Thunderchild 112 and Shuttle 9.0

Discussion in 'Amps [BG]' started by Oracle, Nov 28, 2012.


  1. Oracle

    Oracle Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2012
    I am currently looking for a cab for my shuttle 9.0 , I really want to get the smaller cab I can so l think the Thunderchild 112 fit the bill perfectly but my fear is that GB does not recommend a single speaker cab for this amp. Is anybody using this combination that can provide an input how it sound? any other cab suggestion or should I get a shuttle 6 in order to use it with a single cab?
  2. jlepre

    jlepre

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2007
    Location:
    Warwick, NY
    Why don't they recommend a single cab? I have the STM-900 and I run a single 15. It sounds amazing!
  3. timber22

    timber22 Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2007
    Location:
    Lehigh Valley, Pennsylvania US
    I don't think there's anything wrong with using a single cab with the Shuttle 9.0 as long as you are aware of the watts. If your cab is 4 ohms, you are "potentially" delivering 900 watts to that one speaker. I forget what it is at 8 ohms, maybe 600 watts? You just need to be careful that your cab can handle it, and/or watch how hard you drive it, i.e. keep the gain and volume at reasonable levels.
  4. Pilgrim

    Pilgrim Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2004
    Location:
    Fort Collins, Colorado
    You can run just about any G-B cab ever made from that amp. Just don't crank it up high if the speaker is rated for less power than the amp.

    The only things that matter about matching cabs and amps are impedence and power handling capability. The rest is up to your ears and preferences.
  5. Register to disable this ad
  6. Bassist30

    Bassist30 Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2004
    Location:
    NEW YORK
    If there is a fear I would email Duke from Audiokinesis and ask him the question. 900watts into a single 12 is a lot but I know his cabinets can handle high power. But 900 watts is pretty high for a single 12.

    Mike Arnopol who is also involved with the construction of the Thunderchild cabs stated:

    You do need to be careful. The thing about the LF's is that we are used to the excursion being the limiting factor. You would run out of excursion way before thermal damage. Now with the insane amount of excursion that these speakers have thermal overload is more the issue. These speakers have an RMS rating of 450 watts. They'y take more than that here and there but if you pump more than 450 watts into the speaker for long amounts of time you can damage the voice coil even before you get the warning signs that we're used to. (fartout, hearing the voice coil whack the back plate)

    So be careful
  7. Oracle

    Oracle Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2012
    GB advice to keep an eye on the volume. Friedland mentioned on his review ... and this is the note I got from GB customer service: There is not really a single 12” cabinet that lines up real well with this head. The NEOX-122T as this has a 300 watt power handling if you kept an eye on the volume...I would recommend the GB 1288T-UQ.

    The last thing I want is to fry a $ 800 cab :(
  8. jlepre

    jlepre

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2007
    Location:
    Warwick, NY
    The Uber Quad isn't a single driver cab. I would look for a cab that can handle 500 watts. If you get an 8 ohm cab you would be fine.
  9. Oracle

    Oracle Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2012
    thanks ! the search begins...
  10. CL400Peavey

    CL400Peavey Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2011
    Media:
    11
    Albums:
    1
    Location:
    Grand Rapids Michigan
    I would check out these cabs:

    Baer ML 112
    fEARful 12/6
    fEARless 112
    greenboy Bassic 115
    greenboy Bassic 112
    Barefaced Bass Big Baby
  11. socialleper

    socialleper

    Joined:
    May 31, 2009
    Location:
    Canyon Country, CA
    Like everyone else said, just watch your volume. That Thunderchild cab looks like it can take some serious juice; unless you're playing outside or in a very large room without a PA I don't see where any danger would be. Just because the Shuttle 9.0 CAN supply 900w with everything cranked all the way up, doesn't mean it will instantaneously.
    I just bought that same head and two GK Neo 112 cabs but one is DOA. Just running one of those 300w cabs with the Shuttle set pretty low makes some fat auditory goodness. The Thunderchild is rated a 450w and seems really sturdy.
  12. nutdog

    nutdog Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Location:
    In the dog house.
    I drove an LDS 12/6 cab with the 3012LF and faital 6 inch mid with shuttle 9. It was an 8 ohm cab. It pretty well matched perfectly powerwise. Sounded pretty good, too. I guess technically it's a multidriver cab but technically so is any 12/tweeter cab.:)

    It was dis one: http://www.talkbass.com/forum/f127/fs-lds-12-6-3012lf-faital-mid-754392/

    If you're thinking Thunderchild you might consider the fearless 12/6. It's supposed to be a little smoother in the mids than fearfuls. It's also pretty nifty in that it can also sit like a wedge monitor.

    The TC is great but seems better mated to a 500 at 4ohm head.
  13. KJung

    KJung

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    Location:
    Wisconsin and Upper Michigan
    As others have posted, zero issue. As long as you aren't pushing the 9 into the area where the 'power management activation' light comes on, you are fine. Nice tonal yin yang also.... tight and bright head meets fat and smooth cab.
  14. Oracle

    Oracle Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2012
    thanks KJung !... I emailed AudioKinesis to check if everything is ok.. I currently have an Epifani PS112 that I think is very prominent in the low end, do you see any change in tone by using the Thunderchild?
  15. KJung

    KJung

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    Location:
    Wisconsin and Upper Michigan
    It is quite different. I actually like the PS112 quite a bit, and would call it kind of a 'traditional' voicing... nice low mid bump for fatness, a bit of a dip in the upper mids, and then a nice, extended treble response due to the tweeter.

    The TC112 goes deeper, has NO low mid bump (or hardly any), has very little dip in the upper mids, and won't extend quite so high into the upper treble. It takes more power to get to the same volume, so you will find that the 4ohm TC112 will sound about the same volume as your 8ohm PS112 with the same knob settings. However, the TC112 will get a LOT louder on the gig without compressing down low.

    The TC112 really does vibe a kind of 'studio monitor' vibe, which some love and others find a bit too 'smooth and pure'. It will not 'break-up' at all up top, and the more even ratio of upper mids to lower treble than a typical cab will make it sound less 'sparkly' up top, but more even and 'accurate'.

    Volume-wise, it would be about 75% of a PS112 x 2 stack.
  16. kringle77

    kringle77 Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2004
    Location:
    Massena NY
    I played my 9.2 through Lomo's TC112 and it sounded great.
  17. Oracle

    Oracle Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2012
    Thanks everybody!...now I need to do my homework and research all your suggestions :)
  18. Passinwind

    Passinwind Charlie Escher Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2003
    Media:
    17
    Albums:
    1
    Location:
    Columbia River Gorge, WA.
    FWIW, I've been using a 1000watt @ 4 ohm power amp for a year and half with my TC112AF with no problems at all. I do have DSP limiting and high pass filtering in place though, via my amp's very nice DSP section. I also had a Carvin BX500 for a few months, which makes 500 watts @ 4ohms. Worked fine, didn't sense any difference in the possibility of killing the cab, given my playing situations. The bigger rig sounded a little better, so I let the Carvin go. I should also mention that I've blown tons of stuff up over the years though...;)

Share This Page