Frequency Specs

[harleyboy]

When you purchase a bass speaker cabinet how much do you pay attention to the Frequency Specs?

Do you prefer ports in the back, front, or none at all?


Thanks for your thoughts!

[GrowlerBox]

Originally Posted by harleyboy

When you purchase a bass speaker cabinet how much do you pay attention to the Frequency Specs?

Do you prefer ports in the back, front, or none at all?


Thanks for your thoughts!

1. No attention at all.

2. Ports present, where they are makes no difference.

[Sartori]

The frequency specs that just list the range are not that useful to me. I would rather see a frequency graph, personally.

I don't mind a roll-off of the lows, but would be concerned about weird peaks and valleys in the mid response.

I don't care all that much where the ports are or what they look like.

[testing1two]

If you're reviewing speakers online then specs like frequency response, power handling, sensitivity, porting, and the physical dimensions can give you an idea of how the cabinet is designed to sound. Granted, it requires a basic knowledge of what the specs mean and how manufacturers routinely fudge them.

If you're physically testing out cabs then let your ears guide you. Just make sure your evaluation is thorough since cabs can sound great in the store and lousy at the gig.

[billfitzmaurice]

Originally Posted by harleyboy

When you purchase a bass speaker cabinet how much do you pay attention to the Frequency Specs?

Do you prefer ports in the back, front, or none at all?

Not one manufacturer publishes accurate frequency specs, so they're of no value anyway. Port location is moot.

[Sundogue]

Originally Posted by harleyboy

When you purchase a bass speaker cabinet how much do you pay attention to the Frequency Specs?

Do you prefer ports in the back, front, or none at all?


Thanks for your thoughts!

I very much pay attention to the specs, which is why I don't buy commercial cabinets. They don't publish useful specs and even if they did, the designs don't compare to cabs like fEARfuls, BFM, Barefaced, etc. anyway.

I prefer ports that maximize the response of the cab itself and where they are located doesn't matter one bit in the sound of the cab.

If I preferred no ports at all, I would prefer sealed cabs, which I don't.

[fdeck]

+1

Lack of credible specs is one of the reasons why I gave up on commercial speakers and started building my own.

For my next project: I'm thinking of designing a top-ported speaker, where the port is big enough to stow a "micro" head and cables. It will be the ultimate DIY combo: Just pull the amp out of the port, plug in, and play.

[Sundogue]

Originally Posted by fdeck

+1

Lack of credible specs is one of the reasons why I gave up on commercial speakers and started building my own.

For my next project: I'm thinking of designing a top-ported speaker, where the port is big enough to stow a "micro" head and cables. It will be the ultimate DIY combo: Just pull the amp out of the port, plug in, and play.

Pretty cool idea actually. I love the concept of modularity, where all components actually serve multiple purposes and fit together with other components.

You mean a shelf port I assume? I know micro amps are pretty small these days, but I can't imagine one fitting into a 4" tube port.

[seamonkey]

You pay enough money you should demand accurate frequency measurements.
polar charts for mids, on and off axis.
I like the ports in the front behind the speaker grills to keep the varmints out.

[bobcruz]

To paraphrase an old quotation, there are four kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, statistics, and manufacturer's published bass cabinet specifications. I no longer buy from any manufacturer whose specifications I consider fraudulent or misleading.

[billfitzmaurice]

Originally Posted by bobcruz

I no longer buy from any manufacturer whose specifications I consider fraudulent or misleading.

It sure does shorten the list of candidates.

[DukeLeJeune]

Originally Posted by billfitzmaurice

Not one manufacturer publishes accurate frequency specs...

Well... I didn't really expect you to say "Not one manufacturer except for that annoying little half-Cajun nutjob...", but just for the record:

To the extent that my modelling software is accurate, my frequency response specs are not intentionally padded. I claim -3 dB at 56 Hz from a 95 dB, 1.7 cubic foot box (net) tuned to 50 Hz. Oh darn you tricked me - now you can work backwards and probably figure out the T/S parameters of my top-secret woofer!

Of course I also claim that my cab will make you sound like you have seven fingers on each hand, but I'm smart enough not to put that in writing... oops!

[GrowlerBox]

In the light of Duke's response, I would extend my initial answer to the first question:

1. No attention at all, unless published by AudioKinesis, Barefaced, fEarful or Bill Fitzmaurice.

*Note to young players -- the last 2 design, but do not build cabinets commercially.

[fdeck]

Originally Posted by DukeLeJeune

Of course I also claim that my cab will make you sound like you have seven fingers on each hand, but I'm smart enough not to put that in writing... oops!

With my luck, they'd all be thumbs.

[fdeck]

Originally Posted by Sundogue

Pretty cool idea actually. I love the concept of modularity, where all components actually serve multiple purposes and fit together with other components.

You mean a shelf port I assume? I know micro amps are pretty small these days, but I can't imagine one fitting into a 4" tube port.

Yes, shelf port. I've fiddled with the numbers. The port has to be bigger than otherwise would be strictly necessary, but the added volume is less than the volume of a micro head.

[JimmyM]

Originally Posted by GrowlerBox

In the light of Duke's response, I would extend my initial answer to the first question:

1. No attention at all, unless published by AudioKinesis, Barefaced, fEarful or Bill Fitzmaurice.

*Note to young players -- the last 2 design, but do not build cabinets commercially.

i'd add ampeg to that list. they don't give complete graphs and all that, but they do give you the -3db and the -10db point for their cabs. that's much better than most.

[Jim Campbell]

Originally Posted by seamonkey

You pay enough money you should demand accurate frequency measurements.
polar charts for mids, on and off axis.
I like the ports in the front behind the speaker grills to keep the varmints out.

guys who pay thousands of dollars for audio gear don't get 'em either.....builders tend to use yardsticks that flatter their own gear....unfortunately size of the "yards" vary from place to place

[billfitzmaurice]

Originally Posted by DukeLeJeune

Well... I didn't really expect you to say "Not one manufacturer except for that annoying little half-Cajun nutjob...", but just for the record:

To the extent that my modelling software is accurate, my frequency response specs are not intentionally padded. I claim -3 dB at 56 Hz from a 95 dB, 1.7 cubic foot box (net) tuned to 50 Hz.

Due respect of course, but do you publish SPL charts? IMO no chart equals no specs.

[bobcruz]

Duke's one of the few manufacturers I would buy from since the specs he publishes, while limited, are not padded or misleading. The same goes for a manufacturer who publishes no FR specs (e.g., Avatar). Although I'd like to have complete specs, at this stage I've settled for not being lied to.

[billfitzmaurice]

Originally Posted by JimmyM

i'd add ampeg to that list. they don't give complete graphs and all that, but they do give you the -3db and the -10db point for their cabs. that's much better than most.

More to the point, their specs, like Duke's, are within the realm of possibility, rather than stretching the envelope of incredulity well past the breaking point.