• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

2x15 or 1x15 + 2x10?

Different speakers react differently. Even if you put them in different cabinets (eg with different dimensions or port configurations), they will act differently. It's not simply based on size, but design. Therefore, the same design (make, model, era) should be used if you want to minimize phase cancellation.

Would you agree that 10" drivers respond faster than 18" drivers? If yes, then you already understand that speakers respond differently. Phase cancellation in this context is a slight time misalignment. This phase cancellation also results in construction. This means that some frequencies will be significantly weaker and some will be stronger. Furthermore, smaller drivers tend to have wider spread so your sound will be much less consistent as you move off axis.

I didn't say combining two pickups or cabs is unusual. I said it results in phase cancellation.

3 way systems use a crossover. Crossovers divide the signal into multiple bands. For example, the first speaker receives the low frequencies, the second receives the mids, the third receives the highs.
That is very true about the crossover. For me personally the only bass cab I'd ever use anyway would be a 4x10 + horn and multiples thereof. Multiple 10's are the ultimate bass driver and the reason why it has endured for so long ever since the original SVT.
 
3 way systems use a crossover. Crossovers divide the signal into multiple bands. For example, the first speaker receives the low frequencies, the second receives the mids, the third receives the highs.

Proper crossover design (Butterworth or Linkwotz Riley alignment) demands "in phase" response of different drivers to be connected. If two different drivers would by default "cancel out" at crossover point (that is actually a broad band) then all the well approved math for crossover design wouldn't work properly never ever.
Explained in different words, a 2-way crossover can't prevent "phase issues" of different drivers. That's why a 2-way crossover can't prevent from myths.
But a 2-way crossover can prevent comb filter affects in the vertical plane! That's a total different animal of course.
 
Last edited:
Different speakers react differently. Even if you put them in different cabinets (eg with different dimensions or port configurations), they will act differently. It's not simply based on size, but design. Therefore, the same design (make, model, era) should be used if you want to minimize phase cancellation. There's more to a speaker/cab than its power handling and frequency response. Time is an important consideration.

Beyond phase it's (sometimes) more interesting to deal with group delay deviations.
While phase difference is (most often) rather of smallish number (neglibible) a partially deviation in group delay may predict an odd sounding pairing of cabs.[/QUOTE]

Would you agree that 10" drivers respond faster than 18" drivers?
No

If yes, then you already understand that speakers respond differently.
No,
the frequency response is different but, speaker size tells nothing but speaker size, isn't it?

Phase cancellation in this context is a slight time misalignment. This phase cancellation also results in construction. This means that some frequencies will be significantly weaker and some will be stronger.

No. Woofers don't turn around (unpredictable) phase response multple times * 2pi versus frequency. That's a myth.

Furthermore, smaller drivers tend to have wider spread so your sound will be much less consistent as you move off axis.

True, but 410 and 810 alignment suffer on well known comb filter issues in horizontal plane, and as well on vertical comb filter issues with "large" 810 stacks, as well as skinny 410's

Do you know that speakers' frequency response changes when used in multiples? Eg a 4x10 will have a mid scoop.
never experienced with 410 design on it's own.

I didn't say combining two pickups or cabs is unusual. I said it results in phase cancellation.
Properly way more true for the pickup thing.
BTW did you know that "mechanical" power of a vibrant string travels from bridge to saddle and vica versa? I wouldn't attempt to compare frequency spectrum of pickup alignment towards response of any speaker application,
except the comb filter issues which is naturally present even with a "single" pickup.

3 way systems use a crossover. Crossovers divide the signal into multiple bands. For example, the first speaker receives the low frequencies, the second receives the mids, the third receives the highs.
And if the low/mid drivers act in fashion like a "phase issues myth" then the crossover is nonsense
 
Last edited:
OP here! Yes, I started the whole thing and now I have an update.

Cancel the whole darn thing. Went to the practice space tonight and took my GK 2x10 (8 ohm) to see if I'd like that setup. Well, I was wrong about one crucial thing...the Peavey 15 is a 4 ohm cabinet and none of my amps are rated for 2 ohm operation so there went that! But I hooked it up anyway to see how it did (Ampeg PF800..figured it would just protect itself if it didn't like the 2.6 ohm load) all the time knowing I couldn't keep it like that for long. Anyway, I didn't really like it. The added bottom end was nice, but the 10's did indeed give up well before the 15 and I didn't like the added 'gank' and midrange that the 210 added. I like the sound of the 15 by itself so much better, it was so thick and juicy with just the right amount of high mids.

So now I don't know what I'm gonna do. Maybe nothing. Maybe sell my 4x10 and 2x10 and get 2 15's. Maybe make a sandwich. But now I'm curious how my 4x10 compares to that 1x15. I've never heard my 10's side by side with anything else and I'm thinking I might be a 15" guy!
 
I'm still curious about the whole cab thing because I just bought a Carvin BR515, and will bring it to practice tomorrow. It'll actually be overpowered for the practice room considering the Drummer complains the Fender Rumble 150 is too loud (it's situated behind him).

My plan is to either eventually buy a Carvin BRX10.2 (because I think I prefer ports just like mmbongo might be a 15" guy), or buy that goofy Acoustic B115mkII cab that's on a ridiculous clearance sale at the local.... Acoustic shop. I have no problems transporting a light combo and a 210, but a combo and a relatively large 115 might be a bit much.

(I always wanted a Carvin amp since it's from my hometown - lucky me. I figure I can always detach the BX500 if the combo speaker is doody, but at least it gives me a head start)
---

If anything, mmbongo, the 210 just wasn't paired right with the 115. Maybe try another kind of a 210, just like I'm really hoping the BRX10.2 matches well with what I have. Then again, with your amp, that means a new 8ohm 115. That seems like too much hassle to me, especially if you already like your sound.
 
Proper crossover design (Butterworth or Linkwotz Riley alignment) demands "in phase" response of different drivers to be connected. If two different drivers would by default "cancel out" at crossover point (that is actually a broad band) then all the well approved math for crossover design wouldn't work properly never ever.
Explained in different words, a 2-way crossover can't prevent "phase issues" of different drivers. That's why a 2-way crossover can't prevent from myths.
But a 2-way crossover can prevent comb filter affects in the vertical plane! That's a total different animal of course.

You seem to be describing speakers which are wired out of phase in relation to each other - ie inverse phase.
 
No…
No, the frequency response is different but, speaker size tells nothing but speaker size, isn't it?

I can play that game too. You cannot guarantee the frequency response will be different. Do physics, mass, distance, resistance, acoustics, and time not exist in your world? ;)

Phase response and acoustics apply to speakers and cabinets.

No. Woofers don't turn around (unpredictable) phase response multple times * 2pi versus frequency. That's a myth.

I'm talking about a few degrees. You are describing multiple cycles. Briefly, even something as simple as the acoustics of a cab's reflection will introduce phase construction and destruction.

Mass, diameter, air resistance, etc affect how a speaker reacts. There's more to speakers and cabs than frequency response. Speakers are not linear phase.

True, but 410 and 810 alignment suffer on well known comb filter issues in horizontal plane, and as well on vertical comb filter issues with "large" 810 stacks, as well as skinny 410's

Ok, now you are discussing the effects of phase cancellation which I have described.

I described the comb filtering when I explained "…some frequencies will be significantly weaker and some will be stronger".

I never said that using multiple drivers did not result in phase cancellation. I recommended using identical drivers (among other things) to minimize phase cancellation.

Minimizing phase cancellation is important so that a system sounds more consistent from position to position and room to room.

never experienced with 410 design on it's own.

The widest "valley" in the frequency response will have a center frequency whose wavelength is one half the distance of drivers' centers. Above one octave, the peaks and valleys introduced by phase cancellation become more frequent and complex -- ie less evident.

Probably way more true for the pickup thing.

Yes, likely.
 
---

If anything, mmbongo, the 210 just wasn't paired right with the 115. Maybe try another kind of a 210, just like I'm really hoping the BRX10.2 matches well with what I have. Then again, with your amp, that means a new 8ohm 115. That seems like too much hassle to me, especially if you already like your sound.

No, they paired fine as they sounded really good if you like a sharper, crisper sound. I also ran each by themselves and I preferred the round fatness of the 15 over the 210.
 
No, they paired fine as they sounded really good if you like a sharper, crisper sound. I also ran each by themselves and I preferred the round fatness of the 15 over the 210.

I just meant it as you were getting 2.6ohms with an amp that doesn't have that option and the sound wasn't what you preferred.

It's basically the same reason I got the BR515 instead of the BR510 combo. The BR515 just initially sounded better to me without messing with the EQ.

(by the way, I looked up the Acoustic 115 cab, apparently that thing is heavy too. So I'll pass)
 
I never said that using multiple drivers did not result in phase cancellation. I recommended using identical drivers (among other things) to minimize phase cancellation.

Different cabs have different phase response and deviations in group delay at the low band which is caused by different cab design. Even different cabs but loaded with "matching" drivers can be (theoretically) very different, at the other hand different cabs loaded with different driver size can be very close in this regard, it depends. That's why I would never ever suggest to mix a ported cab with a sealed cab, for example mixing of a 410 ported with a 410 sealed was a good bet for phase and group delay anomalies at the lows.

Within a more "generic" cab family (like MI bass cabinets) the reasonably expecting phase difference at the lows is insufficiant to have "issues" like cancelation. The ball-park tuning of ported MI cabs 45-55Hz predicts constructice interference of two "different" sources rather than destructive interference.

At the other hand summation of different voicings of different cabs at mids and treble of course is a crapshoot, thus more predictable with "matching" stuff.

Very typical for it's comb filter "issue" characteristic are all kinds of full range running compound/isobaric cab designs. The typical comb filter response is caused by the "effective" distance of the two cones which work together as one "new" driver. Although the issue is a no go in HiFi world I would not revile this design as an impractical design for MI application.
Obviously these cabs are most reviled for beeing very inefficient, two drivers which need twice the power for same SPL instead of a single driver, while the typical comb filter response seems widely unnoticed by players and "engineers" in forum discussions. That's paradox but, as the issue is probably widely unknown, why should it be noticed by ears, cause aren't these matching drivers? It seems like as long as all the stuff is matching then there can't be an noticeable "issue" present!


Minimizing phase cancellation is important so that a system sounds more consistent from position to position and room to room.
Agreed. Precondition is to know the manner of cancellation if present.

The widest "valley" in the frequency response will have a center frequency whose wavelength is one half the distance of drivers' centers. Above one octave, the peaks and valleys introduced by phase cancellation become more frequent and complex -- ie less evident.

The one half the distance of drivers centers wavelength is roughly the highest possible frequency for a plane wavefront. Line Arrays take essential benefit of this physics reality.

Instead of destructive interference (a wide valley) there is rather constructive interference up to this 1/2 distance wavelength. The worst "coupling" of full range running drivers was with multiple 15"s (wide distance of the sources centers) while the best "coupling" was with 10"s (narrow distance of the sources centers).
The mixing of different cabs results somewhere in between of the both.

While there is this frequently adressed "phase issue" thing with mixing of different cabs, I think there are a couple of different parameters like cab system damping Qtc and impedance curve that can make a mixing of cabs delicate especially with tube amplifiers. But, unfortunatelly, the result of "indistinct" respectively bad sound is always adressed to phase anomalies. IMO that's a little bit of delusion. A very loosen indistinct muddy sound could also happen with matchin stuff but highish Qtc and highish impedance peak driven by tube amplifier with weak global feedback control.
 
Last edited:
Example of a very nitpicky consideration.
A very lot amount of comb filter affets is produced by the bass guitar itself, the preamp may contain a "notch" which equals a lowish comb filter issue, may be there are two "matching" isobaric cabs stacked vertically. Each isobaric cab hits "matching" comb filter characteristic while vertical stacking does a final but different comb filter characteristic.
Theoretically a combination like this can't work because there is way to much of "phase issues", but probably yet works, because the earth is a flat.
 
Back to the Peavey 15, I have to give it up for the sweet tone of the last one I played through, which was the TKO combo, Sheffield driver I think. It looked like it had been infested with mice, abused by cats, dragged on a chain behind a pickup, and spit back out of a garbage truck compactor, but it sounded NICE.
 
Example of a very nitpicky consideration.
A very lot amount of comb filter affets is produced by the bass guitar itself, the preamp may contain a "notch" which equals a lowish comb filter issue, may be there are two "matching" isobaric cabs stacked vertically. Each isobaric cab hits "matching" comb filter characteristic while vertical stacking does a final but different comb filter characteristic.
Theoretically a combination like this can't work because there is way to much of "phase issues", but probably yet works, because the earth is a flat.

Hey now. It's not like I said that mixing driver sizes or using multiple pickups would be completely unusable or that it would result in demons flying out of one's nose :thumbsup:

I said it before when I used pickups an example - the effects of phase cancellation can sound good. I didn't say that mixing drivers or cabs would not work. I simply recommended an equal speaker+cab to minimize phase cancellation.

Really, how often do you see posts at TalkBass where somebody returned from a concert and said "I loved the bassist's indistinct, phasey sound. I'd kill for that tone!"? -or- "Hey. I want each concert-goer to hear my bass differently based on their location. I'd like to introduce phase issues using several bass cabs positioned far from each other and pointing different directions. That would be cool…". I've seen neither. However, many bassists do want a distinct, clear sound that is consistent from venue to venue -- and it's easy to add phase cancellation with effects if one desires.

Your latest example is taking the problem way out of proportion; as if phase cancellation were either absent or in full effect. That's not the point I am making. I'm saying that mixing different speakers/cabs causes some phase cancellation. To use comb filtering as an example, you are making it sound as if I said the phase cancellation was so extreme that certain frequencies would cancel entirely and that mixing cabs could never work. What I'm actually saying is more like "There's some comb filtering from phase cancellation. It's down a few dB here, up a few dB there… A trained ear could identify the problem. Some non-musicians can sense it. Although it's not generally ideal, it's not a showstopper. Uh, let's record the bass direct and tell the bassist we can always reamp it.".
 
Different cabs have different phase response and deviations in group delay at the low band which is caused by different cab design. Even different cabs but loaded with "matching" drivers can be (theoretically) very different, at the other hand different cabs loaded with different driver size can be very close in this regard, it depends. That's why I would never ever suggest to mix a ported cab with a sealed cab, for example mixing of a 410 ported with a 410 sealed was a good bet for phase and group delay anomalies at the lows.

Within a more "generic" cab family (like MI bass cabinets) the reasonably expecting phase difference at the lows is insufficiant to have "issues" like cancelation. The ball-park tuning of ported MI cabs 45-55Hz predicts constructice interference of two "different" sources rather than destructive interference.

In other words, you are saying that mixing cabs is a big no-no… and that mixing a Jensen BS 15N 350A with, um, a Jensen P6V will not result in some phase cancellation -- out in the audience? Specifically, that this speaker combination will not result in more phase cancellation than using matched drivers - assume their sensitivity is equivalent, although it is not.

At the other hand summation of different voicings of different cabs at mids and treble of course is a crapshoot, thus more predictable with "matching" stuff.

Very typical for it's comb filter "issue" characteristic are all kinds of full range running compound/isobaric cab designs. The typical comb filter response is caused by the "effective" distance of the two cones which work together as one "new" driver. Although the issue is a no go in HiFi world I would not revile this design as an impractical design for MI application.
Obviously these cabs are most reviled for beeing very inefficient, two drivers which need twice the power for same SPL instead of a single driver, while the typical comb filter response seems widely unnoticed by players and "engineers" in forum discussions. That's paradox but, as the issue is probably widely unknown, why should it be noticed by ears, cause aren't these matching drivers? It seems like as long as all the stuff is matching then there can't be an noticeable "issue" present!

A 4x10 does not function as a single driver (=one "new" driver). Time, acoustics, and space still exist. That's why comb filtering and other phase cancellation occurs. The ear is very well adapted to phase cancellation because of acoustics. When somebody speaks in a hallway and their voice reflects of the wall, the brain (typically) discards that "interference". Bass and guitar speakers and cabs are not designed or produced for linearity. Well, they are to some extent but volume, sound/tone, cost and durability are higher considerations. Furthermore, the musicians want that familiar sound. Sure, not all musicians can explain phase cancellation. Many recording engineers understand the problem, and more generally acoustics and phase cancellation. I assume you'll find plenty of internet awareness of the issue if you look up recording guitarists' 4x12s. I would be surprised if a detailed writing on the subject of miking a 4x12 left out phase cancellation considerations. E.g. I am not talking about a blog post which reduces the process to "SM57. On axis. A few cm from the dust cap. Set trim. You may want a room mic for ambiance. Presto!".

Agreed. Precondition is to know the manner of cancellation if present.

The one half the distance of drivers centers wavelength is roughly the highest possible frequency for a plane wavefront. Line Arrays take essential benefit of this physics reality.

Instead of destructive interference (a wide valley) there is rather constructive interference up to this 1/2 distance wavelength. The worst "coupling" of full range running drivers was with multiple 15"s (wide distance of the sources centers) while the best "coupling" was with 10"s (narrow distance of the sources centers).
The mixing of different cabs results somewhere in between of the both.

Yes. Specifically, it's constructive from 270 around to 90 degrees. At 90 degrees (1/4 wavelength) it turns destructive. At exactly 180 degrees, you have total cancellation.

That's a chance in theory that mixing drivers will work when you are standing on axis, but will result in a less consistent sound as you move off axis and as you throw that combination into a venue and acoustics are involved. Your audience cannot all be positioned in "The Sweet Spot". Note: Smaller drivers have wider dispersion.

Mixing drivers as you suggested introduces phase cancellation in hopes of achieving flatter frequency response by averaging (by having comb filtering using multiple fundamental wavelengths).

Would you say that the speakers used in a line array should be identical or would you encourage people to mix different speakers in a line array?

If you said "identical", then why do you believe this does not apply to an 8x10? If you answered "mixed" it would be very inefficient and the sound would be unpleasant from significant cancellation.

While there is this frequently adressed "phase issue" thing with mixing of different cabs, I think there are a couple of different parameters like cab system damping Qtc and impedance curve that can make a mixing of cabs delicate especially with tube amplifiers. But, unfortunatelly, the result of "indistinct" respectively bad sound is always adressed to phase anomalies. IMO that's a little bit of delusion. A very loosen indistinct muddy sound could also happen with matchin stuff but highish Qtc and highish impedance peak driven by tube amplifier with weak global feedback control.

Or an indistinct sound can be from a low quality cable, bad filter design, inadequate headroom, a low battery… I didn't blame everything on phase anomalies. I just suggested a way to minimize phase issues when I suggested a second 1x15 ;)
 
Lots of confusion here. May be it's due to the language barrier. English isn't my first language you know. Sorry if my explanations are hard to translate, and hard to comprehent. So I try (again) to explain a couple of "misleading" points in a (hopefully) more clear manner.


post #79 eigentone said:
Different speakers react differently. Even if you put them in different cabinets (eg with different dimensions or port configurations), they will act differently. It's not simply based on size, but design. Therefore, the same design (make, model, era) should be used if you want to minimize phase cancellation. There's more to a speaker/cab than its power handling and frequency response. Time is an important consideration.



The statement obviously referes to different phase response of different cabs at the lows.
I tried to explain that often a deviation in group delay is of more concern than a difference in phase, which tends to be rather small within a cab family. While some deviation (a few degree) in phase response is of no concern, the deviation in group delay yet can be significant in a "partially" range.
No doubt about it, matching phase and group delay can be reached with matching cabs but, any isolated considerations of (some) deviation in phase isn't the ultimate answer to everything if different cabs can match at the lows.
BTW a speaker cable can be easily swapped if the existing one is crap, Qtc and impedance curve belong to the cab, if Qtc and/or impedance courve don't fits the needs of a tube amplifier than the whole cab gear should be swapped, that's a rather delicate distinction IMO

post #79 eigentone said:
Do you know that speakers' frequency response changes when used in multiples? Eg a 4x10 will have a mid scoop.


post #88 eigentone said:
The widest "valley" in the frequency response will have a center frequency whose wavelength is one half the distance of drivers' centers. Above one octave, the peaks and valleys introduced by phase cancellation become more frequent and complex -- ie less evident.



I tried to explain that the mentioned argument of frequency whose wavelength is one half the distance of drivers' is an essential precondition to make line arrays properly working. The distance of sources determines the highest possible frequency to generate a wavefront without comb filter affects.

This basic "acoustic" scienece can in "rough" words be explained like the following:

...two adjacent sources radiate a spherical polar pattern (i.e. sum coherently) when they are less than 1/4 wavelength apart. Between 1/4 and 1/2-wavelength spacing the pattern narrows, but side lobes (interference patterns, caused by destructive interference) do not appear until the spacing is greater than 1/2 wavelength.

I think the 1/2 half wavelength argumentation to explain comb filter affects isn't a proper tool in this regard, especially a mid scoop response of 410 can't be explained with the 1/2 wavelenght theorem.


post #73 eigentone said:
Rule of Thumb: When using multiple speakers, choose speakers which match (like in a 4x10), align them (also like in a 4x10), and put them close together (like they do in 4x10s). This will minimize phase artifacts, yielding the purest sound and most efficient use of energy (=loudest). Mixing drivers can result in drivers pushing in opposing directions because different drivers will respond slightly differently to the signal.



Properly the post I most struggled with.
Although me myself I'm a advocate of the "close as possible" theorem (as long as it's practical), I struggled a very lot with the "drivers pushing in opposing directions" statement.
May be I'm translating "opposing" again in a wrong manner. I did translate "opposing" as -180 phase rotation.
May be this -180 degree phase rotation is meant to be adressed to the mixing cab stuff exclusively (that's how I translate the statement) but, in this manner it was indefensible!
 
Last edited:
Lots of confusion here. May it's due to the language barrier. English isn't my first language you know. Sorry if my explanations are hard to translate, and hard to comprehent. So I try (again) to explain a couple of "misleading" points in a (hopefully) more clear manner.

No worries, my German is not as good as your English :thumbsup:

post #79 eigentone said:
Different speakers react differently. Even if you put them in different cabinets (eg with different dimensions or port configurations), they will act differently. It's not simply based on size, but design. Therefore, the same design (make, model, era) should be used if you want to minimize phase cancellation. There's more to a speaker/cab than its power handling and frequency response. Time is an important consideration.


The statement obviously referes to different phase response of different cabs at the lows.
I tried to explain that often a deviation in group delay is of more concern than a difference in phase, which tends to be rather small within a cab family. While some deviation (a few degree) in phase response is of no concern, the deviation in group delay yet can be significant in a "partially" range.
No doubt about it, matching phase and group delay can be reached with matching cabs but, any isolated considerations of (some) deviation in phase isn't the exclusive answer to everything if different cabs can match at the lows.

Yes, you are identifying causes (eg group delay). I am simply skimming over the details of numerous causes at play and focusing on the effect (summarily, phase cancellation).

post #79 eigentone said:
Do you know that speakers' frequency response changes when used in multiples? Eg a 4x10 will have a mid scoop.


post #88 eigentone said:
The widest "valley" in the frequency response will have a center frequency whose wavelength is one half the distance of drivers' centers. Above one octave, the peaks and valleys introduced by phase cancellation become more frequent and complex -- ie less evident.


I tried to explain that the mentioned argument of frequency whose wavelength is one half the distance of drivers' is an essential precondition to make line arrays properly working. The distance of sources determines the highest possible frequency to generate a wavefront without comb filter affects.

This basic "acoustic" scienece can in "rough" words be explained like the following:

...two adjacent sources radiate a spherical polar pattern (i.e. sum coherently) when they are less than 1/4 wavelength apart. Between 1/4 and 1/2-wavelength spacing the pattern narrows, but side lobes (interference patterns, caused by destructive interference) do not appear until the spacing is greater than 1/2 wavelength.

Yes, you did. Time (=phase) issues can also be compensated for in line arrays using FIRs.

It's just not cost effective to time align a 4x10, since it has a smaller field because of nearer proximity. Nor would it be useful in practice (eg a live situation).

I think the 1/2 half wavelength argumentation to explain comb filter affects isn't a proper tool in this regard, especially a mid scoop response of 410 can't be explained with the 1/2 wavelenght theorem.

Oh? I thought I gave an example without all the variables or getting deep into the math. The minimum half-wavelength frequency for a 4x10 whose centers are 12" apart and at 90 degrees off axis is between 500 to 600 Hz. The next most prominent frequency will exist for drivers which are farthest apart in the 4x10 configuration (eg Top Left and Bottom Right). This secondary frequency (=> half-wavelength) will be a lower frequency than the primary due to the longer wavelength -- assuming 2x2 matrix. As you position yourself on axis, the half wavelength decreases -- reducing the prominence of the mid scoop.

post #73 eigentone said:
Rule of Thumb: When using multiple speakers, choose speakers which match (like in a 4x10), align them (also like in a 4x10), and put them close together (like they do in 4x10s). This will minimize phase artifacts, yielding the purest sound and most efficient use of energy (=loudest). Mixing drivers can result in drivers pushing in opposing directions because different drivers will respond slightly differently to the signal.
Properly the post I most struggled with.
Although me myself I'm a advocate of the "close as possible" theorem (as long as it's practical), I struggled a very lot with the "drivers pushing in opposing directions" statement.
May be I'm translating "opposing" again in a wrong manner. I did translate "opposing" as -180 phase rotation.
May be this -180 degree phase rotation is meant to be adressed to the mixing cab stuff exclusively (that's how I translate the statement) but, in this manner it was indefensible!

Nope. Sorry. I don't mean they are wired out of phase or 180 degrees out of phase. I mean that different speakers respond differently to an amp's signal. There's more to a speaker than frequency response. A larger speaker may have more mass or air resistance than a small speaker. It usually takes (slightly) more time for a larger speaker to respond because of this. Cab porting and dimensions also affect how quickly and accurately a speaker is able to respond. These time and power deviations in speakers results in their outputs causing some destructive interference -- or simply phase cancellation.

Hope that I explained things better this time around :)
 
Last edited:
Oh? I thought I gave an example without all the variables or getting deep into the math. The minimum half-wavelength frequency for a 4x10 whose centers are 12" apart and at 90 degrees off axis is between 500 to 600 Hz. The next most prominent frequency will exist for drivers which are farthest apart in the 4x10 configuration (eg Top Left and Bottom Right). This secondary frequency (=> half-wavelength) will be a lower frequency than the primary due to the longer wavelength -- assuming 2x2 matrix. As you position yourself on axis, the half wavelength decreases -- reducing the prominence of the mid scoop.

nearly true , except the "diagonal" consideration cause top left is "directly linked" with top right and bottom left, while top right is directly linked with top left and bottom right, and visa versa for the bottom drivers.
Another consideration, top horizontal row is linked with bottom row, and left vertical row is linked with right vertical row. There is no "interference" of top left with bottom right nor top right with bottom left.
In an 810 alignment top left driver can't interfere with bottom right driver up to <=600Hz
And, beyond 600 Hz the interference does not start like a rock, it's a more "gradually" accumulating comb characteristics that comes very "smooth" into play with increasing frequency.
A reasonably "noticable comb" frequency shouldn't be expected >=1kHz indoor, somewhat lower at free air.

Nope. Sorry. I don't mean they are wired out of phase or 180 degrees out of phase. I mean that different speakers respond differently to an amp's signal. There's more to a speaker than frequency response. A larger speaker may have more mass or air resistance than a small speaker. It usually takes (slightly) more time for a larger speaker to respond because of this. Cab porting and dimensions also affect how quickly and accurately a speaker is able to respond. These time and power deviations in speakers results in their outputs causing some destructive interference -- or simply phase cancellation.

Hope that I explained things better this time around :)
Of course a large speaker tends to have more moving mass and actually works with an improved radiation impdance (which is a big benefit with big cones) but,
if an increased very large moving mass would lead to a "trail behind" versus "standard drivers" of around -90 degree (relative phase) then the speaker was impractical for use anyway cause cone movement would tend to be nearly zero
 
Last edited:
nearly true , except the "diagonal" consideration cause top left is "directly linked" with top right and bottom left, while top right is directly linked with top left and bottom right, and visa versa for the bottom drivers.
Another consideration, top horizontal row is linked with bottom row, and left vertical row is linked with right vertical row. There is no "interference" of top left with bottom right nor top right with bottom left.
In an 810 alignment top left driver can't interfere with bottom right driver up to <=600Hz
And, beyond 600 Hz the interference does not start like a rock, it's a more "gradually" accumulating comb characteristics that comes very "smooth" into play with increasing frequency.
A reasonably "noticable comb" frequency shouldn't be expected <1kHz indoor, somewhat lower at free air.

Yes, there is destructive interference between the top left and bottom right speaker -- unless you (or the microphone) happen to be positioned at precisely the same distance from the two sound sources (ignoring reflections). That's why you hear a noticeable comb filter effect when stepping off axis. Because the speakers' distance is greater than Top Left top to Top Right, the half-wavelength will be longer = a lower frequency. I'm talking inches and feet; sound from each speaker travels at the same rate. If one speaker is about one foot closer, the sound that speaker produces will arrive about 1 millisecond sooner, resulting in varying amounts of phase construction and destruction across the frequency spectrum.

Of course a large speaker tends to have more moving mass and actually works with an improved radiation impdance (which is a big benefit with big cones) but,
if an increased very large moving mass would lead to a "trail behind" versus "standard drivers" of around -90 degree (relative phase) then the speaker was impractical for use anyway cause cone movement would tend to to be nearly zero

For the purposes of illustrating the amount of error/cancellation I am describing, I previously quantified the amount of degrees I'm talking about. Not 180. Not 90. I'm done correcting your exaggerations of my words. This is growing circular. Sorry - I'm out.
 
Last edited:

Latest posts