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
Dunno how it'll sound for you, but my living-room B20 is EQ'ed thus (trying for an Ampeg-ish tone)...
- low @ 1:30
- low-mid @ 11
- high-mid @ 3
- high @ 1
Dunno what to suggest for the other two EQ settings on yours, but maybe it's a starting point..
- low @ 1:30
- low-mid @ 11
- high-mid @ 3
- high @ 1
Dunno what to suggest for the other two EQ settings on yours, but maybe it's a starting point..
When I was checking out the Warwick Corvette std bubinga fretless 4 string I eventually bought at Guitar Center, a salesman plugged me into an Acoustic B600H/B810 stack and it blew me away. I bought the bass that night and have wondered about the Acoustic amps work since they rate their wattage at 2 ohms instead of 8/4 ohms like most other amps. Can anyone clue me in?
I'm getting confused regarding the B200H and B600H power ratings after reading some of these past posts. If the B600H head is rated at 600 W at 2 ohms, wouldn't it follow that it would be 300 W at 4 ohms, and 150 W at 8 ohms?
Depending on the circuit design, I don't think the steps down in power due to an increase in impedance is always necessarily linear.
The B600H is rated for 2ohms to allow the owner to drive two Acoustic stacks (either 2 B810s or 4 B410/B115s).
Answer is here:
http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showthread.php?t=482747
excerpt;
At 4 ohms we are at 450w for the B600H. At 8 ohms its about 275w.
Let me know if you have any other questions.
Jonathan @ Acoustic
Anyone own or test-driven the B410 against the B115? I LOVE the tone of my current B115 & thinking about buying another Acoustic cab. I'd like another B115 because the tone is freakin' amazing, but I don't want to rule out a 410 if it has as much low end (or better). I've read many-a-discussion on TB saying that a well designed/ported, etc., 410 cab can very well put out as much (or more) lows as a 15" cab. My local GC is temporarily short on the B410 cabs at the moment - can anyone who's tried both comment on the amount of low end capabilities as compared to each other?
Thanks in advance...
Thanks in advance...
Found these on the Acoustic website - just thought these pics were too cool not to post for any particular reason - Jethro Tull tearing it up circa 1972 & Acoustic was there! 
Excellent question. Then would you stack the 10's on the 15 or the 15 on the 10's. Although I still like the look of 2-15s it is an interesting thought.
i don't think the 410 would sound any different than the 115.after all they are both just cabs.wouldn't your head effect the amount of low end you got?
Not sure, but I'd probably stack the 410 cab (if I get one) on top of the 15. Although my ears love the tone of that 15 - tough decision.
Yes, the head affects the overall amount of lows your asking from your rig. But that says nothing about which of these two cabs can better/ more effectively deliver the amount of lows you ask of them. Typically (but not always), between any two relatively same-sized cabs (410 or 1-15") one will be able to handle/generate more low end response before break up than the other. Just curious if anyone can comment on which of the two does a better job putting out the low end. Maybe between these two, it is the same...don't know, but would like to find out.
Not sure, but I'd probably stack the 410 cab (if I get one) on top of the 15. Although my ears love the tone of that 15 - tough decision.
Yes, the head affects the overall amount of lows your asking from your rig. But that says nothing about which of these two cabs can better/ more effectively deliver the amount of lows you ask of them. Typically (but not always), between any two relatively same-sized cabs (410 or 1-15") one will be able to handle/generate more low end response before break up than the other. Just curious if anyone can comment on which of the two does a better job putting out the low end. Maybe between these two, it is the same...don't know, but would like to find out.
I gotta agree on all this... I was thinking 410s on top.
Played through an 18 with an old 60's Ampeg SVT back in 89
Pure thunder!
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
Just got this the other day. Traded my (conveniently) Acoustic B20 combo for it.
Just got this the other day. Traded my (conveniently) Acoustic B20 combo for it.
About 27 years after selling my Peavey T-40, I am back in the fold at the urging of my son (budget gear consultant extraordinaire who turned me on to TB as well). Just purchased a B200 to go with a pair of SX'sa '75 Jazz and a '62 PJ. I'm very happy.Really good tone! And the best value around. Took this pic with my phone.
I have that same picture with a different axe...and I'm gettin the 4-10's as soon as they get them in stock...then I will have my Stack
Rich
Nice Rich. Our pics do look similar. How do you like the B200 combo? I see you added casters as well. I think they are a must and, given the heft, probably should have been included. But then I think for the price of these amps, I shouldn't quibble.
My son and I just picked his up today using, in part, his birthday GC gift card from yours truly. With the current $25 instant rebate promo plus a 15% off e-mail coupon, he got his for $276 + tax!
I'm also interested to know how the 410 works with the combo in a decreased wattage/increased speaker area trade-off kinda way. Most say that more speaker area should result in greater perceived loudness. Be sure to post back and let us know.
I tried out the 410 and the 115 cab with the 600 head and I personally thought the 410 was a louder cab, and could go equally deep and it was also punchier than the 15" cab IMO...Peace...DAcat
