Psst... Ready to join TalkBass and start posting, make new friends, sell your gear, and more?  Register your free account in 30 seconds.

Carvin 8x10 and Ampeg 8x10 cab designs

Discussion in 'Amps and Cabs [BG]' started by Fender Boy, Aug 9, 2001.


  1. I have been looking into a Carvin 8x10 to run with a R1000, but I was reading a thread on harmony central where a guy said an 8x10 with a rectangle shaped bottom port and no internal baffeling would blow out the top two speakers using a lot of power. He said it must have separate chambers inside to prevent standing wave interference, like the svt 8x10. He also said he even plugs the bottom ports of his 4x10 (Sunn, I think) to prevent this same kind of thing. Has anyone here heard of this?

    I know the Carvin cabinet is supposed to be able to handle the full 1000 watts of the bridged R1000, and being 50 pounds lighter than the Ampeg, it seems like a good choice for a stand alone cab. I just have never heard of the non round ports creating problems, even Eden has them and you don't here many complaints from Eden owners.

    any thoughts?

    Here is a link to that original post: http://acapella.harmony-central.com/Forum6/HTML/002576.html

    (The post I am referring to was made by 5slinger)
     
  2. FalsehoodBass

    FalsehoodBass

    Jul 22, 2001
    Denver, CO
    hey... remember SWR's 810 too... i have one so ofcourse im going to say its great... it has a baffle and 4 circular ports, no problems with it yet. It's about a million times better than the carvin 410+115 i had, in terms of power handling and sound quality, the carvins bottomed out at the same volume settings the swr was singing at.. i've never played the carvin 810 though.
     
  3. Luis Fabara

    Luis Fabara

    Aug 13, 2000
    Ecuador (South America)
    Audio Pro - Ecuador
    In fact the Goliath SR. from SWR has no chambers, and it is a 6x10"
     
  4. Sounds like BS to me.

    The shape of the port and its location is irrelevant. The area of the port and its tuning frequency are the only items of concern. Also, a wave length at 31 Hz is just over 36 feet long. There isn't a standing wave problem in this cabinet, because it cannot contain even 1/4 wavelength, let alone a full standing wave. It is possible to get standing wave interaction in this cabinet above 160 Hz, as a half-wave is about 3.5 feet at this frequency.

    IMO, the guy who blew his speakers out ("5slinger") pushed his cab below the tuning frequency and the top two let loose first. Luck of the draw and the gunslinger lost :D

    The Carvin 410 cabinet is spec'ed at 50 Hz as the lower limit. The PS10 drivers used in this (and probably the 810) cabinet require 4.0 cubic feet for *each* driver to be correctly enclosed. The 810 is obviously not 32 cubic feet internal volume, so the bass response must suffer. This is typical Carvin: cramming too many, and too acoustically large drivers into too small a space.

    I have no experience with the Sunn 4x10, but do have some with the 2x15. It is another cabinet that is tuned too high for a 5-string bass. Plugging the ports entirely cuts the nutz off the bass response, but might add more speaker protection when playing below the tuned frequency of the open ports. The only way to know for sure is to measure it, as Sunn refuses to disclose this information. There is an optimum sealed enclosure volume, and it depends on the driver Thiele-Small parameters, and the number of drivers in the cabinet. Plugging the ports is just a guess at best.