I hope not! I don't want to fall out of love with my 610, or get GAS again. But, you know the road that kringle77 has travelled with the 610 and 69........
Mark
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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.
Barefaced 69'er thread
- Thread starter kringle77
- Start date
I hope not! I don't want to fall out of love with my 610, or get GAS again. But, you know the road that kringle77 has travelled with the 610 and 69........
Mark
- May 20, 2000
- 3,200
- 1,917
- Disclosures
- Endorsing Artist: Aguilar Amplification, Spector, Dingwall, Tech 21 NYC, Darkglass
I don't think so. I was referring to physical mods on the NV610 over the years and discussion/research on the 69er. Based on his videos and discussion on the NV610 followed by discussion about the 69er, I fear that I'll catch a case of GAS after he gets his hands on one.
I had put money down on one and then waited for close to a year. They still had not even built the first one so I got a refund and moved on. I don't have any real interest in the 69ers at this point. I'm using the mbps stock, have an awesome new 1212/5 and don't think the 69erb is going to give me anything that I'm not already getting.
Which 12/12/5 are you using? I still haven't mixed the tweeter with the NV610. It's such a familiar and pleasing cabinet (to me) as it is. I think that if/when the need arises for hi fi I will probably try a 12/6 or 12/12/6... (apologies for the brief OT)
Mark
I would love to hear from Alex on this one. I own a 69er and have never been happier with a cab. I would think that the retro is more of a traditional 6x10 that isn't trying to be a flatback but who knows. Common Alex - give us some info!
The extra 10 pounds is a bummer though. I do love the 55ish pounds that the 69er is.
alexclaber
Commercial User
I need to write an longer explanation of the thinking behind this cab but here's a quick summary. If you wanted an old school sounding very high sensitivity Barefaced cab you could buy the '69er or our 2x15" (Vintage, then Super Fifteen). I preferred the tone of the '69er for most scenarios but it couldn't thunder like the 2x15"s because it didn't have the volume displacement or the port helping out. Every single person who has bought a '69er has loved its tone but too many* have found it can't play loud enough whilst providing big lows. ( * That's the Barefaced idea of too many, which isn't exactly a large proportion!) People who've bought a '69er may have noticed that they're fairly thoroughly quizzed on what they need on the LF front to make sure it does a great job.
So the Retro Six10 came out of a project to develop a special 10" driver which had a similar tone and feel to the '69er (which uses a guitar 10" and five bass 10"s - so this new driver needed much more treble extension than the existing bass drivers) but vastly more excursion. I also had quite a strong view on where it should sit tonally relative to the Gen 3 12XN cabs because there's no point (except from a marketing perspective) making a ferrite 6x10" that sounds just like our neo 2x12"s and I'd also come to the conclusion that we weren't going to try to emulate anyone else's idea of a coloured bass cab, we were just going to create something that sounded awesome.
So the Retro Six10 came out of a project to develop a special 10" driver which had a similar tone and feel to the '69er (which uses a guitar 10" and five bass 10"s - so this new driver needed much more treble extension than the existing bass drivers) but vastly more excursion. I also had quite a strong view on where it should sit tonally relative to the Gen 3 12XN cabs because there's no point (except from a marketing perspective) making a ferrite 6x10" that sounds just like our neo 2x12"s and I'd also come to the conclusion that we weren't going to try to emulate anyone else's idea of a coloured bass cab, we were just going to create something that sounded awesome.
a 69er has been in my sights for a while but now the Retro Six10 sounds like more of what I need! Any pics??
Sounds like it should be easier to mic up especially onstage. I am curious as to why ferrite drivers? Is there enough of a demonstrable difference to warrant making it a 64lb cab? I'd imagine you could have gotten done into the low 40's easy with neos.
alexclaber
Commercial User
Sadly we've not had '69ers in stock when we've done any of our organised photoshoots! The Retro Six10 cosmetics are still slightly up in the air - badge and covering (probably tolex rather than the textured acrylic for a more retro look) but these are the last two '69ers next to a prototype Retro Six10:
Link Removed
Lots more pics on our Facebook page incidentally!
alexclaber
Commercial User
I've been writing an explanation for our site - here's a first draft:
Retro10 - why is the 10CR250 ferrite?
The first reason is TONE. Not better tone but different tone. This is a contentious issue because ever since lightweight neo drivers appeared on the bass guitar scene there have been naysayers insisting that they can't produce the heavy or weighty bass sound that heavy ferrite drivers can. However, neo drivers are actually better at producing a big clean uncoloured tone because a neo magnet has a much more stable magnetic field.
The field created by ceramic (ferrite) magnet changes shape and intensity in reaction to the current flowing through the voicecoil - this generates a certain amount of midrange distortion, reducing the resolution and adding a distinct tonal character particularly at higher SPL.
If you spend enough money on a ferrite driver, using a cast alloy frame, adding copper and/or aluminium shorting rings and using a particularly huge magnet so you can saturate the pole pieces then, in theory, you could get a ferrite driver to sound just like a neo driver (although in practice the huge difference in magnet size and thus woofer basket shape changes the acoustic behaviour of the reflected back wave).
If we want to make an old school sounding driver then we feel that the distortions inherent to typical ferrite magnets are an important part of the tone.
The second reason is output. We wanted to create a driver with significantly more excursion than those in the '69er. This required a frame and magnet structure with the room to let a long voice coil move back and forth a long way and the only such 10" neo structures available have very large diameter voice coils which would restrict the high frequency extension and also its dispersion. So to get the big output in the lows and the tone in the highs we needed a ferrite driver.
We could have created a 10" neo driver for the Retro Six10 but it wouldn't have had such an old school character in the mids and little more than half the max output in the lows. Yes, it would have brought the weight down from the '69er's by about 6lbs but the cab is already very light for its size, especially as we've had customers question the stability with a heavy valve amp on top. The neodymium would also have increased the component cost further (noting that the 10CR250 drivers in the Retro Six10 are a step above those in the '69er), so we'd have had to raise the price much more.
When we at Barefaced state our goals are:
Maximum tone
Maximum output
Minimum weight
we mean it in that order. Get the tone and output we want. Then make the cab as light as possible without affecting the tone and output whilst ensuring it remains gig tough and reliable with a very long working life.
For the Retro10 series the only way to hit the tone and output goals was with ferrite drivers - they're still lightweight cabs though!
This seems like a sensible approach and I think it's good to design the two main product lines with some distinct differences which should appeal to a wider cross section of players. It looks like the Retro Six10 keeps the .5 alignment. I can attest from my own independent build this alignment really works for a 610. I'm curious on the treble extension for this new driver. 5kHz is pretty common but if it were to approach 6kHz that would be outstanding.
I realise the web pages for these cabs are still in progress, but will you have figures for displacement etc like you have for the new 12" drivers? This could make for a useful comparison with other gear.
Thanks for that explanation, Alex. I was not aware the design consideration the magnet types brought to the table. If I were to ever upgrade my compact it would probably be two retro 2 10s. I like the idea of getting more top while avoiding a crossover.
alexclaber
Commercial User
Another first draft:
The 10CR250 is a 10" nominal diameter driver with Ceramic magnet, Retro tone and ~250cc volume displacement (hence the designation!) 200W thermal power handling. It's a light cone and fairly low inductance voice coil so it has a gentle roll off from ~5kHz, with useful output reaching to almost 12kHz. Like the 12XN550 it takes advantage of the cone flex and independent dustcap radiation to provide much better off-axis output than would be possible from a rigid 10" cone.
It's much less sharp ('ice pick in the ear') than other bright sounding bass/guitar 10"s when you're exactly in the line of fire but it keeps its brightness when you step away. It's proved remarkably good sounding playing music clamped in a workmate (ie no enclosure) facing upwards with a smiley face EQ (and the lack of enclosure means it has to move a lot to produce good bottom so it's a very tough test for any driver!)
