AudioKinesis 112 Cab

[lbwdog]

I just want my niche. For instance, I claim to be THE BEST loudspeaker designer of Cajun descent living in Preston, Idaho. So far no one has challenged me on that.

Well Duke, don't ever forget, you're always welcome down here in Cajun Land!
I'll be thinking of you while eating some boiled crawfish during Super Bowl.

 

[greenboy]

The differences between Thunderchild and LDS 12/6 cabs close up may seem to be in favor of the LDS 12/6 because a cone radiates wider. But the crossover has a huge influence for 1.5 to 2 octaves there, and the LDS cabs for the most part have not had any real crossover design attention of that sophisticated a viewpoint put into them. Indeed, several different generic crossovers that are pretty raw in a number of ways have been stuffed into them at different times, and driver spacing hasn't always been optimum for vertical axis imaging either.

But even if they were god's own crossovers, once they get put onto a variable mid-pad - attenuator - any development time might as well have been spent watching soap operas on TV as far as off-axis imaging is concerned. Dispersion will not be optimum in that huge and important midrange area the crossover affects. Intelligibility and clarity that could have been there, have been squandered.

Get Duke's box... You won't lose anything - you'll likely gain. Duke actually spent ages on his crossover and I'll bet he is always revisiting what he could do to further improve it. And he's thinking about what the off-axis response is doing to clarity and detail.

So many people think it's about the drivers. But the drivers are just a mean to an end. The crossover designs REALLY matter, and they are enclosure AND driver specific. Nilly willy substitution and non-committed L-pad values just don't fly as well as one would suppose.

 

[KJung]

The differences between Thunderchild and LDS 12/6 cabs close up may seem to be in favor of the LDS 12/6 because a cone radiates wider. But the crossover has a huge influence for 1.5 to 2 octaves there, and the LDS cabs for the most part have not had any real crossover design attention of that sophisticated a viewpoint put into them. Indeed, several different generic crossovers that are pretty raw in a number of ways have been stuffed into them at different times, and driver spacing hasn't always been optimum for vertical axis imaging either.

But even if they were god's own crossovers, once they get put onto a variable mid-pad - attenuator - any development time might as well have been spent watching soap operas on TV as far as off-axis imaging is concerned. Dispersion will not be optimum in that huge and important midrange area the crossover affects. Intelligibility and clarity that could have been there, have been squandered.

Get Duke's box... You won't lose anything - you'll likely gain. Duke actually spent ages on his crossover and I'll bet he is always revisiting what he could do to further improve it. And he's thinking about what the off-axis response is doing to clarity and detail.

So many people think it's about the drivers. But the drivers are just a mean to an end. The crossover designs REALLY matter, and they are enclosure AND driver specific. Nilly willy substitution and non-committed L-pad values just don't fly as well as one would suppose.

Having listened to and played about a dozen LDS executions with various crossovers, tunings, and configurations, and some with and without L-pads, this is IMO more sour grapes than reality. They were all within 10% of each other

I no longer bother even responding to your posts, but when you do this sort of direct attack, well, a response is necessary.

That being said, I greatly prefer the voicing of Duke's OEM 3012LF, and the higher crossover point than the typical stock 3012LF execution with various crossovers and mid-drivers, so I do agree with you there in a general sense.

 

[greenboy]

Nope, it's not sour grapes. All of us guys who've twiddled with crossovers for awhile would love to have it be different at times. But it isn't. We'd all love it if you could just throw any one of three generic crossover designs in any box rather than really have to WORK, and never have to bother with designing with a specific L-pad value in the circuit.

Thinking it doesn't matter is much like thinking it doesn't matter what drivers are in a given enclosure. Turning a blind eye to it may be good for quick box turnover and profit, but it's not good for enhancing quality.

 

[kringle77]

Hey Ken, weren't you supposed to put up a clip of your new nordy into the thunderchild. I saw the one using the TC electronics rig. Maybe thats what you were refering to. Nice bass man!

 

[KJung]

Nope, it's not sour grapes. All of us guys who've twiddled with crossovers for awhile would love to have it be different at times. But it isn't. We'd all love it if you could just throw any one of three generic crossover designs in any box rather than really have to WORK, and never have to bother with designing with a specific L-pad value in the circuit.

Thinking it doesn't matter is much like thinking it doesn't matter what drivers are in a given enclosure. Turning a blind eye to it may be good for quick box turnover and profit, but it's not good for enhancing quality.

I only know that they sound very good, and comparing about 5 different crossovers now, from off the shelf to a Patterson custom to crossovers sent based on Passinwinds design, they all sound different, they all sound good, and they are all within 10% or so from one another.

I again prefer Duke's overall design and voicing to any of these I've heard. Others of course will prefer the 12/6 design. All good stuff to me.

 

[KJung]

Hey Ken, weren't you supposed to put up a clip of your new nordy into the thunderchild. I saw the one using the TC electronics rig. Maybe thats what you were refering to. Nice bass man!

Thanks. You know, I messed around with the P and the Thunderchild, and it sounded nice, but IMO not as nice as the RS210, so I didn't post. Something about a more old school cab with that low mid bump, the attenuated low end and that nice top of the driver midrange that really speaks to me with a P Bass or old school instrument.

However, I didn't really work with it enough, and am actually going to try the Thunderchild with the new Genz Streamliner and the TC112 when the Genz arrives mid next week.

Don't get me wrong, it sounded good, but I guess I hear a P Bass as a bit more old school, and that's what that RH450 and RS210 really do well.

I'll keep messing with it though!

 

[JimmyM]

Thanks. You know, I messed around with the P and the Thunderchild, and it sounded nice, but IMO not as nice as the RS210, so I didn't post. Something about a more old school cab with that low mid bump, the attenuated low end and that nice top of the driver midrange that really speaks to me with a P Bass or old school instrument.

you hate turning knobs, don't you?

 

[kringle77]

Yeah that streamliner should be something. Talking about it made me want to go down into the cold basement and play with eq on my 70's since, thats what the streamliner is obviously paying respect to. I can't believe it has taken a company this long to do. Ampeg has of course but, I have always thought the eq on the newer amps was kind of weak and mushy in comparison to my "real" svt. If I wasn't going to get one of JGR's preamps I would be all over this amp. Anyway, I can't wait to get the thunderchild cab and will keep using the carvin bx1500 for awhile.

 

[KJung]

you hate turning knobs, don't you?

You know, I do prefer a rig that sounds great 'out of the box'. However, the RH450 is definitely not one of those. It is very voiced, but has very powerful EQ. So, with that head (which is nicely suited to a P Bass due to its voicing that mimics a kind of vintage head through a sealed cab), it typically sounds really nice. However, I have not gotten it to play nice with the TC112 with any bass. I guess sometimes the low end hi passing, the amount of 'distortion' voiced in the mids, etc., etc. just doesn't work.

I did try the P with my F500 (which is the head that I typically use with the TC112 and my J's) and it sounded good, but it sounded like a P bass through a very articulate, wide, open, modern, clean rig, and that just doesn't work with my ear.

I also didn't particularly like the 'tubetone' grind through that horn much, even with the treble attenuation engaged on the cab... just not the same as the top of a driver to my ear.

Again, sounded good, but to my ear, the TC112 excels in a more sort of studio monitor thing that, at least again to my ear, matches up a bit better with the tone of a jazz bass with roundwounds or whatever.

Pure IMO there. It is kind of 'the right tool for the right job' I guess, and I've rarely been able to EQ one cab to sound like a different kind of cab. That RH450/RS210 has much more of, for lack of a better term, the SVT/Fridge thing going on, which is my definition of a great P tone.

 

[alexclaber]

Until you've used a cab in a LOUD band with a dense mix (BIG guitars) in an acoustically difficult room, then you have absolutely no idea of the benefit of good polar response or conversely the problems caused by inconsistent polar response or poor dispersion. Nothing tests a cab more than getting heard in a rock band without compromising your tone by simply piling on a load of gnarly midrange. I don't really give a damn about the polar response of a cab when playing on my own - I'll just stand where it sounds good.

 

[KJung]

Until you've used a cab in a LOUD band with a dense mix (BIG guitars) in an acoustically difficult room, then you have absolutely no idea of the benefit of good polar response or conversely the problems caused by inconsistent polar response or poor dispersion. Nothing tests a cab more than getting heard in a rock band without compromising your tone by simply piling on a load of gnarly midrange. I don't really give a damn about the polar response of a cab when playing on my own - I'll just stand where it sounds good.

Of course. Have had many cabs in a busy mix a few thousand times now over the past 30 years or so

 

[greenboy]

I only know that they sound very good, and comparing about 5 different crossovers now, from off the shelf to a Patterson custom to crossovers sent based on Passinwinds design, they all sound different, they all sound good, and they are all within 10% or so from one another.

Ken, I'm not talking about subjective tonal preferences. I (and Duke in some posts here) am talking about crossover-region performance and how it affects clarity and imaging, and off axis on the vertical is part of that. You just don't seem to get this stuff.

And guess what: the "Passinwind" 15/6 crossover was simply a stop-gap until some real crossover development time could get spent on the fEARfuls. Months of it! The Passinwind 15/6 stop-gap was simply the Passinwind 12/6 xover - with L-pad resistors added. And after Passinwind and I talked about it, it was reluctantly put up in webspace for a brief period - because that was preferable to the horrid Eminence 800 Hz generic or the 1200 Hz Selenium that was getting used nilly-willy.

Charlie and I both knew it really wasn't addressing the 3015LF or the 18 Sound 6ND410 well in a 15/6. But it was still better than the crappy generics. As soon as we could we took that baby down, Charlie being much relieved, and ME TOO. As nice as the same crossover sans resistors sounded in 12/6 cabs at GTGs, it was borderline when dumped into a 15/6. A lesser evil is all it was ever meant to be.

I also doubt Don ever did the Passinwind 15/6. It cost a lot and weighed more than users wanted and would have ate Don's already narrow profit margin. Don did, at best, an approximation using other components.

EDIT: I want to say again, people, Duke is a one-eyed man among the blind when it comes to leveraging crossover design in Basscabland. He could actually do good studio monitors - the kind engineers and producers stake their mixes on.

 

[KJung]

Ken, I'm not talking about subjective tonal preferences. I (and Duke in some posts here) are talking about crossover-region performance and how it affects clarity and imaging, and off axis on the vertical is part of that. You juts don't seem to get this stuff.

And guess what: the "Passinwind" 15/6 crossover was simply a stop-gap until some real crossover development time could get spent on the fEARfuls. Months of it! The Passinwind 15/6 stop-gap was simply the 12/6 with L-pad resistors, and after Passinwind and I talked about it was reluctantly put up in webspace for a brief period because that was preferable to the horrid Eminence 800 Hz generic or the 1200 Hz Selenium that was getting used nilly-willy.

Also, Charlie and I both knew it really wasn't addressing the 3015LF or the 18 Sound 6ND410 well in a 15/6, but it was still better than the crappy generics. As soon as we could we took that baby down, Charlie being much relieved, and ME TOO. As well as the same crossover sans resistors sounded in 12/6 at GTGs, it was borderline in a 15/6. A lesser eveil is all it was ever meant to be.

I also doubt Don ever did the Passinwind 15/6. It cost a lot and weighed more than users wanted and would have ate Don's already narrow profit margin. He did, at best, an approximation with other components.

I understand, and again, don't get me wrong, the work you have done on this stuff is amazing, and trust me, I appreciate it. Alex too. Again, don't get me wrong, I said the ones I've tried have sounded very good, and they have. That DOES NOT MEAN that they can't sound better.

As you know, Don is a 'one off guy', making 112's, 210's sealed 610's, 12/6's 410/6's and every other damn thing. So, I in general agree with you. However, I guess due to the amazing components/drivers, and the basic competence (IMO) of the crossovers available now, I have yet to hear one (15/6 or 12/6) that 'sucks', and the 12/6 with that Faital mid driver sounds simply stunning to me (not sure of the crossover).

That's my only point Didn't mean to get so snippy... life is too short, and as you know, I appreciate good design and execution in a big way, whether it is Sadowksy, Bergantino, Audiokinesis, or the designs that you and Alex and Charlie work on.

I just don't dig the attack sort of thing. It would be like Don coming on the site and dogging Avatar for not bracing their cabs enough or something. That would be uncool also IMO.

All is good....

 

[greenboy]

As for critiquing some company's bracing, or crossovers, or driver choice, or whatever, that happens all the time here on TB. When we are lucky it's done by people who have a clue and can actually be of value in taking things up a notch or two for the consumer. Thus, Avatar was able to release a pretty cool cab for cheaper than the cab they had originally planned, which would have cost more and been lower quality.

As long as I have been aware I have tried to get potential LDS customers to be aware of the crossover and L-pad issues because I've wanted to see them get the best possible nEarful cabs. Threads and PMs abound where I tried to help guys I knew were going with LDS. But bassplayers just don't seem to get that an attenuator on the tweet has a lot less negative impact than one on the mid driver. They don't get that the mid driver is better off above the woofer whenever possible. Etc.

Stuff like this is why I support guys like Duke and Alex. They care. They care enough to learn about this stuff. They design boxes that to many subjectively have great tone AND these boxes are also going to represent well in the more difficult acoustic environments and at ridiculous levels, and won't be easily relegated to the classifieds or the back rooms over time.

 

[JimmyM]

You know, I do prefer a rig that sounds great 'out of the box'. However, the RH450 is definitely not one of those. It is very voiced, but has very powerful EQ. So, with that head (which is nicely suited to a P Bass due to its voicing that mimics a kind of vintage head through a sealed cab), it typically sounds really nice. However, I have not gotten it to play nice with the TC112 with any bass. I guess sometimes the low end hi passing, the amount of 'distortion' voiced in the mids, etc., etc. just doesn't work.

I did try the P with my F500 (which is the head that I typically use with the TC112 and my J's) and it sounded good, but it sounded like a P bass through a very articulate, wide, open, modern, clean rig, and that just doesn't work with my ear.

I also didn't particularly like the 'tubetone' grind through that horn much, even with the treble attenuation engaged on the cab... just not the same as the top of a driver to my ear.

interesting you say that. i think what i loved about the horn the best was how sweet distortion sounded through it when i used a vt to cut the annoying highs and had only good highs below 4.5k left. but different strokes.

 

[KJung]

interesting you say that. i think what i loved about the horn the best was how sweet distortion sounded through it when i used a vt to cut the annoying highs and had only good highs below 4.5k left. but different strokes.

+1 More of a different strokes thing than 'good versus bad'. I'll be messing with it some more.

Interestingly, with the 12/6 and 15/6 cabs, I have not had good luck with the RH450 either... congested sounding for lack of a better term. Now the Tecamp Puma... that is the BOMB with those 12/6 and 15/6's, at least with a J bass. It is a little 'much' in the low end for the smaller TC112 though.

Again, +1 different strokes. With my J basses and roundwould strings and the Markbass LMII/III or F500/F1, the TC112 is just perfect to my ear!

 

[greenboy]

Yeah, too bad the initial TC Electronics offering didn't have user-defeatable low-pass. In retrospect of course ; } ...I understand their reasoning for liking that voicing but it's a limitation for many cabs and user prefs.

 

[KJung]

Yeah, too bad the initial TC Electronics offering didn't have user-defeatable low-pass. In retrospect of course ; } ...I understand their reasoning for liking that voicing but it's a limitation for many cabs and user prefs.

+1 It really does sound great with some matchings, but it does not seem to do as well in the lows, mids and highs with more 'even' cabs like yours, Duke's, etc.

Funny that the Tecamp Puma is kind of the yin to the RH450 yang... so wide and open and clean in the mids and deep and sizzly that it can lay some cabs to waste when you really start pumping. Those big 3015LF's just eat that low end up.. beautiful sounding.

 

[Passinwind]

I appreciate good design and execution in a big way, whether it is Sadowksy, Bergantino, Audiokinesis, or the designs that you and Alex and Charlie work on.

Thanks Ken, but I in no way deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence with any of those guys. I have designed and built a handful of DIY cabs to suit my own somewhat perverse needs and wants, and that's about it. I designed a stop gap 12/6 crossover because seemingly no one else wanted to step up, but honestly I'd rather let actual cab designers bear that cross!

On-topic content: just heard from Duke that my TC cab will be coming soon. Looks like I picked a bad month to quit playing bass! I'm not actually quitting, just planning on putting more energy into my guitar playing and writing for a while. I'm really looking forward to hearing Duke's guitar cab designs...