1. Please take 30 seconds to register your free account to remove most ads, post topics, make friends, earn reward points at our store, and more!  
    TalkBass.com has been uniting the low end since 1998.  Join us! :)

Dem + QSC + Schroeder = One heart-throbbing bass system!

Discussion in 'Amps and Cabs [BG]' started by lo-freq, Aug 8, 2004.

  1. lo-freq

    lo-freq aka UFO

    Jan 19, 2003
    DFW, Texas
    Finally got a digitized picture of my system...(EB MM SR5), Demeter VTBP-201S, QSC PLX1602, & Schroeder 410.

    This is one seriously kicking system that will cover virtually any gig.
  2. James Hart

    James Hart

    Feb 1, 2002
    Endorsing Artist: see profile
    Looks great! I know it sounds great too :smug:
  3. So you're the guy I saw on the Players page with the StringRay. It looks pretty sweet in black. Nice rig! :bassist:

  4. inazone


    Apr 20, 2003
    Congrats! It can be a long road finding "the" sound. Well done.
  5. lo-freq

    lo-freq aka UFO

    Jan 19, 2003
    DFW, Texas

    About five years back I was looking for a 5 string StingRay and that one was just calling my name from the first time I saw it.
  6. lo-freq

    lo-freq aka UFO

    Jan 19, 2003
    DFW, Texas

    I don't have any major GAS pains at the moment.

    There are some other goodies I'd like to check out, but I'm very happy with what I have.
  7. Juneau


    Jul 15, 2004
    Dallas, TX.

    /whispers Dingwall :bag:
  8. lo-freq

    lo-freq aka UFO

    Jan 19, 2003
    DFW, Texas
    Yeah, that's one of the goodies I had in mind.
    Yours is SwEEEEEt!
  9. lo-freq

    lo-freq aka UFO

    Jan 19, 2003
    DFW, Texas
    I thought that I would clean-up my original post here and insert some specific observations regarding the Schroeder 410 that I've scattered about in TB's other threads.

    The posts start off with older ones and go to newer ones (except I managed to get the 07-18-2004 one out of sequence).
  10. lo-freq

    lo-freq aka UFO

    Jan 19, 2003
    DFW, Texas
    [original post date 07-05-2004]

    My current band did a private outdoors party tonight.

    I usually set my HT322 on a metal milk crate that raises it apprx. 12" off the stage, so I did the same with the 410 to try to keep comparisons as even as possible.

    These are my initial impressions and I feel that to really get to familiar with the complete sound of a piece of equipment takes awhile. Anyway, here's my first take on the Schro410.

    As I said after my first exposure to the 410, the major differences between it and my HT322 are in efficiency and in the low end.
    I set my SR5, Dem 201S, and PLX1602 the same as I've been setting them where we practice (a 14' X 16' concrete walled room).
    The rythym guitarist immediately started letting me know I was too freakin' loud.
    He was standing about 15' to 20' from the cab.
    My drummer walked around way out in the audience while I was getting a feel for the sound and he said it was very loud out there and it was totally blowing away what my HT322 could do (just reporting what he said).
    I cut the volume on the Dem pre and cut the bass just a tiny bit from the center detent on my SR5.
    The lows and lower mids have a somewhat aggressive edge to it, but still clearer in the very lowest 10 half-steps of the BEADG range than the HT322 (at least at the same general volume level -- loud -- I've had the 322 for a year, so I'm pretty familiar with its general characteristics).
    The 410 sounded quicker and more distinct in the low end.
    The notes seemed to hit you harder in the chest.
    I could hear myself better and could more easily distinguish the different notes in the lower frequencies.

    Another caveat -- I haven't really tweaked the match-up between my bass, the 201S, and the 410. So take that into consideration when you read the following. The right tweaking might change my judgements, so take it with a few extra grains of salt.
    I so far feel that the 322 has a somewhat more naturally musical midrange and treble than the Schro410.
    [Someone else used the term OPEN to describe the HT322's midrange and treble; I agree. The HT322 is more open in that frequency range than anything else I've heard -- I haven't heard the Accugrooves yet.]
    My style of playing does not emphasize this type of stuff and I don't think the differences are big, so at this point I'm pretty well sold on the Schroeder cab.

    The HT322 has good projection out 10' and farther from the cab, indoors or outdoors.
    Since this was outside, the lack of rear boundaries may have affected the percieved level closer up to the 410, but unless I kneeled down, it seemed to get louder the farther away from the cab I got. I ended up standing about 15' from the cab most of the time and could hear really well.

    All my band mates were VERY impressed with the tone and output of the Schroeder cab.
    I am too.
  11. lo-freq

    lo-freq aka UFO

    Jan 19, 2003
    DFW, Texas
    [original post date 07-12-2004]

    The Berg HT322 is rated at 104db @ 2.83v/1m.

    It would be interesting to compare the measurements of the decibel levels at 1m increments in a typical club environment (out to say 15m) for a conventional 4x10 (with a 103db efficiency rating) and a Schroeder 410.

    I don't think with the Schroeders, the above ratings really tell you everything going on efficiency-wise in a real-world music environment.

    I practiced tonight with my band using the Schroeder 410 for the 1st time in our practice studio. It is definitely louder at a lower gain setting than the HT322 was in the same room.
  12. lo-freq

    lo-freq aka UFO

    Jan 19, 2003
    DFW, Texas
    [original post date 08-14-2004]

    The two main differences are the articulation in the low end and the efficiency/projection of the sound output.

    The Schroeder 410 is very tight all the way down to low 'B', even at high volume levels. It still has a slightly aggressive edge to the sound, somewhat similar to the HT322, just more articulate in the bass.
    The HT322 was a bit looser at the very bottom and gets just a bit looser the harder it's pushed.

    The Schroeders all project sound very well (very even and balanced at several different distances, really great for outdoor gigs -- the Bergs do this well, but not nearly as well as the Schroeders) and seem to have better efficiency than the Bergs.

    The Bergs have (to me) a slight advantage in their midrange and treble -- a more "open" sound and very sweet hi-end, but the Schroeders are close, more so in the treble than the midrange -- I suspect something to do with the angled, semi-horn loading on the one side.

    P.S. Note: My previous speaker system for a little over a year was the Bergantino HT322 with the rest of my equipment being the same as now.
  13. lo-freq

    lo-freq aka UFO

    Jan 19, 2003
    DFW, Texas
    [original post date 08-19-2004]

    How about 9 out of 9 (IMO)?

    The Schroeder 410 can do it and put a really big smile on your face at the same time.
  14. lo-freq

    lo-freq aka UFO

    Jan 19, 2003
    DFW, Texas
    [original post date 09-12-2004]

    I have a tendency to find something that works and stick with it -- sometimes that's a good thing, but I could sometimes I could be a bit more open-minded and flexible.

    The studio one of my bands practices in is a small 14'x16' room and a bit boomy. I've gotten in the habit of cutting the bass control on my SR5 a fair bit.

    The last show we did I had some problems from hearing alot of low end on the stage (mostly from the two guitarists), so I kept the bass cut quite a bit during the show.
    I talked to another bass player at the 1st break and he said that I could stand to turn up a bit and add some bass boost to the sound (I was not running through the PA). I made some small changes and found a spot on the stage where I could hear myself pretty well. The other bassist left in the middle of the 2nd set, so I didn't get to recheck with him about the sound.

    Anyway, at a practice Friday with my other band, I decided to do some more experimenting with the bass settings on my bass and preamp. The acoustics (for bass) are alot better where they practice. I boosted the bass control (centered at 40Hz) on my SR5 about the least amount it could be turned up and the bass control (centered at 60Hz) on my Demeter 201S (the max it can boost is 6db) to different degrees.

    I was really amazed by the low end output from the Schroeder 410 with just modest amounts of bass boost -- very deep, powerful, solid, and still tight -- gave me a really awesome feeling of power.

    These are great days to be a bassist! :bassist: I'm loving it.
  15. lo-freq

    lo-freq aka UFO

    Jan 19, 2003
    DFW, Texas
    [original post date 07-18-2004]

    I promised that I would post a review after our band did it's 1st indoor gig since getting the Schroeder 410.

    The club we did had been renovated since the last time we played there and the acoustics (which had been pretty weird -- very lively in the higher frequencies and boomy in the lower freqs.) were better (fairly decent).

    The club had it's own PA and soundman. I told him that I never used PA support and he insisted on getting a line out from my pre's DI. The stage was pretty cramped so I was maybe 1m from the cab while playing. I think I should have set the cab with the angled baffle angled up. I could hear myself, but not quite as well as I prefer. If I turned up enough to hear myself as well as I like, the audience would complain that I was drowning out the lead singer & the whole setup was already on the LOUD side of things, so I kept the volume down a bit on my SR5.

    I plan on insisting on not going through the PA next time we play there.

    The PA support meant that I wasn't just hearing my cab (though it was mostly my cab).
    Overall, I got a confirmation of my impressions from our outdoor gig.
    Efficient volume output, warmly articulate on the low end down to low 'B', very punchy upper lows and lower mids, nicely voiced midrange and treble (smooth and clear).

    For those similarly suffering from OCD:
    My SR5 bass has DR LowRiders on it. The 410's HF driver control was at 12 o'clock. I cut my SR5's bass control maybe 5 degrees below the center detent and boosted the bass control on the Dem 201S to about 1 o'clock. I cut the SR5's midrange maybe 5 degrees and boosted the Dem's midrange to about 4 o'clock. I cut the SR5's treble control about 10 degrees and boosted the Dem's treble to 1 o'clock. The presence contol on the Dem was at 7:30. The bright switch was 'in', the bass switch was in the 60Hz position (except for while doing "Smoke On the Water"), & the presence switch was 'in'. My Dem's volume was at 2 o'clock and the PLX1602 was bridged, gain max'd, clip limiter on, filters off.

    1600W of clean power into a Schroeder 410 is a wonderful thing.

    P.S. [added 09-18-2004]
    I have since played at the same club again with the same system as above, but without PA support.
    I was on a different part of the stage and the acoustics where I was sounded altogether different.
    I found a good spot on the stage where I could hear myself (and the drummer) fine.
    Everything sounded very good as was confirmed by people I trust in the audience.
  16. lo-freq

    lo-freq aka UFO

    Jan 19, 2003
    DFW, Texas
    Well, I got some NOS tubes to try in my Dem 201S and I think it really is sounding a fair bit better -- mainly more rich & organic sounding while having better articulation from up high to way down low.

    There seems to be a wider range of settings with the tone controls and switches that sound good as well.

    I had an old GE in the gain/tone socket and an Electro Harmonix in the fx/output socket.

    I got a Matsush!ta 12ax7, a Sylvania 7025, and a Jan Philips 12ax7wa.

    I ended up with the 7025 in the gain/tone slot and the JP in the fx/output (these two tubes sound very much alike).

    I tried all different combinations and this just sounds 'right'.
    The EH surprised me -- very harmonically rich, but not as clean as the others (the Matsush!ta was the opposite end of the spectrum -- at first I ran it awhile in the gain/tone slot, but it was just a bit shy of ballsy-ness for bass -- not quite rich enough, but very tight sounding).

    If you get a chance to try some of these, do.
    The Dem original tubes are a bit harsh and not nearly as musical.

    Maybe someday I'll get to try some Telefunkens...
  17. metron

    metron Supporting Member

    Sep 12, 2003
    Wait Im confused. Which tubes were stock in your Dem? I have the stock EH in mine. Thanks for the heads up on the different types of tubes. Ive been meaning to try some Telefunkens as well! :cool:
  18. lo-freq

    lo-freq aka UFO

    Jan 19, 2003
    DFW, Texas
    Yep; the EH were stock in mine as well.
    I think they would work well if you want a very rocky kind of sound and don't mind cutting the treble some.
    The treble from my StingRay 5 may not help with the perceived harshness I got from these...YMMV.

    Even with the smoothest tube I've heard, I still cut the treble some on the SR5.
  19. Big String

    Big String Supporting Member

    Apr 22, 2000
    Northwest Indiana
    Telefunken NOS smooth black plates.... hmmmm.. good, yum. :bassist:
  20. lo-freq

    lo-freq aka UFO

    Jan 19, 2003
    DFW, Texas
    I wish I could hook up your Dem to my PLX & Schro 410 and give them a good taste test. :p

    I'm afraid to try the Crest CA; I can't afford more GAS at the moment. :rollno: