"MODERN" CAB FOR VINTAGE HEAD?

[lowphatbass]

Today it's all about size and weight, the small footprints, neo drivers and progressive designs(for bass cabs) are just killer. The fact that they tend to like a lot of watts is not a problem as fairly priced, lightweight/compact and powerful heads are abundant. I'm absolutely in love with being able to fill the room with a rig that weighs less than my first practice amp, and is only a little bit bigger in size.
So these days I'm getting back a little closer to my roots from time to time and using some old tube heads and period cabinetry(large volume/size, heavy, etc).
It seems like the only "replacement for displacement" is wattage. Does anybody think that technology and design will ever give us a compact and/or lightweight cab that produces volume with "somewhat limited wattage" like a the massive power-miser cabs of yesteryear? Or is the physics and marketability just too much to overcome?

[newbold]

you must be new around here.

Poke around and you'll be able to answer your own question.

[lowphatbass]

Originally Posted by newbold

you must be new around here.

Poke around and you'll be able to answer your own question.

I was sort of asking for opinions.

[JimmyM]

i'd say wattage isn't that great a replacement for displacement. a 500w head through a 110 is still going to sound like a 110, if it doesn't blow...which it will if you crank it hard.

i like what i've heard out of these modern cabs with the low frequency woofer and a mid driver. they can displace significantly more than your typical bass cabs because of efficient use of each speaker. and as long as you can get your 4-5khz cutoff, it can still sound old school. i'm in love with my old ampeg stuff, but an svt driving one of those type cabs would be pretty cool. now those types of cabs take more wattage to kick into gear and i don't know the minimum wattage you'd need, but i've kicked one pretty well with an svt.

[KJung]

Originally Posted by lowphatbass

Today it's all about size and weight, the small footprints, neo drivers and progressive designs(for bass cabs) are just killer. The fact that they tend to like a lot of watts is not a problem as fairly priced, lightweight/compact and powerful heads are abundant. I'm absolutely in love with being able to fill the room with a rig that weighs less than my first practice amp, and is only a little bit bigger in size.
So these days I'm getting back a little closer to my roots from time to time and using some old tube heads and period cabinetry(large volume/size, heavy, etc).
It seems like the only "replacement for displacement" is wattage. Does anybody think that technology and design will ever give us a compact and/or lightweight cab that produces volume with "somewhat limited wattage" like a the massive power-miser cabs of yesteryear? Or is the physics and marketability just too much to overcome?

Not sure I agree with your premise. Many (most?) 'modern' cabs have quite high SPL. I think the issue with using some of them with lower powered tube amps is more a voicing thing (ported, relatively deep low end, etc.). Check out some of the 3012HO boxes made by Barefaced, Low Down Sound, etc. LDS also has made quite a few neo sealed 610 cabs that sound pretty killer. Markbass had a similar cabinet series ('classic'), but they didn't sell and were discontinued. The Bergantino NV line is not featherweight, but the 412 and 610 are a unique combination of old school sealed cab design with uber quality components.

I think the fact that there aren't many 'modern cabs' optimized for tube amps is more of a demand thing versus a capability thing.

[ricky]

interesting approach o discussing this- I'm currently looking for a cab to match with a 1973 Bassman. So as you can guess, looking for 4 ohm to get most volume. Thinking about a 212 or 210 or 410. Any recommendations for lightweight 4 ohm for a vintage tube head? thanks

[greenboy]

When tossing around words like displacement, it's good to realize it means a lot more than "the box is big" or "the box is small".

Nothing much has changed really. Everything for speakers is still tradeoffs conducted according to Hoffman's Iron Law.

So to use a low-watt amplifier while wanting a loud rig, usually means you need bigger boxes (often with many drivers), or you need to be willing to throw away some low end. Or both. As such, those limitations have shaped the ideas of how a tube rig sounds, traditionally.

But there are other ways to sound too, with tubes. And some guys are doing that too.

[DwaynieAD]

i'll take my low end however i can get it

[Mr. Foxen]

If you like the vintage amp/cab sound, then actual sub lows aren't what you are after, so there is a cheerful sacrifice for Hoffman's Iron Law. 200w and a couple of neo 15s will get you loud. Not so sure about the 15/6 with valve amps, the extended top might do funny things with a driven valve amp that would be expecting big cone treble roll off (having not tried that combo, would like to know), happy clean though.

[greenboy]

15/6 sound incredible with the tubers I've tried. Glorious distortion sounds await with high-gain models. Nice extra sheen and detailed midrange without undue EQ with lower-gain models, and a real full studio low end to go with it.

[KJung]

Originally Posted by Mr. Foxen

If you like the vintage amp/cab sound, then actual sub lows aren't what you are after, so there is a cheerful sacrifice for Hoffman's Iron Law. 200w and a couple of neo 15s will get you loud. Not so sure about the 15/6 with valve amps, the extended top might do funny things with a driven valve amp that would be expecting big cone treble roll off (having not tried that combo, would like to know), happy clean though.

+1 That 15/6 type voicing would be pretty far from what many would be looking for with a vintage tone goal (which is so connected to that multi-10 sealed sort of thing). As you suggest though, there are 'modern' executions that can get you close to that 'fridge' sort of tone (or the old JBL 15 type tone) in a much smaller, lighter box.

[lowphatbass]

Realistically speaking I guess there just isn't a huge market for vintage 60-120W(ish) tube bass amps in general, let alone lightweight/small cabs designed to maximize them.
FWIW, when I tossed around the word "displacement" it was in the phrase, "no replacement for displacement" which originated with and relates directly to engine building and hot rods/race cars. I realize it doesn't crossover directly to speaker/cabinet building, I wasn't trying to make literal use of the term.

[greenboy]

Originally Posted by lowphatbass

FWIW, when I tossed around the word "displacement" it was in the phrase, "no replacement for displacement" which originated with and relates directly to engine building and hot rods/race cars. I realize it doesn't crossover directly to speaker/cabinet building, I wasn't trying to make literal use of the term.

Understood. The first time I ever heard it was probably in a Hot Rod magazine during my worship of Don Garlits. Or was it Ed "Big Daddy" Roth (my mind is so fuuuuuzzy, daddio).

[JimmyM]

Originally Posted by KJung

+1 That 15/6 type voicing would be pretty far from what many would be looking for with a vintage tone goal (which is so connected to that multi-10 sealed sort of thing). As you suggest though, there are 'modern' executions that can get you close to that 'fridge' sort of tone (or the old JBL 15 type tone) in a much smaller, lighter box.

yeah, it's a little bottom heavy but it can be rolled off or high passed, then it's not so bad. comes across more like vintage amp going through studio monitors.

[Kindness]

Originally Posted by lowphatbass

So these days I'm getting back a little closer to my roots from time to time and using some old tube heads and period cabinetry(large volume/size, heavy, etc).
It seems like the only "replacement for displacement" is wattage. Does anybody think that technology and design will ever give us a compact and/or lightweight cab that produces volume with "somewhat limited wattage" like a the massive power-miser cabs of yesteryear? Or is the physics and marketability just too much to overcome?

I have gigged with low wattage tube amps (many that I've built) for the last several years. An Ampeg V-4B through a fEarful-style 15/6 is a perfect match (as is a 100 watt Marshall head) to replace the vintage head/cab combinations. I've played the combination head-to-head in gigging situations against a late 70s Ampeg 810 (original drivers) and a Bergantino NV610 and the fEarful can deliver the tone and volume with an enormous size and weight advantage. At home, my 15/6 sits next to my 1970 B-15N so it is easy to compared it to a reference standard as far as tone.

That was the long way of saying "yes."

[greenboy]

Originally Posted by JimmyM

yeah, it's a little bottom heavy but it can be rolled off or high passed, then it's not so bad. comes across more like vintage amp going through studio monitors.

Actually it doesn't seem bottom heavy at all using even just a Fender tone stack in typical settings, it just sounds "extended" at the low end. If one wants to go more to a sealed 810 roll-off, block off half the port and Bob's someone's uncle, seriously. I really like the studio tube vibe with the full monty porting though.

As for the earlier stuff about the mid driver (that practically sounded like an allegation with no basis in actual experience) the 6.5 mid really sounds incredible for either clean tones or distortions. Either for bass or for guitar, Fender tone stack or James/Baxandall.

[JimmyM]

ya, extended. not so much bottom heavy but extended. better word for it.

[greenboy]

Hey Kindness,

Good to see you after so long. If I was doing high-volume no-PA-support gigs, I'd probably do the 1515/66 - or a 15/6 on top of a 15sub. Just because that's about the size of an 810, and a lot less weight too. I kind of liken that to "sealed 810 meets big ported 215".

I really love the tonal profile with tube heads!

But I'm pretty confident I could do a lot of no-assist electric blues and blues/rock type gigs with just the 15/6.

[Kindness]

Originally Posted by greenboy

the 6.5 mid really sounds incredible for either clean tones or distortions. Either for bass or for guitar, Fender tone stack or James/Baxandall.

x 1,000,000

[Kindness]

Originally Posted by greenboy

Hey Kindness,

Good to see you after so long.

Back at you!

Originally Posted by greenboy

If I was doing high-volume no-PA-support gigs, I'd probably do the 1515/66 - or a 15/6 on top of a 15sub. Just because that's about the size of an 810, and a lot less weight too. I kind of liken that to "sealed 810 meets big ported 215".

I don't do any gigs without massive PAs. I'm in Chicago and my typical gig is an indie rock 4 or 5 piece in a room with ~100 people with a PA for a room with 1,000 people. My only volume need is to get myself heard over my drummer and guitarists. My guitarists play with lots of fuzz and effects, but I have them playing out of 1x12 or 2x12 cabs and amps I built (tweed era Fender Deluxe ~20 watts 112 and JTM45 ~35 watts 2x12), though one of them loves to steal my B-15 too. 100 watts and a 15/6 is perfect. I can play into distortion, but not overpower the stage.

Originally Posted by greenboy

I really love the tonal profile with tube heads!

I like it more than with non-tube heads to be honest. As you know, the cabinet is so clean that is often doesn't sound "loud" even when it is when I am using solid state power.

Originally Posted by greenboy

But I'm pretty confident I could do a lot of no-assist electric blues and blues/rock type gigs with just the 15/6.

I would think so too.