• 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.

Markbass Megathread PART 3

#962
This is a really cool rig! :ninja:

f500_warrior.jpg
 
#964
Hey, if those 4x6's work anywhere near as good as some of the 8" driver loaded cabs I've heard from other people, that'll be killer.
Those look like the same sorta kevlar impregnated paper cone, with big rubber surrounds (indicating good xmax) that I've seen work well in 8" land.

Vic said:
This is a really cool rig! :ninja:

f500_warrior.jpg
Click to expand...
 
#965
Chef said:
Hey, if those 4x6's work anywhere near as good as some of the 8" driver loaded cabs I've heard from other people, that'll be killer.
Those look like the same sorta kevlar impregnated paper cone, with big rubber surrounds (indicating good xmax) that I've seen work well in 8" land.
Click to expand...
They do. They work surprisingly well... just like a lot of the Markbass stuff. Low B, no problem. :)
 
#967
tombowlus said:
Yeah, I had some fun with those boxes before I sent them your way, Vic. That is indeed one very impressive rig! :bassist: :bassist: :bassist: :cool:
Click to expand...

Those look pretty cool. I would assume they are basically a different take on a 110 cab, given the kind of 'four small drivers roughly equals the output of a 110' sort of thing with the PJ stuff. I guess I would hope the slightly larger speakers would give you a little more oomph than a PJ cab.

I bet that's quite tight and punchy. I don't quite understand how they would be 'better' than a simple 2 x 110 or especially 2 x 112 stack though, which would probably be higher SPL, more bottom, lighter, and less expensive.

That being said, that stack sure looks cool! I look forward to a full review on these in the mag!
 
#968
KJung said:
Those look pretty cool. I would assume they are basically a different take on a 110 cab, given the kind of 'four small drivers roughly equals the output of a 110' sort of thing with the PJ stuff. I guess I would hope the slightly larger speakers would give you a little more oomph than a PJ cab.
Click to expand...

Phil compared the 4x5 to a 1x10, so I'd guess that these are perhaps more comparable to a 1x12.

Tom.
 
#970
tombowlus said:
Phil compared the 4x5 to a 1x10, so I'd guess that these are perhaps more comparable to a 1x12.

Tom.
Click to expand...
Yeah, and based on the fact that they're more comparable in cab air volume to a lot of 112's rather than 110's, and have exactly the same driver radiating area, I'd say this is dead-on.

Thing is, I need to do some comparing to some 112's to confirm some suspicions on "quickness" and tone. Eventually, I'll have a lot more to say about these, but all in good time. :)
 
#971
Vic said:
Yeah, and based on the fact that they're more comparable in cab air volume to a lot of 112's rather than 110's, and have exactly the same driver radiating area, I'd say this is dead-on.

Thing is, I need to do some comparing to some 112's to confirm some suspicions on "quickness" and tone. Eventually, I'll have a lot more to say about these, but all in good time. :)
Click to expand...

Cool. I've never been a fan of these multiple small driver cabs, but they are interesting. In my experience with the LDS 8's, you could get the neo's punchy as heck, but they would go into overextension and compression WAY earlier than a 110, much less a well designed 112. And, once you spec out the xmax, etc. to get some serious low end out of a small driver (i.e., the long throw 8's), you lose everything up top and need to go to a two way or even three way cab (which works great with these little drivers).

I'll look forward to your review to see if/how MB dealt with this!
 
#972
KJung said:
Cool. I've never been a fan of these multiple small driver cabs, but they are interesting. In my experience with the LDS 8's, you could get the neo's punchy as heck, but they would go into overextension and compression WAY earlier than a 110, much less a well designed 112. And, once you spec out the xmax, etc. to get some serious low end out of a small driver (i.e., the long throw 8's), you lose everything up top and need to go to a two way or even three way cab (which works great with these little drivers).

I'll look forward to your review to see if/how MB dealt with this!
Click to expand...
Thanks, and I'm betting you're right, and was already figuring that's why these are two way cabs. I just don't see how anyone could get clean highs from a cone that's moving that much, IMHO. :)
 
#974
Chef said:
There's something wrong with two way/three way cabs?
Click to expand...

No, as you know, with these small drivers, that's a good thing.

Per Vic's comment, when I said two way, I was talking about the long throw type subwoofers combined with the more mid voiced full range drivers, not just the 'woofer tweeter' thing like the MB.

I've always found the 'traditional' full range small speakers (5, 6, or 8's) too thin and ganky (although if you have enough of those 8's like the Henry 8x8, it can sound pretty cool), and that they give up the ghost much earlier than a well made larger driver in my experience. I've similarly found those super hi xmax type small driver designs quite impressive, but only if you have some paper cone mids up top.

Pure IMO there.
 
#975
KJung said:
Yeah, that's kind of what I figured. Interesting design, although, again, I'm trying to figure out the 'why' versus a high quality, lightweight single driver.
Click to expand...

IIRC, the original idea behind the design was a cab that could be paired with the Minimark combo to run it at full power.

Of course its also voiced quite a bit differently then most 1x10's or 1x12's, so some people may be interested in them for that reason. It seems that for $800 a cab, there are a lot of awesome options out there though.
 
#976
Smallequestrian said:
IIRC, the original idea behind the design was a cab that could be paired with the Minimark combo to run it at full power.

Of course its also voiced quite a bit differently then most 1x10's or 1x12's, so some people may be interested in them for that reason. It seems that for $800 a cab, there are a lot of awesome options out there though.
Click to expand...

+1 I guess I can see it as the Minimark extension cab. I'm with you though, for that price of two of them, you could get a Berg AE112 stack and a couple of REALLY good bottles of scotch:D
 
#977
I just bought a 102 CMD, second-hand. What is the best cab to add as a second? I'm thinking of a second cab to add a little roundness to the sound, so would I be better off getting a 151? With the horn or the piezzo? Or maybe the 104? Front or rear horn?
Any advice/opinions appreciated!
 
#978
KJung said:
+1 I guess I can see it as the Minimark extension cab. I'm with you though, for that price of two of them, you could get a Berg AE112 stack and a couple of REALLY good bottles of scotch:D
Click to expand...

or better yet, an HT112ER stack and a bottle of TEQUILA!!!!

And BTW, Alain Caron let slip that they're working on POWERED CABS and a new signature STEREO preamp for him....

ahem....

Only in Canada you say...

and I have some news on the bass front...

I now have to declare that I'm an MTD endorser...new Canadian distributor...I'll be up on their website soon...will send links...

Cheers,
Cameron
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back