WT300 vs. WT550

[blmeier7]

I have been playing through an Eden WT-300 head and Aguilar 1x12 cab for several years and I have been very happy with the tone. The majority of my playing is as a hobbyist player rather than a gigging bassist but recently I have been playing more with a group and have been working up a setlist to begin gigging again. I will keep my Aguilar 1x12 and add a second 1x12 but fear my 300w amp may not be able to keep up (mostly classic rock songs).

My question is: will the WT-550 provide the same tone as the WT-300 only with more power or does the tone change some between the two heads? I don't know of any 550's locally for me to play through and try it out. I also have considered the GK 1001RB but 6-8 years ago I owned a 400rb and thought the tone was too dry, so this has scared me away some. I really want a warm, tight, focused tone that doesn't color what my bass puts out and the Eden has done that so far. Any advice or recommendations are appreciated. Thx

 

[buffordbass]

The 550 will not be quite as sweet as the 300, but still will have the Eden tone. The power issue depends on what type & volume your band is.

I was ok with a 4-5 piece rock band, but when we added horns it was not enough. I've played a 550 for the past 2 years, but I've just gone back to a 400 and it it doing what I need, and then add a power amp for the outdoor gigs.

 

[Mcrelly]

I tried a wt300 with two gs112s and it was almost not loud enough for our LOUD kids church band. we typically ran around 105 dbc, sometimes closer to 110 dbc. I had the amp clip light blinking occasionally trying to keep up. The 550, which I own, is a very similar tone. slightly less fat in the bottom, but not much thinner. I preferred the 550 over the ALL SS wt405.

The 550 should handle most situations, but if you can swing it, try the WT800!!! The 800 adds an incredible increase in volume and bass thunder, even at lower "store" volumes if that makes sense.

 

[blmeier7]

Thanks for the replys that helps.

Mcrelly, I noticed you also have the Thunderfunk. If I decide to spend over $1,000 I had considered this head. How does the WT-550 compare with the Thunderfunk in terms of tone? I would also be running the same two Aguilar cabs you are.

 

[gerryjazzman]

Another alternative is to keep the WT300 since you like the sound and get a power amp for the bigger gigs. Just patch the headphone out of the WT300 into the power amp. Then you can get as much power as you want and retain the sound of the WT300. Use the WT300 by itself for the smaller gigs and practicing.

 

[joegeezer]

Another alternative is to keep the WT300 since you like the sound and get a power amp for the bigger gigs. Just patch the headphone out of the WT300 into the power amp. Then you can get as much power as you want and retain the sound of the WT300. Use the WT300 by itself for the smaller gigs and practicing.

+1 Yup!

 

[Mcrelly]

Mcrelly, I noticed you also have the Thunderfunk. If I decide to spend over $1,000 I had considered this head. How does the WT-550 compare with the Thunderfunk in terms of tone? I would also be running the same two Aguilar cabs you are.

This is gonna be hard to explain because I'm not sure I fully understand ALL the subtle pros and cons of each... I'm also in the middle of a mid-cab crisis. My love might be switching from the aggies over to the bergies. both the cabs and amps function great in their own way and have different, but full tones. AND each amp seems to respond differently to each cab.

The 'Funk seems to sound best with the aggies (between the two) so far. the Eden makes the bergs really shine. vice versa it seems to be a bit of a struggle. I THINK??? my memory of all the different combinations I've tried over the years.

Now the sound of the 'Funk with the aggies is not quite as deep off the starting line as with the eden. of course you can dial in more heaviness, but its not quite the same as the fat eden bottom. so if you've ever thought "I could do with a little less fatness..." then maybe the 'funk would be a welcome change.

I dig the funk for several reasons over the eden. 1. its lighter, a few pounds. 2. there is an extra mids control. 3. "the switch" and 4. the "timbre" knob.

extra explaination: 2. I tend to find the eden tone controls, especially the mids to be a bit "pointed" if that makes any sense. like the "q" or "width" of the frequency I want to change is too narrow and becomes almost a notch EQ. sometimes on the eden one click is not enough and one more click is too much??

3. the switch is suppose to "emulate" tube versus solid state signals. I'm not sure how accurate these emulations are as I've never owned a real all-tube amp, but the "tube" setting is not quite as "warm" or "round" as the eden, but the attack of notes are a bit blurred. when using the SS setting the notes are more focused and clear. while the switch is not meant to be an "on the fly" tone change. some rooms, basses, or cabs will work better on SS than TUBE or whatever. nice to have the choices.

4. The TIBRE knob is very helpfull for quick start tone adjustments. turn the knob clockwise from 12 o'clock and the bass starts to roll off and certain mids or treble are slightly boosted. contrary turning counter-clockwise treble and certain mids are rolled off and some bass frequencies are boosted. (see Thunderfunk website for more accurate description).

I kinda like the idea of using a separate bigger amp for larger gigs, but when I tried the WT300 with my (at the time) stewart 1.2 (Switching amp) I lost quite a bit of the "eden sound" roundness and warmth. I think it depends on what kind of amp you use.

BOTTOM LINE: I think the eden and 'funk are both great amps. You can get the funk to sound almost like an eden, but I don't think you can get the flexibility of the funk from the eden...I think thats why I still own BOTH

P.S. the WT550 does 2 ohms, the 'funk doesn't....yet??

 

[Daniel L.]

If you need more volume you should probably consider more speakers, say a 4x10 for example, rather than a small bump in wattage.

 

[Thir13teen]

I have been playing through an Eden WT-300 head and Aguilar 1x12 cab for several years and I have been very happy with the tone. The majority of my playing is as a hobbyist player rather than a gigging bassist but recently I have been playing more with a group and have been working up a setlist to begin gigging again. I will keep my Aguilar 1x12 and add a second 1x12 but fear my 300w amp may not be able to keep up (mostly classic rock songs).

My question is: will the WT-550 provide the same tone as the WT-300 only with more power or does the tone change some between the two heads? I don't know of any 550's locally for me to play through and try it out. I also have considered the GK 1001RB but 6-8 years ago I owned a 400rb and thought the tone was too dry, so this has scared me away some. I really want a warm, tight, focused tone that doesn't color what my bass puts out and the Eden has done that so far. Any advice or recommendations are appreciated. Thx

I played in a metal/hardcore band (which my friend whos also a long time bassist/engineer said was the loudest band he ever heard in his life in rehearsal) and had two WT-300's. One went into a SWR 8x8 and one into a SWR 2x12. I never had any problems hearing myself in rehearsal and definitely none live. One sound guy asked me (after we played) "Hey what kind of bass amp is that?" then said "That's the best sounding bass amp I've ever mixed live.".

 

[MMiller28]

The 550 will not be quite as sweet as the 300, but still will have the Eden tone. The power issue depends on what type & volume your band is.

I was ok with a 4-5 piece rock band, but when we added horns it was not enough. I've played a 550 for the past 2 years, but I've just gone back to a 400 and it it doing what I need, and then add a power amp for the outdoor gigs.

Yep, could even be more bitter or salty