Boom Bass Cabinets

[Brad Johnson]

I'm not grinding an axe in fact what brought me here was reviews about your Cabs I had previously been looking at Glasstone as well, and when I saw your design I was like...wth, then I asked about the two heee on TB and people started jumping on me like I had said something taboo, then I knew something was wrong with the picture I then searched TB some more and found this thread and i see others had the same reaction to seeing your design after seeing Gladstone's. So if you want to call it an improvement on his design, or whatever, but my initial impression without reading the back story was that your Cabs were a copy of Gladstone's, maybe "variations" of the sort is common in the design world...not knocking the Cabs as I've heard only good things, but don't get pissed off if people get the impression they're similar to Glasstone especially given your history with Glasstone.. Ijs

Sorry but if you look at our cabs and immediately see a Lil G you don't have much if any of an eye for detail IMO. Yes, they are rectangular boxes. Yes they have a driver and the tweeter on the front and what appears to be a port. So does the Avatar that I attached. So was the Glasstone a copy of the Avatar, which came first? In your opinion of course.

Tell me which Tank model looks like a Lil G. There are pics in this thread.

You can have whatever initial impression you choose to have. Many people had an initial impression of "Blurred Lines" that was completely based on ignorance. Sadly, many musicians are included in that group. Musicians who should know better. In this case being a bass player does not necessarily require being informed about all aspects of that vocation, like gear. Why someone like you wants to continue with your initial impressions is a mystery. But you say you have no motive.


If you think a sealed cab is a variation on a ported cab, cool. If you think a cab that functions differently is still basically the same, cool. That speaks to your understanding of the subject, no offense. Given that, by all means stick with your "impression", you can believe anything you choose to about the subject. You're wrong but don't let that get in the way of whatever your point is. If you have no interest in our products why are you here? Many people have bought into the utter fabrications that Pastor Glass put out there. He did that of his own accord and the story had major factual flaws that he still won't deal with. Many people here on TB have seen what's going on and see what you're doing as rehashing something that's already been run into the ground. I'm not pissed off, far from it. I'm just tired of people too lazy to get readily available details before they make baseless accusations. Speaking for myself, when I know what I don't know, I don't pretend that I know more than I do.

So this is me having an honest conversation with you about this. I hope that doesn't offend you. ijs

 

[Brad Johnson]

One of the industry's most esteemed speaker designers, Bill Fitzmaurice, permanently left Talkbass after getting fed up with the nonsense that some people obstinately clung to and proselytized. At some point you just need to ignore the naysayers and get on doing what you do best.

Part of the problem with new designs is that the builder often can't economically distribute them widely enough for us (the unwashed masses) to evaluate, which leaves the field wide open for speculation and skepticism. This is a hurdle that I don't know how gets circumvented, except by grassroots adoption. The problem can be exacerbated if the designer (for whatever reason, patent pending, etc.) isn't adept at disclosing what uniquely sets their product apart, and sometimes text isn't the best medium. This is a general observation, not a targeted critique of anyone.

I applaud all those willing to follow the path of real R&D and not the market dictates, although the payoff may not be large or widely recognized. My own experiment with speaker design humbled me into realizing that I don't have the temperament to do it right, and will leave it to those with the passion to follow through. My own experience tells me that only my ears are good judges of what sounds right to me.

I've explained what's going on with our products numerous times and for many it is at odds with what they feel they know. The difference with BBC is that when Drue discusses an idea with me I may mention the traditional pluses and minuses but I don't just tell him something CAN'T WORK. BBC has the ability to try out whatever ideas we want to and that's a beautiful thing. And quite often we have been genuinely surprised with the results, despite conventional wisdom. That's a beautiful thing too.

 

[Brad Johnson]

Here are the pics again...

This is a Glasstone Lil G. It is a PORTED cab with two main drivers and a tweeter. It functions as a ported cab with a single port on the lower portion of the front.

This is a Boom Bass Cabinets Tank 1215. It is a SEALED cabinet with two main drivers and a tweeter. It functions as a sealed cabinet with three lower openings which direct the sound from the lower driver in a much wider pattern than a single port. The front dispersion is markedly different too, with much better coverage for up close

These are fundamental differences.

This is an Avatar 112. What does it look like?

All three have single main drivers and a tweeter on the front. All use Faital Pro speakers. There are several front ported cabs that look like this. They are all ported cabinets. The looks of the Glasstone was not new. None of them function like a Boom Bass Cabinet.

 

[abarson]

Brad,
I'm not trying to start anything, but until you answered Duke's questions in post #109 I didn't understand the internal construction of either the Lil' G or your BBCs. Having the details as to how the drivers are coupled to the outside, porting, etc. is significant. Some players at minimum have some concept of the differences in sound produced by sealed versus ported cabinets.
Neither Glasstone nor BBC mention these construction details, whether it is to protect others from copying the design or what have you. From the websites both are small enclosures with one forward and one downward firing woofer, each with a tweeter, and this arrangement is already unique in comparison to the mass market. Without the details you provided in post #109 it would be understandable to superficially conclude that they are more similar than different. I can now appreciate the difference, at least from a dry, technical armchair perspective.
Maybe the fact that your design is sealed with openings for better dispersion needs to be highlighted on your website?

 

[Brad Johnson]

Brad,
I'm not trying to start anything, but until you answered Duke's questions in post #109 I didn't understand the internal construction of either the Lil' G or your BBCs. Having the details as to how the drivers are coupled to the outside, porting, etc. is significant. Some players at minimum have some concept of the differences in sound produced by sealed versus ported cabinets.

I know, I'm one of those players. The problems arise when you try to overlay what you know as a completely limiting factor over what you don't. For instance, many people feel that, generally speaking, tens sound like this, fifteens sound like that, ported sounds like this, sealed sounds like that. But what happens when they don't?

I listen to my Tank 1012 and gun to my head I couldn't tell you I'm hearing tens or twelves, ported or sealed... I'm just hearing what I want to hear. The details won't change what I'm hearing and the fact that I have a sealed enclosure as small as my Tank 1012 that does what I'm hearing, despite me knowing every detail about its design, doesn't make sense to me.

Neither Glasstone nor BBC mention these construction details, whether it is to protect others from copying the design or what have you. From the websites both are small enclosures with one forward and one downward firing woofer, each with a tweeter, and this arrangement is already unique in comparison to the mass market. Without the details you provided in post #109 it would be understandable to superficially conclude that they are more similar than different. I can now appreciate the difference, at least from a dry, technical armchair perspective.
Maybe the fact that your design is sealed with openings for better dispersion needs to be highlighted on your website?

Thanks for the feedback. One problem is that people read things like this thread where I offer some details and apparently they just don't click with them.

Another is that the more details we give, the more some try to use them to prove the cabs can't work. HOW and WHY we did things seems to be a constant source of debate. Look at Seamonkey today... he's still at it, even though he's participated in discussions where we explain things. And as far as I know, he still hasn't heard a cabinet.


As I mentioned, Tech Soundsystems and Schroeder made cabinets with two drivers oriented similarly to our Tanks and the Lil G. It was not a proprietary design. Yes, we checked. Our cabs also aren't isobaric or push/pull either but we have people that assume that. That lead them to think they were like Orange cabs or subwoofers.

We didn't really want to explain that our cabs are sealed. The side openings are explained on our website. We haven't really gotten questions on why the front baffle is angled or the tweeter is mounted towards the bottom. I guess that part made sense. I explained the differences along with pics of three cabs here and I still get people saying they're the same. I get that some folks aren't detail oriented... but they should know that too.

There are some things we aren't going to tell folks. But we've already talked about the main data points of the cabs and some folks get it and some don't. I'm not sure what else we can do. For some who eventually get it it's not because I'm telling them anything new... I'm just repeating myself, which means the info was already out there in the public. I know these long threads can be a chore to read but that's where the questions are answered along with the info on the website.

When I first got my Glasstone Lil G cab, as a CUSTOMER, I had people demand that I take interior pics of my personal cabinet. And somehow that made sense to them.

 

[Brad Johnson]

I gig with and recommend a Behringer (Bugera) amp.

 

[seamonkey]

One of the industry's most esteemed speaker designers, Bill Fitzmaurice, permanently left Talkbass

I'm Not sure of the whole reason he left, but he does have forums where you can get advice and chat about designs. He was up with "Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence". His own high efficiency designs do have published measurements. They have full evidence. Frequency and polar charts. It's the second part of R&D where the engineer actually tests. Then there's the testimony and anecdotes from his fans. The science matches the anecdotal testimony, but only the science is evidence.
A lot of these other designs, just expect to have their fans push the anecdotal testimony. Anecdotal testimony is use throughout pseudo science woo. It's just a bunch of chanting woo woo woo and getting others to join in.

I'm not going to waste my time evaluating anything in my life if there's no evidence that it does me any good. I know what good is, I know what crap is, and the actual measure of good always returns the best results. Just as actual measure of crap always returns crap.

I wish there was more like bill around on this board. It seems the woo, magical, mythical designs stick around much too long without BFM, Greenboy, and others to educate the masses.

 

[Arjank]

Yes, except the combination of both drivers fire into the slot port.

So both drivers fire into the slot port you see on the front? and you wrote that these are sealed designs?

Btw. if the "internal" driver fires downwards into three narrow "slots" we are definitely taking about a 4th order bandpass system here.
Question, are both woofers identical? do they share the same internal volume?

 

[Gab124]

I'm Not sure of the whole reason he left, but he does have forums where you can get advice and chat about designs. He was up with "Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence". His own high efficiency designs do have published measurements. They have full evidence. Frequency and polar charts. It's the second part of R&D where the engineer actually tests. Then there's the testimony and anecdotes from his fans. The science matches the anecdotal testimony, but only the science is evidence.
A lot of these other designs, just expect to have their fans push the anecdotal testimony. Anecdotal testimony is use throughout pseudo science woo. It's just a bunch of chanting woo woo woo and getting others to join in.

I'm not going to waste my time evaluating anything in my life if there's no evidence that it does me any good. I know what good is, I know what crap is, and the actual measure of good always returns the best results. Just as actual measure of crap always returns crap.

I wish there was more like bill around on this board. It seems the woo, magical, mythical designs stick around much too long without BFM, Greenboy, and others to educate the masses.

I have been lurking on several threads lately where you have helped us all to understand what is correct in the world of bass cabinetry. Although I know in my heart nothing I say from here will make any difference whatsoever, I feel driven to voice anyway.

I want to point out that there are many ways to evaluate our world; from a purely scientific and hard data driven fashion as well as a subjective, observational approach (being a biologist I have had to use both regularly). I think it is great that you want to push the importance of the former. In my mind there is a definite science to sound reinforcement, but music is art and the artist must, and often, chooses what works for him/her, many times without the science. In the past I have made choices based on input from the numbers crowd "this such and such really specs out and will deliver" only to get it on a gig and have no inspiration with it at all.

There are no bass cab police assigned to help those who cannot help themselves in making cabinet choices. I would very much like it if you and others would state your opinions, and they are important, and then leave if a conversation/thread regarding any particular product does not meet up to your stringent scientific data point approval, or is just not to your liking. I think I speak for many when I say that numbers mean nothing to me when picking an enclosure - I have to play it and experience the performance - for you it is numbers, great! Use them and buy or don't. This being America I believe that I have the right to purchase something and either be extremely happy with it or sad that I wasted my money, but it is my choice and I would like that choice without a constant barrage from individuals who only want on paper facts. It is also my choice to purchase something with no numbers to back up the claims being presented, and only based on some "woo woo, magical statements". In the end we all make our decisions in ways that work for us - you research a product and make a purchase decision based on your criteria and others theirs,,, simple - live and let live.

So please sir and others like you, if you are not happy with a product, a company, a claim, a thread etc. etc. please make your point, give your .02 and then go away and leave the "un-enlightened" to their devices, methods and possible magic - and hopefully catch one playing live and enjoy their art. Please.

Thank you,

 

[Brad Johnson]

So both drivers fire into the slot port you see on the front? and you wrote that these are sealed designs?

Hi Arjank,
Here's what you're referring to in context. Duke asked a question about the Lil G and I answered it:

"Hi Duke,
Yes, except the combination of both drivers fire into the slot port.

The BBC cabs also have a second woofer which is the only driver firing into the three lower openings".

The Lil G has one front port that both drivers fire into. Our BBC Tank cabinets have three lower openings not just one on the front.

Btw. if the "internal" driver fires downwards into three narrow "slots" we are definitely taking about a 4th order bandpass system here.
Question, are both woofers identical? do they share the same internal volume?

This seems to be at odds with your first question. We don't have a cab that fires into a front port instead of the three lower openings or vice versa.

We make four models of Tanks; 1012, 1212, 1015 and 1215. The numbers break down as follow: Tank XXYY where XX= the size of the front driver and YY equals the size of the internal driver. So a Tank 1012 equals a 10" front driver and 12" internal driver So no, while both woofers are identical on the Tank 1212, they aren't on the other three models. Details about each model are on our website.

 

[ebozzz]

I have been lurking on several threads lately where you have helped us all to understand what is correct in the world of bass cabinetry. Although I know in my heart nothing I say from here will make any difference whatsoever, I feel driven to voice anyway.

I want to point out that there are many ways to evaluate our world; from a purely scientific and hard data driven fashion as well as a subjective, observational approach (being a biologist I have had to use both regularly). I think it is great that you want to push the importance of the former. In my mind there is a definite science to sound reinforcement, but music is art and the artist must, and often, chooses what works for him/her, many times without the science. In the past I have made choices based on input from the numbers crowd "this such and such really specs out and will deliver" only to get it on a gig and have no inspiration with it at all.

There are no bass cab police assigned to help those who cannot help themselves in making cabinet choices. I would very much like it if you and others would state your opinions, and they are important, and then leave if a conversation/thread regarding any particular product does not meet up to your stringent scientific data point approval, or is just not to your liking. I think I speak for many when I say that numbers mean nothing to me when picking an enclosure - I have to play it and experience the performance - for you it is numbers, great! Use them and buy or don't. This being America I believe that I have the right to purchase something and either be extremely happy with it or sad that I wasted my money, but it is my choice and I would like that choice without a constant barrage from individuals who only want on paper facts. It is also my choice to purchase something with no numbers to back up the claims being presented, and only based on some "woo woo, magical statements". In the end we all make our decisions in ways that work for us - you research a product and make a purchase decision based on your criteria and others theirs,,, simple - live and let live.

So please sir and others like you, if you are not happy with a product, a company, a claim, a thread etc. etc. please make your point, give your .02 and then go away and leave the "un-enlightened" to their devices, methods and possible magic - and hopefully catch one playing live and enjoy their art. Please.

Thank you,

 

[Brad Johnson]

I'm Not sure of the whole reason he left, but he does have forums where you can get advice and chat about designs. He was up with "Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence". His own high efficiency designs do have published measurements. They have full evidence. Frequency and polar charts. It's the second part of R&D where the engineer actually tests. Then there's the testimony and anecdotes from his fans. The science matches the anecdotal testimony, but only the science is evidence.
A lot of these other designs, just expect to have their fans push the anecdotal testimony. Anecdotal testimony is use throughout pseudo science woo. It's just a bunch of chanting woo woo woo and getting others to join in.

I'm not going to waste my time evaluating anything in my life if there's no evidence that it does me any good. I know what good is, I know what crap is, and the actual measure of good always returns the best results. Just as actual measure of crap always returns crap.

I wish there was more like bill around on this board. It seems the woo, magical, mythical designs stick around much too long without BFM, Greenboy, and others to educate the masses.

The fact that you don't waste your time truly evaluating a product and yet come to hard conclusions should speak for itself. The fact that you waste others' time doing this should speak for itself too.

There is evidence that our cabinets work... they're called happy customers. Understandably to someone like you the fact that we have the overwhelmingly satisfied customer base we do means nothing. Cool. They're making stuff up too.

There's nothing magical or mythical about our products, we had some out of the box and inside the box ideas and we tried them out together... and they worked. Function does not stop where your understanding does.

Still waiting on your plots proving what our cabs do.

 

[Brad Johnson]

I have been lurking on several threads lately where you have helped us all to understand what is correct in the world of bass cabinetry. Although I know in my heart nothing I say from here will make any difference whatsoever, I feel driven to voice anyway.

I want to point out that there are many ways to evaluate our world; from a purely scientific and hard data driven fashion as well as a subjective, observational approach (being a biologist I have had to use both regularly). I think it is great that you want to push the importance of the former. In my mind there is a definite science to sound reinforcement, but music is art and the artist must, and often, chooses what works for him/her, many times without the science. In the past I have made choices based on input from the numbers crowd "this such and such really specs out and will deliver" only to get it on a gig and have no inspiration with it at all.

There are no bass cab police assigned to help those who cannot help themselves in making cabinet choices. I would very much like it if you and others would state your opinions, and they are important, and then leave if a conversation/thread regarding any particular product does not meet up to your stringent scientific data point approval, or is just not to your liking. I think I speak for many when I say that numbers mean nothing to me when picking an enclosure - I have to play it and experience the performance - for you it is numbers, great! Use them and buy or don't. This being America I believe that I have the right to purchase something and either be extremely happy with it or sad that I wasted my money, but it is my choice and I would like that choice without a constant barrage from individuals who only want on paper facts. It is also my choice to purchase something with no numbers to back up the claims being presented, and only based on some "woo woo, magical statements". In the end we all make our decisions in ways that work for us - you research a product and make a purchase decision based on your criteria and others theirs,,, simple - live and let live.

So please sir and others like you, if you are not happy with a product, a company, a claim, a thread etc. etc. please make your point, give your .02 and then go away and leave the "un-enlightened" to their devices, methods and possible magic - and hopefully catch one playing live and enjoy their art. Please.

Thank you,

Thank you. If ever there was a post screaming to be a sticky...

 

[bb03]

Seamonkey comes through again! Hearing a science guy say "woo" is like hearing Betty White swear up a storm in the movie Lake Placid...it's so wrong, it's actually awesome!

Try to take it easy on him...being boring and repetitive is a tough cross to bear. I still think he's kinda sexy, though.drool

We need to start the Club of Woo. I am definitely in! The Woo: Learn it, Know it, Live it!

 

[Gab124]

Seamonkey comes through again! Hearing a science guy say "woo" is like hearing Betty White swear up a storm in the movie Lake Placid...it's so wrong, it's actually awesome!

Try to take it easy on him...being boring and repetitive is a tough cross to bear. I still think he's kinda sexy, though.drool

We need to start the Club of Woo. I am definitely in! The Woo: Learn it, Know it, Live it!

View attachment 843062

(lotus position)
Ommm mani padme wooooooooooo

 

[Arjank]

Hi Arjank,
Here's what you're referring to in context. Duke asked a question about the Lil G and I answered it:

"Hi Duke,
Yes, except the combination of both drivers fire into the slot port.

The BBC cabs also have a second woofer which is the only driver firing into the three lower openings".

The Lil G has one front port that both drivers fire into. Our BBC Tank cabinets have three lower openings not just one on the front.

Yes, that's what I was referring to. Maybe I was thrown off by the word "also" which suggests that both drivers fire into the slot port but only the 2nd driver fires into the other openings.
But I think that you meant that the front woofer of the BBC doesn't fire into any of these ports and only the 2nd driver fires in the three (front + 2 sides) openings.
So in that case the cab is sealed for the front driver and 4th order bandpass (to a certain degree) for the woofer firing downwards.

 

[Brad Johnson]

Yes, that's what I was referring to. Maybe I was thrown off by the word "also" which suggests that both drivers fire into the slot port but only the 2nd driver fires into the other openings.
But I think that you meant that the front woofer of the BBC doesn't fire into any of these ports and only the 2nd driver fires in the three (front + 2 sides) openings.
So in that case the cab is sealed for the front driver and 4th order bandpass (to a certain degree) for the woofer firing downwards.

The BBC cabs also (ALONG WITH THE LIL G) have a second full range driver. On the BBC that is the only driver firing into the three lower openings".

"only driver firing into the three lower openings means exactly what it says... of the two drivers, the second driver is the only one firing into the three openings.

As opposed to the Lil G where the combination of both drivers fire into the slot port.



The Glasstone Lil G is a ported cabinet with a single front port. It has a front mounted driver and an internally mounted driver. Both drivers fire through the front port. In addition, the front driver fires forward.

The Boom Bass Cabinets Tanks are sealed cabinets with three lower openings. That means exactly what it says. There are two drivers, one front mounted which fires forward and the other mounted to fire down into the three openings*.

I actually started going into more detail about our design but I erased it. I think we've given enough information that anyone truly interested in checking them out will likely do so. And anyone who isn't can ignore them. At some point we have to draw the line on explaining our design, which while one expert considers it not novel, it sure has lots of people scratching their heads. Which is amazing for something that is considered not new.


Does that help? Because at this point I'm confused as to why this is such a brain twister. It's exactly as I've explained time and again. I think some are simply overthinking this.

People are making declarations about what the cabs can and can't do without understanding the fundamental design. At this point if it still doesn't make sense we should just agree that it won't make sense to some people and keep it moving. People who are genuinely interested in our cabs, check one out if you get a chance. People who aren't and consider the need to dismiss them out of hand, cool. Leaving them for the other folks is great advice. The cabs seem to work for users. Coincidence?




*No doubt the front driver effects the bottom driver (and vice versa) on the BBC Tank. But this is already confusing enough for some folks.

 

[basscooker]

For me, it's more about the collective knowledge of the specific posters questioning the designs.

If some of these guys have a hard time seeing benefit or advantage within the design, I'm inclined to seek more details or at least be more inquisitive.

 

[Brad Johnson]

For me, it's more about the collective knowledge of the specific posters questioning the designs.

If some of these guys have a hard time seeing benefit or advantage within the design, I'm inclined to seek more details or at least be more inquisitive.

By all means do that. Many of them didn't even bother.

 

[Mike Arnopol]

I'm Not sure of the whole reason he left, but he does have forums where you can get advice and chat about designs. He was up with "Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence". His own high efficiency designs do have published measurements. They have full evidence. Frequency and polar charts. It's the second part of R&D where the engineer actually tests. Then there's the testimony and anecdotes from his fans. The science matches the anecdotal testimony, but only the science is evidence.
A lot of these other designs, just expect to have their fans push the anecdotal testimony. Anecdotal testimony is use throughout pseudo science woo. It's just a bunch of chanting woo woo woo and getting others to join in.

I'm not going to waste my time evaluating anything in my life if there's no evidence that it does me any good. I know what good is, I know what crap is, and the actual measure of good always returns the best results. Just as actual measure of crap always returns crap.

I wish there was more like bill around on this board. It seems the woo, magical, mythical designs stick around much too long without BFM, Greenboy, and others to educate the masses.

Seamonkey----
You asked for measurements. We provided them. But you never answered my question-----
What is your playing background and what are your playing credentials? I take the word of players that are actually gigging and playing their equipment in context a lot more seriously than someone just viewing from an engineer's perspective.