Schroeder 1212Light... thoughts?

[KJung]

Larry,

I've posted on this issure a few times, but here it goes again!

As one who very much likes the Schroeders, I'm the last to say that they are even sounding. There are many small cabs that IMO have a stronger low end extension and a somewhat more balanced frequency response to my ear... the Epi210UL, the Acme B210, the BergHt210S, the EA NL210, etc.

However.... I've never found any of these more neutrally voiced small cabs (the word 'small' is key) to move enough air on a moderately loud gig to get the job done. I think that IS partly due to the 'true' low end extension that results from the more 'traditional' tuning of those small cabs.

As you know, the beauty of the small Schroeders is that Jorg has somehow 'optimized' the frequency tuning of those cabs to provide enough bottom to sound good, but not so much to suck power and 'overwhelm' a small box like most other small cabs I've owned.

If I was playing at relatively low volumes OR I didn't mind hauling around a heavier and larger cab for the situations in which I use my 1212L, quite frankly, I would probably be using a different box. However, (and this is not an IMO... maybe more of an IME, based on LOTS of E with small cabs), there is no other small box that is as small and light as the 1212L that can put out the usable volume and 'gig appropriate' tone.

The cool thing is, now with the 'L' cabs out, if someone is looking for more 'traditional' low end extension, the 410L and especially the 21012L will put out as much 'true bottom' as literally any other cab I've ever played... and they still only weigh around 60 pounds are are only 16 inches deep.

So again, I wouldn't take some saying that the low end is not what they require as necessarily a negative on the medium Schroeders... they are what they are and do what they do.

Quite frankly, since not many have heard the 'L's yet, there will be at least a few who feel this way about the 1210R's that will be very pleasantly surprised when they try a 1212L... same size as the 1210R, much lighter, more bottom, more upper mids, smoother treble....

As posted a while back, I had the pleasure of hearing my 1212L out front a while back with a moderately loud band, and it was truly amazing, given that it's smaller than most 210's.

 

[Larry Kaye]

what you're saying (I hate to admit it) again makes perfect sense. I have to agree with you in that the cabinets I mentioned either were very flat responding (EA's) and/or mid scooped-ish like SWR, my 2x8 LDS's (which I understand they're now offering a 3 way 4x8 neo that have reportably much more mids and punch than my 2x8's did) and I forgot the AGuilar GS112 I had too, didn't have enough "perceived" volume and cutting enough tone (probably the other side of the same coin?) to handle most of my moderate volume bar gigs or a regular wedding gig in a decent sized room. The 1210can and does.

I'm just thinking that everyone's got their own priorities and even though I've been playing extended range 5 and/or 6 string basses for over 18 years now, my priority has never been whether the fundamental falls off. My style is not such where I camp out on the extra notes on the low B string too often anyway. I tend to use the B string's low notes on the end of tunes, occasionally during the tune if the recording tends to use it, kinda in and out of there. I'll use the B string at the 5 th fret and above so I don't HAVE to do big jumps like on the octave pedalling in September. I'll use the A on the 10th fret of the B String instead of open A sometimes or when we're playing Pretty Woman or Same old song when the band I'm in played it in A, I could play the entire tune in position without using any open strings.

Just gives me more playing choices rather than concerning myself with yet another tonal characteristic to worry about, I don't put much if any importance on the roll off, but rather emphasize punch and clarity + the natural cut through that the 1210R for me seems to have. It may turn out that after I play through the entire L line that my preference will remain with the small r or go to a 1212L or a medium cabinet.

What's nice is that all the choices are reasonably priced when looking at it as a single cab solution, and the entire L line is extremely shleppable. The entire R line bucks vs volume is quite attractive, and weightwise, can be reasonable for the volume ya get, tone of course being in the ears of the beholder in either case.

See ya.

Larry

 

[jokerjkny]

i had a 1210L, and truth be told, it didnt feel like anything close to 46 lbs. on the website.

BUT, jorg assured me that the new versions of the "light" line will be as light as he's ever made them.

 

[KJung]

i had a 1210L, and truth be told, it didnt feel like anything close to 46 lbs. on the website.

BUT, jorg assured me that the new versions of the "light" line will be as light as he's ever made them.

My 1212L weighs 42 pounds. The weights are accurate on the site. However, quite a while ago, the weights for the 'R' versions on the site were low versus what they really weighed. That was fixed a number of months ago.

I wonder if you were shipped an 'R' by mistake, since the 1210R weighs about 55 pounds?

 

[KJung]

I have *actually weighed mine*.

Looks like you and I are the 'weight police' today

However, it is kind of strange... both the DB750 and Heart Rock are listed as weighing 43 pounds. In indirect comparisons, the Heart Rock seems significantly lighter to me, and Munji recently posted that he picked them up side by side and found the Ag quite a bit heavier. So, who knows!

 

[burk48237]

Looks like you and I are the 'weight police' today

However, it is kind of strange... both the DB750 and Heart Rock are listed as weighing 43 pounds. In indirect comparisons, the Heart Rock seems significantly lighter to me, and Munji recently posted that he picked them up side by side and found the Ag quite a bit heavier. So, who knows!

It may just be how it's "balanced". I have picked up Kens Heart Rock (in an SKB rack) and it "feels" significantly lighter too me. I know of at least half a dozen bass players who have sold the big Aggie because it was to burdensome to haul around. It is a GREAT head, but I don't need that much headroom, most of my big gigs have PA support. But if it works for you, cool, I do feel that people should know BEFORE they buy that it is not the easiest 40+ lbs. to schlep around.

 

[KJung]

The DB750 is spec'd at 46 lbs, per the manual, and that's what mine weighs. The spec on the product page of the Aguilar website is incorrect, as far as I can tell and per the manual. I doubt that 3 lbs is the cause of this controversy though.

Munji is prone to exaggeration, but if he says it's true then perhaps Glockenklang found a way to make a given weight feel lighter. If anyone could do it, it'd be them.

I think a lot can have to do with the handles (type, size) and where the bulk of the weight is positioned compared to the handles along with the size of the thing. When moving anything, it's not so much the weight but the size and distribution of the weight vs. the handles.

A 100 lb. 1 ft. cube with a fantastic handle will be much easier to lift and move than a 25 lb 4 ft. cube with all the weight put into one of the corners furthest from you.

So, it is perhaps meaningful to say that it's an awkward 46 lbs to carry. Make that 56 lbs ++ with typical racks (54 lbs total in my case, with Aguilar rack bag). Said that, I work out with 35 lb bells and carry a lot of different amps both big and small and the Aguilar feels about how it should to me, and I started off with a serious bias against the weight of the amp.

That's all I can say about that. Too bad it's not a DB750 thread so won't be of much help to anyone. Apologies V'bass.

+1 Sorry for the derail V!

 

[::::BASSIST::::]

No worries guys. De-railments are educational too!