• 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.

TecAmp amplification club.....is there such a thing yet

Status
Not open for further replies.
#221
KeithPas said:
Bummer, I just got a 2/12 Pepman combo 400 and the speakers and blown. It was not obvious at first but they are shot. I will keep the head and maybe sell the airhead cabinet unless I can get the speakers re-coned for a reasonable price.
Click to expand...


Actually the speakers are fine and the problem is with the head. Intermittent problem where it sounds fine for a spell then sounds completely shot. Seller took good care of me so no complaints other then I wish it was not blown because I love the sound.
 
#222
I could definitely see someone not getting alot of use/value from the Puma's treble knob on a tweeterless cab. I have a somewhat bright sounding bass, and a relatively bright sounding cab. Pulling back on that treble control tames the ultra high end, while preserving presence and articulation. Perfect for my application. Same deal with the bass knob. It works great for wrangling the sub lows while preserving fatness and weight down low.
 
#224
The hi eq control on the Puma 500 that I used to own did very little, as well. I wasn't much of a knob twiddler with that amp since it sounded so good with everything just set flat (+/- a hair, sometimes). I'm also not a slapper, either.

By contrast, all of the other eq controls had a very noticeable range of adjustment. Since I rarely felt the need to make any adjustments, I don't know if that was how it was supposed to work, or if it crapped out during the period I owned the 500.

I took it to the shop where I bought it, and even they agreed the hi knob had only a very subtle change from one extreme setting to the other. I think Tecamp was going through a US distributor change at the time, so he said it might take a while to send it back to get things sorted out. Instead, he offered me a trade for another head I had GAS for. I loved the tone from that head and may someday buy another Puma. (If I didn't get a great deal a few months back on a minty used Aguilar AG500, I probably would've already.)
 
#227
KJung said:
+1 in that the treble control mainly effects the sound at the 'tweeter level'. Very handy if you have a two or three way cab with a tweeter. For the 15/6, the upper mid control is RIGHT where you need it to help control the somewhat peaky upper midrange of that particulare crossover and mid driver.

Amazing sounding heads, with beautiful EQ..... bass control that almost acts like a hi pass filter to cut flub, low mid control that adds punch and fatness, upper mid control that is voiced in the right area to remove the often problematic frequencies around that 1K area, and a treble control that can take the edge off the upper treble without eliminating lower treble/upper midrange grind/presence.
Click to expand...

Sorry for the OT
The 15/6 does not have a "somewhat peaky upper midrange". It is well designed cab with great crossover. Sometimes it is user error that results in statements like Ken's. Of course the 15/6 does not sound like traditional cabs which usually only have a high pass filter to some horn and no midrange. I also needed to adjust my EQ when switching to a 15/6. But that was nothing dramatic and was done with my bass.
 
#229
It's a problem of perspective. For someone thinking in terms of trad bass cabs, the new types with a prominent mid cone and fancy xover design sound like they are boosting those upper mids. For someone thinking in terms of hi-fi studio monitors, the same cabs have no hump up there--rather it is that the OLD style cabs have more signal cut and rolloff!
 
#230
tom-g said:
Sorry for the OT
The 15/6 does not have a "somewhat peaky upper midrange". It is well designed cab with great crossover. Sometimes it is user error that results in statements like Ken's. Of course the 15/6 does not sound like traditional cabs which usually only have a high pass filter to some horn and no midrange. I also needed to adjust my EQ when switching to a 15/6. But that was nothing dramatic and was done with my bass.
Click to expand...

I was strictly talking about the fEARful models (I should have made that clear). The 18Sound driver has a pretty severe peak at around 2K, and then gets peaky again around 4K. This is well documented.

Also, most high end two way cabs use a true crossover, and have VERY little drop in the upper midrange. Yes, a mid driver will give you a touch wider dispersion off axis, but I've found this quite minor with bass guitar background.

There are other 6" midrange designs that sound quite nice and natural up top (for example, the LDS models with the Patterson crossover and the Faital mid driver, and the Baer ML112). Also, Duke's Thunderchild, which is similar to the mid driver loaded cabs in that it has a low crossed over horn, is a thing of absolute wonder up top.... razor flat above 1K, and much more balanced with the driver.

As I've posted before, I've been gigging mid-range loaded cabs for close to 20 years now (EA VL's, Acme's, etc.). My guess is, most of the users who have built or purchased fEARful cabs have no frame of reference to evaluate that design (i.e., it is the first midrange loaded cab they have experienced). There is a huge variation among brands of mid drivers and crossover designs in this class of cab. The fEARful design is, by far, my least favorite personally, and seems the least 'coherent' above 800hz or so. IMO. (edit: however, of course, with the right head/EQ, etc., these cabs can sound very good. I had good luck with the one I owned for a bit with the Genz Shuttle Max).

The good news is, the Puma is voiced beautiful to work with the top end of those specific cabs. With the Thunderchild, or the Baer, or some of the LDS models, no special EQ, etc. is really needed.

IMO and a LOT of IME.
 
#231
Ken just can't have his opinion vs the cult Fearfuls eh? Damn, I see why the guy is a little hesitant to post around here. The cult is strong even on non-Fearful threads... its too bad. Shouldn't have to defend himself on every thread :scowl:
 
#233
KJung said:
I was strictly talking about the fEARful models (I should have made that clear). The 18Sound driver has a pretty severe peak at around 2K, and then gets peaky again around 4K. This is well documented.

Also, most high end two way cabs use a true crossover, and have VERY little drop in the upper midrange. Yes, a mid driver will give you a touch wider dispersion off axis, but I've found this quite minor with bass guitar background.

There are other 6" midrange designs that sound quite nice and natural up top (for example, the LDS models with the Patterson crossover and the Faital mid driver, and the Baer ML112). Also, Duke's Thunderchild, which is similar to the mid driver loaded cabs in that it has a low crossed over horn, is a thing of absolute wonder up top.... razor flat above 1K, and much more balanced with the driver.

As I've posted before, I've been gigging mid-range loaded cabs for close to 20 years now (EA VL's, Acme's, etc.). My guess is, most of the users who have built or purchased fEARful cabs have no frame of reference to evaluate that design (i.e., it is the first midrange loaded cab they have experienced). There is a huge variation among brands of mid drivers and crossover designs in this class of cab. The fEARful design is, by far, my least favorite personally, and seems the least 'coherent' about 800hz or so. IMO.

The good news is, the Puma is voiced beautiful to work with the top end of those specific cabs. With the Thunderchild, or the Baer, or some of the LDS models, no special EQ, etc. is really needed.

IMO and a LOT of IME.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but I just don't see (and hear) what you're talking about:

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

And talking about frame of reference. Don't you think that I have played other cabs before a fEARful?

@Tunaman
Ken has his opinion and preferences - and that is just fine. My opinion differs and so does the data (and my interpretation) published by the speaker manufacturer. Where opinions differ there is going to be a discussion. There is nothing wrong with that and it's what this board is about. As is obvious, Ken seems to like these discussions and most certainly can defend his side of things.
 
#234
tom-g said:
Sorry, but I just don't see (and hear) what you're talking about:

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

And talking about frame of reference. Don't you think that I have played other cabs before a fEARful?

@Tunaman
Ken has his opinion and preferences - and that is just fine. My opinion differs and so does the data (and my interpretation) published by the speaker manufacturer. Where opinions differ there is going to be a discussion. There is nothing wrong with that and it's what this board is about. As is obvious, Ken seems to like these discussions and most certainly can defend his side of things.
Click to expand...

I was suggesting that many who have a fEARful have little experience with other midrange driver loaded cabs. You can't really talk about 'midrange loaded cabs' as a category very accurately, since they all sound just as different as any other category classes (410's, 212's, etc.).

Quite a few plots of the top end of the fEARfuls posted, and a number of builders have verified what I'm hearing. Of course, what sounds 'not so good' to me might sound 'wonderful' to you, so +1.... just trying to report what I hear.

There is someone on the fEARful boards, from what I understand, who has developed a more sophisticated crossover (ala Duke's Thunderchild crossover) that smooths the top end, and takes out that bit of overall rise above 1K (I think the 18Sound in the fEARful is purposely boosted by a few db's to be more present in a live mix).

Back to the topic, the Puma heads work particularly well with the fEARFul voicing IMO, given the EQ center points and Qs.
 
#235
I plug into my Puma 900 and 15/6 and it sounds epic. That's pretty much all I need to know. That and the fact that my head and cab combined weighs less than 40lbs, fits easily in my car, and is probably too loud for my own good :)
 
#236
monsterthompson said:
I plug into my Puma 900 and 15/6 and it sounds epic. That's pretty much all I need to know. That and the fact that my head and cab combined weighs less than 40lbs, fits easily in my car, and is probably too loud for my own good :)
Click to expand...

+1 Fabulous combination, which was my whole point:). Those two pieces of gear yin yang in a very good way... almost made for each other if you want it clean and clear.
 
#237
My comparison was to traditional speaker design. I was not talking about other newer 2 or 3 way designs.

The change in the crossover pertains to the 15/6/1 not the 15/6. There was only a high pass, if I remember correctly, for the tweeter (the 6 does not have a low pass). The new version of the crossover only pertains to the high pass for the tweeter (there is still no low pass on the 6). Two of its components were exchanged with new values. The filter is just as sophisticated as before. This means you can hear the 6 in all its glory.
Just to make it clear. I am not denying in any way what you hear.

The 18 Sound is padded back so the response is on par with the 15.

Same here, just reporting what I hear (15/6 not a 15/6/1).
 
#238
tom-g said:
My comparison was to traditional speaker design. I was not talking about other newer 2 or 3 way designs.

The change in the crossover pertains to the 15/6/1 not the 15/6. There was only a high pass, if I remember correctly, for the tweeter (the 6 does not have a low pass). The new version of the crossover only pertains to the high pass for the tweeter (there is still no low pass on the 6). Two of its components were exchanged with new values. The filter is just as sophisticated as before. This means you can hear the 6 in all its glory.
Just to make it clear. I am not denying in any way what you hear.

The 18 Sound is padded back so the response is on par with the 15.

Same here, just reporting what I hear (15/6 not a 15/6/1).
Click to expand...

That crossover has changed a bit over time. From my understanding (and also my ears and the recent plots I've seen), the padding has been reduced (to make that mid driver pop a little more in a mix... which is why I always recommend that you get a -3db switch with the fEARful cabs), and also the tweeter part of the crossover has (I think...might be remembering what that poster I was talking about did to smooth the 18Sound response up top) been replaced with a true three way crossover instead of a simple hi pass, to deal with the rather rough transition above 4K (that you can see in the plots you provided... that rise above 4K). Remember, the ear is quite sensitive in that region, and a couple db of peak up there can hit you like an icepick, especially if the entire mid driver is padded back less than 'flat'.

And, the crossover in the fEARful is not particularly sophisticated (but is high quality). It provides a decent transition from woofer to mid driver at the crossover point, but does nothing to smooth the 18sound above the crossover point (versus, for example, Duke's amazing Thunderchild crossover (which weighs 4 pounds) and provides a 'studio monitor flat' response above 1K or so.

Of course, there are lots of guys who use the fEARFuls who are rockers and playing P Basses with flatwounds, etc., which kind of makes the response of the mid driver a bit of a moot point above 1K or so.
 
#239
As far as I am aware the only change to the crossover since 2010 (that's the version I built) to today was the introduction of a switch to turn the padding completely off. If my recollection servs me right it has always been a -3 db pad.

I am only aware of the crossover modification as explained in my previous post - which fixed a dip in the 5 k area. Maybe you can point me to the change you are talking about.

Sorry for the confusion about the crossover being sophisticated. I never meant to imply that. My intention was to say that the filter works the same as before - just with different component values - so the level of sophistication is the same.

Oh, and i play a Jazz bass with round wounds.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back