• 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.

Xsonics Club

#261
Ncognito said:
You CL400Peavey are a smart fella! You certainly called that one! A wonderful pairing!!!!! I'd never played a Streamliner or Shuttle before but I now see and HEAR why everyone loves them!!!!!
Click to expand...

I think the shuttles have a more intuitive EQ, and that the streamliners need a cab with the right mid content to sit in a mix. I also think a lot of people cycle through amps and never like their sound, but have been placing that blame on the amps, and not the cab they cling to.
 
#262
I agree. I knew a guy who went through cab after cab and worse, bass after bass over a period off several years just to find out it was his preamp that was sucking the life out of his sound. It literally took him years to finally try different amplification. And he kicked himself when he finally did. A real "duh" moment.
 
#263
Brad Johnson said:
I agree. I knew a guy who went through cab after cab and worse, bass after bass over a period off several years just to find out it was his preamp that was sucking the life out of his sound. It literally took him years to finally try different amplification. And he kicked himself when he finally did. A real "duh" moment.
Click to expand...

For years I thought I didnt like Ampeg amps. Couldnt get the sound I wanted out of them no matter what I tried. Turns out I dont care for a sealed cab. Pair an Ampeg amp up with a different cab, and the story changes a lot! I think the farther down the signal chain you go the more the link matters. Cab is most important, then amp, then effects, then bass...
 
#264
Brad Johnson said:
I agree. I knew a guy who went through cab after cab and worse, bass after bass over a period off several years just to find out it was his preamp that was sucking the life out of his sound. It literally took him years to finally try different amplification. And he kicked himself when he finally did. A real "duh" moment.
Click to expand...

Id love to say Id never done that,but unfortunately I have-though maybe not to that extent. I had bass I liked but was never able to coax the sound I was looking for out of it. Sold it to a guy I knew that I ran into later at an open jam. Played my old bass through his rig and loved it. Tried to buy it back but couldnt pry it from his hands!:D
 
#265
CL400Peavey said:
I think the shuttles have a more intuitive EQ, and that the streamliners need a cab with the right mid content to sit in a mix. I also think a lot of people cycle through amps and never like their sound, but have been placing that blame on the amps, and not the cab they cling to.
Click to expand...

I agree-Ive only played my Streamliner through the NeoX and Uber cabs.Sounds great through those-and Id assume through the Xsonics,but I can see a bigger wider sounding cab not working as well with that head. I actually added a stomp box EQ to my pedalboard recently and its great having a bit more tone control.Im thinking the added EQ might make cab matching easier.
 
#266
bassjam said:
I agree-Ive only played my Streamliner through the NeoX and Uber cabs.Sounds great through those-and Id assume through the Xsonics,but I can see a bigger wider sounding cab not working as well with that head. I actually added a stomp box EQ to my pedalboard recently and its great having a bit more tone control.Im thinking the added EQ might make cab matching easier.
Click to expand...

Its not that a wide cab doesnt work with the 900, its that you have to have some amount of articulation through the mids and upper mids to have presence in the mix.
 
#267
CL400Peavey said:
Its not that a wide cab doesnt work with the 900, its that you have to have some amount of articulation through the mids and upper mids to have presence in the mix.
Click to expand...

No I get what you are saying-and I agree. But some folks gave up on the 900 because of how it sounded with whatever cab they had. Adding an EQ to try before selling the cab or 900 is at least worth a shot. For example-I just got an Uber 115- sounds good with the Streamliner,but even better to me when I use the extra EQ.
 
#268
I found when I was running Eden rigs everybody raved about set flat...Ever look at a Eden head? lots of knobs...they sounded good when you turned them. If the world was flat ...well you get my point.
EQ is put on amps to turn and adjust... I can use the Mo West preamp in my bass and leave the head flat, or I can eq the head and leave the bass flat. I have aways said that all I want to do is make my bass louder. The Xsonics cabinets across the board do that with out overly coloring my tone. Tonight I fly the 212cf and tomorrow the 215CF. I only run a Shuttle Max12.0
 
#269
Oh you got an Uber 115 .. cool!!

bassjam said:
No I get what you are saying-and I agree. But some folks gave up on the 900 because of how it sounded with whatever cab they had. Adding an EQ to try before selling the cab or 900 is at least worth a shot. For example-I just got an Uber 115- sounds good with the Streamliner,but even better to me when I use the extra EQ.
Click to expand...
 
#270
Fretlessboy said:
I found when I was running Eden rigs everybody raved about set flat...Ever look at a Eden head? lots of knobs...they sounded good when you turned them. If the world was flat ...well you get my point.
EQ is put on amps to turn and adjust... I can use the Mo West preamp in my bass and leave the head flat, or I can eq the head and leave the bass flat. I have aways said that all I want to do is make my bass louder. The Xsonics cabinets across the board do that with out overly coloring my tone. Tonight I fly the 212cf and tomorrow the 215CF. I only run a Shuttle Max12.0
Click to expand...

+1 I had a few old eden amps and loved them-especially the sweepable EQ. I think in the case with the Streamliner the bass at 55Hz was low for some and I personally would have chosen a sweepable mid vs the 3 fixed centers.I guess thats all a roundabout way of saying Im really using the Empress Stomp EQ instead of the amps EQ- Ill turn the bass completely to the left on the amp and dial in the bottom I like with the Empress.Then sweep the mids and find the sweet spot. Maybe the long way around but works for me-and especially when I take a passive P Bass.

Looking at the website- the 215CF looks very appealing-Ill keep an eye out if you post a gig report.
 
#274
I have tried these loaded both ways...conventionally and push pull. The conventional load was nice sounding indeed... However; as a push pull cabinet the low end opened up a lot. And the power handling of the Xsonics cabinet is 800 watts in comparison to 600. A lot of the new breed cabinets share some similarities but also have differences as well. I guess it is like a box assorted tea's... everyone has their own cup.
 
#276
Art Araya said:
Tried to read all of this... Has anyone ever ABed an Xsonics to a Glasstone? Seems like they have some similarities. I wonder how they are alike and how they differ in terms of tone/range/volume.
Click to expand...

I have never heard nor played the Glasstone Lil G, but I'm certain it sounds excellent like everyone who has played one/owns one has said. I CAN say with a high level of certainty that the Glasstone will sound great because my earlier prototype also used the Faital Pro 12pr300 and was conventionally loaded as one can see in the attached pictures. That particular Xsonics prototype and the Lil G are more similar than they are different, IMO, but definately 2 different cabinets that's for sure. The Eminence 3012ho is what I use in the Xsonics 212CF because it sounded more pleasing to me and also handles more power. The Eminence drivers are more expensive than the Faital's, but the results justified the additional cost to my ears. It also made more sense to me to have two manufacturers with somewhat similar cabinets loading them with different speakers so there would certainly be quite a noticable "sound" and "tone" difference among other things between the two. I found the Faital Pro's to be more mellow and smooth than the Eminence 3012ho's which to my ears I found to be more aggressive, edgy, and growly which fit the bill for what I was looking for and trying to accomplish with my Xsonics offerings.

Push-pull loading sounds better to me than conventional loading for my cabinets and also makes the box bigger by putting the magnet structure outside the cabinet chamber, and a bigger box is almost always a good thing. With ultra compact boxes like these, any little bit of volume you can gain can be quite helpful for bass response.

I wish nothing but the best for the Glasstone gang as they are great guys and they're doing very well. Different horses for different courses as they say. It's very cool to have cabinet options. Makes sense that there's ketchup and mustard for the different tastes out there as well as Glasstone and Xsonics to cater to different "bass" and "audio" tastes!
 

Attachments

  • prototype 1.jpg
    prototype 1.jpg
    127.8 KB · Views: 91
  • Faital Pro 12pr300s.jpg
    Faital Pro 12pr300s.jpg
    164.6 KB · Views: 77
#279
Ncognito said:
I wish nothing but the best for the Glasstone gang as they are great guys and they're doing very well. Different horses for different courses as they say. It's very cool to have cabinet options. Makes sense that there's ketchup and mustard for the different tastes out there as well as Glasstone and Xsonics to cater to different "bass" and "audio" tastes!
Click to expand...

Well said, Nick! :)

There's no reason these two great cab companies can't peacefully exist together...it's not like there's only one company selling a traditionally loaded 212. :D



Anyone else notice that my paramour is on a TB sponsored vacation? ;)
 
#280
Xsonics2155CF_zpsbaef6de8.jpg

I looked at the 2155CF model on the Xsonics website and remember the comment that the Eminence 3015 really doesn't need the mids. I think this is not a case of needing a mid driver but rather, having the potential of providing another voice for the cab. Since the base configuration of 3015 drivers + tweeter with 4kHz crossover seems to work well, why not leave that intact and install a 2nd crossover for a 3015 drivers + Faital mid alignment with a switch to select one or the other rather than setting it up as a traditional 3-way. These will have noticeably different mid/treble voicing and should provide 2 flavors of good. Not knowing the lo/mid crossover details I think it would be safe to assume somewhere between 1-1.5 kHz. The 3015 has a bit of signature grind in the mids between 1.5-2.5kHz. Crossing the Faital 5" below this should provide a little smoother and sweeter mids with better off-axis dispersion which tops out just over 6kHz - plenty for bass guitar. The original 2-way voicing is a winner but for those looking for the option of a tweeterless version with more extended highs than the 3015 alone this might be sweet. I started a thread exploring the Eminence 3015/Faital 5" mid idea but it occurred to me the Xsonics 2155CF might be an ideal canvas to try this out.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back