Mesa Subway 112 vs. Barefaced Super Midget

[Al Kraft]

This is where I guess we all hear things a bit differently and use descriptors that anything but precisely quantitative. I probably would not describe the cab itself as woolly, but I would describe it as rich and full sounding. However, I can see where having that richness in overtones and harmonics in a cab that you are comparing to one that sounds like it's voiced to focus more on the fundamental note with an almost sterile accuracy might lead one to use that term.

For me wooliness or hair is something I would typically attribute to the sound of a head or a pedal/effect. I associate the term with a characteristic most often seen in tube powered MI amplification equipment that is being pushed a bit (beyond where it is staying totally clean or "wire with gain"/more SS sounding). I would say that the SW cabs will reproduce that woolly artifact well as they seem to be able to fully reproduce the nuances of the signal you send them. In contrast, some cabs are very voiced and will overly accentuate or attenuate certain frequencies, or tend to sound very one dimensional or sterile - just like some amps.

Truth in advertising - I'm mostly a clean player using SS gear (some with a tube/tubes in the pre-amp) and use very few effects, and then only occasionally. So it's fair to say I'm not an expert when it comes to a woolly tone. Based on that, my representations here may not reflect how full tube amp and/or heavy effect users would describe the term.

 

[BadExample]

Actually I like it for two reasons. First, for many of my needs the 115 has enough big bass and volume to carry the day. I find it to be an excellent full range cab with a very robust lower range and solid mids.

Impossible according to TB folklore.

Yes, the entire Subway cabinet was designed to work together from the very beginning.

Impossible according to TB folklore.

Interesting

Impossible according to TB folklore.

 

[Al Kraft]

Someone was asking about tweeter settings...for me I run mine at around -2 dB and it sounds plenty present without getting too crispy/crunchy...I play roundwounds with a pick and it can get pretty in-your-face.

I'm a finger style, round wound player and don't have that edge you get with pick to tame...so I think my setting between normal and -2dB creates a similar voicing to what you're using. Your description of the cab being plenty present and not getting crispy with just a shade off that top end is exactly what I hear!!

A single 212 configuration would only have one horn in the mix and if there was a SW212 , I might run the control straight up if the voicing was identical to the SW112. While I am not big on lots of treble in my tone, the D-800 is not a bright head and I think the cab provides an opportunity to compensate when you're in a room that needs more air and upper end in the bass notes by offering good capability in that higher frequency range.

 

[honeyiscool]

Yep, here it is. I feel blessed to to able to test these cabs first hand, as they are some of the best out there. I have used the Subway cabs for about a year now, and was recently lucky enough to get a Super Midget for testing as I've always been curious about Barefaced cabs. And more importantly, I'm always looking to lighten the load.

So how do they sound???
Firstly, I'll just say it. I fully expected the Super Midget to be more efficient and have greater output than the Mesa but that is simply not the case. The Subway 112 has quite a bit more output, goes deeper, and sounds fuller overall. No, I'm not dissing on the Super Midget..in fact I really really like it. I think it will whoop up on most any other production 1x12 cabinet on the market. But the Subway just has 'that sound'. The Midget has a very clean, somewhat clinical sound but takes to EQ very well so you can shape it pretty well to your liking. The Subway has a deeper, more throaty sound with a wooliness that's just beautiful. The Subway just sings and has an overall warmer, thicker sound. The Midget has a cleaner, flatter sound that pretty much delivers what you put into it with no extra beef like the Subway, and I do believe that was one of the main design goals of the Barefaced 12" cabs so it definitely delivers there.

Do they fart???
Well I was able to make them both reach their limits at about the point on the volume knob of my Mesa Subway amp so that's pretty much a wash although the Subway was producing more output when it got it's limit. The Subway cab could also withstand just a hair more low end boost before fartation set it.

Which one is made better??
That's a tough question as there are other things to consider. The quick answer is that the Subway is constructed better. It's more solid. It's thicker. BUT it weighs more, it's bigger, and it's not as easy to carry. The Midget is much smaller, much lighter, and is nothing to carry. I think my lunch box weighs more and is harder to carry than the Super Midget. The Mesa is covered in tolex, the Midget in Duratex which can be sharp on the knuckles. The Mesa is solid as a rock, the Midget is made from a thinner wood which I can physically bend by pushing on it with my hand which gives me concerns about breakage in the unbraced corners where the ports are. So if you want rock solid and don't care about weight (although it's only like 30 pounds) and don't mind that the odd shape is kinda hard to carry....Subway wins. If you want super lightweight that your Granny can carry to the gig for you, Barefaced wins...just don't drop it on the corners. Also if I were to buy a BF cab I would get the steel grill, as the plastic logo glued to the cloth makes a fluttering sound when the air starts moving.

So which one should I get??
Again, tough question. BOTH would be ideal. The Subway gives that sound I have in my head for bass guitar right out of the box..thick, full, deep, but still quick and articulate. The Midget might take some EQing to get your sound but will never have that wooliness. If you want that, you may want to look at the Barefaced 10" cabinets. Overall the Subway is louder than the Midget. Both have fantastic tweeters. If you're in the USA, the Subway will run $750. The Super Midget is $975.

TLDR version please???
The Subway sounds better to me, is cheaper, and is more solid. But it's bigger, heavier, and odd to carry.
The Super Midget has amazing output for it's size and will kill just about any other 1x12 out there. It weighs almost literally nothing and is a pleasure to carry.
It's impossible to go wrong with either of these cabs, you just need to decide what factors are more important to you.

View attachment 2989636

Man, is that SM tiny. I thought my SC was small.

 

[chris_b]

"Woolly" usually means a less clear sound.

Neither is a good thing or bad thing, but either can be a bad thing if that's not the sound you want. Woolly doesn't only come from the cab, but if you want to and discover you can't dial out either sound than you bought the wrong gear.

IMO clear is the more versatile sound to work with.

 

[ole Jason]

Any of you guys compared an Aguilar GS112 to the Subway 112? I'm pretty happy with two Aguilars but always curious about what else is out there.

I tested out the BF cab before mmbongo and pretty much agree with his assessment. I think it is a great cab but at $900+ it is a tough sell for me. I'd only go for it if ultra portability was a necessity... I could see it being a great option for guys who only travel by subway or bus. It is the best ultralight cab I've tried though.

 

[Al Kraft]

Any of you guys compared an Aguilar GS112 to the Subway 112? I'm pretty happy with two Aguilars but always curious about what else is out there.

A number of years back I played on the GS112 once and was specifically comparing it to the DB112 and some Berg 112 Cabs. I walked out with a Berg CN212 so that may tell you something about what tonal profile/voicing appeals to me (i.e. my built-in bias).

I like the GS series better than the DB even though I think they share a lot of common internal parts. The GS seemed to have more a scooped tone with emphasis on low end performance and upper end brightness. You could EQ your way to a more balanced sound, but I like the more inherently balanced and smoother/fuller mids in the SW112. With some EQ I suspect the SW112 will get as deep feeling as the GS112, albeit with a rounder and less low focused character - remember it was years ago that I played that GS112.

The DB series felt very mid intense to me and bordered on honky at times. The cab build on the Aguilars seemed quite nice and I think the GS had a metal grill which I prefer for transport and storage protection. Build quality on everything I've ever seen from Mesa (including the SW cabs) is top drawer with a solid, heavy duty feel.

Given that the GS series seems to be discontinued, I think your options would be NOS or buying used. The SW112 is the better cab for me and has a lot of tonal richness and a smooth transition from mids to highs that I always associate with Bergantino cabs. With EQ and some power the SW112 will get as deep and loud as you can expect from a single 12 IMO. As for warranty, Mesa cannot be beat IME and the lighter weight on the SW112 is nice bonus.

 

[honeyiscool]

(You know what I hated, though, is the Aguilar SL112.)

 

[Daniel Piper]

Cool thread.

I haven't been able to banish the thought of a SW15 x2 and d800+ rig for quite some time now.

Love this new gen of Mesa gear (loved the previous gen too)

So...thanks I guess...for validating my rig fantasies.

 

[Al Kraft]

(You know what I hated, though, is the Aguilar SL112.)

Funny you mention it because I also auditioned that cab on the same trip. Against the competition it felt thin and weak to me, especially in the lower register. Two of them together was a huge improvement, but for my purposes, one alone would have been very unsatisfying.

I expected to be impressed and wanted to like that cab. I think it would be great for many folks, but coming from Mesa PH cabs fed by Carbine heads and the WA Scout combo as my small rig, I had set my expectations way too high (and in retrospect I'll admit unreasonably so). At that point in time my lightest weight gear included two GK Neo 112 II cabs which to me were much better balanced and full/thick sounding including down low.

IMO the SW112 and SL112 isn't even comparing like products except speaker diameter - the SW pretty much walks away with top honors across the board in terms of meeting my playing needs. That said, I can see the SL112 (especially two of them) working quite nicely for many bass players I know. While the SW112 (or two) could cover that same range of capability, it would have more to offer for heavier rock applications.

 

[Plutonium244]

I bought an SL112, based on weight and good reviews, and found it less than satisfying; it just sounded a bit hollow (but was using it for lower vol gigs). However I doubled down and bought a second SL112, and it really sounded much, much better with 2 not just in volume but in tonal quality. I do use that rig, depending on the room. There's one in particular where that stack and an Aggie TH350 are the only rig that sound good there.

Two SL112's are about five times better than one. Thus I am in the rare demographic of finding one SL 112 to be underwhelming, but still recommending them (in a pair). Nevertheless, for sure, a Barefaced SM or BB2 destroys the SL112, IMO.

 

[honeyiscool]

Funny you mention it because I also auditioned that cab on the same trip. Against the competition it felt thin and weak to me, especially in the lower register. Two of them together was a huge improvement, but for my purposes, one alone would have been very unsatisfying.

I expected to be impressed and wanted to like that cab. I think it would be great for many folks, but coming from Mesa PH cabs fed by Carbine heads and the WA Scout combo as my small rig, I had set my expectations way too high (and in retrospect I'll admit unreasonably so). At that point in time my lightest weight gear included two GK Neo 112 II cabs which to me were much better balanced and full/thick sounding including down low.

IMO the SW112 and SL112 isn't even comparing like products except speaker diameter - the SW pretty much walks away with top honors across the board in terms of meeting my playing needs. That said, I can see the SL112 (especially two of them) working quite nicely for many bass players I know. While the SW112 (or two) could cover that same range of capability, it would have more to offer for heavier rock applications.

Yeah, absolutely. The SL112 is one of those products where you wonder who designed it, did anybody actually play it, and did they even try other 1x12s?

They're light, but they're bulky to carry, so they're not as convenient as they could be. They don't even reach my knees, so even a stack of two is blasting at my thighs, and installing feet on its side just to make the most obvious modification ever shouldn't be necessary on a $749 cab. Side handle's cool, I guess, but the padded slip-on cover was designed by a 3 year old because when you're actually carrying the thing, the cover is on its side so you can't pick it up or set it down without rotating it first. Seriously. It's the worst first party cover ever. Cabs have little to no oomph to speak of, either.

I know nothing about cab design, but what's the point of a speaker cabinet shaped to be short, deep, and wide? Like really? And 250W handling? Really? That's it? That cab turned me off of expensive lightweight 1x12s for a couple years before I realized that others do it better.

 

[Al Kraft]

Two SL112's are about five times better than one. Thus I am in the rare demographic of finding one SL 112 to be underwhelming, but still recommending them (in a pair).

I'm in that same rare demographic! I also agree that the TH 350 (or in my case TH500) sounded better with those cabs than say a GK MB500. My only hesitation on an enthusiastic recommendation for two is cost versus capability when compared to what other cabs can deliver.

 

[Daniel Piper]

Men, lets be honest- 2 of any speaker sounds better than 1.

 

[honeyiscool]

I'm in that same rare demographic! I also agree that the TH 350 (or in my case TH500) sounded better with those cabs than say a GK MB500. My only hesitation on an enthusiastic recommendation for two is cost versus capability when compared to what other cabs can deliver.

I mean, I'm not a fan of the form factor either (short, wide, and deep) and it's quite a bit heavier, but the Mesa can pump 400 watts at the same price and you get a cover with it. I just so much prefer the 1x12 cabs that put more of the volume into the height and less into the width and depth. That way, even a single one reaches a decent height and then a second one gets you a 4 foot stack. Stacking two short cabs makes it sound bigger, sure, but then you have a stack that's not even 3 feet tall.

I mean, what's a better use of $1500? A stack of SL112s or a Barefaced Big Baby and some money left over? At least the Big Baby can handle a 800 watt head. The stack of SL112s says, nah.

(Like I understand that this thread pretty much concluded that the Subway sounds better than the Super Midget, and that's lovely, but I hope readers understand something, that the Midget is a cab that is designed to be the ultimate tiny cab in terms of weight and size with reasonable tone and versatility, and that even the manufacturer says that the Compact and the Baby are much better sounding cabs.)

Men, lets be honest- 2 of any speaker sounds better than 1.

I'd rather have 1 really good speaker than 2 mediocre ones.

 

[Tim1]

To be fair to Barefaced, and since you say that the Subway " goes deeper, and sounds fuller overall", you may have been better off comparing the Subway 112 with the Barefaced One 10 which has a baked-in character which you could well prefer to the Super Midget. This is why Barefaced have the two speaker sizes in their range. I must be honest here and declare that I have several Barefaced ten cabs which match wonderfully with the Subway D800+.
Mind you, after reading this I am also very keen to try a Subway cab myself, not always easy to do in New Zealand unfortunately.

 

[Plutonium244]

Men, lets be honest- 2 of any speaker sounds better than 1.

Yes, but somehow, it's more pronounced with these Aguilar SL 112 cabs... I'd expect 2 cabs of any kind to be twice as good or slightly better-- 2.5x?-- than one. These are, like, five times better so that 2 of them compete with two of any other; but one of these is not, often, as good, as one of any other, IMO.

That said, Barefaced for the win. One SM or BB2 slays one SL112. Two of either 12" Barefaced cab = still considerably better than 2 SL112, IMO. They're just that good. But two SL112's is no slouch.

I too would like to try the Subway cabs, though. People seem to like them. Happy with what I have but there are quite of few really nice cabs out there today.

 

[MrLenny1]

Fartation ? New technical spec ? lol

 

[Wasnex]

"Woolly" usually means a less clear sound.

I usually take the term to mean lacking detail and definition...as if a wool blanket where thrown over the speakers. I usually equate wooly in the low end to mean boomy, loose, and unfocused. Kinda the opposite of tight and punchy.

IMHO, the quality is a function of both the amp and the speaker and sort of a dominant trait. I.E. if either the amp or speaker is overly wooly in the low end, you're not going to get a tight and punchy sound.

 

[Wasnex]

Men, lets be honest- 2 of any speaker sounds better than 1.

Respectfully, I don't agree. Two speakers may be louder and produce more lows, but generally the resultant comb filtering and narrowing of the dispersion pattern significantly degrades the overall sound. I accept that you preferences are different than mine so, YMMV.