Bill Fitzmaurice

[quote name='hubrad' timestamp='1468335197' post='3090224'] I've heard of this in other fields too.. buy up the competition just to close them down. [/quote]More often the buyout is used to acquire manufacturing facilities and/or technology more cheaply than building/developing your own. That's an especially attractive option if the company is acquired for a bargain price because they weren't doing well. The situations with respect to GM and SAAB, or Ford with Volvo, Jaguar and Land Rover are similar, and they didn't work out well either. Those auto brands only survived because GM and Ford ended up needing the funds that they got by reselling those brands more than they needed manufacturing facilities for their own brands that also weren't doing well. Of course, SAAB is still in a state of limbo.

[quote name='JapanAxe' timestamp='1468180061' post='3089085'] But no, you won't blow up your bass amp by playing guitar through it. [/quote]You might make it puke, though.

[quote name='taunton-hobbit' timestamp='1467989028' post='3087895'] I've got Mackie C200s(passive) which have Neutrik xlr............ [/quote]They have Speakon, not XLR. The one marked 'send' is intended for sending the signal to another passive speaker, not to a power amp. Guys, you're bass players, you're supposed to be the smart ones in the band. You should know this stuff. If you leave it to drummers and guitar'd players who knows what kind of mayhem might ensue. [quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1467989275' post='3087898'] What sort of wattage is an xlr designed to take?[/quote]None. They're intended to carry low current signals. For that matter the same applies to 1/4" phone connectors, which never should have been used for speaker connections. They were only pressed into that duty because Leo Fender was too cheap to add another SKU to his parts bins. One could call Speakons better late than never. For a time in the 60s and early 70s some did use XLR for speakers in an attempt to reduce the possibility of plugging an input into an output, but that was before XLR became the standard for microphones and line level sends.

A passive speaker should not have had an XLR out at all.

[quote name='skidder652003' timestamp='1467964501' post='3087554'] I remember we used to speakon out of the power amp to the the passive tops and then xlr daisy chain to the active subs [/quote]I can't imagine how that would work, and by your results I'd say it didn't.

There's no reason for active subs to sound any better with passive versus active tops. Whatever difference heard indicates that you didn't set the system up correctly when using the passive tops.

[quote name='Al Krow' timestamp='1467916280' post='3087327'] I'm thinking that the Fender Bassman proved to be really popular with guitarists, so in theory I should be okay? [/quote]Bassman of 50s-70s vintage were popular as guitar amps. The reason why is that they basically were guitar amps. Other than at very ow levels they were horrid for bass. By the same token a good electric bass rig won't sound good with guitar.

[quote name='skychaserhigh' timestamp='1465555331' post='3069177'] I just made the point about the 410 shape which was they said was wrong for several reasons. [/quote]If one is actually aware of 'the low pass thing' then they'd be aware of how it cures most of the ills created by the 410 shape. I wouldn't want a 410 myself, I'd rather a pair of vertical 210, being easier to transport and it places the drivers high enough for the mids to be heard close to the cab, the one ill that low passing two drivers in a 410 can't cure. But if you're bound to the 410 format for whatever reason the least you can do is to use the only one I'm aware of that is correctly engineered. Not that I would take all of the credit away from Alex, but I was posting about the benefits of low passing one driver column in 410, 610 and 810 formats long before BF existed, and there's no way that he didn't read at least one of them, so I'll accept some. But he's hardly the only designer/manufacturer to peruse bass forums, which begs the question: Why has no one else bothered to fix the errors of their ways? And why doesn't the marketplace hold them accountable? Starting with anyone here considering a 210, 410, 610 or 810 from anyone other than BF? No, that doesn't make me a BF fanboy. It makes me a fanboy of proper engineering. If and when someone else does the right thing I'll give credit to them as well.

[quote name='dave_bass5' timestamp='1467554969' post='3084486'] And different voicing? [/quote]+1. All amps are voiced differently, based on the designer's preference. Gain structure tends to be more of a marketing tool. If you try Amp A and Amp B side by side with the same settings chances are you'll buy whichever is louder. I've seen amps that reach maximum output set at 5, with no increase in volume above that. Those also are the ones that get complaints that they won't go low enough.

[quote name='Chienmortbb' timestamp='1467539776' post='3084321'] It is louder because it is louder not because it it is Class D. [/quote]+1. And it's probably not louder per se, the difference is likely attributable to different gain structures.

[quote name='chris_b' timestamp='1467419711' post='3083626'] The RH750 goes to 2.67 ohms. It's on the web site. A 4 ohm cab with an 8 ohm cab is fine with this amp. Look at the table on page 7 [url="http://cdn-downloads.tcelectronic.com/media/914735/tc_electronic_bass_amp_power_rating___active_power_management.pdf"]http://cdn-downloads..._management.pdf[/url] min load column. . . . 2.66R. [/quote]One must read the fine print. They'll only handle 2.66 ohms with Active Power Management engaged, which significantly lowers output capacity. The same July 2011 Bass Gear review of the TC amps that discovered their overstating of actual RMS continuous measured output of their amps also discovered that the RS210 was 10.5 ohms, and the RS212 11.5 ohms.

[quote name='Musashimonkey' timestamp='1467397193' post='3083466'] The RH750 does let you string 3 TC cabs together [/quote]As I recall that's because the TC cabs are actually higher than 8 ohms.

[quote name='dave_bass5' timestamp='1467295973' post='3082622'] Probably not relevant to this thread on a technical level as i dont have any figures to post, but thought id post anyway. [/quote]Very relevant. What you often get in a rehearsal space, especially one with low ceilings, are cancellations from the waves reflected off nearby boundaries. When you move away the distance that those reflections travel increases, taking the cancellation frequencies down below where they affect you. The same thing happens in close quarters on a stage versus out in the audience. This phenomenon led to the myth of wave propagation, the silly notion that you can't hear long wavelengths at close distances. The wags who came up with that idea clearly had never used headphones.

[quote name='lowhand_mike' timestamp='1467116461' post='3081267'] eh? so what ive been told is all lies [/quote]What you've been told comes mainly from marketing departments, usually through advertising. So yes, lies.

[quote name='lowhand_mike' timestamp='1467110123' post='3081205'] Yes the cab can take 600w but your amp is running at 8ohm so you will at best get 2/3 of your 300w. adding another 8ohm cab will have the amp running at 4ohm and you'll get the full 300w. [/quote]Watts don't matter. You don't measure sound levels in watts, you measure it in decibels, and there's no direct correlation between the two. If there was a Vox AC30 wouldn't make your ears bleed from fifty feet away, nor would anyone be able to gig with an Ampeg B15. The simple fact of the matter is if you can't get the volume you want with one cab you need two cabs.

[quote name='Bigwan' timestamp='1467035935' post='3080637'] More speakers would help you more than more watts. Add another super compact. I say that knowing it's not cheap or easy to do, but the results would be better than adding more wattage. [/quote]Agreed. The added 200 watts that he might be able to make use of with one cab would give at best 2dB additional output. A second cab will give 6dB more output without changing amps.

When you give the back of the cab, or any part of it for that matter, the 'knuckle test' you should hear a high pitched solid 'whack', not a low pitched hollow thud. Spline bracing is better than no bracing, but what works better than any other method is a brace that connects to the opposing panel. Bracing and damping are two areas where manufacturers cut corners more than any other, as you can't see what is or is not inside the cab unless you open it up.

Any of the various recommended materials will work. Don't bother with the brace, it's too small to be reflective.

To successfully swap drivers you need to know the T/S specs and have a frequency response chart of the originals. Chances are that you can't find that information. IMO that's because manufacturers don't want you to be able to find a replacement elsewhere, or to realize in many cases how shoddy the originals are.

[quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1465236319' post='3066405'] One stage only..or all stages? If one stage, EQ for that stage, if all stages, take some bass off [/quote]Response will be different on every stage and every room. Using EQ to fix the response in the hot spot where he's standing means losing low end everywhere else. Not having a hot spot by moving the cab and/or him is the solution. [quote]Trying to get an nice even sound around a pub right to the back and still be at a reasonable volume and clarity 2 foot away from a cab is always going to be a huge comprimise.[/quote]It's impossible, because room response is different at every spot in the room, and varies the most as you move away from the stage. Use the backline only to drive the stage and the PA to drive the room and you'll get a lot better result.

Try moving your rig, and his.

[quote name='molan' timestamp='1465143499' post='3065566'] Have you tried a Gramma pad? My Berg AE210, rear ported, can get boomy but I've found lifting it off the floor and isolating it seems to help quite a lot (especially with suspended wooden stages!). [/quote]Lifting, yes. 'Isolation', no. Thoroughly explained here: http://ethanwiner.com/speaker_isolation.htm

Rear and front ports will give the exact same result, because the radiation from ports is omni-directional. The issue is that midrange and high frequencies are directional, so the only ones who hear the full output of the cab are those within a cone shaped zone in front of the cab that progressively widens as the distance to the cab is increased. The best cure is to put the midrange and highs, but not the lows, through the monitors. If that's not an option the next best is to put yourself on one side of the stage, aiming the cab to the opposite front corner of the stage to make the dispersion more uniform over a wider area.

[quote name='SwamiRob' timestamp='1464619971' post='3060841'] Is there any clever tricks for getting a smoother top end. and filling that gap between mid-mids and treble that seems to appear on a typical tweetered cab? [/quote]Yes. Get a cab that uses a four to eight inch midrange driver instead of a tweeter. The problem with tweeters is that they typically work only above 3.5kHz, some much higher than that, while what you need is for them to start working no higher than 2kHz. There is a bass specific tweeter that will work to 2kHz with a 4th order crossover, the Eminence BGH-25, but I'm not aware of any cab manufacturer that uses it, so at this point it's a DIY proposition.

[quote name='chris_b' timestamp='1464445385' post='3059519'] Running an amp at 4 ohms does not make it less reliable than running it at 8 ohms!! [/quote]True. OTOH going to a 4 ohm driver "to get all of the watts out of my amp" will at best result in a few dB of additional output, and depending on the driver specs it could actually have less output. This is of course totally predictable, using speaker response modeling software, but as the OP decided to leap before looking I give it a 50-50 shot that we'll see a 600w 4 ohm driver appearing in the classifieds in short order.