AudioKinesis Cabs Part VI...

[monsterthompson]

Guess I gotta watch it with my Genz 9.0 when running it with the Barefaced. The BF will take the wattage, but I don't want to blow the Hathor.

 

[Mike Arnopol]

The woofer in either is very close to the same and from the same manufacturer (I'm quite certain) Power handling should be similar.It's just that some use different mathmatical formulas for their specs.

 

[monsterthompson]

Playing around a big more today, using the Hathor solo. I'm finding the two switches down with the port plugged is what I'm gravitating toward. I'm doing that both with my Genz Shuttle 9.0 and my Buster, and with the cab solo and with the Super Compact.

 

[monsterthompson]

Just wrapped up a mini rehearsal with the Hathor 1203. It was a guitarist and me playing along to backing tracks in my living room. Pretty low volume for metal/industrial stuff.

Spector Forte4 SS > Aguilar Agro > Mesa Buster > Hathor 1203 (woofer mids switch up, mid drive switch down)

Great freaking metal tone. I tried a few songs with the port open and a few with it closed. I was sitting beside the cab, and each sounded great. I'm very happy with this little box. I have noticed at times I do get some really spikey treble crackles out of the mid ranger, particularly with a dirt pedal in the chain. Otherwise, it is a mini-monster of a cab.

 

[Dee-man]

Howdy all. Just flirting with something I don't need and am wondering what y'all think. How would a TC115 (4 ohm, wide body) pair with a Hathor 1544? Thanks for your thoughts, DM

EDIT: By the way, I'm aware of Nostatic's positive comments of using a tc112 under a 1203 when he wants more bottom, so it might be similar, just looking for actual experience or, if no one has any, mild speculation.

 

[nutdog]

After stepping out of the bass rig business to build a mini PA I'm jumping back in with both feet. Just ordered a pair of 1203's. Six weeks to decide on an amp. Stoked.

 

[John D Harris]

Duke, I visited your AudioKinesis facebook page for the 1st time in a while -- congrats on the recognition your home audio gear is getting.
Hope it translates into more good economic times for you, but not to the point where you don't have time or incentive to continue building bass guitar/MI cabs. ...or at least, not before I can get to where I can buy one (or some)!

 

[DukeLeJeune]

Howdy all. Just flirting with something I don't need and am wondering what y'all think. How would a TC115 (4 ohm, wide body) pair with a Hathor 1544? Thanks for your thoughts, DM

EDIT: By the way, I'm aware of Nostatic's positive comments of using a tc112 under a 1203 when he wants more bottom, so it might be similar, just looking for actual experience or, if no one has any, mild speculation.

The Hathor 1544 doesn't really have a growly setting, as the native voicing of the woofer (Faital 15PR400) is definitely smooth. When I designed that cab, I hadn't yet figured out where some bumpage in the frequency response could be a good thing for electric bass, and an even better thing if you had a switch to remove it when you didn't want it. On the other hand the 1544 takes to distortion quite readily, thanks to its cone top end. TC115 with the top end rolled off + H1544 should work quite well with pedals and distortion.

Finally, the bottom end of the 1544 doesn't have quite the thump I would have wanted. I was trying for a sealed-box "vibe" with ported-box-woofer efficiency, and didn't quite get the best of both worlds that I was hoping for. I've heard from other builders that perhaps the 15PR400's motor isn't quite up to the Kappalites in impact, but to its credit, its fartout threshold is still quite high. It also happens to be an excellent woofer for a high-efficiency home audio system.

After stepping out of the bass rig business to build a mini PA I'm jumping back in with both feet. Just ordered a pair of 1203's. Six weeks to decide on an amp. Stoked.

Stoked am I as well! My evil plot with the H1203 was to make it really tempting to get two, and many have fallen for it. Pardon me if I indulge a bit: Muuu-huuu-haaa-HAAA-HAAAAAA!!

Duke, I visited your AudioKinesis facebook page for the 1st time in a while -- congrats on the recognition your home audio gear is getting.

Hope it translates into more good economic times for you, but not to the point where you don't have time or incentive to continue building bass guitar/MI cabs. ...or at least, not before I can get to where I can buy one (or some)!

Thank you!

What he's referring to is, one of the top high-end audio print magazines, The Abso!ute Sound, named my four-piece subwoofer system, the "Swarm", to their Editor's Choice Awards list in their March 2015 issue. The actual review (that the award is based on) will be in the April issue, which I've been told is out, though I haven't gotten my copy yet.

I have no intention of getting away from bass cabs. The worst that could happen is that lead times get drawn out a bit longer, but I really like interacting with bass players. If I didn't make bass cabs, I wouldn't get to do that... I'd just be another annoying fanboy.

 

[monsterthompson]

Duke. What's the 1203 like compared to the 1855 in terms of voicing. I'm still pretty tempted by the 1855.

 

[DukeLeJeune]

Duke. What's the 1203 like compared to the 1855 in terms of voicing. I'm still pretty tempted by the 1855.

As background, let's quickly review the philosophy I'm embracing with the current Hathor series (which hadn't matured yet when I did the 1544): We want to zig where the guitar cabs zag... or short of that, we at least do not want to err in the direction of peaking where they peak. In my opinion, the guitars own the 2-4 kHz ballpark. That's where guitar cabs have their peak, and it is also where the ear is most sensitive, so it makes sense for the lead instrument to dominate there. A bass cab that has emphasis in that region sounds really loud and impressive, but instead of sitting in the mix, it's fighting to cut through the mix. Given enough power that can be done, but imo there's a better way...

You see, guitar cabs generally have a dip in the 1-2 kHz octave, and THAT is our window of opportunity! We can be loud there and it doesn't step on anyone's toes and everyone can hear us and it sounds good. (Notice that I'm using the words "we" and "us" as if I'm one of you guys.)

Most guitar speakers roll off north of 4 kHz or so, which means we can come back up and have that top-end sparkle if we want to, again without stepping on anyone's toes.

Okay, now let's look at the voicings of the 1855 and 1203. Starting at the bottom, the 1855 has a much bigger low end with all ports open. I like to reference back to the first overtone of low-B (62 Hz)... whereas the 1203 is -3.5 dB at 62 Hz, the 1855 is 0 dB (flat) at 62 Hz. Now if that's too much (and it may well be), you can plug ports.

Across the rest of the spectrum, I think there's a family resemblance, but they are not identical. The 1855 is growlier in the growly setting, as the combined output of those two big mids is put to good use in our 1-2 kHz region; the 1203 has useful bumpage in that region but not as much. Then the 1855 has some deliberate dippage in the 2-4 kHz region, while the 1203 really just hints at this, but at least it doesn't have any peaks there. And finally north of 4 kHz or so, the 1203 has a fairly smooth and extended top end out to about 12 kHz, while the 1855 has a pretty strong peak at 5-6 kHz or so but rolls off north of about 8 kHz. So their net total amount of top-end energy is roughly comparable, but is distributed differently.

On both cabs the lower switch smooths out the bumpage between 1 and 2 kHz, and the upper switch rolls off the top end gently north of 3.5 kHz or so. (Why 3.5 kHz? Well when I did my first top-end rolloff switch on the original Thunderchild 112, I spent a lot of time listening, and that's what sounded about right to me. I do listen and tweak by ear on each successive design, but end up in just about the same place every time... which is "enough reduction in top end to make a useful difference, but still a more interesting tone - with better dispersion - than woofers all by themselves").

Another part of my philosophy, which extends to all my bass cabs... not just the Hathors and Thunderchilds, but also experimentals like the little Birdhaus... is this: I want the cab's native tone to hold up across a wide area, and that may be for purely selfish reasons. You see, truth be told, at gigs I spend all of my time out in the audience, and I want to hear what the bass player is doing even if I'm not in the on-axis power-alley hot-spot... which I'm not going to be because the guitars are too dang loud there. In fact when a song comes along that sucks, I'll just focus on the bassline (assuming I can hear it), because it won't suck.

So anyway I would say the 1855 comes closer to embodying my zig-zag electric bass cab philosophy than the little 1203 does. Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing, well that's a matter of personal preference.

Even in their most hi-fi settings (top switch up, bottom switch down), none of the Hathor cabs (past, present or future) will be as hi-fi as a cab from the Thunderchild series. But while a Thunderchild cab can theoretically be EQ'd to approximate the zig-zag, it still won't quite have the same vibe, nor will its compression driver be as distortion-friendly as the paper cones.

Hope this helps!

 

[tombowlus]

Duke. What's the 1203 like compared to the 1855 in terms of voicing. I'm still pretty tempted by the 1855.

Here's some language I quoted back in an earlier post:

Comparing the 1855 to the double 1203 stack, the 1855 has tighter, slightly bigger, almost growly lows. Very nice, and very addicting! The 2x1203 stack is a bit more warm/round down low, with more bloom. This can also be very nice in the right situation, and some folks will certainly prefer this kind of low end presentation.

Moving on to the midrange, this is where the meat of the story lies, and it’ll take some time to suss out the details. At first, the 1855 sounded more lean in the mids, but I think this is just the lower to middle mids. It is definitely more articulate and more present the upper mids. The more I played around, the more I felt like the 1855 had more peaks and valleys in the mids and the 1203’s were more consistent and balanced. One big caveat is that this initial round of testing was all done from a seated position a few feet in front of the cabs. I am guessing that as I move around, the perceived mids (and the relative balance through the mids) may vary quite a bit.

The “high end” (which might technically be the upper mids – not sure on this one) between the two was probably their most similar feature. The 1855 is a tad more pure and clean, and the 1203’s seemed to have more harmonic content through the highs. Both setups leave you wondering why you’d ever need a horn.

Now, things got interesting when I switched from my MTD 535 (a two-pickup, active bass) to my Carvin PB5 (a passive P-bass). The 1855 became much more burpy/growly and has a lot more upper mids. The 1203s were much more round and smooth by comparison. This was not a subtle transition, and I view this as a credit to the cabs’ (both the 1855 and the 1203’s) abilities to reflect the character of the signal being fed to them. In fact, the 1855 may be the best-performing cab that I have ever tried in this regard. First impressions can be misleading, mind you, but out of the gate, I was floored by its ability to just entirely transform its sound when switching instruments. The only potential downside to this is that if a player hears this cab at a GTG or demos one at home, unless he/she tries a variety of basses (and I’m guessing, amps) with the cab, they may not really get to know its capabilities.

Comparing the 1544 to the 1855 or the two 1203’s, the 1544 just sounds boxy and thin. With the right head (something big and meaty), this cab can sound great – especially when you throw some overdrive at it. But when I compare it to your other cabs, I definitely prefer the 1855 and 1203.​

 

[DukeLeJeune]

Tom, my recollection is that, back when you made that comparison, neither the 1855 nor 1203 had the full complement of switches they now have. Is that how you remember it?

 

[tombowlus]

Tom, my recollection is that, back when you made that comparison, neither the 1855 nor 1203 had the full complement of switches they now have. Is that how you remember it?

You are absolutely correct! I guess I need to get a second 1203 and update my comparison!

 

[DukeLeJeune]

You are absolutely correct! I guess I need to get a second 1203 and update my comparison!

Ah... yeah... well, sorry it's been so slow getting there!!

 

[Passinwind]

Another part of my philosophy, which extends to all my bass cabs... not just the Hathors and Thunderchilds, but also experimentals like the little Birdhaus... is this: I want the cab's native tone to hold up across a wide area, and that may be for purely selfish reasons. You see, truth be told, at gigs I spend all of my time out in the audience, and I want to hear what the bass player is doing even if I'm not in the on-axis power-alley hot-spot...

So what's the status of the Birdhaus experiments at this point Duke? The one you brought up to Seattle last year showed definite promise, I thought.

 

[Dee-man]

Thanks for your comments on the 1544, Duke. Much appreciated.

Sounds like the 1544 will sound not quite as hi-fi as the TC115, but not as growly as the 1203/current Hathor line. If that's wrong, it probably errs on the clean side. Overall, it has an even distribution across the range except a little shy in the lows (I've read in the low-mids too), due to the woofer and the clarity of the mids. SOunds like if I like a plugged TC115, I might like the 1544, especially if I like the horn rolled down. Did I get that right? Thanks again, DM

 

[DukeLeJeune]

So what's the status of the Birdhaus experiments at this point Duke? The one you brought up to Seattle last year showed definite promise, I thought.

I have a finished but empty Birdhaus 46 cabinet behind me (that's the little cab that went to Seattle last year, for those who weren't there), currently serving as a stand for a Hathor 1203 box that is getting Duratexed in between posts. It has actually been finished to this point for months. I've had a hard time getting the woofers for it... they're either backordered, or I get some in, but then have to use them for home audio speakers. I have eight woofers on order right now, enough to do two Birdhaus 46 cabs, and no home audio speakers in the pipeline that need them, so that one and another might actually get finished. One would be going to LeonD, and I don't remember who the other beta-tester is; they've probably both given up on me.

I've done experimental Birdhaus cabs in 4x8 and 4x15 configurations, and the 4x8 version should be going to its beta tester next time I make a run to "town" to ship stuff. The 4x15 version is with its beta tester now. It uses the 4-ohm Basslite 2515, which combines a 4-ohm Deltalite-class motor with a cone that has a really nice growly peak at about 1.5 kHz. This is actually my favorite off-the-shelf woofer for electric bass, but that 4-ohm impedance makes it a bit awkward... if it was 8 ohms, one for small gigs/two for big gigs would be a no-brainer. But at 4 ohms, well imo there's a pretty limited market for a 4-ohm 300-watt 15-inch cab, as you can't very well add a second cab without the impedance going too low for most amps. But if we could use four of them wired in series-parallel, we're back at 4 ohms, and with the Birdhaus configuration we solve the problem that plagues midless tweetless uber-215 cabs, namely beaming in the top end. Whether the Birdhaus 415 fills a niche or will simply be a curiosity remains to be seen.

The Birdhaus 48 uses the 16-ohm version of the Faital 8PR200 (whose parameters give a bit meatier bottom end than the original 8-ohm version), all wired in parallel for a 4-ohm load. This is the first cab I've done that, to my ears, has "enough" bottom end in full-on sealed-box mode. At this point it might be nothing more than a solution in search of a problem, but it ought to at least be "gig-worthy", whereas the little 4x6 version is more of an "acoustic jam session/coffeehaus" cab. Does the wide, uniform dispersion trade off well against the top end rolling off around 5 kHz? I guess that too remains to be seen.

So the possibility exists that the midless tweetless Birdhaus configuration could become a third line, alongside the Thunderchild and Hathor series. I'd normally balk at doing crossoverless cabs, as that's arguably where I have a chance to "add value", but I'm also all about that wide dispersion thing, and so far the Birdhaus configuration seems to do a decent job in that area. Actually the 4x15 version isn't entirely without crossover parts... I do some response shaping, and there's a switch to take out that 1.5 kHz megapeak.

So I definitely haven't given up on the Birdhaus thing, and we'll see if it scales up well. Pictures on request.

 

[DukeLeJeune]

Sounds like the 1544 will sound not quite as hi-fi as the TC115, but not as growly as the 1203/current Hathor line. If that's wrong, it probably errs on the clean side. Overall, it has an even distribution across the range except a little shy in the lows (I've read in the low-mids too), due to the woofer and the clarity of the mids. SOunds like if I like a plugged TC115, I might like the 1544, especially if I like the horn rolled down. Did I get that right? Thanks again, DM

Yes, I think the 1544 may be tonally closer to the horn-rolled-off TC115 than to the other Hathor cabs.

 

[Selta]

Heya, just saying... if you need a beta tested, I can certainly help with that

 

[DukeLeJeune]

Heya, just saying... if you need a beta tested, I can certainly help with that

Check your inbox...