
    My little GK MB150 works best with the master volume higher than the gain.
     
  3. tombowlus

    tombowlus If it sounds good, it is good Gold Supporting Member

    Apr 3, 2003
    North central Ohio
    Editor-in-Chief, Bass Gear Magazine
    I agree that knob-twiddling on the WW is a bit different than on other amps. I had also grown acustomed to either maxing the preamp gain, or at least setting it 50%+, but with the WW, this is not the best approach - especially with active instruments. In general, though, following Walter's labelling ("passive" up to "active") has proven to be fairly spot on. Based upon your results, though, I'm going to have to try craking the master gain up a bit and twiddling the preamp gain.

    Thanks for sharing!

    Tom.
     
  4. anonymous0726

    anonymous0726 Guest

    Nov 4, 2001
    Former amps that I worked a lot with were a GK MB200 -- the original Polytone killer, and with these it made almost no difference at all what the ratio from pre-to-post was. With a couple of Trace Elliot amps that I had, if you didn't load the preamp really thick -- just short of clipping -- the sound would be thin and brittle. With the PA systems that I used to mess with (long time ago), my general recollection is that going low-gain on input levels would give you feedback headroom (with mics) at the cost of presence.

    I'm a little confused at your response, Eric. You mean that you find that what I'm doing with the WW seems typical? Also, the three instruments that I tried this with were a Fender Jazz -- passive, newer high-end modern slab with Active (Bartonlini) pickup and onboard preamp, and my bass with the FullCircle pickup.
     
  5. tombowlus

    tombowlus If it sounds good, it is good Gold Supporting Member

    Apr 3, 2003
    North central Ohio
    Editor-in-Chief, Bass Gear Magazine
    BTW, Ray, my Walter Woods Ultra sounds phenomenal with the Hevos Midget! It's my current rig of choice for almost any situation. I've never heard something so small, sound so good, or get so loud!

    Tom.
     
  6. anonymous0726

    anonymous0726 Guest

    Nov 4, 2001
    Very cool! Just remember to go through and tighten things up now and then when you're playing loud a lot. The corners especially like to try to escape if you aren't paying attention to them. They will rattle a bit a gig or two before that actually fly to coop, though, which is helpful.

    It is a great little cabinet. I'm happier with the 12" for my bass and have a decent 15" for electric. I'm glad the Midget found love.
     
  7. brianrost

    brianrost Gold Supporting Member

    Apr 26, 2000
    Boston, Taxachusetts
    Another WW trick I was hipped to here at TB in another thread is that the "send mix" knob on the Electroacoustic amps acts as a low mid boost if you're NOT using the loop. I use it all the time for slab, it's like instant FAT.
     
  8. anonymous0726

    anonymous0726 Guest

    Nov 4, 2001
    I'm going to definitely check that out next time I have my stuff plugged together!
     
  9. anonymous0726

    anonymous0726 Guest

    Nov 4, 2001
    Verified! Damn -- now instead of a million different tone variations on the thing I now realize there must be gazillions!

    At any rate -- as I get a hold of this tiger's tail I can see where you can REALLY dial in just what you need for the room...
     
  10. On an old thread that I can't find I remember reading that on that two channel model, one of the channels was supposedly voiced more appropriately for electric, while the other was more suited to DB. Can anyone verify this, and if true which was which?

    Merci.
     
  11. anonymous0726

    anonymous0726 Guest

    Nov 4, 2001
    I've seen note of this and I think it was for an older model -- the series he was making in the 80's?
     
  12. brianrost

    brianrost Gold Supporting Member

    Apr 26, 2000
    Boston, Taxachusetts
    I own an MI-225-8 from the 80s and yes, the two channels do sound very different. Channel 1 seems to be for bass guitar, the bass EQ is voiced very wide and the midrange EQ is tuned pretty low so it actually fattens up the sound nicely overall. Channel 2 sounds better for DB to my ears with a narrower range on the bass EQ and the midrange is well tuned to control the nasal honk of piezo pickups. I'm curious what the EQ on single channel models from that era was like.

    The two channels on my Electroacoustic HiPower head DO sound the same and (not surprisingly) very different from either channel of the MI-225-8. It sounds more dynamic overall and brighter/airier. I will say that I find the midrange EQ not tuned as well for DB to MY ears...I set the sweep to the highest frequency and have to cut mids quite a bit where on the MI-225-8 I often leave mids flat on the DB channel! For bass guitar I use the send mix to get some of the low mid thickness I got from the MI-225-8 BG channel.
     
  13. Sam Sherry

    Sam Sherry Inadvertent Microtonalist Supporting Member

    Sep 26, 2001
    Portland, ME
    Euphonic Audio "Player"
    I have a 1982 WW-1. When I got it (in 1995) Walter Woods told me that I had "the old string bass model" which apparently had both channels voiced for DB. They both sound alike to my not-too-discriminating ear.

    I've always used Channel 1. Maybe that's why I play out of tune . . .
     
  14. anonymous0726

    anonymous0726 Guest

    Nov 4, 2001
    Channel 1 is for those who play sharp. If you're playing flat you may want to switch to channel 2....
     
  15. I own a 1982 2 channel model Walter hand delivered to me in California when I was on the road[Did you get the T-Shirt!!]
    Mine is about the same as Sam's,but yes the two channels are voiced diferrently.
    My big Woods trick is running two different DB pickups out of Phase[The newer models have no Phase switch] one in each channel for the fattest Db sound you can get.Been doing this for many years and it solves all the diferent rooms I play w. a consistant sound.All I have to worry about is the Music....