LawrenceH

Good to see the best thread on BC still going strong! [quote name='M-N-Y' timestamp='1326311976' post='1495395'] Not someone you would normally associate with funk,but this track and the album it comes from 'Aliens Ate My Buick' is a blinder. [/quote] I dunno, Dolby was a bit of an 80s UK funk-master on the quiet. Check out Magic's Wand, one of his: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9fjN5lUgYo[/media] Or with his own band, strangely familiar The bass tone in this is to die for IMO [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEjpTxF2-NY[/media]

[quote name='Skezza' timestamp='1326283018' post='1494828'] Im sure you correct but is it ?? skez [/quote] Yup. Look at the spec sheet from a typical 8 ohm bass guitar driver from Eminence, B&C etc. The nominal impedance will be listed as 8 ohms. Re, which is the DC resistance, will be in the T/S specs and typically somewhere between 5 and 7 ohms. This is what you are measuring with your multimeter. The impedance plot on the driver datasheet will be a complex curve with a peak at resonance, falling to a mimimum slightly below 8 ohms around a few hundred Hz, then rising again. The actual measured impedence in a cab will be different again according to cab size and design. Despite all that, the Markbass will be fine driving a pair of these drivers in parallel in a typical vented box.

I do wonder with these roadworns what else is going on. They always seem to be light weight, and with cracking tone. The 'classic' series which is the nominal equivalent is quite good (I have one and have tried others) but not so uniformly incredible...I wonder if they are using select light bodies, or if they are thinner, or something. I've actually wondered about getting a RW just for the tone/playability, and refinishing it!

Just a thought...my default playing style is quite syncopated, I listen to a lot of funk and latin stuff and as a result push a lot of beats by a 16th or so. If I do this with some drummers who don't usually play those styles it f*&^s them RIGHT up. But funk drummers have no problem at all. Could your playing style, or someone else that the drummer is trying to lock with, messing him up? Another suggestion, practising with a click will probably be more effective if you do it in the context of recording....listening back to a recording done to a click track can be pretty brutal and speed up the learning a bit!

Maybe interesting to people wondering how much of a difference these might make... At a NYE gig where I was doing sound, the speakers were sat straight on the stage, which was contributing a lot to a boomy sound. Ringing out the monitors I found corresponding feedback centred around ~300Hz. Sitting the speakers on 2" thick stiff structural foam pads which we'd brought along 'just in case', gave greater than 6dB extra headroom before feedback. The sound tightened up very noticeably too, to the extent that I had to put some low mids back in having previously cut a broad swathe from ~200-600Hz. So mechanical decoupling can definitely be worthwhile, and I thought it's nice to have an example where you can roughly quantify the extent.

[quote name='ead' timestamp='1326288576' post='1494927'] ...assuming friction had been banned [/quote] Nope, wouldn't matter - if the energy from the string resonates the wood without altering the string's vibration then it is a self-amplifying system, so some of that magically generated energy can be used to re-trigger the string every so often to compensate for frictional losses. [quote name='Muzz' timestamp='1326293753' post='1495036'] Now we can all have a nice big row about the relative proportions of the above - I'm going for 50/25/20/5. I'm prepared to negotiate on the first three... [/quote] Depends on the limits you set though. I'd say with certain combinations the difference would be 1% or less (what is the % measuring though? Not straightforward). OTOH I choose to compare 1/2" thick soft pine cut across the grain, so that it's[i] just[/i] stiff/strong enough not to snap when you pluck the string. Versus carbon fibre.

[quote name='gafbass02' timestamp='1326269698' post='1494589'] Brilliant. All so sadly true ! Fbooked [/quote] Me too, thanks to the OP for posting this!

[quote name='Johnston' timestamp='1326045703' post='1491538'] Acoustics would be different would they not . Do they not need the wood to vibrate to create the sound [/quote] Wood makes a big contribution to the tone of an acoustic instrument, but apparently a skilled luthier 'compensates' for different wood types by using thicker or thinner sheets with more or less bracing to manipulate the variables independently. The most prized wood is sitka spruce, a type of pine, because it has a very high stiffness:weight ratio. [quote name='ead' timestamp='1326285716' post='1494885'] I think that's about right. In terms of physics, an electric bass uses the generator effect by moving a conductor (the string) in a magnetic field (the pickup) to generate an electric current. It is possibly the case that the bridge and the fret are [b]not "fixed points"[/b] so to speak and that [b]vibrations in the wood will cause tiny variations in their relative position[/b]. These variations may manifest themselves as small tonal differences that could be attributed to the construction of the bass. IMHO obviously [/quote] If the body of the instrument is resonant enough that you can hear this significantly when you tap it, then that is resonance that will transfer when the string vibrates. If energy is transferred to the body/neck of the guitar then it affects the string vibration, these are just inescapable physical facts. What matters is whether significant resonances are present in the bandwidth of the string harmonics. Construction could make a difference by increasing the stiffness/altering damping elements as with the acoustic, though generally I think there's less to play with in solid bodied instruments. Laminates will all be pretty stiff and I'd bet that a lot of guitars built by luthiers that use exotic wood combinations will be very stiff, with the pickups/pre dictating the tone more precisely as a result. But a simple maple-neck bolt-on will not be anything like as stiff, and resonances will be lower - more in the range of significant harmonic output. That talkbass thread uses a great thick lump of lumber. It's going to be pretty stiff (and coincidentally it's made of pine - like those acoustic guitar tops!). As I've said before, if wood didn't contribute to tone then dead spots wouldn't happen. Also physics would be wrong and we'd have a form of perpetual motion machine based on plucking a string. Which would be nice.

[quote name='Phil Starr' timestamp='1326186084' post='1493337'] I'd really advise any bass player to avoid 4 or 16 ohm drivers. Most of the available ones were designed as 8 ohm drivers and then offered as a service to customers as 4/16 by simply adding a different voice coil. Because the rest of the speaker was designed to work optimally with the 8 ohm coil they are usually not as good as the 8 ohm version. Guitarists get away with it because they are not so interested in the bottom octave (two if you include the one we have that they don't). Changing the coil also changes all the speakers parameters so they no longer match the box. Stick to the recommended drivers, they were chosen for a reason. [/quote] This is a valid point. OTOH most 4 ohm 410s will use 16 ohm drivers and there are some of those that work very well. Getting the correct specs for alternative ohm versins can be tricky though. That 18Sound I linked to is specifically 16 ohms though, including frequency plots, T/S data. I'd generally be more concerned using 4 ohm drivers because of the series wiring effect on inductance. Safest option is definitely to go with the recommended deltalites, but bear in mind the horn loading cut-off means you will presumably still have the low bass output capability of a good 'normal' 210. I certainly found that with the Jacks (but for a lot of people this will be enough if you like the voicing)

[quote name='jimbobothy' timestamp='1326139798' post='1492904'] The trus-rod is pretty much the same as it was before the install so I can only think that the inserts change how the body and neck vibrate in relation to each other somehow. It played really nicely before the inserts were installed, now it's not as nice [/quote] I have noticed that the necks on my Fenders will shift when I take them off for any length of time, and when I put them back on it takes them a while to get back to where they were. Giving them a good firm flex back and forth a few times seems to help. Before anything drastic might be worth letting it settle, and then re-checking the relief, action etc.

[quote name='Prime_BASS' timestamp='1326154983' post='1493217'] I would say Beethoven has a particular finesse on a piano, and has trademarks, or a style. I don't recall him ever punching the piano strings. [/quote] You saw Beethoven?! (are you Bill S. Preston by any chance? ) Interesting example though as Beethoven employed some very thick, percussive bass voicings to try and extract maximum power from the piano. His cadenzas for Mozart's piano concertos are pretty shamelessly flash too. But more than for the piano, look at great string players/composers of the past and there are a fair amount of crazy bangs, bashes and scrapes going on as the intensity builds. It doesn't make any sense at all when taken out of context. I honestly can't understand criticism based on a video that starts most of the way through whatever it is they are playing and where the audio recording quality renders it unintelligible. As I said, I'm no VW fan and I def don't want to emulate what he does (not that I could), but on the better quality vid it doesn't even sound controversial to my ears, just a modern bass guitar equivalent of something like a classical study piece.

For acoustic-y gigs where you want a discreet little combo that can also perform, there is nothing more unobtrusive than those tiny AER bass amps. They are surprisingly powerful, and very well made.

[quote name='silddx' timestamp='1326068620' post='1491996'] We know Victor is a fabulous and immensely musical bassist. The questions surround the athletics audience, and perhaps dear Victor's monetary exploitation of their needs. [/quote] Not sure I get what you're saying. Athletics? Also, are you complaining about a musician playing for money? In the first clip, he seems to be playing pretty well it's just distorted on the mic. More importantly though, the recording obviously starts most of the way into the music. Start listening to a Bartok sonata 9/10ths of the way through and that makes no sense whatsoever either

People do like S**t, but singling out VW, compared to all the X factor rubbish, seems bizarre to me! I'm not very familiar with his stuff, but that clip with clear sound is great. That 'fast stuff at the end' makes total sense in the context of the piece. Listen to Liszt, Rachmaninov, Paganini, Mozart, even back to Bach and you hear that sort of concluding climactic pyrotechnic element occurring time and again. I'm not saying VW is their equal, but that he's approaching the bass in this piece as a vehicle for solo musical expression and compositional development and the music ebbs and flows accordingly. The fact that you can also use the bass to lay down a solid groove is neither here nor there really.

[quote name='kennyrodg' timestamp='1326035260' post='1491315'] The cab sounds pretty good as it is but having bought it not built it I think I'll delve inside to see what the drivers are. [/quote] While you're at it, weigh them to see if a neo 'upgrade' is actually worth the difference and for which potential models. One drawback of those 18Sound drivers assuming they're more or less suitable is they're each still nearly a kg more than the deltalites. I'm pretty sure other manufacturers will have had 16 ohm deltalites at some point, there are enough 8 ohm 2x10s on the market!

BFM himself will probably be along to advise...but 16 ohm drivers does limit your options somewhat. Maybe the 18Sound 10NMB420? http://www.eighteensound.com/index.aspx?mainMenu=view_product&pid=274 Alternatively, could be worth seeing if replacement 16ohm deltalites are available as OEM from any cab manufacturers

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' timestamp='1326031629' post='1491255'] The weird alignment in BFM cabs means you can't use WinISD to predict stuff. [/quote] Below horn loading it behaves pretty much like a reflex box IIRC, I had issues with the similar Jack 10 and made a hornresp model and a winISD model (ignoring the area of the horn) and compared both those to the measurements. 200Hz-ish the horn loading starts to take over I think? The hornresp model was pretty good actually. As far as I understand BFM cabs require drivers with a rising midrange (to help fill the hole in the mids introduced by the horn design), the steeper the better, which makes the eminence offerings (such as the deltalite ii and one of the basslites?) pretty much the only good options.

[quote name='bubinga5' timestamp='1325893862' post='1489669'] it is a 75.. but the spacing (for some reason) is set at the 60's position on the MIJ jazz basses [/quote] But, that bass you are showing looks like 70s spacing, not 60s hence my rather surprised question - it's hard to tell from photos so I may well be wrong. I have seen only one 75RI Jap jazz (that wasn't a Geddy or a Marcus) that had 70s spacing before.

Is that a Jap RI with 70s PU spacing?!

[quote name='chris_b' timestamp='1325799633' post='1488115'] [size=4]Yes it does and yes it is.[/size] [/quote] You cunningly cut off the key part of what I said. About changing the sound. For the OP looking to buy, they should consider whether they like the sound of peak limiting in general, and the TC implementation in particular. [quote name='chris_b' timestamp='1325799633' post='1488115'] [size=4]Of course you could. You'd be starting with an amp that is twice as powerful.[/size] [/quote] Exactly, but you said it's [size=4]'236 watts...processed and boosted to 450 watts[/size]'. Which it isn't, because that statement makes no sense. It's 236 watts with a form of peak limiting on the pre-amp to reduce peak-average signal ratio. I'm not trying to have a go or be pedantic, there just seemed to be a fundamental misunderstanding of what is going on which obscures the fact that tonal changes will occur. A TC 450 will not sound the same as an equivalent pre-amp without compression, boosted through a more powerful amp to the same perceived average loudness level. Whether you think this is a tonal compromise or an enhancement is down to personal preference, of course. Some people may not even hear the difference, that's fine, though I'd be surprised if a bassist couldn't if they A/Bed them. A lot of people say it sounds like a valve amp...but there are many different flavours of valve amp and to me it sounds like the 'bad' kind! The OP may love it, and shouldn't rule it out on spec, but IMO it's worth knowing what it does and that you could do something very similar with a different more powerful amp using outboard units if so desired but not be stuck with it.

[quote name='chris_b' timestamp='1325789652' post='1487836'] [size=4]Sorry guys but this is total bollocks!!!!![/size] [size=4]The 236 watts is processed and boosted to 450 watts or 750 watts. These amps are putting out their stated levels of volume. TC are some of the loudest amps into [i]any[/i] cabs. [/size] [/quote] The 236 watts are not 'processed and boosted'. The preamp signal is processed to ensure maximum perceived volume from the full 236 watts RMS the amp is capable of outputting. This may well make it louder than a 500w amp without such processing, but it will also sound different. I don't like the tone of these amps, but whether that's the compression algorithm or the low-mid emphasis I can't say for sure...I suspect a bit of both. Anyone who does like it, I'm not knocking that. But with a 'real' 450 watt PA amp, parametric EQ and a studio multiband compressor I could get a 'louder' sound still.

[quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1325774739' post='1487457'] but I think most cabs are breakable if you let that situation arise. [/quote] Absolutely, exacerbated by the fact most of us use ported cabinets. Although it reduces cone excursion in the midbass, below resonance the ported box provides no damping so cone movement increases compared to the equivalentsized sealed cab. It's easy to generate massive sub-bass frequencies, lower and more powerful than those of the bass notes themselves, just from thumping the strings, and these are probably the easiest way of wrecking your cab at high power! Best solution is a steep sub-bass filter, like on most decent PA amps.

[quote name='pietruszka' timestamp='1325765630' post='1487209'] So I don't get this out of phase business, all this cabs aren't rated to what they're advertised and sold with [/quote] Phase is a separate issue and IMO one that bassists rarely encounter as a problem when mixing cabs. Most of our cabs are tuned fairly similarly, in the region 45-60 Hz. Any significant cancellations will be in a narrow band and in the low bass region, it may well be very audible if you A/Bed it and it would matter for PA but for bass guitar you're probably not going to notice, and it won't affect the majority of your 'tone' which is really more about the mid-range. [quote name='Lozz196' timestamp='1325756511' post='1487018'] Run flat out, the 210 may have been pushed, [b]but din`t get anywhere near that[/b]. The rig ran fine, and sounded great. [/quote] When it works, this is why it works. All kit is being run with plenty of headroom. [quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1325750411' post='1486925'] I always have conservative expectations from cabs and [b]EQ and bass boost can add a lot to the equation[/b].... [/quote] This is why it doesn't always work! If you consider the signal from a passive jazz bass then probably well less than half the total energy is in the lowest octave of the bass. But stick a J Retro in there for example and you have up to 15dB of bass boost centred at 50Hz. In power terms that is an astonishing 32 times as much power as the passive signal! Even if you 'only' add 6dB boost that is still 4 times as much power in the bottom octave as the original passive signal. Adjust the gain at the amp to compensate and suddenly your signal is dominated, in power terms, by low bass. But having adjusted the gain it'll now sound [b]quieter[/b] than before even though the total power output is the same, because volume perception is dominated by the mid-range. So you turn up the amp to a similar subjective loudness than before, just with a bit more bass. Now, the speakers are seeing more total power (watts) and far more of that signal is concentrated in the bottom octave where mechanical excursion, rather than thermal handling, is the practical limit on speaker output. Any weak link in the chain will be evident. This is all further complicated by what the (pre-)amp may do to the signal in terms of adaptive compression (as in the TC heads), high pass filters etc, not to mention any pedals/FX. But overall I hope the message that comes across is that bass guitars can vary massively in their output characteristics, and what may work flawlessly in one scenario will struggle in another. So to have a good idea of what will work for you, understand the nature of your particular desired bass tone. If you constantly boost the bass by a significant amount or run your kit at full tilt then long excursion drivers are much more likely to make a worthwhile difference to you and matching cabs becomes important. If not, then don't worry about it.

[quote name='Ou7shined' timestamp='1325256921' post='1481399'] I find that those with an opinion, tend to describe the tone of a neck based on the colour of the fingerboard wood rather than it's actual density which if anything should make the most difference - so according to accepted popular [s]ramblings[/s] belief maple = bright and rosewood = dark... but I have yet to hear someone describe an ebony board sounding brighter than maple and yet it is infinitely more brittle and dense. I have swapped two similar necks, one had maple the other rosewood. There was a difference in tone between the two. One neck had a better fit. I believe herein lies the real answer to the audible nuances. [/quote] Funny, I'm sure I've heard ebony described as being a very bright-sounding fretboard wood. OTOH ebony's far less common than maple so perhaps that explains a relative lack of comments? Of course, the maple tends to be lacquered which further complicates the issue. I have to say that my subjective opinion based on playing quite a few maple v rosewood basses is that the maple does indeed tend towards being brighter, a conclusion I came to long before I started reading forum ramblings! Why it should be, I don't know since it seems so minor a component of the neck's total mass/structure. A while ago I asked a question about the effect of fret profile on tone...as intuitively the nature of the metal-metal contact seems like it could make a significant difference, but no-one seemed to have much to say either way. My own experience is that bigger, flatter frets give more of a grinding, clanking sound which I like. Shame all my basses have tiny vintage fret profiles really! Btw Muzz is probably spot on IMO, just depends how much you care about that 5%!

Unfortunately the weather has stopped me properly testing this, so alas no freq responses/waterfalls, but I've managed to check the box resonance and play some bass/recorded music through it at reasonably decent volume. Shelf port makes the tuning frequency a bit sketchy but it has come out at 58 Hz, so not quite the figure of 55 I'd decided on but perfectly acceptable, reinforcing the upper bass but not giving that dreaded, boomy 'hump'. For testing purposes I used a mixer/DI into QSC PLX2402, a 'proper' PA amp. Incidentally this would make a fabulous amp for a truly high-powered rig that was still light enough for an easy load. Recorded music sounds solid enough, no tweeter means my perception is dominated by the lack of shimmery high end on full range material but it extends high enough for my purposes (much more than a 12" Ashdown blueline, for example) and it is definitely a lot less 'honky' than a Deltalite, sounds quite neutral. The bass is not dominant, there isn't any boom, but it is there and authoritative when the overall volume is turned up - I'd describe it as tight and punchy which subjectively matches with what the model would suggest. Bass guitar on recorded tracks sounded very good to my ears. I tried the cab both unlined and lined, using 1 to 2 inches of Monacor wool/poly wadding throughout except around the port. Testing this on vocal tracks, it surprised me how minor the difference was. I think this may be a combination of the braces and rough ply acting to make the inside a bit less regular, and the wadding not absorbing much below 1k. I suspect that lack of tweeter made a difference as well, I have found before that imperfections are a lot more obvious when you have full-range signal. On bass guitar it sounded very good. I was using a battered but good 80s Jap Fender jazz, and the growly loveliness of the tone came across well without over-emphasis of any part. I can imagine for some gigs, EQ-ing to replicate the tone of more typical bass speakers would indeed be useful as Phil suggested, but I think it will do well set flat for most of the time. Again, a nice tight sound. No boom, and at low volume this suggests real bass might be under-represented, but turning it up to (loud) rehearsal volume gives a (IMO) very well-balanced sound and just emphasises the importance of Fletcher-Munson curves when auditioning loudspeakers for gigging. A relatively brief burst of real power to get the cones moving by a good cm or more peak-peak was very impressive, and suggests that from the performance perspective this cab will easily manage what I want. Bass end didn't seem to be struggling either from fart-out or chuffing. Weight of the prototype is ~7.75kg, quite heavy really (eg half a kilo more than the Genz Shuttle even without hardware, though that's a 12l smaller cab). I hope to lose a fair bit of this with the poplar. Disappointingly several things got in the way that slowed me down and I'm back to Edinburgh tomorrow, so I won't get to the 'real' cabs this time. But I'm hoping to have the ply machine-cut for accuracy and progress further in the near-ish future. User 'Discreet' on here has given me some very helpful advice and suggestions for finishing. Obviously the prototype was a rough bodge with no aesthetic considerations at all but for the real thing I will take much more care. One concern is the softness of poplar compared to birch, so I may yet go down the carpet route to avoid obvious dents. I know from previous cabs that Duratex-type paint won't protect it enough. The polyurea spray is still a possibility. Further suggestions of what to do and what to avoid welcomed. What are other people's preferences aesthetically?