The problem with this topic in particular, is that many have their heels dug in, and I mistook his post as an example of that. My apologies.
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.
Any Rules For Mixing Cabinets?
- Thread starter Mike SS
- Start date
Hey, it's not just you. On a favorite political site, they changed the rules, requiring you to categorize satire articles as satire, because they were just too believable in the crazy world we live in today.
As a musician and electronic engineer I'm more interested in dB numbers rather than abstract looking plot samples.
Adding of two signals with same Amplitude and frequency but different (relative) phase
0 degree: +6.00 dB
10 degree: +5.97 dB
20 degree: +5.87 dB
45 degree: + 5.31 dB
55 degree: +4.96 dB
90 degree: + 2.99 dB
120 degree: + 0 dB
180 degree: total cancelation
That's a very impressing results cause it means nearly no loss within 0-20 degree phase "issue".
At 55 degree phase shift (which is quite lot of shift) the dB loss is silly -1dB versus perfect matching (wasn't there a claim of inaudible difference within smallish dB deviation?).
The 90 degree (relative) shift can be understand as -3dB point like commonly used with frequency response specifications.
Of course the "new" generated signal has got a different phase then the original ones. The new "phase" can be easily calculated by divide the "relative" shift with divisor 2.
But, if matching of cabs don't cause phase issues with different room environment THEN the relative shift has to be of no concern anyway.
Another consideration regarding phase "issues" with different drivers
different phi(z) based on voice coil R(dc) and L for f=500Hz
BASSLITE S2010: 16 °
LEGEND CB158: 10 °
DELTA-10A: 20 °
DELTA-15A: 18 °
DELTALITE II 2510: 14 °
DELTALITE II 2515: 34 °
KAPPALITE 3010HO: 18 °
KAPPALITE 3015LF: 28 °
The relative phi(z) difference at f=500Hz between Legend-CB158 and Deltalite-II-2512 looks large on paper: 24 °
while phase "issue" for 24 ° difference is rather smallish (neglible) in total dB numbers (see above).
No reason to claim noticeable phase issues that result in "cancelation" within room environment on these both rather extreme samples. Although, I wouldn't try to mix these both 15" drivers but, it was not due to "phase issues"
Of course the common represented argument for matched cabs to come "as close as possible" in all regards is justified. But, on closer examinaton, the commonly frequently adressed phase problem "issue" isn't properly the right tool to explain every sound problems with mixed gear.
There are a couple of different (probably) more recent paramters that impact the success of mixing but, as these resecent paramerts are not understood so they are not discussed at forum discussions. Instead "phase issue" is always (penetrantly) regarded as root evil all.
Adding of two signals with same Amplitude and frequency but different (relative) phase
0 degree: +6.00 dB
10 degree: +5.97 dB
20 degree: +5.87 dB
45 degree: + 5.31 dB
55 degree: +4.96 dB
90 degree: + 2.99 dB
120 degree: + 0 dB
180 degree: total cancelation
That's a very impressing results cause it means nearly no loss within 0-20 degree phase "issue".
At 55 degree phase shift (which is quite lot of shift) the dB loss is silly -1dB versus perfect matching (wasn't there a claim of inaudible difference within smallish dB deviation?).
The 90 degree (relative) shift can be understand as -3dB point like commonly used with frequency response specifications.
Of course the "new" generated signal has got a different phase then the original ones. The new "phase" can be easily calculated by divide the "relative" shift with divisor 2.
But, if matching of cabs don't cause phase issues with different room environment THEN the relative shift has to be of no concern anyway.
Another consideration regarding phase "issues" with different drivers
different phi(z) based on voice coil R(dc) and L for f=500Hz
BASSLITE S2010: 16 °
LEGEND CB158: 10 °
DELTA-10A: 20 °
DELTA-15A: 18 °
DELTALITE II 2510: 14 °
DELTALITE II 2515: 34 °
KAPPALITE 3010HO: 18 °
KAPPALITE 3015LF: 28 °
The relative phi(z) difference at f=500Hz between Legend-CB158 and Deltalite-II-2512 looks large on paper: 24 °
while phase "issue" for 24 ° difference is rather smallish (neglible) in total dB numbers (see above).
No reason to claim noticeable phase issues that result in "cancelation" within room environment on these both rather extreme samples. Although, I wouldn't try to mix these both 15" drivers but, it was not due to "phase issues"
Of course the common represented argument for matched cabs to come "as close as possible" in all regards is justified. But, on closer examinaton, the commonly frequently adressed phase problem "issue" isn't properly the right tool to explain every sound problems with mixed gear.
There are a couple of different (probably) more recent paramters that impact the success of mixing but, as these resecent paramerts are not understood so they are not discussed at forum discussions. Instead "phase issue" is always (penetrantly) regarded as root evil all.
Last edited:
I run a GK 1001rb 2x10 combo with a SBXii 1x15 cab most of the time. Nice Mark Bass rig, by the way...
I think a very good bet to run into those (high-)mid competing issues was to put a 15" on top with the tweeter set to ON, and then the tweeter response let interfere with highish resposne of 10"s at the bottom cab.
But indeed, not every voicing of different drivers do well accomplish at high-mids. Although never tried out I can't imagine a EVM 12L would do well together with Delta 12A.
I think it has something to do with driver design and the way how membrane goes into resonant (response peak), and the driver ability to generate distinct voicing (THD) at some overload range of course.
Last edited:
I don't get militant like some people around here. I've never had much luck with mixing cabs personally, but I have no doubt that it can work with great results. The first time I ever got to play a mixed stack a long time ago, it was a 410 and 115 from the same company in the same line. I had seen many famous players do that, so I was pumped to try it. I was extremely disappointed, and noticed what has been said around here countless times, the 115 couldn't keep up with the power handling of the 410. The mixed scenario where I noticed the most audible phasing issues was with a 210/115 rig from the same company. Either cab sounded much better individually. I don't think there's really a rule of thumb you could go by, like a 210/115 being better than a 410/115, unless you're only talking about matching power handling between cabs.
There's basically 2 reasons people suggest not mixing cabs: power handling and phasing. The power handling thing is probably easier to understand for a lot of people. I was attempting to illustrate what is meant when people talk about phase problems. A lot of people probably don't even understand what phase is.
The 1-15 tuned low in my example was not even a bass cab, rather it was more of a "theater sub". I used it in the example because it and the 410 example were at two extremes. The more realistic example would probably be to show two completely different 410 cabs. The two 115 cabs in my example would be another more realistic case of bad phasing because I actually built and tested those two cabs together as part of an experiment. I was able to get them to play nicely together using a lot of processing (filtering and time alignment).
I don't think I'm the greatest player ever by any means, but I like to think I have a good live sound. A lot of bass players, many times players who are more skilled technically, ask me for advice on how they can sound like me live. In almost every case, they are running mixed cabs and are thrilled when I show them that they sound better live with a single cab that's better than their mixed cabs. The last player, for example, was running an Eden 410 with an SWR 410. He had way better results with a single 212. He and the band agreed that he never sounded better live as with the single cab. He had been running at much higher volume to make up for the "holes" in his frequency response with the mixed setup, so he was way too loud on some notes and not audible on other notes. He was able to have much more clarity at a lower volume with the single cab. Another case was a teenager in a progressive metal band. They were a great band with great songs, but their live sound needed serious work. He was running three different cabs (115/210/410 if I recall) because he thought more cabs would be cool. I set him up with a single 412 cab--massive improvement.
I will close with this, just like I was extremely let down by the epic 410/115 combo, I was extremely taken aback at the awesomeness of two high quality, matched 410 cabs the first time I ever tried it.
Last edited:
Rule 3: there is no law that prohibts doing it.
There is no law that prohibits diving into a chipper, either. I think.
Everything is allowed that is not explicitely prohibited by law.
If I rember correctly, if somebody surrenders suicide attempt then there is a prosecution by department of public prosecution.
At least in my home country there isn't impunity within a "diving into a chipper" suicide attempt.
Last edited:
The main problem with mixing cabinets is that one has to try the things together as a system. That means that one has to actually buy the cabinets to put together. If they work well one is off to the races. If they don’t, which is statistically more likely, one is left with an unusable cabinet.
We musicians are, in general, not a rich bunch so the advice to go with matching cabinets is better from a financial point of view.
I have no argument that a mixed rig can work well. It’s just that getting to that point is not that easy. At close range any two cabinets sound better than one. It’s out in the room where the anomalies start to show themselves.
At one time I placed my Acme B2s side by side for a “normal” 4x10. They sounded great. Then I read about vertical stacking on this site and, thinking about it from a scientific point of view, it seemed perfectly reasonable. I tried it at the next gig. Walking out into the room using my wireless I was stunned at the vastly superior coverage the vertical stack gave me. Now these are identical cabinets. Using them either way sounded good but vertical made them even better. My point is that even with matched cabinets letting science guide you in placing them is better for everyone.
We musicians are, in general, not a rich bunch so the advice to go with matching cabinets is better from a financial point of view.
I have no argument that a mixed rig can work well. It’s just that getting to that point is not that easy. At close range any two cabinets sound better than one. It’s out in the room where the anomalies start to show themselves.
At one time I placed my Acme B2s side by side for a “normal” 4x10. They sounded great. Then I read about vertical stacking on this site and, thinking about it from a scientific point of view, it seemed perfectly reasonable. I tried it at the next gig. Walking out into the room using my wireless I was stunned at the vastly superior coverage the vertical stack gave me. Now these are identical cabinets. Using them either way sounded good but vertical made them even better. My point is that even with matched cabinets letting science guide you in placing them is better for everyone.
Ric5
Inactive
- Jan 29, 2008
- 29,772
- 30,452
- Disclosures
- I like 5, 8, 10, and 12 string basses
That was the tour after dark side of the moon ... I remember the druggies ... some people were so drugged up they did not know what planet they were on ... I went un-drugged so I would actually remember the concert ...
It just reminds me on gear in rehearsal room I played through a couple of months (long time ago).
It was a GK 1000RB 210 combo on top of a Warwick 115 cab.
The 210 cab for itself did a very punchy sound but, in my impression and taste way to busy at high mids to get the sound I'm after. I claim the very busy emphasis at high mids masked already the lack of clarity at the middle range of mids.
Both cabs in combination was a real disaster. The busy peak was gone a little bit while the middle mids around 1kHz (rough estimate) became more "diffuse".
Which kind of toad to swallow?
I dicided to run the 210 with 115 cause I didn't liked the annoying busy peak of the 10"s nothing at all. The drawback was a noticeable loss of clarity that couldn't be EQ'd.
(may be an old school Fender bass would have been a better choice with this rig? I have got no idea)
Some time later, same Warwick 115 cab mixed with 410 Hartke, completely different result, balanced response, clarity in response from lows up to top end.
If a voicing is disliked it makes no sense to "round up" or "mask" the response with a different cab, and also it makes no sense to accomplish a disliked voicing with still more of "dislike"
how do you explain your loss of clarity then?
Individually my cabs sound fine, together more fine ( tall stack, headroom to burn ), biamped finer still ( tall stack, no phasing mishmash ) but no extra headroom.
A very good question. A question I asked myself very often. Indeed it was one of the most disapointing combinations I ever played.
IIRC the 10"s suffered on some "loosen" reponse at lower mids already on it's own yet masked by the very remarkable "punchy" resonant peak at high mids. Lowering relatively the busy peak at high mids (may be) could reveal the more "loosen" reponse at lower mids, competing with mids of the 115.
And in addition, As far as I remember the issue was depending on volume. While the tonal response was adequate at low volume levels the "disaster" increased (nearly exploded) with loudness, of course we did it loud
No doubt about it, in any situation like this biamping helps to improve clarity
Last edited:
It indeed was a night to remember @ Chicago's Soldier Field...about 90,000 in attendance...you are correct...it was one big party...lol
I suspect the sum of two signals with delays to one signal on parts of the spectrum and not others yields less than optimum results to many ears. Hence the reason for avoiding it with matched cabs.A very good question. A question I asked myself very often. Indeed it was one of the most disapointing combinations I ever played.
IIRC the 10"s suffered on some "loosen" reponse at lower mids already on it's own yet masked by the very remarkable "punchy" resonant peak at high mids. Lowering relatively the busy peak at high mids (may be) could reveal the more "loosen" reponse at lower mids, competing with mids of the 115.
And in addition, As far as I remember the issue was depending on volume. While the tonal response was adequate at low volume levels the "disaster" increased (nearly exploded) with loudness, of course we did it loud
No doubt about it, in any situation like this biamping helps to improve clarity
Agree. That's why I love the EV eliminator sub+top as application for bass guitar. Although PA gear it provides some "imperfection" thus sounds "musical" with bass guitar. Drawbacks are, way to bulky and unfortunatelly impractical with tube amplifer overload soundwise.
The imperfection adresses a rather "crappy" crossover design for sub and top that is indeed noticeable with audio program material, at the other hand provides a "charming" voicing with bass guitar
The drawback with my 212 (vertical driver alignment) indeed is tonal dependence in vertical plane versus distance to the cab. Although the cab is loaded with a "coaxial" driver crossed 4kHz, and the cab is lifted somewhat from floor to keep top 12" driver and "coaxial" driver closer to the ears, on stage I struggle with vertical "phase issues" every time.
May be that different cab Qtc leads to more of step response issues than delay diviation.
If Qtc of different cabs differs too much then the amplifier has no chance to damp both cabs evenly at sharing frequency range.
Last edited:
I cannot deny your experience or wisdom...I appreciate you weighing in on this discussion...I did speak to Jason from GK and he advised that mixing cabs was really no big deal...I posted his response in an earlier thread on this topic.
For the record...here is a reply to this question from Gallien Krueger:
I do appreciate all of the responses to the mix or match speaker configuration question. I decided to go to the source "GK and I will share my response. According to "GK", this is a non issue. As long as you do not exceed a 4 ohm load in my case. Please see below:
Dear GK,
My current setup consists of a GK 1001 RB 2 x 10 combo, and extension cabs Backline 4 x 10 and SBX II 1 x 15. My question relates to speaker cab combinations. With my current set up I can use a 6 x 10, 2 x 10 and 1 x 15 or 4 x 10 and 1 x 15. All of which I enjoy the sound variation this provides.
• I have been advised that it is not a good idea to mix and match speaker cab combinations
• Therefore using a 1 x 15 SBX II and a 4 x 10 Backline may not be a good choice according to some
• There are some purists who recommend only using matching cabs i.e. two 4 x 10 cabs @ 8 ohms to reach a 4 ohm load
• Is there any problem with mixing up these cabs as I have described
Can you please speak to this, and lay it to rest once and for all. I have seen different artists utilize different extension cab combinations. For larger venues I prefer the 1 x 15 and 4 x 10. I enjoy the sound I get from all of my GK cabs. Can you offer any technical advice ?
Answer from GK:
The only concern to have is the ohm load. The 1001RB is stable down to 4 ohms. This will accommodate the internal speakers plus one 8 ohm cab or 2 external 8 ohm cabinets. It sound like you are aware of this but I want to make sure you are.
Beyond the ohm load consideration, I would say use whatever combinations you like. There are many “experts” online that love to share their opinions. Many of these guys are informed but many are not. Some people will attempt to apply hi-fi concepts to musical instrument amplification that are either not applicable or have no real benefit outside of a controlled acoustical environment.
Thanks,
Jason
GK
I don’t claim to be an expert on much but I have seen guys obsess over inconsequential things and forget to actually play the gear. Meanwhile, there are a lot of guys out making a living using the rigs that the “experts” claim are inferior.
I am of the mindset that blending the response of multiple speakers can yield great results. One speaker may lack somewhere and another driver can compliment it in a positive way to “complete” the sound you are CREATING. If you want to play pre-recorded music and sit between two speakers in an acoustically neutral room it may make a difference I suppose. However, you are making the sound you want to hear with an instrument that is imperfect in a room that is almost always the worst possible environment acoustically. To make any nuance even more difficult to perceive, you are usually standing next to a guy who is banging on a plastic skin stretched across a wooden hoop and flattened pie tins
Let me know if I can assist in the future.
Jason
GK
I do appreciate all of the responses to the mix or match speaker configuration question. I decided to go to the source "GK and I will share my response. According to "GK", this is a non issue. As long as you do not exceed a 4 ohm load in my case. Please see below:
Dear GK,
My current setup consists of a GK 1001 RB 2 x 10 combo, and extension cabs Backline 4 x 10 and SBX II 1 x 15. My question relates to speaker cab combinations. With my current set up I can use a 6 x 10, 2 x 10 and 1 x 15 or 4 x 10 and 1 x 15. All of which I enjoy the sound variation this provides.
• I have been advised that it is not a good idea to mix and match speaker cab combinations
• Therefore using a 1 x 15 SBX II and a 4 x 10 Backline may not be a good choice according to some
• There are some purists who recommend only using matching cabs i.e. two 4 x 10 cabs @ 8 ohms to reach a 4 ohm load
• Is there any problem with mixing up these cabs as I have described
Can you please speak to this, and lay it to rest once and for all. I have seen different artists utilize different extension cab combinations. For larger venues I prefer the 1 x 15 and 4 x 10. I enjoy the sound I get from all of my GK cabs. Can you offer any technical advice ?
Answer from GK:
The only concern to have is the ohm load. The 1001RB is stable down to 4 ohms. This will accommodate the internal speakers plus one 8 ohm cab or 2 external 8 ohm cabinets. It sound like you are aware of this but I want to make sure you are.
Beyond the ohm load consideration, I would say use whatever combinations you like. There are many “experts” online that love to share their opinions. Many of these guys are informed but many are not. Some people will attempt to apply hi-fi concepts to musical instrument amplification that are either not applicable or have no real benefit outside of a controlled acoustical environment.
Thanks,
Jason
GK
I don’t claim to be an expert on much but I have seen guys obsess over inconsequential things and forget to actually play the gear. Meanwhile, there are a lot of guys out making a living using the rigs that the “experts” claim are inferior.
I am of the mindset that blending the response of multiple speakers can yield great results. One speaker may lack somewhere and another driver can compliment it in a positive way to “complete” the sound you are CREATING. If you want to play pre-recorded music and sit between two speakers in an acoustically neutral room it may make a difference I suppose. However, you are making the sound you want to hear with an instrument that is imperfect in a room that is almost always the worst possible environment acoustically. To make any nuance even more difficult to perceive, you are usually standing next to a guy who is banging on a plastic skin stretched across a wooden hoop and flattened pie tins
Let me know if I can assist in the future.
Jason
GK
