Trickfish vs Barefaced - Any thoughts?

[Muzz]

I used to run an SVT/810 rig, back in the days when lifting wasn't something I even thought about, but the only time I've had both a Super Twin and an 810 in the room together was in a rehearsal room, so, despite the rolling of eyes from the other band chaps, I had to A-B them. Yes, the 810 has more immediate presence when you're standing next to it, definitely helped by being the right height for it, but at PBLRB (Pretty Bloody Loud Rock Band) levels - two 412 Marshall geetards - and from more than 10 feet away, there wasn't anything in it. If anything, the Super Twin would go lower...

The 810 obviously looked far more rock and roll, tho... 😀

[EBS_freak]

There's no eye rolling going on here as far as I am concerned - it's quite possible that 2x12 drivers with enough excursion and in the right box could compete with an Ampeg 8x10 with its low excursion drivers. I'm more intrigued by the fact that you say that the Super Twin doesn't appear to have much presence when you are next to it, which doesn't bode well for hearing yourself on a variety of stages. I couldn't comment whether a Barefaced or Trickfish would outperform an 8x10 without some proper scientific testing - and again, what does scientific actually mean? Whats not to say that the acoustic deficiencies of an Ampeg Fridge is what actually makes them appealing? Let's not forget that the fridge design was from an era where random speakers were put into random sizes boxes until they were deemed to sound good.

I can understand why the sound out front (when using such a cab as both foh and for monitoring on a small stage) is too loud if the dispersion from the cab is not reaching your ears on stage. Naturally, you are going to want to turn up to hear yourself on stage - but in doing so, you are compromising your front of house mix.

If there is any eye rolling to be had, it's the fact that bands are still using big cabs and expecting to have a great sound out front and on stage.

Edited February 2, 2021 by EBS_freak

[Muzz]

Noooo, I wasn't saying the ST didn't have much presence - they'd both make their presence felt in a ridiculous manner - but the 810 puts speakers nearer your ears (I'm talking about standing right next to it) so it's more immediate. 10ft away there was nothing in it.

I had a similar thing a while back with a Big Baby 2 on a stage in a verrrry large RAF hangar. It was set low down, and I was close to it, so it was kinda firing past (below) my knees. Our singist went out into the soon-to-be audience area and nearly passed out (or so the dramatic dahling claimed) there was so much bass...I hoicked it up on a crate, turned it down, and things got a lot better...It's not dissimilar to my Patented Cure For Overloud Rock Geetards - point their speakers directly at their head; works every time... 

The eye rolling was from the geetards, affronted that the bassist, of all people, should want to faff about a bit with gear...this after the traditional 45 minute 'let me just get my pedal board sorted out' from the pair of them... 😒

 

Edited February 2, 2021 by Muzz

[Downunderwonder]

Lots of jibberjabber about strength.

Stiffness is as much related to shape, as the strength of the material.

[Lozz196]

I’ve found that as long as people are sensible with the volume control that big cab set ups just sound better, to my taste. A band with an 810 & 412 set up playing to the volume of the kit just has a better depth to it, again, for how I like to hear music. I’ve never had an 810 (though played through many) but my 210 & 410 stack sounded better than any of the 212 set ups I had. 

[EBS_freak]

2 hours ago, Downunderwonder said:

Lots of jibberjabber about strength.

Go on then, I would invite you to expand and quantify, taking into account spherical bass cabs  or triangular sections aren't the most practical for speaker cabs.

[EBS_freak]

1 hour ago, Lozz196 said:

I’ve found that as long as people are sensible with the volume control that big cab set ups just sound better, to my taste. A band with an 810 & 412 set up playing to the volume of the kit just has a better depth to it, again, for how I like to hear music. I’ve never had an 810 (though played through many) but my 210 & 410 stack sounded better than any of the 212 set ups I had. 

That's certainly a valid opinion. What specific cabs are you making reference to?

[Lozz196]

Well my 210/410s were Ashdown ABM EVO-IV cabs, the 212 set ups I’ve had - all of which were good I should state - were Markbass CMD121P & NY121, Barefaced Super 12T & Barefaced Big Twin 2. 

All good set ups but as well as preferring the sound of the ABM cabs there was a depth & overall bigness to the sound of that stack that wasn’t there with any of the 212s. I would say though that the 212s in terms of that depth & bigness were pretty much the same as the ABM410 on its own.

So my preference isn’t volume so to speak, but that depth/bigness that you get from multiple speakers. Similarly why I like Marshall amp heads with matching 412s rather than their combo amps.
 

 

[jorisj]

Hey, reviving this.

@Sibob, any updates since last year? 

I'm planning on buying a Trickfish Bullhead .5K, but haven't decided between the TF112 and the Barefaced Two 10S yet...

[Sibob]

33 minutes ago, jorisj said:

Hey, reviving this.

@Sibob, any updates since last year? 

I'm planning on buying a Trickfish Bullhead .5K, but haven't decided between the TF112 and the Barefaced Two 10S yet...

 

Nothing further to add I'm afraid. I didn't move on the Trickfish cabs and stuck with my Barefaced setup, which I know I love. 
I would have been changing for the sake of it. I wouldn't rule them out if I was forced to buy something new though.
 

Si

[stevie]

Sensible decision.

[Count Bassy]

On 24/01/2021 at 19:04, stevie said:

with "dado and rabbet"

 

Am I the only one who finds this a bit "double entendre"-ish?

 

 

[stevie]

No, you're not. 😁