For ported cabs there is probably a "pumping time" delay, and therefore phase change, closely related to some other spec.
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.
Always wanted to try a CA9. I heard that they kick like a mule!
If you are willing to chase "tight" all the way down the rabbit hole... and are willing to trade away SPL...
There are a number of car subs that will do this for you.
Note: nearly all of these are "subs" so biamping around 100 Hz is necessary.
The absolute tightest of these are EBP=50-ish and housed in a sealed D2 alignment.
The Eminence LAB12 isn't a car sub (box is too big), but meets the requirements.
F3 around 43 Hz in D2, with a box volume around 3.75 cubic feet.
D2 rolls off a wee bit higher than the smaller B2 box.
If you are OCD about the tightest possible speaker configuration, D2 is it.
There are a number of car subs that will do this for you.
Note: nearly all of these are "subs" so biamping around 100 Hz is necessary.
The absolute tightest of these are EBP=50-ish and housed in a sealed D2 alignment.
The Eminence LAB12 isn't a car sub (box is too big), but meets the requirements.
F3 around 43 Hz in D2, with a box volume around 3.75 cubic feet.
D2 rolls off a wee bit higher than the smaller B2 box.
If you are OCD about the tightest possible speaker configuration, D2 is it.
Last edited:
I know maybe i am bit different....
The first thing that i put in my consideration if i wanna do something with my tone is the bass itself (wood...pickup....string) then effect.....then cab and speaker
Off course cab and speaker is important to shaping the tone.....but the change will more bigger if you consider that first ...and then...amp....
That's why this forum has more bass hoarder rather than amp hoarder....i guess
The first thing that i put in my consideration if i wanna do something with my tone is the bass itself (wood...pickup....string) then effect.....then cab and speaker
Off course cab and speaker is important to shaping the tone.....but the change will more bigger if you consider that first ...and then...amp....
That's why this forum has more bass hoarder rather than amp hoarder....i guess
When running frequency response tests, the transient response of both the Glockenklang & the
Reeves Custom 225 showed considerably faster rise time & quicker damping than any other amps
that I tried. Transient response directly correlates with what you hear, like tight & punchy or
muddy & boomy. TR is not just the amps ability but also that of the speakers.
Reeves Custom 225 showed considerably faster rise time & quicker damping than any other amps
that I tried. Transient response directly correlates with what you hear, like tight & punchy or
muddy & boomy. TR is not just the amps ability but also that of the speakers.
I have two Hartke LH 1000, they test fairly good on Transient response. I frequently compare them side to side with
my Reeves C225 when running various sound tests & have to admit that I can get them to sound pretty damn close. Worth checking out Hartke if you want to save money. Hopefully, one day I will get to check some of the aforementioned
big hitters like GK, Mesa & Crest CA9.
Edit : apologies, should be Impulse response not transient response.
Last edited:
- Feb 12, 2006
- 61,051
- 5
- 221,021
- Disclosures
- Development Engineer-Mesa Boogie, Development Engineer-Genzler (pedals), Product Support-Genz Benz
The D-800/800+ are defined as high damping
The WD-800 is variable damping (low-medium-high)
The TT-800 is low damping (not quite as low as the WD in low position) and it remains constant through 8, 4 and 2 ohm loads just like the output transformer would on the Bass-400.
What kind of transient test are you talking about?
I think there is a misunderstanding or mis-correlation of what you are saying versus what you are actually testing or describing.
My apologies, I meant Impulse Response, when testing amps & speakers in systems. Swapping out components
gives me a good idea of how each performs. However, the ultimate test of course is your ears.
- Feb 12, 2006
- 61,051
- 5
- 221,021
- Disclosures
- Development Engineer-Mesa Boogie, Development Engineer-Genzler (pedals), Product Support-Genz Benz
Characterizing an amplifier's response via an impulse response convolution is a way to express a lot of data in a single package. That's very difficult than transient response which involves propagation delays, amplitude versus phase data, bandwidth data, etc.
This is why I dig my Reeves C225 so much. Using it with Mike Arnopol's speaker cabinets is so amazing, it has to be experienced to be believed. They respond so quickly, you can punch your brains out if you're not careful.
Absolutely, agree with you a 100%. I wish I had the means to conduct transient response tests, that are a part of all
the other test parameters that influence the overall end result of a products sound, like someone in your
position that has those facilities to hand.
- Feb 12, 2006
- 61,051
- 5
- 221,021
- Disclosures
- Development Engineer-Mesa Boogie, Development Engineer-Genzler (pedals), Product Support-Genz Benz
Actually, transient response data really isn’t important for amps, more useful for characterizing speakers.
My non-expert 2¢ is that I doubt any (normal) tube power amp belongs in *this* thread, except as a comparatively negative example.
I have to throw my opinion into the mix here. A few years ago I looked into the behavior of speakers, and convinced myself that frequency and transient response are "joined at the hip" for sealed and ported speakers in the frequency range where the basic electromagnetic theory is valid, i.e., below roughly 250 Hz. If two speakers have different transient response, then they will have different frequency response, making it difficult to attribute an audible difference to one or the other.
This is because frequency, phase, and transient response are all governed by the same equation of motion.
Where do amps fit into the mix? Power amps are unlikely to have an interesting transient response signature unless something special is designed into the feedback loop, or the loop has low gain. Also, electronic filters, such as EQ controls, will have their own transient behavior. The speaker is an electromechanical filter. So, two amps with different "voicing" will have different transient response.
All of these things convinced me that trying to understand speaker transient response from a sonic perspective was unlikely to bear fruit, unless someone smarter than me has figured out how to separate those issues. Digital filtering is one possible way.
This is because frequency, phase, and transient response are all governed by the same equation of motion.
Where do amps fit into the mix? Power amps are unlikely to have an interesting transient response signature unless something special is designed into the feedback loop, or the loop has low gain. Also, electronic filters, such as EQ controls, will have their own transient behavior. The speaker is an electromechanical filter. So, two amps with different "voicing" will have different transient response.
All of these things convinced me that trying to understand speaker transient response from a sonic perspective was unlikely to bear fruit, unless someone smarter than me has figured out how to separate those issues. Digital filtering is one possible way.
This thread has become very interesting with a lot of technical stuff and a lot of focus on speakers. The thought that DI is important and FOH's place, IEM's etc. should have been mentioned by me. I guess more so what I should have asked is for a thread of the best "modern" voiced amp. I always associate modern tone with quicker, snappier, faster decaying and attacking bass. I understand that the right compression can fix this, but just want to move to something with little more headroom and different voicing.
Think I'm going with the GK legacy 800, and an Empress Bass Comp. Might also try the Fusion S, but all I can find around here to play is the legacy right now so hopefully that gives me the tonal quality I'm looking for. Thanks for the info folks!
Think I'm going with the GK legacy 800, and an Empress Bass Comp. Might also try the Fusion S, but all I can find around here to play is the legacy right now so hopefully that gives me the tonal quality I'm looking for. Thanks for the info folks!
I've always felt Hartke's (much like aguilar) have more of a vintage voiced kind of amp. Beautiful, sits in a mix really well, pretty warm and round, but just not the sound I'm chasing, I've already got that coming from my TC, loved it for a while, ready to change things up!
I'm curious how the HPF applies? I have a 4 band semi parametric eq which shelves lows I set it around 80hz and cut until it starts to sound thin, then dial in just a touch. I then try to rely on the bump in low mids, but it doesn't quite get me the punch I need. How would an HPF work any differently than this?
The frequencies that are causing the mud are well below 80hz, so I suspect you are actually cutting some of the "good" lows -- the thump you want -- but not touching the "bad" lows that are mucking things up. The Broughton ("Always-On") HPF I recently bought cuts everything below 25hz at the minimal setting, and then you can adjust the cutoff upwards from there. In my case I didn't have to move it very far: I'd guess that I have it set somewhere around 35-40hz. (This particular model doesn't have the frequencies labeled around the adjustment knob, so I can only estimate.) I was really wowed by the difference: I didn't even realize how much mud was in my tone until it was gone. And as I said in my previous post it wasn't just me: My bandmates (in two different bands) commented on how much "punchier" the bass was in the mix.
