Xsonics 212CF FIRST GIG IMPRESSIONS

[svtb15]

That would be something that i may be able to use... for instance the gig i did with guitar player george lynch last week.
He uses a boutique Friedman 50 watt Plexi clone though an antique Marshall 412 or pair of 412s...
There is nothing like the plexi tone for rock guitar IMHO... its that brown sound. Not too distorted , unless you want it. But it hits you like a freight train with a warm full velvet wrapper..
A bass cab, or pair of cabs has to be able to deal with that!

Originally Posted by Fretlessboy

The 215/5 may be more up your alleyAttachment 318446 4 ohm 1,000 watts 40 hz .

[seamonkey]

Originally Posted by Fretlessboy

Also bear in mind these we my gig findings in the real world with a bass in my hand not a slide rule.

And it's a fine opinion. Honestly, I never expect anybody to spend a chunk on cabs and then give them a sucky review.

There's a bell curve. Grab 1000 musicians and ask them what they hear. It falls out into bell curve. Where are you on that curve. Superior to the other?, inferior?

I'll take scientific measurements. Look at them, compare them to a know reference I know what it sounds like to me, and then compare. I don't need a slide rule, I need honest measurements.

What's the harm? If this was somebody importing cheap cabinets that "looked" the same, there'd be an uproar. If Fender or Ampeg came out with something that looked the same there'd be an uproar. Looks don't matter much, it's actually performance that count. And performance can be measured and documented between cabinets. No harm in asking.

[Fretlessboy]

Originally Posted by seamonkey

Just plain silly to swap drivers facing in facing out.

Any cabinet can mount the dirvers facing in and if it increases the bass, then the cabinet wasn't designed with enough volume inside to account for what the drivers take up. Baskets out - drivers simple allow more room inside the cab. If it sounds better, it says the cabinet is too small for two drivers in the first place.

There's no new science here. More anecdotal testimony. Just another gimmick as with other cabinets with the same setup. Missing BFM

It doesn't sound like a gimmick. I am not a scientist...I am a bassist with 35 years of listening to cabinets wishing the did something they weren't doing... This one makes me wish it came years earlier. Now you might be a scientist and know something my ears don't. I really also don't care if changing the way speaker fires fixes a flawed design because it did. "Post-its" were a failed permanent underwater glue and they have fared out well. So I guess my point is this... I don't really care why it works, I just know it does. When you can get a 212 cabinet with that size,punch and volume I'll take that. So I say "Hat's off to Nick" ... how ever he accomplished it the fact is he did.

[Ncognito]

Originally Posted by seamonkey

You're not going to see isobaric in expensive FOH, or even High end HiFi designs anymore.

How wrong you are. Ever heard of EAW or Apogee Sound? Arguably 2 of the biggest names in world class FOH. Formers founders of EAW and Apogee Sound started VUE Audiotechnik with revolutionary designs and concepts, and their Isobaric cabinets are the latest huge hit in professional touring FOH.

http://www.vueaudio.com/products/as-418/

http://www.eaw.com/docs/1_Current_Pr...TS250_Spec.pdf

Doing your homework before commenting is wise, and the "gimmick" crack is unwarranted and disrespectful. Several touring professionals are gladly "gigging" Xsonics cabinets and actually earning money with professional tools for intended for professionals.

[seamonkey]

That link you gave to "VUE Audiotechnik" is bandpass

"One woofer's
frontal radiation is direct, while the second
woofer's frontal radiation drives a bandpass
chamber with fourth-order response
characteristics. Each woofer has its own
amplifier, power supply and unique DSP
algorithm."

They also provide full measurements and EASE data.
You do not have a DSP - they measure their speakers and apply DSP to correct their response.

Doing your homework before commenting is wise.

You can't just "look" like them and expect to actually produce the same results.

It doesn't sound like you're going to bother even measuring. It's fair to say I think it's a gimmick until I see some data like that from VUE Audiotechnik. Even some remote effort to measure with the same software you used to model the drivers in the cabinet would be something.

[Brad Johnson]

Originally Posted by Ncognito

How wrong you are. Ever heard of EAW or Apogee Sound? Arguably 2 of the biggest names in world class FOH. Formers founders of EAW and Apogee Sound started VUE Audiotechnik with revolutionary designs and concepts, and their Isobaric cabinets are the latest huge hit in professional touring FOH.

http://www.vueaudio.com/h-class/

Doing your homework before commenting is wise, and the "gimmick" crack is unwarranted and disrespectful. Several touring professionals are gladly "gigging" Xsonics cabinets and actually earning money with professional tools for intended for professionals.

It's pretty wild that for some building a product that works great for the intended user isn't good enough. As if one would like something more after getting "good" test results. It would still sound like it sounds.
Musical instrument amplification is not about shooting for an ideal plot. It's about getting the sound you want. At least it is for.

The remark about people liking things because they paid a lot of money was pretty telling. That's not a given and it does give insight into the stance.

Looks like you have a happy customer, Nick. Good job and congrats. Far as I can tell that's the point of offering a product like this.

Isn't it?

[svtb15]

+1

Originally Posted by Ncognito

How wrong you are. Ever heard of EAW or Apogee Sound? Arguably 2 of the biggest names in world class FOH. Formers founders of EAW and Apogee Sound started VUE Audiotechnik with revolutionary designs and concepts, and their Isobaric cabinets are the latest huge hit in professional touring FOH.

http://www.vueaudio.com/h-class/

Doing your homework before commenting is wise, and the "gimmick" crack is unwarranted and disrespectful. Several touring professionals are gladly "gigging" Xsonics cabinets and actually earning money with professional tools for intended for professionals.

[svtb15]

Yeah.. I agree.. I ve been blessed to work with some cool record producers over the years ..I remember jimmy iovine telling me waaaaay back when i was maybe 19.. He said, always remember the number one rule in recording.. There are no rules...
I agree with him... Even to this day he is correct..

Whatever it takes to make it happen is what is needed to get er done..
The 215 looks really cool. i dont think i would require a tweeter.. Just the mid driver would be fine for me

Originally Posted by Fretlessboy

It doesn't sound like a gimmick. I am not a scientist...I am a bassist with 35 years of listening to cabinets wishing the did something they weren't doing... This one makes me wish it came years earlier. Now you might be a scientist and know something my ears don't. I really also don't care if changing the way speaker fires fixes a flawed design because it did. "Post-its" were a failed permanent underwater glue and they have fared out well. So I guess my point is this... I don't really care why it works, I just know it does. When you can get a 212 cabinet with that size,punch and volume I'll take that. So I say "Hat's off to Nick" ... how ever he accomplished it the fact is he did.

[astack]

+1 Brad

Originally Posted by Brad Johnson

It's pretty wild that for some building a product that works great for the intended user isn't good enough. As if one would like something more after getting "good" test results. It would still sound like it sounds.
Musical instrument amplification is not about shooting for an ideal plot. It's about getting the sound you want. At least it is for.

I emailed Fender to ask them to measure the new American Deluxe Jazz basses to compare to the Squiers and got no response. Obviously it's snake oil because they didn't measure it

I can't think of ANY maker that does offer plots except for maybe BFM. At most some owners have measured their cab in a hole in the yard and shared the results. Honestly even Baer, Barefaced, etc. aren't giving plots out when you buy and they have all the respect here on TB. How have they earned it by not doing what you demand of Nick? Happy customers I suppose. Just the way it sounds like Xsonics is going about it.

Originally Posted by Brad Johnson

The remark about people liking things because they paid a lot of money was pretty telling. That's not a given and it does give insight into the stance.

I think most people would quietly return the item and follow the "If you dont have anything nice to say" rule. At most, people will say it didn't work for them.

Back OT, curious to hear more about the 215. Wasn't expecting the mid driver, but guess it gives it a more even extended range.

[jnewmark]

If you were that concerned with measurements, you could always buy a cab, and measure it, or you could ship it to BFM, who, IIRC, has a standing invitation to test any cab as long as you pay for shipping both ways to New Hampshire. Then, once satisfied, you could sell it to me at a small reduced price. What say, ye, Seamonkey ?

[svtb15]

The Xsonics look real nice. But one thing that really stands out to me is that the owner of Xsonics comes in here and takes part in the discussion and answers questions about his product... TO me, that gets a very good two thumbs up on the Customer Service check off list.
From the past, and what i have seen in other threads, some people just like to come and beat up the manufactures for some reason, while siting behind a keyboard and being a net bully... Dont want that to happen to Xsonics. They have only been very positive. And its great to see a new company come up and offer choices. ..
I don't know Xsonics , I don't own a cab. But the cab seems interesting..

[Ncognito]

Originally Posted by svtb15

The Xsonics look real nice. But one thing that really stands out to me is that the owner of Xsonics comes in here and takes part in the discussion and answers questions about his product... TO me, that gets a very good two thumbs up on the Customer Service check off list.

Thank you very kindly svtb15 !!!

I'm proud to offer anyone who purchases an Xsonics cabinet at 72 hour approval window. My goal is tonal and total satisfaction. If my box doesn't deliver - return it!

[JohnnyLiBass]

I couldn't agree more. In fact I promptly went to their website to view their products as a result of Nick's involvement in this discussion. That's the kind of service and involvement after the sale that will earn a company my trust and my money.

It looks like these cabs would be an investment. I have been looking hard for a 212 that can handle real power, I may start saving my pennies for one of these.

[svtb15]

+1

Originally Posted by Ncognito

Thank you very kindly svtb15 !!!

I'm proud to offer anyone who purchases an Xsonics cabinet at 72 hour approval window. My goal is tonal and total satisfaction. If my box doesn't deliver - return it!

[5StringPocket]

Originally Posted by Fretlessboy

The 215/5 may be more up your alleyAttachment 318446 4 ohm 1,000 watts 40 hz .

That 215/5 looks like a beast! Is that loaded with a pair of Eminence 3015's and a Faital M5N12 mid? I'm interested in how the sound profile compares with the CF212 and how it works at the big Daytona gig. That should be quite the proving ground.

[Fretlessboy]

There are a few videos on youtube

[Fretlessboy]

Originally Posted by 5StringPocket

That 215/5 looks like a beast! Is that loaded with a pair of Eminence 3015's and a Faital M5N12 mid? I'm interested in how the sound profile compares with the CF212 and how it works at the big Daytona gig. That should be quite the proving ground.

it will indeed... Nick says the 5 isn't necessary... I trust him. I have always been a 15 fan but the box size has been too big till now.

[seamonkey]

Originally Posted by jnewmark

If you were that concerned with measurements, you could always buy a cab, and measure it, or you could ship it to BFM, who, IIRC, has a standing invitation to test any cab as long as you pay for shipping both ways to New Hampshire. Then, once satisfied, you could sell it to me at a small reduced price. What say, ye, Seamonkey ?

I'm not the one who has to prove anything. The whole discussion of flip-flopping drivers and listen how it sounds is outright silly.

Spend your money however you want, but we're all here to champion better products that are actually better. With some proof behind it.

[5StringPocket]

Originally Posted by Fretlessboy

it will indeed... Nick says the 5 isn't necessary... I trust him. I have always been a 15 fan but the box size has been too big till now.

What are the dimensions and weight of that 215/5? The 5 would help dispersion of the upper mids and probably go high enough (~6.5kHz) you wouldn't need a tweeter but the crossover point is lower which would affect the voicing. You wouldn't get as much cone breakup from the 15 as when you run it full range. I have both woofer/mid and woofer/tweet cabs. They are two different flavors of good and the right crossover design is important for both. It would be interesting to have a cab with both so you could select between the two and see which you prefer.

[Fretlessboy]

Seamonkey, you can say what you want and if you want to stir dog **** knock yourself out... But do it in your own thread where you have personal knowledge of the gear you are talking about.