• 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.

Schroeder Cabinets ... smart design = very compact ! (regular and lights)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Son of Bovril said:
thanx for the newer mini review troll, it was very helpfull. I think I might just shell out for the 310212...

It will definately beat carrying around an 810 or the like to gigs!

That's funny, because every gig I've had it to, another band had an 8x10 there, and it blew every single one away and they all commented on it's sound and volume. I hope I changed some minds along the way. I was cocky enough and in a mood one night I told a guy "I'd put this up against any 8x10 anyday".
 
I wonder if stacking a 1210 with a 21012 gives close to the same type of sonic characteristics as having a 310212.

Obviously, it's the same number and types of drivers, but not in the same box.

I'd have to no doubt get like an RMX 1850HD so I could drive the two ohm load bridged (or an even bigger amp so you could drive the 21012 with enough power from one of the channels in stereo mode.

That would be interesting because it would be a bit more modular than the 310212. You'd have your practice amp and small gig amp, you'd have your medium to large gig amp with PA support, and then a jumbo rig for outdoors and no PA support type gigs.

I just wonder whether you sacrifice much in the sonic quality.
 
BuffaloBob4343 said:
I wonder if stacking a 1210 with a 21012 gives close to the same type of sonic characteristics as having a 310212.

Obviously, it's the same number and types of drivers, but not in the same box.

I'd have to no doubt get like an RMX 1850HD so I could drive the two ohm load bridged (or an even bigger amp so you could drive the 21012 with enough power from one of the channels in stereo mode.

That would be interesting because it would be a bit more modular than the 310212. You'd have your practice amp and small gig amp, you'd have your medium to large gig amp with PA support, and then a jumbo rig for outdoors and no PA support type gigs.

I just wonder whether you sacrifice much in the sonic quality.
Probably similar, but still somewhat different:
Different interior volumes
Different drivers on flat/slanted baffles
two crossovers/tweeters instead of one of each.

AFAIK, the RMX1850HD is not rated for bridged operation into 2ohm, but I suspect there wouldn't be problems as long as it wasn't pushed hard &/or used in a hot environment -- those cabs are so efficient, the amp should be loafing along 95% of the time.
 
lo-freq said:
Probably similar, but still somewhat different:
Different interior volumes
Different drivers on flat/slanted baffles
two crossovers/tweeters instead of one of each.

AFAIK, the RMX1850HD is not rated for bridged operation into 2ohm, but I suspect there wouldn't be problems as long as it wasn't pushed hard &/or used in a hot environment -- those cabs are so efficient, the amp should be loafing along 95% of the time.
Yeah, I actually misread the manual when I was reading it for my 1450. It said the 1850HD is designated heavy duty (HD) because it is the most suitable for driving 2 Ohm loads for extended periods, but somehow I read that to say that it was for 2 Ohms bridged as well.

Yeah, I think if you wanted to drive a 1210/21012 stack you would want like a PLX 3002 or even a 3402 so you have enough overhead on a per channel basis to drive the 21012.
 
el_Kabong said:
I weighed my 410UL when I got it, it was spot on the spec. So unless my scales are dodgy, don't worry.
Just got my 410UL. Epifani sez 57#, my scale sez 63.5#, anybody weighed a Schroe 410? I wish we had access to the helium balloons the manufacturers apparently use when weighing these things. :rolleyes:

By the way, the 410UL ROXXXXX!!!!!!!
 
tallboybass said:
Just got my 410UL. Epifani sez 57#, my scale sez 63.5#, anybody weighed a Schroe 410? I wish we had access to the helium balloons the manufacturers apparently use when weighing these things. :rolleyes:

By the way, the 410UL ROXXXXX!!!!!!!
Dang! So maybe they are dodgy. That makes me fatter too! :scowl: I'm expecting a schroe 1212 next week, I'll chuck that on my helium powered scale and see wot I get. And I agree, how hard is it to get the weight spec right? It's right up there with correctly counting the number of drivers.
 
Every cab I've owned (Schroeder, EA, Aguilar) has weighed more than the specs say. It's annoying. My Schroeder 1212 weighs in at 58 lbs. If I would have known this before hand I don't know if I would have bought it. I'm glad I did go through with it. It is a very portable 58 lbs and it sounds great.
 
el_Kabong said:
Dang! So maybe they are dodgy. That makes me fatter too! :scowl: I'm expecting a schroe 1212 next week, I'll chuck that on my helium powered scale and see wot I get. And I agree, how hard is it to get the weight spec right? It's right up there with correctly counting the number of drivers.
The variation in weight would be from the differences that different batches of plywood would naturally have.

A reasonable question is, did the manufacturer weigh cabinets from several different batches of plywood and take the average weight as their 'posted' weight or did they just weigh one cab?

Does the manufacturer use the same supplier of plywood that he started with when the 'weight' was first posted?
 
SnoBassMan said:
If you guys are so concerned with weight why not get a nice DI box and spend your cab money on in-ear wireless units.


Or maybe try out another planet with less gravity....that'd do the trick too.
Maybe we're not as buff as you SBM. I had a near fatal motorcycle wreck 5 1/2 years ago that left me unable to lift much weight, so it's a huge factor for me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.