• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Official Barefaced Bass Cab Club

While the BB2 horn may be the best on the market, the tweeter in the SM is no slouch. It's very, very nice. When comparing the two cabs I noticed more difference in the depth and fullness of the low end of the BB2 than I did the high end.

That is good to know as I have a SM arriving in a few weeks (hopefully) having placed an order a number of days ago. Even though I already own a ST, I just can't wait to try out the SM. It will probably replace the ST as I am fairly sure it will give me all the sounds and volume I need. The ST is incredible and way more than I now need. Hopefully I can find another loving home for it somewhere in the UK.
 
That is good to know as I have a SM arriving in a few weeks (hopefully) having placed an order a number of days ago. Even though I already own a ST, I just can't wait to try out the SM. It will probably replace the ST as I am fairly sure it will give me all the sounds and volume I need. The ST is incredible and way more than I now need. Hopefully I can find another loving home for it somewhere in the UK.
I'm debating between replacing my current Speaker Cabinet which is a Mess 4ohm 600 watt 2x 10 that I power with an M9 carbine head, with either a big baby 2 or super twin cabinet from barefaced. Frankly this cabinet that I have services most of my gigging needs as it is a great cab with lots of bottom, volume and good tone, however the 70 pound weight is starting to get to be a little much at 2 in the morning. The specs for the BB2 say it will take up to 800 watts fairly safely at 8 ohms, so I'm wondering if I upgrade my amplification to something that'll send somewhere between 6 to 800 watts into the 8 ohm BB2 , if that will serve as a suitable replacement to my Mesa 2x10?
 
I'm debating between replacing my current Speaker Cabinet which is a Mess 4ohm 600 watt 2x 10 that I power with an M9 carbine head, with either a big baby 2 or super twin cabinet from barefaced. Frankly this cabinet that I have services most of my gigging needs as it is a great cab with lots of bottom, volume and good tone, however the 70 pound weight is starting to get to be a little much at 2 in the morning. The specs for the BB2 say it will take up to 800 watts fairly safely at 8 ohms, so I'm wondering if I upgrade my amplification to something that'll send somewhere between 6 to 800 watts into the 8 ohm BB2 , if that will serve as a suitable replacement to my Mesa 2x10?

If you go to a BB2 and keep that head, you should be fine. Moving to an amp rated at 6-800 watts means figuring out how realistic that rating is. I've got three heads now, rated at 700, 800, and 900 watts into 4 ohms. I'd trust the 8 & 9 for loud hams, but that 700 would struggle.

I played an M6 and I've tried the 210 with it. I think you'll be surprised.

IMHO. Ymmv.
 
While the BB2 horn may be the best on the market, the tweeter in the SM is no slouch. It's very, very nice. When comparing the two cabs I noticed more difference in the depth and fullness of the low end of the BB2 than I did the high end.
Does it have the same "no holes between tweeter and woofer" sound as the BB2?

@alexclaber ... Any plans to update the SuperMidget?
 
Does it have the same "no holes between tweeter and woofer" sound as the BB2?

They are pretty similar. The driver of the BB2 is nicer, but the coss-over design is the same (AFAIK). The SM doesn't have the same depth of lows, but the tone is otherwise comparable. I suppose the BB2 compression driver has "nicer" highs and probably better dispersion. At close range, though, they will seem pretty similar. I've owned both, but not at the same time.
 
Does it have the same "no holes between tweeter and woofer" sound as the BB2?

No holes. And I agree with Monster that the tone is comparable to the BB2. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that, aside from the extra depth and volume that the larger BB2 cab provides, they sound the same to me. The SM feels closer in size to a One10 than it does to a BB2 and, like the One10, it's astounding in what the SM puts out in volume and tone for its small size and low weight.
 
They are pretty similar. The driver of the BB2 is nicer, but the coss-over design is the same (AFAIK). The SM doesn't have the same depth of lows, but the tone is otherwise comparable. I suppose the BB2 compression driver has "nicer" highs and probably better dispersion. At close range, though, they will seem pretty similar. I've owned both, but not at the same time.

aren't they the same driver ?
 
Any views on the two cabs would be great too if no one has owned both.

I have just moved from an all tube head/810 cab setup. I was using another bands backline on my most recent tour using an Orange 810 which sounded great with the D800+. Had my eye on a Barefaced for a while so any comparisons to the Orange would be greatly appreciated too.
 
No holes. And I agree with Monster that the tone is comparable to the BB2. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that, aside from the extra depth and volume that the larger BB2 cab provides, they sound the same to me. The SM feels closer in size to a One10 than it does to a BB2 and, like the One10, it's astounding in what the SM puts out in volume and tone for its small size and low weight.
Thanks for the help...you're not helping me resist the allure of the SM though! ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1954bassman
If you go to a BB2 and keep that head, you should be fine. Moving to an amp rated at 6-800 watts means figuring out how realistic that rating is. I've got three heads now, rated at 700, 800, and 900 watts into 4 ohms. I'd trust the 8 & 9 for loud hams, but that 700 would struggle.

I played an M6 and I've tried the 210 with it. I think you'll be surprised.

IMHO. Ymmv.
Oh ok cool, the M9 only puts out 380 watts into 8ohms, so that's why I was thinking, since the BB2 is an 8 ohm cab, I might need some more wattage to have that clean head room if I was to replace my 210 with the single 12 BB2.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tallboybass
Oh ok cool, the M9 only puts out 380 watts into 8ohms, so that's why I was thinking, since the BB2 is an 8 ohm cab, I might need some more wattage to have that clean head room if I was to replace my 210 with the single 12 BB2.
Do you use the tweeter on your 210? If not, I would highly recommend the SuperTwin. 4 ohms and your amp will run out of power before the speaker even gets awake!
 
Oh ok cool, the M9 only puts out 380 watts into 8ohms, so that's why I was thinking, since the BB2 is an 8 ohm cab, I might need some more wattage to have that clean head room if I was to replace my 210 with the single 12 BB2.

You might, but I doubt it. Of course, everyone has different goals, rigs, techniques, and settings. The M9 is a pretty robust head. I hate to bring up the old "tube vs. solid state vs. class D" discussion but not all watts are rated equally. A watt is a watt, but everyone seems to measure with a different ruler.
 
They are pretty similar. The driver of the BB2 is nicer, but the coss-over design is the same (AFAIK). The SM doesn't have the same depth of lows, but the tone is otherwise comparable. I suppose the BB2 compression driver has "nicer" highs and probably better dispersion. At close range, though, they will seem pretty similar. I've owned both, but not at the same time.
I havent tried the SM but own two BB2's. I would go straight to the BB2 and skip the SM. The BB2 has thunderous lows, and clean highs. It's BF flagship cab.
 
I havent tried the SM but own two BB2's. I would go straight to the BB2 and skip the SM. The BB2 has thunderous lows, and clean highs. It's BF flagship cab.

Depends if you're going to a gun fight or a knife fight. If you can afford it, the BB2 is nice. Better to have it and not need it. However, I could almost be satisfied with a SM.
 

Latest posts