Barefaced Big Twin 2 Gen 3 or 2 x BB3 stack

[Paddy Morris]

Quick one for you experts.  I'm tempted by a Barefaced Big Twin 2 Gen 3 that has come up, reasonably nearby to me.  I already have a BB3, and the Big Twin would take up a lot of space in my car alongside an upright bass.  Possibly I couldn't get both in.  But in the heat of battle the BB3 alone feels like it's at it's limits.  I have already blown a crossover once.     In my position would you resist the Big Twin and look out for another BB3 to stack?  Am I going to get the same meat from 2 BB3s as I would from a Big Twin, do you reckon?  It's just easier to transport 2 smaller cabs, and I can leave one at home for smaller gigs.

 

Cheers

 

Patrick

[chris_b]

My take is that the smaller, lighter, modular option is always best.

 

So 2 x BB3's would be my choice.

 

On  the loud gigs I use my older BB2 with a Super Midget. I can also use my SC with the SM and can use all of them individually, depending on  the gig. IMO modular is the way to go.

[Lozz196]

I think two BB3s should work just fine, from recall, having had both, two of the BB3s would stack approx the same size/height as the BT so essentially the same cab, but in a more convenient to move set-up.

Edited 2 hours ago by Lozz196

[fretmeister]

If you are blowing the cross-over I can't see the risk being lowered - presumably the BT3 has the same cross-over for the split with the HF horn?

 

And as an aside - if you are that loud then surely the PA should be doing the hard work instead?