Passinwind

[quote name='Phil Starr' timestamp='1481446201' post='3192267'] As the idiot who did most of the design I worked on the assumption that the fundamental makes up only about 25% of the signal from the bass. I used the only information I had to hand which was from some testing TKS were generous enough to share. It's impossible for any designer to have control over how their design will be used but if 6dB of bass boost (much less than doubling the amount of bass subjectively) was used then that 25% assumption means 100% and I'd have to assume the speaker was working right up against its limits for considerable amounts of time. [/quote] There was a long and sometimes contentious thread on Talkbass several years ago where many bases were tested with an eye toward spectral distributions. It's archived in the Amps Forum FAQ: [url="https://www.talkbass.com/threads/bass-frequency-waterfall-plots-what-they-mean-to-rigs.510749/"]https://www.talkbass...to-rigs.510749/[/url] I provided some of the first few analysis examples, which from my perspective basically worked out to [i]let no good deed go unpunished[/i], which seems like something you might relate to right about now. It's not all that hard to do your own testing and draw your own conclusions, which I would highly recommend. My personal takeaway was and is that as usual, it just depends. Room EQ Wizard is one bit of free software that does an excellent job analyzing bass recordings. In any case, boosting the fundamental in the way you mention most likely won't take that hypothetical 25% number to 100%, because the overtones still all have energy and therefore have to take up part of that 100% ceiling, and depending on what note you are looking at the bass control may well be boosting the first overtone or two just as or nearly as much as the fundamental. I'll be happy to illustrate this with an actual measured example or two when you start your new thread if you like. I don't do DIY speaker cabs any more myself, but I still enjoy doing the math. I reckon that the adjustable HPF I build into my amps would add right around $100 at retail, given the standard markup typically needed to make a successful go of commercial production. But that also just depends, and as you say, most amps already have at least a rudimentary low order filter response built in. IMO, in many cases that is plenty, and may represent the best balance of tradeoffs for many users.

[quote name='LukeFRC' timestamp='1481377455' post='3191852'] why don't they put a HPF as standard on bass amps? [/quote] There are substantial tradeoffs at play and the vast majority of players either "don't need" one or don't realize that they do. Note that I do include one as a standard feature on most of my DIY builds these days though...

[quote name='blablas' timestamp='1481376130' post='3191840'] Replaced the pickguard om my StingRay 5 with something a bit more modest that only covers the control cavity, it's a crime to hide such a nice piece of wood underneath a big white plastic sheet! [/quote] Well played. I've never been a fan of big plastic pickguards at all.

[quote name='lowregisterhead' timestamp='1481327158' post='3191623'] I'm looking for a bit of general guidance on whether a different preamp will really be able to change the sonic character of a bass, in this case a Status S2 5-string thru-neck. The bass is lovely to play, sits really nicely, and I like the look and general ergonomics of the instrument. However, regardless of how I fiddle with the eq, it has a high-mid bark that I can't seem to dial out, and getting a clear, glassy top end out if it seems to be beyond the capabilities of the current preamp (an 18v 302 board). Is it worth fitting, say, a John East Uni-Pre (I've had several different East preamps and they've all been great) or would I be wasting my time & money? All advice gratefully received! [/quote] Have you tried changing string type yet? I went through two pickup replacements and two aftermarket preamps plus one DIY one in a similar scenario (too dark in my case though) before I finally got around to trying that. The third preamp did help a lot, but the strings probably made even more difference, and starting there might have gotten me close enough to what I wanted to not bother trying all those other tweaks.

My three latest DIY onboard preamp builds: The one in the middle is my latest design, a three band format with a "filter" style treble control section. I expect to post it eventually as an open source project including circuit board fabrication files. Initial testing has been going pretty well, much better than I really expected to be honest. Here are the two stomp box enclosures I just received in the mail today for some tester versions I can pass around to friends for user feedback: I'll also have them in some friends' booths at the NAMM show in January, but again just to see how I might be able to improve the design. I would love to eventually sell some IP, but have little interest in marketing hard goods.

[quote name='Lord Sausage' timestamp='1480943683' post='3188218'] When you see a band in a pub or function, do you ever go and speak to the bass player afterwards? [/quote] The vast majority of the live shows I attend these days feature friends of mine on bass and that is a large part of why I go, so definitely. Since I'm in the US, very few if any of them frequent Basschat though. But FWIW, I know literally hundreds of Talkbass members in what passes for real life.

<p>[quote name='BigRedX' timestamp='1479302384' post='3175436'] Bi-amping has nothing to do with stereo, and IME is actually very useful if you run an effects heavy sound. Having used a bi-amped system for most of the 90s, the ability to run effects that adversely affect the bottom end of your sound such as chorus, flanger and distortion, just on the higher frequencies is amazing, you can run quite extreme effects settings and still retain plenty of bottom-end presence. The crossover frequency for this is much higher than a PA type tops and subs set up, so you don't run into those kinds of problems. [/quote] Yep, I used stereo and biamped rig for a while,crossed at 635Hz. But I have also run that system in many other permutations including tube guitar amps for blended distortion, satellite speakers, full range on one side and high passed on the other, vertically stacked stereo config, and so on. A DSP based speaker management system makes all those things pretty easy to do, actually.

[quote name='sirmuppet' timestamp='1479290041' post='3175303'] That's awesome. Thank you so much. [/quote] De nada. I've posted about my own modded versions elsewhere on BC a few times as well.

[quote name='sirmuppet' timestamp='1479251671' post='3175165'] Quick question. What pots does the 2 band take? [/quote] 1 Meg reverse audio taper and 100K audio taper for the tone controls, 25K audio taper for the master volume. Zillions of people have built up the Uncle Fluffy knockoff version via Talkbass BTW, it's a very simple and inexpensive little project.

My latest folly: a DIY "Filter EQ" onboard preamp, with a matching stompbox version to facilitate trying out various mods I have in mind. The format includes conventional Bass and Mid controls, then a swept frequency low pass filter with resonance control. The sweep range for the one in my Travis Bean is likely to be ~2.4K-8.8KHz, but will be fairly easy to tailor to other ranges as desired. Once I get things sorted out I hope to make this an open source project giveaway, with the circuit board layout shared via a board fabricator's website, so anyone who cares to give it a try can just buy a short run of 3 boards and roll their own. I'll post a link to all the details if this comes to pass, assuming this is within BC's rules. I have a board revision ready to go and should be ordering the next set in the next few days. Here are the basic modeled frequency response sweeps for five different resonance settings and six frequencies covering the full range of my initial test build. I have confirmed good correlation between the model and actual measurements and so far everything looks and sounds pretty decent.

[quote name='markstuk' timestamp='1475587487' post='3147114'] [url="http://barefacedbass.com/product-range/FR800.htm"]http://barefacedbass...range/FR800.htm[/url] Something like this would do the job nicely... I think there is a bergatino version as well.. [/quote] Yep, the BF powered cab appears to be a good bet. The Bergantino IP series was discontinued a few years ago. The one I heard was not really uber hi-fi like anyway though, but it was a great sounding "bass cab." The Bergantino B|Amp would be a great choice for a modeling rig though, IMHO. When I was using that type of rig I went with fEARful-ish 15/6/1 cabs and a pro sound power amp, and a channel strip style preamp. A single 12 powered cab would have been a little light for what I was doing at that time, but the QSC K-12 has worked pretty well for me and for others in less demanding situations.

[quote name='afroblue' timestamp='1475164871' post='3143672'] Yeah, maybe I'm thinking though I have my dbass covered, curious as to what would go well for electric only setup [/quote] Which Euphonic Audio cabs, specifically? And in what musical context(s)?

[quote name='blue' timestamp='1474854637' post='3141058'] If you were into music and you were born in 1952 you won the lottery ticket of life. [/quote] That will be for history to decide, and only after we're long gone. I plan on looking forward for a good while yet, backward can wait in this particular case.

[quote name='PaulWarning' timestamp='1474742522' post='3140217'] ( I was born in 1952, doesn't everybody think the music of their youth is the best ever?) [/quote] Nope, not at all. Many kids these days tell me they wish they were our age (1953 here) so as to have experienced the 60s first hand. I enjoyed that at times, but best evah? Nah.

[quote name='Bigwan' timestamp='1474624838' post='3139303'] Agreed it's a good skill to have as a DIYer, and if I was better set up at home I would tackle it no problem. I just don't see the point of risking it myself when I have the correct equipment at work is all. I think with the loss of a lot of FETs, etc. as through hole devices it's likely that there will be a lot more SMD required for DIYers in the near future. [/quote] Yep. A lot of modern opamps are not available any other way these days too. I've been using little adapter boards to allow retrofitting in old through hole designs, but at some point for new builds it seems better just to go all-in with SMDs.

[quote name='funkle' timestamp='1474618083' post='3139205'] I love the GK MB800. It was a very close call between the GK and the Tecamp....the GK had a much noisier fan. Great sounding amp though. Pmjos, can't wait to hear your review as well. I am seriously tempted here, for the first time in a few years. I'll keep an eye on the TB classifieds... [/quote] The Puma is a really nice amp and should work very well with those cabs. I am very picky about fan noise myself, my homemade ones are all convection cooled.

[quote name='TheButler' timestamp='1474626166' post='3139320'] So, my question is this: The cab is clearly designed for Eminence Kappalite 3015LF, 18Sound 6ND410 and a horn of some description.. If I don't use these speakers then things will sound awful right, because the cab is like designed for them? Should I be looking at alternatives/better options? [/quote] IMO, going off the plan sheet works best for those who don't need no steenkin' plan sheet in the first place.

[quote name='funkle' timestamp='1474562188' post='3138858'] Thanks Passinwind. My Tecamp Puma 900 would probably have enough welly for one of these then. Anyone know how loud one of these gets in the mids?.... I'm not worried about the lows with that 3012LF and the box size...I tried an Audiokinesis TC112AF before and that sucker had bass which would punch through walls, but was fairly neutral/quiet in the mids....the Berg CN112 cab I currently use is loud in the mids, and I find the 98db SPL claim credible. Tight in the lows though... [/quote] Heh. I replaced my fEARful 12/6 with an AK TC112AF, the first 4 ohm version, which I slightly prefer for a variety of reasons (my 12/6 had no tweeter, for starters). Both the F112 and the 12/6 are somewhere in between the TC112 and the Berg in terms of mid forwardness/distortion/loudness/growliness, call it what you will. I only heard the CN series Bergs at NAMM (which is more or less worthless for critical listening), but I think I've heard nearly every other model Jim has ever made. I only really listened to the F112 at NAMM as well, but it was in the quietest section of the show and I really liked what I heard.

[quote name='funkle' timestamp='1474527927' post='3138527'] You mean 600-800 watts into 8 ohms? That's quite a bit more than the rating for that driver...and does anyone make a micro amp capable of pushing 600-800w into 8 ohms? [/quote] Yep, 600-800 into 8 ohms. Yes, you can easily toast a driver that way, but for my purposes with a fEARful 12/6, that was what I found to sound best. The amp I used with it for a year or so makes 600+ watts at 8 ohms on test bench with a sine wave.. So that means that realistically the greatest long term power I subjected the cab to using a bass signal was probably around 150 watts. That whole subject gets complicated quickly though, so I wouldn't presume to tell you what'll work best for your particular situation. Any 112 cab is still just a 112 though, so your volume control and your ears are your friends. It depends on what you call "micro", but the 700-1000 watt @ 4ohm ones (thus 1/2 to 2/3 of that at 8 ohms) would be pretty much all I'd be looking at, as most of the 500 watt class ones make 250-300 watts at 8 ohms, which sometimes left me wanting a little more.

[quote name='funkle' timestamp='1474481571' post='3138342'] What's the ideal power for an F112? What is the max anyone has pushed through it? Edit: It's just I see people using very big power amps through these...and the 3012LF is a power hungry driver...is there a micro amp with 'big' power? [/quote] You need to look at 8 ohm power ratings. IME 600-800 watts works about right, but I'd shoot for at least 450 if trying to maximize output capabilities. The GK MB800 series is fairly popular with that crew, for one.

I ended up doing a second one of these for a friend, using the original prototype enclosure that didn't quote meet my specs. The fabricator let me keep it at no charge though, since it wasn't going to do them any good. My friend had the half rack format preamp and power amp I built last year, but decided that an integrated amp just makes more sense -- the same reason I got rid of the 1/2 rack stuff in the first place. So I traded back the pretty nice sounding 1/2 rack stuff for a build with the "bummer" case and the the guts pictured above. This of course gave me a perfect excuse to work on rev. 4 of my preamp and HPF/PEQ boards, which I have just finished up. Among other things, I went a little deeper down the rabbit hole with an even more uptown Jensen input transformer for the power amp section, and a hybrid dual opamp that is 1/2 FET input and 1/2 bipolar. Those little SMD/DIP adapters came in handy for that. So, the new one for my friend, note the unwelded case seams: And my own, with what passes for a pink LED pilot light: The 1/2 rack format pair: And finally, the original rack mount one, which uses an older ICEpower 500 watt module: Time to move along to some simpler and more economical builds for a while now, I reckon.

[quote name='Subthumper' timestamp='1474106908' post='3135634'] Ok will do. I've got a few other projects on the go so will be a little while until I do it but keep an eye out. I'm thinking model T preamp split channel with a bassman preamp. Not so much drive and clean but two distinctly different sounds. All mated up to a 4x kt88 power amp. What ya think folks? [/quote] Sounds cool, always liked the Model T. I'm going to take another swing at redoing my 80s Fender 30 combo one of these days, although its current quasi-single channel Vibrolux Reverb format is actually pretty danged sweet.

[quote name='MacDaddy' timestamp='1474317804' post='3137151'] Blue, if that post is a genuine reply to mine, then I have to say you are propagating the belief that American's do not understand irony. [/quote] Well, not in Milwaukee anyway.

[quote name='Marvin' timestamp='1474373805' post='3137454'] It did its job well, maybe too well. Schroeders (the earlier ones) don't focus on deep bass tones, but then I've always rolled them out anyway so not a problem for me. [/quote] Depends on which early ones you mean. I had a 1210L that was all mids all the time, and then a 21012L that made tons of low bass and was pretty well balanced all in all. The 1210L was fantastic for one particular band situation at the time, but utterly hopeless at taking EQ if any other thing was desired. OTOH, the 21012L was great as long as you didn't ever have to move it. I never see Schro cabs around here any more though.

[quote name='Merton' timestamp='1463302281' post='3050222'] 12", 6" mid and horn I believe [/quote] That's the fEARful line, the FEARLESS (sic) ones use a 5.