Al Krow

Pulling you on to the Yammy thread if I may: Fyi Yamaha certainly had the AlNiCo pups with their higher end 1024/5 and 2024/5 basses in 2010 when these were brought out; the more budget end of the range retained the ceramic pups. Not sure what the pups were in the previous top end basses (e.g. BB1200, 2000, 3000, 5000) - need @AndyTravis or another BC'er with greater Yammy history than me to jump in to confirm that. The current series which came out in 2017 saw the the AlNiCos being extended to the whole range, with 'higher end' AlNiCos for the 734A/5A and P34/5 than the 434/5s and only the 234/5 still having ceramic. My experience is that the ceramics are indeed higher output / more punchy but 'flatter', and the AlNiCos more harmonically rich, which I personally prefer.

The resultant tone on my "slap patch" (which is essentially a tailored EQ) on my cheap-as-chips Zoom multifx is definitely impacted by the addition of a dual band compressor effect in the patch. In layman's terms the sound is noticeably crisper / less muffled on both the slap and pop. Is this what you would expect or could it simply arise from the fact that this is a digital effects patch and not necessarily particularly transparent?

With due respect to the Sire P7, it's not meant to be a passive bass IMHO. Stick with your excellent Yammy BBs if you just want passive. A P7 in passive mode is like a bike stuck in first gear.

You can put your Becos on at the same time. What else will it have on it? Mind you if you end up with a P7 bass, you won't be needing the MXR thump, you'll have all that tone shaping available on your bass.

Well must admit - it's given a new lease of life to my multifx having them as the centre piece of my two boards. Loving having the the Zoom paired with the Boss LS2 which allows me to parallel clean blend - something you can do internally on a Helix but not on the Zoom. The clean blend adds tonal authenticity and preserves low end and although cleverer folk than me have mentioned the risk of "comb filtering" when you put a digital pedal in a parallel loop as I have done with Zoom in the LS2's loop, it's not been at all noticeable in the fx patches I have got set up. And I can by-pass the Zoom altogether should I want, with the LS2, thereby further eliminating a layer of pedal noise (not that the board is noisy at all given the isolated PSU from the Iso5). Having the Smoothhound for wireless and Mosaic for octave up (which the Zoom, bless it, is pants at) gives me access to pretty much all the fx I'm going to be using live (other than perhaps a decent synth - but hey this is supposed to be a 'budget board'!) Might be compact but it's definitely brought a smile to my face

Seriously, they are very good e.g. twice the power of the market leading Ciocks DC5 for less than half the price, and even smaller. What's not completely clear from the pic is that if you want to use the long ends of the PSU leads i.e. the middle three in my pic above, you need to angle the HB Iso5 just a tad. Easily done with a bit of felt pad or similar, and frankly it angles / rests fine on the long ends anyway. Not an issue if you're happy using the short J ends (the end two in my pic) - but most of the time you'll want that for the pedal board above it, which in my case looks like this - and all powered by the HB Iso5 with a polarity reverse for the Smoothhound: PS the board itself is also a Harley Benton Thomann own brand - the HB 50M. Ideal for having the B1X-4 on it as it's just that little bit deeper at 17cm than the PT Nano+ or Nano

There is actually a technical reason for this I believe (although you'll need someone a few levels above my pay grade to explain the precise details!) - when combining pups whether it's P+J on the Sire or J+J on my Ibby you often seem to get a mid scooping effect, which can result in a sweeter tone (certainly the case on the Ibby - less so on the Sire) but is less punchy for the same reason. Have to agree it's not an issue on the Yammy PJ pups - but maybe that's 'cos they're pretty hot?

Interesting - you'll have noted that my initial impression was of the P+J together sounding a little 'insipid' which seems to be a variation (but obviously not exactly the same) of what you were getting. But the P pup by itself is just great and doesn't need a blended J in the way a lot of us do as 'standard' on our Yammy PJs.

Was just wanting a reminder about what the fault was on your P7 - to make sure I don't have the same on mine!

Nah - it's going to be a really nice alternative to my other couple of regular gigging basses. And it has the honour of being least expensive of my herd which makes it just perfect for CV laden East London pubs. Remind me what the issue was on yours, that meant that it didn't last more than one gig?

P7 arrived today! First impressions - very positive. A shade under 10 lbs (4.5kg = 9.9 lbs) which is fine and comfortable to 'wear'. The EQ is very versatile. Having a tone knob in addition to a 3 band EQ allows you to dial in a lot of variety. My preference is for the tone knob to be at around 8/10 which gives quite a sweet tone. The treble has a decent range from cut to boost. The bass EQ is just huge and needs, if anything, to be cut slightly otherwise it's going to dominate (and not in a good way!). Will need to get my head around the mids with a semi para range of 80 Hz to 2 kHz. Key annoyance for me are the two stacked pots which are 'sticky' with each other and dialling the bottom also moves the top - another excuse to replace these as well as their slightly cheap plastic appearance. In terms of the pups, I sense this bass is going to be mainly used in solo P, which I really like btw, occasionally J and hardly ever P+J blend, which feels a little insipid. So this bass provides a very nice set of complementary options to my purely passive Yammy PJ, which I typically use in either P+J or solo J these days. The active P on the Sire cuts through on the low B really well and won't, I suspect, require me to switch to the solo J which I do on my Yammy. As a PJ bass, it is in many ways a better stable mate to have alongside my Yammy BB1025 rather than it's sibling BB735A, which whilst active had many similarities tonally / pups / feel etc. So overall a big thumbs up in terms of very initial impressions and this will, when they start happening again(!), likely be a regular feature at our gigs.

HEALTH (WALLET) WARNING ABOUT STARTING THREADS LIKE THIS (note to self) If you scroll back to the OP a year back I had neither of the two cabs I was asking for your views on.

I'll do you a deal - I'll gig it the very next time you decide to come to hear us play and don't pull out at the last minute 😁 You can then report back what the audience is hearing and also how crap I am on bass!

The F112 is a more articulate, balanced and capable cab than my BF SC, but it is double the weight despite being approx the same size. The BB2 is nearer the F112 in terms of hitting the mark sonically but closer to the SC in weight, so potentially a really good compromise. So, yes, primarily portability in terms of why the SC, which is still a very good cab indeed and an undoubted step up from my predecessor Markbass cab it replaced, has hung around so long in my set up. And it's plenty 'good enough' for rehearsals and gigs.

Interesting you found the F112 lacking mid punch. It has both a dedicated mid speaker and, if anything, a reputation for being strong in the mids. But not all marriages work and clearly this cab was not meant to be for you and your wooden stages! It's very happy to have come home 😊

Ah I now get what you're saying i.e. it's a venue specific frequency that was causing the boominess. Absent a sound engineer who can have a listen whilst the band is playing live, and adjust on the fly taking account the number of 'bodies' in the audience etc., I don't know an easy fix other than a bit of trial and error and remembering what worked / didn't for the next time you're there.

@Dood - thanks Dan, excellent & helpful post. FWIW I've rarely found that boosting bass works when playing live, if anything I'm usually doing the opposite on either an active bass or amp EQ: cutting the bass a touch and typically giving the mids a nudge at 250 Hz (the latter more so with BF cabs than my Fearless F112). The one exception will be for slap bass where a mid cut / treble boost is more likely to be the order of the day. Gotcha "ponk" = "anti-clank" 😁

@dave_bass5you mentioned you were struggling with low end with the F112 more than the Berg, so the offending freq's must, by definition, be at the lower end? What am I missing here? You can obviously start cutting low end at whatever starting point you want with a variable HPF eg you can start at 80Hz with a 4 string to tighten things up (or 60 Hz with a 5 string) ie you don't need to just focus on the low end crud which something like a Thumpinator deals with, which cuts steeply from 28Hz. @NancyJohnson have you just introduced a whole new term "ponky"? 😁

Classic case for using a decent HPF to get the most out of that excellent cab?

Always a mistake to venture south! And even more risky to the wallet if you're heading back via Mark at Bass Direct. My two most expensive basses at the time I bought them were entirely his fault 😁 My recommendation of Bergs was borne out of the fact that the Berg CN212 I had (and which now adorns Dave's mantle piece) was right at the top of the cabs I have had in terms of articulation, power handling and tone. It's obviously not a 112, but I can only imagine that the quality of Berg 112 cabs will be entirely comparable. The only thing that has held me back from going down the Berg 112 route was their power handling - I would have wanted / needed to go for a pair rather than just the one and my quest has been very much for a "one stop shop" single cab solution. But you are looking to go for two 112s so they could be perfect for you. Hopefully @Dood will be along shortly to expound on the virtues of Berg 112 cabs.

Thanks Chris for clarifying that point. As I mentioned above - that's a really neat feature! And I'm already loving the fact that it's a horn and not a hissy piezzo tweeter! What might also be really helpful for other readers on this thread, and for balance, is to get your considered thoughts on your three BF cabs. It would be interesting whether you agree my broad conclusions about the SC vs BB2 with your Aguilar AG700 & Sadowsky / Mike Lull basses.

Thanks Dave. Been reflecting on this and I think the better statement is that "the best way to test a cab or rig is to gig or rehearse with it use it in the situation you're going to be playing it. So if your main / primary / most important use is going to be live, test it in a live mix (without and with earplugs!); if your main use is at home then try it out at home". My F112 is 99% used and pretty much daily(!) at home and as you said "on hearing it at home I couldn’t imagine a finer cab." My SC on the other hand has been almost entirely used at rehearsals and gigs and after 18 months I've got a very good idea of how it sounds / works in that environment. But it also makes sense that you test any bit of gear in the most demanding environment you're going to be using it in, which I totally accept may well be in live band mix, to make sure it can handle / has enough headroom for those circumstances. I appreciate that many folk only have one cab (despite having several basses!) but the point still stands. Wise.

Been a bit of a pedal board fest for me this weekend! Metro 24 board also now set up and following the same theme as the budget mini board (which is going to be first one I'll be taking out on the road) posted above i.e. centred on a multifx. Signal chain: Smoothhound-->Boss SY1 with Red Ripper in its parallel loop--> HX Effects-->SA Manta-->VT DI. One Spot CS6 underneath and own dedicated PSU for the Helix.

If that's correct, Dave, that would be doubly neat as it would leave the woofer able to focus more on the mids and lows. Win win. I actually quite like the tone with HF dial set at 8/10 or so; it really is very articulate. Not sure now why I hesitated in getting the BB2 before, perhaps based on some friendly fire which suggested that topping out at 4kHz shouldn't make much of a difference (on the SC and the ST). It noticeably does.

Bit of a shock response from the missus, just now (must be going down with a bug or something)! I explained that the BB2 edged it over the SC for me sonically, and I thought that Monsieur P le Chat was a bit mad letting it go for such a good price only having had 6 months, particularly as he'd felt it sounded a LOT closer to what he was after when paired with my AO900 rather than his Ashdown, so actually it's his head he needs looking at? Mentioned I'd had my SC for 18 months 'cos it's easily the lightest decent cab out there. She asked "if that's the case, why was I thinking about selling it then?" Hmmm...she's got a point...it is still the perfect "grab'n'go" cab. @Merton I think you've just replaced your SC, what's taken its place and you glad you made the move?