Double Bass Which EA Combo? iamp500C or iamp800C?

[Jason Hollar]

I know I really like the EA stuff -- but have never played either of these particular combos.

I want a portable, front-firing, high powered combo amp -- primarily for small to medium DB jazz gigs, but also for EB rehearsals and small shows. Hoping to operate the unit as is...self-contained, with no additional speakers.

iamp500C -- under $1,500 new, 45 lbs., 500 watts (@ 4Ohms)

iamp800C -- under $2,000 new, 60lbs., 500 watts (@ 8Ohms), plus wheels and cool trolly system

I realize this topic might be old hat -- but wanted to ask if those of you who bought either of these amps are still enjoying using it -- or if you're moved on to smaller & better things?!

Jason (praying for a big tax refund)

 

[drurb]

I know I really like the EA stuff -- but have never played either of these particular combos.

I want a portable, front-firing, high powered combo amp -- primarily for small to medium DB jazz gigs, but also for EB rehearsals and small shows. Hoping to operate the unit as is...self-contained, with no additional speakers.

iamp500C -- under $1,500 new, 45 lbs., 500 watts (@ 4Ohms)

iamp800C -- under $2,000 new, 60lbs., 500 watts (@ 8Ohms), plus wheels and cool trolly system

I realize this topic might be old hat -- but wanted to ask if those of you who bought either of these amps are still enjoying using it -- or if you're moved on to smaller & better things?!

Jason (praying for a big tax refund)

The most important piece of information you offered is that you do not plan to use an extension speaker. Now, if you truly think that is unlikely, my choice would be neither. Rather, I would opt for the iamp200C and save your money!

Here's why.

Both the iamp200c and the iamp500c use the 4-ohm Wizzy cab. The maximum rated continuous power handling ability of the driver is 200 watts. At that power, it will achieve 126 dB SPL. Yes, the driver can withstand peaks above that level but, then again, the iamp200 can also achieve such peaks in the short term. So, the extra 300 watts (into 4 ohms) that the iamp500C gives you is basically wasted on that driver (if it doesn't smoke it).

The iamp800c uses the 8-ohm CX-112L driver that has a maximum rated input of 350 watts. At that power, it will achieve 128 dB SPL (a whole 2 dB more than the Wizzy can achieve with a 200 watt amp). So, if you bought the iamp800C, you would, again, have an amplifier whose maximum rated power (500 watts into 8 ohm) exceeds the maximum input of the driver with which it is coupled by 150 watts.

Now, if you said that you really prefer the sonic characteristics of the CX-112L driver over the Wizzy, then I'd suggest you buy the CX-112L cab coupled with the iamp500. Why the iamp500? Because, that amp, rated at 350 watts into 8 ohms, will drive the CX-112L cab right to its maximum rated input.

Bottom line. If you're okay with the Wizzy (I have one and really like it), buy the iamp200C. Any more power is a waste if you do not plan to run extension cabs.

Knowledge saves you bucks!

By the way, I have the Wizzy cab and the iamp200 as "separates." I chose this, rather than the combo, so that I could have more flexibility in the future in terms of changing the amp and/or the cab. I really like my little rig!

 

[peterpalmieri]

For what it's worth there is an IAMP200 and wizzy on sale here for $900 seems like that would be more then enough for what your looking to do.

Just thought I'd mention it.

 

[Marcus Johnson]

I have the 800. For what you describe, it works very well. Loud and clean. Sounds great with the DB or the slab. The extra power is most useful when I'm playing slab, and I need to make ears bleed. Sorry, but that's sometimes just my reality.

 

[Jason Hollar]

Doctor,

As always, your posts are informative, appreciated, and grounded in reality -- the numbers don't lie!

I guess I've always been under the assumption that having TOO much power is not a bad thing...

Maybe opting for the extra power could be a bonus in the long run... I know there are many bass players here that use something like the iamp800 combo plus an additional speaker for bigger jobs.

I'm just hoping to find that one combo amp that sounds super solid, has tons of headroom (for low notes and peaks), and one that is relatively easy to tote around. I don't see needing an additional cab for the majority of jazz casuals that I do. Some concerts and dance band gigs, absolutely.

Marcus, so that thing can really kick some booty when push comes to shove??? Are you happy with the 800C on its own?

Who else here recently got an EA combo -- Bolo, Troy? How are these working out for you?

 

[bolo]

Like drurb said, the differences in the sonics for the CX-112L driver v. the Wizzy would almost seem to be the biggest differentiating factor for me. Unfortunately, I haven't heard what the CX-112L sounds like in person. I betcha Tom Bowlus has done an A/B or shootout of these though, just to maybe give you some idea of how they compare.

That and to a much lesser extent the dolly thingy I reckon.

P.S. FWIW, I have the iAMP-200 C combo. Have used it for almost every gig for the last 3 years (mostly DB, some slab). Does great IMO for all but the loudest gigs. For those I run a line to the PA.

 

[drurb]

I appreciate the kind words. Thank you.

I would say that headroom should not be a consideration for you in terms of wanting to have enough reserve behind the single cabs you mention.

Please take a look at this.

If you want the flexibility to drive additional cabs, then, by all means, get an amp that has more power. There are limits to what you can achieve in terms of sound pressure level with additional cabs. I've posted on that before as well. In all event, I wanted to make sure that you didn't get caught up with advertising hype regarding and/or the "emotional desire" to have more power.

 

[drurb]

P.S. FWIW, I have the iAMP-200 C combo. Have used it for almost every gig for the last 3 years (mostly DB, some slab). Does great IMO for all but the loudest gigs. For those I run a line to the PA.

I agree having had a similar experience. The difference is that virtually every gig for me is with a small combo in a small to moderate sized room. The exceptions were the few outdoor gigs I've done and the Wizzy and iamp200 have done fine either on their own or with backup from the PA.

 

[bolo]

Disclaimer / qualifier: I just bought a Wizzy M line. And Rick Jones is waiting for me to swing by and pick up a Focus 2R that he has ready for me.

I bought this stuff not because I don't like my iAMP-200 combo. And not because I felt I needed 800 watts instead of 200.

Rather, I bought it because (1) I like the sonic characteristics of my regular Wizzy so much, (2) I like the amp or 'head' portion of my AI Contra, (3) it will mean I won't have to lug and plug my D-TAR Solstice when I wanna blend a p/u and a mic, and (4) I really wanted a HPF.

 

[tombowlus]

Like drurb said, the differences in the sonics for the CX-112L driver v. the Wizzy would almost seem to be the biggest differentiating factor for me. Unfortunately, I haven't heard what the CX-112L sounds like in person. I betcha Tom Bowlus has done an A/B or shootout of these though, just to maybe give you some idea of how they compare.

I have not tried any of the actual EA combos, but as I see it, you have a couple questions to answer when addressing this type of conundrum. First, as noted above, which driver do you prefer (CxL-112 or Wizzy)? In general terms, the Wizzy is more warm, full, and somewhat 'vintage' sounding - though I like to think of it as 'vintage, with clarity.' The CxL-112 is a clarity king, and offers great dynamic punch, but it is not as full sounding (with no EQ) as the Wizzy. You can shape the tone of the CxL-112 to a great extent via EQ, and it will do a nice job at delivering a wide range of tones. The Wizzy is slightly less flexible, tonally, but I, for one, dig its inherent tone (especially for my old Kay upright), so for me that is not a big issue (but perhaps it's more important to others).

Next question is, are you sure that you will not be using an extension cab? No? You're sure? Okay, just checking.

Then there is the power issue. IME/IMHO, the iAMP 800 really shows its stuff when driving larger cabs, or multiple cabs, and especially when handling a 2 ohm load. Conversely, I tend to prefer the iAMP 500 with smaller cabs, or a single cab. Unless you are driving multiple and/or larger cabs, I find the 500 to be basically just as loud as the 800 - again, this is just what I have observed, and YMMV.

The iAMP 200 Combo is a great suggestion, and also definitely worthy of consideration. My iAMP 200 is definitely not as loud as the 500 or 800, but it has several very redeeming qualities. First off, it is just a tad more warm than the other two, and offers a tad more texture in the midrange. It seems very musical to my ears. Second, although 'lower powered' it never sounds starved for headroom. My Phil Jones 6T/9B cabs normally like a lot of headroom to sound their best, but for whatever reason, the iAMP 200 just makes them sing.

So, piece together all of those sub-issues, and you should have a good idea of what works best for you. To muddy the waters a little more, I think that I have seen iAMP 500 combos with both the Wizzy and the CxL-112 as their driver component.

Hope this helps, Tom.

P.S.
Of course, the Micro 300 and one or two Wizzy 10's should also be worthy of consideration, if you don't mind the separate head thing.

 

[drurb]

Disclaimer / qualifier: I just bought a Wizzy M line. And Rick Jones is waiting for me to swing by and pick up a Focus 2R that he has ready for me.

I bought this stuff not because I don't like my iAMP-200 combo. And not because I felt I needed 800 watts instead of 200.

Rather, I bought it because (1) I like the sonic characteristics of my regular Wizzy so much, (2) I like the amp or 'head' portion of my AI Contra, (3) it will mean I won't have to lug and plug my D-TAR Solstice when I wanna blend a p/u and a mic, and (4) I really wanted a HPF.

I would be VERY interested to hear your thoughts and impressions regarding the differences between the "regular" Wizzy and the M-line Wizzy. So much so, that I'd appreciate a PM if and when you post that.

 

[drurb]

My iAMP 200 is definitely not as loud as the 500 or 800, but it has several very redeeming qualities. First off, it is just a tad more warm than the other two, and offers a tad more texture in the midrange.

Tom--

That was truly a fine and informative post. Are you saying that you perceive sonic differences between these amplifiers, per se? That is, that the electronics sound different to you?

 

[tombowlus]

Tom--

That was truly a fine and informative post. Are you saying that you perceive sonic differences between these amplifiers, per se? That is, that the electronics sound different to you?

Yes, while they are very, very similar, I do hear some subtle differences when I A/B/C them. Now, I need to qualify this in a major way by saying that I have not done signal/gain matching, and since the output sections are of varying power, the danger is there of hearing the loudest source as sounding the best, and whatnot. So definitely take this for what it is worth, and toss in many grains of salt, but I own the 200/350/500/600/800 iAMPs, and to my ears, they all sound at least somewhat different (with the older 350 and 600 sounding more different from the newer 200/500/800, and the 200/500/800 being all very much in the same ballpark). But again, YMMV, and the differences that I am hearing are likely not going to be very audible - if audible at all - in a gig environment (though a studio environment may be a different story).

Tom.

 

[drurb]

Yes, while they are very, very similar, I do hear some subtle differences when I A/B/C them. Now, I need to qualify this in a major way by saying that I have not done signal/gain matching, and since the output sections are of varying power, the danger is there of hearing the loudest source as sounding the best, and whatnot. So definitely take this for what it is worth, and toss in many grains of salt, but I own the 200/350/500/600/800 iAMPs, and to my ears, they all sound at least somewhat different (with the older 350 and 600 sounding more different from the newer 200/500/800, and the 200/500/800 being all very much in the same ballpark). But again, YMMV, and the differences that I am hearing are likely not going to be very audible - if audible at all - in a gig environment (though a studio environment may be a different story).

Tom.

Fair enough, your point of view is quite reasoned and realistic. By the way, let me comment on your notion about "louder" being perceived as better. It is a very powerful effect. In fact, this a trick employed by many a less-than-ethical hi-fi salesman to induce the purchase of more expensive products. It only takes 1-2 dB of difference to tip the balance on judgments of preference!

Besides just plain listener bias (that's not meant to be disparaging in any way, it is a real factor in "uncontrolled" human auditory judgments of this type), there is the possibility of slightly different interactions of the complex impedance of speaker cabinets with the output stages of different amps. Now, I would have thought that the output stages of the family of EA amps would not differ sufficiently and in the appropriate ways to produce such effects but that is a matter for empirical measurement and cannot be dismissed. In other words, it may not all be in your head, Tom.

 

[tombowlus]

Fair enough, your point of view is quite reasoned and realistic. By the way, let me comment on your notion about "louder" being perceived as better. It is a very powerful effect. In fact, this a trick employed by many a less-than-ethical hi-fi salesman to induce the purchase of more expensive products. It only takes 1-2 dB of difference to tip the balance on judgments of preference!

Besides just plain listener bias (that's not meant to be disparaging in any way, it is a real factor in "uncontrolled" human auditory judgments of this type), there is the possibility of slightly different interactions of the complex impedance of speaker cabinets with the output stages of different amps.

No offense taken! It's a quite valid point.

Now, I would have thought that the output stages of the family of EA amps would not differ sufficiently and in the appropriate ways to produce such effects but that is a matter for empirical measurement and cannot be dismissed. In other words, it may not all be in your head, Tom.

It is my understanding that the output stages are not identical, with the 200 being perhaps more unique and the 500 and 800 being more similar (going off of memory of past discussions here, so definitely take this FWIW, grain of salt, I may be wrong, YMMV, and all that stuff). I do know that the 200's topology is at least somewhat unique, relative to the 500 and 800.

It is also my belief (after tinkering with these amps quite a bit) that the input stages of the iAMP 200/350/500 (e.g., the ones with just the input clip LED) behave in a different fashion than that of the 600/800, (with the graduated LEDs). The difference may be subtle, but it IME, you have to drive the input harder on the 600/800 (or perhaps the limiting function is more aggressive?) to get the signal to it's 'ideal' level (or to drive to clipping, for that matter). My point being that even if you matched the final output voltage coming out of the heads, the 'gain ratios' between the input and master volume stages may not be identical.

Now, I do not have the technical expertise to explain how or why this might make a difference, but it is at least my perception (which of course involves all kinds of variables, including listener bias) is that these (possibly slight) differences in gain staging may have an audible impact. I am qualifying this (or trying to, at least) because I really don't know why the iAMP 500 and 800 don't seem to sound identical at very similar volume settings. And I am not ruling out that it may all be a product of me not exactly matching the output voltages, nor am I ruling out listener bias.

I'm just throwing out different notions relating to why they may sound different (which they do, to my ears), and also emphasizing that the difference in tone between the 200/500/800 is very minor.

Tom.

 

[drurb]

No offense taken! It's a quite valid point.

It is my understanding that the output stages are not identical, with the 200 being perhaps more unique and the 500 and 800 being more similar (going off of memory of past discussions here, so definitely take this FWIW, grain of salt, I may be wrong, YMMV, and all that stuff). I do know that the 200's topology is at least somewhat unique, relative to the 500 and 800.

It is also my belief (after tinkering with these amps quite a bit) that the input stages of the iAMP 200/350/500 (e.g., the ones with just the input clip LED) behave in a different fashion than that of the 600/800, (with the graduated LEDs). The difference may be subtle, but it IME, you have to drive the input harder on the 600/800 (or perhaps the limiting function is more aggressive?) to get the signal to it's 'ideal' level (or to drive to clipping, for that matter). My point being that even if you matched the final output voltage coming out of the heads, the 'gain ratios' between the input and master volume stages may not be identical.

Now, I do not have the technical expertise to explain how or why this might make a difference, but it is at least my perception (which of course involves all kinds of variables, including listener bias) is that these (possibly slight) differences in gain staging may have an audible impact. I am qualifying this (or trying to, at least) because I really don't know why the iAMP 500 and 800 don't seem to sound identical at very similar volume settings. And I am not ruling out that it may all be a product of me not exactly matching the output voltages, nor am I ruling out listener bias.

I'm just throwing out different notions relating to why they may sound different (which they do, to my ears), and also emphasizing that the difference in tone between the 200/500/800 is very minor.

Tom.

Makes sense to me. Thanks again.

 

[bolo]

Jason, don't feel obligated of course, but this might be worth a look.

 

[TroyK]

I have the 200 Wizzy combo and use it for jazz gigs of virtually any size (sometimes I still bring my GKMB150 if portability is key or if I think that I may not actually need an amp), but I haven't played anything that was too big or loud for the 200c yet. It's a great amp.

I also have played some low volume slab gigs with it and it's a wonderful doubling amp. I think that I could find its limits if I tried to use it with an honest to God rock and roll band, but I don't really do that, so it hasn't come up. Frankly, I think it would scale fairly well with a reasonably sized R&R band too, especially if I went out to the house system as well.

The heads in these combos are removable quite easily too, so it's been in my mind that could always pull the head out and run it to a 4 ohm 4x10 or 8x10 cabinet if I needed a bigger wall of sound or maybe someday I'll find a powered Wizzy extension on mega sale, that I'll likely never need.

I've played a lot of stuff with this combo now and have not approached its limits yet.

That being said, is more power better? Sure, in theory (I can't hang with the good doctor on the science of sound). Would I feel better knowing that I could plug in any old extension cabinet if the need ever came up? Sure.

But for price and little bit of weight savings and on drurb's posts about the likely real difference in the headroom of the combo, I went with the 200 and have never looked back.

From what you described, I think you'll be fine with it. If this is going to be your only rig and you think you may end up sitting in with Spinal Tap at some point, go for the 800 and get a dolly...or a roadie...and a volume knob that goes to 11.

-tk

 

[bolo]

My iAMP 200 is definitely not as loud as the 500 or 800, but it has several very redeeming qualities. First off, it is just a tad more warm than the other two, and offers a tad more texture in the midrange. It seems very musical to my ears.

Thanks Tom. That's interesting and nice to hear.

So if they stop making the iAMP 200 head, I've got a real keeper on my hands. Well, it's probably a keeper for me regardless.

I say that because I noticed that the iAMP 200 is not depicted on one of the 2007 EA glossy brochures that I've seen. I assumed maybe they were phasing it out to "make room" for the Micro 300. Or maybe they just ran out of room on the printed page ... dunno.

Just speculation on my part. The feature set is different between the 200 and the Micro, so maybe the 200 still has its niche.

 

[Jason Hollar]

Dr. URB -- thanks again, I checked out the link to your previous post. I've read several of your posts on this topic before...which is one of the main reasons I'm sold on the EA cabinets -- because of how efficient they are.

Tom -- it's very interesting to hear how subtle the variations in tone can be from model to model.

I guess I really don't know if I want a Wizzy or a CxL or an M Line for that matter! I need to line them all up and A/B/C the whole frickin' product line!

I do like the idea of a single 4 Ohm cabinet that maximizes power from the amplifier. Plus I guess since these guys can run down to 2 Ohms, I'd be cool for adding another box in the future.

I'm also interested in the possibility of the Micro series...according to the EA web site, the company "envisions scalable models up to 1,500 watts"!

I could use a two channel amp that cranks out massive power that also fits in my gig bag! Not sure about a single 10 though...

I'll keep saving pennies and I guess I'll have to plan a revenge visit to (A.H.) Bob Gollihur's again this summer when the family vacates "down the shore". Last time I was there, I tried the iamp800 and NL 2x10 and couldn't believe how solid it sounded. Ouch...GAS pains...

I could still see a rig like that working quite well for me -- but I was just hoping to find something a bit more compact and hopefully self-contained for ease of load in and set up.

I sincerely appreciate all the comments.