2x10 Shootout

Okay, this review has been through several iterations, so I am going to list them from most recent to the oldest. This means that first, we have...

Part 3:

In this installment, four "newcomers" (Markbass 102P, Music Man HD-210, Sadowsky SA210, and Schroeder 1010) go head to head against the top three contenders from the prior shootouts (Bergantino HT210, EA NL-210, Glockenklang Duo Wedge). Here's how they look on paper:

Bergantino HT210 (500w, 8 ohm, 36 Hz to 18 kHz, 100 db, 64 lbs, 18” x 22.75” x 18”)

EA NL-210 (500w, 8 ohm, 45 Hz to 16 kHz, 100 db, 43 lbs, 22.5” x 17” x 15”)

Glockenklang Duo Wedge [German model] (400w, 8 ohm, 40 Hz to 18 kHz, 100 db, 53 lbs, 15.4” x 22.8” x 18”)

Markbass 102P (400w, 8 ohm, 45 Hz to 18 kHz, 101 db, 33 lbs, 23.4" x 13" x 17")

Music Man HD-210 (350w, 8 ohm, 50 Hz to 20 kHz, 98.5 db, 64 lbs, 24" x 17.5" x 18")

Sadowsky SA210 (400w, 8 ohm, 48 Hz to 16 kHz, 100 db, 50 lbs, 22.75" x 18" x 11.5")

Schroeder 1010 (8 ohm, 100 db, and need more stats! )

And here is how they look on film:



I did this shootout at the same time as the 1x12 shootout, so the test gear was the same (Skjold Custom 5, Stewart Audio TD-100, Crest CA9), as was my playing style (mostly fingerstyle, with a little slap/pop for tone testing). My previous test results for the Berg, EA and Glock all pretty much held true, and I have spent more time trying to describe the newcomers.

The results, in alphabetical order:

Bergantino HT210 – This cab was very similar to the NL-210, and I was quite surprised by that. Also a true standaout. Most of the comments for the NL-210 also apply, but it was a bit tighter in the lows (with the NL-210 being a bit more warm). The mids were a bit more solid sounding, whereas the mids from cab EA were a bit more cutting. This cab really sounds like a “bass” cab, but still remains very dynamic, punchy, full and clear at the same time, and fast, yet with a sense of weight and gravitas. It was one of the louder of the 2x10's, if not the loudest of the group.

EA NL-210 – At the first 2x10 update, this cab actually exceeded my expectations (which were actually high to start with). It was as big, deep and full as the Acme in the lows, but with even more crisp high end (compared to the Low B-2). Midrange clarity was exceptional, with a very quick, very articulate tone and tons of attack. I was surprised, but impressed, by its similarities to the HT-210 (see above).

Glockenklang Duo Wedge– This extremely impressive cab sounds like a cross between the NL-210 and the HT210 (you see why these three were my top picks from before? ). It was not quite as big sounding as either of these two, but was very close in this regard. Considering its compact size and wedge design, this is to be expected. Great articulation, clarity and precision without sounding at all harsh. Again, a standout cab among a very good group.

Markbass 102P - Despite its diminutive size, this little cab is very full and big sounding, which seems to mostly stem from an enhanced low mid voicing. By contrast, it seems to be missing some presence in the upper midrange. The tweeter adds a respectable degree of clarity, but seems to add more string noise than most. On the lowest notes, I did notice the response falling off fairly steeply below A on the B string, but down to that point it was very strong. Once I stood the 102P on end, it sounded much better to my ears (more balanced and articulate, smoother high end), but the overall impression is still a big low end (down to a point), somewhat reticent upper mids, and a rather sharp high end. The overall package is quite respectable, IMHO, especially for such a small and light package.

Music Man HD-210 - Looking at my notes, the first thing I wrote down was "Wow!", and that about sums it up. It was big, full, deep yet tight in the lows, with a very open high end, and balanced/articulate mids. It did not go quite as deep as the HT210, but in other respects, sounded very similar, though it perhaps had tad more presence in the upper mids, relative to the Berg. Compared to the Glock, it was not quite as "refined", but again quite similar. I wish this cab had an L-pad adapter on the tweeter, though in truth the highs sounded quite nice "set" as it was (with perhaps a tad too much string noise). This cab is rather heavy, but probably delivers the best bang for the buck, tone-wise, of any 2x10 (and perhaps any cab) I have played. Very impressive!

Sadowsky SA210 - This compact, shallow cab is not quite as deep or full sounding as the NL-210 (few cabs are), but otherwise shared many similarities with the EA, including similar "warmth with clarity" through the mids. The tweeter is fairly aggressive and expansive, though still "connected" to the drivers, which are themselves very punchy. There is a combined sense of clarity and presence that begins in the mids and carries through to the highs. It's not a bump/hump, but just a slightly enhanced presence over this broad range. I have found this to cut through very well in a mix, but without getting boomy or obnoxious. This cab was designed to be used with the all-tube SA200, and as such, I find that with SS amps, some slight low end boosting is called for. Still, it takes to low frequency boost fairly well, and is a full sounding cab, on the whole. Relative to the Duo Wedge, it was also quite similar, though not as open sounding (which is a characteristic that Glocks seem to do so well). While this cab was designed and built by Jim Bergantino (and its outer shell is shared by the HT210S), the drivers, crossover and tweeter are different, and the SA210 has its own voice (exellent, but different from the HT210S). The drivers are very efficient, and this was one of the louder cabs of the group.

Schroeder 1010 - I have had the pleasure of hearing a number of Schroeder cabs, and this one is perhaps my favorite. Compared to the other Schroeders I have played, it seems more tonally balanced and more clear and precise with fingerstyle playing. That said, compared to the other cabs in this roundup, it is rather boxy and a little congested sounding. There is not a whole lot of what I call "true" low end, but it stays reasonably full. The 1010 is not as low-mid heavy as some other Schroeder cabs, but instead, it's more bumped in the upper mids (especially on the A and D strings). I do like this particular tweeter better than the Selenium titanium tweeter option, and I actually preferred the sound with it cranked up some (though this caused some hiss - which is not unexpected and was not a problem). Being an 8 ohm cab, the 1010 was not any louder than average for this group (though in its upper mid "boost range" it was very loud). Note: although "new", this cab is an older configuration, and Jorg has made numerous changes to his lineup. I am not sure that a 1010 is even offered right now.

I've been able to review some pretty killer 2x10's, and IMHO, this is a pretty competitive group. Please read any "negative" comments as references in context to the competition - which is very, very good!

And before Part 3, there was...

Part 2:

Okay, some time back, I did a little shootout among the 2x10’s that I had on hand at the time. Since then, I have acquired a few more, and I figured that it was time for an update. The cabs involved this time around are as follows:

Accugroove Tri 210L (600w, 4 ohm, 39 Hz to 18 kHz, 103 db, 57 lbs, 21.25” x 24.75” x 18.25”)

Acme Low B-2II (350w, 4 ohm, 41 Hz to 22 kHz, 93 db, 50 lbs, 23” x 15.75” x 16.5”)

Bergantino HT210 (500w, 8 ohm, 36 Hz to 18 kHz, 100 db, 64 lbs, 18” x 22.75” x 18”)

Dr. Bass Custom 2x10 (specs unknown – I’ll take some measurements later)

EA CxL-210 (600w, 8 ohm, 42 Hz to 14 kHz, 102 db, @ 80 lbs, 22.5” x 17” x 15”)

EA NL-210 (500w, 8 ohm, 45 Hz to 16 kHz, 100 db, 43 lbs, 22.5” x 17” x 15”)

EA VL-210 (500w, 8 ohm, 38 Hz to 15 kHz, 95 db, 70 lbs, 23.125” x 19.5” x 16”)

Glockenklang Duo Wedge [German model] (400w, 8 ohm, 40 Hz to 18 kHz, 100 db, 53 lbs, 15.4” x 22.8” x 18”)

Here's the lineup shot:



First off, let me say that I think that all of these cabs are very good (or else I wouldn’t have bought them!), and that personal preference will definitely be the deciding factor as to which one is “best” for a given person. My “testing equipment” included my Skjold Custom 5 (which is the instrument that I am the most familiar with right now, and a very clear, yet full-sounding, instrument), into a line driver (with variable high pass filter) built by Jim Bergantino, into a Crest CA9. The little line driver from Jim is deceptively simple, but it is the most clear, pure, uncolored and 3D sounding device I have at my disposal. Basically straight wire with gain (and a variable high pass filter, which I left turned off). Here’s a shot of the Bergantino line driver, if’n you’re interested:



Here are my thoughts/observations:

EA VL-210B – This cab was one of a few that could take all that one side of the CA9 could dish out (with the line driver cranked up all the way). In fact, this cab had no signs of breakup at all, even at the highest volumes I could push. The overall tone is slightly dark, with a deep tight low end – although the lows to low mids were not as full, overall, as some of the other cabs. Good clarity on the whole, with fairly smooth highs. Midrange was nicely present, but again a little dark.

Acme Low B-2II – Very deep and very full sounding. Also a very clear cab, but with less mids than some of the other cabs, and brighter highs than the VL-210B. I’d say that it is slightly mid scooped, though not perhaps compared to other cabs not in this shootout. This cab was louder than I expected, but it couldn’t take all that the CA9 could put out without showing signs of stress.

EA NL-210 – This cab was one of the standouts, and in fact exceeded my expectations (which were actually high to start with). It was as big, deep and full as the Acme in the lows, but with even more crisp high end (compared to the Low B-2). Midrange clarity was exceptional, with a very quick, very articulate tone and tons of attack. Could not handle full power from CA9 without signs of stress.

EA CxL-210 – This cab had probably the most cutting, bright, and clear tone. The midrange response was similar to the NL-210, but not as full, especially in the lows. Very, very quick (slightly more so than the NL-210), but somewhat thin sounding compared to the NL-210 and the Acme. Not as dark sounding as the VL-210, but with some definite similarities to its predecessor, on the whole.

Dr. Bass Custom 2x10 – This cab had a similar tonal range to the NL-210, but was not as polished. It was not as clear/precise as the best in this group, but had good articulation. There was a hint of vintage warmth to the mids. The high end sounded a bit boxy compared to the best in this group, but would probably be praiseworthy outside of a direct comparison to this particular competition. Not quite as full sounding as the Acme and NL-210, though very close. This cab was the punchiest of the group, and also took all that the CA9 could offer.

Bergantino HT210 – This cab was very similar to the NL-210, and I was quite surprised by that. Also a true standaout. Most of the comments for C also apply, but it was a bit tighter in the lows (with the NL-210 being a bit more warm). The mids were a bit more solid sounding, whereas the mids from cab EA were a bit more cutting. This cab really sounds like a “bass” cab, but still remains very dynamic, punchy, full and clear at the same time, and fast, yet with a sense of weight and gravitas. This cab also didn’t quite handle all the CA9 could put out, but was one of, if not the, loudest of the group.

Glockenklang Duo Wedge– This extremely impressive cab sounds like a cross between the NL-210 and the HT210 (which were very close to begin with). It was not quite as big sounding as either of these two, but was very close in this regard. Considering its compact size and wedge design, this is to be expected. Great articulation, clarity and precision without sounding at all harsh. This cab could take all the CA9 put out without stressing. Again, a standout cab among a very good group.

Accugroove Tri 210L – This cab shared some similarities with the NL-210, especially in the lows, but was even more full sounding and had the warmest tone, overall, of the group. Even the high notes maintained a certain thickness to them. This cab was not as clear, punchy or dynamic through the mids as some of the rest, but it moved the most air. Handled most of what the CA9 could put out, but not quite all.

Again, these are all very good, very impressive cabs. If I had to pick any “winners”, based upon sonic performance alone, I would have to say that the NL-210, HT210, and Duo Wedge made me sit back and say “day-um!” more than the others. However, I could easily see any of these cabs being someone else’s favorite based upon variations in personal preference. Also, I could gig quite happily with any of these (and in fact, I have gigged with most of them – the Glock being a very recent acquisition and only put through its paces at a gig in "vocal monitor" duty - which it handled quite well!).

Again, the EA NL-210, Bergantino HT210, and Glockenklang Duo Wedge ended up within spitting distance of each other, and for my tastes, my playing style, and with the associated gear used in this test, they would all via for top honors. For a small, compact wedge shaped "monitor", the Duo Wedge has a very big sound, but of course the NL-210 and HT210 both sound a tad bigger. The Glock does have a fairly unique voice, and it strikes me as somehow taking the rough edges off each note, but maintaining the clarity. The NL-210 surprised me with its authoritative sound, great volume, and excellent balance. But again, almost any subjective words that I can use to describe one of these three would tend to apply to the other two, as well. However, the NL-210 is the warmest of the three. The HT210 took the sound of the other two and just added some meat behind each note. Very dynamic, with a sense of deep forcefulness behind the clarity, the HT210 was probably the loudest/punchiest of the group (even though it couldn't quite take all the gain from the CA9 - but it didn't need to).

But, some thoughts on the other fine contenders:

VL-210 - two of these stacked, and pushed by a big old amp, are still a force to be reconned with. The louder you drive these cabs, the better they sound, IME.

Low B-2II - these cabs still offer excellent bang for the buck, and present a very smooth sound, with good clarity, and excellent low end in a compact, lightweight package.

CxL-210 - this cab is exceptionally quick sounding, with good high end zing and clarity. I can see where slappers might really like this sound (of course, it sounds great with other playing styles, too). In my previous 2x10 shootout, I felt that it was slightly more warm sounding and slightly less clear than the VL-210. Well, with the line driver and the CA9, it seems that my results are reversed to an extent, as the CxL-210 had more clarity, and the relative fullness was right about equal. These two really sound a lot alike.

Dr. Bass 2x10 - This thing weighs next to nothing, and it is in a very compact box. Combine its diminutive dimensions with the diminutive prices charged by Dr. Bass for their cabs, and you have a heck of a bargain that won't break your back. I am just amazed at how much power you can pump into these cabs.

Tri 210L - You can move a ton of air with this cab, and the tone is full, full, full. Although it is the biggest cab in the group, it's weight is deceiving and highly manangable. The low end had many similarities to the NL-210, but the mids were rather different. One unique characteristic of Accugroove cabs, IME, is that they sound full and rich no matter where you are playing on the fingerboard.

And starting it all, was...

Part 1:

I am lucky enough to own multiple very good 2x10's, and here is a little shootout I was able to do one night when the wife and kids were out, and I could shake the house a little!

Here were the contenders:



Again, if you don't know them by sight, they would be:

EA VL-210B
EA CXL-210
ACME Low B-2
Accugroove Tri 210L

These cabs were all used with my iAMP 800 (I had put the rack rig away by then), and I played through my Thunderbird, primarily. I did briefly play my 5-string through them, but as I had used all of them with the 5 before, I didn't spend a lot of time with the 5-string. Quick answer: they all do the Low B thing quite well, and do so consistent with the more general observations below. Here is what I found:

With EQ's all set flat and all tweeters (and mids) were all the way on - which is, of course, "flat" for the ACME and Accugroove, but "boosted" for the EA cabs, the cabs in the photo are arrayed from left to right in the order of the tightest low end, and greatest overall perceived clarity, to thickest low end (and least perceived clarity).

There were two big surprises for me, here. First, was that the CXL-210 was slightly more warm/round than the VL-210B. The CXL-112 is a very cutting and clear cab, and I thought that the CXL-210 would be between the VL-210B and CXL-112 in this regard. To my surprise, though, the CXL-210 takes a good bit of the edge off the CXL-112, and the VL-210B (with two mids and a tweeter, versus the CXL-210's single coax tweeter) has the edge in overall clarity, but is slightly thinner sounding than the CXL-210. This is even more intriguing given my prior comparison of my CX-310 to two VL-210's. In that scenario, the CX-310 had more cut and clarity, and equal "heft" and "weight." I can see why one VL-210 might sound thinner where two did not, but I am not sure why the CX-310 would have more perceived cut/clarity than the CXL-210. My guess is that it is, indeed, a perception thing, where once you stack two VL-210's, the low end beefs up to the point that perceived cut/clarity is reduced. I don't know...

The other surprise was that the Tri 210L was even thicker in the lows than the Low B-2. Accugroove cabs certainly are known for being full, rich, and phat, but the Low B-2 is the king of thick 2x10's (or so I thought!). Granted, the difference between the two was not huge, but nevertheless, I had expected the ACME to have the deepest, fullest, thickest low end, and was surprised when the Accugroove bested it in these regards. [For those desiring truly collossal tonal girth, I should point out that the Whappo, Jr. has even more low end weight than the Tri 210L!] Along with this, the ACME had more upper midrange and high end clarity than the Tri 210L. Keep in mind, this is with everything set totally flat, EQ-wise.

Overall, the two EA cabs were more similar than different, and the ACME and Accugroove cabs were also more similar than different. The EAs, had a thinner, cleaner sound, but could easily add bass boost to crank out truly massive low end. The ACME/Accugroove cabs appear to be designed from the opposite end of the spectrum, where you start out with a full, rich, tone, and cut low end if need be. Set flat, the Low B-2 or Tri 210L would be the kind of cabs that I would bring to an outside gig, or a room that is known for being a bit on the thin side, whereas the EA's are better suited for situtations where you might have to fight some boominess in a room or onstage. The latter seems to be more common for me, although I have played more and more outside gigs of late.

I guess there is a third surprise. The perceived loudest of all three cabs, with the gain set equal? The VL-210B. This came as quite a surprise, especially since the Low B-2 is a 4 ohm, and the Tri 210L had its Accuswitch set to 4 ohm. Both EA cabs are 8 ohm models.

I am not sure if these types of "shootouts" are at all helpful to the rest of you, but I do have people ask me about comparisons between these cabs, so I thought I would share.

Take care, Tom.

[Edit 10/25/05]

I have been meaning to get back to this 2x10 shootout for some time, as I have picked up some additional cabs (EA NL-210, Bergantino HT210, and a custom neo 2x10 from Dr. Bass). I still have not done a comprehensive test of all the available 2x10's, but for the sake of sharing some information (as opposed to none) concerning these cabs, let me state the following limited observations.

The NL-210 is a very light weight cab, and a breeze to manhandle. It is more warm sounding than EA's prior 2x10's, but is still very clear (though perhaps not as ultimately clear as the VL-210), and the bottom end on the whole is more full. Very nice balance of warmth and clarity in a very compact, lightweight package.

The HT210 is a real eye opener. So far, I have only compared it against my Tri 210L, but despite being rated at 100 SPL (versus the Tri's 103 SPL) and despite its 8 ohm rating (versus the Tri's 4 ohm load), the Berg was louder, punchier, more forceful, more clear, and had more dynamic impact than the Accugroove. Wow! I can't wait to put this cab through its paces!

The Dr. Bass cab is a custom compact/lightweight cab that Marc Serio built. After I provided him with some detailed feedback and some suggested modifications to make it even better, he offered to take the cab back and make the modifications for free! Great service, if you ask me. And indeed, it came back sounding even better than before. I love the size/dimensions on this cab, and it is also extremely light. The tone is very well balanced, and it can hold its own against the "big boys!"

Ultimately, depending on your personal preferences, playing style, and associated gear, any of these cabs might be "the one" for you.

Later, Tom.

The 1x12 Shootout

Okay, this has been a long time coming, and even after all the time I spent waiting until I had ALL the players on hand, I still had one soldier away on active duty (my CxL-112 is currently serving in the Cheezewiz Regiment). But, I can't wait forever, so here comes the Bowlus Bass Borg 1x12 Shootout!

The competition:

Bag End S12-D (200w, 8 ohm, 50Hz to 5kHz, 100 db, 41 lbs, 15.5" x 18" x 15.5")

Bag End S12X-C (200w, 8 ohm, 50Hz to __kHz, 100 db, 41 lbs, 15.5" x 18" x 15.5")

Bergantino EX112 (300w, 8 ohm, 48Hz to 18kHz, 97 db, 36 lbs, 15" x 17.5" x 13")

Bergantino HT112 (300w, 8 ohm, 48Hz to 18kHz, 97 db, 39 lbs, 15" x 17.5" x 13")

Bergantino IP112 (500w [amplified; 1,000w with ext. cab], 8 ohm, 15" x 17.5" x 13")

EA Wizzy (200w, 4 ohm, 45Hz to 12kHz, 103 db, 41 lbs, 19.25" x 17" x 12.5")

Epifani T-112 (300w, 8 ohm, 43Hz to 16kHz, 100 db, 41 lbs, 16.5" x 19.5" x 16.25")

Glockenklang Space Deluxe (250w, 8 ohm, 39Hz to 18kHz, 98 db, 43 lbs, 16.9" x 20.9" x 14.8")

Raezer's Edge Bass 12-400 (400w, 8 ohm, 40Hz to 4kHz, 99 db, 45 lbs, 18.5" x 17" x 14")

Schroeder Mini 12+ (500w, 8 ohm, 40Hz-20kHz, 100 db, ?? lbs, 16" x 16" x 16")

And here is the lineup:



As usual, the test bass was my trusty Skjold Custom 5, and the reference amp was a Crest CA9. My Bergantino line driver is off visiting its maker, so I used my Stewart TD-100. I was able to play through most of these cabs with Mike, Steve, and Pat at a recent GTG, but the commentary below is more directly from my own observations with me playing a range of fingerstyle approaches (some slap/pop), though certainly, Mike's playing through these cabs (using his Smith, and either his Focus Series III or Pat's WT-550) was fresh in my mind when I made my notes. For the most part, the results were consistent. Here we go!

Bag End S12-D - The S12X-C which we played at the Mini GTG was a bit of a surprise, and generally received good remarks. This is the X-C's tweeterless brother (which we did not play). For some reason, it did not seem to go quite as deep as the S12X-C, but did seem more smooth and even through the mids. It was certainly punchy, and just a slight bit "boxy" sounding (I need to try to better define what I mean by that, but just bear with me for now, please!). It has some definite tonal similarities to the EX112, but sounded a little rougher around the edges.

Bag End S12X-C - As mentioned above, this was one of the 1x12's that Mike, Steve, Pat and I checked out, and it acquitted itself well in a very competitive group. It is fairly balanced, tonally, and goes pretty deep for a smallish box. The coax tweeter is certainly aggressive, but not unpleasant. It takes a bit for your ears/brain to adjust to it, though. The mids are thick up to a point, and then they thin out a bit in the upper mids, but remain quite present. Just as the S12-D is reminiscent of the EX112, so, too, is the S12X-C comparable to the HT112. The Bag End seems to offer more lows, but is not as balanced through the mids, relavent to the HT112 The HT112 is more smooth, while the S12X-C is more aggressive.

Bergantino EX112 - This tweeterless cab has punchy, full mids, with a strong lower-midrange voice. The highs are somewhat muted relative to the Wizzy (though similar to the S12-D), and the low end is both deeper and more full than the Wizzy. On the whole, it sounds a lot like a more refined S12-D.

Bergantino HT112 - For some reason, the HT does not sound as punchy as the EX, and while the EX has just a hint of "boxiness", this does not seem to be present in the HT. The highs are crisp, but not harsh at all, and the transition from driver to tweeter is virtually seamless. It has a full low-midrange that is both very clear and quick, but also thick. It goes relatively deep, and never seems to chuff or choke on the lowest notes (even though some cabs may offer more volume on these notes). All in all, a very "comprehensive," refined presentation.

Bergantino IP112 - This is really not a fair comparison to the other cabs in the group. It has an internal amplifier (500w into its 8 ohm load, 1,000w with an 8 ohm extension cab), and an onboard, 2-channel DSP (see numerous other threads on the IP line of cabs for more details). It could go far louder than any of the other cabs without breaking up. It was much more full sounding, and went far deeper than anything else. There are no discernable peaks or valleys, and the overall tone is very "fast", with tons of dynamics and punch, but still open and clear. The mids were smooth, musical, rich, yet very defined. Not a hint of boxiness. The high end was sweet, clear, quick yet still full. This cab can do it all!

EA Wizzy - The Wizzy is very tight and controlled with a full tone, and smooth (slightly muted) highs. The low B through a single Wizzy is not huge sounding, but nevertheless balanced relative to the other strings. As you turn up the volume, the low B stands out more, but remains very tight. The mids are the predominant speaking voice, and offer a hint of vintage warmth, but with good articulation. The whizzer cone allows it to transmit more high end informatoin, and the highs seem go even higher as you turn it up. Depsite its low power rating, this Wizzy seems capable of taking a lot of power without breaking a sweat. It gets very loud, and while it is a somewhat "punchy" cab, and the mids are somewhat present, they are a musical, broad (yet not dramatic) midrange "push", as opposed to a definite peak. The Wizzy sits great in a mix, too.

Epifani T-112 - Next to the IP112 and the Glock, the Epi had the biggest, deepest low end (very close to the Glock in this regard). The T-112 also serves up beautiful, crystalline highs that seem to float above the cab and are very open and airy. It is somewhat scooped in the upper mids (the UL-112 definitely has more going on in the upper mids, though a little less on the lowest notes). This cab takes gobs of power effortlessly, but IME, it needs a lot of power to perform its best. When played loudly, the A-string seems a little too aggressive relative to the other strings, but it was not as peaky as the Schroeder. Also, at higher volumes you hear a good bit of string noise. While I didn't have one on hand when I was playing, going on Mike's UL-112 at the Mini GTG, I think we all preferred the UL-112 as a stand alone cab, but I just love the T-112 (NYC-112) as a compliment to the UL-110.

Glockenklang Space Deluxe - This cab also seems to offer it all, and comes the closest of all the non-powered cabs to matching the IP112. Its tone is big and full (with the deepest lows of the bunch - agian, notwithstanding the IP112), but it is also quick, tight, and clear, with a very "connected" sounding high end. It has an expansive sound, and great tonal balance. It is a little bigger in the low end compared to the HT112, but not quite as clear in the low mids as the HT112, though for the rest of the frequency range, it bears certain similarities to the HT112 - the Berg is a little more full/thick, and the Glock is a bit more open sounding. It feels a lot lighter than the 41 lbs quoted on the Glockenklang website.

Raezer's Edge Bass 12-400 - This cab was somewhat similar to the Wizzy, but not as full on the low B. It was more articulate than I had expected (based upon previous experience), but was definitely somewhat boxy sounding. It offered up a consistent, punchy tone as you cranked the volume. On the whole, it was not as defined as the Wizzy, but was not as peaky or muffled as the Mini 12+.

Schroeder Mini 12+ - Compared to most of the other cabs in this group, the Mini 12+ sounded a bit muffled (like the proverbial blanket had been dropped in front of it). The cab has a low-mid throatiness, and its response is kind of peaky (for instance, an E on the A string really pops out at you when played). I do like the tweeter in this cab much more than the Selenium titanium tweeter I have heard in some other Schroeder cabs, and in fact, I actually liked the high end pretty well, but it sounded rather detached, and kind of out there on its own. The low B was kind of chugging at higher volumes, though overall volume stayed fairly loud. It less muffled, but more "barky" at higher volumes, too. On the whole, it has a strong midrange presence, and is not as articulate, defined, clear as some of the other cabs.

Some of these cabs also made it down to the upright "belchfest" in Columbus. There were some commonalities, but also some marked differences in how these cabs performed with upright (and in the particular room) relative to electric bass (being played in my basement). I'll try to reflect more on that later, but I've got to go, so we'll stick with this content for starters.

Later, Tom.

Prototype Chambered MTD

In addition to a Sadowsky, one bass that I always wanted was one from the mind and hands of Michael Tobias. After perusing many photos on the MTD GAS pics thread over at TalkBass.com, I could take no more, and I contacted Joel at The Groove Shoppe to discuss an order for an MTD 535. Joel and I spent a lot of time talking about the various woods. I was initially really turned on by the flamed redwood tops (and I still am!), but Joel pointed me to some blackened (and flamed, and burled!) redwood similar to the top on this fretless he sold:



Well, needless to say, that got my attention!

So, after much debate, we decided that we would go with an alder body, blackened redwood top (with multiple veneers between), maple neck, and ebony (or perhaps Rose of the Mountain) board. But, before we placed this order, Joel had an opportunity to play a prototype that Mike had built which was much to these specs above, but which employed a chambered body (which is 2.25" thick), and which had a blistered ebony fingerboard. According to Joel, this was one of the best sounding/playing MTDs he has encountered.

But, Mike would not sell it, and instead opted to keep it for himself. He named it "Marilyn" in honor of the chambers. ;^] However, he did decide to build two more chambered basses, one with a 2" thick body, and one with a 1.75" thick body, to the same (or very similar) specs, and Joel was able to weasel me in on the 2" thick prototype! The specs will be as above, except that Mike may use a Rose of the Mountain fingerboard instead of the blistered ebony. They should sound quite similar, so I left it up to Mike to decide which would look best.

Being a fan of fingerboard dots, I asked about this possibility, and I think that were are going to use purpleheart dots, which will match the purpleheart veneer between the body and the top. Also being a fan of the volume/volume configuration, I requested this as well. Some of you may find both of these requests blasphemous, but hey, it is my bass, right? It will be a 24F model.

Needless to say, I am really stoked about this bass, and I can't say enough about the help that I received from Joel!

Here are some photos of progress so far. First, this is the block of flamed, burled, blackened redwood for the top:



Later, Joel was able to send me a photo of some potential fingerboards (these are "blistered" ebony, and the two-tone board is Rose of the Mountain):



Here is a shot of the boards taken from the other end:



I really liked the Rose of the Mountain, but would have been happy with any of those boards. I told Mike that I trusted his judgment, and left the decision up to him. I believe that we are going with the ROM board.

Joel really got me going when he sent me some pictures of the body after it had been cut!



and



I can't wait for more photos! I asked Michael about the option of doing wood control knobs or pickup covers, but he indicated that he does not offer these (the knobs take a lot of time, and get to be too expensive to offer, and the pickups come from Bartolini already set into the ABS shells). But, it looks like I may be able to get Pete Skjold to build me some wood control knobs from some of the scraps, so that should be cool!

Needless to say, I am very excited about this instrument! I will update this post as the "story" develops!

Of course, shortly after I committed to buying this bass, I did manage to snag myself one of Michael's earlier, creations, a Tobias Basic 5, but that is another story! ;^]. However, here is a "sneak peek!":



[Update on the fingerbaord]

I just received word that Mike decided to go with one of the blistered ebony fingerboards. It has sounded like he was leaning towards the Rose of the Mountain, but apparently changed his mind. I totally trust his discretion, so I am sure that it will be delicious! He said that the ebony would go better with the purpleheart dots, which makes sense.

Here are some additional shots that Michael sent me documenting the progress of my bass:



































































Once the bass was finished, it was first sent to The Groove Shoppe (whom I bought it through) and Joel took these photos:

































Here is a mini report on mine based upon last night's gig. In a nutshell, I'm even more in love that I could have imagined prior to the gig! I think that Joel nailed it on the head when he told me that this bass sounds like a "bigger version" of a "standard" MTD with these woods. This is very true, and at the gig, I noticed that the chambered 535 sounded much larger and more full sounding than either my 435 (mahogany body, quilted maple top, maple neck, ebony board) or my Skjold Custom 5. The B-string was huge, and the tone was full throughout its range. The expected MTD clarity was there, two, which really impressed me. My 435 was just a tad more bright/clear overall, but sounded thin in comparison (and with the mahogany body, I generally think of my 435 as a fairly full sounding MTD). The Skjold ended up sounding somewhat between the two MTD's, but the overall tone/feel through the chambered 535 made it sound like I had kicked in another wall of cabs, or else another bass was doubling my line. It was clear and coherent, just really, really "BIG!!!" Those chambers certainly do something other than reduce weight!

Joel also told me that this was the finest sounding MTD he had played to date, and I also must concur. It just seems to do everything well, and it combines that almost supernatural clarity of an MTD with an ebony board with a big, huge, full tone - not to mention sustain for days!

As for weight, I weighed my 535 at 8.8 lbs. For comparison, the 435 is 8.4 lbs, the Skjold is 9.2 lbs, my 25th Anniversary 24F 5-string Sadowsky is 9.0 lbs (as is my Gibson Thunderbird), my Turner EL-535 is 9.4 lbs, and my DeArmond Pilot 5 Deluxe ties the 535 at 8.8 lbs. The lightweight of my stable (not counting semi-hollow bodies or ABG's) is my old Lotus 4-string at 7.6 lbs, and my Gibson Explorer and Corvette Standard 4-string fretless tie for heaviest honors at 10.6 lbs each!

Here is a shot from the gig. It's not the greatest quality, and does no justice at all to these fine instruments:



FWIW, the WWU powering the (4 ohm) VL-208 was my "rhythm guitar" rig - UniBass into Daddy-O, into the WWU. My "bass" rig was Kern IP-777 into Stewart World 2.1, into two (4 ohm) Low B-2's.

I recently got my custom wood knobs made for my by Pete Skjold (using wood from my actual redwood top!), and I am really happy with the results!






Later, Tom.

Another Skjold in the works!

Okay, I admit it. I am totally hooked on Pete Skjold's basses! Some of you might have seen my thread regarding my Skjold Custom 5. Well, I just got off the phone with Pete and laid the groundwork for my Skjold Exotic Custom 4! It will be a 4-string (obviously!) with a Hipshot D-tuner for drop-D tunes. It will use the Skjold preamp and pickups, with an optional, hotter, bridge pickup.

For woods, I spent a lot of time talking to Pete about possibilities, and then my good buddy Juneau hoped over to Pete's shop to take some photos (thanks, Juneau!). Here is Pete with three of the "finalists":















Up against the wall behind him is a sweet chunk of maple burl. He is holding some uniquely flamed anigre, and this awesome piece of flamed mahogany, also called "fiddleback mahogany." This photo is really the one that did it for me, as it made the mahogany just jump out relative to the other two. Pete had just picked up that piece of wood the day Juneau took the photos, and both Pete and his supplier seemed very excited about it. I can see why!

Here are two more shots of the fiddleback mahogany:





























But to really appreciate this piece of wood, check out this little video that Juneau took. Or, as he says, "And now, this is the Fiddleback Mahogany taking its little turn on the catwalk!":

Mahogany on the catwalk

You can see how I am so smitten with this wood! It will grace both the front and back of my bass, as well as the headstock. The body wood will be spanish cedar (after much debate!), and Pete will incorporate two thick (3/16") veneers of flamed maple, and at least two darker veneers between the maple and the cedar (on both sides).

The neck will be a 7-piece, and we have yet to pick out the exact woods. We did spend a lot of time talking about fingerboard woods, though. After thoroughly discussing all of the tonal qualities of various options, as well as the esthetic impact, we decided upon ebony. We will also use ebony for the pickup cover, knobs, and for the neck pocket overlay. The fingerboard dots will be flame maple, and I plan on incorporating a Norse symbol (also in flame maple, and in honor of Pete's Viking heritage!) on the neck pocket overlay.

[Updated 7/16/05]

Okay, the top, back, and laminates have all been glued, and the rough cut of the body is done. Here are some shots of the initial stages of my new Exotic Custom 4 (courtesy of Juneau, as always!). You can also see the ebony fingerboard, which Pete put in the picture for a little persepective.



In these two shots, you can see a bit more of what the spanish cedar body wood adds to the equation/





And here is a shot of the back.



The coloration of the mahogany is a bit more ruddy than it looked from the other photos, but I think it provides even more contrast to the ebony. I am really excited by the look of the cedar, too. I wasn't sure what to expect, there. And the flame maple veneers really add a lot, I think.

Here is a shot of the 7-piece neck blank:



Thanks again, Juneau!

[Content added on 7/20/05]

Well, I have a few new developments. As you may recall, Pete and I had talked about doing some Norse symbol inlay options, and we were initially thinking about having him doing it using flame maple.

After a while, though I decided that I wanted him to do not only the Hammer of Thor symbol on the neck pocket overlay, but to also do the "Gungnir" symbol in place of the dot position markers. Gungnir was Odin's spear, and the symbol looks like this:



So, we are now talking about doing these in gold pearl (which I did not know existed, but as described, it sounds like an awesome match for this bass). Needless to say, I am even more psyched!

[time passes...]

Well, here we have the finished inlay!



[more time passes!]

New photos from Juneau!



This photo highlights both the fact that we have switched from the single C4 pickup configuration to dual pickups. It also shows the custom Skjold bridge (I think this is one of the first basses to sport this bridge!).











Here are more progress shots:

















More update shots [10/10/05]:

The neck is now fitted to the body.





This shot shows the gold pearl side dot markers (to match the gold pearl inlay):



[11/21/-5]

Some more update shots, after the finish has been sprayed:





More updates! It's getting close!








Thanks again, Juneau!

Okay, I have been having fun with this bass over the weekend, but I was only able to play it loud today at lunch. Whoa, Momma! I could tell from playing it through my Baby Blue II that this thing just plays, and it is so very comfortable for both hands. Oh, and did I mention fast? This thing makes even a schmuck like myself think he can play fast!

Tonally, it definitely sounds like a Skjold, but compared to my Custom 5, it has a more aggressive high end (which it should, considering the ebony board on the 4 and the bubinga fingerboard on the 5), and a different midrange voice. The Custom 5, with its mahogany body, is a bit more 'organic' and slightly warm (but very clear) through the mids. The Exotic Custom 4 speaks more like my '73 Jazz, with a bit of aggressiveness and a 'forward' kind of attack. In fact, the 4 sounds very reminiscent of my '73 Jazz in many ways. The overall vibe is quite similar, though the Jazz is even more high end snappy (having a maple fingerboard) and the Skjold is definitely more balanced through the mids. Come to mention it, the feel of the neck on this bass reminds me more of my '73 Jazz than anything else.

Here are some shots of the three Skjold's (Stage 4, Custom 5, Exotic Custom 4) hanging out. Please note that Pete wasn't done with my ebony knobs yet, so he shipped it with black metal knobs.









Here are some more shots. I love what Pete does with fingerboards! Check out the birdseye on the Stage.



And the inlays on the Exotic Custom 4 were just what I had in mind!



A few more comments after playing this bass some more...

On the electronics front, there are two "new" design features at work on this bass. First, Pete now offers an optional "hotter" bridge pickup, which I believe was designed to offer better balance between the two pickups (am I right, Pete?). I am not sure how much of what I am hearing as the difference between my Exotic Custom 4 and my Custom 5 is related to this pickup (versus the different woods and strings), but the overall tone is definitely more aggressive and there is a "snap" to the attack (even on the lower notes) that you don't quite hear from my 5. My presumption is that the different "attacks" on my 4 and 5 is perhaps more due to this hotter bridge pickup than it is due to the woods involved.

At any rate, they both sound great, but different, to my ears. What is even more amazing is the range of tones offered by the pickup selector switch. I am normally a fan of the vol/vol pot configuration, and I was skeptical at first about not having the control that I am used to, but the ability to drive the pickups in series or parallel is well worth it. You get two very distinct tones this way. I hope I have my "series/parallel" settings right (again, help me out if I'm wrong, Pete!) but in parallel mode, it's a bit more refined and in series, it's a bit more aggressive (and very slightly louder). Oftentimes, when I play through different amp/cab combos, switching from series to parallel (or vice versa) can take an "okay" tone and make it really gel. Also, series setting in passive mode just kicks with an all-tube rig!

The other new feature (relative to my Custom 5, at least) is the newly voiced Skjold preamp (made to Pete's specs by John East). The frequency range on the parametric midrange now encompasses a wider range, and goes all the way down to 100 Hz. This one tone control is hugely powerful. You have boost/cut, and control over the frequency. But whatever Q setting John/Pete use, it tends to not screw up your sound (which is sometimes easier to do than you might think when you start messing with parametric EQ's). This parametric midrange is worth the price of admission, alone, for this preamp! But no, it doesn't stop there! You may be familiar with John East's preamps in general, but I want to mention the bass control on this preamp. It is a boost only, but uniquely (to the best of my knowledge), as you turn it up, not only does the boost increase, but it also starts to boost progressively deeper notes (again, Pete, keep me straight if I am wrong, here). What I have found is that quite simpley, this bass boost just works better. You can fill in the lows to the extent needed without getting boomy/muddy in one particular range. I'm not sure exactly what is going on here from a physics perspective, but all I can say is that in practice, this bass knob seems to do a better job of dialing in "good" low end and avoiding any "problems" you may sometimes encounter when boosting lows.

Wow, I know that I am rambling on, but one more comment, if I may. While it may not necessarily look like a Jazz, Pete has told me several times that he has spent some time thinking about what makes those vintage J's sound/play so good, and I think he's drawn on more than a bit of their mojo, here. If you close your eyes, this neck feels a lot like a vintage Jazz (in fact, Pete based his shape on measurements from a vintage Jazz), it hangs like a J-bass (again, on purpose), and in parallel/passive mode, this thing really captures a lot of the mojo that I hear from my '73 Jazz. The mids are very similar, and the low-mids to lows are again reminiscent, but more balanced on the Skjold. Highs are very much in the same ballpark, though the maple board on my Jazz is certainly brighter. But this does not mean that the Skjold is a one-trick pony. Far from it. I think that Pete's basses are probably some of the most tonally flexible instruments I have played. But if you want to be able to dial in a great J-Bass tone (among other tones), you can certainly do it on this bass (and on my Custom 5, too, but the Exotic Custom 4 gets a tad closer).

That's it for now. Thanks for letting me rant, y'all. I'm just awefully excited about this drop-dead-gorgeous, awesome playing instrument!

Here are some more shots from Juneau:







Hopeless Skjold addict, Tom.