A 600W, three cabinet, bi-amped rig.

[danlea]

I'm not going to be taking this entire rig to a concert any time soon (we never play anywhere without a PA anyway), but for rehearsals it unbelievable! You can see the details in my signature, but I'm not posting to brag - I'm doing it to share some observations:

I've just recently bought the [url="http://www.gallien-krueger.com/products_blx_series.html"]GK 210BLX-II[/url] so that I could switch to bi-amp mode. Of course I could do this with just the Trace 1x18 and 2x10 and the clarity does improve but the bass loses focus and punch, as you'd expect from a 1x18. The logic was that an extra 2x10 would sort out this problem and allow me to enjoy the lovely sound of the highs from a 2x10 that isn't being pushed for bass (I'm not generally a fan of the sound of tweeters), as well as providing a larger speaker area and in fact boosting the overall volume as happens with the bi-amp mode in any case (not something that can be generalised - this kind of bi-amping is primarily for tone, not volume).

I went for the GK because a) it's just about the cheapest option and b) because it's sealed for "traditional attack and projection". It doesn't need to push the boundaries of deep bass since it's sitting on top of a 1x18! I'm afraid I can't comment on the cab as a product in its own right as I haven't tried it out by itself. As for the rig as a whole...

The sound is immense, and the volume it's capable of can have any drummer begging for mercy. In fact when I took my ear-plugs [ER-15s] out at the end of the rehearsal I was genuinely shocked at how loud it was. At first I put a fairly hefty EQ cut at the very low end, but then realised that a better option was to stuff the ports of the 1x18 with sponges I had bought a while back for testing out the old Trace Elliot tuning system, essentially making this too a sealed cabinet. The result is that my EQ setting is now almost flat, with only a very slight dip at around 600 Hz (this constitutes my mid-cut) and a boost of some of the high mids (lets not forget that the highs are only going to 2 ten inch speakers, but I don't really want to drop the level of the amps low channel) and it gives me the best of everything, aside from a compact, light-weight rig (or all-valve, if that's your thing). One benefit of having a flat EQ (as opposed to needing a boost in the bass region) is that I can push the input gain to a more suitable level for general playing without clipping occuring when I really punish the strings. Incidentally the cross-over is tentatively set at a middle of the road 500Hz or thereabouts, and I use a moderate level (~40% of max) of low end compression, but almost no high end compression (~5% of max).

OK, so the rig is as tall as I am (~5'11"), and definitely a lot heavier, but at least it's modular! In any case, if anyone's thinking about this kind of setup, all I can say is, "Do it, do it, do it!!!" I'd primarily recommend it for those who already have decent cabinets and don't want to have to trade up to an entirely different, and likely very expensive system, as was my situation. This enormous sound upgrade cost me only £175 (could've been less if I'd have waited around for a suitable second hand cabinet)

Edited October 7, 2009 by danlea

[waynepunkdude]

I do a very similer thing all my low end goes through a 15" and the full range goes through a 4X10", because the low end is taken care of it means I can cater the mids/highs without worrying about low end.

I gig mine it is amazing.

Edited October 2, 2009 by waynepunkdude

[MythSte]

[quote name='waynepunkdude' post='615061' date='Oct 2 2009, 06:13 PM']I do a very similer thing all my low end goes through a 15" and the full range goes through a 4X10", because the low end is taken care of it means I can cater the mids/highs without worrying about low end.

I gig mine it is amazing.[/quote]

have you tried them round the other way yet? Id be interested to see if you notice much difference!

[waynepunkdude]

[quote name='MythSte' post='615066' date='Oct 2 2009, 06:18 PM']have you tried them round the other way yet? Id be interested to see if you notice much difference![/quote]


You mean low end through the 4X10 and full range through the 15"?

[MythSte]

[quote name='waynepunkdude' post='615068' date='Oct 2 2009, 06:20 PM']You mean low end through the 4X10 and full range through the 15"?[/quote]

That i do!

[waynepunkdude]

[quote name='MythSte' post='615071' date='Oct 2 2009, 06:20 PM']That i do![/quote]


Not as yet I need to try all kinds of combinations but the way I have it set up is so savage I just leave it, I will round to it though.

[danlea]

[quote name='waynepunkdude' post='615061' date='Oct 2 2009, 06:13 PM']I do a very similer thing all my low end goes through a 15" and the full range goes through a 4X10", because the low end is taken care of it means I can cater the mids/highs without worrying about low end.[/quote]
Also, you could try splitting them entirely to see if the high end benefits from not having to deal with any really low end stuff.

[alexclaber]

[quote name='danlea' post='615050' date='Oct 2 2009, 06:04 PM']At first I put a fairly hefty EQ cut at the very low end, but then realised that a better option was to stuff the ports of the 1x18 with sponges I had bought a while back for testing out the old Trace Elliot tuning system, essentially making this too a sealed cabinet. The result is that my EQ setting is now almost flat... ...One benefit of having a flat EQ is that I'm can push the input gain to a more suitable level for general playing without clipping occuring when I really punish the strings.[/quote]

Actually you'd be less likely to clip anywhere along the signal chain if you left the 1x18" ported, plus the 18" would be less likely to run out of excursion.

I bet those 10"s run a lot cleaner without the lows going through them.

Alex

[Bill Fitzmaurice]

[quote name='alexclaber' post='618581' date='Oct 6 2009, 09:20 AM']Actually you'd be less likely to clip anywhere along the signal chain if you left the 1x18" ported, plus the 18" would be less likely to run out of excursion.


Alex[/quote]+1. With the added low frequency sensitivity gained by porting the 18 and the bass EQ cut more headroom is gained. The idea that flat EQ settings are of any value is intrinsically flawed, since neither amps nor speakers have flat response to begin with. The purpose of EQ knobs isn't to have them all pointed to 12:00, it's to have them set wherever they give the best result. If you can get the tone you want with the bass EQ cut by 3dB that's the equivalent of doubling the usable power from your head.

[thisnameistaken]

[quote name='Bill Fitzmaurice' post='618607' date='Oct 6 2009, 02:38 PM']If you can get the tone you want with the bass EQ cut by 3dB that's the equivalent of doubling the usable power from your head.[/quote]

OK this has confused me. I've heard that for every 3dB you need to double the power, but how does cutting 3dB at the EQ improve power output? Or if it does, is this bonus power ever usable, given that you've just removed 3dB from your sound in order to generate it?

I thought I might figure this out half-way through typing but I didn't. Please explain!

[alexclaber]

When you cut the lows on a bass amp it's akin to cutting the gain, i.e. turning the amp down, because most of the power demands for bass guitar are in the lows.

Alex

[Bill Fitzmaurice]

[quote name='alexclaber' post='618703' date='Oct 6 2009, 10:59 AM']When you cut the lows on a bass amp it's akin to cutting the gain, i.e. turning the amp down, because most of the power demands for bass guitar are in the lows.

Alex[/quote]And to paraphrase Mr. Franklin a watt saved is a watt gained.

[danlea]

[quote name='alexclaber' post='618581' date='Oct 6 2009, 02:20 PM']Actually you'd be less likely to clip anywhere along the signal chain if you left the 1x18" ported, plus the 18" would be less likely to run out of excursion.[/quote]
[quote name='Bill Fitzmaurice' post='618607' date='Oct 6 2009, 02:38 PM']+1. With the added low frequency sensitivity gained by porting the 18 and the bass EQ cut more headroom is gained. The idea that flat EQ settings are of any value is intrinsically flawed, since neither amps nor speakers have flat response to begin with. The purpose of EQ knobs isn't to have them all pointed to 12:00, it's to have them set wherever they give the best result. If you can get the tone you want with the bass EQ cut by 3dB that's the equivalent of doubling the usable power from your head.[/quote]

Sorry, I wasn't exactly clear regarding the benefit of a flat EQ. I meant as compared to my long-term traditional boost around the 100Hz mark. Yes, by leaving the cut in I could push the volume even higher, but at this stage it's absolutely unnecessary! I therefore decided to seal the cabinet to get the smoother natural tail-off, and because it genuinely sounded better.

[quote name='alexclaber' post='618581' date='Oct 6 2009, 02:20 PM']I bet those 10"s run a lot cleaner without the lows going through them.[/quote]

They do sound much clearer, particularly when responding to transients - they no longer sound like the clack of two poles, know what I mean?

Edited October 7, 2009 by danlea

[thisnameistaken]

[quote name='alexclaber' post='618703' date='Oct 6 2009, 03:59 PM']When you cut the lows on a bass amp it's akin to cutting the gain, i.e. turning the amp down, because most of the power demands for bass guitar are in the lows.[/quote]

Ah right, so it's like when my girlfriend buys some shoes and think she's saved twenty quid?

[alexclaber]

[quote name='thisnameistaken' post='619061' date='Oct 6 2009, 09:45 PM']Ah right, so it's like when my girlfriend buys some shoes and think she's saved twenty quid?[/quote]

Only if she was barefoot and empty of wardrobe at the time.

Alex

[Stylon Pilson]

[quote name='alexclaber' post='619276' date='Oct 7 2009, 08:04 AM']Only if she was barefoot and empty of wardrobe at the time.[/quote]

See, it's not just technical gubbins and jargon with the Clabe. You get wry analogy too.

S.P.