• 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 S212/Puma500 Ultra Light Rig

#641
@shiveringbass, I use a puma 1000 with my Glock quattro 410/212 cabs. I dig the way the Puma sounds with them. I haven't tried the 500, which I think is a lil more aggressive than the 1000. Been looking for a light 212 cab and tried Tecamp S212 cab. I even talk to Kjung about a different cab. Well anyway, I notice the Tecamp and Glock cabs sounded similar, to my ears. I think I like the Glocks so much, I compare other cabs to it. So, I have a hard time selecting a cab. But, I was really impress with the tecamp and plan on getting one.

I totally agree that Glock heads don't sound good with the Tecamp cabs.
 
#642
Hey Diglo,

To my ears, the Tecamp M212 has a unpleasent high mid bump, very honky, especialy with a ash/maple bass. But this is easily sorted with a slight cut of the high mid on the Puma.
;)

Now to be fair, the M212 is my first 2x12 cab and the Quattro is a 4x10". So the differences I've noticed could well be the differences between 10" and 12" and not Tecamp VS Glock.

I'd like to ear your take on the comparison between the Glock 212 and the Tecamp 212.
:)

Also the Tecamp rig is absolutly killing with a Warwick, I didn't feel the need to cut some high mids off.
:)
 
#643
Shiveringbass said:
Hey Diglo,

To my ears, the Tecamp M212 has a unpleasent high mid bump, very honky, especialy with a ash/maple bass. But this is easily sorted with a slight cut of the high mid on the Puma.
;)

Now to be fair, the M212 is my first 2x12 cab and the Quattro is a 4x10". So the differences I've noticed could well be the differences between 10" and 12" and not Tecamp VS Glock.

I'd like to ear your take on the comparison between the Glock 212 and the Tecamp 212.
:)

Also the Tecamp rig is absolutly killing with a Warwick, I didn't feel the need to cut some high mids off.
:)
Click to expand...

I think the Glock 212 is a llil warmer. The tecamp S212 is a great cab too. I like the "treble" switch on the cab. The tecamp I'm trying is the older cab, no port on back. The plus on the Tec is the weight. I'm looking for something light to carry to church. Having a shootout with tecamp and two BagEnd 15's, one being a coax. Decisions, decisions! :help:
 
#644
diglo said:
I think the Glock 212 is a llil warmer. The tecamp S212 is a great cab too. I like the "treble" switch on the cab. The tecamp I'm trying is the older cab, no port on back. The plus on the Tec is the weight. I'm looking for something light to carry to church. Having a shootout with tecamp and two BagEnd 15's, one being a coax. Decisions, decisions! :help:
Click to expand...

As pointed out above, the s212 sounds great but needs the upper mids dialed down just a touch (the Puma's upper mid control is in just the right place). The Bag stack is great also... warmer in the mid mids and a bit more attenuated down low... more warm punch versus the more modern sound of the s212. My guess is (from using that Bag End stack for years... one standard and one 'x' with the coax), the volume will be a touch more with the Bag's, and the s212 will sound more articulate, clean and 'modern'.... just depends what you want.

Hard to not love that 40 pound weight of a 212.. I believe that the s212 weighs significantly less than a single little Bag End 115.
 
#645
I decided to go with Tecamp S212. Both cab are great, but my ear like the Tecamp better. I'm not a technical guy, but with the Tecamp I get the a full 500 watts running at 4 ohms. With the BagEnd's I have to run both cabs to get 500 because they are only 8 ohms, it's like 270 per cab. I enjoyed the BE's more up against the wall, intsead of sitting in an open area. Maybe the back ports are not for me. The Tecamp cabs used less adjustment on my amp, and that's a plus for me. With the BE's, I had to do a lil more adjustment. Especially when I used the BE's seperate. Don't like remembering what setting was on this cab and this cab. So convience was a plus too with the Tecamp. So, to all my friends (BE users & Tecamp users) that gave their input, thanks! Like I said both cabs are great, but the Tecamp had more of what I'm looking for. Peace!
 
#646
Ok!!! I didn't settle with tecamp S212. It's a great cab, but I'm looking for something that will fit in both of my cars with a lil extra room. I have two small cars. So, I went back to a Schroeder 1212BMF. The Schroeder's have spoil me with weight and ease of handling. The bagend's are small & sound great also, but still are heavy. I workout, but don't like to workout before I play. LOL. I just wanted something light and being a previous Schroeder owner, I know they want be a hassle to pack and carry.
 
#648
Shiveringbass said:
Hello Diglo,

It seemed to me that the 1212BMF and the S212 have almost the same size ?

Alsos, since the BMF was a cab I've considered but could never hear, could you give your impression on how the S212 and the BMF compare ?

Thanks very much
Click to expand...

From the specs posted on both sites, the cabs are virtually the same size, with the BMF being 1" less deep (15" versus 16"). I believe the weight is about the same

The BMF cabs are VERY midrange present and tight... less lows and much less treble extension and sparkle versus the s212 or m212. As a result, they are VERY loud. Nice cabs if you like it very tight and burpy.

Edit: The BMF cabs are a nice match to the Puma head, which is wide and smooth, deep and sizzly.. nice yin yang with the voicings!
 
#649
OK, for the final time, I kept the Tecamp S212. Enough said about it.

@shiveringbass, Kjung explained it pretty well about BMF. It has tight lowend, but not as midrangey as the Schroeder lights. The BMF is more even tone, but it lacks the booty bottom i like. I play hip-hop and I need boom behind the clean tight sound. The Tecamp gives me that.

@kjung, Out of all the cabs I've played, the Tecmp puma's can make any cab sound better, too me.
 
#651
Shiveringbass said:
Thanks Diglo.

To my ears, if you want that big fat boomy tone (dub, ragae, hip-hop...) while keeping clarity, the Puma with the Glock Quattro is one of the thickest combo I've tried.
:)

The tecamp stack can also do that but the Puma+Quattro is realy something to be hear.
:)
Click to expand...

Yesssir! I have a glock 410 quattro and 212 big rig using the puma 1000! :hyper:
 
#652
I'm going to go to Germany this summer. Therefore, I'm planning to buy a Tecamp cabinet. I have Epifani UL-502 and UL112 cabinet and I need to complete my gear. Could anyone give an advice about cabinet?
Here are my options; buying a XS112, S115 , S210 or buying a S212 then sell my UL112. Which one would you advise? I think buying a S210 and using it with UL112 may be nice, because UL-502 has already good low end and S210 may be nice for some mids. Otherwise, I may use S212 and forget the other options (then, maybe someday I get a Puma 500 too) :)
I also don't know the differences between XS, S, M and L series. Is the L series the most powerful, or do they have the fattest tone?
 
#653
djombwe said:
I'm going to go to Germany this summer. Therefore, I'm planning to buy a Tecamp cabinet. I have Epifani UL-502 and UL112 cabinet and I need to complete my gear. Could anyone give an advice about cabinet?
Here are my options; buying a XS112, S115 , S210 or buying a S212 then sell my UL112. Which one would you advise? I think buying a S210 and using it with UL112 may be nice, because UL-502 has already good low end and S210 may be nice for some mids. Otherwise, I may use S212 and forget the other options (then, maybe someday I get a Puma 500 too) :)
I also don't know the differences between XS, S, M and L series. Is the L series the most powerful, or do they have the fattest tone?
Click to expand...

The letters represent size of box. The drivers are all the same. XS=extra small, S=small, etc.

Make sure to get an 8ohm version of any cab you decide on, if you want to use it with your UL112 and the 502, since the 502 is 4ohm minimum.

If you are considering an 's' cab, make sure to try one. They are tuned differently than the original 's' cabs and the 'M' cabs... more bass, less punch. That might not be the best combination for the very wide, deep 502 voicing. If you are thinking of just a 212, I would consider the M212 4ohm.
 
#654
Thank you for your response.
I know the letters represent large, small etc. Changing only the size of the cabinet but not the drivers... Does it make any difference?? I haven't heard this kind of thing before. Do you mean the drivers of S212 and M212 are totally same, but M212 sounds different? (According to comments, there is M212's upper mid bump)
 
#655
djombwe said:
Thank you for your response.
I know the letters represent large, small etc. Changing only the size of the cabinet but not the drivers... Does it make any difference?? I haven't heard this kind of thing before. Do you mean the drivers of S212 and M212 are totally same, but M212 sounds different? (According to comments, there is M212's upper mid bump)
Click to expand...

Yes, the size of the box and the tuning have a big impact with any driver. The current 's' models are quite deeply voiced and even in the mids.. almost a bit scooped... very different tuning/porting than original 's' design and the current 'M' design. The older 's' models and the similar 'M' models are voiced a bit tighter down low, and are brighter and grindier in the upper mids (which can be controlled nicely with the Puma upper mid control, which is in just the right place).
 
#656
I've skimmed through this thread but didn't find an opinion to my question, thus will ask here....

Just received my M212-8 to use with my Puma 1000....I want to understand the tweeter control more and wonder what setting would be best for punchy fingerstyle fretless...

I just unpacked the box and haven't even plugged the cab in as yet but have a session tonight and I'm going to use it!

Thanks.
 
#658
AndroWal said:
I've skimmed through this thread but didn't find an opinion to my question, thus will ask here....

Just received my M212-8 to use with my Puma 1000....I want to understand the tweeter control more and wonder what setting would be best for punchy fingerstyle fretless...

I just unpacked the box and haven't even plugged the cab in as yet but have a session tonight and I'm going to use it!

Thanks.
Click to expand...

It will be pretty obvious when you mess with it. The 'soft' settings (lo, hi, med) result in a high crossover point, and performance very similar to the 'typical' tweeter and attenuator in cabs like Epifani, Aguilar, etc.). The 'hard attack' setting moves the crossover point down, with the tweeter acting as more of an extension of the upper mids/lower treble of the driver... very aggressive and grindy. The 'lo' setting is very subtle, and just basically provides a slight bump at the upper end of the driver's range. The 'hi hard' setting is snarly and grindy... very aggressive.

I use the 'med soft attack' setting for the most part, which is similar to a typical tweeter with the attenuator set around noon or so.
 
#659
KJung said:
It will be pretty obvious when you mess with it. The 'soft' settings (lo, hi, med) result in a high crossover point, and performance very similar to the 'typical' tweeter and attenuator in cabs like Epifani, Aguilar, etc.). The 'hard attack' setting moves the crossover point down, with the tweeter acting as more of an extension of the upper mids/lower treble of the driver... very aggressive and grindy. The 'lo' setting is very subtle, and just basically provides a slight bump at the upper end of the driver's range. The 'hi hard' setting is snarly and grindy... very aggressive.

I use the 'med soft attack' setting for the most part, which is similar to a typical tweeter with the attenuator set around noon or so.
Click to expand...

Many thanks!

Once set-up I did dial through them and found just what you describe and....I will employ what suits best. This said, no one setting is an absolute never use for me. Each has its benefits. Now I'll probably find myselft running to turn the dial on the cab inbetween pieces!
 
#660
Hey guys.

Puma500 update. TecAmp has started shipping an updated Puma500.

As some know, the class D TecAmp models (500 and 1000) had a few problems with overheating and shutting down on occasion, especially when used in the rack bag. Not a huge deal, since this issue went away when taken out of the bag, but still not good.

This happened to one of my 500's on a gig a while back (pushing it VERY hard in the bag for 4 hours... went into power amp protection with one minute to go on the gig!). I contacted Glenn at Austin Bass traders, and he said that the guys at TecAmp wanted to check the amp out for me. So (at their expense) it went back to Germany. They contacted me and said while the amp checked out OK, they would like to upgrade it to the new power module they are using in the current Puma500 production (I believe one of the higher end ICE class D amps.... 550 watts at 4ohms).

So, the amp came back last week with the new guts, and it is very cool. The good news..... the ICE module runs cooler, and takes up less room in the box, so should be no issue with heat and shutdowns when really pushed.

The good/bad news is that the tone has changed a bit. They seem to have adjusted the hi pass just a touch for a tighter, punchier tone down low (which is a good thing in the mix, even if it doesn't have that huge, fat, tubey low end like the original Powersoft module loaded 500's), and the upper mid response is warmer and has more character... so a bit louder and punchier and tighter.

I believe this is a good move, and should help with reliability, and also keep those speaker cones from pistoning so much. There is something special and magic about the original deep, creamy, wide voicing, but that always sounded a bit better solo in the basement than on the gig to me.

So, there it is. The new Puma500's are shipping now, and based on my upgraded model, I highly recommend them for those looking for clean, crystal clear, and accurate amplification (and also Austin Bass Traders as a source for these... amazing service and support).

As a final note, the new Puma1000, again, based on a monoblock ICE power module that puts out 1000 watts into 4ohms and is also 2ohm safe) will start shipping at the end of the year. The box will be slightly bigger according to Glenn, but it should just kill.

FYI!

Edit: I'll try to put up a clip comparing the old versus current 500 if the differences come through on the recording... pretty subtle, but they are there. Look for that later today.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back