Dood

It deserves to be said again. Beautiful!!

For fear of sounding like I( am stating the obvious, have you not arranged an appointment to meet with the manager to discuss the issue in person. Take someone along to listen in too. Discuss the issues you have raised together. I don't think they will just happen to spot your thread on a forum.

I hope this gets sorted out. I know the manager of BC. He is a good person and will be helpful.

oh yes terrible.. look.. the best you can do is just take it to the tip.. tell ya what, I'll pop down and do that for you.. just pop it into the back of my car will ya.. before Steve gets here! ;o)

I don't think I have ever heard a bad word about the V8 to be honest. They are rather sought after. There's a chap over on TalkBass who pops his on top of an Accugroove el Whappo and then has the audacity to show off some amazing photos of his monster rig!! *'nan' from Catherine Tatee* ooooh the &*£&*$( liberty!!

[quote name='pete.young' post='12164' date='Jun 4 2007, 11:10 PM']Welcome back Alex, what would we do without you? Thank you for that explanation, which even a numpty like me can grok.

According to Eminence's web site:

Deltalite II 2515 -

Vas 204 litres
Recommended enclosure sealed: 42.5 - 48 litres

Basslite C2515

Vas 260 litres
Recommended enclosure sealed: 45 - 82 litres !

Hmm. Something doesn't seem to add up here. Finally I'm beginning to understand what Bill means when he
says that designs don't specify big enough cabinets for the driver parameters.

So in order to get the optimum bass response, you need a cabinet volume equivalent to the VAS ? It
can't be that simple, surely.[/quote]

I'm far from 'in the know' when it comes to cab designs, but certainly from the specs, 2x10 cones would be far more capable in a cab the size of an 810 than squashed into a 24x24x18 box. again, WINISD was the software of choice to play with!

[quote name='JPJ' post='12208' date='Jun 4 2007, 11:51 PM']Dood, I'll be really interested to hear how this works out. I have fancied a 6x10 setup for quite a while but have been put off by the low end rumble most of them produce (like a fully laden jumbo jet taking off). Both the Ampeg and the SWR I have tried have this run-away low end sound that I couldn't tame with the amp eq. Let us know soon how yours works out please?[/quote]

I think I know what you mean.When I tried the cab out in the shop, there wasnt any 'runaway' bottom end as such. Just 'extended girth' in comparison to 4x10's and 12's. The noticeable difference was if i had EQ'd for a smaller cab then plugged in the 6x'. I'd have to back the bass control off as the cab was so much more capable of producing that 'bottom' without having to crank the bass control. An idea I like. A lot. However, I do like to have a certain amount of 'kick' from my cabs, so the extended bottom end is very welcome. I hope to give the cab a good thrashing when the cones have 'broken in' a bit. I think the cab's voice will become a little more apparent then.

[quote name='peted' post='12210' date='Jun 4 2007, 11:56 PM']Yowza. I think Gamble's SWR 6x10 sounds awesome. The Ampeg I tried sounded woolly and crap. Can't wait to hear your new cab Dood.[/quote]

I had a play on the SWR and the MArkBass cabs down at Bass Merchant, along with the Warwick 611pro. I guess they would sound good with certain set ups, but I found the Warwick a little distant sounding, the MarkBass was good, but didnt give me the 'voicing' I was looking for and the SWR was really clear, but the tweeter let it down for me.Not so much bottom as the MB (which was the larger MB cab with the front facing ports). I'm not saying these were cr@p cabs. They were all very capable. I am overtly fussy when it comes to gear!

[quote name='joegarcia' post='12212' date='Jun 4 2007, 11:58 PM']Ooh that looks nice! Looks a tad difficult to move though. Does it not have a tilt back with wheels? Mind if I ask what they cost?
Glad you managed to try some Aguilar cabs in the end, am interested in the whole 2x2/12's versus 1x4/12 thing. Curious how they'd sound so different with the same speakers. Where the 2x12's quite big then?[/quote]

The cab is a mere 40kg, so it's a one man lift!! The handles on the side are in the right place for a big fella like me too. It has some lovely big rubber wheels and the usual tilt back handle built into the cab, so, no towel rail sticking out. The UK RRP is around 1200 quid and to be honest, importing and the additional 'costs' didnt make it worth the price difference I agreed on.(I had a bit of a deal including shipping!)

The aggies were excellent. I was sooo close to getting the 212's for a stereo set up. I have to admit, that in the shop, I found that the 212's performed better bottom than the 412. Again, the 412 was very impressive,but the weight of such a hooj cab put me off a wee bit, as the Epi' is so much lighter for a big cab. The aggies are very capable and in the absence of the Epi, I would have jumped straight on them.Awesome!
Bass Merchant were once again BRILLIANT with me and deserve a pat on the back for such patience with one of the fussiest (spelling??) customers! lol lol

oh.. I think the 2x12 cabinet is larger than half the size of the 412. Mebbe its the way they are ported? hmmm.. an interesting investigation to be had!


[quote name='joegarcia' post='12216' date='Jun 5 2007, 12:00 AM']Yea I heard a guy with an Ampeg 6x10 a while ago. He managed to make an SVT2 sound terrible with it, he didn't have any weird or extreme eq going on either. Can't be a particularly good cab I don't think, maybe it was dodgy or something.[/quote]

In general, I find Ampeg cabs to be middley with a rolled off top end.Mixed with the wrong amp and bass, it sounds muddy and lacking in clarity. On the flipside, with the right combination they can sound awesome.
Not my cup o' tea though!!

Dan

Just a quite reply... yes mate, you can get P basses with skinny necks. I have a Fender with a Jazz neck, and a Fender with a P bass (A) neck. they are so very similar, honestly. My P bass, so you can have a search for more information, is a Fender CIJ 1970's reissue. The model number is PB70US-xx. I bought mine new from Ishibashi. My mate has a 72 P bass.. and we reckon they are very alike.. but his has 'mojo' ;o)

Somewhere I have some pics.. but gawd knows what I did with them. They are definitely on BassTalk!

She's here! She's here! Yippeee!!! Though it's too late to crank her up... noooooooo... so I plugged into the stereo to see how it fairs. BLIMEY!

Already I am surprised at how good this cab sounds with just normal HIFI audio. I cant wait to hear what the cab sounds like up loud. I guess I'll be doing a full review for you all at the weekend.

[quote]UL-610
When you need to move air you have to have speakers -and the more the better! The UL-610 was a custom design made exclusively for bass legends Daryl Jones (Rolling Stones) and Christian McBride but we were so impressed with the results that the UL-610 has now become part of our standard production line. This monster is equipped with six 250 watt Epifani 10" drivers that handle an astonishing 1500 watts (RMS) of power. Utilizing two separate isolation chambers, the UL-610 delivers unsurpassed clarity and accuracy even at high decibel levels.[/quote]

Sorry to hear of your troubles. I had to wait a day extra for a delivery from another shop.. it was only a day.. but it was a long 24 hours!! Have you called them directly?

Hi Steve! I have never really dabbled with external MIDI gear, except for my Korg X3 workstation. Bit knackered now, but has a whole host of Dream Theater type sounds on. (Indeed, Derek Sherinian used to play one, way back)

My only other 'MIDI' stuff has all been in the 'virtual' world, using VST instruments to make my noises. Never really got a hold of working with them, but they have been a lot easier to get hold of than their hardware equivalents.

I have messed about with BFD for drums, Halion and Sampletank for synth noises and used amplitube and Ampeg SVX for guitar and bass noises respectively. They all have MIDI functionality in one way or another.


The only other MIDI I do is between my foot controller and my effects unit.

On a related note, one of the very few preamps that I have seen that have an effects loop between the bass input and the input gain control (pre amplification, pre EQ) is the Trace Elliot V-type. Just a great design for simplicity!

[url="http://www.aguilaramp.com/pdf/support_manuals_db680.pdf"]http://www.aguilaramp.com/pdf/support_manuals_db680.pdf[/url]


I have had a very brief look.. it appears the Di can be post or pre EQ. I would make the assumption that the post EQ sections is also post FX as well. There isnt a block diagram to refer to and I cant be bothered to read the whole manual. The EQ section is pre FX loop.

yup good point. I guess we need to know what the amp in question actually is! ;o)

There's another reason why wireless systems *can* sound a bit rubbish, especially in the bargain basement types. (in comparison to a good cable). They use a technique called 'companding' to help get a good strong signal from the transmitter to the receiver.

This means , that the signal is compressed by the transmitter (yup, like a normal compressor pedal for example) then the signal is shoved out the aerial. When the receiver picks up the signal, an 'expander' err 'uncompresses' the signal, in an effort to make it sound the same as the signal being fed into the transmitter. There are many reasons why this can be a bit hit and miss. Everything from quality of components, to just limitations in compreession/expansion can have an effect. There are good systems out there. There are also some pretty grim ones too. the choice seems to get lower if you use a B string.. and you may as well give up on em if you have an F# string lol lol!!

cool! try it! There are definitely many pro bands out there that swear by them.

[quote name='Dan_Nailed' post='11836' date='Jun 4 2007, 01:54 PM']You can't plug your bass directly into the compressor as it doesn't have a proper Hi-Z guitar input. -10 and +4 are both line-level standards that are meant to be used with already line-level inputs and outputs, such as other effects gear, preamps and poweramps.

The best place is in the FX loop, or ideally between your preamp out and poweramp in(if you have one).

If you plug your bass straight into the dbx you'll either get stupidly low signal and very unusable compression, or nothing at all. If you have an active bass things might be slightly better but your signal to noise ratio will still be terrible. You could go Bass>DI box>dbx if you wanted though. I think it's always better to compress after the preamp as you compress any boosts in EQ that you've put in previously.

As for amp DI out, if your amp DI has a Pre EQ/Post EQ button, make it post-EQ and it should include everything in the FX loop. This is what I do when sending a DI to the soundguy and I want my out front sound gated. However, most engineers like to use their own compression and EQ so I wouldn't worry too much about sending all your signal to the soundguy.[/quote]

I'm going to have to disagree Dan. pretty much every compressor rack that I have used has had a far higher input impedance than that of a passive bass and has worked fine IF as you say the pickups have enough output volume. Active pickups don't suffer to badly from from the impedance miss-match, having a far lower impedance. Low into high is fine. I do agree that if the bass is too quiet the s/n will be a bit grim. Pups like EMG for example are pretty hot and I find that I have to switch down to take care of the extra input gain.

I also have to disagree with the placement of compression after the EQ. It isn't wrong as such to do this, but there is a good reason not too, unless it is the effect you are hoping to get. I'll do my best to explain!

ok.. lets get theoretical.

We'll take it that we have plugged a bass into a preamp and then into a compressor. We will assume for this example that the bass is a flat response across the frequency spectrum to make my life a little easier explaining.

we'll set the compressor to kick in at -10dB

ok, if you strike a note down the bottom end of the scale, the 'bassy' sounds will go over the threshold and pull the compressor output level down closer to the -dB level.
Also if you hit a high frequency note and it goes over the threshold level, the compressor then pulls the whole output level down to the -dB level.

How's that sound so far? and frequency that goes over the threshold volume level will make the compressor pull the total output level down toward the threshold.

ok, here's my problem with putting the EQ before the compressor. Remember we are assuming the bass is flat response. (most basses have a greater bass end than top end)

ok, lets play a bassy note and a trebly chord at the same time. because both are a similar velocity the compressor pulls down both by the same amount towards the threshold.. you can stil hear them both clearly. good.

now. lets wind the bass end up to +15dB at say 40 Hz.

this is where it gets difficult to explain!! if the threshold of the compressor is -10dB, the bass frequencies need a whole 15dB less to kick the threshold of the compressor and drag the output right down by an additional 15dB.

now play a chord (something high up) and then strike a bass note whilst the top notes are sound. you will notice that the extra 15dB boost on those low notes will tug that output level down by that extra 15dB. You'll hear your bass note at the right volume, but because the total output volume of the compressor has been forced down ward.. your high notes / chords whatever will just disappear. Too much bass boost and you will loose top end and the compressor will sound woolly.

The only way round this on a budget compressor is to ensure it has a side chain filter, or.. go out and grab yourself a dual band or multiband compressor.

Failing that, simply move the EQ after the compressor, so it has no effect on the compressors threshold.

I have tried and tested this on many amps to the same effect.

a nice cheap rack compressor with said side chain filter is the Behringer Autocom.

I'd finish off by saying, that if you want a woolly bass sound that pumps annoyingly, set a lower threshold say -20dB and crank the ratio nice and high.. 4:1 or higher then pile on the bottom end on your EQ!

I hope this makes sense. It'd be easier with pictures!

The 'short' description would be that it is an amp and cab simulation in a pedal. It has a DI output that is 'meant' to simulate the sound of an amp and cab combination miked up, that can be fed to a PA. I know a lot of players that will feed the DI straight to the PA, but take the 'unnaffected' sound to their usual backline. You can treat the unit like a 'clever' DI box.

The sounds you can get out of the bddi are wide and varied. I understand that Geddy Lee only uses sansamp gear, instead of his old tour rig. You can get that Ampeggy crunch out of the pedal too.

If like me you are a fan of a HIFI tone, this pedal may not be for you. In that case, try the MXR M80. A very similar pedal, with extra switching options. The overdrive sound is ver different too.

I A/B'd the BDDI Vs the M80 at the last bass bash.

hoffman's law?

I'm glad you have said that, as my 'fiddling' with WINISD made the Deltalites the more desireable out of the lot.. though for looks alone (yes I know...) the CA2010 is my cup o' tea! MMMM Alu cones!

Wise words Andy.. defintely worth doing. It'd just take longer to get sorted out, if the UK side of distro is slow.

[quote name='Machines' post='11663' date='Jun 4 2007, 07:54 AM']A natural finish on the Bongo does help a bit in masking it's shape, I like.[/quote]

I agree!

*sings* There's a new cab on its way.. a new cab on its way.. I hope to have some info for you all later!

ah yes.. you beat me to it, re the previous threads. Infact the drivers have been discussed on other threads too. Another good place to find info is over at Bill Fitzmaurice's site.

When it comes to getting hold of eminence speakers, I *think* JPJ can. I'm not sure though.

I'm slightly put off my what *looks* like areally wide string spacing. Mebbe it's just that hooj bridge that makes it look that way?

I would like to add some details about the Hartke 4.5XL cab, as I see you have mentioned pairing it with a 1x15.

This will sound harsh, but trust me.. don't bother with the 115XL. On it's own its a nice cab.. and with less sensitive cabs its is fine, but the 4.4XL eats it for breakfast in every department. the 4.5 is deeper, bassier, fuller LOUDER and also has all the other benefits of 10" cones and the tweeter. If you want to pait the XL with any cab.. another 4.5 sounds amazing. I really dont mind admitting that I miss mine so much.. but I have a poorly back and am hoping my new cab will at least sound similar.

I really cant say anything bad about Hartke. (oh except for the transporter and VX ranges)

Feel the force Luke!! I sense he is near....