I've toyed with the idea of using a powered monitor with a mixer of some sort too. Very tempting for all the reasons talked about here. I have a feeling that these units are best suited for vocals and DJ's by design, though. That keeps me from pulling the lever on a purchase every time. Nowhere in the promo for these units do they push the idea of using for acoustic bass. The primary design goal seems to be for vocals and canned tracks.
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.
Double Bass Mackie DLM8
- Thread starter Adrian Cho
- Start date
PC, I think that is a reflection of the miniscule market share represented by Double Bassists using them for this purpose. I would give more weight to the fact that two accomplished and respected fellow TBers (Ric and Adrian) have been using them for some time and continue to be happy with them. As always, the final decision rests with the individuals ears. I plan/hope to A/B demo the EV against my Shuttle 3.0 8t. If I do that I will certainly post my reaction and hopefully a sound clip.
Peace
Well I found a deal online so I bought one today. Should be here sometime this week. Bass went to the bass doctor today and won't get it back for a week. I'll do a comparison with the DLM8 and the GB Shuttle 3.0 8t hopefully next weekend.
Last edited:
Just saying the primary design goal for these things sees to be tilted toward general PA duty. Not DB performance. All the brands have an eq curve that is proprietary which may or may not be complimentary for DB. Of course this can be adjusted with external eq, but the powered cabs each have their own "sound" that is designed to project a modern digital recording mixes, not specific instruments.
Not sure I agree with that. The goal of modern powered cabs is to get as close to 'studio monitor' quality as possible - i.e. flat curve. A quick hunt around gave me this page and ... well they do a pretty good job of it.
Invalid Link Removed
Here's the cab I use:
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
Can't complain.
IMO: Like any small cab/combo system you have a trade-off between size/volume/low-end. This is where an amp for EB differs from one designed for DB. An electric bassist expects to be bringing down plaster at 30Hz - so cabs must be designed to not compromise volume at the low end. An upright player looks to reproduce the sound of their acoustic bass as closely as possible - meaning there is a natural roll-off of the low end. For this we often use an electronic HPF.
In other words... The compromise on low end built into a product not built specifically for bass actually fits well with what we're chasing in an amplifier.
Invalid Link Removed
Here's the cab I use:
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
Can't complain.
IMO: Like any small cab/combo system you have a trade-off between size/volume/low-end. This is where an amp for EB differs from one designed for DB. An electric bassist expects to be bringing down plaster at 30Hz - so cabs must be designed to not compromise volume at the low end. An upright player looks to reproduce the sound of their acoustic bass as closely as possible - meaning there is a natural roll-off of the low end. For this we often use an electronic HPF.
In other words... The compromise on low end built into a product not built specifically for bass actually fits well with what we're chasing in an amplifier.
Excellent! Yes, but there are intangible, unmeasurable and complex components involved that ears sense..like the sound of plastic cabinets as opposed to high grade lightweight lami woods. And is the goal of modern gigging DB bass amps to get as close to studio monitor specs as possible? Or to sound good in live context it's going to be used in? Or are they the same thing?
I'll amend this after reading vin tones remark that the goal is this: "The goal of modern powered cabs is to get as close to 'studio monitor' quality as possible"
Yeah - that's my opinion anyway.
That said - I really enjoy playing DB through my Mesa Scout (12") which has a softer tube vibe to it. The QSC seems to be more "accurate" (assuming you have a good mic/pickup & preamp) and being a wedge fires up at my ears, not my kneecaps. So on a busy stage the QSC is worth its weight.
Also re: the plastic/plywood thing you mention. Modern powered speakers have come a long way. The EV cabs are a great example - some are ply and some are plastic and they're very hard to tell apart. IIRC the more expensive range is ply but the cheaper one is often recommended bc its lighter, tougher and sounds almost identical.
That said - I really enjoy playing DB through my Mesa Scout (12") which has a softer tube vibe to it. The QSC seems to be more "accurate" (assuming you have a good mic/pickup & preamp) and being a wedge fires up at my ears, not my kneecaps. So on a busy stage the QSC is worth its weight.
Also re: the plastic/plywood thing you mention. Modern powered speakers have come a long way. The EV cabs are a great example - some are ply and some are plastic and they're very hard to tell apart. IIRC the more expensive range is ply but the cheaper one is often recommended bc its lighter, tougher and sounds almost identical.
+1 it really is, because it only weighs 32 lbs. Of course, you could purchase one of the KW series from QSC, but adding the wood enclosure to a K12, increases the weight by 6 lbs. probably not a deal breaker for some, but I'm always going for lighter. My take is that the QSC fills the bill on smaller gigs. I have my concert rig that I use for more important concerts. etc. QSC doesn't offer a K8 or K10 with the wooden enclosure anyway. Just my take. For me at least, the QSC's are an upscale version of the Gallien Krueger Microbass amps, lightweight, good sounding, with significantly more power and flexibility, provided you have a decent pre amp to put ahead of the speaker. It's not going to keep up with some of the more "boutique" offerings. However after you add the cost of a really nice pre amp, they are not a inexpensive option.
Ric
Last edited:
That's a point Ric, the QSC plus the Headway is easily running over $1K. The GK micros are much cheaper, (I purchased a 110MB new for $275) and for many will get the job of stage monitoring done just as well. Both would probably sound the pretty much same in context to the average small gig listener, imo.
True, however I'm one of those players who likes his amp to sound like a reasonable facsimile of their own instrument. To get that, I'd have to still own my GK 200MB which is long gone. I'm not enamored with the newer GK offerings. Just my take.
I recently heard a really fine bassist playing in a local club, his bass is a really fine instrument, but he was using a "road worn" GK MBE, it sounded great. So there's no doubt that it's got a lot more to do with the player and their instrument. A nice amp
is the icing on the cake. The audience hear's the bass differently than we do.
Ric
Apples and oranges there I'm afraid. The Headway gives you a HUGE range of feedback busting tools that the GK just doesn't.... HPF, notch filter, phase... That's even before you start thinking about wanting to plug a mic in. The GK MB range is great for what it is - don't get me wrong but I'd still be wanting a preamp before it.
I used to have an MB112 combo but sold it when a first gen SWR Baby Blue popped up on the used market. The GK sounded "blurry" in comparison. ... but hey if it does the job for you then that's a great buy. As Ric said - it's more about the playing than the gear.
Actually, I was referring to the new line of GK, the ones with the digital power amps. The old 112 metal box combo is the only analog power amp GK offers these days. Still about 700 bucks or so. I'm not trying to rain on the parade here..just expressed my personal hesitation with the powered speaker/preamp experiment.
Yeah the MB112 I had was the one based on the MB200... but first gen. I was never a fan of the older one.
Interesting discussion. The whole notion of not needing a 'bass amp' is a tough one to swallow at first but keep an open mind - the newer powered PA cabs might surprise you. In fact... it's worth remembering that the great granddaddy of all bass amps was originally designed for accordion.... The Ampeg A15!
Ampeg A15 Photos by baconbobacon | Photobucket
Interesting discussion. The whole notion of not needing a 'bass amp' is a tough one to swallow at first but keep an open mind - the newer powered PA cabs might surprise you. In fact... it's worth remembering that the great granddaddy of all bass amps was originally designed for accordion.... The Ampeg A15!
Ampeg A15 Photos by baconbobacon | Photobucket
Actually, based on what I know the A-15 and B-15 were designed at virtually the same time, but purposed for different instruments. While the A-15, may have indeed come to market before the B-15, both Jess Oliver and Everett Hull were bass players. Jess took the 800 Series Pre Amp, matched it
with an RCA power amplifier, and designed Double Baffle Reflex enclosure, with a "flip top" that was inspired by the Singer sewing machines of the 1960's. While we can only guess at such things, I'd say that the B-15 was truly designed as a Bass Amp from the ground up and the A-15 was it's accordion
modification. The schematics for the amp list both models together. Just my take.
Ric
Matt,
Hope you find one. They haven't been readily available to try out in St. Louis, while virtually everything else is (i.e. QSC, JBL, Electrovoice, and Yamaha) Mackie has recently dropped the price of their iPad supported
mixer. Probably due to the competition from QSC and their new Touch Mix.
Ric
I went in another direction with the Carvin AGE300 ext. cab. For those that are still interested Mackie is selling b-stock for $419 on the bay.
I disagree with everything except your conclusion, which I agree with for entirely different reasons.
If one truly wishes to amplify the sound of the instrument accurately, it is necessary to have an amplification system with a reasonably flat response curve that extends from the lowest fundamental to the highest audible overtone. The system begins with a pickup or microphone, and pickups especially often seem to unnaturally exaggerate* the bottom half-octave. Mics can also if they have a strong proximity effect. Speaker systems that roll off steeply below 80Hz, such as the K10 in your example, often pair well with the many pickup systems that have an exaggerated output in that same frequency range.
The speaker has to be considered in the context of the entire system. If the pickup or mic used does not exhibit a tendency to exaggerate the lowest frequencies, the use of a speaker with a steep LF roll-off will exacerbate the instrument's own weakness in that frequency range.
-bob
*it's not that the pickup exaggerates the lowest frequencies, but instead accurately picks up the energy in the frequencies below the instrument's ability to resonate effectively. Or something like that.
