• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

AudioKinesis 112 Cab

Status
Not open for further replies.
#421
JimmyM said:
does that mean we'd run the risk of blowing the horn if we used them for double duty?
Click to expand...

What concerns me is signals that have a huge amount of energy in the treble region, like a synthesizer rich in harmonics. I think Thunderchild would be fine as a PA cab with most types of music.

The compression driver in the Thunderchild is the same as was used in the 212 cab that you beta-tested, but the crossover is improved, both in sound quality and in driver protection. So within the limitations imposed by its smaller size and so forth, Thunderchild is arguably a better PA cab than the one you had.

The production version of the 212 is somewhat inspired by your intention to use it for PA, so it will have a beefier compression driver. It will be the same compression driver as in some of my home audio speakers.
 
#422
I just used mine yesterday with an old AI Focus two channel amp and ran a vocal mic through the first channel and the second with my EUB and it sounded great for both!

I got two gigs coming up this weekend where I will take the Thunderchild out for club blasting. Can't wait to see how it goes!
 
#423
DukeLeJeune said:
What concerns me is signals that have a huge amount of energy in the treble region, like a synthesizer rich in harmonics. I think Thunderchild would be fine as a PA cab with most types of music.

The compression driver in the Thunderchild is the same as was used in the 212 cab that you beta-tested, but the crossover is improved, both in sound quality and in driver protection. So within the limitations imposed by its smaller size and so forth, Thunderchild is arguably a better PA cab than the one you had.

The production version of the 212 is somewhat inspired by your intention to use it for PA, so it will have a beefier compression driver. It will be the same compression driver as in some of my home audio speakers.
Click to expand...
always thinking ahead! i thought it was darn fine as a pa cab as it was, quite honestly. glad these tests hensonbass and ken have done are working out. i probably won't quite challenge it like some others would, but it's nice to know it can take it.
 
#424
Thanks for the feedback, Hensonbass! Good timing - it applies to the present topic.

Jimmy, let me give a little bit more information about power handling of the compression driver in the Thunderchild.

The driver is rated at 50 watts thermal. Now at first glance that sounds pretty wimpy, but over most of its range, the compression driver is about 10 dB more efficient than the woofer. The padding required to match levels reduces the power the compression driver sees over most of its range by a factor of ten. So far so good.

But remember the qualifier - "over most of its range". You see, at 8 kHz and above, the compression driver is only about 4 dB more efficient than the woofer, so up there it's not protected by padding nearly as much. Hence my concerns about hitting it with a full-power signal that has a lot of high harmonic content. Maybe someone who knows more about the spectral content that a PA speaker might see will comment.
 
#425
DukeLeJeune said:
Thanks for the feedback, Hensonbass! Good timing - it applies to the present topic.

Jimmy, let me give a little bit more information about power handling of the compression driver in the Thunderchild.

The driver is rated at 50 watts thermal. Now at first glance that sounds pretty wimpy, but over most of its range, the compression driver is about 10 dB more efficient than the woofer. The padding required to match levels reduces the power the compression driver sees over most of its range by a factor of ten. So far so good.

But remember the qualifier - "over most of its range". You see, at 8 kHz and above, the compression driver is only about 4 dB more efficient than the woofer, so up there it's not protected by padding nearly as much. Hence my concerns about hitting it with a full-power signal that has a lot of high harmonic content. Maybe someone who knows more about the spectral content that a PA speaker might see will comment.
Click to expand...

I would think that mic'ing up cymbals, etc. might be an issue, or as you say, super loud synth or something. However, you probably would not be doing that with a cab this small anyway.

Even though my bass tone is quite 'bright', with more treble extension than many, I would assume there is VERY little energy above 8K. That shouldn't be an issue. However, I'll let you know. If I don't blow out the horn with my stainless steel roundwound strings and slapping on occasion, then most likely, no-one will!
 
#426
KJung said:
I would think that mic'ing up cymbals, etc. might be an issue, or as you say, super loud synth or something. However, you probably would not be doing that with a cab this small anyway.

Even though my bass tone is quite 'bright', with more treble extension than many, I would assume there is VERY little energy above 8K. That shouldn't be an issue. However, I'll let you know. If I don't blow out the horn with my stainless steel roundwound strings and slapping on occasion, then most likely, no-one will!
Click to expand...
lol! good point!
 
#430
DukeLeJeune said:
Thanks for the feedback, Hensonbass! Good timing - it applies to the present topic.

Jimmy, let me give a little bit more information about power handling of the compression driver in the Thunderchild.

The driver is rated at 50 watts thermal. Now at first glance that sounds pretty wimpy, but over most of its range, the compression driver is about 10 dB more efficient than the woofer. The padding required to match levels reduces the power the compression driver sees over most of its range by a factor of ten. So far so good.

But remember the qualifier - "over most of its range". You see, at 8 kHz and above, the compression driver is only about 4 dB more efficient than the woofer, so up there it's not protected by padding nearly as much. Hence my concerns about hitting it with a full-power signal that has a lot of high harmonic content. Maybe someone who knows more about the spectral content that a PA speaker might see will comment.
Click to expand...

I don't know, but I would think that thermal energy produced by reproducing most music goes down as the frequency goes up. Synthesizers would probably be the toughest in this regard, of course depending on the musicians playing style and the music covered. Most other signals are fairly bursty in nature, so not as much demand on the driver.

Does the driver's manufacturer provide any thermal energy/frequency info?
 
#431
lo-freq said:
I don't know, but I would think that thermal energy produced by reproducing most music goes down as the frequency goes up. Synthesizers would probably be the toughest in this regard, of course depending on the musicians playing style and the music covered. Most other signals are fairly bursty in nature, so not as much demand on the driver.

Does the driver's manufacturer provide any thermal energy/frequency info?
Click to expand...

The other thing here is that Duke seems to be brutally honest about spec's. Since I have quite a bit of upper mid/treble presence to my tone, when I saw him post that his tweeter was rated at 50 watts thermal, just for a second, I thought 'uh oh'.

Then, I remember the one time in 30 years of using two way cabs with tweeters that I blew up one of the '100 watt tweeters' that Epifani puts in their UL cabs (my own fault... showed up with a small cab and low wattage head at a gig that ended up being stupid loud, and the head (EBS HD350) put out a TON of 5K+ volume. Distortion and tweeters with no protection circuitry.... not good:D.

OK... point of the story... I took it into the local cab repair guy, and he said if that tweeter was truly rated at 100 watts, he would eat my cab and send me a video of it:D and then buy me a new cab.

So, a 'true 50 watts' with an expertly designed crossover makes me feel pretty 'OK".:bassist:
 
#432
The Fitzmaurice-designed Jack 12's are not common, but it'd also be interesting to see a comparison between those cabs, equipped with 3012HO's, and the Thunderchilds. It's not too likely that anyone has had both of those, though.
 
#435
Yeah, the Bon Jovi pic is one of my sons. I look more like this guy.

Lo-freq, the driver's thermal power handling spec is based on the EIA 426-B protocol, the details of which I'd have to google.

Anyway, that 10 dB of padding means that a signal level high enough to put 500 watts into the woofer will only put 50 watts into the tweeter, at least up to 8 kHz.

Optimistic power ratings can be based on "peak" power, and the shorter the peak the higher the wattage can be before the voice coil heats up enough for thermal failure to occur.
 
#436
50 watts with 10db of attenuation means around 500 watts of real power handling assuming the attenuation circuit can dissipate that much...I think :)

With 4db of attenuation you're still looking at >100 watts continuous. That's a lot of volume at 8khz.

I'd suggest you use a 14khz or so low pass on your PA to save yourself some power handling, and I'd try it with 8khz before rejecting it.

Just be careful and responsible with your volume :)
 
#437
rpsands said:
50 watts with 10db of attenuation means around 500 watts of real power handling assuming the attenuation circuit can dissipate that much...I think
Click to expand...

The attenuation is accomplished by several different circuits within the crossover; it would be more accurate to call it "EQ", as "attenutation" implies a simple resistor network. I suppose passive EQ can be thought of as "selective attenuation".

I use fairly beefy crossover parts; probably not high-watt sine-wave-proof, but we should be fine with music plus there's a margin of safety built in. Arguably the cab is a good pound or so heavier than I could have gotten away with because of said beefy crossover parts.
 
#439
hensonbass said:
I find myself engaging the gentle rolloff at 3.5 kHz switch all the time for bass application. However, I didn't the other night when I ran a microphone through it. :p

In general I really like the way that roll off sounds for upright and electric. How about you guys?
Click to expand...

It's great for certain applications. I have the roll-off engaged on the clip with my Alleva-Coppolo. It works great with a more organic bass like that 60's style J with rosewood board and nickel rounds. The cab just sounds like a REALLY good one way cab with that setting to my ear.

I dig the full open too, though... still very organic and 'sweet' sounding.

Nice circuit!!!!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back