Cab Combination Question

[will33]

So, your statement on Mesa's bracing was based on one pic you saw here "awhile ago", and you don't even know which cab it was - I see...

I don't see it as "odd" that Mesa doesn't have pics on their site of the insides of their cabs - do others have them??? - and why would they???(btw, I don't know if they do, or not)


- georgestrings

Get away from the emotional attachment and just look at the box for what it is. I haven't seen every Mesa cab but I have seen several and yes, the internal construction more resembles a doghouse or miniature building than it does a speaker cab, meaning a lot of bracing is focused in the corners. That adds structural stiffness where it's needed to keep a house from falling down but doesn't eliminate panel resonance. This doesn't mean they sound bad, it just means they could've been braced better "speaker box style" and ended up being lighter as well.

Old design, yes, but look at the plans for the tl606 cab, it looks like a doghouse. I think they sound good but I could make you the same sound, shave off a lot of weight and end up with a stiffer box. The stiffer box would actually make it a little louder as there'd be no energy wasted vibrating cab panels.

 

[JimmyM]

So, your statement on Mesa's bracing was based on one pic you saw here "awhile ago", and you don't even know which cab it was - I see...

I don't see it as "odd" that Mesa doesn't have pics on their site of the insides of their cabs - do others have them??? - and why would they???(btw, I don't know if they do, or not)

I haven't seen many, no, but I have seen them occasionally, but mostly from companies who are bracing cabs well.

Easy way to take care of this, though...open up your Mesa cabs and post pics. My money is on Bill being right, though. Doesn't make them bad cabs or anything...at least they're braced well. Don't know about all the superhuman qualities you imbue them with but I generally don't have anything bad to say about Mesa cabs, except their near total lack of specs released to the public.

 

[Joe Louvar]

I wonder what Ampeg cabinets look like on the inside?

 

[JimmyM]

I've seen plenty, and they look pretty good. Do I know if they are braced perfectly in line with Bill's philosophies? No I do not. But they are solidly built and don't vibrate.

 

[BurningSkies]

Mike Bendinelli is Mesa Boogie's Chief Technician and Mesa Boogie is in Petaluma, CA - they’re about 20 miles south of where I live, and there are no inside cabinet pictures, only outside pictures on Mesa’s webpage (which is common) but they are built like a tank.

Tank or not, that doesn't say how they deal with bracing. I remember the photos that Bill is talking about, and IIRC they're corner braced, which is fine if you're building a bookcase or a table, but isn't what you brace for in a speaker cab. Bracing for the corners is great when you're using a cab for structural purposes...but when you're trying to reduce panel vibration and resonance, you need to brace the center of the panel. That's how you reduce vibration.

Now Mesa may certainly write that off as a design decision, or because they use thick and heavy wood, and its the traditional way to do things, or because that's part of their 'tone profile'...

 

[georgestrings]

Get away from the emotional attachment and just look at the box for what it is. I haven't seen every Mesa cab but I have seen several and yes, the internal construction more resembles a doghouse or miniature building than it does a speaker cab, meaning a lot of bracing is focused in the corners. That adds structural stiffness where it's needed to keep a house from falling down but doesn't eliminate panel resonance. This doesn't mean they sound bad, it just means they could've been braced better "speaker box style" and ended up being lighter as well.

Old design, yes, but look at the plans for the tl606 cab, it looks like a doghouse. I think they sound good but I could make you the same sound, shave off a lot of weight and end up with a stiffer box. The stiffer box would actually make it a little louder as there'd be no energy wasted vibrating cab panels.

I don't think it's "emotional" to point out that Bill's statement was based on him looking at ONE picture, and not even knowing which cab he was looking at... I'm basing mine on actually owning a few, and looking inside of them, as well as looking inside a few others...


- georgestrings

 

[georgestrings]

I haven't seen many, no, but I have seen them occasionally, but mostly from companies who are bracing cabs well.

Easy way to take care of this, though...open up your Mesa cabs and post pics. My money is on Bill being right, though. Doesn't make them bad cabs or anything...at least they're braced well. Don't know about all the superhuman qualities you imbue them with but I generally don't have anything bad to say about Mesa cabs, except their near total lack of specs released to the public.

If I get a chance to, I will, Jimmy - although it's no secret that my photog skills and gear are severely limited at best...

"Don't know about all the superhuman qualities you imbue them with "

I don't know that I necessarily do that - but I DO play in loud bands, and like alot of low end, and clear highs, out of a cab that will produce them at the volumes I need - Mesa, and a few other models/makes will get me there... and that's from actual real world experience with all those cabs... Furthermore, I don't hesitate to take Mesa to task for poor designs or executions - you'll never hear me say a good thing about the PH1000 and PH1200, for a couple of examples...


- georgestrings

 

[jungleheat]

The 15 sounds deep because it's midrange is flying past you at knee level where you have no ears. Put your 210 on the floor and your 15 at ear level and see which sounds deeper.

I've done just this, and surprise of surprises, the 15 is still deeper. And this is even comparing a pretty well built and fairly large Trace 2x10 to a more "vintage style" Carvin 15 which is pretty small. Granted, the Carvin has an upgraded driver, but it's from roughly the same period as the Trace cab (EVM 15B II) and doesn't sound all that much different than the Peavey Black Widow that was in the cab when I got it (and for about 1/2 the time I've owned it so far).

So if it's not exactly an "apples to apples" comparison, it seems like it shoudl be pretty close, and if anything, probably favor the 2x10. To it's credit, if I run my Q-Tron in LPF mode, the 2x10 can get pretty low/deep, but if I just run my bass straight, it doesn't sound as naturally low/deep as either of my single 15 cabs.

I think the problem is that pretty much of all the audio science wizards and their disciples, want to state everything as if it is an absolute universal truth. This might be fine if the discussion is kept strictly to the theoretical physics. But as soon as you get to practical applications, a lot of that goes out the window.

CAN a cab based on 10s outperform a cab based on 15s in the low end? Sure. WILL it? Maybe. There are a lot of variables that go into that. Driver selection/specs, build quality, style/design, size, materials, etc... Obviously, you can solve any problem if you throw enough drivers, size, and weight at it. But who wants to do that?

Even if the ONLY reason why 15 cabs tend to be deeper and 10s tend to go higher is because it's "traditional" and so major manufacturers keep doing it, it's still the way things tend to go. So why not take advantage of it? For some people, matching cabs may work better (keeping in mind that one "do it all" cab is going to cost more typically than one which is more "specialized"), for others, mixed might be the way to go.

To discourage people from trying ALL decent options available to them that might work is really not doing anyone any favors, except for the egos of the people who are disciples of the "matched cabs only" church of dogma. To match only, whatever cab you pick has to be a superstar across the entire frequency range, and to get that usually costs $$$ (not always, sometimes you can get lucky and find bargains). In contrast, my whole mixed Trace Elliot setup cost me $300 and sounds killer.

Maybe I'm strange, but I think people should find their tone using their ears and not their calculators.

 

[billfitzmaurice]

I don't see it as "odd" that Mesa doesn't have pics on their site of the insides of their cabs - do others have them??? - and why would they???(btw, I don't know if they do, or not)


- georgestrings

If you're going to make it a sales point that your cabs have 'Aviation Style Bracing' you should show those considering your cabs based on that a picture of what they're getting for their money. If you also make it a sales point that your
'Aviation Style Bracing' 'reduces weight' yet your cabs are among the heavier on the market then IMO Lucy, you got some s'plainin' to do.

 

[Joe Louvar]

I've seen plenty, and they look pretty good. Do I know if they are braced perfectly in line with Bill's philosophies? No I do not. But they are solidly built and don't vibrate.

If your Ampeg cabinet wasn’t perfect would you still keep using it or would you replace it? Maybe if you post a picture of the inside of your Ampeg cabinet Bill can tell if its good or not?

 

[BurningSkies]

I've done just this, and surprise of surprises, the 15 is still deeper. And this is even comparing a pretty well built and fairly large Trace 2x10 to a more "vintage style" Carvin 15 which is pretty small. Granted, the Carvin has an upgraded driver, but it's from roughly the same period as the Trace cab (EVM 15B II) and doesn't sound all that much different than the Peavey Black Widow that was in the cab when I got it (and for about 1/2 the time I've owned it so far).

So if it's not exactly an "apples to apples" comparison, it seems like it shoudl be pretty close, and if anything, probably favor the 2x10. To it's credit, if I run my Q-Tron in LPF mode, the 2x10 can get pretty low/deep, but if I just run my bass straight, it doesn't sound as naturally low/deep as either of my single 15 cabs.

I think the problem is that pretty much of all the audio science wizards and their disciples, want to state everything as if it is an absolute universal truth. This might be fine if the discussion is kept strictly to the theoretical physics. But as soon as you get to practical applications, a lot of that goes out the window.

CAN a cab based on 10s outperform a cab based on 15s in the low end? Sure. WILL it? Maybe. There are a lot of variables that go into that. Driver selection/specs, build quality, style/design, size, materials, etc... Obviously, you can solve any problem if you throw enough drivers, size, and weight at it. But who wants to do that?

Even if the ONLY reason why 15 cabs tend to be deeper and 10s tend to go higher is because it's "traditional" and so major manufacturers keep doing it, it's still the way things tend to go. So why not take advantage of it? For some people, matching cabs may work better (keeping in mind that one "do it all" cab is going to cost more typically than one which is more "specialized"), for others, mixed might be the way to go.

To discourage people from trying ALL decent options available to them that might work is really not doing anyone any favors, except for the egos of the people who are disciples of the "matched cabs only" church of dogma. To match only, whatever cab you pick has to be a superstar across the entire frequency range, and to get that usually costs $$$ (not always, sometimes you can get lucky and find bargains). In contrast, my whole mixed Trace Elliot setup cost me $300 and sounds killer.

Maybe I'm strange, but I think people should find their tone using their ears and not their calculators.

I like people who do both. Use their ears and also pay attention to acoustic engineering and science. That way there's a lot less guesswork.

Of course, the reality of a 2x10 vs. a 115 is entirely down to the individual speaker model in a specific cabinet, and I don't think anyone has said otherwise. But the myth that 15's are all deeper than 10's is bogus. If people would read what the 'experts' actually say, and not just a couple of the words but could actually make it through a whole paragraph, they'd see that no one has espoused the notion that all 10's go lower than 15's.

Of course everyone is free to do their engineering by their eyes by putting a big speaker under a small one and calling it good.

 

[Joe Louvar]

If you post a picture of the inside of your bass cabinets maybe Bill will tell if they are perfect or not. If your bass cabinets are not perfect will you continue using them or replace them?

My GK MB115 bass combos may not be perfect - but I will still use them because I really like them.

Does anyone live near Santa Rosa, CA who has one of Bill's bass cabinets who whould like to do a shootout?

 

[BurningSkies]

If you post a picture of the inside of your bass cabinets maybe Bill will tell if they are perfect or not. If your bass cabinets are not perfect will you continue using them or replace them?

My GK MB115 bass combos may not be perfect - but I will still use them because I really like them.

Does anyone live near Santa Rosa, CA who has one of Bill's bass cabinets who whould like to do a shootout?

I have posted detailed pictures of the interiors of my cabs. They're actually braced a far cry better than 99% of what's out there, but they're not crossed-braced in the fashion that Bill espouses, more for other design concerns they're girdle braced.

But since you'd like to see:

Invalid Link Removed


Invalid Link Removed

Invalid Link Removed

Invalid Link Removed

Invalid Link Removed

And for the heck of it, since we all like to discuss it too...here's a shot with damping material installed too:

Invalid Link Removed

 

[will33]

I've done just this, and surprise of surprises, the 15 is still deeper. And this is even comparing a pretty well built and fairly large Trace 2x10 to a more "vintage style" Carvin 15 which is pretty small. Granted, the Carvin has an upgraded driver, but it's from roughly the same period as the Trace cab (EVM 15B II) and doesn't sound all that much different than the Peavey Black Widow that was in the cab when I got it (and for about 1/2 the time I've owned it so far).

So if it's not exactly an "apples to apples" comparison, it seems like it shoudl be pretty close, and if anything, probably favor the 2x10. To it's credit, if I run my Q-Tron in LPF mode, the 2x10 can get pretty low/deep, but if I just run my bass straight, it doesn't sound as naturally low/deep as either of my single 15 cabs.

I think the problem is that pretty much of all the audio science wizards and their disciples, want to state everything as if it is an absolute universal truth. This might be fine if the discussion is kept strictly to the theoretical physics. But as soon as you get to practical applications, a lot of that goes out the window.

CAN a cab based on 10s outperform a cab based on 15s in the low end? Sure. WILL it? Maybe. There are a lot of variables that go into that. Driver selection/specs, build quality, style/design, size, materials, etc... Obviously, you can solve any problem if you throw enough drivers, size, and weight at it. But who wants to do that?

Even if the ONLY reason why 15 cabs tend to be deeper and 10s tend to go higher is because it's "traditional" and so major manufacturers keep doing it, it's still the way things tend to go. So why not take advantage of it? For some people, matching cabs may work better (keeping in mind that one "do it all" cab is going to cost more typically than one which is more "specialized"), for others, mixed might be the way to go.

To discourage people from trying ALL decent options available to them that might work is really not doing anyone any favors, except for the egos of the people who are disciples of the "matched cabs only" church of dogma. To match only, whatever cab you pick has to be a superstar across the entire frequency range, and to get that usually costs $$$ (not always, sometimes you can get lucky and find bargains). In contrast, my whole mixed Trace Elliot setup cost me $300 and sounds killer.

Maybe I'm strange, but I think people should find their tone using their ears and not their calculators.

I used to have a carvin v115 and it did have good mids and dare I say low treble than you'd think coming from a 15 if you follow the old "15's must be deep and 10's must be punchy" school of thought. My point is, it isn't that way all the time and when it is, it's because of other design parameters/choices the size of the cone having the least to do with it.

And yes, I use my ears, I don't know anyone who doesn't. It's just that a lot of us don't always know why things sound the way they do, so we make false assumptions, I used to do the same thing.

 

[Joe Louvar]

Nice pictures and thanks for posting. It will be interesting to read what Bill says. Why did you stager the drivers rather than placing them vertically? If your cabinet isn’t perfect will you keep using it because you like the way it sounds or replace it with say - one of Bill’s perfect loudspeakers?

 

[will33]

I wonder what Ampeg cabinets look like on the inside?

I haven't seen the inside of every ampeg either but a guy did put some pics up here of a 115 he was refurbishing. Don't know which particular model but that one was in bad need of bracing. The 810 on the other hand is pretty solid as it's essentially four 210's put together with a shelf between each pair of drivers that really stiffens up the box. Were it me, I'd put a stick from between the driver holes to the back wall in each chamber but that's about it. If you were to make the same box out of thinner plywood, then it would require more bracing but would still end up lighter. In those days, weight was of no concern as the original svt bass package came with two 810 cabs. Doing a lot of bracing is labor intensive and runs up production costs so a lot of companies use thicker, heavier panels annd less bracing instead but still skimp out too much on bracing. Energy spent vibrating a cab panel is energy not coming out as sound and the resonating panel will cancel out some frequency as well.

 

[will33]

Nice pictures and thanks for posting. It will be interesting to read what Bill says. Why did you stager the drivers rather than placing them vertically? If your cabinet isn’t perfect will you keep using it because you like the way it sounds or replace it with say - one of Bill’s perfect loudspeakers?

That's a 2way cab that uses a crossover. The 2 drivers aren't playing the same frequencies and thus don't interfere with each other. The empty space to the right of the 6 is where the tweeter goes should you choose to do a 3way version.

 

[billfitzmaurice]

They're actually braced a far cry better than 99% of what's out there

True. Most cabs are poorly braced, if at all. They try to make up for that by making the panels thicker, which they do because using thicker materials is less expensive than paying the added labor to install bracing. The results can be more or less the same, save for the weight. A well braced cab can be 1/2 the weight of unbraced for the same result. You're the one lugging them, you decide which you'd prefer.
As you already know direct panel to panel bracing gives the most effective result with the least amount of material and weight in both the panels and bracing. Like so:

 

[Bass_Pounder]

Nice pictures and thanks for posting. It will be interesting to read what Bill says. Why did you stager the drivers rather than placing them vertically? If your cabinet isn’t perfect will you keep using it because you like the way it sounds or replace it with say - one of Bill’s perfect loudspeakers?

Man crushing ?

Give it a rest dude.............

FWIW I primarily make my living designing speakers, both for the DIY builder and for commercial speaker manufacturers. If you haven't played through a cab I designed chances are you've heard one. Which I am not at liberty to say, as no manufacturer that doesn't have engineers on payroll, which is most of them, wants the public to be aware of that fact.
My side gigs are as a consulting acoustical engineer (@ $100 an hour) and as a bass player.

What do you do for a living?

+1, including equipment reviews. I've well over a hundred speaker oriented publishing credits.

Until you can come back with better credentials then Bill, you just sound like a whiney spurned lover looking to discredit his opinions.

 

[BurningSkies]

Nice pictures and thanks for posting. It will be interesting to read what Bill says. Why did you stager the drivers rather than placing them vertically? If your cabinet isn’t perfect will you keep using it because you like the way it sounds or replace it with say - one of Bill’s perfect loudspeakers?

Even though I know you're posting for the sake of arguing rather than for any meaningful discourse, I'll still answer you.

As has been mentioned rather than many cabs with a tweeter/woofer and a high pass only on a tweet, this is a fully crossed over mid range. The two speakers don't interfere with each other, although later iterations put both the mid and the optional tweeter closer to the center of the cab.

I'll keep using it because it blows away any production cab I've ever used or heard. And while I know you're really just taking pot shots at Bill, I'll clarify that Bill's design philosophy is different that Greenboy's design philosophy. Bill's speakers are horn loaded while these are direct radiators. All good speaker design is a balancing of trade-offs. These cabs balanced those in a way that I like.

On the other hand, many cabs on the market have no design philosophy beyond 4 speakers in a box that's a convenient size that 'looks cool.