The right set-up

[Jim Carr]

I'd get the advanced signal smoothing power cable, platinum tape wound strings, and all kevlar driver tower with argon-cooled precision garnet ground voice coils and 12 kilogram rare Taenite magnets. The anodized baskets come in black, grey, or olive. I'd do olive.






j/k

 

[iualum]

I recommend against mixing different types and sizes of drivers unless you use a cross-over and have selected all the drivers based on the role they will play in a two or three way system.

Two 115 cabs or two 212 cabinets, or even a 412 would be a better alternative to mixing a 115 and a 212. The reasons are numerous, but the two most important are that the power handling and differing EQ requirements of any two such miss-matched cabs nearly always result in poorer performance, despite what conventional wisdom and marketing jive assert.

Adding a 15 does not "bring the lows," unless it is a specialized sub. Moreover, one of the cabs will be the weak link, and will prevent full benefit from its "mate." However, you can somewhat overcome those balance problems with a two channel power amp.

All IME.

Find a box you like and one (which when an identical one is added) that will cover your volume needs/wants.

 

[WaldoNova]

Don't limit yourself to 210's. 212's are a great option. If you get 210's make sure they are stacked vertically so the speaker is closer to your ears.

 

[Interceptor]

Want to buy once and be done with it? There's only one way to do that and have any chance of success. Take a few days and fly to one of the big shops and personally demo gear. Spend a bit of your budget on that trip, it is cheaper than flipping gear to find your sound.

I live in a small market, and did a mix of big city auditioning and gear flipping to find my sound. Even with careful buying, your needs may well change over time - allow yourself that latitude.

 

[lfmn16]

Want to buy once and be done with it? There's only one way to do that and have any chance of success. Take a few days and fly to one of the big shops and personally demo gear. Spend a bit of your budget on that trip, it is cheaper than flipping gear to find your sound.

I live in a small market, and did a mix of big city auditioning and gear flipping to find my sound. Even with careful buying, your needs may well change over time - allow yourself that latitude.

I would also forget about buying once and done. Most people's tastes change over the years and what may be the perfect sound today will unlikely be the perfect sound in 10 years, particularly if you are a relatively new player. Also, the type of music you play will have a big part in what the perfect rig is. When I played country, a Precision, Genz Benz shuttle with a 2x10 cabinet sounded great. I'm playing more old school hard rock/metal and now a Rickenbacker, SVT with 8x10 cabinet sounds perfect.

 

[Gravedigger Dav]

I recommend against mixing different types and sizes of drivers unless you use a cross-over and have selected all the drivers based on the role they will play in a two or three way system.

Two 115 cabs or two 212 cabinets, or even a 412 would be a better alternative to mixing a 115 and a 212. The reasons are numerous, but the two most important are that the power handling and differing EQ requirements of any two such miss-matched cabs nearly always result in poorer performance, despite what conventional wisdom and marketing jive assert.

Adding a 15 does not "bring the lows," unless it is a specialized sub. Moreover, one of the cabs will be the weak link, and will prevent full benefit from its "mate." However, you can somewhat overcome those balance problems with a two channel power amp.

All IME.

I see this opinion about not mixing speaker sizes all the time. I think it is an old wifes' tale like don't go swimming for an hour after you eat. I used a single 15 and a 2x10 for many years and got a great sound from it. The only reason I don't still have that rig is weight and space.
The only suggesion I would make is 2x10 rather than 2x12. I used an Ampeg B1RE with a SansAmp preamp and it sounded great and had plenty of volume.

 

[CL400Peavey]

With $2k this is how I would go:

greenboy Dually with 15PR400's, Ampeg PF - 800.

 

[iualum]

Don't limit yourself to 210's. 212's are a great option. If you get 210's make sure they are stacked vertically so the speaker is closer to your ears.

212s stacked vertically, too.

 

[strictlybass_ic]

Everyone has already given you the good general advice. $2,000 is more than plenty. For that you can get some really high end stuff.

My slightly more specific suggestions are:
Look into class D amps. The portability is quite nice and with money like that you can easily get a 800-900 watt option that will cover any gig you'll need. (GK MB800, GB Shuttle/streamliner 900, etc)
I quite like the "mini-stacks" of 2x 112 or 2x210. I prefer the 2x10 as they yield a bit more cone area but you need to look around a bit to find a good 210 that can bring the deep lows. If you can get neo speakers that will make toting them around that much easier. Normally I point people to Avatar as they are great cabs at very reasonable prices, but with your budget you can splurge and get some "high end" cabinets. Just make sure you get 2 8 ohm cabinets as together they will put 4 ohm load on an amp (unless you get an amp that is 2 ohm stable, but those aren't as common). If you find a cab you really like but can't get a pair don't fret. Buy 1 8ohm cab now, wait a bit for the coffers to refill and pick up the second matching cab. A good 210 can get you by for more than you might think, but the second is nice to have in reserve.

As mentioned above you could go the fearful/fearless route as well. Those are sort of their own type of monster and there's a lot of discussion around them. I haven't heard one yet to say either way but some of the reviews/commentary is pretty interesting. I'm building a pair for myself to see what it's all about.

 

[BurningSkies]

Hello fellow bassist,

This website has alot of useful information on everything a bassist needs. However, I have a question in regard to set-ups. I believe in only buying something once, not buying something and figuring out that I should've bought product "B". I play a 4-string Fender Jag and I'm using a combo amp Acoustic 20 (please don't laugh). My style of playing is smooth and low, Jazz, R&B and Neo-soul. I don't do alot of slapping or popping.

I'm not going to ask what's better or why its better. Just need to be pointed in the right direction. My budget is $2000 and I have a suv to move the rig.

I'm looking to future proof myself with a head amp and cabs consisting of 1x15 and 2x12's..

Is there a head amp that can run such a set-up without having to buy a second amp? What head amp offers an aux out for IEM?

I do apologize for this long post, but I played a gig last night a local coffee spot and I was really dissatisfied with my sound. I want to be able to not just hear it, but to feel it too....

I'd like to take a moment to address the highlighted statement. While I understand the sentiment and this philosophy, I don't believe it applies in this situation like it might in other aspects of your life. A bass amp isn't a new TV or a nice piece of furniture or a ring for your wife. Bass playing is and should be a journey. As such, over time as you play and develop (and probably more importantly) listen and develop you'll GROW as a person. The equipment you own and use is part of that development. What may be the 'end best' piece now, may not be in several years, or a decade, etc.

The intrinsic value of an amp is not only in the build quality and/or features but more importantly the SOUND. Except that our perception of sound changes over time, as often do our needs in any given band setting. The GOOD NEWS is that music gear has an active 'second life' on the used market, so even if you're invested in a piece now, you're not necessarily stuck with it forever.

Look for what's best for your needs right now rather than some end ideal piece of something.

 

[static0verdrive]

I like the micro heads for portability. I've said it before, I'm loving my Traynor SB500H (500W for about 4lbs). I currently have a 85lbs 4ohm cabinet that has 2x10" and 1x15", but in the future I'll get two 8ohm cabs - 1x15" neo and 2x10". Easier to cart around but otherwise the same as I have currently. I'll be sticking with Traynor but obviously there are other great brands out there.

 

[Jim Carr]

I see this opinion about not mixing speaker sizes all the time. I think it is an old wifes' tale like don't go swimming for an hour after you eat. I used a single 15 and a 2x10 for many years and got a great sound from it. The only reason I don't still have that rig is weight and space.
The only suggesion I would make is 2x10 rather than 2x12. I used an Ampeg B1RE with a SansAmp preamp and it sounded great and had plenty of volume.

You haven't been around here that long, friend. You don't know how recently your "old-wives tale" arrived on TB. It's relatively new.

Actually, all sexist and age-related pejoratives aside, I'm happy your 210+115 rig worked for you. I too, used a 210 and a 115 (SWR goliath jr. III 210 + son of bertha 115) for quite a while. It can work fine if you don't bump up against it's limits. I did. Here is what happened.

I found a used 410 goliath II. With the same head, it blew away the 210 + 115 for volume and tone. When I moved from a pre-fender 350 watt SWR Pro silverface to a Crest CA6 + pre, I needed and wanted more speaker performance. The CA6 is basically two channels of 400 watts into 4 ohms. I tried it with the 410 and 115, but as most have found, a 115 (usually) does not keep up with a 410. I could balance the two with the amp two channels, but the 115 only made a little difference in level, and basically none in tone. Nice cab stand, though.

Besides getting an 810, how to go beyond the 410? Adding another 410 is the same thing as an 810. A 610? I found a stout 210 to add. The NYC Epifani t-210 was about equal to the goliath II. They worked pretty well together, but the differences in sensitivity (the 210 was more sensitive), and EQ (the 210 was darker), left things unbalanced. The Epifani sounded so much better. So—get a better 410!

I found a 4 ohm Epifani UL1 410 in mint condition for $550. Oh Joy, they match for ohms! 8 ohm 210 + 4 ohm 410 Epifani goodness? Well yes, but they still didn't really act as a single unit. The 210 had DIFFERENT DRIVERS. Yes, different color and different sensitivities from drivers of the same size, same impedance, and same cabinet geometry! I still needed to balance them with the input attenuators on the CA6. Great rig, though.

Then a UL1 8 ohm 210 appeared, and I could afford it. Now I had a 610 of identical drivers, split into a 210 + 410. It is great, truly. If only I had enough gigs to justify using it. One very loud country band I subbed for a lot was the ideal gig. Lot's of outdoor events, many on large opulent ranches. That was loud stuff, but fun. Loud fun.

About that time, Talk Bass was influenced by the thinking of several speaker designers (some have left the forum). A number of other TB luminaries investigated the designers claims, and found a lot of science behind it. Other bassists have had experiences like mine. They have arrived at advising same-sized/same-type drivers through real empirical bass rig "systems engineering." As always, YMMV.

 

[Gravedigger Dav]

You haven't been around here that long, friend. You don't know how recently your "old-wives tale" arrived on TB. It's relatively new.

Actually, all sexist and age-related pejoratives aside, I'm happy your 210+115 rig worked for you. I too, used a 210 and a 115 (SWR goliath jr. III 210 + son of bertha 115) for quite a while. It can work fine if you don't bump up against it's limits. I did. Here is what happened.

I found a used 410 goliath II. With the same head, it blew away the 210 + 115 for volume and tone. When I moved from a pre-fender 350 watt SWR Pro silverface to a Crest CA6 + pre, I needed and wanted more speaker performance. The CA6 is basically two channels of 400 watts into 4 ohms. I tried it with the 410 and 115, but as most have found, a 115 (usually) does not keep up with a 410. I could balance the two with the amp two channels, but the 115 only made a little difference in level, and basically none in tone. Nice cab stand, though.

Besides getting an 810, how to go beyond the 410? Adding another 410 is the same thing as an 810. A 610? I found a stout 210 to add. The NYC Epifani t-210 was about equal to the goliath II. They worked pretty well together, but the differences in sensitivity (the 210 was more sensitive), and EQ (the 210 was darker), left things unbalanced. The Epifani sounded so much better. So—get a better 410!

I found a 4 ohm Epifani UL1 410 in mint condition for $550. Oh Joy, they match for ohms! 8 ohm 210 + 4 ohm 410 Epifani goodness? Well yes, but they still didn't really act as a single unit. The 210 had DIFFERENT DRIVERS. Different color and different sensitivities of drivers of the same size same impedance, and same cabinet geometry! I still needed to balance them with the input attenuators on the CA6. Great rig, though.

Then a UL1 8 ohm 210 appeared, and I could afford it. Now I had a 610 of identical drivers, split into a 210 + 410. It is great, truly. If only I had enough gigs to justify using it. One very loud country band I subbed for a lot was the ideal gig. Lot's of outdoor events, many on large opulent ranches. That was loud stuff, but fun. Loud fun.

About that time, Talk Bass was influenced by the thinking of several speaker designers (some have left the forum). A number of other TB luminaries investigated the designers claims, and found a lot of science behind it. Many others had experiences like mine. They arrived at similar sized drivers through real empirical bass rig systems engineering. As always, YMMV.

LOL. I am older than you be far, I'm sure. I'm 71 years old and have been playing since 1963 and I have owned and/or played about every amp there is, so belittling me will not wash.
As to speaker designers, I don't care what they say. Amp designers tried to give us all sorts of scientific data about why solid state amps were far superior in sound to tube amps in the late 60s when they first came out. Turns out they were wrong.
So, I go by my ear. I could care less what some geek with a slide rule that doesn't play says.

 

[Jim Carr]

LOL. I am older than you be far, I'm sure. I'm 71 years old and have been playing since 1963 and I have owned and/or played about every amp there is, so belittling me will not wash.
As to speaker designers, I don't care what they say. Amp designers tried to give us all sorts of scientific data about why solid state amps were far superior in sound to tube amps in the late 60s when they first came out. Turns out they were wrong.
So, I go by my ear. I could care less what some geek with a slide rule that doesn't play says.

I am not belittling you, friend. I am pointing out that you have not been on Talkbass long enough to tell what is new advice or old advice. Do a search. BTW, I started electric bass in 1963, too.

 

[Gravedigger Dav]

I am not belittling you, friend. I am point out that you have not been on Talkbass long enough to tell what is new advice or old advice. Do a search. BTW, I started in 1963, too.

Cool. I understand your point, now. Sorry.
I have not been on TB that long, true; however, I have read a lot of the posts on the subject and seen a lot of disagreement. I can't argue that the scientific folks have valid theoritcal reasons, but I still go with my ear. When I selected the rig I described, I had a large variety of cabs to choose from. I used the same bass and head and tried about everything in the store. I picked what sounded best to me.
Bottom line is listen to it and pick the one you like.

 

[Jim Carr]

...I can't argue that the scientific folks have valid theoretical reasons, but I still go with my ear...

As the Duke of West 106th Street said, "If it sounds good, it is good!"

 

[BurningSkies]

As I say in every thread where this comes up, 'scientific' and 'ears' are not mutually exclusive. The assumption that people who pay attention to the physics of sound and use that to inform their gear choices also use their ears. I'm going to quote myself from another recent thread where this came up:

I don't count on science to tell me what sounds good, I look for it to tell me the most effective way of reproducing what sounds good for the given room I'm playing in. Huge difference.

 

[Gravedigger Dav]

As I say in every thread where this comes up, 'scientific' and 'ears' are not mutually exclusive. The assumption that people who pay attention to the physics of sound and use that to inform their gear choices also use their ears. I'm going to quote myself from another recent thread where this came up:

I don't count on science to tell me what sounds good, I look for it to tell me the most effective way of reproducing what sounds good for the given room I'm playing in. Huge difference.

Don't disagree on that. My comments are based on those who die by their scientific analysis of what sounds good without discussing how it sounds. It has also been my experience that the scientists are not always right.

 

[Dan Knowlton]

I would also forget about buying once and done. Most people's tastes change over the years and what may be the perfect sound today will unlikely be the perfect sound in 10 years, particularly if you are a relatively new player.

+1000 on this advice! The rig I keep in the house for practice is a Glockenklang head into a Euphonic Audio 1x10 cab! (The cab is heavy! VBG!-21lbs) The rig I play out with most of the time is a Genz Benz Streamliner 900 into an Accugroove Tri-115.

My current fling is with a Fender 100T into a 4x10 Fender neo cab and has a LOT more drive and grind than the Genz. Three years ago that sound would would not have been what I want.

I guess as I get older I go retro! I can hardly wait to see what I like in 80 years - two big rocks whacked together? VBG!

Dan K.

 

[BurningSkies]

Don't disagree on that. My comments are based on those who die by their scientific analysis of what sounds good without discussing how it sounds. It has also been my experience that the scientists are not always right.

I think there's a disconnect here. The tone of a speaker is what it is. There are a million ways to skin that cat, for different sounds. The 'science' helps that tone be heard as evenly as possible in many different places around that speaker, or explains why it may sound better in some places and not in others...or why it may be brighter in some places and lacking in others, etc. Science explains why some of the nulls occur, or why some of the points of beaming occur.

Those things matter differently to different people. They matter to me because I'm often faced with providing front of house along with stage sound. I'm also tasked (by genre of music) with having a certain amount of low end that needs to be clean and clear in the house as well as being loud and even across the venue or room. Therefore, I play with the rules as outlined scientifically. If my rig was just a stage monitor, that would be different. If I wanted breakup from a speaker that would be different. If I didn't need off axis tone to be as close to on axis as possible, that would be different.