• 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...

#1,643
morebassbaby said:
Hathor 1203 comes today AND all of my pedals I sent to a guy to fix up into a pedalboard. It's going to be a Great Day!!!

....on the topic of the h1203, I cannot remember...does someone have a slip cover for these cabinets spec'd? Want to keep the new baby protected!
Click to expand...

I just called Tuki covers and ordered two padded slip covers for my Hathor 1203's based on Duke's info. Duke stated somewhere in this thread that the 1203's are exactly the same width and depth as the TC112, except the 1203's are 4" shorter. Tuki sells the TC112 cover (on their site), but has not made a 1203 cover yet… Until now :)

I should be getting my covers within two weeks. When I do, I'll report back and let you know how it worked out. Btw, they were $69 each plus shipping.
 
  • Like
Reactions: morebassbaby and dmrogers
#1,645
Marial said:
I went with Lecover for my TC212 based on someone's recommendation here, very happy with it.
Click to expand...
Cool. They make good covers as well. I have a Tuki padded cover for my TC112 and its great, and their price is great, thats why I went with them. I had purchased a cover from studio slips for another cab I have, and that cover was great too, but very expensive. Susan is great but her prices are high, however, she does provide great custom options such as adding zipper pockets, etc.
 
#1,647
maisbass said:
I just called Tuki covers and ordered two padded slip covers for my Hathor 1203's based on Duke's info. Duke stated somewhere in this thread that the 1203's are exactly the same width and depth as the TC112, except the 1203's are 4" shorter. Tuki sells the TC112 cover (on their site), but has not made a 1203 cover yet… Until now :)

I should be getting my covers within two weeks. When I do, I'll report back and let you know how it worked out. Btw, they were $69 each plus shipping.
Click to expand...
Awesome! Thanks so much for the info! Looking forward to hearing how it all works out.
 
#1,648
maisbass said:
I just called Tuki covers and ordered two padded slip covers for my Hathor 1203's based on Duke's info. Duke stated somewhere in this thread that the 1203's are exactly the same width and depth as the TC112, except the 1203's are 4" shorter. Tuki sells the TC112 cover (on their site), but has not made a 1203 cover yet… Until now :) .
Click to expand...

Actually the Hathor 1203 is 1/2 inch shallower than the TC112. I've been carelessly saying that it's "the same" and "14 inches" deep, but it's more like "13.5 inches" deep. Even this is making some allowance for the grille pooch-outage and corners; the actual depth of the wooden cabinet is 13.0 inches.

Sorry about that, I should have taken the time to specify that there's actually that half-inch difference.
 
#1,649
DukeLeJeune said:
Actually the Hathor 1203 is 1/2 inch shallower than the TC112. I've been carelessly saying that it's "the same" and "14 inches" deep, but it's more like "13.5 inches" deep. Even this is making some allowance for the grille pooch-outage and corners; the actual depth of the wooden cabinet is 13.0 inches.

Sorry about that, I should have taken the time to specify that there's actually that half-inch difference.
Click to expand...

Ug… So I guess I should call them and tell them 13.5"d then?
 
#1,650
maisbass said:
Ug… So I guess I should call them and tell them 13.5"d then?
Click to expand...
Just tell them 1/2" less than the TC112, as they've already adjusted their measurements of the TC112 to take into account the grille and corners.
 
#1,651
DukeLeJeune said:
Just tell them 1/2" less than the TC112, as they've already adjusted their measurements of the TC112 to take into account the grille and corners.
Click to expand...

Yeah I got off the phone with them an hour ago. I explained to Glen's son that its a half inch shorter in depth than the TC112, and also explained the new orientation of the handle. He said he already cut the fabric but would talk to his dad (Glen) about it as well (Glen is the designer). I explained to him that there are other people interested in purchasing covers as well so he wants to make sure they get it right. Keep y'all posted… :)
 
#1,652
maisbass said:
Yeah I got off the phone with them an hour ago. I explained to Glen's son that its a half inch shorter in depth than the TC112, and also explained the new orientation of the handle. He said he already cut the fabric but would talk to his dad (Glen) about it as well (Glen is the designer). I explained to him that there are other people interested in purchasing covers as well so he wants to make sure they get it right. Keep y'all posted… :)
Click to expand...
Thanks for blazing the trail, and sorry gave you a bad map!

* * * *

On a different subject, I have a really stupid question: When someone talks about "old school" voicing for a bass cab, what do they mean? I think that implies "little or no highs to speak of", but does it have a specific implication for the mids and low end as well?
 
#1,655
DukeLeJeune said:
On a different subject, I have a really stupid question: When someone talks about "old school" voicing for a bass cab, what do they mean? I think that implies "little or no highs to speak of", but does it have a specific implication for the mids and low end as well?
Click to expand...

Not at all stupid...

Yes, it definitely means "no tweeters", and not a lot of upper midrange - from the cones(s) or from a tweeter. But I do think it means more than that, and it does have to do with the low end and midrange frequencies as well.

Relative to today's rigs, "old school" certainly means lo-fi: the lows are not that extended (think Bergantino HD series, Epifani, fEARful/fEARless, Barefaced, Acme...and yes, AudioKinesis as well), with the low frequencies tending to "bunch up" in the upper bass region (roughly 100Hz - 200Hz), and lower midrange - yielding a tone that was phat, but not really deep.

Since the drivers were not nearly as high-quality when old school was new school, you could expect a fair bit of distortion as well - harmonic as well as otherwise - along with the occasional burp. In general, one could describe the sound as warm, smooth, rounded, relatively phat, but also a bit smeared and blurry. Cutting-edge precision in bass tone was not much of a design goal during the Sixties and early Seventies - nor much of a feasible possibility.

My take on it, at any rate...

MM
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joebone, GregC and will33
#1,656
Mystic Michael said:
Not at all stupid...

Yes, it definitely means "no tweeters", and not a lot of upper midrange - from the cones(s) or from a tweeter. But I do think it means more than that, and it does have to do with the low end and midrange frequencies as well.

Relative to today's rigs, "old school" certainly means lo-fi: the lows are not that extended (think Bergantino HD series, Epifani, fEARful/fEARless, Barefaced, Acme...and yes, AudioKinesis as well), with the low frequencies tending to "bunch up" in the upper bass region (roughly 100Hz - 200Hz), and lower midrange - yielding a tone that was phat, but not really deep.

Since the drivers were not nearly as high-quality when old school was new school, you could expect a fair bit of distortion as well - harmonic as well as otherwise - along with the occasional burp. In general, one could describe the sound as warm, smooth, rounded, relatively phat, but also a bit smeared and blurry. Cutting-edge precision in bass tone was not much of a design goal during the Sixties and early Seventies - nor much of a feasible possibility.

My take on it, at any rate...

MM
Click to expand...
Pretty good descriptor.

Bit of cone breakup at times. Bit of amp breakup as well. Both the result of squeezing what they could out of the limitations of the bass equipment then.

A lot of the recordings were mixed in a pretty narrow bandwidth as well. Think being able to catch the timbre and emotion, and hear all the parts clearly on a mono am car radio with one speaker in the dash. Bandwidth what? 100-5khz maybe?

A lot of the bass tones had to do with flatwound strings and foam mutes as well.

If you ask older guys what it was like to play through some of the equipment back then, they'll say the good ol' days maybe weren't all that good and us "younger" guys have a bit of a romanticized view of it. :D

In general...not so deep, not so bright, not so clear. "Lo-fi", in a "musical" way.

Ya, I kind of suck at describing sound. :)
 
#1,658
will33 said:
In general...not so deep, not so bright, not so clear. "Lo-fi", in a "musical" way.
Click to expand...

Pretty good description. That's the way I remember it. Oh, and I used a foam mute for a long time.

Freddels said:
It was always just plug and play. I never worried about my tone b/c it sounded so good. :)
Click to expand...

It was! One bass, one amp (Bassman 100 w/4x12), one cable, no charts, no worries! I thought it sounded good, of course, I had nothing to compare it to. We only had a few choices and it all sounded kinda the same (taking genres into account).
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back