Psst... Ready to join TalkBass and start posting, make new friends, sell your gear, and more?  Register your free account in 30 seconds.

Flexible, portable rig idea: Stewart, Acme b-1

Discussion in 'Amps and Cabs [BG]' started by junglebike, Feb 28, 2003.


  1. junglebike

    junglebike Supporting Member

    Feb 14, 2003
    San Diego, CA
    Anyone had experience with the Acme low b-1's? Here's my thought:

    2x Acme Low B-1 8-ohms

    Used Stewart World 600 or PA-500 (anyone used one of these?)

    And I get...

    1. 120Wx2 stereo for a home stereo system or low-powered coffeeshop PA system

    2. 400W 8-ohm 1-speaker small jazz/coffeeshop bass rig

    3. 600W 4-ohm 2-speaker larger bar/rock bass rig...

    What do you guys think? Better than My Acoustic Image Contra combo?
     
  2. NOLABASS

    NOLABASS

    Oct 16, 2002
    New Orleans
    Thats the thinking I had when I went with 2 2x10's.
    Very very flexible, I can use the B-2s as a PA, all I have to do is bring along a small Behringer board. run my DI to the board, into the b2's. Works great....lots of uses.
     
  3. NeedMoreBass

    NeedMoreBass unregistered

    Feb 14, 2003
    Sounds good, but I would consider the Euphonic Audio CXL110's instead. Incredibly performance from these cabs!
     
  4. pjhandlin

    pjhandlin Gold Supporting Member

    Sep 17, 2002
    Grand Rapids, MI
    junglebike

    I'm new to TB, but may have some helpful insight here.

    I have used this setup for the past two years. I am using two Acme B1's with a Stewart 1.2 and the tone is beautiful. These little cabs work very well for light PA duty and function as my current studio monitors also. To my ears, these cabs sound good!

    Depending on the type of music you play, you may want to consider more efficient cabs.

    My gigs are 60% jazz on DB, and one or two of the B1's is perfect with my Clarus. But for pop, blues and funk work, I am having trouble cutting through with my electric despite the headroom provided by the Stewart 1.2. This is the tone I want, but I get lost in the mix at times.

    For an interesting comparison, I have a 4 ohm Eden 210T with a high sensitivity (103db I think) and with the Clarus @ 200 watts it almost matches the loudness of 2 B1's and the Stewart rig.

    I hope to check out EA CXL 112 soon.
     
  5. junglebike

    junglebike Supporting Member

    Feb 14, 2003
    San Diego, CA
    Thanks for the feedback, guys!

    Does the EA have a flat response? Their spec is only up to 14kHz -- not really enough for monitors or PA, right?

    Efficiency seems like the Acme's Achilles heel. Luckily, I don't play loud gigs. But, I may in the future...
     
  6. NeedMoreBass

    NeedMoreBass unregistered

    Feb 14, 2003
    The EA is very flat and the high end is smoother than the Acme. Also more efficient. Should work fine for a small PA or monitor. Any questions, call them!! They are very helpful on the phone.
     
  7. jokerjkny

    jokerjkny

    Jan 19, 2002
    NY / NJ / PA
    you rang??? ;)

    [​IMG]

    i did have a Stew 600, but was able to pounce on a 1.2 for a killer price.

    also, i'm gonna have to disagree a bit with my bro, NeedMB, and say that the Acme is waaaaaaaay smoother, and not as hyped in the higher highs as the EA. i've tried my rack with an EA 1x12, and was annoyed to hear some higher end hiss, that wasnt audible with my Acme.

    also, on my Acme, there's an attenuator for both the highs and mids, to more fit the room or sound you're after. very handy.

    overall, the Acme is the only cab i can say that's truly flat. the EA, on the other hand, seems goosed in the very highs, and some lower than lower mids for that trademark wrecking ball punch. something that unfortunately, the Acme in its natural state would never have.

    still both cabs totally ROCK! just depends what you're after. btw, are you using this for an upright? if so, the Acoustic Image is killer. another cool combo, would be a stack of Acme 1x10 cubes, along with a nice AI Clarus ontop. killer transparent rig.
     
  8. junglebike

    junglebike Supporting Member

    Feb 14, 2003
    San Diego, CA
    Nice rig! Thanks for the response...

    I play fretless and fretted 4-string electric. My band Hoilday plays sort of folk/rock/pop stuff, nothing too raucous. I like a good clean pure tone from my fretless, which has TI flats to give an upright-y tone.

    I'm learning how to slap, though, so watch out... :D

    So, jokerjkny... have any volume problems with that rig? Main advantage that I see in the EA vs Acme 110's are the 10dB efficiency difference...
     
  9. NeedMoreBass

    NeedMoreBass unregistered

    Feb 14, 2003
    If I was talking about 12's, I would have mentioned 12's. If you look at my profile I use all EA 10's. I've had the 12's and the 10's sound better. Please don't compare the 10's to the 12's. junglebike, you're right. EA's are more efficient. If you call EA they will even tell you that the 10 cab is a more PA sounding speaker than the 12.
     
  10. jokerjkny

    jokerjkny

    Jan 19, 2002
    NY / NJ / PA
    yea, i've heard many a dood mention the inefficiency of the Acme's. its fine for my small gigs. but some guys say they dont cut the mustard. it takes ALOT of drastic EQ'ing to equal what most cabs already EQ to alot of your rig's tone.

    if you wanna be safe, look into an EA. no problems being heard with those. but Andy at Acme offers a 2 week, no hassles, return policy just so you can go gigging and see if its right for you.
     
  11. alexclaber

    alexclaber Commercial User

    Jun 19, 2001
    Brighton, UK
    Director - Barefaced Ltd
    Just thought I'd bump this up because it's quite useful regarding relative loudness/efficiency. The Stewart puts 350W into each Low-B1. Their combined efficiency is 93dB. Thus the maximum rms output is 121.5dB.

    The Clarus puts 200W into the Eden, whose efficiency is 103dB. Therefore the maximum rms output is 126dB.

    According to pjhandlin the Clarus/Eden rig is almost as loud as the Stewart/Acme rig - note that according to the specs it should be 4.5dB louder. Draw your own conclusions...

    Alex
     
  12. jokerjkny

    jokerjkny

    Jan 19, 2002
    NY / NJ / PA
    woah, another oldie but a goodie.

    i use a pair with my Clarus as well as with my Stewart 250 & 1.2, and its plenty loud for my funk/soul gigs.

    i really feel that you have to give any new cab time to allow the speakers to break in. once they do, they'll get louder and louder as the surrounds relax and get more comfortable with the increased wattage.

    as you can see, i did own a B-2, and in its regret, i've gotten a pair of B-1's and a B-4 to make up for it. :p along with my Epi 1x10UL's, i'm unstoppable for all things small gig! ;)

    check it out:

    http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=91373

    btw, one of the big reasons i held onto the B-1's was they make great PA speakers, too. recently did an outdoor BBQ, using my B-1 pair, and the music was kicked up!

    by themselves, the music was fat and punchie. but later, we needed more sound for the group of peeps behind us, so a friend added his QSC PLX1602 & JBL EON1500 pair, while we used the B-1's as mini subwoofers, and it was pretty freakie.
     
  13. pjhandlin

    pjhandlin Gold Supporting Member

    Sep 17, 2002
    Grand Rapids, MI

    Alex, I'm not sure how you determined the rms output of the Stew 1.2 and the two Acme B1 cabs.. I would like to learn the calculations though.

    Did you run the numbers with two 4 ohm Acme B1 cabs? Maybe that would get the efficency closer to the Clarus/Eden combo. Looking back, I think that I may have been somewhat disillusioned with the initial performance of the Acme cabs. I am intersted in the objective data describing the relative differences in the above comparisons.. the low-mid grunt of Eden vs the true extended reproduction of my B string offered by the Acme pair. Both useful, just different.

    Joker, I still have the above equipment and I agree that the Clarus/Acme B1 rig is tonally beautiful. I ran the Clarus at 2 ohms with the Acme pair and clipped the amp a few times until I recognized the strengths and limitations of this setup. I recently have been fortunate to put together another setup ...

    With this relative loudness/efficency twist to the thread, I can't help but wonder what my current working equipment would register at max rms output: Walter Woods Ultra and EA CXL 112 (800 watts into 8 ohms, 103 db sensitivity). Alex, anyone..... some help with the homework please?

    (I'll wait to say what I think is louder/more efficient this time)
     
  14. alexclaber

    alexclaber Commercial User

    Jun 19, 2001
    Brighton, UK
    Director - Barefaced Ltd
    pj, I assumed that your Stewart was driving 4 ohm cabs in parallel (rather than 8 ohm cabs bridged) - I hope that was correct. The calculation was as follows:
    sensitivity + 10x(log power) = max rms output

    For the Acmes I assumed that two Low-B1's have the same efficiency as one Low-B2 (of course they've got extra mid & high drivers but that should make little difference), thus the efficiency is 93dB. The amp then raises the dB level by 10x(log700)=28.45dB. Hence the max rms output of 121.5dB. The Clarus/B1 rig should put out 93+10x(log300)=117.8dB.

    Your new rig should put out 103+10x(log800)=132dB (theoretically!) However both with this rig and the Stewart/Acme rig these calculations are inaccurate because the speakers can't handle that many watts rms continuously. Saying that, both rigs have got about twice as much rms power as they can theoretically handle (which is ideal IMO as it gives you enough headroom for dynamic bass playing) so the ratio of relative loudness is the same.

    So, does the new rig sound twice as loud as the old one?

    Alex