Go Back   TalkBass Forums > Bass Guitar Forums > Bass Guitar Forums > Amps [BG]
Register Rules/FAQ/CUP Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read



Supporting Membership
Thank You

Latest Supporting Member
Donate to Upgrade Today

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1  
Old 06-28-2010, 07:46 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Springfield, OH
fEarful question

Sign in to disble this ad
I was just browsing through greenboy's fEarful enclosures. I noticed under the advantages of the fEarful enclosures is listed "lower box tuning via shelf extension." I read about that here, but I am not clear on what exactly the shelf extension does. Anyone able to explain?

Thanks!
  #2  
Old 06-28-2010, 08:13 PM
BurningSkies's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Seweracuse, NY
Supporting Member
It makes the port 'deeper'. Thus giving more volume to the port and making the cab extend to lower frequency range. On my fEarful 15/6 port shelf is the full depth rather than splitting it into the shelf, plus extension. I knew I'd want deeper anyway.
__________________
fEARful: for those who want something better: http://greenboy.us/fEARful/


For Sale (locally only): Bergantino HT115 with Cover: $500.00. PM me about it.

  #3  
Old 06-28-2010, 08:21 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Springfield, OH
Is there any known, quantifiable relationship between the shelf extension and how much lower you'd like to go? Say, how much would the shelf need to be extended to better play certain lower notes
  #4  
Old 06-28-2010, 09:32 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sydney, Australia
Quote:
Originally Posted by Execut1ve View Post
Is there any known, quantifiable relationship between the shelf extension and how much lower you'd like to go? Say, how much would the shelf need to be extended to better play certain lower notes
First off, don't fall into the trap of thinking longer ports automatically equals more lows. Lengthening the port does indeed lower the tuning frequency. But lowering the tuning frequency does 2 things to the frequency response, it introduces more sound in the lower end of the cabs frequency capability but it also can create a situation where the low frequencies start to roll off sooner. In other words you might gain 3dB at 40 Hz but you might also move the -3dB point from 60Hz up to 90Hz, resulting in a cab that sounds less full overall.

I wouldn't mess with the porting too much.
__________________
Composite speaker cab enthusiast.
  #5  
Old 06-28-2010, 10:15 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Oregon
Just like most things, there's a lot of research detailing and quantifying loudspeaker design elements.

A good university library will have plenty of info.

On this topic, just like most things, there's precious little on-line that's worth its carbon footprint.
  #6  
Old 06-29-2010, 07:57 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Springfield, OH
Quote:
Originally Posted by Petebass View Post
In other words you might gain 3dB at 40 Hz but you might also move the -3dB point from 60Hz up to 90Hz, resulting in a cab that sounds less full overall.
Couldn't this be corrected in the EQ though? Whereas the lowest frequency capability of a cab couldn't?
  #7  
Old 06-29-2010, 08:14 AM
Registered User

Owner, Bill Fitzmaurice Loudspeaker Design
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: New Hampshire
Quote:
Originally Posted by Execut1ve View Post
Couldn't this be corrected in the EQ though? Whereas the lowest frequency capability of a cab couldn't?
EQ can correct it, but at the cost of power. A mere 3dB of boost at 60 Hz can nearly double the power draw from the amp. And there's the matter of cone excursion, and that demand in the upper bass region will also increase if the tuning of the cab is lowered. As to the lowest frequency capability of the cab, most users are off by at least a half octave between what they think they need and what they really need. Or, in the case of a cab they have, what they think it's doing and what it's really doing.
  #8  
Old 06-29-2010, 08:24 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Springfield, OH
Quote:
Originally Posted by billfitzmaurice View Post
As to the lowest frequency capability of the cab, most users are off by at least a half octave between what they think they need and what they really need. Or, in the case of a cab they have, what they think it's doing and what it's really doing.
All right Bill, you seem to know what you're talking about. I'm playing a 5 string tuned to low A, using an Ampeg BA115 to hear myself onstage. What do I need/what am I getting?
  #9  
Old 06-29-2010, 09:10 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Bristol, UK
Sort of tone you are after is more important than your tuning. Plenty of metal bassists tune really low, but have a clanky sound without any real bottom, that is still happy through a sealed 8x10.
__________________
myspace.com/caricaturesband
ampstack.wordpress.com
  #10  
Old 06-29-2010, 09:33 AM
4Mal's Avatar
Endorsing Curmudgeon: Mal's Kitchen Cruelties ...
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Columbia River Gorge
Supporting Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Petebass View Post
First off, don't fall into the trap of thinking longer ports automatically equals more lows. Lengthening the port does indeed lower the tuning frequency. But lowering the tuning frequency does 2 things to the frequency response, it introduces more sound in the lower end of the cabs frequency capability but it also can create a situation where the low frequencies start to roll off sooner. In other words you might gain 3dB at 40 Hz but you might also move the -3dB point from 60Hz up to 90Hz, resulting in a cab that sounds less full overall.

of course in the case of the fEarful cab - the port extension was actually part of the design... which renders the above as probably accurate in a generic sense but maybe not in this specific scenario...

I wouldn't mess with the porting too much.

dead on the money there!
I run the fEarful 12.6 w/o the port extension as I'm mostly a 4 stringer. I have played 5 through it though and I really don't think the extension is necessary. Part of the eqution for me is that I also built a 12 Sub which is tuned a bit lower to begin with so If I feel the need, I can drag that along for the ride as well... If I were playing moslty dub - I might have been more inclined to try the port extension.

If you really want authority down low and clarity everywhere else, you might consider doing the 15.6 using the upgraded mid driver. I don't need that kind of volume so for me the 12.6 is a better bet. It easily hangs with the 2 guitarists using 40 watt tube amps, key's and a mic'ed kick drum in 'loud' band. We run Mackie 450's out front for that band.

If you're realky lighting it up volume wise, the 15.6 has the same voice but is capable of going much louder. It is also more efficient. I'm transportation limited in that I carry a bunch of PA and bass rig, sometimes guitar rig in my Subaru... the 12.6 fit's the 15.6 won't ...
__________________
I think I'd know normal if I saw it ... 'Calvin
  #11  
Old 06-29-2010, 09:53 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Springfield, OH
I'm not really looking for huge volume so much... this would be used for my own personal sound onstage, so it really only has to compete with the monitors.
  #12  
Old 06-29-2010, 10:00 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Bristol, UK
If it is just onstage sound, you probably don't need to worry about the bottom so much, concentrate on clear mids, since that is what you'll pic up most of the notes you are playing from. If you are running all the out front sound through the PA, apparently lots of bottom on stage is detrimental. Although I've never had a sound man actually complain about it harming the out front sound, only that my rig made his desk vibrate too much to comfortably operate the sliders.
__________________
myspace.com/caricaturesband
ampstack.wordpress.com
  #13  
Old 06-29-2010, 10:01 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Springfield, OH
maybe I'm being ambiguous here... I don't need a LOT of bottom end, but I would like to hear my lowest notes reproduced well. I don't think those are necessarily the same thing. I guess I"m talking more about extension than overall volume?
  #14  
Old 06-29-2010, 10:14 AM
rpsands's Avatar
Less Ebay, more Mel Bay
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Supporting Member
I've tuned my 5-er to A with the stock fEarful port and I think it's fine.
__________________
Dingwall ABZ 5
Lots of pedals
Markbass SD1200 -> fEarful 1515/66 (or TC115N)
Red Complex
  #15  
Old 06-29-2010, 10:53 AM
Registered User

Owner, Bill Fitzmaurice Loudspeaker Design
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: New Hampshire
Quote:
Originally Posted by Execut1ve View Post
All right Bill, you seem to know what you're talking about. I'm playing a 5 string tuned to low A, using an Ampeg BA115 to hear myself onstage. What do I need/what am I getting?
With a 5 string tuned to low A you don't need an F3 lower than 40Hz. You'd have to check the fEarful threads to see which of the versions would meet that requirement. I doubt the BA115 F3 is less than 70Hz, and it will have a big response hump around 100 Hz, so while it goes fairly loud it can't go low. You definitely need a lot more than 100 watts to deliver a fat bottom, even at monitoring levels. Don't even think about using the BA115 and fEarful together.
  #16  
Old 06-29-2010, 10:55 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Springfield, OH
Quote:
Originally Posted by billfitzmaurice View Post
Don't even think about using the BA115 and fEarful together.
don't worry, I wasn't the BA115 would probably come home to be used for my own practice
  #17  
Old 06-29-2010, 11:16 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Springfield, OH
not to be a pain... I'm legitimately curious here why does the F3 have to be only 40Hz to reproduce a note with frequency 27.5Hz? again, just curious
  #18  
Old 06-29-2010, 11:23 AM
Passinwind's Avatar
I Know Nothing
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Columbia River Gorge, WA.
Supporting Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Execut1ve View Post
not to be a pain... I'm legitimately curious here why does the F3 have to be only 40Hz to reproduce a note with frequency 27.5Hz? again, just curious
Read this thread from the Amps FAQ.
  #19  
Old 06-29-2010, 02:58 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sydney, Australia
Quote:
Originally Posted by Execut1ve View Post
I'm not really looking for huge volume so much... this would be used for my own personal sound onstage, so it really only has to compete with the monitors.
Be careful here! How loud are the monitors? Most people underestimate their SPL requirements in this scenario.

It may only be a personal monitor but it's not uncommon to measure at typical rock/pop gigs an average ambient stage volume of 112dB plus peaks hitting 116dB. Sometimes louder. That's loud!
__________________
Composite speaker cab enthusiast.
  #20  
Old 06-29-2010, 03:24 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Springfield, OH
well, the drums are electronic, so that cuts down the ambient stage noise a lot
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Follow TalkBass on Twitter   Visit TalkBass on Facebook  

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:19 AM.




Copyright 2011 Talk Music Group Inc. All rights reserved.
Play guitar? Visit our new sister site TalkGuitar.com [beta]
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.