1. Please take 30 seconds to register your free account to remove most ads, post topics, make friends, earn reward points at our store, and more!  
    TalkBass.com has been uniting the low end since 1998.  Join us! :)

Schroeder/thunderfunk as replacement

Discussion in 'Amps and Cabs [BG]' started by shatner, Jul 5, 2005.

  1. shatner


    Sep 22, 2004
    Isle Of Wight, UK
    I'm thinking of ditching my Ampeg 1x15 and 2x10 and buying a schroeder cab. Also thinking of trying the thunderfunk instead of lugging a rack around (sansamp into QSC RMX 1450). Will the thunderfunk and schroeder give me more volume than the above? It will need to be a noticeable difference for me to bother. As it stands I have 400watts of cabs and 250 watts per channel from the QSC (biamped) so a schroeder 410 and thunderfunk should give me more and be a lot smaller.

    I just don't want to spend out on yet more gear and find that the difference isn't that big. I've read all the threads on both the schroeders and the thunderfunk which is why my GAS has been re-ignited. The Ampegs are just not enough for the gigs I do (large outdoor, obviously with PA support). The sound just disappears into the air and I have to compete with brass and loud backline. The other option is to get an El Whappo and run the QSC bridged mono. That would obviously be enough power but I could buy a smaller schroeder and thunderfunk for around the same price. Obviously I could run my current rack into a schroeder but I would like to get a head anyway to be used as a backup on the bigger gigs if the rack goes down.

  2. popinfresh


    Dec 23, 2004
    Melbourne, Aus
    If you do outdoors without PA. Schroe' is the way to go. Woo, I rhymed.

    I'd say your rig will be alot louder, have more headroom and be easier to hear without out been turned up.
  3. Alexander


    Aug 13, 2001
    Seattle, WA
    Or you could do a Thunderfunk into an El Whappo - I hear that is THE sound...
  4. alexclaber

    alexclaber Commercial User

    Jun 19, 2001
    Brighton, UK
    Director - Barefaced Ltd
    Why aren't you currently bridging the QSC?

    Your comment regarding having 400W of cabs suggests that, like most people, you're equating cab power handling with loudness. The sensitivity is what matters (which is where the Schroeders score so highly), not the power rating.

    If you want a significant difference in volume, I'd go for the biggest Schroeder cab that you're willing to cart and bridge your power amp into it. TFunks are great but they still can't beat a 1400W power amp for maximum output.

  5. Brad Johnson

    Brad Johnson SUSPENDED Supporting Member

    Mar 8, 2000
    Gaithersburg, Md
    DR Strings
    Then again, there's usable output and there's also TONE to consider. I wouldn't go back to a pre/power rig since I settled in on my TF/Nahas rig.
  6. Chef

    Chef Moderator Staff Member Supporting Member

    May 23, 2004
    Columbia MO
    Staff Reviewer; Bass Gear Magazine
    It's a combination I have and like a lot.
    Last job I did with the t-funk and schroeder 410 I had the input volume at 3, and the master at 5. No PA support, plenty of volume and headroom. I'm a very big fan of both of these pieces of gear. Having said that, 1400 watts in bridge mode from the qsc ought to be pretty good.
    I've not used a sansamp, so I can't speak to it's tonal qualities. The t-funk is freakin' awesome that way tho;)

Share This Page