AudioKinesis Cabs Part VI...

[Joe Louvar]

Here it is, next to a cab with an 18. I call it the "Hathor 1203" (Kappalite 3012LF woofer + 3" Faital mid, the latter I'm using more like a tweet). Dimensions are 18" tall by 14" wide x 14" deep (the actual depth of the cabinet is 13"; there's about 1/2" of grille pooch-outage and I rounded up), and weight is 24 pounds. Will deliver low-B and handle 500 watts:

The 3" cone mid has an "open format" mid-chamber, hence the "ports" on top. The idea is to allow the cone's backwave energy to escape, making it easier to hear the overtones if you're right on top of the cab on a tight stage.

The woofer's chamber has a single 3" diameter flared port, on the back of the cab. This port can be plugged to help deal with a boomy room, so I guess it can be a sealed cab.

The Hathor 1203 moves over 3 times as much air as a Deltalite 2510 (a high quality 10" woofer), and I'm gonna call that a "kill". It also moves over 1.5 times as much air as the mighty Kappalite 3010LF, which translates to about 3 dB louder at fartout, and it weighs 12 pounds less than the lightest 110 I know of that uses the 3010LF. So maybe it doesn't "kill" the 3010LF, but it does verbally abuse it.

Edit: Oops, sorry, I see you guys already responded.

Thank you very much - btw, your detailed response is much better.

 

[steve_rolfeca]

There was some discussion earlier about using a Demeter/Monique amp combo with Duke's cabs.

I got to audition them through my TC112AF at the Toronto GTG today, and I would caution anyone doing so to be very careful.

They sounded very good together, but there seems to be little or no high-passing on either unit. We were able to get the TC's cone jumping around in a way that I hadn't seen before, and didn't like.

I have used both a Genz SL 900 and a G-K MB800 extensively with my cab, and while you could certainly damage the TC with either one if you really worked at it, I suspect that the Demeter could do the deed before you even had a chance to realize what was going on.

I would definitely want an HPF like the fdeck, if I was running that combination.

 

[5StringPocket]

The Demeter/Monique amp combo should be incredible with the Hathor 1855 then, since that 18 needs no high passing and could accurately reproduce those lows. I'd love to hear that!

 

[IntrepidCellist]

The Demeter/Monique amp combo should be incredible with the Hathor 1855 then, since that 18 needs no high passing and could accurately reproduce those lows. I'd love to hear that!

Yeah, but why spend all that energy for ultra-subsonic lows that no one is going to hear or want in a live performance?

 

[AstroSonic]

By comparison, the TC115 has much bigger, smoother lows, and the 1203 has a ton more going on in the upper mids. It actually cuts through a good bit better.

Tom,

What do you mean by 'much bigger, smoother lows'? Within the passband of the 1203 (so both cabs are within say 3db of reference), shouldn't they sound pretty similar in the bass? I could see how the TC115 could sound 'bigger' in the low bass, in the range where the 1203 does not produce full or useful output. By smoother do you mean that individual bass notes sound smoother with the 115 (due to some chuffing in the 1203 or smoother crossover?), or that note to note, the 115 is more even?

Bob

 

[tombowlus]

i'm relying heavily on your call here. how is the 1855 to move? i know it isn't terribly heavy, but is it awkward at all?

It is very easy to move. I guess it is on the "medium-large" size, but the handles are well placed. I do have to remember to carry it with the grill facing forward, though, otherwise it bends/pops as it bounced against my body.

 

[tombowlus]

That's what I've been talking with Duke about, as well as possibly a H1203/TC112 stack. How do you compare the H1203 to the ML112s?

Wrapping up some work on BGM#14, but that comparison is coming up very soon!

 

[tombowlus]

Tom,

What do you mean by 'much bigger, smoother lows'? Within the passband of the 1203 (so both cabs are within say 3db of reference), shouldn't they sound pretty similar in the bass? I could see how the TC115 could sound 'bigger' in the low bass, in the range where the 1203 does not produce full or useful output. By smoother do you mean that individual bass notes sound smoother with the 115 (due to some chuffing in the 1203 or smoother crossover?), or that note to note, the 115 is more even?

Bob

The TC cabs have an inherent smoothness from top to bottom, which I suppose is the product of a number of factors: relative tonal balance, transient response, ratio of fundamental to harmonics, etc. The 1203's seem to be tuned for a more aggressive kind of attack. The tradeoff is probably absolute balance across the frequency range (probably some peaks and valleys, there), and they seem to definitely have more harmonic content going on. The TC115 is not a "loose, bloomy" kind of cab, at all, but by comparison, the response of the 1203's down low seem to be "faster." Not necessarily tighter, as there is just a little bit of bloom to both of them (but I'm talking a very small amount, nothing that get's out of hand at all). I probably wouldn't have noticed this in either of them if I hadn't also been playing through the 1855, which is amazingly tight/quick (and overall, amazing!) in the lows.

 

[AstroSonic]

The TC cabs have an inherent smoothness from top to bottom, which I suppose is the product of a number of factors: relative tonal balance, transient response, ratio of fundamental to harmonics, etc. The 1203's seem to be tuned for a more aggressive kind of attack. The tradeoff is probably absolute balance across the frequency range (probably some peaks and valleys, there), and they seem to definitely have more harmonic content going on. The TC115 is not a "loose, bloomy" kind of cab, at all, but by comparison, the response of the 1203's down low seem to be "faster." Not necessarily tighter, as there is just a little bit of bloom to both of them (but I'm talking a very small amount, nothing that get's out of hand at all). I probably wouldn't have noticed this in either of them if I hadn't also been playing through the 1855, which is amazingly tight/quick (and overall, amazing!) in the lows.

Thanks, great info.

WRT the 1203 having more harmonic content, is this due to mid and hf peaks, dispersion or ? Would an upright bass sound more natural with the TC or the 1203?

WRT bloom and 'tightness', do you think these are related to the group delay inherent in a given bass alignment? Many times tightness and bloom are used in a way that suggests that tight cabs are not as extended in the deep bass. Bloom seems often to be related to bass peaking. Is the 1855 both extended and tight?

 

[christw]

Man this 1855 sounds fun... I can't help but love the TC118 so I'm sure Duke's take on a voiced cab will be phenomenal. His work with 18's is very respectable. He's brought new life to the black sheep of the techy bass world with science!

 

[Joe Louvar]

Man this 1855 sounds fun... I can't help but love the TC118 so I'm sure Duke's take on a voiced cab will be phenomenal. His work with 18's is very respectable. He's brought new life to the black sheep of the techy bass world with science!

And Duke seems like a really nice guy too - he always helping TBers (I like that) and that's how I heard about the 110Killers. I'd love to hear Dukes Hathor 1203 - I bet its awesome.

 

[monsterthompson]

Really torn. I just got my F115 back operational (the one Mike Arnopol "built") and it sucks to move with the single top handle. The 1203 stack is very attractive for an easy move. However, the 1855 just seems too awesome to pass on, except for the schlep factor. Wonder if the 1855handle placement is gonna be a fix for me; still managing a weak, partially paralyzed left arm and leg.

 

[steve_rolfeca]

...WRT the 1203 having more harmonic content, is this due to mid and hf peaks, dispersion or ? Would an upright bass sound more natural with the TC or the 1203?

Duke's previously stated position on this, is that the TC is better for upright.

 

[KJung]

Thanks, great info.

WRT the 1203 having more harmonic content, is this due to mid and hf peaks, dispersion or ? Would an upright bass sound more natural with the TC or the 1203?

WRT bloom and 'tightness', do you think these are related to the group delay inherent in a given bass alignment? Many times tightness and bloom are used in a way that suggests that tight cabs are not as extended in the deep bass. Bloom seems often to be related to bass peaking. Is the 1855 both extended and tight?

Duke and I exchanged quite a few emails early on in the TC product cycle (I actually purchased the first TC112!).

Per Tom's post (+1 to all of it), the beauty of the original TC112/115 was that Duke designed a crossover (which weighed almost 5 pounds and takes up the entire bottom of the cab) that totally flattens and cleans up the top end. It removes any hint of dip or bump in the upper midrange (that so defines the tonality of other cabs), and since so much of the upper midrange response is coming from the horn, the nature of the midrange is very clean, transparent and pure (edit: in addition, Duke's OEM versions of the LF drivers in the original TC cabs increase sensitivity of a single cab due to the 4ohm configuration, and he voiced them just a touch tighter to make them work nicely in the very small TC boxes... nice!)

This is a good and a bad thing, depending on what you want. There is absolutely no 'grind' when you dig in (that top of the driver distortion that can sound so musical and warm and rich).

For DB, where you, for the most part, want a relatively even, clean, transparent 'reproduction' of the acoustic tone of the instrument, the TC cabs are simply beautiful, as they are for many 'modern' soap bar loaded active instruments. For a P or J type bass, the TC cabs, for some, can be a bit too much of a good thing, taking some of that harmonic complexity that Tom mentions out of the sound of the instrument.

So, Duke (who does a WONDERFUL job listening to his customers) decided to develop a line of speakers (starting, I guess with the original Hathor cabs) that would keep much of the wonderful mechanical/acoustic science capabilities of the TC cabs (all that xmax of the LF drivers, and the nice dispersion in the upper midrange across the stage), while allowing the cabs to sound a bit more like a 'bass cab'... i.e., some nicely voiced peaks and valleys, and more break-up characteristics above 1K or whatever.

Sounds like he has succeeded nicely!

IMO, and again, based on conversations over a number or years now.

 

[John D Harris]

The TC cabs have an inherent smoothness from top to bottom, which I suppose is the product of a number of factors: relative tonal balance, transient response, ratio of fundamental to harmonics, etc. The 1203's seem to be tuned for a more aggressive kind of attack. The tradeoff is probably absolute balance across the frequency range (probably some peaks and valleys, there), and they seem to definitely have more harmonic content going on. The TC115 is not a "loose, bloomy" kind of cab, at all, but by comparison, the response of the 1203's down low seem to be "faster." Not necessarily tighter, as there is just a little bit of bloom to both of them (but I'm talking a very small amount, nothing that get's out of hand at all). I probably wouldn't have noticed this in either of them if I hadn't also been playing through the 1855, which is amazingly tight/quick (and overall, amazing!) in the lows.

Thanks for the H1855 GAS!

[+ maybe an H1203 for practices & small venues.]

 

[DukeLeJeune]

In an e-mail, Tom suggested that I include a switch on the 1855 to toggle between growly and smooth, and I think that's a very good idea. The necessary parts will probably add a pound or two, but it will become a more flexible cab. Fortunately the circuitry only has do address the midrange drivers, so I don't need very heavy gauge inductors.

Thank you, Tom!!

Would an upright bass sound more natural with the TC or the 1203?

Steve and Ken did an excellent job of responding. On the drawing board is a Hathor 1231, which would be the 1203 + a dome tweeter + switchable midrange response-smoothing circuitry, in the same size box as the original 1203. I don't know whether this will turn out to be a practical cab or not, but I do want to at least try it. Unfortunately adding all that stuff will significantly increase the weight and cost, as this time the response-smoothing circuitry will need 15 gauge inductors, probably two of them. [Edit 4-6-2014: The 1231 has been prototyped, and the tweeter isn't worth the added trouble and expense, so I'm pulling the plug on the 1231. But the midrange smoother circuitry is clearly beneficial, and will be offered as an option.]

 

[AstroSonic]

In an e-mail, Tom suggested that I include a switch on the 1855 to toggle between growly and smooth, and I think that's a very good idea. The necessary parts will probably add a pound or two, but it will become a more flexible cab. Fortunately the circuitry only has do address the midrange drivers, so I don't need very heavy gauge inductors.

Thank you, Tom!!



Steve and Ken did an excellent job of responding. On the drawing board is a Hathor 1231, which would be the 1203 + a dome tweeter + switchable midrange response-smoothing circuitry, in the same size box as the original 1203. I don't know whether this will turn out to be a practical cab or not, but I do want to at least try it. Unfortunately adding all that stuff will significantly increase the weight and cost, as this time the response-smoothing circuitry will need 15 gauge inductors, probably two of them.

I would like to add my thanks to Steve and Ken for their very helpful posts regarding my question about mids voicing and performance with DB.

+1 for switchable midrange response. I know people tend to look at weight as an indication of portability, but handle placement, weight distribution and box shape have as much or more to do with it. OTOH, this response smoothing function might be more easily and flexibly incorporated at line level via a box/pedal in the effects loop. It could also include a low bass boost tailored to the cab (and its capabilities -excursion limits). This approach might be more cost effective, incur less weight penalty and allow for future upgrades. It would also allow players to switch in those response changes 'on the fly'. Just an idea… OTOH, maybe it's a good idea to just keep things simple, and incorporate theses changes in the cab as you planned.

WRT my earlier question about 'bloom' and 'tightness', I tend to like both at different times. I found that I needed cabs for each. I was never really able to get satisfactory bloom by boosting the bass on a 'tight' cab, not could I get satisfactory tightness by cutting bass on a bloomy cab. I have always suspected that a cab could be designed to straddle that fence allowing it to get enough bloom or tightness to satisfy by a little bass EQ. Just wondering if the 1203 could be it.

 

[tombowlus]

I was able to spend some time last night comparing the Baer ML-112 to the 1203, and then, briefly, to the 1855, as well.

The ML-112 is bigger and deeper in the lows than the 1203, and it really hammers nicely on a low B. Of course, it's a much larger enclosure than the 1203, so no real surprise. The 1203 is a bit more warm/round, and totally keeps up with the larger Baer on the E string (possibly even a tad more full on the E and D strings). The upper mids have a lot of similarities, with the 1203 being a bit more smooth and laid back, and the ML a bit more precise and clear. The treble is a bit more present on the Baer, as well. Both cabs held up very well to getting slammed by my MB Fusion 800 (I was playing an MTD 535). The 1203 gets a tad more warm (in a good way) when really cranked.

Breaking out the 1855, is is more massive and dynamic down low - and also more aggressively articulate - when compared to the ML-112. The ML, in turn, is smoother than the 1855. In fact, the ML-112 in many ways sounded like a midway point between the 1203 and the 1855 in regards to relative smoothness, low end, and aggressiveness of the upper mids/treble region.

Here is a quick iPhone pic showing the relative size of the three cabs:

 

[KJung]

I was able to spend some time last night comparing the Baer ML-112 to the 1203, and then, briefly, to the 1855, as well.

The ML-112 is bigger and deeper in the lows than the 1203, and it really hammers nicely on a low B. Of course, it's a much larger enclosure than the 1203, so no real surprise. The 1203 is a bit more warm/round, and totally keeps up with the larger Baer on the E string (possibly even a tad more full on the E and D strings). The upper mids have a lot of similarities, with the 1203 being a bit more smooth and laid back, and the ML a bit more precise and clear. The treble is a bit more present on the Baer, as well. Both cabs held up very well to getting slammed by my MB Fusion 800 (I was playing an MTD 535). The 1203 gets a tad more warm (in a good way) when really cranked.

Breaking out the 1855, is is more massive and dynamic down low - and also more aggressively articulate - when compared to the ML-112. The ML, in turn, is smoother than the 1855. In fact, the ML-112 in many ways sounded like a midway point between the 1203 and the 1855 in regards to relative smoothness, low end, and aggressiveness of the upper mids/treble region.

Here is a quick iPhone pic showing the relative size of the three cabs:

Nice comparison. Man, that 1203 is a small! I love Duke's stuff, but have to also give Roger kudo's. That 'sitting right between' those two would be a very nice sweet spot for many players.

 

[godblender]

Tom- how does that 1855 compare to your 15/6/1 cabs?