Chef
In Memoriam
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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 1x12 Cab Part Two
- Thread starter Thor
- Start date
- Status
Hey Ric! That must have been a cool little road trip and gig!
And, we are kind of 'joined to the hip' through gear!
It is quite amazing that I can do a full pop gig with a 112 and not get buried. Again, my 410 or 212 is a whole different thing regarding filling the room and wumping the low end, but the TC112 stays clean at stupid loud levels, and generates enough real low end at volume to get by nicely for almost any gig. Really nice for those nasty load in situations, or limited space in an equipment van or whatever.
And, we are kind of 'joined to the hip' through gear!
It is quite amazing that I can do a full pop gig with a 112 and not get buried. Again, my 410 or 212 is a whole different thing regarding filling the room and wumping the low end, but the TC112 stays clean at stupid loud levels, and generates enough real low end at volume to get by nicely for almost any gig. Really nice for those nasty load in situations, or limited space in an equipment van or whatever.
I agree with Chef on this one. Those two cabs are just so different in every way, efficiency, voicing, cone size, tweeter design/crossover, and while it 'might' work, a betting man would take the bet that it would be 'strange'.
If you kind of dig your 115L+, I would highly recommend getting a second one of those. Your low end would extend a bit through coupling, and you would have 'more of what you already like'.
If, on the other hand, you aren't digging the 115L, I'd make a clean break. You obviously aren't 'weight sensitive' with that head. One of the fEarful 15/6's would probably really float your boat with that head, if you are looking for more low end, and more clarity through the upper mids.
IMO there. Jim Bergantino is getting ready to start shipping the new HD212. Not lightweight, but basically a double HT112ER..... that, with a DB750.... as Tom Bowlus says 'boy howdy'
Ken is as usual spot on. I periodically use two Schro 115's driven by a ShuttleMAX 12, and that does produce better low end than the single cab while being a pretty amazingly loud and portable rig; which is why I hung on to them.
OTOH, I have been waiting for the past 2 years for someone to weigh in here on TB on using two of the 4 ohm TC112 cabs. I have no doubt as to their performance as self standing cabs, but remain unclear as to how a pair of them would perform together, since combinations can sometimes be more than 1+1, and sometimes less.
OTOH, I have been waiting for the past 2 years for someone to weigh in here on TB on using two of the 4 ohm TC112 cabs. I have no doubt as to their performance as self standing cabs, but remain unclear as to how a pair of them would perform together, since combinations can sometimes be more than 1+1, and sometimes less.
I guess it is partially due to the fact that Duke set out to make a cab optimal for stand-alone use. His design goal early on was actually targeted to players like me, who were kind of 'large city freelance' guys who wanted to give up the least amount of volume, low end and 'quality sound' as possible in a very small box. He hit the ball out of the park with that one, as you can tell by so many who use this little bitty 112 on sometimes impossibly large gigs with success. He also engineered a great compromise between efficiency and low end, and sculpted the specs to work perfectly with the typical 400-600 watt micro head.
So, the stand alone guys are his primary audience and market IMO.
Secondly, given the unique design of so much sound coming out of that nice big horn (all the way down through the upper mids), I guess the physical configuration of the cab limits (somewhat) its use as a 2 cab stack, since the 'correct' way of doing that would be to have the top cab 'upside down' to align the horns. It would work, but with the handle location, the bottom rubber feet, etc., I wouldn't really want to bother.
I think that is why he is coming out with the TC115. While you would get, on average, about a 5db increase by doubling the number of cabs and almost doubling the power, Duke (I believe) says he achieves a very similar tone with the TC115, with about a 3db increase in max volume, which gets you most of the way there and still allows a one cab solution (with a larger, but still 'more schlep-able format than two TC112's).
Of course, I continue to put words in Duke's mouth
, but from our limited discussion, and his posts, I think that is a relatively accurate description of his design goals and the logic of the line having 'single use friendly' 12's and 15's.
Thanks Ken, makes sense.
Duke does recommend running two TCs stacked at 90 degrees to each other, therefore providing more even coverage to a 180-degree arc (as well as getting the added benefits of having more power handling and more ability to pump out volume.)
Sounds pretty good to me; it's out of my price range, however, and certainly beyond my ability to haul on the subway.
+1 upside down and at an angle. It isn't that it can't be done, just really isn't in the inherent design philosophy of that box. I believe that is why quite a few plan to own the 12 and the 15 to use in different sized venues or playing contexts.
You guys are making me revisit this option. I had one on order early on but decided to go with a pair of AE210s. I still love those cabs, but I'm doing a lot of small rooms where the 210 is overkill, and I sense the TC would speak a bit better, especially with the RA.
Interestingly, I prefer my AE210 to my Thunderchild (or Acme112) with my Rob Allen. The low end of those basses can quickly get away from you in a room and mix, and to me, those basses sound best when the low end is tamed enough to bring out the beautiful woody midrange that seems to work best coming from the top of a paper cone driver. IMO and IME there. It sounds very good through the Thunderchild, but sounds more woody, organic and 'DBish' through the AE210 to my ears.
As much as I love the Thunderchild, the AE210 is, for me, better voiced for those particular basses.
Also, the TC112 will put out every bit the max volume of the AE210, so the 'overkill' issue is kind of moot. It is a little smaller, but not so much as to change your life during the schlep.
It was funny that I was playing my Rob Allen through the Streamliner and Acme FullRange 112, and when I got back to my PBass, it sounded like a telecastor through a twin reverb compared to the overwhelming bottom generated by that bass through that rig
Passinwind
I know nothing.
- Dec 3, 2003
- 23,075
- 46,028
- Disclosures
- Designer/Toaster Tech @ Passinwind Electronics
We very well may get to try that at the New England GTG in Nov. It's a little too far for me to haul mine, but there will be at least a couple of other TC owners in attendance. If it happens I will report back.
It was funny that I was playing my Rob Allen through the Streamliner and Acme FullRange 112, and when I got back to my PBass, it sounded like a telecastor through a twin reverb compared to the overwhelming bottom generated by that bass through that rig
thx - you may have saved me some $$$
I know what you mean about that counterpoint. When I was running the Streamliner with the AE210 I'd dial the bass down to like 9:00 on the head when I had the RA plugged in. When I'd swap to the P-bass it was exactly as you describe it - a Tele but in my case, maybe a Deluxe Reverb (I'm a 1-12 kinda guy for guitars
). My way around that was to use a Paradriver and cut the bass and dial up the mids when I had the RA plugged in. With different heads it is a little more even between the two.
KJung said:I agree with Chef on this one. Those two cabs are just so different in every way, efficiency, voicing, cone size, tweeter design/crossover, and while it 'might' work, a betting man would take the bet that it would be 'strange'.
If you kind of dig your 115L+, I would highly recommend getting a second one of those. Your low end would extend a bit through coupling, and you would have 'more of what you already like'.
If, on the other hand, you aren't digging the 115L, I'd make a clean break. You obviously aren't 'weight sensitive' with that head. One of the fEarful 15/6's would probably really float your boat with that head, if you are looking for more low end, and more clarity through the upper mids.
IMO there. Jim Bergantino is getting ready to start shipping the new HD212. Not lightweight, but basically a double HT112ER..... that, with a DB750.... as Tom Bowlus says 'boy howdy'
Ok Fellas- you've never steered me wrong before- I am looking for the ultimate doubler box, so I'll just compare the two and see what I get.
I'll be driving each with my LMK (the old discontinued 2 channel one) which I think works well with both cabs.
Gracias!
IntrepidCellist said:
+1, and I'll offer a counterpoint to Ken's well-thought-out perspective on stacking Thunderchild 112's::
I've just come off a few years of using a Bose L1 system as my main bass amp, stage monitor, and all-around Swiss army knife for keys, acoustic guitar, vocals, and anything else I could throw at it.
The Bose is a funny creature. It only goes out to about 15KHz, so it doesn't have the "sparkle" that you'd expect from home hi-fi, or a really stellar PA. Also, it only pushes 250 watts to the subs, so if you're looking for a real pants-flapper for rock gigs, it doesn't cut it. But for everything in between, the clarity and the near-perfect dispersion over about a 170 degree arc are mind-boggling. I've never gotten so many compliments on my stage sound, from audience and bandmates alike.
I believe that a pair of TC 112's stacked at 90 degrees to each other, may be the ultimate Bose replacement. Thanks to the wide dispersion, you'd have a stage environment free of hot spots, and excellent audience coverage. With a lightweight power amp, you'd have a stellar modular rig for large or small gigs.
Unlike a Thunderchild 112/115 pairing, you'd have matched cabs, so according to user reports, you'd also have a pretty awesome small PA for acoustic duo's, that could double as a more than adequate home stereo.
Price-wise, a second TC 112 and one of those new Crown ultralight's would cost about the same as, and be considerably more flexible than, a single more spendy cab like a Genz Uber series, or one of Ken's Bergantino AE's.
Also, IIRC, Duke indicated that the dipoersion pattern of the horn was such that you didn't need to invert the too cab when stacking at 90 degrees.
Interesting sidenote: Duke acknowledged that the Thunderchild doesn't have quite as wide a dispersion pattern as a 3-way fEarful cab. I'm thinking that the tables would be turned, if you compared a 90 degree TC stack to a fEarful 1212/6/1...
Interesting sidenote: Duke acknowledged that the Thunderchild doesn't have quite as wide a dispersion pattern as a 3-way fEarful cab. I'm thinking that the tables would be turned, if you compared a 90 degree TC stack to a fEarful 1212/6/1...
Cool. I was remembering a very early discussion on aligning those horns. So, really, if you just want to stack two TC112's, it sounds like it will work pretty much like any other vertical cab stack of identical cabs.
I think the increase upper mid dispersion of the 6" loaded mid cabs is due primarily to the lower crossover point (I think typically 700 or 800hz) versus what I think is around 1K for Duke. Seems pretty minor, but who knows.
I think I remember Duke saying that the 115 will be crossed over lower, which should, (again, I think) slightly improve the spread of the upper mids, since more will be coming from the horn versus the top of the driver.
Chef
In Memoriam
I believe that's correct, as the 15 doesn't go as high as the 12; this necessitates a stouter and more expensive horn for the TC115, and crossover changes as well.
I remember him mentioning that his goal was to "pattern-match" the horn and woofer at the crossover point so that they essentially sounded and acted like one unit, no matter where you stood. Seems to have done pretty well.
- Status
