Custom / DIY / Cutting Edge cabinet megathread

[rpsands]

I've had a few people asking me for my opinions on various custom / cutting edge / etc. cabinets since I've owned a bunch (fEarfuls, dr. bass, bfm) and spend a lot of time lurking in the various threads.

It occurred to me it might be fun to have a megathread for all your questions about getting away from the standard cabinet designs toward the cutting edge -- Barefaced, LoPhat, fEarfuls, BFM, AudioKinesis, Acme, custom DIY stuff, and so on.

Let's try to keep this positive: discuss the advantages and tradeoffs of these newer designs. This isn't just a "high excursion woofer + midrange" thread, either, but will absolutely include discussion of using the newer extremely high output neodymium drivers full range as well. Please try to steer clear of bagging on other cabinet companies as much as possible.

This is the place to ask me for my opinions on the stuff I've tried or heard, and hopefully other regulars will chime in.

[naturalkinds]

Great thread idea. Thanks, RP.

I would be curious to know if there were any general ways to differentiate this new wave of cabinets from the classic woofer-plus-tweeter boxes that most of us have used for years. Not so much the benefits of such systems -- although I look forward to seeing those -- but what is in common with the design philosophies of the abovementioned builders.

[Boostedrex]

I'm a big advocate of going the DIY route. I think that it's a great way to get wonderful performance for a fraction of the cost. Or if I were going to buy a cab, I would personally rather support the smaller companies/people in the industry. Just my .02 on the subject.

And I look forward to hearing your impressions on the various DIY/custom cabs you've played through rpsands.

Zach

[Mo'Phat]

My .02...the only way that you get wonderful performance at a fraction of the cost with DIY is if you do not put a dollar value on your labor.

Not that this is a bad thing in the slightest, but bass cabinet manufacturers pay less for their raw materials than you do, but need to get paid for labor.

My DIY 215 with Eminence Kappalite 3015's shoots through schools. It is the fist of the angry god. It kills kittens.

[rpsands]

Originally Posted by naturalkinds

Great thread idea. Thanks, RP.

I would be curious to know if there were any general ways to differentiate this new wave of cabinets from the classic woofer-plus-tweeter boxes that most of us have used for years. Not so much the benefits of such systems -- although I look forward to seeing those -- but what is in common with the design philosophies of the abovementioned builders.

I don't think you can be 100% accurate with generalization, but there are a few trends I can point out:

1- Paying attention to optimal box size.

Historically, most big cabinet companies have erred toward the size of "small" when working with Hoffman's iron law, giving up low end performance for a more compact cabinet. You'll see most cabinet designs offer 1 cubic foot or less per 10" driver, 1.75 cubic feet or less per 12" driver, and 2.5 cubic feet or less per 15" driver, very commonly.

You'll see bigger boxes, or in some cases drivers which can specifically tolerate extremely small boxes (the 3012HO is a great example of that, able to do a good job on bass in 1.3 cubic feet or so, and still be pretty solid on bottom).

2- Real low end, not exaggerated upper bass

Going along with the above on cabinet size, you'll see most older designs are more present in the upper bass (100-200hz) than they are down low, because of being stuffed into boxes too small for the drivers.

Lots of times this is perceived as good, but it winds up sounding pretty muddy in mixes.

The fEarful cabinets, Acme, LoPhat, and the Barfaced Big One, to name a few, offer real usable, smooth extension down to 40hz or so -- especially important is the smoothness around 60hz for 5-string players.

3- Attention to crossover networks

Most old bass cab designs use a high pass only, or an extremely high crossover which often leaves a gaping hole in midrange response either on or off axis. When crossover networks are used, they're generally the cheapest they can be (12db/octave or less, and not at a particularly good frequency, and often quite generic).

4- Attention to polar response

You'll see drivers vertically arrayed, or splayed just the right amount to interact with the crossover region. Folks are designing cabinets to maximize intelligibility.

5- Use of modern drivers

BFM could probably say more, but most cabinets I see use pretty generic drivers. It's the exception rather than the rule when you see something other than an Eminence american standard driver (delta, beta, or otherwise). Sometimes you'll see a modded deltalite.

Kappalites are just better in terms of raw performance. Some folks don't like the midrange character, but I find that generally immaterial for most players -- especially using a dedicated midrange.

[rpsands]

Originally Posted by Mo'Phat

My .02...the only way that you get wonderful performance at a fraction of the cost with DIY is if you do not put a dollar value on your labor.

Not that this is a bad thing in the slightest, but bass cabinet manufacturers pay less for their raw materials than you do, but need to get paid for labor.

My DIY 215 with Eminence Kappalite 3015's shoots through schools. It is the fist of the angry god. It kills kittens.

I bill my labor out at 75 bucks an hour, and this is why I rarely build a cabinet unless it's a labor of love My 1x12 copy of the Barefaced Midget probably cost me around 1200 bucks if you factor in the labor costs.

I generally don't advocate people DIY unless they really like doing it. You could pay someone with the skills (there are a half-dozen fEarful builders!) to do it for you and still come out cheaper than any boutique cabinet.

I'll give an example: I had a BFM builder make me a Jack 112, and it set me back less than if I had bought a Neox112T or Schroeder 12L new.

[koobie]

Looking forward to seeing which cabs are offered up as being cutting edge. From my limited experience hearing them and reading about them here on TB, the fEarful cabs would get my vote. A fEarful spec'd cab made out of a honeycomb material would be pretty tough to outdo as far as performance, low weight & minimal dimensions go.

My .02 worth is that for the sake of both performance & flexibility, cutting edge cabs should be bi-ampable or tri-ampable unless they're comprised of a single driver or multiples of the same model drivers.

[rpsands]

One thing about the whole "custom / diy / cutting edge" thing is that we need to keep in mind that cabinet design inevitably has tradeoffs. Further, knowing what you need performance wise can make your life a lot easier.

Many, many players will be super happy with the aggressive voicing of something like a Barefaced Midget. For them, a single midget with a 300w amp will get more volume than a fEarful 15/6. Why? The tone profile they require allows making the trade of low frequency extension for sensitivity.

Now, remember that a 2x12 with 3012HOs is about the same weight and cost as a fEarful 15/6. It sacrifices midrange dispersion and bottom end extension in exchange for 3-4db of sensitivity and another 3db of increased voltage sensitivity.

In short, if your tone profile permits, a 2x12 with 3012HOs could perform almost as well as TWO fEarful 15/6's!

[timbledum]

I just found this page put out by barefaced, its got a graph down the bottom that probably sets out the pros/cons in terms of tone/volume quite nicely.

http://barefacedbass.com/uploads/But...une%202010.pdf

What do you peeps think?

[KJung]

Good idea for a thread. With the 15/6, 12/6, etc. designs, I'll let others speak to the advantages in technical terms (deeper bass, better upper mid dispersion, higher excursion, etc.).

Since I've played a lot of these designs, I always like to point out that the TONE is also quite different between these cabs and a well designed, similarly spec'd two way cab with tweeter.

Here are two Youtube clips I did comparing a very well designed and high quality 'traditional' 212 with tweeter (the new Bergantino AE212... neo drivers and tweeter), with a 212/6/1, which is the 'three way' equivalent of the standard 212 design (with a mid driver, a deeply voiced subwoofer type neo driver, and a tweeter). Same bass, same head, same player, same strings, etc.

You can hopefully hear the deeper bass extension and smoother top end of the 1212/6/1, and the more 'hi fi' upper mid response (i.e., very clean, no break-up at all), versus the punchier low end, the bit more grindy and warm upper mids coming from the top end of the woofer of the more traditional 212/T design.

For my tone, I prefer the upper mids to come from the top of the driver myself... more character and 'musical' sounding to me for my tone. However, the very 'studio monitor' pure sound of the 1212/6/1 is also nice for some applications (I call it the 'Anthony Jackson' voicing).

Just FYI, and if you use headphones, it is easy to hear what I'm talking about.

Here is the classic 212 example (playing starts at about the 25 second mark):

http://www.youtube.com/Kjungbass#p/u/3/B64ptPqdfCw

Here is a very nice Low Down Sound 1212/6/1 cab, that is also very RED (makes it easy to see the driver layout), again with the same head and bass, etc.:

http://www.youtube.com/Kjungbass#p/u/6/cNZdhoNxW2I

[KJung]

I also have one of Duke's Audiokinesis 12's coming to me when the first ones ship in early September.

He has a different take on the mid driver loaded cabs' goal of 'deeply voiced woofer but yet smooth transition through the mids to the tweeter with good midrange dispersion'. He uses a somewhat modified 3012LF driver (the deeply voiced subwoofer type driver used in most of the 12/6 designs) combined with a very large, very powerful PA type horn, which is crossed over low enough (I think right around 2K) to improve that midrange 'beaming/dispersion' issue in the upper mids.

Interesting design. I look forward to checking it out. He also designed the cab to be 4ohms, since that driver can handle some wattage, and the very small size of the cab will appeal to those using all these relatively low powered micro heads that seem to be happier running at 4ohms. Nice!

Here's a picture of the prototype. The production model has a top recessed handle.

[jnewmark]

Originally Posted by KJung

I also have one of Duke's Audiokinesis 12's coming to me when the first ones ship in early September.

He has a different take on the mid driver loaded cabs' goal of 'deeply voiced woofer but yet smooth transition through the mids to the tweeter with good midrange dispersion'. He uses a somewhat modified 3012LF driver (the deeply voiced subwoofer type driver used in most of the 12/6 designs) combined with a very large, very powerful PA type horn, which is crossed over low enough (I think right around 2K) to improve that midrange 'beaming/dispersion' issue in the upper mids.

Interesting design. I look forward to checking it out. He also designed the cab to be 4ohms, since that driver can handle some wattage, and the very small size of the cab will appeal to those using all these relatively low powered micro heads that seem to be happier running at 4ohms. Nice!

Here's a picture of the prototype. The production model has a top recessed handle.

Wow, that looks like a small PA cab.

[KJung]

Originally Posted by jnewmark

Wow, that looks like a small PA cab.

I guess that is basically what it is. However, it is voiced for the bass guitar. I've never been particularly pleased when I've tried to play out of PA type cabs in general, but Duke put a lot of time into making this design sound musical as a bass guitar backline cab. The voicing of the woofer, the crossover, and the options (he has a lo pass switch to soften the sizzle up top, for example), SHOULD make this cab sound wonderful. We shall see. He should start shipping within the next 4 weeks, based on the last update I received from him.

[jnewmark]

Originally Posted by KJung

I guess that is basically what it is. However, it is voiced for the bass guitar. I've never been particularly pleased when I've tried to play out of PA type cabs in general, but Duke put a lot of time into making this design sound musical as a bass guitar backline cab. The voicing of the woofer, the crossover, and the options (he has a lo pass switch to soften the sizzle up top, for example), SHOULD make this cab sound wonderful. We shall see. He should start shipping within the next 4 weeks, based on the last update I received from him.

I wonder what two things out of three it will have: loud, low, or light?

[KJung]

Originally Posted by jnewmark

I wonder what things out of three it will have: loud, low, or light?

Actually, the 'formula' is loud, low, small... you can have two out of three.

However, the 'loud' part of the equation represents SPL (loudness per watt), not necessarily max SPL (how loud will it g when you really pump some watts into it... which I understand is more limited by speaker design/excursion, etc.).

Duke seems to have reached a nice compromise and a nice 'averaging' of this formula....

- Small and Light... check!
- Low.... he tightened up his OEM version of the 3012LF, so it goes low but not 'stupid low' to cause issues with punch and being super power hungry.
- Loud.... driver has BIG excursion and can handle some power... that, combined with the 4ohm rating that will allow these small heads to put some decent power (400-500 watts) into that cab should result in...

relatively low, relatively loud, and relatively small and light.

Nice!

[billfitzmaurice]

Originally Posted by jnewmark

I wonder what two things out of three it will have: loud, low, or light?

The three variable factors are low, efficient and small. For instance, fEarfuls go low and are small for the output they're capable of. But they're not highly efficient, so to get what they're capable of giving takes a lot of power.

[jnewmark]

Can't wait for a clip of this little monster !

[naturalkinds]

Originally Posted by rpsands

4- Attention to polar response

You'll see drivers vertically arrayed, or splayed just the right amount to interact with the crossover region. Folks are designing cabinets to maximize intelligibility.

Could you say a little bit more about this? I understand intuitively that it is beneficial from a performance perspective to have drivers closer to your ears to benefit monitoring in band situations. I also know, from reading this site, that the 410 is not supposed to be a very optimal design for acoustical reasons. But what are the general reasons for wanting to stack drivers?

I am also a little interested in the design of the new AE212. From what I gather, placing drivers directly on top of one another is a good thing, but what about the oblique positioning of the drivers on the AE212? Is that good design?

[billfitzmaurice]

Originally Posted by naturalkinds

Could you say a little bit more about this? I understand intuitively that it is beneficial from a performance perspective to have drivers closer to your ears to benefit monitoring in band situations. I also know, from reading this site, that the 410 is not supposed to be a very optimal design for acoustical reasons. But what are the general reasons for wanting to stack drivers?

I am also a little interested in the design of the new AE212. From what I gather, placing drivers directly on top of one another is a good thing, but what about the oblique positioning of the drivers on the AE212? Is that good design?

Drivers vertically stacked give maximum dispersion in the horizontal plane, where you want it, and minimal dispersion in the vertical plane, where you don't. A watt that's sending sound towards the floor or ceiling is a watt wasted. Drivers obliquely mounted aren't as bad as horizontal, but they're still not vertical, so they're not optimal.

[Passinwind]

Originally Posted by jnewmark

Can't wait for a clip of this little monster !

I played through the prototype at the last Seattle GTG. I expect it to become my main gigging cab --'nuff said.