Which is Louder? 500watt 12/6 or 400watt 210?

[Nate74]

I'm subbing for a band next week that claims to be "on the louder side" at a venue with no PA support. From looking at their website, it looks like their regular bassist uses a 4x10, maybe a GK but hard to tell from the pics.

I don't have a cab that big so am wondering what gives me the better chance of being heard. I have two options.

First, is my LoPhat 12/6 has a 12" rated at 1000-watts, and a 6.5" rated at 300-watts. Crossed over at 500Hz, so the 12" is taking a brunt of the signal. The cab is bigger than option two, but the surface area of the speakers is smaller. Power handling is higher.

My other option is my Genz Benz shuttle 210 cabinet. Rated at 400-watts overall. It has more surface area to the speakers but has a lower power handling rating... though I've heard GB is pretty conservative on such things.

I don't really want to run both cabs if I can help it. From what I've read, that would be more headaches than a 45 minute, $75 gig would be worth.

I'll be using a Shuttle 9.2 amp.

If it matters, this is an upright gig in a rock-a-billy/country band.

thanks in advance for any input!

[metalinthenight]

And you can't use both cabs with the 9.2 in a just-in-case scenario?

[KJung]

'Power handling' has absolutely NOTHING to do with how loud one cab is from another. All that gives you is a very rough guide as to the maximum power a cabinet can use on a continuous basis before there MIGHT be thermal damage to the voicecoil.

It is all about the ratios of voicing/sensitivity of the cabinet, power of the head, and EQ (both baked into the head... hi passing, etc., and the way you turn the knobs).

From my experience with cabs similar to the 12/6 you are desribing, and also with that 210, if you have a very low powered amp, and like a very midrange oriented tone, with little true deep bass, the 210 will sound 'louder', all other things being equal, since midrange takes less power to reproduce, the ear hears midrange more efficiently than deep bass, and that sort of tone profile usually slots itself in most mixes so that it is 'less covered up'.

If you have a decent amount of power (300-500 watts at 8ohms), and enjoy a deeper, more fullrange tone, my guess would be that the 12/6 would be 'louder in the bass region', and with enough power, would significantly outperform that small, midrange focused 210.

Edit: With the 9.2, the LoPhat all the way. If you had an Genz Uber210, might be a fair fight and close.

[4Mal]

Not sure about the LoPhat but my fearful 12.6 will get uncomfortably loud on a fair sized stage.. Key is that the 12 is actually a subwoofer driver and has the extended xmax and so throws more air. The 6 is really loafing based on the frequency content it is being thrown. My f12.6 will bury any 2x10 I've ever heard... I used to use 2 Bag End D10XD cabs... Migrated to a Schroeder 21012. I never had the 21012 and f12.6 side by side. I believe that they would be about equivalent in terms of absolute output.

If your 12.6 performs like mine, I would carry that and be comfy... 45 min set sounds like an environment where rapid setup and tear down would be considered 'pro' as well...

[Nate74]

Originally Posted by metalinthenight

And you can't use both cabs with the 9.2 in a just-in-case scenario?

As a last resort, yes I could. But one extra trip to the car, the potential problem with phase issues that I've read about with all the different cone size, and the fact that I'm old and lazy... I'd love to get by with one if at all possible.

Originally Posted by KJung

'Power handling' has absolutely NOTHING to do with how loud one cab is from another. All that gives you is a very rough guide as to the maximum power a cabinet can use on a continuous basis before there MIGHT be thermal damage to the voicecoil.

It is all about the ratios of voicing/sensitivity of the cabinet, power of the head, and EQ (both baked into the head... hi passing, etc., and the way you turn the knobs).

From my experience with cabs similar to the 12/6 you are desribing, and also with that 210, if you have a very low powered amp, and like a very midrange oriented tone, with little true deep bass, the 210 will sound 'louder', all other things being equal, since midrange takes less power to reproduce, the ear hears midrange more efficiently than deep bass, and that sort of tone profile usually slots itself in most mixes so that it is 'less covered up'.

If you have a decent amount of power (300-500 watts at 8ohms), and enjoy a deeper, more fullrange tone, my guess would be that the 12/6 would be 'louder in the bass region', and with enough power, would significantly outperform that small, midrange focused 210.

Edit: With the 9.2, the LoPhat all the way. If you had an Genz Uber210, might be a fair fight and close.

Some good stuff, thanks. Excellent points on the power handling vs. sensitivity. I think I knew some of that stuff at some point, but needed to jog the old brain a bit.

With upright, I usually HPF at about 80 to 90hZ, depending on the room. My main upright rig has been a GB Neox 112 for about a year but I'm not in love with my new LDS 2x8. Both way to small for this venue I fear.

The Shuttle 9.2 should give me 500 watts at 8 ohms and 900 watts at 4 ohms (which is what I believe the LoPHAT is).

[Nate74]

Originally Posted by 4Mal

Not sure about the LoPhat but my fearful 12.6 will get uncomfortably loud on a fair sized stage.. Key is that the 12 is actually a subwoofer driver and has the extended xmax and so throws more air. The 6 is really loafing based on the frequency content it is being thrown. My f12.6 will bury any 2x10 I've ever heard... I used to use 2 Bag End D10XD cabs... Migrated to a Schroeder 21012. I never had the 21012 and f12.6 side by side. I believe that they would be about equivalent in terms of absolute output.

If your 12.6 performs like mine, I would carry that and be comfy... 45 min set sounds like an environment where rapid setup and tear down would be considered 'pro' as well...

Good point on the quick setup and tear down for sure...

The 12" in the LoPhat is a Faital Pro and is pretty bad-ass.

http://www.usspeaker.com/faital%20pro%2012fh500-1.htm

[Foz]

Surface area is like the bore of a cylinder - without also knowing the strength of the motor pushing the piston and the length of the stroke you learn nothing comparing bore sizes = a piston in a smaller bore cylinder with a stronger motor pushing for a longer stroke could yield significantly more output ["move more air" in TB physics lingo].

The power rating is slightly more useful - but supplied without details could be misleading. This rating is based on a signal composed of much more high frequency content than a bass rig put out and yields information on what power level of a fairly high frequency signal will burn the motor [thermal limit]. Problem is, bass rigs typically fail when they hit the limits of low frequency content [excursion limit]. That said the ratings you mention are pretty disparate and indicate your LoPhat probably gets loud in the lows better than the GK... is that right?

Anyhoo - assuming I could dial in a tone that satisfied from either cab, I'd take the one that got louder in the lows, cause that's going to be the limit of your useful output capability in all likelihood.

[KJung]

Originally Posted by Nate74

Some good stuff, thanks. Excellent points on the power handling vs. sensitivity. I think I knew some of that stuff at some point, but needed to jog the old brain a bit.

With upright, I usually HPF at about 80 to 90hZ, depending on the room. My main upright rig has been a GB Neox 112 for about a year but I'm not in love with my new LDS 2x8. Both way to small for this venue I fear.

The Shuttle 9.2 should give me 500 watts at 8 ohms and 900 watts at 4 ohms (which is what I believe the LoPHAT is).

If you are using an HPF set that high, then the primary differences in low end output between those two cabs is probably negated. Take the one that sounds the best to you at home, and you should be good to go! If you were cranking at 50hz, the Lo Phat would probably be more appropriate as a stand alone.

The other issue with these 'high xmax' PA woofer loaded cabs (been there, done that) is that even though the mid driver takes care of the upper midrange, unless your EQ is really lined up to dial in punchy low mids and more mid midrange, those cab designs can sound quite scooped on the gig (i.e., lots of big, beautiful low end, and lots of presence around 1K (depending on the mid driver and crossover, but not much going on in the all important true midrange). Of course, turning some knobs will fix some of that, but in many cases, not so much.

[Nate74]

Originally Posted by KJung

If you are using an HPF set that high, then the primary differences in low end output between those two cabs is probably negated. Take the one that sounds the best to you at home, and you should be good to go! If you were cranking at 50hz, the Lo Phat would probably be more appropriate as a stand alone.

The other issue with these 'high xmax' PA woofer loaded cabs (been there, done that) is that even though the mid driver takes care of the upper midrange, unless your EQ is really lined up to dial in punchy low mids and more mid midrange, those cab designs can sound quite scooped on the gig (i.e., lots of big, beautiful low end, and lots of presence around 1K (depending on the mid driver and crossover, but not much going on in the all important true midrange). Of course, turning some knobs will fix some of that, but in many cases, not so much.

Yeah, the mid-range oomph seems to be where the upright tone lives for me, rather than the low and high-mids I prefer on electric.

Thanks for the input all!!!!

[lomo]

12/6 all the way. If the other bassist's 410 is on the cheaper side, you'll probably match it with the 9.2.

[::::BASSIST::::]

I think it depends on the excursion of the 12" driver of the 12/6 in question.

The reason that the Thunderchild and fEARful 12/6s excel is because of the 3012LF's large degree of excursion. Does the Faital driver match the 3012LF? Not sure.

[Nate74]

I spent some time with both and the 210 is far better at getting me a decent sound so even though the 12/6 has more thump, it sounds pretty 'non upright' so I guess the 210 will be going. Thanks for the input guys.

[lomo]

Originally Posted by ::::BASSIST::::

I think it depends on the excursion of the 12" driver of the 12/6 in question.

The reason that the Thunderchild and fEARful 12/6s excel is because of the 3012LF's large degree of excursion. Does the Faital driver match the 3012LF? Not sure.

I agree. I had assumed that if it's rated at 500 watts it was a 3012LF. If it's a regular driver it's prolly 6 vs a half dozen.

[Bmorefoozler]

from the us speaker site specs listed, it has 7.25mm of Xmax and 16mm of Xdamage

at a reasonable 97db spl