Something I don't understand.

[Cb4rabid]

Might be a dumb question, but here goes nothing. I have heard many people on this board say that speaker size means nothing, and it does not equal better frequency response (as in 15s dont have more low end, 12s aren't more punchy, etc.)

So my question is, if speaker size doesn't mean anything, why produce speakers of all sizes anyway? I mean, if a 10'' speaker can sound as big or as fat or as punchy as any other speaker, why do companies even make 12s or 15s? Usually the answer would be ''preference'', but if there is no difference, why would there be preference?

I mean hell, wouldn't it be more economical for companies and consumers? Less speaker size, I'd imagine is cheaper to make because of less material, so less cost for the company, less cost for us consumers. I ask because it's confusing to me. Before I joined this site, I usually thought an 18'' monster would reproduce fatter sounds than a 10'', and when you read frequency charts or something, that's usually the case?

Im used to hearing things like 410s are louder than 115s or 810s are perfectly balanced or 215s are too muddy (this one I hate the most ). Am I over analyzing it or is it just marketing strategy?

[Mushroo]

I think you answered your own question. 410 is louder than 115. 110 is not louder than 115.

In mathematical terms, the area of a speaker is pi x r2
area of a 10" = 3.14 x 25
area of a 15 = 3.14 x 56.75

[Cb4rabid]

Originally Posted by Mushroo

I think you answered your own question. 410 is louder than 115. 110 is not louder than 115.

So it's just a question of volume? I usually see 410s and 115s at the same price, so if there is no difference in tone, why would anyone go for the 15'' considering it's the same price and not as loud? (I assume you would want the most bang for your buck, no?)

[Venom of God]

The way I've always seen it (not necessarily right, btw), the more surface area being moved is going to equate volume, or how loud you hear it at least. Also, just because a 10" could reproduce the same lows as a 15" doesn't mean it will have the same timbre? I'm not really sure, just the way I've come to interpret such things!

[Mushroo]

I think you are under-analyzing a highly-sophisticated area of engineering. If you cannot hear the difference in tone, then yes, you should buy the cheapest cabinet.

[Cb4rabid]

Originally Posted by Mushroo

I think you are under-analyzing a highly-sophisticated area of engineering. If you cannot hear the difference in tone, then yes, you should buy the cheapest cabinet.

Well that's the problem! You just said if can't hear a difference in tone, buy the cheapest cab. So then why do people say 15s can't produce lower sounds than a 10'', etc? It just seems like 50% of people say there IS a difference, and the other half disagree. Believe me, I am trying so hard to understand.

[Mushroo]

Originally Posted by Cb4rabid

Well that's the problem! You just said if can't hear a difference in tone, buy the cheapest cab. So then why do people say 15s can't produce lower sounds than a 10'', etc? It just seems like 50% of people say there IS a difference, and the other half disagree. Believe me, I am trying so hard to understand.

If you've done an A/B test and can't hear the difference, I respect that.

[Cb4rabid]

Also, I think it's because ive always attributed bigger = lower. For example, a tuba is much bigger than a euphonium. Which one produces lower sound? A bass trombone is bigger than a tenor trombone. Again, which one produces a heavier, lower tone? I'm not too sure about drumming, but I think a 22'' bass drum is lower than an 18''? So I guess it was just natural for me to believe okay, a 15'' speaker would sound lower than an 8''? I mean, it has more surface area, so the sound waves coming from it are spread out wider, thus making it sound deeper?

And yes, I have tried both a 115 and a 410, and PERSONALLY, I felt the 15'' had more beef to it. I could be hearing things, but I know what I heard.

[Mushroo]

Originally Posted by Cb4rabid

And yes, I have tried both a 115 and a 410, and PERSONALLY, I felt the 15'' had more beef to it. I could be hearing things, but I know what I heard.

I agree.

[Stan Laurel]

There are numerous factors that affect speaker volume and sound quality besides the diameter or surface area of the cone. One is the cone material which can affect its ability to move back and forth quickly without distortion. Another is the suspension; the part around the edge where the cone is fastened to the frame. The pliability of the suspension plays a major role in the movement of the cone. A stiffer suspension will require more power to move the cone a given amount. Yet another is the voice coil and the field magnet. I think the best bet is to try out various cabs to see what suits your tastes best. And remember that while you want to be sure it will handle the volume at which you plan to play, you also want to be sure it still sounds good at low volume. Some speakers lose freq response at low volumes. Hope this helps.

[Nalte]

There is a pretty wide range of speaker sizes (about 10"-18") that are all suitable, and the differences between them are not as big as the differences from cab design. IMH

[JimmyM]

The reason different speaker sizes exist is because some sizes are better and more efficient at doing things than others. Like you could build subs using 10"s, but a 15" or 18" is going to be more efficient in a practical application. And you can build a bass cab using nothing but 6" speakers, but 6" speakers are better suited for midrange cones, so very few makers use them to build cabs.

You've misinterpreted what's been said somehow. All speakers, in fact, sound different, and you can't just listen to one 115 cab and think all other 115's will sound like that. That's what meant by the phrase "speaker size means nothing." When it comes to the tone of the cab, it means nothing. I've heard bright 115's and deep 115's. I've heard bright 410's and deep 410's. It's all in the way the speakers are made and the type of cab they're installed in.

[Cirk]

Just to throw in a curveball, how is it that the Phil Jones cabinets sound so good? Also the SWR Henry the 8x8 sounds great as well. Of course, these are only my opinions, yours may differ, and that's fine too.

[Downunderwonder]

Dispertion. A single 15 doesn't beam its higher frequencies into such a narrow pattern as a 4x10 does, so more people get to listen to the same thing as the bass player.

Don't stress about it, just play what you like.

[Cb4rabid]

^ To me, that makes it sound like speaker size does have an effect on frequency response. I know that speaker size isn't the only factor, and i'm not saying it is, but I feel like it *does* play a part in it, you know?

It could have even been that I tried a bad 410 and a good 115. Or it could even be biased preference. I've used 15s for as long as ive been playing bass. I just naturally love me 15'' speakers

[JimmyM]

Originally Posted by Cirk

Just to throw in a curveball, how is it that the Phil Jones cabinets sound so good? Also the SWR Henry the 8x8 sounds great as well. Of course, these are only my opinions, yours may differ, and that's fine too.

Phil Jones uses a lot of 5"s in a large ported cab. Same with the Henry...a lot of 8"s in a large ported cab. Cab size and porting makes a big difference.

[JimmyM]

Originally Posted by Cb4rabid

^ To me, that makes it sound like speaker size does have an effect on frequency response. I know that speaker size isn't the only factor, and i'm not saying it is, but I feel like it *does* play a part in it, you know?

It could have even been that I tried a bad 410 and a good 115. Or it could even be biased preference. I've used 15s for as long as ive been playing bass. I just naturally love me 15'' speakers

Nothing wrong with that. But let me take your favorite cab with 15"s and stick 15" DJ subwoofers in it. Or maybe some vintage 15" guitar speakers from 1961 (yes, there was a time guitarists used 15"s). Think that cab will sound the same? Me neither.

Go look at the frequency response of the speakers that are all the same size at Eminence Speaker | The most trusted name in audio since 1966. Great upgrades for JBL, Celestion, Jensen, and Fane. . Notice how each one has different specs. That means they sound different. So no, same size speakers don't have to have the same frequency response by a longshot.

[Cb4rabid]

Originally Posted by JimmyM

Nothing wrong with that. But let me take your favorite cab with 15"s and stick 15" DJ subwoofers in it. Or maybe some vintage 15" guitar speakers from 1961 (yes, there was a time guitarists used 15"s). Think that cab will sound the same? Me neither.

Go look at the frequency response of the speakers that are all the same size at Eminence Speaker | The most trusted name in audio since 1966. Great upgrades for JBL, Celestion, Jensen, and Fane. . Notice how each one has different specs. That means they sound different. So no, same size speakers don't have to have the same frequency response by a longshot.

Nope, and I understand this. But what i'm saying is, different size speakers have a different frequency response.

Basically, the way I think about it, bigger speaker = larger surface area. Larger surface area = wider spread of sound which can equate in a lower frequency response. Kind of like when you sing, and you open your throat a little wider, your pitch gets deeper/lower. I just can't imagine a 5'' speaker sounding as low as an 18'' sub.

But im not saying that small speakers can't sound bassy. I have an 8'' sub in my room, and it sounds bassy as all heck. But I would imagine if I had a 15'' sub, it would tear my house down.

[bassmasta_01]

I've found that more variation in sound comes not from the size of speakers themselves, but the cabinet and the room that you're playing it in. If you stick an expensive 10" long-throw woofer in a large cabinet that's meticulously engineered and made of thick plywood, etc, etc, that it will most certainly sound better and appear to have comparable low-end to a crappy 15" woofer thrown in a particle-board box. Porting has a lot to do with it as well. I've found that I can get more bottom from my rear-ported Ashdown 4x10 by facing the ports towards a nearby wall or something than I can get from my front-ported Fender 1x15 in the same situation.

[Cb4rabid]

Originally Posted by bassmasta_01

I've found that more variation in sound comes not from the size of speakers themselves, but the cabinet and the room that you're playing it in. If you stick an expensive 10" long-throw woofer in a large cabinet that's meticulously engineered and made of thick plywood, etc, etc, that it will most certainly sound better and appear to have comparable low-end to a crappy 15" woofer thrown in a particle-board box. Porting has a lot to do with it as well. I've found that I can get more bottom from my rear-ported Ashdown 4x10 by facing the ports towards a nearby wall or something than I can get from my front-ported Fender 1x15 in the same situation.

This is true as well, but im mainly think about it in a speaker sense. if you were to remove all the variables, I just have this feeling that speaker size does count for something (it could be very minimal, but to say a bigger speaker wouldn't have a lower freq, response just doesn't sound right to me.)

Im sorry if i'm coming off as stubborn, I realize there are people here who have been playing longer that I have been alive, but it doesn't sound right to me. It's like a monkeywrench was thrown at me when I learned that apparently speaker size had nothing to do with it