Acme Full Range Series III 112

[andertone]

Ken nails it. Since most of my signal goes to the FOH via a DI and the crowd hears that, my stage setup needs to be a nice balance of low end thump (not boom) and midrange cutting through. The Bergies do that very well, and two give me enough db's to hear myself over the drums. A 1x112 alone won't do that for me.
What the acme was great was for moderate volume gigs without PA support to carry small venues

 

[Bluesy Soul]

Again, as usual, disagree strongly with this. Different cabs will produce different ratio's of the fundamental versus the upper harmonics across the range of the instrument. My open G string sounds quite different through the Acme versus the TC, and the lower notes of the E string sound WAY different. Of course, different does not mean better, as I like the sound of my lower register through both cabs, even though they are very different.

+2, Ken. In the context of this thread and the cabs discussed here, Steve Rolfeca is absolutely correct.

 

[ACB0015]

This may be a little off-thread, but not really, as I ponder the pulchritude of the powerful possibilities, and you fellows have definitely heard your share of gear:
In the interest of making the most of what's in front of me, may I have some suggestions for replacement drivers, neo or not, for my current group of cabs. They are all older USA Eden. 8ohm D112XLT, 4ohm D210XLT, 8ohm CX110. I have two WT330 Time Traveller heads. The whole thing is nicely modular and if I run it all the 110 and 112 go off one amp and I slave the other to run the 210. I already made the 110 not CX and replaced the stock co-ax with an Eminence Beta10. But there may be a nicer 10. I was thinking a 3012HO for the 112. I would keep it simple as possible and not mess with changing any crossovers or tweeters and keep the same nominal impedences. I play mostly supporting role, ensemble bass on traditional P and J basses and amplified acoustic double bass.
You's guys rock, this is one of the best threads I have followed.

 

[KJung]

This may be a little off-thread, but not really, as I ponder the pulchritude of the powerful possibilities, and you fellows have definitely heard your share of gear:
In the interest of making the most of what's in front of me, may I have some suggestions for replacement drivers, neo or not, for my current group of cabs. They are all older USA Eden. 8ohm D112XLT, 4ohm D210XLT, 8ohm CX110. I have two WT330 Time Traveller heads. The whole thing is nicely modular and if I run it all the 110 and 112 go off one amp and I slave the other to run the 210. I already made the 110 not CX and replaced the stock co-ax with an Eminence Beta10. But there may be a nicer 10. I was thinking a 3012HO for the 112. I would keep it simple as possible and not mess with changing any crossovers or tweeters and keep the same nominal impedences. I play mostly supporting role, ensemble bass on traditional P and J basses and amplified acoustic double bass.
You's guys rock, this is one of the best threads I have followed.

Answering you from the 'non technical' side of things, you surely won't save much weight in a single driver cab (maybe 4 pounds or so). I would just leave well enough alone if the drivers are not damaged. Just IMO there. Sometimes, swapping a driver can make a wonderful tonal difference, and other times not, depending on the crossover design and the appropriateness of the driver to the box.

 

[greenboy]

Actually there are still a lot of cabs out there where it is relevant where you use a low B string or not. There are ones that allow you to get a lot of output out of the rest of the strings - sometimes a shocking amount - but once a B string is in use they begin to lose the plot. The worst examples of cabs like this have a high driver mortality rate, while the lesser examples often just require that you roll off more low end than maybe you'd like and/or having to back down the volume to keep the low B fartage at bay.

With a lot of these cabs if you were a 4-string player you could do a fairly loud gig with a single cab ... but to do the same one with a 5-string would push you into having to bring a second box, or to use something else entirely. So it's not a tonal issue per se.

 

[rpsands]

OK, I'm done arguing with folks who don't think how low you tune should impact your cabinet selection

 

[Bluesy Soul]

Actually there are still a lot of cabs out there where it is relevant where you use a low B string or not. There are ones that allow you to get a lot of output out of the rest of the strings - sometimes a shocking amount - but once a B string is in use they begin to lose the plot. The worst examples of cabs like this have a high driver mortality rate, while the lesser examples often just require that you roll off more low end than maybe you'd like and/or having to back down the volume to keep the low B fartage at bay.

With a lot of these cabs if you were a 4-string player you could do a fairly loud gig with a single cab ... but to do the same one with a 5-string would push you into having to bring a second box, or to use something else entirely. So it's not a tonal issue per se.

I don't disagree, greenboy; but I really think that's a topic for a different, broader thread. Ken has done us all another great service by testing, recording and posting about a particular "Super 12" cab. Inevitably, the comparison to the Thunderchild 12 became part of the discussion. Then as always, other cabs, general technical subjects and other tangents cropped up.

I don't speak for Ken; but personally I would prefer to see all those other cabs discussed in their own thread, with its own appropriate title. And it sounds as though Tom Bowlus is considering a shootout of some of those "other cabs" in the future.

 

[rogerwilliamsen]

KJung:
Would you be kind to make a guess on my behalf? I double on el./upright with an acoustic image focus 600w top. Would the acme or the tc perform best on upright?
Hope you'll find the time.
Roger

 

[KJung]

KJung:
Would you be kind to make a guess on my behalf? I double on el./upright with an acoustic image focus 600w top. Would the acme or the tc perform best on upright?
Hope you'll find the time.
Roger

I am DB clueless! With that caveat, both cabs would 'work' nicely with that head. The Acme would give you a huge fundamental wump down low, whereas the TC would be tighter, more controlled and more 'studio monitor pure' up top.

Given the limited EQ of the AI, the Thunderchild would IMO be the safest bet, since it automatically rolls off down low, and is very 'flat and even' up top.

Take that all with a grain of salt though, since I am an EB player and nothing else.

 

[KJung]

OK, I'm done arguing with folks who don't think how low you tune should impact your cabinet selection

If you take it from the other way around (as Greenboy did), there are definitely cabs out there that have such a high roll-off point that they sound pretty thin down low... on the E and B strings. So, I could see eliminating some cabs completely that don't provide the low end you want with any bass.

What doesn't make as much sense is eliminating a cab with a deep, full low end because you don't play a bass with a B string. That makes little sense, although it DOES make sense to choose a tighter voiced cab with higher efficiency regardless of the number of strings on your bass if you like a tighter, grindier low end on your lower notes (E or B string).

For example, my favorite cab (the Bergantino AE212) has, I believe a -10db at 40hz (maybe 45hz, can't remember). It still sounds great with my B string and E string, and does a great job of pounding that first harmonic of those lowest notes at high volumes. I believe the Acme is only -3db at around that frequency, which means it cranks much more of the fundamental frequencies of the E string as well as the B.

 

[Ric Vice]

I am DB clueless! With that caveat, both cabs would 'work' nicely with that head. The Acme would give you a huge fundamental wump down low, whereas the TC would be tighter, more controlled and more 'studio monitor pure' up top.

Given the limited EQ of the AI, the Thunderchild would IMO be the safest bet, since it automatically rolls off down low, and is very 'flat and even' up top.

Take that all with a grain of salt though, since I am an EB player and nothing else.

As I have not played through the ACME Full Range I can't comment on that. The Walter Woods Ultra and Woods MI-400-8 which is probably closer to the AI EQ wise ( Shelving Bass, Midrange and Treble Controls) both sound incredible with the Thunderchild 112. However there is a midrange voicing on the Woods amps that isn't part of the Acoustic Image EQ section which is much more "transparent". That wonderful Horn on the TC 112 reproduces the midrange and treble timbre of a Acoustic Bass exquisitely. There's real magic there. If I were to offer a guess I would say that the AI and Thunderchild 112 would be a perfect match for Double Bass. Electric Bass would be some what different however, the AI amp are so clean that Electric sounds a bit sterile. IMHO

Ric

 

[rpsands]

If you take it from the other way around (as Greenboy did), there are definitely cabs out there that have such a high roll-off point that they sound pretty thin down low... on the E and B strings. So, I could see eliminating some cabs completely that don't provide the low end you want with any bass.

What doesn't make as much sense is eliminating a cab with a deep, full low end because you don't play a bass with a B string. That makes little sense, although it DOES make sense to choose a tighter voiced cab with higher efficiency regardless of the number of strings on your bass if you like a tighter, grindier low end on your lower notes (E or B string).

For example, my favorite cab (the Bergantino AE212) has, I believe a -10db at 40hz (maybe 45hz, can't remember). It still sounds great with my B string and E string, and does a great job of pounding that first harmonic of those lowest notes at high volumes. I believe the Acme is only -3db at around that frequency, which means it cranks much more of the fundamental frequencies of the E string as well as the B.

Yes, it does crank out more of the fundamental of the E-string, but so would a 3012LF in a box, and close to 3db louder across the entire spectrum.

Sensitivity is the reason not to buy a cab tuned lower than you need. If one 3012LF in a box would do the job, why buy two Flatwounds?

Not that many guys are going to be able to gig with one of these 12s. Lots and lots of guys could gig with one 3012LF-based cab (duke's MRL, the 12/6, just a 3012LF in a box, whatever) who couldn't get by with just one Flatwound/Roundwound.

These cabs are way more of a niche piece than they're being made out to be with their pretty poor sensitivity. But whatever. I don't want to harsh on anyone's gig, I'm just here to help people find the gear that's right for them when I can

 

[AMJBASS]

I don't know about sterile, but the AI can sound a bit bland or lifeless with electric. Depends on your tonal ideal I guess.

I am super interested in the TC112. My previous experience with Acme cabinets kind of scares me a bit as I really don't like that super deep low end. If these Flatwound/Full Range 12 cabinets are indeed much more balanced I may need to consider it though!

 

[KJung]

Yes, it does crank out more of the fundamental of the E-string, but so would a 3012LF in a box, and close to 3db louder across the entire spectrum.

Sensitivity is the reason not to buy a cab tuned lower than you need. If one 3012LF in a box would do the job, why buy two Flatwounds?

Not that many guys are going to be able to gig with one of these 12s. Lots and lots of guys could gig with one 3012LF-based cab (duke's MRL, the 12/6, just a 3012LF in a box, whatever) who couldn't get by with just one Flatwound/Roundwound.

These cabs are way more of a niche piece than they're being made out to be with their pretty poor sensitivity. But whatever. I don't want to harsh on anyone's gig, I'm just here to help people find the gear that's right for them when I can

Again, I mostly agree with what you are saying, in that you pay a price for the low end response. If someone doesn't want that sort of low end response, there are better options. I just don't tie that to having a B string or not, and the feel of the E string on the Acme is quite different from any 12/6 cab I've ever played.

Yes, if you are looking for the maximum perceived volume in a single, small box, there are better options. If you are looking for fat, fat, fat down low (on the E and the B), I've not heard anything else like it, and was actually surprised at the absolute volume it put out (although that took a lot of watts to get to... but watts are light and cheap now).

 

[rpsands]

I suspect strongly that the difference on the low end E-string between a 12/6 and the Acme is being exaggerated. Differences in amp selection, eq position, bass, etc.

Have you sat down and a/b'd one with the same amp and bass? On paper, the difference should be borderline negligible. Since there's so little "tone" down low I've found low end specs to be highly predictive of real world performance, when they're accurate.

 

[KJung]

I suspect strongly that the difference on the low end E-string between a 12/6 and the Acme is being exaggerated. Differences in amp selection, eq position, bass, etc.

Have you sat down and a/b'd one with the same amp and bass? On paper, the difference should be borderline negligible. Since there's so little "tone" down low I've found low end specs to be highly predictive of real world performance, when they're accurate.

I have not directly A/B'd, but it is kind of a moot point. The Acme sounds totally different from the 8 or 10 12/6's I've played, from low to high... very different box.

With the same amplifier, the 4ohm Acme seems about on par volume-wise with the 8ohm 12/6 cabs built around a stock 3012LF. Of course, the upper midrange is VERY different, as is the nature and feel of the low end. If you have a way to match wattage, the 12/6 would be louder, by that expected 3db or so I would guess.

 

[steve_rolfeca]

OK, I'm done arguing with folks who don't think how low you tune should impact your cabinet selection

Sorry guys, I didn't mean to stir things up.

My comments were meant to be interpreted strictly in relation to the quoted post (user looking for a cab smaller and easier to carry than his un-named 115, and loud enough to cover rock and dance music), and the family of "super twelve" compact cabs being discussed as alternatives to the Acme- the fEarful 12/6, Thunderchild, the Barefaced, presumably the Baer...

Cabinet tuning indeed matters a lot. But as far as i am aware, none of these cabs fall into the "unable to play loud", or "unsuitable for 4-string" category.

These boxes aren't going to float everybody's boat tonewise. And there are lots of great-sounding 2*12's, etc., that will do the job if you don't mind paying a size, weight, and/or cost penalty. But like I originally said, if the requirements are stuck at a 12/6-sized or smaller box, weight around 40lbs (or less), enough low end to do dance music, and enough power handling to do jams and rehearsals at rock volume levels, then I don't know of anything else that can git 'er done...

 

[JxBass]

I have not directly A/B'd, but it is kind of a moot point. The Acme sounds totally different from the 8 or 10 12/6's I've played, from low to high... very different box.

I agree with Ken, not that I have the technical credentials to back it up.

Awhile back, when I A/B'd my 12/6 and Thunderchild, I found them very similar in tone, the 12/6 having a somewhat fuller bottom. I no longer have the 12/6 (because the TC112 sounded so similar in a smaller form factor) but I did A/B my Thunderchild and Acme. Very different. I can only deduce I would have heard the same difference against my old 12/6.

Again, non-techno. Just my feeble ears.

 

[rpsands]

The tone will absolutely be different. I'm talking about the bottom end exclusively.

 

[tombowlus]

The tone will absolutely be different. I'm talking about the bottom end exclusively.

I have A/B/C'd the Flatwound, Thunderchild and fEARful 12/6cube/1, and yes, their tone is definitely different (I think we all agree on that). Of those three cabs, the Acme and fEARful definitely go lower than the Thunderchild (with both ports open), and that's just as you would expect given their relative designs. I feel that the Flatwound and fEARful go equally deep, and are equally fat and full down low, but once you get into the lower midrange (on up), they each take on their own character. I'll also note that the relative efficiency of these three cabs across their frequency ranges also varies to an obvious degree.

At the risk of becoming too repetitive, I'll reiterate that bit about all these killer new 1x12's (the aforementioned trio, plus the Baer ML-112 and the Bergantino HT112ER - now the HD112) each being very impressive in their own rights, and each bringing something unique to the table. I have not heard any of the Barefaced cabs, but I'm guessing that they'd represent another killer take on this form factor.

More specifically to Andy's cabs, I have always been impressed with the top notch sonic fidelity that Acme cabs offered, and I have been equally impressed with his way more than reasonable prices. The Flatwound (and presumably the Full Range 112) certainly continue both traditions.