TC Electronics RS210 vs. RS212

savinggrace · #1 02-16-2010, 04:22 PM

I am starting this thread as the other TC Electronics Rh450/ RS 210/ RS 212 thread has too much stuff to shift through to just focus on the differences in tone between these two cabinets.

AJ Brown · #2 02-16-2010, 04:25 PM

Without getting scientific...

* The RS210 is punchier and more articulate. The RS212 has more low end, but sounds more 'muddy' than the RS210. Together they sound great. I haven't heard (2) RS210's together but I'm sure it's great too.

* The RS210 of course is smaller and easier to move than the RS212.

I drive the RS210 with the RH450 and it is more than enough for me. Sounds awesome. I'm replacing my RS212 with an RS112.

RickenBoogie · #3 02-16-2010, 04:29 PM

Just in general, a 212 will be louder than a 210, and in many cases, just as deep/tight. I would *assume* since they're both made by the same company, they'd be voiced similarly. One thing for sure- a single 212 can hold it's own with a band, where a 210 could fall short. Edited to add: the above post is from expirience, have some salt with mine.

savinggrace · #4 02-16-2010, 04:29 PM

Thank you AJ.

Does the RS212 seem to have more mid-range punch than the RS210 as is USUALLY typical in a lot of 212 cabs? Does the hi-end sound any different between the two?

rodl2005 · #5 02-16-2010, 04:37 PM

Interesting!! I actually thought from the advertising, that both the 210 & 212 cabs were the same sized cabs- just diffferent sized drivers???? NOT the case???

savinggrace · #6 02-16-2010, 04:49 PM

Not the case. The RS212 is the same height and width as the RS210 but it is just 6.5" deeper and 6 pounds heavier.

esoxhntr · #7 02-16-2010, 09:08 PM

Try 2 RS112 cabs together, better than either the 210 or 212 IMO.

drpepper · #8 02-16-2010, 09:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by esoxhntr

Try 2 RS112 cabs together, better than either the 210 or 212 IMO.

Go on...

TravTrav · #9 02-21-2013, 09:13 PM

Just wanted to bump for more opinions. I'm REALLY interested in buying an RS212....

gommer · #10 02-22-2013, 12:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TravTrav

Just wanted to bump for more opinions. I'm REALLY interested in buying an RS212....

I just got one on January.
It is really good with enough bottom end to hold on its own.
For me, if it sounds muddy you can fix that that with appropriate amp eq settings.
Overall, very sturdy design and it's light in terms of weight.
For me it's the best 2x12 cab for its price.

atomicdog · #11 02-22-2013, 12:32 AM

I have a TCE 450 and an RS210. It's a decent rig for around the house. I doubt I would take it out to a gig. It doesn't even measure up to my Fender Rumble 350 (2X10).

4-string · #12 02-22-2013, 06:57 AM

No drastic difference in tone IMO, the 212 is a bit louder and a bit deeper sounding, but they sound much the same to my ear.

I've gigged with only the RS210 many times, that cab is more than gig-worthy.

recreate.me · #13 02-22-2013, 08:45 AM

I think last year-ish, i met up with someone from the classifieds here to purchase either an RS210, or an RS212. He had them both set up side by side and after a while of playing i went with the 212.

The 210 seemed to be more defined, while the 212 tends to have more low end to it and its a little loose around the edges.

For the style of music i play i picked up the 212 to pair with a second 212 and they work great!

You are able to clean up and define the tone if your head allows it and you know what your doing, but also you can get a nice rough tone if you like, all with a big bottom end!

I also have an RS112, which sounds even better on its own since its kinda like in the middle between the 212 and 210 in terms of definition, i can see 2 of them sounding great and 4 of them sounding unreal, however the cost would be way to much.

drpepper · #14 02-22-2013, 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4-string

No drastic difference in tone IMO, the 212 is a bit louder and a bit deeper sounding, but they sound much the same to my ear.

I've gigged with only the RS210 many times, that cab is more than gig-worthy.

Personally, I'm with you on both remarks, but I think "to my ear" is the operative part of the first.

Objectively, the RS212 is capable of being louder than the RS210. I've commented more than once that in my experience (and to my ear), they have very much the same character at lower levels. At higher levels, the the RS212 sounds more fat and smooth. They handle grit or wooliness differently when pushed.

That said, I think hearing is more individual and different than we typically believe, so we might give someone credit for being able to hear distinctions that they actually can't and we discount others' claims to hearing distinctions that we can't hear.

I have decent persistence of pitch (though far from perfect pitch), but my persistence of tone is very short. Not necessarily a bad thing because my ears adjust and I'm more easily satisfied or made happy

I think that to say the RH450/RS210 is merely decent for around the house is laughable. It's not suitable for some gig situations and perfectly suited to others.

TravTrav · #15 02-22-2013, 09:53 AM

Could someone enlighten me as to the finish problem these cabs had? I tried sifting through the mega TC Electronic thread, but I was having a hard time finding specifics.

Like, what does the newer/improved finish look like compared to the older one? Reason I ask is so I can make sure I'm getting a newer one...

drpepper · #16 02-22-2013, 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TravTrav

Could someone enlighten me as to the finish problem these cabs had? I tried sifting through the mega TC Electronic thread, but I was having a hard time finding specifics.

Like, what does the newer/improved finish look like compared to the older one? Reason I ask is so I can make sure I'm getting a newer one...

The original finish had more of a matte texture to the substrate/"paint" part. It was very dry seeming and chipped and scratched pretty easily. It also seemed to pick up marks that were not actually reflecting any damage to the cabinet finish, but transfer of material to the finish - like you wouldn't say a wall damages sandpaper; the sandpaper picks up the paint from the wall. Whatever the makeup of the mark (whether damage or a transfer mark), it's not attractive. The later and current finish has more of a gloss texture to the paint. The granular part of the finish is more coarse, making it somewhat less likely to pick up transfer marks. You could categorize it as "bumpy," where the original finish was "rough" and more sandpaper-like.

Mostly by force of GAS, I went through 2 original finish RS210s, 1 original and 2 "shiny" RS212s. IME, the newer finish is both more durable and, like I said above, less susceptible to picking up transfer marks.

Not too long ago, I sold one of the RS212s that I got in January 2011, and it was fantastic shape.

TravTrav · #17 02-22-2013, 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by drpepper

The original finish had more of a matte texture to the substrate/"paint" part. It was very dry seeming and chipped and scratched pretty easily. It also seemed to pick up marks that were not actually reflecting any damage to the cabinet finish, but transfer of material to the finish - like you wouldn't say a wall damages sandpaper; the sandpaper picks up the paint from the wall. Whatever the makeup of the mark (whether damage or a transfer mark), it's not attractive. The later and current finish has more of a gloss texture to the paint. The granular part of the finish is more coarse, making it somewhat less likely to pick up transfer marks. You could categorize it as "bumpy," where the original finish was "rough" and more sandpaper-like.

Mostly by force of GAS, I went through 2 original finish RS210s, 1 original and 2 "shiny" RS212s. IME, the newer finish is both more durable and, like I said above, less susceptible to picking up transfer marks.

Not too long ago, I sold one of the RS212s that I got in January 2011, and it was fantastic shape.

Thanks!

happyg · #18 02-22-2013, 04:37 PM

210 and a 212 makes for a great combo with the 450 head. I had the 212 as a stand alone for a awhile. I added the 210 as a Christmas present to myself. The 210 added more midrange and clarity. IMO, on its own the 212 is a little darker and rounder sounding than the 210. If I had to choose between on it the other as a stand alone, I'd choose the 212.

TravTrav · #19 02-23-2013, 07:30 AM

I got one more question:

Because these cabs are so narrow and compact, are they not quite as "loud" as other 2x12s? Like, are they not as full? The only other 2x12 I've played is an SWR Workingmans 2x12, and that cab was pretty big physically and also pretty big sounding.

drpepper · #20 02-23-2013, 08:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TravTrav

I got one more question:

Because these cabs are so narrow and compact, are they not quite as "loud" as other 2x12s? Like, are they not as full? The only other 2x12 I've played is an SWR Workingmans 2x12, and that cab was pretty big physically and also pretty big sounding.

Not necessarily.

One aspect of a given cabinet's capabilities and sound is its internal size (volume), which you can get some idea of comparison by looking at the dimensions.

Cabinet sizes vary by design goals, and while (without looking at too many other cabinets) the RS212 is at the smaller end of the range, it isn't necessarily so small as it looks from the front. It's deeper than most (possibly all?) other 2x12 cabinets. (At at a glance) the SWR does appear to be at the bigger end of the range of 2x12 cabinets, and while bigger than the RS212, it's not as tall or deep.

Given that there are other aspects that determine capability and sound, you can't say that because cabinet X is bigger than cabinet Y, cabinet X will be capable of being louder or will sound more "full" than cabinet Y, any more than you can say because two cabinets are the same size, they'll have the same capabilities and sound.