• 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.

New Cab Day - Genzler BA 12-3

#21
walterw said:
at over $3000 for three little 1x12 cabs, "wow" is right!

<snip>
also, what about a matching "sub" cab that was identical specs but without the array in front of the 12 (and without the big price tag)?
Click to expand...

not quite $3K... but certainly not inexpensive. While three cabs would look cool, I can't imagine any setting I'd play in where I'd need three... plus my head only goes to 4 ohms anyway so 3 isn't an option.

I played the cab with the church band again this morning. Last Sunday, our normal sound guy was not there. He was there today. During soundcheck he said that he missed the bottom end of the Acme. The rest of the band all said again that they heard the bass much better and really preferred the Genzler. I told him that I could either raise the EQ of the bass or push the bass boost but he preferred to take a line out to the PA and added a bit of bottom end via the FOH subs. The sub that walterw mentions might have made the sound man happy or if I put the cab on the floor rather than the stand the bottom end may have been more what the sound guy was looking for. I think it could be a good addition for Genzler to consider... but I don't know ho that would impact the overall balance of an excellent product.

Playing the cab the second week I really appreciated how tight it sounds, the definition, and strong mids. It certainly makes my mistakes stand out a bit more but also makes it easier to play in tune on my fretless. I am very pleased with the choice and looking forward to getting to know the cab a bit better.

I went so far as to trade the Acme away this past week so I am committed :thumbsup:
 
  • Like
Reactions: iceboxbass
#24
Djadja said:
it is a small room (about 100 seats) and we play at a relatively low volume so going through the PA really isn't necessary.
Click to expand...
maybe it's the loud rock musician in me, but if there are subs and the kick drum is going through 'em then i wanna be in there too!

in fact, that may be the better way to go anyway, especially for lower volume stuff; aim this nice little hi-fi cab up at your ears for pitch recognition without a lot of stage volume, let the PA carry the actual low end out front.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TAZ, MikeXbass and iceboxbass
#25
walterw said:
... i find myself wishing that the thing had been made with the box arrayed "vertical" to get at least some height out of it. ...
Click to expand...
+1. My two current 12s are only about 15-16 inches square in stage footprint but much taller so the stack of two gets the top cab up where I need it to be. Most important though is the need to minimize my stage footprint, so as much as I want these cabs, I'll have to wait and see if GA comes out with a taller, slimmer version.
 
#26
bobcruz said:
+1. My two current 12s are only about 15-16 inches square in stage footprint but much taller so the stack of two gets the top cab up where I need it to be. Most important though is the need to minimize my stage footprint, so as much as I want these cabs, I'll have to wait and see if GA comes out with a taller, slimmer version.
Click to expand...

The prohibitive factor for a taller/slimmer design is the Array column itself. Using the four 3" drivers is the perfect match to the LF driver in impedance, output and physical size. The 3" drivers must be aligned in a dense array which creates an approximate 15" tall column. And it is critical that if you are to stack 2 BA12-3 cabs on top of each other that the array's must be aligned as close to each other as physically possible.
These where the critical design factors that led to the current footprint of the cabinet.
While we know there is not one cabinet shape that works for everyone we felt that this was certainly an accepted dimensional design.

As well we are certainly aware of the popularity of 15" drivers and their response characteristics, we've heard from many a BA12-3 user that they are pleasantly surprised with the LF fullness and depth with the 12" driver.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dcbeeman, Swordsman3311, phishaholik and 4 others
#27
Jeff Genzler said:
As well we are certainly aware of the popularity of 15" drivers and their response characteristics, we've heard from many a BA12-3 user that they are pleasantly surprised with the LF fullness and depth with the 12" driver.
Click to expand...

True statement. I was one of those users. From my experience, plenty of low end content in the 12-3 configuration and I am not sure a 15" configuration could improve on what Jeff has already accomplished in the BA12-3. And two of the BA12-3s can cover pretty much anything most bass players would encounter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bebass, murphy, iceboxbass and 1 other person
#28
bebass said:
Someone posted in another thread a pic with 3 modern 12's and I have begun to think that this combination is the ultimate size/weight/sound for bass cabs.
In general, from my experience with modern 12's two will give plenty of volume for most people, even with most any 500 watt amp, and even with some 200 watt amps.
But there is just something about the looks and sound of 3 stacked modern 12's that spells WOW, and it does put one right up there making it SO easy to hear.
I am guilty of doing this for the WOW factor and I mean my personal WOW as much as anyone's WOW that is looking at and hearing them. I like WOW!
Click to expand...
You and me both!:thumbsup::woot: I will be ordering a third one if all goes well.:) First the Demo!
 
  • Like
Reactions: bebass
#29
Jeff Genzler said:
The prohibitive factor for a taller/slimmer design is the Array column itself. Using the four 3" drivers is the perfect match to the LF driver in impedance, output and physical size. The 3" drivers must be aligned in a dense array which creates an approximate 15" tall column. And it is critical that if you are to stack 2 BA12-3 cabs on top of each other that the array's must be aligned as close to each other as physically possible.
These where the critical design factors that led to the current footprint of the cabinet.
While we know there is not one cabinet shape that works for everyone we felt that this was certainly an accepted dimensional design. ...
Click to expand...
Exactly what I thought were the reasons for the cab's shape. In my mind, a taller cabinet would work if the woofer and HF array were at the top of the cab so that a second cab could be stacked inverted and the drivers would align. It would probably look weird but a cloth grill would cover that. (Goodbye cool factor seeing the array exposed behind a metal grill...oh well.) Anyway, it would work for me. Bob
 
#31
Saluki said:
True statement. I was one of those users. From my experience, plenty of low end content in the 12-3 configuration and I am not sure a 15" configuration could improve on what Jeff has already accomplished in the BA12-3. And two of the BA12-3s can cover pretty much anything most bass players would encounter.
Click to expand...
I was a die-hard 15" cab person and used one to four for my gigs. The newer modern 12"speakers have made a convert of me; this time last year I would have told someone they were crazy if they asked me to give up my 15's.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iceboxbass and rufus.K
#32
bobcruz said:
Exactly what I thought were the reasons for the cab's shape. In my mind, a taller cabinet would work if the woofer and HF array were at the top of the cab so that a second cab could be stacked inverted and the drivers would align. It would probably look weird but a cloth grill would cover that. (Goodbye cool factor seeing the array exposed behind a metal grill...oh well.) Anyway, it would work for me. Bob
Click to expand...
More challenges. Then the array would not be in the same linear plane as the woofer and my OCD would never allow the top cab to be stacked upside-down.
What do you do with the brand logo?
How do you let the user know this is how it is designed to work?
See my challenges?

Now if you go and tell me that there is no Santa Claus I just may wing out;).

I'd better take a pill.

Have a great Holiday Celebration everyone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wave rider, Swordsman3311, iceboxbass and 8 others
#33
Jeff Genzler said:
...
Now if you go and tell me that there is no Santa Claus I just may wing out;).
...
Click to expand...
Well, I will tell you he is too fat to fit down the chimney...at least he is in my house.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: iceboxbass
#34
Yup. Here's another idea--is a single HF array loud enough to keep up with two woofers? If possible, the single array could have a pad for 1 cabinet, switchable to no pad for use with a second woofer only cabinet. No stacking or logo issues! But I suspect those little 3's are at their limits right now keeping up with a single woofer, so...I'm unlikely to see a taller array cab.
 
#38
nostatic said:
Just to be clear - it is CDO. It should be in alphabetical order.

No, it MUST be in alphabetical order...
Click to expand...

It's actually "COO" (or, strictly alphabetically, compulsive obsessive order) - nothing "disorderly" about this condition;).

Back on topic: I've played a 2 410 stack for a fair amount of time and recently purchased 2 BA12-3. I miss exactly nothing, and actually think that I gained clarity, definition and bass response. Amazing cab by itself, 2 are more than two (synergy, you know). And just as importantly the character of the cabs doesn't change with different SPLs - they just sound the same. Soft at home when learning new stuff, nicely controlled on a small stage, or last week flat-out at rehearsal -not sure why we had to be so loud but I was pushing hard, and you know what? The BA12-3s said: "is that all you have?"

I am mightily impressed.

Regards,
Michael
 
  • Like
Reactions: bass_69, John D Harris, Djadja and 3 others

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back