What's the big problem with 4x10s?!

[steve-soar]

What's the problem with 4x10"s?, they're not 8x10"s.

[JTUK]

Indeed, you'll only get away with a 410 on a decent stage if the monitoring is good.
That means a stage mon mix and side fills, IMO.

[51m0n]

Never had a problem with my ae410 being heard on stage or off....

Yes dispersion is not ideal, hoever in the venues where I'm playing without PA (ie its all backline) the acoustics of the place more than mess with any chance of perfect dispersion anyway.

And if I am playing with a super duper PA then I only need it as my monitor (lovely).

However I do always get it up off the floor, I dont see any benefit with it shooting off past my knees, then again I dont see how putting a 212 down there is a good idea either....

So Get yourself a nice strong hop-up like this (good for 150Kg apparently, and about £50):-



Drape a nice bit of dark cloth over it, put your "single cab solution" of choice on top and all your bags and guff under it behind the cloth and you are good to go. I hear every note and nuance when I play, my drummer claims he's never heard the bass better (previous bands the bassist had a single 15 apparently - lost it was, and nothing to do with dispersion), and the guiatrist says he can hear it perfectly too.

Weird that, the maths and theory are undeniable, but in practice I havent really heard it yet...

[JTUK]

I'd suggest you are playing small stages in small bands.

[51m0n]

Well, on a proper big stage I'd expect decent PA support, so I'm stood next to my rig as my monitor and have the rest of the band through my monitor(s) - thats how its always worked for me on larger stages in days of yore (when I had a significantly less capable rig and it was still fine)

Punters arent listening to my rig at all in that scenario and the band arent either really (drumer has sidefills with everything in, guitarist has decent monitors) so how is that any different exactly?

I've never entertained the idea of running backline for FOH on a big stage, not entirely sure what you are getting at?

Edited April 2, 2013 by 51m0n

[JTUK]

I am saying that a 410 is ok for a small stage and a small band, .. but anything like a decent sized stage, say 12 mtrs or more wide will need very good monitoring or you'll be standing right on top of your 410 and no one else will hear it.
And if that is the case, then a 810 will struggle as well.. so nobody has specc'd it very well.

There is a reason why nobody takes 212's onto these stages as well.

[RandomBass]

My current leaning is towards a pair of 210s, stacked with the drivers vertically. I can hear it fine on stage, and getting out into the audience has proven to me that it projects very nicely indeed.

[51m0n]

[quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1364918197' post='2032621']
I am saying that a 410 is ok for a small stage and a small band, .. but anything like a decent sized stage, say 12 mtrs or more wide will need very good monitoring or you'll be standing right on top of your 410 and no one else will hear it.
And if that is the case, then a 810 will struggle as well.. so nobody has specc'd it very well.

There is a reason why nobody takes 212's onto these stages as well.
[/quote]

Funny, when I saw Bela Fleck and the Flecktones at The Barbican Vic was playing through a Hartke 410 on a flightcase, actually it may have been two 410s. Didnt seem to bother him, thats a pretty big stage too...

Dr John at Brighton Dome, bloody massive stage, Bass player had a 410 on a flightcase. Sounded superb, owned half the stage so he did, monster of a man, monster bassist, no IEMs that I could see (I'm sad enough to look for this stuff), the guitarist was easily 40ft away and didnt seem bothered, because he was relying on the monitor at his feet. The drummer was using the immense side fill, Dr John himself had monitors.

Of course like I said, on a big stage I'd expect decent monitoring, and decent PA. On a really big stage, if I was considering running around alot (not likely I can promise you), I'd go down the IEM route, same as everyoine else. 410, 810, 212 all irrelevant in those applications, none of them will suffice at all.

You cant just turn you amp up loud enough to hear it from the other side of the stage, it will be far too loud for the sound engineer to deal with the spill. You need localised sound on big stages, provided either by monitors or IEMs. A big rig with great dispersion is not the solution.

What exactly do you take on these immense stages?

Edited April 2, 2013 by 51m0n

[JTUK]

Can you read ..?? or are you so intent on banging out your own posts you kind of skip that bit??

Edited April 2, 2013 by JTUK

[51m0n]

Can you answer the question ?

[stingrayPete1977]

I'm intrigued too

[JTUK]

[quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1364897458' post='2032236']
Indeed, you'll only get away with a 410 on a decent stage if the monitoring is good.
That means a stage mon mix and side fills, IMO.
[/quote]

[JTUK]

Playing on 12 mtrs stages is no big thing, and I'll find my 2x210 will need a lot of help. A Theatre type hall will have one of that size typically.
Even one or two good local beer Festivals can call those up..

That size, enought to buy a 410m to sit under it..? no. not for the few gigs a year I'll do on that ( even tho I've thought hard about it..)
but I will talk to the P.A co about the monitoring they
can provide.
Not got at any festival gigs abroad in the offing at this point..and they only come around every few years but I wouldn't take anything bar basses anyway.

[51m0n]

[quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1364924876' post='2032780']
Can you read ..?? or are you so intent on banging out your own posts you kind of skip that bit??
[/quote]

So you are being rude about being agreed with in principle then about the real world cabability of a 410 rig of any alignment, if not the detail of the alignment of the cabs. Thats a very special talent that is...

Have you got an example of this magnificent bass tone that does you so well and can be heard so clearly with your bass rig alone? The one that doesn't have any of those annoying mids in that you hate so much, that is.

I am truly intrigued to hear your band, and your bass tone - the one with so little mids that is produced by your 4 10 inch cones and yet sits holding its own in the mix - in a decent sized room, small stage and no PA suppor (other than vocal) would be fab.

Really...

You see you have agreed with everything I've said, except the alignment of your 410s, and the requirement for mids to help the bass be a more defined and musical presence in the mix, every other thing you agree with. So humour me and provide a clip of your band please...

All I'm saying is I have had no practical example whereby a standard 410 doesnt deliver as expected in a given sized venue on a given sized stage. And a tonne of experience (and theory to back it up) that proves that cutting the mids from your tone kills your chance to be heard and hear yourself in a mix.

[JTUK]

I don't think I've had to agree... I pointed out my thoughts, you pliled in.. and seemed to take issue with what i said or enough to quote my post...and now you think I agree..??
That was why I asked whether you read previous posts. I've not said anything different.and indeed requoted it as post 337.

I have a copuple of examples of stuff that I consider ok to put out but do I want to share them here... ? not really.
If I was interested in that sort of thing I would have done it ages ago..
I don't really need any 'endorsement' ..or not.. as I don't see this forum as the a place for it. If others do and want to promote certain things and bands, then fine, but that is not what interests me here.
You are just going to have to take my word for it....or not.

But as an aside... very recently, we had to demo another drummer..and just from the sound point of view alone..that did not work. Wont go into what else didn't work either.. but the drum sound in that instance was no help at all to a good band mix.

[51m0n]

I was pointing out how the reality is that serious players do use 410s on really big stages as personal monitors, with the rest of the band naturally relying on PA monitors. And that no matter what the alignment no one would use a bass rig to cover a really large stage totally with the bass (not practical for FOH sound for one thing). So alignment is largely irrelevant on large stages IMO and IME.

And IME on smaller stages a standard 410 has worked fine, and even in the backline as FOH scenario, since in these smaller venues IME the acoustic is shot to bits anyway, so the reflections off the boundaries do more damage to dispersion than your cabs alignment can ever fix.



As for the mids thing, that is a direct reference to your thoughts on the recent Markbass thread where you stated the following:-

[size=3][quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1364900155' post='2032269']
Low mids can kill your sound as much as save it... in that you might have a sound coming through everyones else, but what sort of sound..?
Should you accept a punch through the hole approach... and the loss of any real interesting bass definition, potentially. or should you set the whole band up so you can get your sound to work?
To my ears Markbass is punchy and efficient, but too many players use the mid punch approach and the bass is just plain dull and uninspiring.
I don't blame Markbass so much as the people using it. and the way they choke off all character.
I really don't get why you want to accept something that works in a mix...but doesn't if solo'd..
A wall of sound and volumes wars are never a good mix.
[/quote][/size]

I really couldn't be bothered before but here goes, in for a penny and all that:-

[i]* Low mids can kill your sound as much as save it... in that you might have a sound coming through everyones else, but what sort of sound..? *[/i]

A really great sound, musical, clear, definied, punchy and not just felt, not at all honky or nasal, just classy. Its a balancing act like everything else to do with mixing.

[i]* Should you accept a punch through the hole approach... and the loss of any real interesting bass definition, potentially. or should you set the whole band up so you can get your sound to work? *[/i]

What is "interesting bass definition", why is that in any way lost if you also adopt the practice of allowing some mids to poke through in useful places? Frequency mixing is an absolute staple of all forms of mixing it is about the only way to make everything heard. Definition is in the mids, not the bass...

What on earth do you mean by set the "whole band up so you can get your sound to work" precisely? Cant imagine a worse way to make a good mix, live or anywhere else. The polar opposite of what is being suggested.

[i]* To my ears Markbass is punchy and efficient, but too many players use the mid punch approach and the bass is just plain dull and uninspiring. *[/i]

How? What is uninspiring about a great bass being heard musically (ie the pitches of the notes are relevant)?

Your opinion appears to be that all that is required is deep bass. Fine, great, but the theory (and practice) is that we dont hear that so well (Fletcher-Munsen curves), and we cant differentiate pitch well from sound that low in pitch, and I am willing to back that up with real evidence.

If you want the deep bass approach it works great in a recording, far less so at gig volumes. Its an unfortunate fact of life for anyone who doesn't like a less bass heavy sound. Again I would happily back that up, but you dont have any clips we can hear ogf your band anywhere, or you just arent willing to share.

For what its worth I personally dotn find MB particularly punchy,, now my ae410 on the other hand, that really is all about the punch and definition.

[i]* I don't blame Markbass so much as the people using it. and the way they choke off all character. *[/i]

Thats big of you, please please show me on a recording what you consider great and characterful bass sound (it really needn't be you) I am truly fascinated by what you are drawn to at this point. One mans character is another mans dull thud. The other mans character may be the first mans nasal assault....

[i]* I really don't get why you want to accept something that works in a mix...but doesn't if solo'd.. *[/i]

Clearly, but then you dont understand the first concepts of effective mixing as laid down by real legends in the art/science, and used for the last 5 decades to create well structured, musically pleasing mixes as enjoyed by everyone, in any and all styles of music. Until you get that we are doomed

I guarantee you that any album you happen to hold up to be your guiding light for bass tone either used this approach to mixing or it would sound like utter garbage.

[i]* A wall of sound and volumes wars are never a good mix. *[/i]

Agreed.

Which is precisely why we use frequency mixing to allow all the instruments their own space to be heard in, and its a lot more complex to do well than simply bass at the bottom, then kick, then guitar and snare; oh, wait what about the vocal? Doh!

Good mixes are good because you can hear everything, it all works together to create a beautiful final product greater than the sum of its parts. The human brain does a staggering job of filling in the bits that have been cut away to allow this to happen for one thing.

If you insist that a part sound beautiful on its own it may in fact ruin the mix. As many people on here have found getting heard at gig volume often means a less beautiful soloed timbre, what the hell does that matter? How many punters came to hear the bass and how many came to hear the band?

[EBS_freak]

And chill.

[xgsjx]

[quote name='EBS_freak' timestamp='1365008223' post='2034098']
And chill.
[/quote]

Shut up you!

I just made profiteroles & have popcorn ready.

Edited April 3, 2013 by xgsjx

[JTUK]

[quote name='51m0n' timestamp='1365006650' post='2034069']
I was pointing out how the reality is that serious players do use 410s on really big stages as personal monitors, with the rest of the band naturally relying on PA monitors. And that no matter what the alignment no one would use a bass rig to cover a really large stage totally with the bass (not practical for FOH sound for one thing). So alignment is largely irrelevant on large stages IMO and IME.

And IME on smaller stages a standard 410 has worked fine, and even in the backline as FOH scenario, since in these smaller venues IME the acoustic is shot to bits anyway, so the reflections off the boundaries do more damage to dispersion than your cabs alignment can ever fix.



As for the mids thing, that is a direct reference to your thoughts on the recent Markbass thread where you stated the following:-



I really couldn't be bothered before but here goes, in for a penny and all that:-

[i]* Low mids can kill your sound as much as save it... in that you might have a sound coming through everyones else, but what sort of sound..? *[/i]

A really great sound, musical, clear, definied, punchy and not just felt, not at all honky or nasal, just classy. Its a balancing act like everything else to do with mixing.

[i]* Should you accept a punch through the hole approach... and the loss of any real interesting bass definition, potentially. or should you set the whole band up so you can get your sound to work? *[/i]

What is "interesting bass definition", why is that in any way lost if you also adopt the practice of allowing some mids to poke through in useful places? Frequency mixing is an absolute staple of all forms of mixing it is about the only way to make everything heard. Definition is in the mids, not the bass...

What on earth do you mean by set the "whole band up so you can get your sound to work" precisely? Cant imagine a worse way to make a good mix, live or anywhere else. The polar opposite of what is being suggested.

[i]* To my ears Markbass is punchy and efficient, but too many players use the mid punch approach and the bass is just plain dull and uninspiring. *[/i]

How? What is uninspiring about a great bass being heard musically (ie the pitches of the notes are relevant)?

Your opinion appears to be that all that is required is deep bass. Fine, great, but the theory (and practice) is that we dont hear that so well (Fletcher-Munsen curves), and we cant differentiate pitch well from sound that low in pitch, and I am willing to back that up with real evidence.

If you want the deep bass approach it works great in a recording, far less so at gig volumes. Its an unfortunate fact of life for anyone who doesn't like a less bass heavy sound. Again I would happily back that up, but you dont have any clips we can hear ogf your band anywhere, or you just arent willing to share.

For what its worth I personally dotn find MB particularly punchy,, now my ae410 on the other hand, that really is all about the punch and definition.

[i]* I don't blame Markbass so much as the people using it. and the way they choke off all character. *[/i]

Thats big of you, please please show me on a recording what you consider great and characterful bass sound (it really needn't be you) I am truly fascinated by what you are drawn to at this point. One mans character is another mans dull thud. The other mans character may be the first mans nasal assault....

[i]* I really don't get why you want to accept something that works in a mix...but doesn't if solo'd.. *[/i]

Clearly, but then you dont understand the first concepts of effective mixing as laid down by real legends in the art/science, and used for the last 5 decades to create well structured, musically pleasing mixes as enjoyed by everyone, in any and all styles of music. Until you get that we are doomed

I guarantee you that any album you happen to hold up to be your guiding light for bass tone either used this approach to mixing or it would sound like utter garbage.

[i]* A wall of sound and volumes wars are never a good mix. *[/i]

Agreed.

Which is precisely why we use frequency mixing to allow all the instruments their own space to be heard in, and its a lot more complex to do well than simply bass at the bottom, then kick, then guitar and snare; oh, wait what about the vocal? Doh!

Good mixes are good because you can hear everything, it all works together to create a beautiful final product greater than the sum of its parts. The human brain does a staggering job of filling in the bits that have been cut away to allow this to happen for one thing.

If you insist that a part sound beautiful on its own it may in fact ruin the mix. As many people on here have found getting heard at gig volume often means a less beautiful soloed timbre, what the hell does that matter? How many punters came to hear the bass and how many came to hear the band?
[/quote]



Boy, have you got problems? You must love the sound of your voice a LOT. You must like reading your posts back even more. and there are a lot of them
Not something I am going to waste my time doing, I'm afraid and you will just have to live with your assumptions, --but I garauntee you are guessing...---
but then I just know you are very comfortable doing that...

But, your voice and rant is just plain boring now ..and I guess for everyone else too, so chill indeed, I will.
I have better things to do.

Edited April 3, 2013 by JTUK

[stingrayPete1977]

I can't beleive there has been 18 pages of this sh*t!

[Dad3353]

So; there's a big problem, or not..?

[51m0n]

[RandomBass]

[quote name='Dad3353' timestamp='1365015331' post='2034227']
So; there's a big problem, or not..?
[/quote]
Yeah. The big problem with 4x10s is that they caused this thread.... lol

[TimR]

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1365013883' post='2034202']
I can't beleive there has been 18 pages of this sh*t!
[/quote]

Well 1 page this year. Why do people resurrect these dead threads?

[charic]

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1365064632' post='2034644']
Well 1 page this year. Why do people resurrect these dead threads?
[/quote]

Because it's better to have all the conversation in one place rather than many