AudioKinesis 112 Cab

[rpsands]

You might be interpreting "more midrange sensitivity" as "more sensitivity." I'm looking at the calculated SPL numbers for 12" woofers which generally is a much fairer number to look at than what companies post. It's also what Acme uses.

What interests me in most applications is the sensitivity under 400hz (and especially under 100hz) as the lower you go the higher the power demands.

I've talked about this before, but adding 3db @ 80hz takes a lot more power than adding 3db @ 1500hz, especially for bass guitar.

 

[KJung]

You might be interpreting "more midrange sensitivity" as "more sensitivity." I'm looking at the calculated SPL numbers for 12" woofers which generally is a much fairer number to look at than what companies post. It's also what Acme uses.

That's why sometimes we need to put away the paper spec's and actually try the stuff and use our ears Fairer number or not, the way a human hears 'volume' does not exactly correspond to the spec's you are using.

 

[rpsands]

That's why sometimes we need to put away the paper spec's and actually try the stuff and use our ears Fairer number or not, the way a human hears 'volume' does not exactly correspond to the spec's you are using.

Yes, but the way a bass player actually uses a cab plays in here. Having an unbalanced tone profile (e.g. lots of mids) is not a big advantage for most bass players.

Cab A is 95db from 60 to 15khz
Cab B is 95db from 60 to 1.5khz, and 101 db above that (average)

Is Cab B really that much louder? Not really. It's already got as much mids as you could ever really want and your amp's got the mids at noon.

Crank up 6db of upper mids in Cab A, and now it's the same, and not really using that much more power (at least, I've never had an amp fart out from adding some upper mids .

 

[greenboy]

I didn't read either of your posts past about a sentence because I know the simple answer is that the cab falls in a zone midways between the Acmes, and most of the common 112 cabs for averaged sensitivity ; }

Once you drag tonal preferences into the mess it gets more convoluted and there is no single answer.

 

[KJung]

I didn't read either of your posts past about a sentence because I know the simple answer is that the cab falls in a zone midways between the Acmes, and most of the common 112 cabs for averaged sensitivity ; }

Once you drag tonal preferences into the mess it gets more convoluted and there is no single answer.

+1 That is right where my ears put it, and what I posted above... kind of in the middle of the 'typical' mid voiced 112 and the Acme in 'perceived volume per watt' and 'low end'. And, the good news is, it will TAKE more wattage (i.e., this cab seems to have much better 'mechanical' specs when hitting it with relatively high wattage at relatively high volume with aggressive playing) without folding than either the Acme or the 'typical 112'. Hence, I've experienced higher 'max SPL' with my little micro heads than with any other small cab to date!

 

[greenboy]

And to make a more complex answer yet, if one were to average the measured output of the Thunderchild from say 100 points in a room, or 20 points on a stage, it's going to have an advantage over a conventional two-way cab, or an Acme.

This is because of its off-axis performance. It's a better "room filler" for the size.

 

[KJung]

Yes, but the way a bass player actually uses a cab plays in here. Having an unbalanced tone profile (e.g. lots of mids) is not a big advantage for most bass players.

Cab A is 95db from 60 to 15khz
Cab B is 95db from 60 to 1.5khz, and 101 db above that (average)

Is Cab B really that much louder? Not really. It's already got as much mids as you could ever really want and your amp's got the mids at noon.

Crank up 6db of upper mids in Cab A, and now it's the same, and not really using that much more power (at least, I've never had an amp fart out from adding some upper mids .

Totally disagree.... personal taste there... depends what tone you are looking for.

Again, sometimes, we need to put the paper and pencil away and do a few hundred (or a few thousand) gigs on this stuff and actually listen to how a certain voicing matches up with various amplification voicings, tone goals, playing styles and volume requirements.

 

[rpsands]

I didn't read either of your posts past about a sentence because I know the simple answer is that the cab falls in a zone midways between the Acmes, and most of the common 112 cabs for averaged sensitivity ; }

Once you drag tonal preferences into the mess it gets more convoluted and there is no single answer.

I dunno man. I think there is some concrete truth wrapped up in there -- a full range deltalite might sound louder Duke's cabinet, but only because Duke attenuates the horn with some obnoxious amount of padding.

I say this as a guy who has A/B'd a lot of unbalanced tone profile stuff to my fEarful cabinet (specifically some things that are voiced similarly to conventional cabinets -- e.g. the Jack 112, and also a 3012HO run full range).

If you take a full range Deltalite, say, which is typical of quality 1x12 cabs, and scalp the midrange off of it so that it's closer to flat, I doubt you'll find it to be that much louder (if at all).

 

[greenboy]

rpsands,

You kinda missed my point though: the simple answer FIRST. Because most people can digest that, and then maybe can deal with the situational complex answers later.

At the end of that simple answer I said that it gets more convoluted once you consider actual tonal preferences. And maybe more important than a particular tonal preference is what type of music in what types of bands in what types of venue circumstances. Once you are playing in dense loud mixes things change considerably. People that play a certain type of gig almost all the time truly do not seem to get that.

 

[rpsands]

I'm not so sure you can distill this to a simple answer because you're not comparing apples to apples. Cabinets with flattish tone profiles like fEarfuls and Acmes and TC's compare average sensitivity quite well.

Cabinets with unbalanced tone profiles do not compare easily. Sit a fullrange 3012HO next to a 15/6 -- some people will think they are the same, some people will find one or the other louder. Especially gets aggravated at different listening volumes.

 

[John D Harris]

I didn't read either of your posts past about a sentence because I know the simple answer is that the cab falls in a zone midways between the Acmes, and most of the common 112 cabs for averaged sensitivity ; }

Once you drag tonal preferences into the mess it gets more convoluted and there is no single answer.

I'm not so sure you can distill this to a simple answer because you're not comparing apples to apples. Cabinets with flattish tone profiles like fEarfuls and Acmes and TC's compare average sensitivity quite well.

Cabinets with unbalanced tone profiles do not compare easily. Sit a fullrange 3012HO next to a 15/6 -- some people will think they are the same, some people will find one or the other louder. Especially gets aggravated at different listening volumes.

Forget about fruit, he's talking about all conventional loudspeaker systems, not just specific tone profiles.

 

[rpsands]

I got that, and my point was that all loudspeakers are fruit. Those with flattish tone profiles are apples and those without are oranges.

This is based on setting a fEarful 15/6 next to a 3012HO -- similar "average" sensitivity, vastly different perceived volume *for different listeners* *which changes as the volume goes up*.

 

[shrigg]

This cab takes a LOT more power to get up to volume than a typical 112. You are somehow misinterpreting the specs that you are using, or the specs are incorrect. Trust me, I've been A/Bing for a month now with various 210's and 112's. However, the good news is, it will take the power and at the rather unusual 4ohm impedance for a 112, it will at least somewhat make up for the significantly lower SPL.

And of course, the 'louder cabs' will, almost by definition, have a less low end response and or a much more aggressive mid bump. This cab has MUCH higher Max SPL across a wide frequency range than any other 112 I've experienced, but there is a price to pay in 'volume per watt'... that's just the way it works from my experience. The difference with this little box compared to many of the other 'deep, low SPL' executions from back in the day (like the Acme) is it can actually take the power needed to get the volume up there, and it handles the transients MUCH better.

To the OP, this cab falls right between an Acme and a 'normal' 112 (like your HT112) regarding, not surprisingly, low end and SPL. Also, the good news is, the driver is much more 'robust' than the Acme... none of that cone creasing or that 'clank' when the cone hits the coil or whatever that is (the xmech thing that can be a problem with the Acme's if you slap).

Also, to the OP... if you are an Acme lover, this is not the same thing. You might want to PM my buddy Mothra2, which loves his B210 and didn't really dig the Thunder Child. Good to have another data point and a direct Acme comparison.

Well I'm not an Acme lover per se. I put up with it for 10 years or so but always wanted something closer to the efficient cabs everyone else had. If nothing else this will sit happily between then Acme and the more-efficient Berg Stack. Knowing this cab can actually *take* a lot of power also gives promise. If I run out of power I can always lineout into my Crown XTi-1000 bridged for 1000w.

All said, I'm sold. I placed my order with Duke today.

 

[SG-Jazz]

Quick Question about using effects with a Thunderchild.

Will fuzz or overdrive such as a wooly mommoth or a pro co rat damage the horn and or speakers? Ive heard they can damage tweeters. Though i am not sure if horns and tweeters are the same.

 

[JimmyM]

Quick Question about using effects with a Thunderchild.

Will fuzz or overdrive such as a wooly mommoth or a pro co rat damage the horn and or speakers? Ive heard they can damage tweeters. Though i am not sure if horns and tweeters are the same.

they can be the same. you can have a tweeter horn. the one on the thunderchild is a mid horn. and yes it can damage tweeters, but these mid horns duke uses will take a goodly amount of abuse, plus they have a crossover with a switch that cuts out all those high freqs that don't sound good with distortion anyway. i've run distortion through one of those horns before, and it'll take a pretty good pounding. and it sounds amazing. don't expect to play in a doom band with a thunderchild, but as long as you cut the highs, i don't see any problem using fuzz.

 

[SG-Jazz]

Hmm so what your saying is as long as I turn the horn off for songs with fuzz I should be fine?

Any other effects I should be weary about(such as mode 7 on the ps-3, auto filters, and such)?

 

[IntrepidCellist]

The TC sounds fine with fuzz, it just helps to use the 3.5k "rolloff" switch. Honestly, it would take about 1000W IIRC to blow that compression driver because of how it's "padded back" to make it blend with the woofer, and at that point you'd stand a good chance of damaging the woofer too. Duke wrote a post on this earlier in the thread somewhere.

 

[John D Harris]

Hmm so what your saying is as long as I turn the horn off for songs with fuzz I should be fine?

Any other effects I should be weary about(such as mode 7 on the ps-3, auto filters, and such)?

On, attenuated using switch, or off using switch -- totally personal preference, but one or more of those settings will probably work for most people.

This is a totally non-harsh-sounding HF driver/horn combination aided by an excellent crossover (at least most reports indicate this - I have yet to try one out myself).

 

[greenboy]

For any extended-bandwidth cab I'd recommend that you have post-distortion/fuzz EQ facilities on any pedal (or amp channel). Not so bad to have some dry/effected mix control too.

But actually I think all that's good advice for any cab, if you want flexibility, or tend to look to change things up once in awhile.

 

[SG-Jazz]

The TC sounds fine with fuzz, it just helps to use the 3.5k "rolloff" switch. Honestly, it would take about 1000W IIRC to blow that compression driver because of how it's "padded back" to make it blend with the woofer, and at that point you'd stand a good chance of damaging the woofer too. Duke wrote a post on this earlier in the thread somewhere.

So your saying that 3.5 "rolloff" switch should protect the horn from getting damaged? 500W max will be the most ill ever ever send into the TC. Is the compression driver a component of the horn?