Baer Amplification Part 3

[Tunaman]

I'm actually interested in the Baer... I guess I'm just looking for a concrete answer to IF he chose his design to specifically be better in a physics sense... sell me on his cabs like the Barefaced website does so damn well, but in the UK

Every cab companys website promises earth shattering lows & crips mids & highs after all. I'm just digging a little deeper here. I'll wait for him to answer & leave well enough alone.

Thanks again for the responses & patience. I love my GK NEO 412 but I'm starting to get a bit weary of hauling it up 2 flights of stairs at my home now.

[greenrositti]

Tunaman has just been formally invited to the Ryan Link residence (that's me) here in snowy Boston to play through the Baer 2 by 112 rig of doom.

[nostatic]

Originally Posted by greenrositti

Tunaman has just been formally invited to the Ryan Link residence (that's me) here in snowy Boston to play through the Baer 2 by 112 rig of doom.

The move from "physics sense" to "physical sense" is the litmus test.

The only other factor is then being able to extrapolate from home to gig. I frankly didn't (and still don't) think that the Baers sound very "pretty" at home alone. On a gig though, they kill.

[Tunaman]

Originally Posted by nostatic

The move from "physics sense" to "physical sense" is the litmus test.

The only other factor is then being able to extrapolate from home to gig. I frankly didn't (and still don't) think that the Baers sound very "pretty" at home alone. On a gig though, they kill.

I find thats OFTEN the case which is why the talk about these MLs have peaked my interest. I've had Epifani cabs in the past which were the BEST cabs I've ever heard... in my house but in the gig I was too scooped & muddy for my preference

I like the GK NEOs as they are ugly & aggressive at home but sit well in the mix

[greenrositti]

Originally Posted by nostatic

The only other factor is then being able to extrapolate from home to gig. I frankly didn't (and still don't) think that the Baers sound very "pretty" at home alone. On a gig though, they kill.

I agree totally. It is not the solo tone you've always been dreaming of (it is fantastic for Portrait of Tracy). I do think, though, that you can get some of that gig flavor by just putting a song on, wiping out the bass in the recording, turning it up reasonably loud, and laying your "bass track" back into the mix. That way even at home I can hear the roundness of the notes on the g string and the combined warmth and effortless clarity in the lower register that is the hallmark of this particular box.

edit: I remember hearing Rocco Prestia, one of my favorite bassists, play when I was a junior in high school a long time ago. I got to go early and listen to the soundcheck. I was shocked at how much Rocco's tone sucked...I mean SUCKED when he was first getting things plugged in and set. Then the band started playing something and I had an "aha" moment. Suddenly Rocco sounded like...Rocco and it absolutely slammed. Lesson learned that day.

[R Baer]

Originally Posted by Tunaman

Sorry for the derail Baer...Just a quick question though...Because you have a mid driver, is your crossover point lowered vs a tweeter cab?
If so... because your main driver has less frequencies to deal with, does that make it more efficient?

No worries. Yes, the mid does allow for a lower crossover point, but there's more to that crossover point than just looking at the mid. The crossover point also has a lot to do with where we wanted to cut off the woofer as well. By not asking the woofer to reproduce higher frequencies, you are theoretically making that driver more efficient, but once again it comes down to a matter of what is good theory and what just plain sounds right. Many companies will run the woofer full range, not just to cut down on crossover cost, but simply because it sounds better for the cab to do so. So in answer to your question, yes we cross over at a lower frequency than you can with a horn, but remember that it's just a means to an end. I don't feel that by doing so, it makes our cabs a "better" bass cab. Our cabs are simply built the way they are because that's what it took for me to create the sonic flavor I was going for with our cabs.

Originally Posted by Tunaman

I'm actually interested in the Baer... I guess I'm just looking for a concrete answer to IF he chose his design to specifically be better in a physics sense... sell me on his cabs like the Barefaced website does so damn well, but in the UK...Every cab companys website promises earth shattering lows & crips mids & highs after all. I'm just digging a little deeper here. I'll wait for him to answer & leave well enough alone.

I'm afraid I really don't believe in trying to sell our cabs with a bunch of tech speak on why I believe they are better engineered than another cab on the market. I think you should only buy a cabinet because you feel it will deliver the tone you are after and will meet your performance expectations and no other reason. Who cares how much X-max a driver has, if the cab doesn't meet their tone goals? My take on bass cabs is that I am designing a piece of gear that is going to become just one part of someone's bass signal chain. Much like our guitar brethren, I believe that a cab should have some personality and be flattering to our instrument. Just think about some of the best selling bass cabinets throughout the years. You have cabs like the Sun 215, Ampeg SVT, SWR Goliath, Hartke 410XL and Eden 410XLT. Now, what exactly was it about these cabs that made them so popular? Was it the fact that these cabs were built technically perfect from an audio engineering standpoint? Hardly. It was simply the fact that all these cabs brought something different to the table and all of them had a distinct personality. Players heard them and said "Oh, that's a cool sound, I want to try one of those".

So, I guess the point I'm trying to make is that we buy cabinets based on personal preference with some preconceived notion in our heads of our ideal bass tone. For some players, a cab with ruler flat response and amazing performance performance specs will do the job, but I think these players are in the minority. If not, then you would see a lot more bassist using PA cabs in their bass rigs. After all, the pro audio market has building highly advanced cabs of this nature for decades. Most players, IMO, are looking for a certain flavor from their cabs and if they find a cab that delivers on that, then it really doesn't matter what kind of science is behind the cab. I get what you are saying about cabs like ours, fEarful, Barefaced, Audiokenesis, etc..., but at the end of the day, all that engineering doesn't mean our cabs are any "better" than anyone else's cabs. As an example, just today I picked up an ML112 I from a local cat who used it for the last couple weeks. This guy is a monster player, very well known and tours with many big name acts. When I asked him what he thought of the cab, he said that while he really liked the cab, he prefers the tone of his Aguilar GS112 better. So, there you go. Honestly, all the tech speak in the world isn't going to make a cab right for you if it doesn't fit the tone profile you are looking for. While I really don't try to "sell" anyone on our cabs, if you want to call and let me know exactly what type of sound you are looking for, I would be happy to let you know if I think one of our cabs would be right for you. (661) 947-5336

[Saluki]

Originally Posted by R Baer

When I asked him what he thought of the cab, he said that while he really liked the cab, he prefers the tone of his Aguilar GS112 better. So, there you go.

Ya the ML112 is like the anti-GS112, which to my ear is really scooped and big bottom. I never liked the GS112 in the mix, so there you go!

[KJung]

Originally Posted by Saluki

Ya the ML112 is like the anti-GS112, which to my ear is really scooped and big bottom. I never liked the GS112 in the mix, so there you go!

+1 The ML112 is more like a more refined and powerful DB112 than in any way close to the mid polite and 'upper midrange hole' of the GS112.

[Saluki]

Originally Posted by KJung

+1 The ML112 is more like a more refined and powerful DB112 than in any way close to the mid polite and 'upper midrange hole' of the GS112.

Concur, DB112s are nice sounding cabs IMO. GS112s are good for scooped sound, which works well for me on my 1 piece bedroom gigs. I've tried a bunch of cabs of the last 5 or 6 years (I blame TB for this, not sure if I mean Talkbass or Tom Bowlus) and all things considered the ML112s are my favorite. Thanks Roger! Roger, Roger.

[Chef]

Man.

I -have not- been able to get hooked up with one of those.

Originally Posted by Saluki

which works well for me on my 1 piece bedroom gigs

[gillento]

I have been using a db212 as my alltime fav cab for a few years now.
My second ML112 is ready to be picked up, so soon I'll be able to comare both 2x12" configs side by side....
A first appreciation of the single ML112 vs the db212 shows a lot more clarity in the upper mids with the ML112 using the uber thick db750 and a Nordy PJ5...
I am really excited comparing both stacks in the low mids / low end!

[BuffaloBob4343]

OK, so the reason I want a Baer cab is that I have it on good authority that chicks dig dudes with Armadillos in their trousers.

[Saluki]

Originally Posted by Chef

Man.

I -have not- been able to get hooked up with one of those.

With the help of the armadillos I hoping this will become a two person, maybe a three person bedroom gig

[Tunaman]

Great response Baer, really appreciate it

The mid driver was a choice vs the tweeter for tonal objective vs necessarily improving the ability for the woofer to take more punishment before it maxes out

Thanks

[jasonbraatz]

I think I'm the only guy in the world who doesn't think GS112's are scooped, but I use it with an AG500 and really mid-focused basses so I think as a package it works out well.

Anyways, that kind of brings me around to the Baer stuff. I like using rigs that were designed together. The description and logic behind the Valkyrie is almost exactly what I'd do were I to be able to create a head from scratch to my own specifications, and having the ML's built around the goals of that head - particularly the tube distortion - is really appealing.

I'm not sure the ML's and my AG500 would currently be a good match, but I'm certain I'd like the Valkyrie + ML rig more than my current setup.

[R Baer]

Originally Posted by Tunaman

Great response Baer, really appreciate it

The mid driver was a choice vs the tweeter for tonal objective vs necessarily improving the ability for the woofer to take more punishment before it maxes out

Thanks

Exactly. I've never been a big fan of tube distortion through a tweeter and I wanted to the tube section in the Valkyrie to really shine. If you want to know how to do distortion right, you have to look to our guitar brethren for that. For most guitarist, it's all about the combination of tube distortion and driver break up. You always hear these guys going on about the "lush, creamy distortion" they get from this amp, or that amp. For most of these guys, it's all about the distortion. Now ask yourself, how many times have you seen a guitarist playing through a horn loaded cab? It's not because they are ignorant to the technology. It's just the fact that they prefer the way distortion sounds through a paper driver, as opposed to a tiny metal diaphragm. I know we like to make fun of our guitarist friends, but they do know good distortion when they hear it!

[SherwoodGreen]

Roger; we spoke briefly at NAMM- Really like your builds.
Is the 15 available as a 4-ohm?

[Tunaman]

Better grit through a paper cone vs a tweeter... makes a hell of a lot of sense!

[Addison]

My drive/distortion effects sound WAAAAAAAAAY better through the ML212 than with a tweeter loaded cab.

It's not even close.

[greenrositti]

I'm not sure the ML's and my AG500 would currently be a good match, but I'm certain I'd like the Valkyrie + ML rig more than my current setup.[/quote]

I gigged that combo for a while and it sounded glorious. Very articulate.