AudioKinesis 1x12 Cab Part Two

[Passinwind]

Pardon me if this has already been discussed, but has anyone considered putting a monitor stand mount on the bottom, so it could be set atop one of those alloy tripods?

Hey Vic,

I have posted an external top hat solution, but frankly in many cases that looks a little sketchy as far as weight handling. Be sure to look at the weight handling spec closely if you choose that route. I've used my TC112AF on a Invalid Link Removed on a few gigs and at home in my stereo rig when I want the tweeter to image from nearer the same height as the one in my 15/6/1 cab. In the stereo rig losing a little low end in one side is actually beneficial (cuts down on cancellation issues), and I also do not always want or need huge low end anyway. So for me, a stand works fine.

That said, like Ken I also think a simple tilt back like a couple of door wedges, the AmpWedge, etc., will probably satisfy you if you even need that. With the AF version especially...

Hope you enjoy the cab as much as I do!

 

[KJung]

Cool. Some data points...

I wouldn't want an altered design, so the external mount would be my only consideration. I also realize that means it would interfere with the stock feet, so that'd have to be figured out.

I have already considered the acoustic coupling aspects, but you can at least get some of this back by being close to a wall. That said, reading about how much low end extension this thing has, and my general lack of desire for a super huge low end, I'm thinking it'd be no biggie for me, but wouldn't know for sure until I heard it of course.

I do also remember your near field monitoring comments, which does make this a pretty low priority curiosity.

I'm thinking I'll come to the resolution that if I really want to do anything like this (raise it up and/or kick it back) I'll probably just use a small amp stand. It's just that the "monitor style" form factor of these cabs brings the idea to mind.

Thanks.

+1 Also, just to make clear, this cab doesn't really have a huge low end as defined by low end extension (ala Acme). What it does is not compress at high volumes in the mid bass region like most cabs, due to the amazing 3012LF. Duke's 4ohm OEM version of the 3012LF actually rolls off a bit higher than the stock version, and has (according to him... I have not heard his driver without the horn and crossover) a nicer upper mid response. Hence, you get all the mechanical benefits of the stock 3012LF, but with a bit tighter voicing down low, the ability to cross the driver over a smidge higher than on the stock 3012LF loaded cabs, like the 12/6's, and put the entire thing in a suprisingly small box.

Pretty cool... so again, not so much 'huge' bottom as 'useable bottom that does not drop out when really pushed'.

The 12/6 cabs with the stock 3012LF extend a bit lower in an absolute sense, but require a somewhat bigger box, and sound best crossed over a bit lower than the TC112.

Duke can come in and fix anything above that isn't quite right, but I think that is the gist of it.

The hallmark of these cabs is an even, open, strong useable low end with no low mid/upper bass bump, and especially no upper mid bump.... relatively 'flat' transition from the top of the driver to that big horn in the upper mid region.

Edit: The other cool thing about the TC112 is that it is the rare small cab that can actually handle high power (400-500 watts) both mechanically and thermally (within reason), making it just sing with the typical micro head at 4ohms. Sweet!

 

[Vic]

Hey Vic,
I have posted...

Also, just to make clear...

Both noted, and very helpful! Thanks!

 

[thudfromafar]

Darn, I should've inquired about the pole mounting issue. I remember Duke saying it would come with a mount thingy but that was quite a while ago so maybe plans have changed. I was hoping to be able to set mine up like a PA speaker at times, just add tripod.

 

[thudfromafar]

OK, recent first-time AK customer here. I took delivery of a new ThunderChild from Duke just a few weeks ago, and have recently been playing through it with a new GK MB500 micro amp.

What a pleasure to play through a premium cab! Yes, it does seem to have that seamless quality between the woofer and the horn that some have claimed. And I dig the overall balance and smoothness of the frequency response - surely a hallmark of quality.

But what I especially appreciate is how much clean power the TC can handle, without farting out. Though playing at high volume kind of defeats the purpose of using a compact, portable rig such as this, in those instances when I may wish to crank the input gain, nudge up the master volume and dig in a bit, I'm fairly secure that the TC will take it without complaint, and will yield lots of clean, warm, smooth low end in return.

Definitely glad I invested in this. The MB500 and the ThunderChild will from now on be my go-to rig for small, lower-volume gigs & rehearsals throughout NYC.

MM

Hey, I think I recall you saying that you were grabbing a fEarful (LDS?) design cab. Did you ever get one of those, and if so, are you happy with them both and how do they compare?

 

[JxBass]

Hey, I think I recall you saying that you were grabbing a fEarful (LDS?) design cab. Did you ever get one of those, and if so, are you happy with them both and how do they compare?

I did a comparison between and LDS 12/6 and TC112 somewhere back in this thread.

Short version is that they sound very similar with the 12/6 being slightly fuller down low. But with the TC112 being tonally similar and as just as loud, but in a smaller form factor and weighing less, the LDS is gone and the TC112 remains.

 

[steve_rolfeca]

Another thing that should be pointed out about cabs of this type, is that they are exceptionally clear, clean and detailed.

If you like to push an SVT cab hard, to the point that it's compressing heavily, and speaker distortion is starting to put some "hair" around the note; or if you like the sound of the old short-excursion twin 15's from JBL or E-V in a sealed cab being driven close to failure, you may be disappointed by a Thunderchild, fEarful, etc.

In comparison, people use statements to describe the sound of these cabs like "quicker", "transparent", "clinical", "less voiced", "less compressed", "more open", etc. They are more revealing, especially in the midrange, and much more responsive to tone sculpting via EQ, compared to traditional cabs.

 

[JxBass]

Another thing that should be pointed out about cabs of this type, is that they are exceptionally clear, clean and detailed.

If you like to push an SVT cab hard, to the point that it's compressing heavily, and speaker distortion is starting to put some "hair" around the note; or if you like the sound of the old short-excursion twin 15's from JBL or E-V in a sealed cab being driven close to failure, you may be disappointed by a Thunderchild, fEarful, etc.

In comparison, people use statements to describe the sound of these cabs like "quicker", "transparent", "clinical", "less voiced", "less compressed", "more open", etc. They are more revealing, especially in the midrange, and much more responsive to tone sculpting via EQ, compared to traditional cabs.

+1. "PA-like".

 

[Mystic Michael]

Hey, nice to hear from ya again, Ken...

I bet that combination with the GK really sounds good, since the cab can handle the big low end that GK puts out, and also is able to 'organic up' the very aggressive top end of that head.

Indeed it does. Although I will have to take your word on the aggressive top end, as the TC is the only cab I've used with the MB500 thus far - except for just a couple minutes earlier today with a Hartke HX112 - not long enough to do a real comparison.

Interesting thing about that low end: Last night as I cranked the MB for just a moment, fully expecting to hear the TC begin to stress out, instead the tone seemed to sort of shift a bit to keep the sound flowing in a deep, clean, and smooth way. Not really like compression per se (squeezing the sound through a small-bore pipe), but more like channeling the sound through a large-bore pipe.

Maybe it's a circuit in the MB that responds that way, maybe something about the TC itself. I checked to see if the MB limiter was engaged (it wasn't). But a limiter wouldn't behave like that anyway.

Whatever. It sure sounded good...

MM

 

[Mystic Michael]

Hey, I think I recall you saying that you were grabbing a fEarful (LDS?) design cab. Did you ever get one of those, and if so, are you happy with them both and how do they compare?

Yep. In fact I got a matched pair of LDS 12/6/1 nEarfuls w/mirror-image baffles not long ago.

Would you believe I haven't actually played them yet? I've got most of my gear stacked up in the kitchen right now, 'cause I'm going to get several of the other rooms in my apartment repainted, and the kitchen is one room that doesn't need any work.

Soon as I can free up some space to spread out my gear, I'll give the nEarful stack a good run-through. In fact, I may even start a new thread, and include photos...

MM

 

[thudfromafar]

cool, sounds good

I'm getting my TC12 (acoustic) next week

 

[peterpalmieri]

Another thing that should be pointed out about cabs of this type, is that they are exceptionally clear, clean and detailed.

If you like to push an SVT cab hard, to the point that it's compressing heavily, and speaker distortion is starting to put some "hair" around the note; or if you like the sound of the old short-excursion twin 15's from JBL or E-V in a sealed cab being driven close to failure, you may be disappointed by a Thunderchild, fEarful, etc.

In comparison, people use statements to describe the sound of these cabs like "quicker", "transparent", "clinical", "less voiced", "less compressed", "more open", etc. They are more revealing, especially in the midrange, and much more responsive to tone sculpting via EQ, compared to traditional cabs.

I can appreciate your enthusiasm but you've skipped at least 30 years of advancements.

 

[Derek Kiernan]

I can appreciate your enthusiasm but you've skipped at least 30 years of advancements.

I took the comment more as it won't get the compression/distortion you can get with those soeakers, if that's what you're after, but it can mimic the frequency response of many speaker setups fairly well at decent volume if you have the EQ and the watts for it. Also, I think some of the TC/fEARful crowd finds the advancements to have been a mixed bag, such as adding cheap tweeters to 4x10s and creating a valley in frequency response both on and off-axis, or having different drivers covering the same frequency ranges. I think the transparent, less compressed, more revealing, etc comments still clearly hold up when compared to most of what's available in modern mass market or boutique bass speakers.

 

[DukeLeJeune]

I have been hoping that the TC would have that sort of "reach" and clarity thanks to the large horn, especially since I'm looking to retire my Bose L1 rig.

I think this might be part of what's going on:

The farther away you are (inside rather than outside), the higher the reverberant-to-direct energy ratio, and thus the greater the relative contribution of the reverberant energy to the overall tonal balance. That big horn has a fairly wide, uniform radiation pattern, and its pattern matches up well with the woofer's pattern in the crossover region. What this means is, the spectral balance of the reverberant energy is pretty similar to the spectral balance of the direct sound. As a result, the upper harmonics are still well-represented even back at distances where the reverberant energy is totally dominant, and that's part of the reason why the clarity is still good fairly far away. At least, that's my opinion.

Which model Bose L1 rig do you have?

Pardon me if this has already been discussed, but has anyone considered putting a monitor stand mount on the bottom, so it could be set atop one of those alloy tripods?

Yeah as Ken posted, I'd have to figure out another place to put the crossover board. That's more complicated than it sounds, because I had to leave a bare spot on the crossover board so that the inner flare of the lower port has clearance. I'd have to split the crossover onto two boards, which probably could be done but it would be a pain. Actually in the acoustic-friendly version, there's already a second, smaller crossover board on one of the sides.

Darn, I should've inquired about the pole mounting issue. I remember Duke saying it would come with a mount thingy but that was quite a while ago so maybe plans have changed. I was hoping to be able to set mine up like a PA speaker at times, just add tripod.

I remember looking into it, but don't remember saying that I'd definitely do it. If I did say that... oops... sorry!! Unfortunately yours has already been shipped.

This looks like one possible solution, but I wasn't able to find a source for it in the US.

Invalid Link Removed

There's about 1/4" clearance underneath the crossover board, so if we're really careful not to use screws that are too long, some beefy threaded inserts in the right place could probably hold the external tophat in place when we need it, and then when it's not in use the screws could be used to seal up the holes so that we don't have air leaks.

Thud, try your cab and see if it works for you as is. If not, let me know.

 

[steve_rolfeca]

I can appreciate your enthusiasm but you've skipped at least 30 years of advancements.

Either I didn't make my point very clearly, or you simply misunderstood. Probably the first!

What I was trying to articulate for anyone considering a Thunderchild, is that it belongs to a very small group of products that don't follow the normal standard for bass amplification.

What I mean by that, is that the vast majority of bass cabinets follow a time-honoured tradition of running so-called full range drivers in a somewhat undersized cabinet, with or without a small tweeter tacked on to add fret noise and "spank". The drivers typically have higher distortion numbers than "super-woofers" like the 3012LF and Duke's custom variant. As such, those cabs share similar characteristics- fairly high distortion, a pronounced mid-bass hump, and a loss of dispersion and output at higher frequencies. Multiple-driver versions display additional dispersion issues.

While the last 30 years have brought improvements, even cabs as delightfully aggressive as the Bergantino AE410 fall into the same camp. Why not? It's a well-loved formula. But on the other hand, there's a small family that the Thunderchild falls into, which has more in common with studio monitors and PA speakers. As such, they have a flatter and wider frequency response, smoother polar response, greater dynamic range, and less distortion than "normal" cabs. I would lump Acme, Accugroove, Bose's L1 Model 1, the fEarful, and Flite's '3W/'MHD series into the same category.

The point I was trying to make, is that anyone looking to switch from a Bergie, Eden, or other conventional cab, should be aware that this is an unusual beast- not necessarily better or worse, but certainly different. The amount of clarity and headroom available from this type of system has to be experienced to be believed, but on the other hand, some of the acoustic artifacts that bassists are used to hearing (and in some cases, depend on), are missing from "hi-fi" cabs.

I feel that this is a good thing, but not everyone will agree. Nor should they. Duke has pointed this out himself in the past...

 

[steve_rolfeca]

...Which model Bose L1 rig do you have?

...Thud, try your cab and see if it works for you as is. If not, let me know.

I have the Model 1. Bose doesn't make a big fuss about it, but the Model II lacks bass management features that make it feasible to use the system with other subs. For me, at least, that would have been a deal-killer.

By the way, your response to Thud demonstrates an attitude to customer service that explains why people are willing to buy the TC sight unseen, and why I'm so excited to be on your customer list.

 

[AMp'D.2play]

@ KenJ (or anyone else interested in chiming in) -

How would the TC112 sound paired with a TC Electronic head (Classic 450)? Yesterday, my employer confirmed the $$ amount of my annual bonus, which I get on the 22nd. So in another week, I'll be flush with cash.

I confirmed the availability of a Berg HT112ER cab a few days ago, & that was the direction I was going to go. But I read in the Berg thread that Ken was less than impressed with the TCE head and an ER cab. (I won't have the chance to test the pairing b4hand, but I currently own an HT322.)

A cab like the TC112 (&/or an AccuGroove) is now in my budget, and Duke gets nothing but props from the TB community.

I'm looking for a great-sound, in a lightweight package. I play rock/blues/some prog. Basses are a Fender P & a Lakland Skyline 44-02.

 

[Lee Barker]

@ KenJ (or anyone else interested in chiming in) -



A cab like the TC112 (&/or an AccuGroove) is now in my budget, and Duke gets nothing but props from the TB community.

I want to help you in your decision making.

I have both the TC112 and an Accugroove Tri112 and you can't have either one.

 

[AMp'D.2play]

I have both the TC112 and an Accugroove Tri112 and you can't have either one.

Yeah, but do you have a TC Electronic head?

Actually, I just found one of Duke's threads where he gives a price for the TC112. For some reason, I thought they were $1k+. Unless there's been a drastic change, it's actually in the same ballpark as the Berg HT112ER. (and well below an AccuGroove ... assuming new, not used)

 

[KJung]

Yeah, but do you have a TC Electronic head?

Actually, I just found one of Duke's threads where he gives a price for the TC112. For some reason, I thought they were $1k+. Unless there's been a drastic change, it's actually in the same ballpark as the Berg HT112ER. (and well below an AccuGroove ... assuming new, not used)

Hello. Yes, the price of the TC112 is quite reasonable for what it is. I'm not a huge fan of the Tri112. It does have a nice, warm mid present voice, but it is in no way as even and 'hi fi' (in the true sense of that term) as the TC112 IMO and IME.

I like the RH450 head, and have a clip of it compared to a couple of other heads driving the HT112ER (great little, if heavy, cab). It is a warm, mid present head, with a bit of attenuation down low and way up high built in to give it a bit of vintage tone right out of the box.

The RH450 would not be my personal first choice for the HT112ER or the TC112. Both those cabs do a great job of a very even, full range tone, and IMO and IME the RH450 does not particularly take advantage of that.

That being said... rockin' on a P Bass... that might work very well. With a PBass, I'd take a look at the Genz Streamliner600 with the TC112... tubey, warm, fat, but also 'full range'.