• 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.

Mike Arnopol MAS 112 vs. Bodai 28

#21
Mike Arnopol said:
Hey Tom---are you in Chicago? You should stop over---I'm in Wilmette.
Ok
First---dynamic capabilities
The amount of air moved (Vd) is a good indicator of maximum volume
The Vd of the 28 is around 700 cc's (nearly 900 with a good HPF)
The Vd of the MAS112 is around 1000 cc's . The B28 is indeed the most balanced speaker I make. Great Mid to upper bass punch with a bit more weight in the mid to upper bass. In comparison to the 112 it is a bit warmer but not too bloomy or romantic.
The MAS112 is crazy punchy. More pop in the mid to upper bass. Strong mid to lower bass, but less than the 28. More efficient by 3 to 4db. Vd specs on the two cabs is similar, in real world situations the 112 goes a lot louder
While the Vd's are close, the Xlim (the actual limit when the coil reaches it's maximum excursion before hitting the backplate or the limit of the forward excursion of the spider) is greater on the 112.
What this means is that while the linear controlled maximum excursion is a bit higher on the 112 ( the point where distortion rises due to losing linear cone control) the Xlim (the point where mechanical excursion is limited by the end of coil travel) is much higher with the 112. So----while the 28 is close to the 112 as far as low distortion linear excursion, in terms of excursion to failure is much higher on the 112.
Now--with the 8's----one of the reasons the 8's will hit the wall is that in order to get the extension and excursion capabilities of my 8 we went with a very compliant surround. There are two points as far as the damping (control over cone movement). One is mechanical. That involves all aspects of surround and spider. The other is electrical. This means the size and strength of the motor system. (magnet size, coil). If we look at the overall damping, or QTS, we have a combination of the mechanical damping and electrical damping. This is a balance between the mechanical Q and electrical Q. I go for a QTS of around .30. Both the 28 and 112 have similar QTS's of around .30. But---the 112 has a bit higher resonant frequency and higher efficiency. It has a stiffer (cloth) surround (more mechanical Q) and less electrical Q (less strong motor assembly by comparison). The stiffer surround and longer Xlim will allow the 112 being played into distortion without slapping the back plate with the coil.
The 8's have a much more compliant surround (less mechanical control) but comparatively more electrical Q (stronger motor by comparison). This means that the surround has less control over cone movement, but the motor has more control.
What this translates to---if you give the 8's subsonic frequencies the amp and motor or the speaker will try their best to reproduce this. Since on the 8's there is less surround control (so as to go lower)---the surround does little to damp cone movement (by design).Those cabs will give more in the 32 to 42 hz region. But---when the amp and speakers see the subsonics---they will do their best to reproduce them. Since we're a bit closer in terms of Xlim and the surround is exerting less control, it is more possible to reach the excursion limit. This means a "splat" sound.
Since the 112 has more physical control and a bigger comparative distance between Xmax and Xlim, the surround will slow things down enough so that, yeah, it can get distorted, but no nasty sounds.
This means--without a good HPF filter set at--let's say 30hz--the 112 will go a lot louder than a 28. More like a 38.
But--if you use a good HPF---the 8's will go lower and with better control. This is because that stronger (comparatively speaking--) motor on the 8's is only trying to reproduce what the 8's are good at. So---with a good HPF, the 28 is just about as loud as a 112, and the 38 is substantially louder.
You can use the 8's without a HPF--just be more careful. I have driven mine to "splat" many times to check and have not damaged the driver.
The MAS112 was designed as a nod to Bergantino 212's. The Berg is a great 212. It is not a hifi sounding speaker. It has a midrange profile that is a standard in high end bass cabs.I just tried to make it to my taste.. Nothing leaves my house unless I would be comfortable using it as a top quality PA cab. The 112 leans more toward a bass guitar sound (more mid-forward) and the 28 is more balanced. Of course the 28 can be eq'd to sound more like the 112.
If you are doubling---the 8's are better. If just EB----the MAS 112 was designed as a practical cab. Decent size and 39#
It wins the HP/to weight ratio in my lineup.
Also, Steve is working like crazy on a very high quality but inexpensive outboard HPF. Should have prototypes soon.

A note to mods---all comparisons are made comparing my cabs to my cabs. That's what the question was
Click to expand...
I learned more about speaker/cab design and considerations from this one post than anything else in the last three to five years (maybe I should read more??)

Thanks for taking the time to spell all this out, Mike!

Raz
 
  • Like
Reactions: 31HZ, MarkA and spiritbass
#22
Has anyone directly compared the new MAS 112 to the old version? I'm interested in dispersion mainly. Wanted to know if the new one is as good as the old one in terms of dispersion.
 
#23
3rdcurve said:
The new MAS112s are 4 ohm only correct? The first version of the MAS112 with eminence driver is still my favorite for electric bass. I am interested in how the newest version compares to the old version. Also interested in how the new MAS 110 compares to the Bodai 110 in the mids and lows as I also had a pair of these that were very nice. The thought of 1 for a kicked back monitor, and 2/3 stacked for a modular rig is quite interesting. The lighter weight is definitely enticing.
Click to expand...
Can someone point me to the ohms on the new cabs ( 10 and 12)? I couldn’t find these on any of the threads or Mike’s Facebook page.
 
#28
jaroh24 said:
Thanks! I’m looking to buy one but I’m not sure if should grab the new version or hunt for the old one.

How long does it take for Mike to build the cabs and ship them out?
Click to expand...

Mine will be a powered MAS112 with the new HPF system. The build time Mike quoted me was about 4 weeks because he was waiting on power modules and HPF circuits. A passive cab would probably be quicker.
I'm going to check with him at the end of the week and see how things are coming along.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jaroh24
#30
Matt Morgan said:
Mine will be a powered MAS112 with the new HPF system. The build time Mike quoted me was about 4 weeks because he was waiting on power modules and HPF circuits. A passive cab would probably be quicker.
I'm going to check with him at the end of the week and see how things are coming along.
Click to expand...
I called Mike today and he said the dispersion should be the same in the old and new MAS 112. The biggest changes are in the actual tone in the cab and the weight. I think I'll be picking up a new MAS 112 soon!
 
  • Like
Reactions: kesslari, eff-clef, wave rider and 1 other person
#35
Sorry guys---lots of new technology to be implemented. Today I should be finalizing the HPF. Everything else is in place. Matt's will ship early next week. It totally kicked my butt trying to fit everything into the 18's.
BTW---I misspoke. The new 112 definitely has better dispersion than the original. Those weird cutouts really improve dispersion. The relief on the top helps shoot some of the sound up toward the player. The reliefs on either side make the midrange more open and less boxy.
 
#39
Matt's is shipping today. It's been very challenging implementing the HPF but I was up late last night and got everything working perfectly. It took so long becaause it was utilizing the new Pascal amp, the custom input boards. combo switch to turn on the power and engage the amp-to-speaker. When turned off it behaves like a passive cab. Then the extension speaker jack functions as a passive input. Very nice Bournes volume pot. 24db/ octave HPF set at just under 30hz. The "knee" has to be set a bit lower than the HPF frequency because the slope actually starts a bit above the target frequency. It's set so that no attenuation is noticeable down to open B. I think that you get about 3db more output on the E and B strings with the HPF. That's like adding a second speaker. This cab hits wickedly hard.

Getting all of this stuff working and integrating together was extremely challenging and put me more than 2 weeks behind. I'm not worried about durability in the field---everything is quite solid. Lots of hot melt stabilizing components. It was just really hard getting impedances and levels matched. All is good now and I'll be getting at least one cab a day out. I've got six cabs ready to go except for the HPF. Now they'll go out. I told the guys that I could ship without the HPF and then pay for their cabs to be sent back to have it installed. They all wanted to wait. Now all will have it.

I know that things are late but I appreciate everyone's patience---this is a bunch of changes and new technology and it's just me doing all of the assembly and testing. I have to admit--it was harder than I had expected, but all is now good.Sometimes it takes a little extra time to do this. I test the crap out of stuff and subject it to transients and volume levels that you won't likley see.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 31HZ, wave rider and spiritbass

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back