Big heavy speaker vs. new ultra light

richnota · #1 06-16-2010, 03:21 PM

I have a 15 EV speaker from the 80's. I may be wrong but i think it weighs more than my Bergantino speaker AND cabinet.

I'm thinking about buying an enclosure for it and add it to my cabinet menagerie. Don't really need it another cabinet, but i don't have any 15's in the mix right now.

Is there any inherent charm to an old, but well kept speaker? Even one with a massive cast frame and magnet.

bottomend! · #2 06-16-2010, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by richnota

Is there any inherent charm to an old, but well kept speaker? Even one with a massive cast frame and magnet.

Looks cool?

Seriously though, there are reasons why some of this old stuff lasted so long. It's built very well and sounds awesome. By todays standards they are heavy and dont cover the bass range as well as newer stuff but that doesn't mean they SOUND bad.

BigOldHarry · #3 06-16-2010, 05:45 PM

I don't think so. In fact, it seems to me that speaker technology has changed enough in the past 20 years that a newer driver would be lighter, more efficient and sound better (depending, of course, on the driver).

Old does not always equal good.

THAT SAID... I find the I prefer the sound of non-neo cabs. It might all be in my mind, but they seem to lack that *big bottom* that a heavier cab has.

hstingrayh · #4 06-16-2010, 05:58 PM

Did try neo cabs but was not happy with it.So,I'm back on rbh 410and sbx410 plus...this cabs are heavy but they got the SOUND of million dollars.

seamonkey · #5 06-16-2010, 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by richnota

Is there any inherent charm to an old, but well kept speaker? Even one with a massive cast frame and magnet.

No

peterpalmieri · #6 06-16-2010, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hstingrayh

Did try neo cabs but was not happy with it.So,I'm back on rbh 410and sbx410 plus...this cabs are heavy but they got the SOUND of million dollars.

I usually don't comment on grammar but WOW

I agree with Seamonkey, no charm just old and heavy. Especially considering you are just going to toss it in a random enclosure.

hstingrayh · #7 06-17-2010, 11:03 AM

Heheh.Regardles my bad grammar I think that my fellows bassists undertand what I was talking about in my post,exept you smarty.And probably that happend because you dont care about bass. Dont be so judgemental of people.

peterpalmieri · #8 06-17-2010, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hstingrayh

Heheh.Regardles my bad grammar I think that my fellows bassists undertand what I was talking about in my post,exept you smarty.And probably that happend because you dont care about bass. Dont be so judgemental of people.

hehehehSure .you Rights ,those giy are a reel jork

playerunk · #9 06-17-2010, 02:59 PM

build it in some 'retro' enclosure and add a way to see the driver..maybe just for show.

worst case..make a transparant cab and put it for decoration

gbarchus · #10 06-17-2010, 04:27 PM

EV15L is what a lot of the "new" speakers are trying to copy.

Gale

BassmanPaul · #11 06-17-2010, 04:43 PM

If you want to try the EV out put it into an EV designed enclosure. TL606????

Paul

Haysoochreesto · #12 06-17-2010, 04:51 PM

With the exception of you, no one will notice the difference between an old heavy-ass cab and a newer and lighter one.

I have two Markbass cabs (115 and 410) and while I never bitched about the weight of the 115, I've complained a lot about the 410... until last week when I had to haul an old Randall guitar from the 80's that has 4 15's to and from a gig for a friend. Holy crap!

I remember when I had the old Ampeg with 8 10's. But at least it had casters on the back.

I'd go with lighter and newer any day of the week unless the old rig is so remarkable (and better) in both looks and sound that it makes the decision for you.

4-stringB · #13 06-17-2010, 05:08 PM

Yo guys, The simple physics of the situation will explain,(all other things being equal) the heavier the enclosure/speaker combination, the deeper (in pitch) the sound will be. To explain this, it is exactly like the theory of vibrating string manifestation(ya'll liking these 4 dollar words?). It's just like my '66 P-bass, That I had to add 2.5 lbs. of lead to reach the sound I wanted. "The fact that God invented beer proves that He wanted us to be happy" Benjamin Franklin...Cheers...

countrybass007 · #14 06-18-2010, 07:42 AM

(I hope my grammer is okay on this post.) I have both old and new bass cabs, all good quality. My Guass and Boogie cabs still sound great after many, many years of use, but so do my new Orange cabs. The main difference I've noticed is how my back feels after loading and unloading. The big, old heavy cabs still get used though, mostly for the outdoor festivals during the summer.

peterpalmieri · #15 06-18-2010, 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4-stringB

Yo guys, The simple physics of the situation will explain,(all other things being equal) the heavier the enclosure/speaker combination, the deeper (in pitch) the sound will be. To explain this, it is exactly like the theory of vibrating string manifestation(ya'll liking these 4 dollar words?). It's just like my '66 P-bass, That I had to add 2.5 lbs. of lead to reach the sound I wanted. "The fact that God invented beer proves that He wanted us to be happy" Benjamin Franklin...Cheers...

Honestly I've never noticed a direct correlation between the weight of a cabinet and it's tone nor have I read anything to suggest physics somehow can explain this. I have heard and experienced adding mass to a headstock to reduce dead spots but not to achieve a specific tone.

I'm not disagreeing or saying your wrong this is just the first I'm hearing about this, can you explain further?

alexclaber · #16 06-18-2010, 08:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4-stringB

Yo guys, The simple physics of the situation will explain,(all other things being equal) the heavier the enclosure/speaker combination, the deeper (in pitch) the sound will be.

Except they don't! Making the speaker cone heavier (whilst changing nothing else) will lower the resonant frequency. But the actual net weight of the driver and/or enclosure has no effect whatsover.

BurningSkies · #17 06-18-2010, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alexclaber

Except they don't! Making the speaker cone heavier (whilst changing nothing else) will lower the resonant frequency. But the actual net weight of the driver and/or enclosure has no effect whatsover.

+1.

My lightweight speaker/cabs are way lower than any of my 'heavy' cabs. Of course, the cabs are well designed which is what really has the impact.

4-stringB · #18 06-28-2010, 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by peterpalmieri

Honestly I've never noticed a direct correlation between the weight of a cabinet and it's tone nor have I read anything to suggest physics somehow can explain this. I have heard and experienced adding mass to a headstock to reduce dead spots but not to achieve a specific tone.

I'm not disagreeing or saying your wrong this is just the first I'm hearing about this, can you explain further?

I think the best way to describe this phenomena is, one, a heaver cabinet is more solidly built,(reducing resonance) meaning thicker, heaver wood. The same rigidity could be obtained with lighter materials, but with a lot of expensive internal bracing. And, two, coupling (how well the cab is fixed in position, by it's own weight, strapped, bolted down, etc.) How many times have you seen a speaker cab moving around. That's a loss of efficiency .That factor is also reflected on the bass itself, as a vibrating string will try to vibrate the bass (sympathetic vibration) Think of a short scale hollow-body, when you hit a string, you feel the bass vibrate as well. This is a loss of efficiency between the string and pickup. A heaver bass( or speaker cab) will not vibrate, so the pickup will be exposed to a greater peak-to-peak string excursion..I hope I've been some help..I'll try to provide references if I can find them. Call back anytime. My drummer and I argue speaker theory all the time, and sometimes we just have to agree to disagree...Cheers...

peterpalmieri · #19 06-28-2010, 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4-stringB

I think the best way to describe this phenomena is, one, a heaver cabinet is more solidly built,(reducing resonance) meaning thicker, heaver wood. The same rigidity could be obtained with lighter materials, but with a lot of expensive internal bracing. And, two, coupling (how well the cab is fixed in position, by it's own weight, strapped, bolted down, etc.) How many times have you seen a speaker cab moving around. That's a loss of efficiency .That factor is also reflected on the bass itself, as a vibrating string will try to vibrate the bass (sympathetic vibration) Think of a short scale hollow-body, when you hit a string, you feel the bass vibrate as well. This is a loss of efficiency between the string and pickup. A heaver bass( or speaker cab) will not vibrate, so the pickup will be exposed to a greater peak-to-peak string excursion..I hope I've been some help..I'll try to provide references if I can find them. Call back anytime. My drummer and I argue speaker theory all the time, and sometimes we just have to agree to disagree...Cheers...

We can agree to disagree on this one. All the Lighter cabinets I've owned have been built with good internal bracing and I have never noticed any bass cabinet moving around they just don't seem to be that light. I try to avoid coupling by using a gramma pad when neccesary.