And likewise, best wishes your way.
I didn't realize that you are in Italy until just now.
Sorry if things were lost in translation.
I am clearly at a disadvantage with English being my primary language.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
12" cab, high power handling recommendations
- Thread starter BecDeCorbin
- Start date
-
- Tags
- power
I didn't realize that you are in Italy until just now.
Sorry if things were lost in translation.
I am clearly at a disadvantage with English being my primary language.
This might be the dark ages of bass cabinets. 
At some point maybe we'll see enough skeptics in the bass player world that manufacturers will actually be forced to publish actual measurements, charts. Check out JBL - they do it. They just need to point out they work for bass too.
Mackie's new coax cabs may break some ground since they have a similar form factor to what a player might expect in a cabinet.
At some point maybe we'll see enough skeptics in the bass player world that manufacturers will actually be forced to publish actual measurements, charts. Check out JBL - they do it. They just need to point out they work for bass too.
Mackie's new coax cabs may break some ground since they have a similar form factor to what a player might expect in a cabinet.
I rather think we're either in a golden age, or at the dawn of a new paradigm: small, lightweight and effective.This might be the dark ages of bass cabinets.
At some point maybe we'll see enough skeptics in the bass player world that manufacturers will actually be forced to publish actual measurements, charts. Check out JBL - they do it. They just need to point out they work for bass too.
Mackie's new coax cabs may break some ground since they have a similar form factor to what a player might expect in a cabinet.
"Lies, damned lies, and statistics."
I think many manufacturers both hide behind and obscure the worth of their cabs with data. If there is to be any truth in advertising, I do believe manufacturers should publish as many measurements as they can.
Another SPL consideration based on published specs of a pro audio line array element for touring application.
Power Rating¹ LF:
2 x 2000 watt Continuous (AES / 2 hour)
99 dB 1W / 1m
Maximum Peak Output²: 141 dB SPL (LF)
Footnotes:
1: AES Standard, one decade pink noise with 6 dB crest factor within device's operational band, free air.
2: Calculated maximum SPL based on rated peak power and measured sensitivity.
----------------------------------------------------------
So let's do the math for the way how the extraordinary SPL of 141 db can be achieved.
The first essential information is provided by Footote 1.
AES continous represents a signal with 6dB crest factor. This means the input power has to be multiplied by factor 4 to suffice "peak" dynamics of the noise.
total system input continous
2 x 2000 watt = 4000 watt continuous
Representing 6dB crest within pink noise
4000 watt x 4 = 16000 watt (peak)
16000 watt versus 1 watt means +42dB, which is in rough words around 4 times the loudness of 1 watt input power.
The sensitivety for 1 watt is given with 99dB 1watt 1meter.
99dB + 42dB = 141dB Maximum Peak Output
Never the less Footnote 2 provides further essential informations.
The Peak Output is a calculated number based on rated peak power and measured sensitivity.
Power Rating¹ LF:
2 x 2000 watt Continuous (AES / 2 hour)
99 dB 1W / 1m
Maximum Peak Output²: 141 dB SPL (LF)
Footnotes:
1: AES Standard, one decade pink noise with 6 dB crest factor within device's operational band, free air.
2: Calculated maximum SPL based on rated peak power and measured sensitivity.
----------------------------------------------------------
So let's do the math for the way how the extraordinary SPL of 141 db can be achieved.
The first essential information is provided by Footote 1.
AES continous represents a signal with 6dB crest factor. This means the input power has to be multiplied by factor 4 to suffice "peak" dynamics of the noise.
total system input continous
2 x 2000 watt = 4000 watt continuous
Representing 6dB crest within pink noise
4000 watt x 4 = 16000 watt (peak)
16000 watt versus 1 watt means +42dB, which is in rough words around 4 times the loudness of 1 watt input power.
The sensitivety for 1 watt is given with 99dB 1watt 1meter.
99dB + 42dB = 141dB Maximum Peak Output
Never the less Footnote 2 provides further essential informations.
The Peak Output is a calculated number based on rated peak power and measured sensitivity.
Very different SPL consideration with a very similar line array element of the same family (same LF-drivers)
Footnote #2 for Peak SPL now reads little bit different at the data sheet.
2: Peak, unweighted SPL measured under free-field conditions (free-field 1 meter) using broadband pink noise with a 10dB crest factor
Now I'm (more) interested in the average power that strains the drivers thermal wise with a 10dB crest factor, and thus better would describe the max "average" noise with more generic audio program material
141dB - 10dB = 131dB
131dB refers directly to the average input power
The "average" input power can be easily calculated from the 1watt 1meter sensitivety:
+32dB calculates to
1600 watt input power average.
That's not so bad I think cause compression losses shouldn't become an issue
Never the less the amplifier must be capable of around >10k watt to amplify the dynamics (crest) AND meet the stated Peak SPL requirement.
Again Footnote 2 provides an very essential information. the measured SPL is unweighted
BTW
To be honest I'd be very interested to know what most folks think about a given SPL number respectively what do folks expect from a stated max SPL? Do folks expect natural musical coloring (headroom) at transients with max SPL numbers or do folks expect max noise?
Footnote #2 for Peak SPL now reads little bit different at the data sheet.
2: Peak, unweighted SPL measured under free-field conditions (free-field 1 meter) using broadband pink noise with a 10dB crest factor
Now I'm (more) interested in the average power that strains the drivers thermal wise with a 10dB crest factor, and thus better would describe the max "average" noise with more generic audio program material
141dB - 10dB = 131dB
131dB refers directly to the average input power
The "average" input power can be easily calculated from the 1watt 1meter sensitivety:
+32dB calculates to
1600 watt input power average.
That's not so bad I think cause compression losses shouldn't become an issue
Never the less the amplifier must be capable of around >10k watt to amplify the dynamics (crest) AND meet the stated Peak SPL requirement.
Again Footnote 2 provides an very essential information. the measured SPL is unweighted
BTW
To be honest I'd be very interested to know what most folks think about a given SPL number respectively what do folks expect from a stated max SPL? Do folks expect natural musical coloring (headroom) at transients with max SPL numbers or do folks expect max noise?
Last edited:
- Feb 12, 2006
- 61,086
- 5
- 221,200
- Disclosures
- Development Engineer-Mesa Boogie, Development Engineer-Genzler (pedals), Product Support-Genz Benz
I think that what is happening here is that some forum members took some of the published data out of context and stated as fact something that was not in fact claimed by the manufacture to begin with. My comments were that the claim (not by the manufacturer, but by other people) could not be possible because the CLAIM was outside the envelope of what it reasonable possible.
In fact, if you investigate this more thoroughly, the recommended maximum amplifier power is 800 watts, so using the commonly accepted thought that a speaker can be "safely" driven to between 1.5x and 2x it's rated continuous power (over very short periods of time), that would take the 800 watt factor back to between 400 and 600 watts continuous. This agrees with the BB2's published rating of 550 watts (thermal).
And to clarify for the third time (yes, it's in English, but you all should get the point), in no way did I disparage or cast in any negative light the Barefaced products, nor did I say anything negative about Alex or what he has accomplished. In fact, I appreciate what he has done and how popular his speakers have become, it's not an easy task for sure. It was purely reconciling the difference between a claim being made that exceeded the performance envelope of any driver suitable for bass guitar. For those of you continuing down this path of putting words in my mouth and trying to make something out of nothing, please knock it off. It's disrespectful not only to me, but to other forum members who are trying to learn something from their internet forum addictions...
In fact, if you investigate this more thoroughly, the recommended maximum amplifier power is 800 watts, so using the commonly accepted thought that a speaker can be "safely" driven to between 1.5x and 2x it's rated continuous power (over very short periods of time), that would take the 800 watt factor back to between 400 and 600 watts continuous. This agrees with the BB2's published rating of 550 watts (thermal).
And to clarify for the third time (yes, it's in English, but you all should get the point), in no way did I disparage or cast in any negative light the Barefaced products, nor did I say anything negative about Alex or what he has accomplished. In fact, I appreciate what he has done and how popular his speakers have become, it's not an easy task for sure. It was purely reconciling the difference between a claim being made that exceeded the performance envelope of any driver suitable for bass guitar. For those of you continuing down this path of putting words in my mouth and trying to make something out of nothing, please knock it off. It's disrespectful not only to me, but to other forum members who are trying to learn something from their internet forum addictions...
One of these things does not have a place in science, the other is a core element of science.
I say this with no reference to any particular remark regarding makers, cabs, etc made anywhere in this thread; just a statement on the nature of epistemology.
.
I think that what is happening here is that some forum members took some of the published data out of context and stated as fact something that was not in fact claimed by the manufacture to begin with. My comments were that the claim (not by the manufacturer, but by other people) could not be possible because the CLAIM was outside the envelope of what it reasonable possible.
In fact, if you investigate this more thoroughly, the recommended maximum amplifier power is 800 watts, so using the commonly accepted thought that a speaker can be "safely" driven to between 1.5x and 2x it's rated continuous power (over very short periods of time), that would take the 800 watt factor back to between 400 and 600 watts continuous. This agrees with the BB2's published rating of 550 watts (thermal).
And to clarify for the third time (yes, it's in English, but you all should get the point), in no way did I disparage or cast in any negative light the Barefaced products, nor did I say anything negative about Alex or what he has accomplished. In fact, I appreciate what he has done and how popular his speakers have become, it's not an easy task for sure. It was purely reconciling the difference between a claim being made that exceeded the performance envelope of any driver suitable for bass guitar. For those of you continuing down this path of putting words in my mouth and trying to make something out of nothing, please knock it off. It's disrespectful not only to me, but to other forum members who are trying to learn something from their internet forum addictions...
Well said.
Too many people are quick to take one side of an argument as being gospel. In doing so they close themselves off to further debate. Then someone else comes along voiceing the contrarian view and the new information is automatically rejected with no basis.
True open mindedness is the ability to see equality, the merits and faults of both sides of an argument. Then after weighing both sides fairly, one will form an opinion. But that person will also be open to a change of mind if new evidence comes to light that persuades otherwise. IMO, evidence of the ability to change one's position tells me a lot about that person. I am wrong a lot. In fact, most anyone here would be a fool to take anything I say to be an absolute. Go do your own research boys and girls, then come back and tell me I'm wrong. We'll discuss it.
This thread started as a simple request to recommend a speaker cabinet that was capable of meeting certain operating conditions. I jumped in early and tried to help with that. I ended up making a fool of myself for believing specifications published on a website. When someone pointed out that the information I has passed on was faulty, did I start attacking people? No. I looked into it further, found the correct information, notified the vendor and they corrected the error. And all the while I was open with everyone here about my mistake and what transpired through to the resolution that started with my mistake. But I also worked to help others to not be led down the same road. For the most part this thread has been something like the following:
Jack likes cabinet A, it works well for him. Jill thinks jack is an ass for feeling that way, because her BFF told her that Jack drives an Oldsmobile. Jill being a Ford girl, just can't get past that so clearly everything about Jack is flawed.
The physics of speaker technology dosn't care what you drive or what your BFF told you.
People have many good reasons for liking the gear they own, if they didn't then they'd get rid of it.
The electrical, mechanical, thermal and all other properties cannot be fudged. That is physics, that is science, that is engineering and that is technology. Cold hard truths.
What can get twisted around is how the cold hard facts are presented. What parts are included, what parts are left out. That's the warm and fuzzy appeal that goes into the sales brochure. Oddly enough, the sciences of selling derives its methodology from the cold hard facts of other scientific disciplines. So believe what you want, for the reasons you wish. But if you are not going to be open minded, then I will not be available for such a debate.
Before adding my LIKE I looked up the word epistemology.
It all sounded good, but that word was previously not in my vocabulary.
Hope I didn't totally miss the point with SPL considerations on pro audio line array elements.
Seriosly, may be it helps to keep ones mind open that a number without a comment (at footnote) way to often means nothing.
Seriosly, may be it helps to keep ones mind open that a number without a comment (at footnote) way to often means nothing.
I'm in the second camp - but I'm learning to mentally subtract some dBs of power compression. Not interested in "headroom", not in the sense of "clean power" anyway: I don't expect anything but "dirty" to come out of an amp+cab system, given how unclean my way of playing is... (I'm a hobbyist, mind you - I do play out for money but only occasionally.) I do try not to break anything if I can help it.
Now, if anyone here belongs to the first group, well, at least they're smarter than those who only choose their gigawatt amps based on "headroom" without enough thought given to how well their cabs are gonna handle those clean transients...
She's a bitch anyway; did you see what she wore last night? Unbelievable. ;-)
LMAO, but this Truth defines so much about all our lives. And is so true about much more than speaker cabs, lemme tell ya.
I would love to see a concentric 12" cab with "tweeter" in the middle of the huge 12" driver. But a cab that can be divided up into Bi-amping. Not bi-wiring. Markbass had one signature model- a combo - that took care of biamping but the tweeter were separated from the main 12" driver. Since on some cabs there are options to test drive this, to see if it's worthwhile and if it makes any difference. My experience is that bi-amping only has advantages when both drivers are pushed to the loudest levels, but can make the difference in "straw that breaks the camels back" so to speak. They can survive, and not choke at the last decimals of maximum decibels. The concentric I want for off axis balance, and phase anomalies eliminated or mitigated.
Is there such a cab?
Is there such a cab?
Passinwind
I know nothing.
- Dec 3, 2003
- 23,087
- 46,071
- Disclosures
- Designer/Toaster Tech @ Passinwind Electronics
Yep. I gigged with one for several years very happily. IME most if not all coax drivers mated to 12s or 15s bring some fairly serious compromises compared to using a compression driver on a separate horn though, assuming the woofer portion needs to make deep bass and "hi-fi" is the game.
Skeptical, because I want to hear what the voice coil is doing, and this seems to block it.There is an alternative to coax drivers that seems to be catching on. Sealed back mids/highs in a line array in front of the woofer. Seems like a good idea in general.
