Ampeg SVT210AV Micro Classic Bass Cabinet

Rossman59 · #1 05-06-2009, 04:38 PM

In trying to built a giggable micro rig I've been looking at cabs for a long time and I'm finding this one interesting because with a bad back I need light, light, light.

http://www.americanmusical.com/Item--i-AMG-SVT210AV

Anyone used this cab and if so what did you think of it?

Otherwise I'm also looking at getting a second Gallien Krueger 112 MBX and having a mighty micro full stack!

http://www.rmcaudio.com/gallien-krueger/112mbx.htm

Thanks for your help on this.

riker1384 · #2 05-06-2009, 04:41 PM

It won't have as much low end as a ported 2x10.

Rossman59 · #3 05-06-2009, 04:48 PM

Yes that's probably true. As small as it is this might be moot anyway.

Might have to turn up the bass knob on the amp eq.

dog1 · #4 05-06-2009, 06:22 PM

I asked this same question on two other forums. No one responded that had actually used it. I guess it is just too new.

JimmyM · #5 05-06-2009, 06:57 PM

Ya, you don't see many of them. Justin Meldal-Johnsen said he tried one at NAMM and thought it was killer. That's all I know about it. I'm not a big fan of 210's but Justin knows his stuff and is pretty honest about his opinions.

Rossman59 · #6 05-07-2009, 07:10 AM

Thanks for the reply Dog1, I might have to take a leap of faith here if I pull the trigger on this.

And thanks for the input JimmyM. I've always found your comments and experience on these matters helpful. And I understand about your views on 10s. That's why I might just get another GK 112 mbx. Decisions, decisions.

Maybe I just need to be a mini Kjung / Tom Bowlus and get both and compare.

Problem with that is I might keep both. lol.

JonathanD · #7 05-07-2009, 07:16 AM

I have heard the cab, but not the head. I used it with an SWR redhead combo as an external box(Combo off) and for short time with a marshall tube head. I enjoyed the cab. Punchy. If you are doing dub reggae, dance, or hip hop you will need PA support. To me it has the perfect high end extension(or lack there of). It takes out fret noise and leaves me with a great overall sound. It is light and looks great with a small head on top of it.

Rossman59 · #8 05-07-2009, 07:36 AM

Now this is what I'm talking about JonathanD. Thanks for the input. This is most helpful.

I'm not getting the head. Just looking at the cab. I think if I have the proper expectation for this it might work.

billfitzmaurice · #9 05-07-2009, 07:47 AM

Two inescapable facts of loudspeaker design are that small cabs cannot go both low and loud, and sealed cabs won't go as low and loud as vented. Going both small and sealed is a double whammy where low and loud are concerned.

Rossman59 · #10 05-07-2009, 08:04 AM

Well Bill, seeing that you are a guru around here I have to consider what you're saying very seriously.

Looks like what you're saying is that with the Ampeg or the GK 112 mbx I wouldn't have low and loud. I'd only have light.

If I found a similar sized cab that was ported would I get either low or loud back?

daveman50 · #11 05-07-2009, 08:23 AM

Isn't this intended to be, in essence, a mini SVT 8x10 cabinet? The 8x10 is constructed like four 2x10's - four sealed (non-ported) compartments, each with two 10's. This little cab is sorta what you'd get if you sawed off the top quarter of the SVT cab.

Opinions vary as to the sound produced by the classic Ampeg 8x10, but it seems like a lot of folks like them -- regardless of their sonic properties (or limitations, depending on your point of view).

Wes Whitmore · #12 05-07-2009, 08:53 AM

I would like to hear it. I don't know how it could be considered infinate baffle, more like a small sealed enclosure. Maybe I'm missing something. Regardless, it doesn't look like you are needing killer output since you are using the small GK 12 now, anyhow. How do you set a SVT tube amp on it without it falling off?

The Ampeg should be louder than the 112 by itself, but not as loud as 2 of them. At $300, how can you go wrong if it even sounds remotely like the 8x10. It's as heavy as 2 of your 12s. What amp are you using, and what type of music are you playing, and what sized area? PA support?
Wes

Rossman59 · #13 05-07-2009, 09:16 AM

Daveman50, my original thinking was that if this cab have a flavor of a Ampeg 8x10 then that could be a cool sound that I'd like to have. Especially if I combined it with the VT bass pedals that everyone has been raving about.

Wes, I just got into a band setting late last summer but we're a ways from going on gigs. As to the type of music we're playing. It's trance, rave, drum and bass, dub, electronica, space rock, semi-prog, etc. The kind of music that any rig of the type I'm looking at I'm sure won't work as well on its own. But I have back issues so as Clint Eastwood says, "A man has got to know his limitations". So I am looking at all of this knowing there maybe only so much I can do here and I will need help with this when I gig, as in FOH / PA support.

Currently I have the GK MBS-150 I use with the MBX but it's way underpowered. I was looking to revamp my whole set up and was looking at options.

All of this input is really helping so feel free everyone to keep it coming.

And that's what makes TB such a great place.

billfitzmaurice · #14 05-07-2009, 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by daveman50

Isn't this intended to be, in essence, a mini SVT 8x10 cabinet? The 8x10 is constructed like four 2x10's - four sealed (non-ported) compartments, each with two 10's. This little cab is sorta what you'd get if you sawed off the top quarter of the SVT cab.

Opinions vary as to the sound produced by the classic Ampeg 8x10, but it seems like a lot of folks like them -- regardless of their sonic properties (or limitations, depending on your point of view).

+1. SVT sound, more or less, without SVT size and weight. Actually the sound should be a tad better, with two drivers vertically aligned. But output will be some 18dB lower, and that's a huge differential.

i_got_a_mohawk · #15 05-07-2009, 11:06 AM

Just wondering how you came to the 18dB difference Bill?

I got a 6dB difference (3dB difference between 2x10 & 4x10, 3dB difference between 4x10 and 8x10), or if it was with a SS amp it'd be about 9dB (4ohm vs 8ohm driving causing ~half the power)?

I'm probably missing something completelly, just wondering reall was all

Cheers

daveman50 · #16 05-07-2009, 02:23 PM

I'm also thinking this is intended for recording -- you can mic this up to get the SVT sound without needing the 8x10.

Gashaponcito · #17 05-10-2009, 03:44 PM

maybe the Micro-VR with 2 210AV it is a good gigging rig =O

Bassslayer69 · #18 05-10-2009, 03:48 PM

Justin is an Ampeg shill !!!!
dont listen to this pussy nio matter what!'

Ampeg SUCKS!!!!
they just want your cash!

Mojo-Man · #19 05-10-2009, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gashaponcito

maybe the Micro-VR with 2 210AV it is a good gigging rig =O

I was thinking the same thing.
It sure would look cool.

DukeLeJeune · #20 05-10-2009, 04:49 PM

Bill and Mohawk, I come up with yet a third answer for the maximum SPL difference between the 2x10 and 8x10. I figure +3 dB for each doubling of cone area and +3 dB for each doubling of power handling. Two doublings of each = 6dB + 6dB = 12dB difference.

Another difference relative to an 8x10, assuming the same drivers are used, is a bit brighter tonal balance for the 2x10 because you'll have less destructive interference between drivers, which has the effect of rolling off the top end somewhat.