• 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 Cabs Part VI...

#3,881
DukeLeJeune said:
gi.mpl?u=2112&f=1505front.jpg


gi.mpl?u=2112&f=1505rear.jpg


Dimensions 25" tall x 18" wide x 14" deep, weight 38 pounds.
Click to expand...

I may need to try one of those, Duke! :thumbsup:
 
  • Like
Reactions: shrigg, wave rider and Marial
#3,883
DukeLeJeune said:
My beta tester, Shrigg, said that the 1505 compared favorably to a 410 that was rated at 101 dB, but I'm not sure whether that particular 410 was "typical".
Click to expand...

Yes, that is correct. It was substantially more efficient than this Ashdown 4x10. And SO much more pleasing, smooth and organic sounding. To this day, everyone that hears the H1505 is stunned!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DukeLeJeune and svtb15
#3,884
I'm not a big fan of the "as loud as" claims because some have been on the exuberant side in the past but I'm confident in saying a pair of 1203's are handling all the gigs I used to do with a trace 210/115 (2103H/1153T) setup I used for 13 years.

I was looking for great sound yet portable back then and that was the best compromise I could find at the time. I got help at gigs but had to do all the loading at home on my own. No way I was doing a 100+lbs 410. Plus it had to fit in a TBird. Those cabs were easily twice the size of the 1203 and weighed 50-60lbs each.

Also, it wasn't uncommon for them to fart/chuff from low G on down. Had to be careful. Haven't heard the hathor fart yet. But I have no doubt a hathor fart would smell really bad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 10cc, svtb15, tombowlus and 1 other person
#3,885
I'm doing an outdoor Beerfest this Saturday with my Thunderchild composite 115/LMII and no PA support. I will take my CMD102P and 102H for backup, and augmentation if needed, will report back with results, I have used the Thunderchild outdoors before in a smaller setting, so I'm optimistic it can handle it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: svtb15
#3,888
nutdog said:
I'm not a big fan of the "as loud as" claims because some have been on the exuberant side in the past...
Click to expand...

I hear you on "louder than" claims based on memories or other non-direct comparisons... but in this case two other sound professionals played and listened while I pulled the speakon cable out of the H1505 and plugged it straight into the 4x10, amp settings untouched and identical for both. Everyone agreed the 1505 was noticably more efficient and pleasing sounding. They wanted me to switch back to the Duke cab right away. I'd call that a pretty telling yet objective test.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 10cc, Mystic Michael and svtb15
#3,889
shrigg said:
I hear you on "louder than" claims based on memories or other non-direct comparisons... but in this case two other sound professionals played and listened while I pulled the speakon cable out of the H1505 and plugged it straight into the 4x10, amp settings untouched and identical for both. Everyone agreed the 1505 was noticably louder and wanted me to switch back to the Duke cab right away. I'd call that a pretty telling yet objective test.
Click to expand...
I wasn't trying to question your claim. I think I remember you saying the 1505 overshadows the 1203 when paired together so it seems reasonable it could outclass an older 410.

As far as same amp/settings I would think sensitivity would play into that as well. It's possible if you turned both up until they reached their limits it might be different. It might take more amp to get the 410 to it's max.

Also different frequencies can cause different perceptions in loudness. If the 1505 is doing better at presenting the high mids (which I imagine it is) it might make that cab seem louder even if the 410 was louder in the low end. Not trying to argue, just throwing out thoughts on why cab comparisons can be difficult even when side by side.

Something along the lines of a berg hd410 would probably fair better but of course it would be much larger and heavier.
 
#3,890
nutdog said:
I wasn't trying to question your claim. I think I remember you saying the 1505 overshadows the 1203 when paired together so it seems reasonable it could outclass an older 410.

As far as same amp/settings I would think sensitivity would play into that as well. It's possible if you turned both up until they reached their limits it might be different. It might take more amp to get the 410 to it's max.

Also different frequencies can cause different perceptions in loudness. If the 1505 is doing better at presenting the high mids (which I imagine it is) it might make that cab seem louder even if the 410 was louder in the low end. Not trying to argue, just throwing out thoughts on why cab comparisons can be difficult even when side by side.

Something along the lines of a berg hd410 would probably fair better but of course it would be much larger and heavier.
Click to expand...

No offense taken, this thread is specifically intended for discussion such as this. And I do agree that the 4x10 in question was a mid-line model, not high end. It was still fun to note the huge difference swapping the cable from cab to cab while a player played live. I'd love to hear if @tombowlus shares my opinion that the H1505 is very authoritative for a 36 lb. (by my digital shipping scale) cabinet!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 10cc and svtb15
#3,893
svtb15 said:
On the 1505 cab.. What exactly happens when one would PLUG 1,2 or 3 of the ports.. OR leave them all open?
Sonically , what happens ?
Click to expand...
If I recall, which, I may very well be wrong, but you wouldn't want to plug 3 of the 4 (or 1, or two on one side).

I run my TC118 with all the ports plugged all of the time. It effectively raises decreases (edited for correction, in case someone stumbles on this post later) the tuning of the cab - you're basically making the ported cab, a sealed one.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DukeLeJeune and svtb15
#3,895
lax4bags said:
Maybe mine is 4 ohm! I need to know that! hmmmmmmmmm I shall message Duke!
Click to expand...

Apologies for my lousy memory, it is possible that I made one or two Hathor 1544's in 8 ohms and forgot about them. I think you can remove a port and see the back of the magnet, and there should be a label there. Or if you have a way to measure DC resistance, more than 5.1 ohms = "8 ohms nominal impedance" in this case.

svtb15 said:
On the 1505 cab.. What exactly happens when one would PLUG 1,2 or 3 of the ports.. OR leave them all open?
Sonically , what happens ?
Click to expand...

Selta covered it well, but I'm no longer telling people to use a symmetrical port plugging protocol. I did that for a while because I was paranoid about severe cone rocking, which occurred in a prototype cab, but no one has ever reported it since I moved the port locations to behind the cone.

To get a little more specific about what happens, as you plug ports the tuning frequency of the box decreases. The result is that the low-end rolloff starts higher up (I know that's counter-intuitive), but it becomes more gradual, which has the effect of tightening up the low end a bit.

Also the more ports open the more midrange energy we get behind the cab, because the ports are right smack behind the woofer cone(s). On my Thunderchild cabs I offer the option of a reduced-level rear-firing tweeter so that you get pretty much full spectrum sound behind the cab, albeit at reduced level relative to out front.

nutdog said:
Also different frequencies can cause different perceptions in loudness. If the 1505 is doing better at presenting the high mids (which I imagine it is) it might make that cab seem louder even if the 410 was louder in the low end.
Click to expand...

This may well be the case. Eyeballing my measurements just now, with the switch set for "growly", it looks to me like the upper-mid peakage (centered around 1.5 kHz) is in the 104-105 dB ballpark. Note that is not my claimed efficiency - imo that would be an optimistic and misleading claim.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: svtb15, Selta, lax4bags and 1 other person
#3,896
FWIW, the "loud" descriptor is pretty useless and meaningless in my book. Standing next to a jet is loud. Walk into a yarn mill...loud. Sit next to loudspeaker at a high school football game...loud. The folk duo sharing a gig the other night...vocals were painfully loud. Which is a shame because they were pretty good.

None of it has anything to do with good bass sound. A cab needs to make a noise that sounds and feels good to whoever needs to hear it. Depending on the situation it may be just me, the band and/or the audience.

What is good? That's where it gets tough to describe. I know it when I hear it. Essentially it's when, in a particular environment/mix, it sounds like the bass on the recordings I like.
 
#3,897
nutdog said:
FWIW, the "loud" descriptor is pretty useless and meaningless in my book. Standing next to a jet is loud. Walk into a yarn mill...loud. Sit next to loudspeaker at a high school football game...loud. The folk duo sharing a gig the other night...vocals were painfully loud. Which is a shame because they were pretty good.

None of it has anything to do with good bass sound. A cab needs to make a noise that sounds and feels good to whoever needs to hear it. Depending on the situation it may be just me, the band and/or the audience.

What is good? That's where it gets tough to describe. I know it when I hear it. Essentially it's when, in a particular environment/mix, it sounds like the bass on the recordings I like.
Click to expand...

Guess I used unflattering terms without realizing it. Thanks for pointing that out, just edited my posts to read "more efficient" which is a better description.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mngnt and svtb15
#3,898
DukeLeJeune said:
Selta covered it well, but I'm no longer telling people to use a symmetrical port plugging protocol. I did that for a while because I was paranoid about severe cone rocking, which occurred in a prototype cab, but no one has ever reported it since I moved the port locations to behind the cone.

To get a little more specific about what happens, as you plug ports the tuning frequency of the box decreases. The result is that the low-end rolloff starts higher up (I know that's counter-intuitive), but it becomes more gradual, which has the effect of tightening up the low end a bit.

Also the more ports open the more midrange energy we get behind the cab, because the ports are right smack behind the woofer cone(s). On my Thunderchild cabs I offer the option of a reduced-level rear-firing tweeter so that you get pretty much full spectrum sound behind the cab, albeit at reduced level relative to out front.
Click to expand...
I knew I was reversing the terminology on that :) Thanks for all the clarification and extra details, Duke.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back