Good to know. We'd hate to be a bad influence on ya
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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.
The Acoustic Club
- Thread starter The Owl
- Start date
Probably preaching to the choir but 360 is preamp only
Extra Special ACC sighting! One of my favorite Jazz Funk bands, The Crusaders. Especially their earlier stuff.
No surprise to see that awesome bass rig pumping out the tone.
No surprise to see that awesome bass rig pumping out the tone.
The most obvious difference between the two is their cabinet styles -- the 118 has a standard front-ported chamber with two rectangular port holes at the bottom of the baffle board. The 126 has no front ports in the baffle but rather it has a large vent at the bottom fed down from the rear of the speaker.
Their electronics are totally different. The 118 has no graphic EQ, just your standard Treble-Mid-Bass tone controls (the bass tone control is very hot compared to many other Acoustic amps). It uses a stock 8-ohm 130040 speaker and has a rated power output of 50W.
The 126 does have a graphic EQ section. The amplifier and internal modules are identical to what's in a model 120 head, which itself is essentially a 220 preamp/EQ with a lighter power amp section. The 126 was originally loaded with a 4-ohm 130024 speaker, and the 4-ohm speaker probably contributes to the 126's higher 100W power rating.
You didn't ask, but it's worth mentioning that the 118 was the successor in the Acoustic product line to the very similar 116 ported combo. The 116 had a 4-ohm speaker and was rated at 100W (IIRC) versus the 118's 50W @ 8-ohms. Although I've never seen tech docs for the 116, I suspect the main reason difference between the 116 and 118 is their speaker impedances. Again, this could be why the 118 and 126 are rated differently.
I've never used a 126, but IMHO the 118 is a great combo -- a tone monster with nice grit when pushed.
Last edited:
My experience with the 126 (my avatar) fits the description above by @JacklegBass.
Tonally it's identical to my 120 head, which sounds great (although different from today's 'modern' amp voicing), has a nice grit upon breakup, and weighs about 70 lbs.
It also appears to me that the 126 used the same 'box' as the shallow 6x10 and/or the smallest 2x15 cab (402 ?), by separating the top portion off for the amplifier to occupy and varying the speaker baffling and venting for tuning purposes.
Nice 371 and 271 stacks of a blues legend
That's a very good point. The 118 amplifier chassis was narrower than other typical Acoustic generation-3 solid state chassis, so its cabinet is also narrower than the 126. Same with the 116. The 126 and 122 combos used the 120 head, so both of them were the same width as the 402 and 406-wide cabinets.
So the difference between 122 and 126 is probably only in the venting then, making the 126 somewhat higher
I don't have the dimensions handy, but I'm guessing the 126 is slightly taller. The other difference is the speaker impedances, I don't know for sure but I'm pretty sure the 122 was loaded with the standard 130040 8-ohm driver that Acoustic used in most cabinets, while the 126 used the 4-ohm 130024.
The 126 is definitely taller. My guess is It's exactly the size of a 402 cab in external dimensions. Literally the same box simply re-purposed.
Anyone own or use vintage AC with Karlson cab design? Curious as to opinions as to handling deeper bass?
This beauty is sold and heading to California but wanted to share a photo after about an hour of cleaning. So cool next to the 74 Jazz. Bell bottoms and funk.
I have owned a separate Karlson cab w/a 300 watt Gauss woofer. It seemed a little light on deep lows. I bought it used in the 80's and had no idea what it was the whole time I owned it. I liked it for its size at the time.
