Big E Speakers Part 4 - Quadraphenia

[MarkA]

Is the weight of this thing (unpowered 16) in here somewhere?

From the link in the post you quoted:

Technical Specifications
One custom high excursion 6.5" driver and one 3" Faital midrange/tweeter
8 ohms
16" x 8 1/4" x 14" deep
Power handling 125 watts RMS
Sensitivity 92 db
13#
All marine Okume plywood construction

150 cc's Vd (air moved)
8 ohms
​

I'm taking "13 #" to be 13 pounds.

 

[TomB]

Oh... yeah, snuck right by me. That's amazing! Thx.

 

[J.Wolf]

Jake, thanks. That is a helpful description. Not hyperbolic if that's how you really feel about it! I'm very interested in the note envelope and how different links in the chain (player, instrument, amp, cab) affect it. Bloom and present but un-harsh articulation are helpful descriptors. How about when you put the brakes on? How do notes stop with the 109 vs. with the Flex?

I'd say the note 'overhang' or cutoff or whatever you call it (when the note dun stops ringin) is in line with the flex, which is to say, VERY quick compared to other cabs. the 109 might be smidge slower than the flex, but I don't think its really about 'speed' as much as note envelope and transient attack. The Flex with the right power section is about as fast as any bass cab that I've heard. The 109 is also super fast, like all of Mikes cabs it has that 'effortless delivery' thing going on, but the 109's voicing doesn't give quite the same leading edge wallop as the flex.

The real comparison for me will be the Flex 210 Mod vs. 2x MAS109 :-D

 

[Mark Sacchetti]

Thanks Mark. Do you set the 16s on a stand or on the floor? And did you post a photo of them with your 1203, earlier?

That's the third MAS/AK pairing I recall hearing about. All involve the 1203 - with a 109, your 16s, and I think a 46 (wanna say that was way back in the AK thread).

I use the 16's on the floor and here is the 116/1203.

 

[coyoteboy]

26 conversion now complete. No going back. Little mids removed and blocked. Now i know im the only one dumb enough to do something like this, but just in case, i got a couple more 3" mid blockers if anyone needs.

 

[kesslari]

View attachment 909239

I use the 16's on the floor and here is the 116/1203.

Mark, that Skold fretless makes me salivate...

 

[tombowlus]

You're right! My bad. Again, I'm not sure about the module -- I think Mike said something about the 700 ASC, but it was a blip in the conversation, so don't quote me on that. Would be a lot of amp for a single 16, but would make sense powering multiple speakers.

Yes, the powered 116 can drive a slave cab, as well, and I do believe this is the 700ASC module. In fact, I think Mike said that he could offer powered versions of any of his cabs. Very cool!

 

[MarkA]

For those who are interested, Mike A. and Tim Seisser (@Tslicebass) will be hosting a get together at The Music Garage, 345 N. Loomis, in Chicago, this Sunday from 3:30 to 7:00. Showcase room. 5th floor. Mike will be bringing the Tantra amp -- I would presume some cabs as well -- and Tim will have some basses there. Might be some other folks as well.

That's all I know at the moment.

 

[MarkA]

Yes, the powered 116 can drive a slave cab, as well, and I do believe this is the 700ASC module. In fact, I think Mike said that he could offer powered versions of any of his cabs. Very cool!

Yeah, there's a thread I just saw on the DB side that goes into some detail on the 16 (guess upright players would be attracted to that cab). Looks like you could run two 8 Ohm extension/slave cabs off it.

 

[J.Wolf]

Man, someone needs to snag this Flex Mod from me. Holla!

I'm still really loving the 109, just gotta say. The envelope of the low end is just addicting. I'm gonna try it out an a gig with the Flex sub and see how it goes, and wondering how the 109 would pair with a 46.. hmmmmmmmmm

 

[MarkA]

Man, someone needs to snag this Flex Mod from me. Holla!

I'm still really loving the 109, just gotta say. The envelope of the low end is just addicting. I'm gonna try it out an a gig with the Flex sub and see how it goes, and wondering how the 109 would pair with a 46.. hmmmmmmmmm

Well, if the 109 + 46 is like the Flex sub + 46, it should be pretty wicked. I was without my 46 for awhile -- dropped it off to Mike for some tweaks we discussed -- and, when I had it, to be honest, I was playing my 112 more. Just got back into town after being away for awhile -- and it just happened that my 46 arrived a few hours before I did. Picked it up on the way home, walked in, and immediately unpacked it (of course).

Played it back to back with my 112 for a bit. 46 is amazingly clear and detailed (I can so hear that I need new strings) and deep... but I was digging the kick and thick-but-tight low end of the 112 more. Plugged the sub into the 46 (both elevated -- learned a bit from last time) and BAM, huge sound. Unbelievably thick and clear up top with some fast, chordal, palm-muting/finger-picking stuff -- still, not quite as clear down low as I'd like. Goofed with the EQ for a few moments, then got the idea to set everything to noon (on the Glock Blue Rock), rolled the bass back to 11:00, and got a really great, really dynamic and articulate hi-fi (but juicy) funk tone with kick. 112 was still a bit drier (played it with the EQ on the Blue rock disengaged) and leaner in the lows, but the 46+Flex sub made the 112 sound dull by comparison -- and the 112 makes most other cabs I come across sound dull by comparison.

Caveats:

• This is based on 30 minutes of noodling at home after driving all day. More playing and more mature reflection will, I am sure, reveal more!
• Can't open up the cabs properly at home -- even with the windows open and indulgent neighbors the 112 and 46/sub are still barely idling. I like the 112 at home but know from experience that it opens up beautifully and is a different animal when playing out. 46/sub would, I imagine, do something similar.
  
• I plugged the amp into the 46, then the 46 into the sub. If you plug into the sub first (using its internal high-pass filter for the top cab), you get a different result. It's been awhile, but I seem to recall liking that more -- I think it would be leaner/cleaner. In my brief and simple flirtation with EQing the stack tonight, rolling off a little bass got me 90% there, but I still felt there was a bit more bump in the lower mids/upper bass than I wanted (I suspect where the sub and the 46, both running full-range, would overlap).

I will try it running through the sub first then report back.

Liked mids "normal" on the 46 solo, "hot" when running with the sub.

One more brief note, on amps (again, at first blush): I like the GBE 1200 more than the Blue Rock, overall, through the 112, but liked the Blue Rock more through the 46. Maybe I'll feel different after I goof with the EQ a bit (tried the GBE "flat" through the 46, but didn't try rolling back the bass as I did with the BR). Highs and lows felt a bit much with the GBE and the 46.

That's all for now.

 

[coyoteboy]

MA109 tone was king @ the State Fair gig today. No bass in monitors as I predicted. That single 10 filled the entire stage. I wasnt playng it wide open, but probably around 80-90% capacity. Hooked up the 26 mod, but didnt get opportunity to really use it. My g**tar pedal chain still needs work. I want more MAS speaker, but I certainly dont need more.

 

[MarkA]

UPDATE: Just did a quick, sotto voce check (it's late) with the 46/Flex sub on running into the sub first vs. running into the 46 first -- I did not misremember. There is a marked difference, with the former being significantly leaner/more open sounding. Sounded the best to me, this time, with the EQ on the Blue Rock disengaged -- that's one indicator, IMO, of a well-voiced cab. (EQ tweaks, in this very brief check, were very clearly reflected.) Tried with mids normal and "hot" and both were viable voicings -- not sure which I preferred. (I mentioned awhile back -- but it's worth repeating -- that, per my request, Mike built my 46 with "normal" being the "hot" voicing he used at the time and "hot" being "a bit hotter". Not sure how he's voicing the cabs now.)

Playing some two-octave scales at this whisper-quiet volume, and standing right in front of the cabs, when running through the sub first, I could hear the gradual transition from sub to 46. I anticipate that this will fill out/even out more at "real" -- or even apartment practice -- volumes. Even at this volume the bass is, palpably, very deep.

I wouldn't normally report on a silly little experiment conducted under conditions so far removed from "normal" playing, but I'm a bit enthusiastic after having been away from my instrument for several days and reacquainting myself with this cab I haven't played in awhile. That, and I wanted to check on the sub/crossover thing before I forgot.

MA109 tone was king @ the State Fair gig today. No bass in monitors as I predicted. That single 10 filled the entire stage. I wasnt playng it wide open, but probably around 80-90% capacity. Hooked up the 26 mod, but didnt get opportunity to really use it. My g**tar pedal chain still needs work. I want more MAS speaker, but I certainly dont need more.

Cool! If you do get the guit-bass amalgam alchemically active, please share the results here.

 

[MarkA]

Update to my update: Still a quickie, but played at a more realistic volume and without having driven all day immediately before.

Messed around a bit with the EQ at first, then decided just to leave it disengaged -- easier and more useful, I think, for making comparisons and for getting reacquainted with the cab.

There is a definite and significant difference in the voicing of the 46/Flex sub stack when run through the sub's HPF and when running both cabs full range. Last night, I thought that I'd prefer the top high-passed, no contest, but today I'm not sure -- I like the thicker, "full range" voicing a good deal, too. Last night I felt that rolling off some bass would be necessary when running both full range but today, running flat (and the Blue Rock with the EQ disengaged is pretty close to flat), I didn't feel that, though you might want to, depending on the mix and the room. Mids hot/normal worked in all configurations, but I think that I would prefer them "normal" under most circumstances with the 46 high-passed. With both cabs full range... would really depend on the context. For me, in most live situations, probably "hot" to get some bite -- "normal" is nice and smooth but still articulate, though. Running the 46 solo, probably "normal" most of the time but, again, it would depend on the situation.

Sounds good with and without the tweeter in all configurations. There is plenty of top end info without the tweeter -- harmonics are still clear -- but the tweeter adds a bit of air and definition at the very top.

My remark about being able to hear the crossover between the sub and the 46 when playing scales quietly -- realized today that a good part of that -- maybe most of it -- was moving from one coil/sensing position of the split P pickup on my P/J to another when moving from the A to the D string. Tried playing scales along one string and, if there was an audible transition from sub to 46, it was much less so. Will continue to listen for it. I was aware of the tonal change moving from one coil of the split P to another long before this, but the 46 shows it (and plucking position and my dead strings) very clearly.

As for the woofers/mids/tweeter on the 46 itself, they are well integrated -- seamlessly so in the "normal" position. Mids might be a bit pokey when running the 46 solo in the "hot" ("bit hotter") position with my cab, but that was kind of the point.

That's all for now!

 

[spiritbass]

Sounds like your having fun with it. Was the tweak on your 46 the switch allowing 'hot mids'? Waiting for the update to the update on the update... (and for Mike to send me a 110 sub)

 

[MarkA]

The switched "hot mids" were something Mike and I discussed before the cab was built, so it had that in place from the outset. Mike has the top of my Flex Mod right now -- he's putting another handle or two on it to make navigating tight stairways with it easier (safer for knuckles) and adding a switch (and the associated circuitry) to make the voicing when the top is used solo more like the voicing when the top and sub are used together. (Figure it needs another switch, right?)

My 46 was just a bit more resonant on "A" than other notes -- not enough to be problematic, but enough that I noticed it. He fixed that and, while he was at it, changed the voicing of the cab slightly to bring it in line with his latest builds -- the cab so far, to my ear, seems less "romantically voiced" (to use Mike's term) than it was previously -- a bit leaner, a bit more "flat" -- but still more "romantic" in voicing and presentation than the 18 Sound 112, which is tighter and "drier" than the 46. It's been awhile since I played the 46 and I can't A/B it directly with its previous self, but I think I like it more this way. A/Bed it a bit more with the 112 today, with a variety of amps, all set "flat" (controls at noon) or very close to it and found the 46 to work well with all of them (including the GBE, which I felt a bit much yesterday, though I did roll off the tone knob on my bass a bit with the GBE). Previously, I felt that I had to mess about a bit with EQ to get the 46 where I wanted it -- much less so now. Even though they present differently, today I was liking both the 112 and the 46 sans EQ at the amp -- both are very responsive to EQ, but I didn't feel that I had to do any "corrective" EQ with either.

The real test, of course, will be when I get the 46 out again a few times. Still think the 112 might be more "me" but, yes, I am enjoying the 46.

 

[MarkA]

For those who are interested, Mike A. and Tim Seisser (@Tslicebass) will be hosting a get together at The Music Garage, 345 N. Loomis, in Chicago, this Sunday from 3:30 to 7:00. Showcase room. 5th floor. Mike will be bringing the Tantra amp -- I would presume some cabs as well -- and Tim will have some basses there. Might be some other folks as well.

That's all I know at the moment.

For what it's worth, I have decided to make the trek out to this shindig tomorrow. Not sure exactly when I'll be there -- probably on the early(ish) side -- but I'll be there. Don't let that prevent you from going, though!

 

[spiritbass]

Okay, I admit to being a little slow. It's been a couple of weeks since I commissioned a 110 Sub with Mike, and the question that I didn't ask at the time finally occurred to me - how will the out of phase setting work? I like it for thinning out the low end on my Flex 110's. Unless I'm mistaken, flipping the switch to put the internal 10 out of phase with the mid/high section would still leave the sub in phase. I'm wondering if the 'thinning' effect will be less pronounced. I'm also wondering if a phase switch on the sub would be a good idea. Beuller?

 

[Jeff Bonny]

I just ordered a MAS109 and over the last few days have read a good deal of this thread doing my homework on MAS cabinets. Realizing just now that a primary source of information is not at present locally available was a genuine what-the-**** moment. Immediately and in the broad view a thin-skinned strait-laced baseline of propriety is impairing a unique resource.

 

[mntngrown]

I just ordered a MAS109 and over the last few days have read a good deal of this thread doing my homework on MAS cabinets. Realizing just now that a primary source of information is not at present locally available was a genuine what-the-**** moment. Immediately and in the broad view a thin-skinned strait-laced baseline of propriety is impairing a unique resource.

What the heck I will be the sacrificial responder to your post! Not sure what you are asking but if you go to BigE forums etc website the patent info etc has all the scientific info. The inventors of the concept chime in here periodically. MAS has been excluded from being able to post here. If you did order one you will likely be pleasantly surprised . Welcome to the vortex