I'm curious about the frequency response. Carvin claims +/- 3db down to 52 hz, and -10 db at 46 hz. Yet you're hearing great things on low low low notes, correct?
Yeah, as far as numbers go those are relatively accurate. Using the
HONESTIFIER™ (WinISD Pro with all the right driver profiles) I can get something like that though one never knows where the center line is for the provided specs unless there is also a graph.
I use low B, and low A below that, and some of those V-Bass patches also have a subharmonic content or a lot of fundamental. A couple of things make or break a cab for this type of use:
1) does overexcursion and speaker unloading happen easily? If so, no go. It's not only got to sound rich, it's got to do it when more wattage is applied.
2) Everything is relative. If there is a lot of upper-mid spiking like 2-by-10 cab tends to have, it makes the actual sub-100 Hz content obviously lacking unless there is a mid-bass hump there to fool some ears. If there is a lower-mid scoop it can make the bass sound louder, but again, that's just a relative balance issue. So people often percieve a relative lack or abundance of one thing based on other areas of the spectrum being used as comparison.
I know that frequency response numbers are pretty meaningless without the true spl curves available, and that different cab makers probably do different little 'tricks' to make their numbers look good.
Yes, for almost any bass cab the numbers are totally meaningless and if there was any measurement actually done it certainly was not done on a level playing field using industry standard measurement techniques. The numbers might as well be pulled out of thin air and give little indication of the tonality or the true real-world performance. That's one reason I like to gnab T-S parameters of woofers for any cabs I am interested in and get a creduility check using the
HONESTIFIER™ ; }
And I also know, yes, that we hear the overtones, etc., etc. I'm just trying to understand how this stuff works, and how the numbers relate (or don't relate, more likely?) to real-world performance ...
I think what helped me was working with a lot of PA gear over the decades, and doing studio gear purchases and engineering. When I got my first bass and rig back in '98 I went through an eye-opening research phase that made me realize that bass cab manufactuers might as well be claiming to do cold fusion using a glass of water and a tab of Alka Seltzer. Nothing added up, it was all flim-flam and wishful thinking predicated on (among other things) the tendency of a lot of ears a lot of times thinking they were hearing 40 Hz when they were actually hearing 80 and 120 Hz.
So while this Carvin spec seems like it means less low end,
it ain't necessarily so, to quote an old song.
