• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

AudioKinesis Cabs Part VI...

Duke, I know you're trying to stay away from the bigger cabs but I'm wondering how a Hathor 215-55 would sound with a pair of Faital 15FH500's in 4.5 cu-ft tuned to 49 Hz. A 36"H x 21"W x 16"D box with three 4" flared ports on the back like a larger version of the TC212 but with the twin M5N8-80 open chamber mids, tilt-back handle and corner castors might do it. I think it would be about -2dB at 62 hz, not as deep as the 18 but about 3.5 dB more max volume north of 80 Hz. The 0.31 qts should give it a nice focus, less bloated and more punch than the 3015LF and without that nasty 1300 Hz spike. For those who want a big hammer in the size of a typical 215 cab with the presence and extension of that open mid format I think this would slay. Thoughts on this configuration??? Wonder if it could be done in Okume around 70 lbs?
 
Duke, I know you're trying to stay away from the bigger cabs but I'm wondering how a Hathor 215-55 would sound with a pair of Faital 15FH500's in 4.5 cu-ft tuned to 49 Hz... twin M5N8-80 open chamber mids... I think it would be about -2dB at 62 hz... The 0.31 qts should give it a nice focus, less bloated and more punch than the 3015LF and without that nasty 1300 Hz spike... Thoughts on this configuration??? Wonder if it could be done in Okume around 70 lbs?

Wow, I am impressed. You guys aren't gonna need me at all pretty soon!

That would totally work. Very, very good job.

I've decided to steer the Hathor line in a slightly different direction, and it has to do with the upper mids, 1-2 kHz region, which is where a bit of emphasis can give a nice growly tone that sits well in the mix, in my opinion (but ime it needs to be centered north of that upper peak the 3015LF has). I think part of the appeal of Hathors 1203 and 1855 has been their bumpage in that region, combined with a "smoother switch" to remove said bumpage.

You can take away bumpage, but you can't add it. The 15HF500's are smooth in that region and I bet they sound great, but they are also efficient enough that I can't really expect the twin M5N8's to be loud enough to bring the grind to a pair of 15FH500's. You see, I tried combining a single M5N8 with a single big Faital woofer and it didn't do the grindy thing. In order to get that voicing in the 1855, I had to use two M5N8's.

So what you describe is totally feasible, totally do-able, and would make a GREAT cab, but I want to offer a switchable grindy-upper-mid voicing. And I don't think that particular combination would do it.

A 36"H x 21"W x 16"D box... tilt-back handle and corner castors might do it... Wonder if it could be done in Okume around 70 lbs?

Difficult to do in a 36" tall box. The woofer frames are about 15.5", and then the midrange driver's frame is 5.5", so that's 36.5"... realistically, we'd need about 38" minimum.

I bought a set of tilt-back handles and casters and rails a few years ago, but really hesitate to use them. Here's why: First, I'd want the cab to sit solid on four feet when it was on stage. Second, even with stair-skid rails, that's a lot of bumping into steps for a heavy-but-1/2" cab, even if it was Okume. Third, for roughly the same money that I'd upcharge for adding the casters and handles, you can get a folding dolly that will do a better job and be usable for other things as well. So I lean away from installing tilt-back handles and casters.

...not as deep as the 18 but about 3.5 dB more max volume north of 80 Hz... For those who want a big hammer in the size of a typical 215 cab with the presence and extension of that open mid format I think this would slay.

So, you think there may be a market for a nearly 130-dB-capable Hathor-style cab? I'm under the impression that, once we get to a big enough gig, PA support is pretty likely, but I don't know. Jim Bergantino discontinued his much-loved NV215, and he's smarter than me. Talk me into it!
 
Last edited:
Duke, you're still the man when it comes to putting it all together. I could see how that grindy upper mid emphasis would require a different driver. 38" seems reasonable when considering the frame sizes but that is getting pretty big. I guess that's why the twin 3012LF hits an optimum size/performance slot. Really like the open back mid idea though and can't see needing more than about 6khz in a live setting.
 
So, you think there may be a market for a nearly 130-dB-capable Hathor-style cab? I'm under the impression that, once we get to a big enough gig, PA support is pretty likely, but I don't know. Jim Bergantino discontinued his much-loved NV215, and he's smarter than me. Talk me into it!
Because, sometimes, doing something dumb is just so much more fun?

Edit: Also, for science?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: monsterthompson
Wow, I am impressed. You guys aren't gonna need me at all pretty soon!

That would totally work. Very, very good job.

I've decided to steer the Hathor line in a slightly different direction, and it has to do with the upper mids, 1-2 kHz region, which is where a bit of emphasis can give a nice growly tone that sits well in the mix, in my opinion (but ime it needs to be centered north of that upper peak the 3015LF has).
I think part of the appeal of Hathors 1203 and 1855 has been their bumpage in that region, combined with a "smoother switch" to remove said bumpage.

You can take away bumpage, but you can't add it. The 15HF500's are smooth in that region and I bet they sound great, but they are also efficient enough that I can't really expect the twin M5N8's to be loud enough to bring the grind to a pair of 15FH500's. You see, I tried combining a single M5N8 with a single big Faital woofer and it didn't do the grindy thing. In order to get that voicing in the 1855, I had to use two M5N8's.

So what you describe is totally feasible, totally do-able, and would make a GREAT cab, but I want to offer a switchable grindy-upper-mid voicing. And I don't think that particular combination would do it.



Difficult to do in a 36" tall box. The woofer frames are about 15.5", and then the midrange driver's frame is 5.5", so that's 36.5"... realistically, we'd need about 38" minimum.

I bought a set of tilt-back handles and casters and rails a few years ago, but really hesitate to use them. Here's why: First, I'd want the cab to sit solid on four feet when it was on stage. Second, even with stair-skid rails, that's a lot of bumping into steps for a heavy-but-1/2" cab, even if it was Okume. Third, for roughly the same money that I'd upcharge for adding the casters and handles, you can get a folding dolly that will do a better job and be usable for other things as well. So I lean away from installing tilt-back handles and casters.



So, you think there may be a market for a nearly 130-dB-capable Hathor-style cab? I'm under the impression that, once we get to a big enough gig, PA support is pretty likely, but I don't know. Jim Bergantino discontinued his much-loved NV215, and he's smarter than me. Talk me into it!

I love the mid grind that the 1203's give. I also love the fact that, with the flip of a switch, I can tone it down. That, combined with a small sub 25 pound weight, is a clear winner in my book.

I have gone modular for the past 12-15 years, and it certainly has made gigging much more enjoyable! Plus the option of 1 cab or 2 cabs is great. Duke, you have certainly found a niche for people like me that are on the "modular" bandwagon!

Sure, I use a Rock & Roller Multi-cart for load in/out, but even with adequate wheels, lifting a 24 pound cabs into the vehicle and onto the stage makes life easier.

Think small Duke! :thumbsup:
 
  • Like
Reactions: steubig
Duke, you're still the man when it comes to putting it all together. I could see how that grindy upper mid emphasis would require a different driver. 38" seems reasonable when considering the frame sizes but that is getting pretty big. I guess that's why the twin 3012LF hits an optimum size/performance slot. Really like the open back mid idea though and can't see needing more than about 6khz in a live setting.

Thank you very much. At best I'm one of the guys who puts it all together.

You mentioned twin 3012LFs + open-chamber mids. I have plans to compare that with a slightly louder variation on the theme.

Because, sometimes, doing something dumb is just so much more fun?

Edit: Also, for science?

Either one's a good enough excuse!

Every year here in the land of Napoleon Dynamite they have a few days of "spring cleaning" where the landfill people send out a front-loader and dumptruck and people can put out just about anything to be picked up and hauled away. Over the past few years I've probably averaged about twenty experimental cabs a year that end up out there for the front loader to pick up. Sometimes people stop in their pickup trucks to get stuff that looks cool to them and I tell them which empty cabs are possibly worth their time and which ones aren't. Point being, I'm no stranger to trying dumb things that don't work out! Hope to continue doing so because every now and then something does work out. The open-format mid chamber in the Hathor cab was an experiment that panned out. So too the Birdhaus.
 
I love the mid grind that the 1203's give. I also love the fact that, with the flip of a switch, I can tone it down.

Yes I've found that people like the switches (when they make a worthwhile difference), which is great for me because that's something I can do that's not found in many cabs. I'm taking such comments to heart and moving more in that direction with things that are still in development.

Think small Duke! :thumbsup:

We live in a great time for compact rigs. Greenboy has his new F210, Mike has his MAS112, 46 & Flex210, and Duke has a pair of Hathor 1203's!

Sometimes I think too small, and my beta-testers let me know when I've pushed things too far in that direction. I was all set to go with a very compact Hathor 1533 but cut it too close, so it will be getting a bit bigger box; the previously-posted weight and dimensions are now incorrect.
 
Last edited:
Yes I've found that people like the switches (when they make a worthwhile difference), which is great for me because that's something I can do that's not found in many cabs. I'm taking such comments to heart and moving more in that direction with things that are still in development.
Sometimes I think too small, and my beta-testers let me know when I've pushed things too far in that direction. I was all set to go with a very compact Hathor 1533 but cut it too close, so it will be getting a bit bigger box; the previously-posted weight and dimensions are now incorrect.

Duke,
With that being said, I have a question (something I have been thinking about since I received my 1203's):

What would the results be if you took the 1203 cabs (with same drivers and switches) and made it approximately 4" wider, 4" deeper and 4" taller? Besides the obviously larger cab size, what the end user see in volume, tone and efficiency?

What would you guess the final weight on such a cab be (5 pounds more?)? Could you retain the same basic concepts of the Hathor 1203 with the added dimensions?

Or, would there be such a small change with the added dimensions and weight that it wouldn't be worth the size/weight change?

Not that I would change the 1203, I'm just curious. Actually the size is one of the top factors (to me) in owning these cabs!
 
My strong personal bias is for a cabinet that is as shallow as possible. I'd prefer any dimension increase to be in height, with width being less desirable and depth kept to a minimum. This is entirely based on logistic issues as I'm often on very tight stage situations so every inch counts. I have mostly unlimited space going up, less going sideways, and rarely going back (often shoved against a wall).

I continue to not really have a complaint about my H1203. It doesn't quite have the B-string support that the TC112 does, but frankly it isn't night and day and the H1203 handles a low B better than it has a right to considering the size/weight.
 
I recall Duke mentioning that on the 1203's, the mids barely keep up with the woofs, and adding the open mid ports on the top and sides helped a bit, but any cab size increase that benefits just the woofer may then make the woofer start to overpower the mids perhaps? His goal with the 1203, and TC 112 was to get them as small and light as possible as other makers have 12" cabs that are a larger, like Greenboy, Barefaced, & Baer,
 
  • Like
Reactions: dmrogers
I recall Duke mentioning that on the 1203's, the mids barely keep up with the woofs, and adding the open mid ports on the top and sides helped a bit, but any cab size increase that benefits just the woofer may then make the woofer start to overpower the mids perhaps? His goal with the 1203, and TC 112 was to get them as small and light as possible as other makers have 12" cabs that are a larger, like Greenboy, Barefaced, & Baer,

The small niche he hit is perfect! The 1203 cab is totally manageable, both size & weight wise. And I am sure there are people that would need more than what my rig is capable of, however I have more than enough power for my gigs. I did an outdoor gig about three weeks ago. PA support for vocals and acoustics only. Monique and the 1203's handled it fine, didn't even break a sweat!

What you mention about the 3" driver keeping up with the 12" makes sense, however at least in my experience, the 1203 has a ton of mids. I'm sure it has a lot more to do the total cab package and Duke's design expertise than just solely on the 3" driver. So much so, that it seems to be the exact opposite of the GS112's I have. But the great thing about the 1203 is that, with the switches, it is super easy to control the mids. Sometimes it was a challenge to EQ the GS cabs to make up for the lack of mids.

I guess what I am trying to say is (beyond the fact that I love talking about gear), the overall efficiency of the 1203 cabs combined with the weight and size is a great solution for me. :)
 
What would the results be if you took the 1203 cabs (with same drivers and switches) and made it approximately 4" wider, 4" deeper and 4" taller? Besides the obviously larger cab size, what the end user see in volume, tone and efficiency?

i think it's called a TC112 ;)

(i kid)



. . . H1203 handles a low B better than it has a right to considering the size/weight.

truth.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dmrogers
What would the results be if you took the 1203 cabs (with same drivers and switches) and made it approximately 4" wider, 4" deeper and 4" taller? Besides the obviously larger cab size, what the end user see in volume, tone and efficiency?

What would you guess the final weight on such a cab be (5 pounds more?)? Could you retain the same basic concepts of the Hathor 1203 with the added dimensions?

Or, would there be such a small change with the added dimensions and weight that it wouldn't be worth the size/weight change!

The original idea behind the 1203 was to build a really good 110 cab. And so I cheated and built a really small 112 cab.

Increasing each dimension by four inches would more than double the internal volume, and the low end would definitely be embiggened. I actually think that, in most cases, the bass cab shouldn't be strong at 50 Hz, that being the kick's territory, so I probably wouldn't want to increase the size that much.

There are tradeoffs everywhere you turn in audio, and the louder low end from a bigger box comes from increased output by the port. Imo a port is a necessary evil. You see, as notes near the port's tuning frequency decay, the pitch actually shifts towards the tuning frequency because it doesn't stop resonating right away. Too much port contribution and low-end clarity takes a hit. So I try to use only as much port helpage as necessary, but then have enough x-max that you can safely dial in a bit of low end boost as needed.

Also, as we go with the twice-the-size box, we lose just a little bit of upper bass output (80-200 Hz region). It's slight, less than 1 dB, but ime it's audible. Frankly I think the Thunderchild-size cab is just about ideal for the 3012LF, but wanted to explore the compact end of the spectrum. That little 3" Faital "fullrange" driver (which I call a "mid", but almost use it like a tweet), combined with the small-box-friendly parameters of the 3012LF, opened up the door.

I gotta run now but may come back to this topic as my answer is still incomplete, and I want to reply to nostatic's suggestion as well.
 
What kind of music do you play?
The gig I'm doing now is primarily Americana (Lucinda Williams, John Prine, Townes Van Zandt The Band, etc...). But we throw in some classic country, some old rock (Stones, Jackson Browne, Byrds, Gram Parsons, Dylan, Fleetwood Mac etc...). We have three vocalist, acoustic guitar, lead guitar, keys, drums & me.

It's a great gig, I love the music & the challenge. The guys in the band have played forever and have a rich musical history. Actually, our guitarist/vocalist has a nephew that is guitarist for a major country artist.

Duke, thanks for addressing my question. I'm just interest in what you do and it is a fun read. I just got back from rehearsal and every time I play, I'm amazed at the full tonal range I get out of the 1203. At rehearsals, I use one 1203 with a TH500.
The way you explain the way the cab would change with the added dimensions helps me understand why I like the 1203 so much. I Have never liked a super low (or muddy) tone. Plus I like the mids of the cab too. It's so easy to get a good tone and balance in the band mix.

Thanks again!
 
Continuing with my response to dmrogers, started above:
What would you guess the final weight on such a cab be (5 pounds more?)? Could you retain the same basic concepts of the Hathor 1203 with the added dimensions?

Roughly doubling the cab's internal volume would put the weight in the 33-to-35 pound ballpark I would guess, based on experience building cabs of that size that used Kappalite-class woofers.

The same basic concept could absolutely be retained; the 1203's basic concepts are pretty much dominating my thinking as far as cabs for electric bass, I'm just going to scale it up a bit and maybe offer a little more of what it does well if/when I can.

My strong personal bias is for a cabinet that is as shallow as possible. I'd prefer any dimension increase to be in height, with width being less desirable and depth kept to a minimum. This is entirely based on logistic issues as I'm often on very tight stage situations so every inch counts. I have mostly unlimited space going up, less going sideways, and rarely going back (often shoved against a wall).

I hate it when someone's post makes a really good case for something that a) I should have thought of and b) means I have to change my drawings and go to my woodworker and tell him that I changed my mind on this cab (for the third time) so he has to redo everything that he was going to send to the CNC machine because c) that makes me look like an idiot. And I hate looking like an idiot, whether said idiocy is known only to me and my woodworker, or to everyone with enough time on their hands to read my posts.

And I hate it even more when a bunch of my paying customers "like" that post!

So anyway I changed my drawings and went to my woodworker and his belief that I'm an idiot who can't make up is mind is confirmed.

Thank you nostatic and those who liked his post... I guess.

Seriously, it's a change that needed to be made and I wouldn't have done it without you, nostatic. Thank you sir, and you who liked his post as well. You guys won me over. The idea of keeping the footprint as small as practical for tight stage situations is totally consistent with what I'm trying to do with the Hathor series, and I should have thought of it.

I recall Duke mentioning that on the 1203's, the mids barely keep up with the woofs, and adding the open mid ports on the top and sides helped a bit, but any cab size increase that benefits just the woofer may then make the woofer start to overpower the mids perhaps? His goal with the 1203, and TC 112 was to get them as small and light as possible as other makers have 12" cabs that are a larger, like Greenboy, Barefaced, & Baer,

A larger box would increase the cab's efficiency significantly south of 80 Hz; decrease its efficiency slightly from 80-200 Hz; and have no effect north of 200 Hz. So we could still get away with that one little dinky 3" mid, for a 3012LF cab. Anything more efficient than the 3012LF and we'd either need a louder midrange section or we'd have to move the goal posts.

What you mention about the 3" driver keeping up with the 12" makes sense, however at least in my experience, the 1203 has a ton of mids. I'm sure it has a lot more to do the total cab package and Duke's design expertise than just solely on the 3" driver. So much so, that it seems to be the exact opposite of the GS112's I have. But the great thing about the 1203 is that, with the switches, it is super easy to control the mids. Sometimes it was a challenge to EQ the GS cabs to make up for the lack of mids.

Thank you! What I do is overlap the woofer and mid in the woofer's top end, and then roll off the mid hard and fast starting at about 1.2 kHz. That aggressive rolloff is needed to protect it, because on paper its thermal power handling is pretty low. But we if take into account the power distribution of a bass guitar's overtones, along with allowance for distortion effects, then it fits. The open-format mid chamber helps with cooling too, as opposed to having the motor heating up a small sealed chamber. So at first glance it looks like a long shot, and it would be for keyboards or PA, but it works for bass guitar.

The switch engages/bypasses two notch filters that, together, pretty much smooth out that overlap region.

Duke, thanks for addressing my question. I'm just interest in what you do and it is a fun read. I just got back from rehearsal and every time I play, I'm amazed at the full tonal range I get out of the 1203. At rehearsals, I use one 1203 with a TH500.[emphasis Duke's]

Thank you sir!

I recently got in trouble for posting unsolicited product announcements here, and rightly so. I plead guilty. So, from now on I need to refrain from talking about new projects or products until someone else brings it up, which is what I should have been doing all along. I really don't want to get booted off of TalkBass for being that guy.

Plus I like the mids of the cab too. It's so easy to get a good tone and balance in the band mix.

I was lucky enough to make a mistake that I learned from, and that lesson went into the midrange voicing of your cabs.

What a cromulent supposition!

How noble of you to notice!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 31HZ
My strong personal bias is for a cabinet that is as shallow as possible. I'd prefer any dimension increase to be in height, with width being less desirable and depth kept to a minimum. This is entirely based on logistic issues as I'm often on very tight stage situations so every inch counts. I have mostly unlimited space going up, less going sideways, and rarely going back (often shoved against a wall)....

Too shallow, and it may be a tough fit for the variety of heads out there. The Demeter is just 9" deep, but it's nice to have a couple of inches to spare in front and behind as it sits on the cab.