• 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...

#141
DukeLeJeune said:
You'd think my goal was to shoehorn a lot of cab into a small footprint, and that's partially true. But more precisely, the goal was to shoehorn as much cab as I could into a standard 36" x 16" x 16" double-walled cardboard shipping box, with room for a bit of padding!
Click to expand...

Thank you for reinforcing a message I deliver to my students every semester: constraints catalyze creativity!
 
#143
cnltb said:
Alright, Thanks! :)
On just came to me...
Is there a version wih 10" drive units rather than the 12" one mentioned above(unless I misread, of course.)?
I generally prefer the tone I get with 10s.
Click to expand...

there is not at this time.

a few of us have been after him to do a 1x10, but he doesn't feel like he can get what he needs to do the job adequately. (i hope i'm characterizing this properly.)
 
#144
cnltb said:
Alright, Thanks! :)
On just came to me...
Is there a version wih 10" drive units rather than the 12" one mentioned above(unless I misread, of course.)?
I generally prefer the tone I get with 10s.
Click to expand...

If there was, the 10 would sound virtually identical to the 12, just not as loud. The old 'cone sizes sound different' pretty much falls apart when you are dealing with these more PA subwoofer drivers combined with relatively low crossed over mid drivers or horns.
 
#145
Jazzdogg said:
Thank you for reinforcing a message I deliver to my students every semester: constraints catalyze creativity!
Click to expand...

I hadn't thought of it like that, but you're right. And it's a rather arbitrary, self-imposed constraint, but it did help me focus a bit better.

One of these days I still want to do the "suitcase cab", another exercise in seeing what can be done within constraints.

cnltb said:
Alright, Thanks! :)
One just came to me...
Is there a version wih 10" drive units rather than the 12" one mentioned above(unless I misread, of course.)?
I generally prefer the tone I get with 10s.
Click to expand...

The short answer is, no, I don't offer a 10" version.

Thank you steubig and Kjung for your replies. You both possess the gift of conciseness, which as you can see below, I do not!

So feel free to skip over the long version of my answer:

I subscribe to the school of thought that says other things besides driver diameter are the main factors in determining how a speaker sounds. Driver diameter directly affects the radiation pattern and is a factor (along with excursion) in how much air can be moved, but in my opinion the shape of the frequency response curve is what dominates at low frequencies.

Often a speaker manufacturer will use the same motor (magnet + voice coil) on different size woofers, so what we have is essentially the same motor strength combined with different size and weight cones. The result is generally "tighter" low end from the smaller-diameter cones. But it is quite possible to make a larger-diameter cone that has the same "tight" characteristics - we just need to use a more powerful magnet (I'm making a few simplifying assumptions here, and for now I'm overlooking the role of the enclosure).

The Kappalite series of woofers from Eminence have very powerful motors, such that their 12" and even one of their 15" models are capable of the sort of tight low end we traditionally associate with multiple 10's. In fact, the 12" woofer used in the TC212, and in the 8-ohm version of the TC112, is a woofer that I've used in custom studio monitors, where low-end articulation is a high priority.

Now let's get back to the shape of the frequency response curve. In addition to the woofer's characteristics, the enclosure's characteristics play a major role here. The bigger the box, the more low end, generally speaking. But with a ported box, we also need to choose our tuning frequency carefully. This tuning might give us a more massive low end, while that tuning gives us a tighter, more articulate low end. So what I do is use round ports that can be easily and solidly plugged, changing the tuning frequency and thereby changing the shape of the low-frequency response curve.

Here's a photo of the back of a TC212:

gi.mpl?u=2112&f=P1000796.jpg


With all three ports open, we get a fairly big bottom end. It's not the most massive out there by any means, but it's big for the size of the cab.

Plugging the middle port changes the shape of the response curve to more like what we might get from a good cab with 10's - tighter, more articulate low end. Unplugging the middle port but now plugging the top and bottom (I can explain why this configuration if you'd like) results in a rolloff more like a sealed box, for an even tighter low end. And all three ports plugged is a sealed box, albeit one that will sound anemic in all but the most boomy of rooms.

Which brings up another advantage of the pluggable port system: If you show up to play and the room is intolerably boomy or muddy, you can plug ports and tighten up the low end and theoretically make a bad situation tolerable.

So anyway I think that I can deliver the kind of low end people like from multiple 10's in a smaller-footprint package.

Further up the spectrum, in the midrange region, I compensate for the relative limitations of my larger woofers by using a PA-style compression driver and a good horn so that I can bring the crossover point down lower than normal, in order to get a good blend between woofer and horn. I match up the radiation pattern of woofer and horn in the crossover region (not perfectly, but closer than most), and this helps the tonal balance to remain more uniform across a broad frontal arc. So once again, I think I can meet or exceed the performance of a roughly equivalent cabinet that uses 10's.

Now there is a very interesting 10" woofer out there, the Kappalite 3010LF. It uses the same motor as my 12" woofer. Unfortuantely its frequency response curve is more difficult to work with, so by the time I've tamed it, I've got a more expensive and possibly heavier box because of the additional high-power-handling inductors required in the crossover. The 3010LF is also less efficient, so our bang-per-buck as well as sound-per-pound both go down. And this woofer has a very powerful motor relative to its cone size and weight, which can result in a thin low end unless we tune the enclosure a bit higher than we might otherwise have (which introduces its own set of tradeoffs). So it's still a great 10" woofer, but imo it has a hard time competing with its 12" big brother, which is imo a super-great 12" woofer. Going with two Kappalite 3010LFs, we'd end up with a cab that's a little bit smaller, probably just as heavy and just as expensive if not moreso, that won't play as loud, and imo doesn't obviously do anything significantly better. Probably would have a little better articulation in some regions, but not by much.

Another very attractive 10" driver is the Faital 8PR200. Wait a minute - that's an 8"!! Yes it is, but it moves enough air to make it competitive with many 10's in that regard (though not the mighty Kappalite 10 mentioned above). I really like this woofer, but what I come up against is, its high cost relative to what it does. In a 2x10 (okay 2x8) using the Faital, we'd have a cab that definitely costs more than the Thunderchild 112, weighs more, and won't go as loud. Again we might have a little better articulation in some areas, but not by much.

Well that's probably a longer answer than you were looking for!
 
  • Like
Reactions: eaglemachine and blip
#147
Jazzdogg said:
Great explanation, Duke. Thank you! Out of curiosity, how much does the weight of the crossover contribute to total cab weight?
Click to expand...

The crossover in the 212 is probably five or six pounds. I don't think I've ever actually weighed it, but it's probably in the ballpark of the 115's crossover which is about six pounds. I think the 112's crossover is a little under five pounds. Most of the crossover weight is in the inductors, as they're just coils of solid wire.

Adding more complexity to the crossover of a dual-Kappalite cab is expensive in dollars and in pounds, as I have to use 14 gauge inductors for power handling.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eaglemachine
#150
I got this a few months back but haven't had time to post a picture. I think this might have been the second to last one Mike made. What I great cab. Without getting technical this thing has a big full sound, small footprint and is very light. This thing is a beast. I was actually looking to have Mike make me a 210 but he kinda talked me into the 212 and I am not disappointed. I have already sold my other cabs and am only using the TC212. Here's a pic.
 

Attachments

  • TC212R.jpg
    TC212R.jpg
    113.1 KB · Views: 190
#152
Mark Sacchetti said:
Wanted to share how the Hathor 1544 shines especially when it's paired with a jule De Monique Tardis amp. The combination yields a rich, warm, and articulate tone.
View attachment 361067

Thanks again to Duke for making a fantastic bass cab!
Click to expand...

Thank you very much, Mark! Wish I could hear the combination in person!
 
#153
Duke [or anyone else who cares to chime in],

Curious about what you think to be the most ideal spot for mic placement in front of a TC112. I plan on doing some recording soon and will be using the TC112 (with Aguilar TH500) as my mic'd amp/speaker rig. I plan on using only one mic in front of the TC112 (Heil PR40). Just curious where you think the "sweet spot" would be for capturing a good/proper blend of both drivers.

FWIW, I have a non-AF model and I plan on plugging both ports. The "recording room" is a closet. Prob will use my mstr bedroom closet, about 6x6x8, will be leaving the clothes on the racks to help deaden the boom.
 
#154
Jazzdogg said:
Thank you for reinforcing a message I deliver to my students every semester: constraints catalyze creativity!
Click to expand...

That's a very true statement. I often find working within constraints to be the most inspiring situation when it comes to engineering.

DukeLeJeune said:
hadn't thought of it like that, but you're right. And it's a rather arbitrary, self-imposed constraint, but it did help me focus a bit better.I

One of these days I still want to do the "suitcase cab", another exercise in seeing what can be done within constraints.
Click to expand...

Let me know when that suitcase cab happens. :p

But seriously, I fell in love with a TC112 and a Walter Woods at the only TB GTG I've ever managed to make it to. That was why I was silly enough to want a Thunderchild 118 to maximize low end and efficiency within my own limits-clean 300w RMS tube amps. I already know Duke's designs are tasteful and versatile to say the least. :)
 
#155
g4string said:
Duke [or anyone else who cares to chime in],

Curious about what you think to be the most ideal spot for mic placement in front of a TC112. I plan on doing some recording soon and will be using the TC112 (with Aguilar TH500) as my mic'd amp/speaker rig. I plan on using only one mic in front of the TC112 (Heil PR40). Just curious where you think the "sweet spot" would be for capturing a good/proper blend of both drivers.
Click to expand...

That's a good question... unfortunately, I don't really have a good answer! I have zero experience mic'ing cabs. Maybe start with the mic height at or near the top edge of the woofer cone, and see what distance "works". For a bit warmer tone, maybe lay the cab on its side, and lower the mic height accordingly. Somebody with some experience help me out, I'm just flailing about here...
 
#156
There are probably as many opinions on this question as anything else. The things that no one disputes are: mic close to the speaker and you get less room sound, further away you get more. That gives you some control over how "live" you want it to sound.

You're going to want to aim the mic at the cone (paper part of the speaker). Stay away from the edge (because there is less movement) and I've also heard to stay away from the center where the voice coil is, but I don't know the reasoning behind that.
 
#157
g4string,

I'd suggest you make some test-recordings trying several different mic positions to find what you like best.

If you don't have a really good set of studio monitors for playback, use your TC112. You could simply patch the recorders output through your amps effects return and compare your test tracks without using any additional eq.

I'd suggest you also burn the test tracks to a disc and listen/compare them on every type of playback system you have access to. (from hi-end home/automotive systems to cheapo computer monitors ;)
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back