I know that some of you are interested in this topic, and it's been on my mind since Friday, so, here goes.
112 (18 Sound)/Flex ramble.
I've been going back and forth between the 112 and the Flex for the last three days. At least once a day, I change my mind about which one I like better. It's been said before and sounds a bit silly, but playing these cabs really is like playing an instrument. I guess I've always thought of my amp and cabs, at least to some degree, as extensions of my instrument. When I started playing electric at the age of 15 (coming from Doublebass and trombone), it weirded me out that I was playing my instrument over *here* and the sound was coming out over *there*, from that box. Felt weirdly disconnected and impersonal (especially when the pep band played a big, boomy gym and the setup required me to be some distance from the amp). I got over that, but a good rig/setup, for me, has always been one that enhances that feeling of connection, of what you're doing at the instrument being manifest instantly in the sound. There are of course other factors than the rig you're playing that figure into this, and this feeling is achievable with other cabs, but Mike's cabs facilitate it better than any others I've played. Put a less touchy-feely way, they are the most touch-responsive cabs I've played. And, like acoustic instruments, they respond differently.
Both cabs are quick and clear. The 112 is "drier" and stiffer feeling. The notes stop instantly. There is no detectable bleed from one to another, to the point where I feel it keeps me on my toes with my *left* hand; if I'm arpeggiating a chord and I want the notes to ring through for a certain length, I'd better be sure not to lift my fingers a split second early. Staccato passages are spit out as fast as you and your amp can handle them. Note separation is exemplary.
The Flex, while also very quick, is a little more forgiving in this regard. If it were a guitar, its top would vibrate more freely and it would be a little more resonant. That's not to say that you can't do the rapid-fire staccato stuff with it just as well (I haven't found anything I can do with one cab that I can't manage convincingly with the other), but that you achieve the result with a slightly different touch. I find that, with the Flex, I'll have my left hand resting a bit more lightly on the strings, muting a hair sooner. I might play a bit closer to the bridge to get the same focus. Both the Flex and the 112, however, are very responsive to hand placement. Last night, I played a quick fingerpicking/strumming thing that I'd normally have done back by the bridge right at the end of the fingerboard and was amazed that it came off clearly through both cabs. Not saying that I couldn't have managed it - well, even - with another cab, but these cabs encourage me to try stuff like that.
The 112 is brutally quick. The Flex has a bit more bounce. At least that's how I feel it - like it's helping me along. I can't tell which cab starts quicker. Some things feel a little easier to play with one, some with another - like you might like playing a certain song on one guitar more than another - but both are capable, responsive instruments. The 112 does stop a little quicker than the Flex, but the Flex stops quicker than most anything else I've heard.
Mids, amount and quality: The 112 is more mid-forward than the Flex is in every mode but the Full Nasty mode. That's pretty in-your-face and grindy. The mids on the 112 are coming partly from the main driver and partly from those 4" mid-tweets. They are detailed and textured and will render grind from your amp just fine but they don't, to my ear, grind much on their own (that's the one thing about my old 2x12" that I'd graft onto the 112 if I could). I wouldn't call the Flex a grindy cab - its default voicing is smoother and more laid-back - more R&B - than the 112's - but there is something going on with those mids. Part of it has got to be that the 6" mids (same driver, I'm pretty sure, as in my old 2x12") break up earlier than the 4-inchers, part of it that they've got their own waveguide, maybe part that they're crossed-over lower... but they're just so detailed. I don't feel I'm missing anything in the mids with the 112, until I play the Flex. They're a little more full, 3D. Chords up high are a bit more fulfilling with the Flex, no doubt. It has an edge there. Tweeters off, mids up, it will grind - you miss the tweeters more, though (I presume they come in lower on the Flex.)
Mid-boost (really just letting the mids run full-open) on the 112 is more subtle than on the Flex. To my ear, it doesn't make them more "aggressive" so much as thicker. If you have a thin-sounding bass or a scooped sounding amp it can be good for that.
Both cabs slap really well. Here, though, I'd give the edge to the 112. A bit more meaty, with a bit harder kick. Both cabs do pick playing really well, too (almost never do that, but tried to channel a little Bobby Vega today - I'm no Bobby Vega!), with the Flex a little rounder and fuller and the 112 a little more percussive. The 112 handles dirt like a champ (I prefer the tweeter off for that). Haven't tried dirt through the Flex, but I know I'd want the tone rolled way down or the tweeters off.
The 112 has a more small-stage friendly footprint: deepish but tall and narrow and you can stand right on top of it and hear yourself clearly.
Don't know what else to say. If you're a rock player, plug into the 112 and go. It will handle pretty much anything else with some (or maybe no) tweaking. The Flex will do rock, but you'll probably tweak some more. It will do pretty much anything else, and the "Dark" mode is cool for old school. The 112, generally, is more direct and aggressive, but it can do laid-back and sweet. The Flex, generally, a bit more expansive and detailed, but it can do agressive. The 112 is a more "traditional" sounding cab, though I realize that's not a very well-defined term and depends on which tradition you're talking about... Tweets off in Dark mode (mids padded and "light bulb" circuit engaged) with the tone rolled back, the Flex might better approximate an old 15" than the 112...
Digression: I recently switched the pickups on my favorite bass (the one that's had nothing but string changes and an occasional truss rod adjustment since I got it in 1990). I was hating the new pups at first (played them out twice - albeit with supplied backline - and felt lost in the mix both times). Trying to come to terms with them led, in part, to the recent tonal exploration, which happened to result in a lot of open-eared time with both cabs. I'm digging the pups better now. Still don't know if they're keepers, but I'm confident I can get a good result with them live. Hoping to get them and the Flex both out soon to test that proposition. I feel like I know the 112 pretty well by now. The Flex I'm still learning - despite mtngrwn's kind comment several posts up, I don't gig nearly as often as I'd like to - work, life, yadda yadda - but I do what I can!
/ramble
. Looks like this will be an excellent start, @ the very least.
