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.
Big E speakers: Pt 2
- Thread starter Chef
- Start date
- Status
lelandcrooks
Commercial User
Interesting you should say that. I've been evaluating drivers for the WT8 2x8 line array cabs. The driver we have been using sounds terrific. I found another mfg's model with better specs, flatter response, better sensitivity, it should have been a slam dunk better cab with it. I installed it, measured, the graph was great, better than the original choice. The I started doing the listening aspect. The original choice just killed it. I could eq the new drivers close, but no cigar. Not sacrificing quality for output. There's a box to driver interaction here that we are still exploring. A lot of empirical testing, because the numbers don't always show us what will/is happening.
So yes, there is more to life than measurements. But they give you a frame of reference to start with.
Jazzdogg
Less barking, more wagging!
I'm thinking that when Mike makes these DSP powered BigE's available, someone's going to set a Monique on top of one and achieve total sonic bliss...
You been readin' my mail?
You been readin' my mail?
Yeah, my initials are N.S.A. And MIKE, I'm not familiar with the source material you used to break the decibel statutes, but thank you for beginning the break-in on my woofer in fine fashion!
thank you for beginning the beak-in on my woofer in fine fashion!
Beak-in sounds dangerous ... Won't a beak damage the cone?
Liam
Hey Folks,
I just wanted to chime in and say that I received a 66 from Mike this week and it is a hammer.....
The 85 I had for a couple weeks sounded fabulous but was just under my volume needs with the RnB band that is my main gig. In comparing the 2 I would say the 85 has the clearest midrange I have ever heard in a bass cab and actually reproduces low frequencies quite well. The 66 is not quite as pristine in midrage reproduction but is better than most convention cabs I have tried. The thing that knocked me out at a fusion Gig last night was how muscular and quick the low end is on the 6 based cabs. I never felt a hint of strain from this cab and it provided such a clear, thick foundation for the band. This technology is quite remarkable in its ability to push bass clearly with a level of dynamic nuance that has been previously missing. Another common big E effect that is worthy of note is that any setup irregularities such as saddle/ pickup height are quite obvious. Now I have heard 2 of these designs I have a good feel for the benefits as applied to the working bassist.
1. The ability to monitor your instrument at a overall lower volume with superior transients.
2. freakishly good dispersion with very little volume drop at distance.
3. Reduced activation of room problems.
4. increased communication with the drummer/band
5. Overall increased perceived articulation and fidelity.
The 66 sounded massive last night with my Monique/Tone Hammer as the front end.
I will post more with pictures after I pummel this cabinet some more!
Thanks Mike!
I just wanted to chime in and say that I received a 66 from Mike this week and it is a hammer.....
The 85 I had for a couple weeks sounded fabulous but was just under my volume needs with the RnB band that is my main gig. In comparing the 2 I would say the 85 has the clearest midrange I have ever heard in a bass cab and actually reproduces low frequencies quite well. The 66 is not quite as pristine in midrage reproduction but is better than most convention cabs I have tried. The thing that knocked me out at a fusion Gig last night was how muscular and quick the low end is on the 6 based cabs. I never felt a hint of strain from this cab and it provided such a clear, thick foundation for the band. This technology is quite remarkable in its ability to push bass clearly with a level of dynamic nuance that has been previously missing. Another common big E effect that is worthy of note is that any setup irregularities such as saddle/ pickup height are quite obvious. Now I have heard 2 of these designs I have a good feel for the benefits as applied to the working bassist.
1. The ability to monitor your instrument at a overall lower volume with superior transients.
2. freakishly good dispersion with very little volume drop at distance.
3. Reduced activation of room problems.
4. increased communication with the drummer/band
5. Overall increased perceived articulation and fidelity.
The 66 sounded massive last night with my Monique/Tone Hammer as the front end.
I will post more with pictures after I pummel this cabinet some more!
Thanks Mike!
Beak-in sounds dangerous ... Won't a beak damage the cone?
Liam
Oops, my brain farted that "r" right out my left ear...
Fixed!
I'm thinking that when Mike makes these DSP powered BigE's available, someone's going to set a Monique on top of one and achieve total sonic bliss...
+1
Do you know if your 66 is made from poplar or okoume? I understand the 6-based cab mids are more present with the harder okoume.
Okume.All of the 6's these days are Okume. Better mids.
There have been numerous requests for a list and descriptions of various models.
I'll do that tomorrow.
I have to apologize for the rapid evolution/changes to the line.
Ok--I'll admit it---I'm a dumbass businessman. I should just release a few cabs and let momentum develop ---introduce changes and new cabs a little at a time.
I've got a hard time with that. I'm proud of--and feel very good about every cab I've sold.I'd be very happy playing any of them.
But---I have to improve things and work on new designs when it appears that something can be a big leap. And I listen to EVERY criticism and implement changes if I feel necessary.
For instance---the whole thing with the 10's started out as an accident. A top bassist was auditioning cabs. He loved the 8" based cabs but when he played the 45 he thought it was the perfect tonal balance.
I had an experimental 2x10 cab that I was going to give Tom and Steve to see if they wanted to mess with the drivers. It was really big---Version 1 with crossfiring drivers. 30 by 13 by 16 deep. Not a very appealing form factor.
Just for S & G's I brought out the 210. No horn mounted. Crappy response above 500hz. But the bass was amazing. The bassist said---"Man--what would be perfect would be combining the 210 and 45" Steve and I were like--"Yeah, we could do that".
We were looking to see if we could use 2 Faital 6" mids instead of the four 5"ers. So Steve (in his mad scientist mode)came up with the design. And went nuts with the crossover.
And it didn't sound like the 45. I had wanted to come up with a cab that could compete sonically with the more mid-forward cabs out there but wanted more flexibility and a crazy powerful low end. So began the Flex110. It can sound more aggressive but can also get a warmer old-school sound. Or a pristine balanced modern sound.
And that spawned the 45/110 combination. And the 45/210 combination.
And as dumb as it is--I'll continue to improve and evolve the cabs in the future.
There have been numerous requests for a list and descriptions of various models.
I'll do that tomorrow.
I have to apologize for the rapid evolution/changes to the line.
Ok--I'll admit it---I'm a dumbass businessman. I should just release a few cabs and let momentum develop ---introduce changes and new cabs a little at a time.
I've got a hard time with that. I'm proud of--and feel very good about every cab I've sold.I'd be very happy playing any of them.
But---I have to improve things and work on new designs when it appears that something can be a big leap. And I listen to EVERY criticism and implement changes if I feel necessary.
For instance---the whole thing with the 10's started out as an accident. A top bassist was auditioning cabs. He loved the 8" based cabs but when he played the 45 he thought it was the perfect tonal balance.
I had an experimental 2x10 cab that I was going to give Tom and Steve to see if they wanted to mess with the drivers. It was really big---Version 1 with crossfiring drivers. 30 by 13 by 16 deep. Not a very appealing form factor.
Just for S & G's I brought out the 210. No horn mounted. Crappy response above 500hz. But the bass was amazing. The bassist said---"Man--what would be perfect would be combining the 210 and 45" Steve and I were like--"Yeah, we could do that".
We were looking to see if we could use 2 Faital 6" mids instead of the four 5"ers. So Steve (in his mad scientist mode)came up with the design. And went nuts with the crossover.
And it didn't sound like the 45. I had wanted to come up with a cab that could compete sonically with the more mid-forward cabs out there but wanted more flexibility and a crazy powerful low end. So began the Flex110. It can sound more aggressive but can also get a warmer old-school sound. Or a pristine balanced modern sound.
And that spawned the 45/110 combination. And the 45/210 combination.
And as dumb as it is--I'll continue to improve and evolve the cabs in the future.
Guess I called this combination out of lurk status... From what I've read about this unique pre, I'd think it would sound like a slice of heaven on earth with a BigE modulating the vortex the way it do. Full spectrum punch.
Jazzdogg
Less barking, more wagging!
Jazzdogg
Less barking, more wagging!
I don't want powered cabs. Personally, I'd prefer an outboard dsp amp and separate pre-amp (like Monique, or the new two-channel pre coming from Acoustic Image), packaged as an easy-to-carry unit. I don't want to add any weight to my cabs unless I'm rewarded by improved sound. Practically speaking, with such a rig, I'd still grab an "amp," bass, cab(s), and gig bag, and head out the door. But, the cabs would be lighter, and they'd sound just as good.
In the future, I'd like to see cab makers install dsp chips in their speakers; the bass head would read the chip during its start-up routine, and verify the dsp settings have been installed in the bass head without the player lifting a finger. I would expect a company like TC Electronic or Markbass to lead the charge. Who else is a likely contender?
Sounds like a lot of churn, BUT...a lot of good advancement in refining the implementation.
I'd love to hear me some of these cabs!
+1 It has been exciting and entertaining following the refinement and re-iterations of all the new cabs, and these guys are far from calling it 'done'!!!
Thomas Ewers
Commercial User
Just thought those waiting for 210's would like to know we spent quite a bit of time on preliminary voicing for Mikes cab. It seems to be a bit of a Monster. Hopefully ready soon for the Arnopol to OK and suggest tweeks. Steve is figuring the 210's switching network over the next few days maybe a week or so. Then Mike will get to pound it, wring it out and make sure it is up to his standards.
It is it's own beast!
It is it's own beast!
Sounds awesome! I am guessing there are more differences between the 110 and 210 flex than just adding another 10 and adjusting the mid padding.
Thomas Ewers
Commercial User
Due to how the cab works and some inherent anomalies of the design we must factor in, it is it's own Beast! Completely it's own.
On a side note it has already chased women and children from the lab at less than 175 watts........
Can't wait to see 900+!
On a side note it has already chased women and children from the lab at less than 175 watts........
Can't wait to see 900+!
- Status
