Big E Speakers Part 4 - Quadraphenia

[MWBass]

I'm curious if Mike or anyone can make a somewhat concise comparison on solely the bass performance on the different iterations. I am talking about the 200 hz and below performance.

I have been reading through the thread and picking up bits and pieces and Mark's recent posts touched upon this a bit. thanks for that.

Basically, I am strictly a 4 string player who plays 90% funk, percussive style playing, slap and choppy fingerstyle groove.

I'm curious as to the differences in the bass region presentation from the 5 based cabs, the 6 based cabs, the ten based cabs, and the new 12 based cabs in regards to thumping on a low E and up.

I have taken note of words like muscle from the 10-12 based cabs to words like depth for the 6 based cabs.

Whereas muscle sounds like it would pump, which is great, but something like a 6 based cab, which I believe is the only cab that can hit the true fundamental of a low e at around 41 hz which is also very enticing.

Just looking for some insight since I have not had a chance to make my own opinions in person yet.

Thanks.

 

[Mike Arnopol]

I'll chime in later with a long-winded reply

 

[MWBass]

Thanks Mike

 

[kesslari]

While I don't like it when people say "well, I haven't played X, but I can tell you that Y is better"...
I'm gonna do it. Or something like it.

When you describe "90% funk, percussive style playing, slap and choppy fingerstyle groove" you're talking about the Flex210's happy place. Freakin' kills for that kind of percussive articulate shtuff.

Not saying the other MAS cabs won't also do that - but I KNOW the Flex will.

 

[MarkA]

Well, last week at Mike's I played the 25 and 45, 66, and MAS 112. I've owned a 2nd gen. (sans dedicated mids) 66 for a few months and have owned a mid-loaded Dr. Bass 2x12 for a few years. Last year, I played a 110 Flex back-to-back with the Dr. Bass -- I have a pretty clear memory of that, but it is hard to compare the Flex directly with the MAS 112 because of the time in-between. I've had my 66 out in loud clubs (and once at a small outdoor festival) maybe half a dozen times.

Like you, I play primarily 4-string and do a lot of percussive playing. I don't know the frequency response curves of the various cabs, but, subjectively, the 66, Flex, and 112 all will deliver the E-string solidly in percussive playing. (The 45 actually sounds great slapped, but if I were going to push it I'd want a 110 sub underneath. I haven't tried that combo -- sorry kesslari! -- but I think it would do well based on hearing the 45 and the 110 Flex.)

When I got my Dr. Bass cab, I played it side-by-side with the usual local suspects -- Markbass, Ampeg 410s, GK 12s, and one or two others -- and found it to be tighter, more solid, and more responsive down low than any of them -- not an OMG! difference, but enough, and the impression has held in live playing. Having played the DB next to the Flex, the 66s, and the MAS 112, there is a difference in how the cabs behave as you thump notes down through the lowest octave. With the Big E cabs, the percussive spike that you hear and feel in the higher octaves is maintained all the way down to the open E -- not just in the overtones and the sound of the string on the fret, but in the meat of the note as well. It's audible, but, more than that, it's palpable. Slapping down there retains more of the feeling of "playing drums on the bass." The 66 has this kick. I think the Flex and the 112 have it to a greater degree, but in different places. Mike says that the 112 hits you more in the gut, while the Flex hits you more in the chest. This is subjective, but squares with my impressions. It's harder for me to localize the kick of the 66 -- it's more subtle, but it's there all the time. (You might think this would interfere with the kick drum, but that's not my experience. Drummers seem to dig the cab.)

The 66 sounds smoother in the mids and rounder down low than the 112, but can get aggressive with EQ. The 112 is leaner and meaner by default, but can get big down low with EQ and the low end is muscular enough to intimidate small children. I remember the Flex having a lot of slam in the lowest registers, too -- again, it's been awhile since I played it, but, qualitatively, I'd put it between the 66 and the 112, with it closer to the 112 than the 66 in that regard. (Bear in mind that I haven't played the 210 Flex.)

Totally subjective, somewhat nonsensical:

66 - Marcus Miller meets Chaka Khan.
MAS 112 - Flea meets Gojira (the band).
The Flex is harder for me to pin down... I want to say something like Louis Johnson meets Chick Corea, but that's not right. Maybe Bernard Edwards meets King Kong (the ape).

Of the cabs I've played, the 112 is the best for metal.

 

[MWBass]

Thanks Mark for the multiple lengthy insights.

Your comparisons were priceless yet useful.

I've been putting off diving in because I wasn't playing out that much, but it has picked up lately quite a bit.

I'm only asking about the low end of each unit because A few months back me and Mike were talking about a unique combo that I would like. I basically want a very small combo-ish rig, preferably a 25 but maybe a 26, but I want to have it set in a biamp setup so I can throw it on top of something that will manage the bass duties and allow the small cab to manage the mids and highs with the added power it could probably handle not having to deal with bottom end.

For me the small cab could do all of my practice at home, writing at home, and small coffee shop gigs, but then I can throw it on top of something for a stage level rig. Heck, I could bring it to the practice studios we go to and biamp into the house cab so I can at least have my familiar mids and highs without bringing the whole shabang.

So, I'm just trying to wrap my brain around

210 sub, 110 sub, 112 as a sub, or even an unloaded 46 as a sub.

All I know is that I used to play in a progressive hardcore band and I had two 410xlts on stage with like 1200 watts, and I still couldn't hear myself...it was obnoxious.

Last night, played 4 sets / jams at an open mic were running, played through an ampeg 15" combo, tilted it back a bit, volume and master at half way, and I was clear as could be. The way I figure, if I can match the volume of a good 15 or 2x12 I'll be set. Fridge volume, not a necessity anymore.

 

[Razman]

I hope by the time the MAS115 comes out I'll have the scratch to get one. The 112 would work sonically but not prop up my 400 all that well. I'm trying to envision what the 215 would look like though too....

 

[MarkA]

EDIT: Re-read your post, so am rewriting mine.

Not sure what you mean by "unloaded 46 as a sub" -- a 46 sans internal crossover, mids, and tweeter? Or do you simply mean you'd be running it with a poweramp to cover lows only?

Mike knows the cabs better than I do and can better advise you as to how different combos would work together, but I'll throw in my tuppence anyway.

Modular rigs I've considered with small tops (some assume a poweramp or an amp that will go below 4 Ohms):

8 Ohm 26 + 4 Ohm 46. 2.7 Ohms. Advantage: Small, medium, and large rigs, all with the same basic tonality. No need for external crossover. Mike has said that a 26 will be about as loud as a 45 but go lower.

8 Ohm 26 + 110 sub. -- an 8 Ohm load, using the internal crossover in the sub. 4 Ohm, I think, running both cabs full range. Or you can biamp as you like. I brought this combo up earlier in the thread, but I'm not aware of anyone using it.

45 + 110 sub -- similar to the previous (except that it's on the MAS website and people are running that combo), but the 45 has its own voice and won't go quite as low as the 26 solo. The 45 is a pretty easy one-handed carry. It won't go in a shoulder bag like the 25, but it's lighter and easier than my Epifani PS112 -- even a little easier than my little Markbass CMD 121P combo, because it's thin front-to-back and doesn't bump into your leg when you walk.

25 + 45 -- a tiny, tiny, stack, but beautiful sounding... not sure how it would compare in volume to a good 15" cab, but it would be louder than most 12" cabs... simple math says it should be about as loud as "3x6" but not go quite as low.

Personally, I think a "stripped" 46 (if that's what you meant) would be a waste of that cab's potential and reduce the versatility of your modular rig, but, who knows, it could work for you, depending on how you go about biamping. I would put a 110 sub (similar size to a 46) underneath before I'd do that.

One more consideration: Not sure what your jam is like or how tightly it's controlled, but, in my experience, there's a difference between you using your rig and other people using your rig. At the jams I frequent (thinking of one in particular), I'd feel more comfortable with the 6" based cabs or one of the "+sub" setups as the "house rig" than the 5" cabs... if you have someone with a B-string who decides to boost the bass on his or her onboard pre, for instance.

 

[MarkA]

I hope by the time the MAS115 comes out I'll have the scratch to get one. The 112 would work sonically but not prop up my 400 all that well. I'm trying to envision what the 215 would look like though too....

A 215? Seriously? I just found out about the 115. I can see an application for it -- you'd use it where you'd use a beefy 4x12" cab or where that 810 isn't quite enough... but the 215, I dunno.

 

[MWBass]

Kesslari,

I have heard this about the flex before. Some guys I know and respect and have shared gear dilemmas with for years play the cab and swear by it. My problem is that the 110 flex is just too big for one side of my current goal. It would be perfect for the stage, heck so would the 210 flex, but I do a lot of sessions developing and writing in apartment settings and the volume, and schleps up multiple flights is just not fit for what I want.

Now, I could get two, but some combination where I can use the main portion, the mids and highs all of the time seems like a more desirable option to me. But who knows. Maybe I'll plug into a flex and just be sucked into the vortex hehe.

 

[Razman]

A 215? Seriously? I just found out about the 115. I can see an application for it -- you'd use it where you'd use a beefy 4x12" cab or where that 810 isn't quite enough... but the 215, I dunno.

Read about that on the Big-E forum, it's supposed to be only slightly larger than the 115. Must be modeled after the Tardis.

FWIW I'm getting a deal on a GK 810sbx at a local shop. It might need a couple of drivers, but the price was right. Got to have something to "get by" with for now. Although I'll be using it for metal, I can't imagine it not being enough - even at our loud levels we play at.

I was gassing for a 210 Flex until the 112 came out, but I would much rather have the footprint of the 115 cab under my Mesa.

 

[Mike Arnopol]

Thanks Mark for the multiple lengthy insights.

Your comparisons were priceless yet useful.

I've been putting off diving in because I wasn't playing out that much, but it has picked up lately quite a bit.

I'm only asking about the low end of each unit because A few months back me and Mike were talking about a unique combo that I would like. I basically want a very small combo-ish rig, preferably a 25 but maybe a 26, but I want to have it set in a biamp setup so I can throw it on top of something that will manage the bass duties and allow the small cab to manage the mids and highs with the added power it could probably handle not having to deal with bottom end.

For me the small cab could do all of my practice at home, writing at home, and small coffee shop gigs, but then I can throw it on top of something for a stage level rig. Heck, I could bring it to the practice studios we go to and biamp into the house cab so I can at least have my familiar mids and highs without bringing the whole shabang.

So, I'm just trying to wrap my brain around

210 sub, 110 sub, 112 as a sub, or even an unloaded 46 as a sub.

All I know is that I used to play in a progressive hardcore band and I had two 410xlts on stage with like 1200 watts, and I still couldn't hear myself...it was obnoxious.

Last night, played 4 sets / jams at an open mic were running, played through an ampeg 15" combo, tilted it back a bit, volume and master at half way, and I was clear as could be. The way I figure, if I can match the volume of a good 15 or 2x12 I'll be set. Fridge volume, not a necessity anymore.

I really feel that, as Mark had stated, a 26 + 46 would be really nice. Forget the biamping. You'l likely be using all three combinations. The 46 goes surprisingly loud and adding the 26 (essentially a modular MAS66--my go-to cab) would really cover anything. The 26 is also surprising as far as how loud it goes. I really feel that the 45/110 is best for upright players that double on electric.

 

[MWBass]

Mark, I guess I should explain further.

Mike taunted me with a lab gruppen amp months ago that has been haunting my dreams. So the rig would consist of an amp that would have separate channels for the mid/highs and the lows. Approximately 300 at 8 ohms for the top and 600 at 4 ohms for the lows. It has built in dsp/ crossovers/HPF and banks, so I can dial in a nice cross at 200-300 for when the whole rig is used and I can have another setting where the one channel is run full spectrum when I just use the smaller cab.

As for the 46 or 66...

I did indeed mean without mids, tweets, and crossover. The way I look at it is like this,

If, say, the 46 was the cab that had the lows that I desired, you can't look at it as a cab without its mids and highs and lacking its potential, but rather, when the whole rig is connected, it's like a 46 with the bass in one cab and the mids and highs in another. This is of course if that bass is the right choice. I agree it's wierd that the 6s can go so much higher, but if the bass is right for me, it's right lol.

I just hope I can pull this off with the 25 as the top. I say this because first, I have heard a lot of clips of the 5 based cabs and have heard from people whose opinions I respect that the mids on those fivers are amazing. Second, because the cab is the smallest of the lot, and third, because it would act as a three way in a biamp set up instead of a four way which would happen if the 26 were chosen.

The first time I discussed this with Mike, the 5s were a no go, because the two didn't have enough juice to keep up,
But now that the new eighteen sound drivers are in play, maybe the door is open.

 

[Mike Arnopol]

Read about that on the Big-E forum, it's supposed to be only slightly larger than the 115. Must be modeled after the Tardis.

FWIW I'm getting a deal on a GK 810sbx at a local shop. It might need a couple of drivers, but the price was right. Got to have something to "get by" with for now. Although I'll be using it for metal, I can't imagine it not being enough - even at our loud levels we play at.

I was gassing for a 210 Flex until the 112 came out, but I would much rather have the footprint of the 115 cab under my Mesa.

Yeah---here are our thoughts
The 109, 110 and 112 are based on what we call the Rach-E waveguide. It's a different geometry than the original 2 drivers crossfiring configuration. It's meant to optimize a single driver and still get the crossfiring and other MVW benefits. But--the original design (which is still used in many cabs--for me the 26 and 46) for lets say---two drivers crossfiring is not twice the width of the Rach-E.

So--if we run it vertically, the 215 would only be about 6" taller than the 115. It's going to likely be around 22" wide and 24" deep and weigh around 95#. Initially it was just a fun project. But what speaker does every backline and sound company have? An 810. An 810 has the VD (air moving capacity) of around 1100 to 1200 cc's. The amount of air a cab can move can essentially determine how loud it can go--for a bass player.The 115 would move around 1600cc's. The 215 about 3200cc's. A typical 215 cab would move around 1600 to 1700 cc's. So we were thinking that the 215 might be good for backline and sound companies.

 

[MWBass]

I hear you Mike.

My back up choice initially, if I were to not go biamp, was actually a 26 atop a 66, effectively giving me an 86.
With that, I'd probably run a Demeter hbp1-800... I had the pre years ago in my accugroove rig and was floored by it. I believe that's one of the heads you and Mark tested recently.

Anyways, I'm starting to think if I went that route that a 26 over a 66 would be overkill, but who knows.

I guess if I went this way, the only scenerio that wouldn't be addressed is the biamp ing situation at the practice studio. I guess I can just suck it up and haul the gear, we don't go that often, or b just deal with svt810 that every studio has lol.

 

[Mike Arnopol]

Mark, I guess I should explain further.

Mike taunted me with a lab gruppen amp months ago that has been haunting my dreams. So the rig would consist of an amp that would have separate channels for the mid/highs and the lows. Approximately 300 at 8 ohms for the top and 600 at 4 ohms for the lows. It has built in dsp/ crossovers/HPF and banks, so I can dial in a nice cross at 200-300 for when the whole rig is used and I can have another setting where the one channel is run full spectrum when I just use the smaller cab.

As for the 46 or 66...

I did indeed mean without mids, tweets, and crossover. The way I look at it is like this,

If, say, the 46 was the cab that had the lows that I desired, you can't look at it as a cab without its mids and highs and lacking its potential, but rather, when the whole rig is connected, it's like a 46 with the bass in one cab and the mids and highs in another. This is of course if that bass is the right choice. I agree it's wierd that the 6s can go so much higher, but if the bass is right for me, it's right lol.

I just hope I can pull this off with the 25 as the top. I say this because first, I have heard a lot of clips of the 5 based cabs and have heard from people whose opinions I respect that the mids on those fivers are amazing. Second, because the cab is the smallest of the lot, and third, because it would act as a three way in a biamp set up instead of a four way which would happen if the 26 were chosen.

The first time I discussed this with Mike, the 5s were a no go, because the two didn't have enough juice to keep up,
But now that the new eighteen sound drivers are in play, maybe the door is open.

Ok---I get it. Yeah---the new 25--as a mid and high speaker would quite literally keep up with any cab or sub I make. If I made one to double as a coffee house cab or a mid-high top I would probably recommend using one Ciare tweet in it. Maybe with a switch.

Sub portion---man---I'd consider what we call the MA112 Essential. It's really a MAS112 without the mids and tweets.The 12" 18sound actually sounds nice and punchy up to 3k. I've happily used it on gigs.An MA112 would go as loud as two of the 110 subs and cost the same as one of them.

If the 25 was crossed over above 300hz---it would keep up with the 112 as a sub--no sweat.

 

[Mike Arnopol]

BTW

It's doable but pretty hard getting a 26 to work on top of a 66. 46--no problem. I can't see needing more volume than a 66. (or a 46+26)

 

[MWBass]

Quick question mike, how do those 112 perform when their on their side, not vertical, I'll call it the traditional big e position lol

And in quick terms, how is the bass presentation different between the 112 and say a 210 sub similar? More or less weighty? Etc.

Thanks

 

[Mike Arnopol]

Quick question mike, how do those 112 perform when their on their side, not vertical, I'll call it the traditional big e position lol

And in quick terms, how is the bass presentation different between the 112 and say a 210 sub similar? More or less weighty? Etc.

Thanks

On its side---better as a sub.

The 112 and 210 go similar volumes. The 210 is punchy in the mid to upper bass region with a tilt toward the "warmer" side. It goes very low, but is tighter/leaner in the 40 to 140 hz range. Super strong bass, but quick and nimble.

The 112 is flatter in the upper bass region. And it stays flay all the way down. But it is very fast. Duke says that the leading edge of the low end pops out more than any bass speaker he's heard. It's a more visceral/powerful bass. Buy with great speed and control.

The 210 has a bit of an illusion thing going. The slightly less prominent lower bass (I'm just saying that it's about 2 to 3db lower from 40 to 150hz---it's still there very strong into the 30's)(quickness) is offset by a slightly more prominent mid/upper bass (warmth).

I'm a pizzicato funk guy. Two of my favorite bassists

MAS112---Paul Jackson---speed and power. More weight

210---Bernard Edwards with another octave lower. Nimbleness and articulation, but with actual low end.

 

[kesslari]

Kesslari,

I have heard this about the flex before. Some guys I know and respect and have shared gear dilemmas with for years play the cab and swear by it. My problem is that the 110 flex is just too big for one side of my current goal. It would be perfect for the stage, heck so would the 210 flex, but I do a lot of sessions developing and writing in apartment settings and the volume, and schleps up multiple flights is just not fit for what I want.

Now, I could get two, but some combination where I can use the main portion, the mids and highs all of the time seems like a more desirable option to me. But who knows. Maybe I'll plug into a flex and just be sucked into the vortex hehe.

MWBass - I hear you on the size. The top half of my FlexMod (more or less a Flex110, with slightly different electronics) is bigger than I would ideally like for my small gigs.
But fugginA, it sounds so GOOOOD....