Go Back   TalkBass Forums > Bass Guitar Forums > Bass Guitar Forums > Amps [BG]
Register Rules/FAQ/CUP Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read



Supporting Membership
Thank You

Latest Supporting Member
Donate to Upgrade Today

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1  
Old 03-02-2013, 12:08 AM
bb03's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: CT
Supporting Member
Xsonics 212CF...seat of the pants review

First, a disclaimer brought about by the now constantly occurring "eyes vs. ears" arguing in the amps forum:

I am not against science/specs/data, and I will check them out to the best of my ignorant ability when they are available. But, being that I live in an area that has several music stores, where I can buy a cab (or other gear), take it home and try it in the setting I choose...I can live without the specs. To further expand on the "tryout" aspect...Xsonics (and others, like Mike Arnopol's Big E cabs) offer a trial period that gives me that same opportunity to test these cabs how ever I choose. The money I spend occasionally sending something back that didn't "work" for me, is far less than the time it would take me to educate myself to the point where I could truly know what a cab sounds like by reading specs. That time is much better spent spending time with my family, riding my bike, working out, watching a movie, blah, blah, blah, time is money, etc., etc.. IMO Also any reference to Hz figures are to be taken with a grain of salt, as they are not measured, but guesstimated to the best of my limited ability. Being as this review is wholly non-scientific, and is entirely based on my opinions, I think it's best to label myself as "unreliable" so as to keep the more tech oriented TB'ers from lambasting this review as heresy, nonsense, and plain old crap. This is the end of my disclaimer...what follows is a self-professed lame review in words, not numbers, of what my non golden ears perceive to be a great sounding cab.



So, being I like gear that is a bit out of the norm (single pickup basses, heads with minimal eq, cabs that have "interesting" speaker configurations), it was hard not to latch on to Xsonics, and their push/pull speaker loading (and, yes I am dumb enough to buy something this expensive, because I think it looks cool):

http://www.xsonics.com/

After talking with Xsonics owner, and fellow TB'er Nick via phone and email, I ordered a 212CF. It's a 2x12 box with one 12 firing out, and the second 12 firing into the same enclosure the out-firing driver is in. See the above weblink to get the visual, and explanation.

Xsonic's stated goal was to get the sound of an Eden 410 XLT in a smaller lighter package. This was an easy sell for me, as I love the sound of Eden cabs. They are punch city! Definitely not a ruler flat PA type cab. They are all about upper bass and low mids, with a nice bump in the 80 to 300 Hz range. This may not be everyone's cup of tea, but it's mine. This is the freq. range that can get through the mix without muddying up the bottom, while still sounding solid.

The 212 CF does the Eden imitation very well. It's loud...very, considering it's the size of some single 112's. It doesn't put out a lot of low (sub) bass, but when looking at the size of the cab...that's understandable. For me, it's got enough low end to not seem like it's lacking in that department (for reggae/dub...it's lacking), but it's got a very solid "punch you in the chest" slam to it. Can it keep up with an Eden 410 in the volume department...I don't have one for comparison, but it would be close, for sure. When you factor in the size and weight difference, it's impressive what this box does for sound output.

A few people have made visual comparisons with the Xsonics, and the older Schroeder 1212's with the angled baffle. There are some similarities for sure, especially if you flip the Xsonics side driver to the inside (which I have not tried). I had a Schroeder 1212R for a long time, and I liked that cab! It seems that style Schroeder went from a love to hate situation with more than a few owners. I always liked mine. but I completely agree about some of it's issues. The biggest was it didn't take EQ at all. Try to add some more low end...nope, doesn't work! Try to EQ out the massive low mid bump...you need more EQ than I ever had! All that being said, the Schroeders were crazy loud for their size, very portable, and happened to work for me.

The Xsonics has the loud thing down, and the portability is even better than the Schroeder. My 212CF weighs 38 lbs., and I can't think of another cab that could outdo it when considering size and weight. The Xsonics accepts EQ well. You can't add in subwoofer lows...the cab is not designed for it in the first place, but you certainly can add usable lows to fill out the bottom. I don't have any way to measure tech specs, but I'd guess (as the listed low end spec is -10db@44Hz) that this cab is producing usable bottom in the 60's are far as Hz goes. The ports on the Xsonics are much bigger than the Schroeder (which were tiny), so I'm sure that helps give it the better lows. Mids respond well to EQ, also. There isn't the "boxiness'' that the Schroeder had.

I can't say with any confidence that I know exactly what the push/pull is doing as far as the engineering aspect goes, but a few more knowledgeable TB'ers (arjank,will33,rpsands...to name a few) have given a probable synopsis of the design in the Xsonics main thread. It's worth reading. The gist of it is that the side speaker is adding lows, and low mids, but most of the upper mids and above, are being filtered out, as that speaker is not directly firing at you. So the Xsonics gives the output of two speakers where it matters most...in the meat of what most people associate with "bass". The mids and above, are mostly being heard from the forward firing speaker, which is enough, as our ears hear better at those frequencies, anyway, and it also takes much less wattage in that area to balance the lows. Having only one forward firing speaker certainly should help with dispersion, as compared to a multi-speakered box (of the same sized drivers).

In short...if you're using a 212 (or 2x112) or a 410, and want a super portable cab that will keep up volume wise (with a small loss in the sub low end), the Xsonics is worth serious consideration. It hits it's target of small, light and loud, for sure! IMO, and all that kind of stuff.

The cab is constructed very nicely...no complaints at all, there. I wish the plastic corner makers would come out with a corner to fit 1/2'' ply, but that's a cosmetic issue. All my communications with Nick from Xsonics were fruitful, and enjoyable. He's been quick to respond, whether by phone or email.

I'm sure I'll be editing this long post for grammer, etc. I'll do my best to answer questions, but they will all be opinion and experience based...I have no tools (or enough expertise to use them if I did) for any kind of technical specs. Oh, and my idea of "loud" is a Mesa M6 with the gain at 2 o'clock, and the master at 11 o'clock into a SWR Henry the 8x8...not a GK MB115 maxed out.
  #2  
Old 03-02-2013, 02:03 AM
::::BASSIST::::'s Avatar
Your life is your message.
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Vancouver, BC Canada
Supporting Member
Wow, very thorough. Thank you.
__________________
Stambaugh J Shortscale - fEARful 12/6 + 12sub - Gallien Krueger MB800



  #3  
Old 03-02-2013, 05:55 AM
Temp Banned (TOS Violation)

Endorsing artist Alien Audio basses GENZ BENZ/HERCULES STANDS/XSonics
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: St Augustine Florida
Wow...nicely explained.
  #4  
Old 03-02-2013, 08:39 AM
Banned

Owner, Xsonics Bass Cabinets
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Hoffman Estates, Illinois
GOLD Supporting Member
Thank you bb03 for the review! I'm so happy the Xsonics 212CF fits your needs!
  #5  
Old 03-03-2013, 06:47 AM
Banned

Owner, Xsonics Bass Cabinets
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Hoffman Estates, Illinois
GOLD Supporting Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by bb03 View Post
.

Xsonic's stated goal was to get the sound of an Eden 410 XLT in a smaller lighter package. This was an easy sell for me, as I love the sound of Eden cabs. They are punch city! Definitely not a ruler flat PA type cab. They are all about upper bass and low mids, with a nice bump in the 80 to 300 Hz range. This may not be everyone's cup of tea, but it's mine. This is the freq. range that can get through the mix without muddying up the bottom, while still sounding solid.
Having a rule flat cab maybe the ticket for some. That was never what Xsonics was shooting for. I have made plans to have my cabinets charted but that has to be done outside and with 10 degree temperatures that won't be happening for a few months!
  #6  
Old 03-04-2013, 09:05 AM
Temp Banned (TOS Violation)

Endorsing artist Alien Audio basses GENZ BENZ/HERCULES STANDS/XSonics
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: St Augustine Florida
I see a lot about "flat response" cabinets and I don't really get it. If your bass is not flat and your head everything at noon is not flat and God knows the rooms I play aren't flat so we are eq'ing. That being said, it comes back to what it sounds like to you. bb03 has hit it on the head. The 212cf is a great cabinet. As you guys know (or you don't) I have been a 12's guy for the last 15 years or so give or take. There was the Eden 112xlt and the 212 xlt... then the last 5 or 6 years the GB Neox112 and 212 and Uber 212. I am so pleased with this Xsonics 212cf . It is small and light and really cranks. The OP's findings are dead on. I can't find my box of crayons or I would draw a graph... just try one and let your ears decide.
  #7  
Old 03-04-2013, 10:48 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: North Idaho
Very cool stuff. There are so many interesting choices out there. Fretless, How would you compare it to the GB Neox/Über 212 beyond the weight issue?

The Xsonics is already on my list to check out and I'm just getting started with this.

Last edited by Blackjax : 03-04-2013 at 10:50 AM.
  #8  
Old 03-04-2013, 10:57 AM
Temp Banned (TOS Violation)

Endorsing artist Alien Audio basses GENZ BENZ/HERCULES STANDS/XSonics
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: St Augustine Florida
The uber 212 has a more pillowy type of bottom due to the 410 box size. If you want a cabinet to duke out and win the big ( but tight) bottom cab while saving size and weight the Xsonics 215cf is the kryptonite for that. The 212cf is a great tiny cabinet and has a very focused bottom that is very clean and handles a low "B" very well.
  #9  
Old 03-04-2013, 06:05 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fretlessboy View Post
I see a lot about "flat response" cabinets and I don't really get it. If your bass is not flat and your head everything at noon is not flat and God knows the rooms I play aren't flat so we are eq'ing.
It's basically just about knowing what your cab does/doesn't do to your sound. Where your color/tone/etc comes from, and where it doesn't. Of course all of that stuff isn't flat. Even what would be considered a "flat" cabinet really isn't... it's just closer to it than others.

Why would it matter? On stage, it doesn't. It's about stage sound vs FOH. And how much one cares (or not) about the two being the same, or similar. The oft-raging questions... DI, or mic? If DI, direct from bass? Or from the head/preamp? Pre or post EQ?

All of that stuff. If one really likes the tone they get from their cab, and it is a cab that definitely has a large impact on the tone/voicing, and they want FOH to get the same... should probably mic the cab if at all possible.

On the other hand, if the cab is flatter, with less impact on the tone, one might prefer the simplicity of a post EQ DI. Or if one primarily uses the rig EQ as a corrective tool, a pre EQ might be fine. (The sound person being in a better position to judge and correct for FOH.) If one doesn't care about getting the tone of their preamp to FOH, then they might be fine with right from the bass.

Or if you know your favorite cab rolls off at 65Hz, has a big bump at 130Hz, a dip at 3K, and so on, and you're not going to be able to mic your cab... maybe you could tell the sound person that's what your cab does that you like, as a starting point. (Whether they are willing to do such a thing being an entirely different matter of course.)

Anywho, just different strokes and various ways to skin the cat. The "flat thing" isn't at all about wanting to "be flat", it's about chosing or simply knowing where the bumps and curves are.
  #10  
Old 03-04-2013, 06:31 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
It is small and light and really cranks. The OP's findings are dead on.
  #11  
Old 03-04-2013, 07:44 PM
Temp Banned (TOS Violation)

Endorsing artist Alien Audio basses GENZ BENZ/HERCULES STANDS/XSonics
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: St Augustine Florida
Well I am the sound guy/bassist/musical director for Bobby Scott and I Mic the cabinet because it sounds that good. Cabinets prior I used the d.i. But since this cab I mic
  #12  
Old 03-05-2013, 09:52 AM
Temp Banned (TOS Violation)

Endorsing artist Alien Audio basses GENZ BENZ/HERCULES STANDS/XSonics
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: St Augustine Florida
Click image for larger version

Name:	ImageUploadedByTalkBass1362502243.030588.jpg
Views:	45
Size:	71.9 KB
ID:	322402
  #13  
Old 03-05-2013, 10:19 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fretlessboy View Post
I see a lot about "flat response" cabinets and I don't really get it. If your bass is not flat and your head everything at noon is not flat and God knows the rooms I play aren't flat so we are eq'ing. That being said, it comes back to what it sounds like to you. bb03 has hit it on the head. The 212cf is a great cabinet. As you guys know (or you don't) I have been a 12's guy for the last 15 years or so give or take. There was the Eden 112xlt and the 212 xlt... then the last 5 or 6 years the GB Neox112 and 212 and Uber 212. I am so pleased with this Xsonics 212cf . It is small and light and really cranks. The OP's findings are dead on. I can't find my box of crayons or I would draw a graph... just try one and let your ears decide.
How do you know these cabinets aren't flat? Are you just assuming they aren't?

The Winisd graphs posted in another thread showed they tended to be flat. Unfortunately the same graphs had the low frequency roll-off point much higher than reference designs based on the same drivers. They were flat above the roll off. You could extend the low end roll-off with EQ.

If these cabs ever get measured then maybe you'd know what you like without the assumptions.
__________________
My opinions are the result of years of rational, objective analysis. I analyze all factors before making a choice. I update my opinions to include new facts. Fallacies? No?
  #14  
Old 03-05-2013, 10:21 AM
bassjam's Avatar
Registered User

Lakland Basses,Genz Benz
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: dfw
Supporting Member
I like the look of these- This may have been discussed and I missed it (If i did miss it I apologize in advance) but these are very similar looking to the smaller Schroeder cabs. Any comparison?

Very cool idea-subscribed!
  #15  
Old 03-05-2013, 10:24 AM
jnewmark's Avatar
Keepin' the Groove Alive !
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Stax 1966
Supporting Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by bassjam View Post
I like the look of these- This may have been discussed and I missed it (If i did miss it I apologize in advance) but these are very similar looking to the smaller Schroeder cabs. Any comparison?

Very cool idea-subscribed!
There's a mega thread about these cabs. Interesting reading.
__________________
R.I.P Duck Dunn, 2012.
  #16  
Old 03-05-2013, 10:28 AM
bassjam's Avatar
Registered User

Lakland Basses,Genz Benz
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: dfw
Supporting Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by jnewmark View Post
There's a mega thread about these cabs. Interesting reading.
Cool thanks-I was just browsing and ran across this-bit behind on my research and I missed it-tried to search on my phone.Not always user friendly. Ill check it out!
  #17  
Old 03-05-2013, 10:37 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by bassjam View Post
I like the look of these- This may have been discussed and I missed it (If i did miss it I apologize in advance) but these are very similar looking to the smaller Schroeder cabs. Any comparison?

Very cool idea-subscribed!
Schroeder doesn't make the side fire into a cavity "look" cabinet anymore.
The new Schroeder design is a standard cabinet
http://www.schroedercabinets.com/1212.htm

Out with the old, in with the proven.
__________________
My opinions are the result of years of rational, objective analysis. I analyze all factors before making a choice. I update my opinions to include new facts. Fallacies? No?
  #18  
Old 03-05-2013, 10:50 AM
bassjam's Avatar
Registered User

Lakland Basses,Genz Benz
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: dfw
Supporting Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by seamonkey View Post
Schroeder doesn't make the side fire into a cavity "look" cabinet anymore.
The new Schroeder design is a standard cabinet
http://www.schroedercabinets.com/1212.htm

Out with the old, in with the proven.
Wow you're right-havent been to the site in ages. Doesnt look like to old pricing either!
  #19  
Old 03-05-2013, 11:24 AM
Temp Banned (TOS Violation)

Endorsing artist Alien Audio basses GENZ BENZ/HERCULES STANDS/XSonics
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: St Augustine Florida
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fretlessboy View Post
I see a lot about "flat response" cabinets and I don't really get it. If your bass is not flat and your head everything at noon is not flat and God knows the rooms I play aren't flat so we are eq'ing. That being said, it comes back to what it sounds like to you. bb03 has hit it on the head. The 212cf is a great cabinet. As you guys know (or you don't) I have been a 12's guy for the last 15 years or so give or take. There was the Eden 112xlt and the 212 xlt... then the last 5 or 6 years the GB Neox112 and 212 and Uber 212. I am so pleased with this Xsonics 212cf . It is small and light and really cranks. The OP's findings are dead on. I can't find my box of crayons or I would draw a graph... just try one and let your ears decide.
Quote:
Originally Posted by seamonkey View Post
How do you know these cabinets aren't flat? Are you just assuming they aren't?

The Winisd graphs posted in another thread showed they tended to be flat. Unfortunately the same graphs had the low frequency roll-off point much higher than reference designs based on the same drivers. They were flat above the roll off. You could extend the low end roll-off with EQ.

If these cabs ever get measured then maybe you'd know what you like without the assumptions.
I actually know the only thing I am not assuming is the cabinet kicks butt for a 212. The 215cf is a bad mother (shut your mouth)... This is a 212 thread but for 3 more inches the 215cf will hurt you... flat is anyone standing in front of it.
  #20  
Old 03-05-2013, 11:57 AM
bb03's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: CT
Supporting Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by seamonkey View Post


Out with the old, in with the proven.
My dearest seamonkey,

Your vendetta against "side firing" cabs has crossed over from ridiculous into comical. I would like to say "thank you" for being so boringly predictable...but I can't, because I'm beginning to think I may be falling for you! You are so strong of will, that when I think of you, I picture a square jawed man, shirtless astride an 810...like on the cover of a romance novel (or the guy in the old spice commercial)!

I'm dreaming of our first date...we'll start with a long drive in my Wrangler. I know at first, you'll be nervous about driving on the pavement in a vehicle engineered for off-road. There will be no top or doors either, but my strong forearms and bare feet will cause you to swoon and fall, like a manly flower, into the passenger seat.

We'll drive for miles..the wind in our hair. The soft jazz on the radio will struggle against the roar of the mud tires. We may stop at Staples, under my false pretense of picking up an "Easy Button", for you to push while I later exceed the speed limit. My real reason for the Staples sidetrack, will be to see the excitement in your face as we roam the aisles, passing paper, and printers, and computers, and all those wonderful things that can chart, graph, and fulfill your secret desires. I imagine a flush in your stubbled cheeks.

As the day passes, I am more and more sure we are meant to be together, and as the moon softly pushes a fading sun beneath the horizon...finally the night arrives! We would fall into each others arms, as my Xsonics cab burns like a Duraflame in the hearth. The last sight I would see, before I close my eyes in rapture, would be the glow of the computer screen, as Winisd works feverishly on a new cab...my cab, that you designed just for me. (There is no Smilie I could possibly imagine that would work here!)

...and we lived happily, provenly, together for always.





...until I found the Schroeder in your closet!

The End.

Last edited by bb03 : 03-05-2013 at 12:08 PM.
Closed Thread


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Visit TalkBass on Facebook   Download our iOS app   Download our Android app

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:09 PM.




© 2012 Talk Music Group Inc. All rights reserved.
Play guitar too? Visit TalkGuitar.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.