• 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.

Crossover question

#61
BassmanPaul said:
I AM being nice Chef! I have been totally courteous in everything I have written:)

I'm just trying to explain to Floyd what the ramifications of his actions could lead to. The last thing I want is for him to damage his expensive equipment through lack of knowledge.
Click to expand...

Certainly appreciated my friend, but my equipment is far from expensive and it hasn't let me down in all these years. Besides, if I blow it up it will force me to buy an SVT Pro and an 8x10.

While I got you here though and since you are familiar with Carvin, do you think I would be doing myself a favor if I got another 8 ohm 4x10 cab and ran it with my current 8 ohm 4x10? This would give me a 4 ohm load and jack the wattage up to ( allegedly) 1000 watts right?

Also, my apologies for the hi-jack.
 
#62
heck yeah!

lose the biamping so both cabs pull their weight and you'll have a crushing rig (and a cleaner and tighter one too.)
 
#63
That's kinda what I thought. The main reason I haven't done it already is because I'm torn over spending more money on this rig when what I really want is an Ampeg and an 8x10. Considering it will be quite a while before I can afford the Ampeg, I probably ought to buck up and get me another 410. I use an RBI, so it's "almost" an Ampeg. lol

Thanks.
 
#65
@ Floyd eye, you mention the idea of getting another 4x10 cab, i would add that while i agree its a good idea that if your adding a different brand or model 4x10 to existing 4x10 you should try b4 your buy, they all differ slightly, mixing different drivers (even of the same size)could have undesirable effects that said tho,,,, you have mentioned the 8x10 ampeg a few times, thats obviously what you really Really want, save your £$£$£$ and go for it IMO
 
#66
rad bassman said:
@ Floyd eye, you mention the idea of getting another 4x10 cab, i would add that while i agree its a good idea that if your adding a different brand or model 4x10 to existing 4x10 you should try b4 your buy, they all differ slightly, mixing different drivers (even of the same size)could have undesirable effects that said tho,,,, you have mentioned the 8x10 ampeg a few times, thats obviously what you really Really want, save your £$£$£$ and go for it IMO
Click to expand...

If I were to get another 4x10 I would get one identical to the one I have, but you hit the nail on the head as far as my dilemma goes. I do want the Ampeg 8x10.
 
#68
A pair of matched 4x10s makes sense for flexibility and ease of transport, but more than one guy has said that they found the 8x10 easier to move around, as it could be levered on and off trucks and stages instead of having to be dead-lifted.
 
#69
I would definitely prefer the 8x10. We have a huge enclosed trailer which I have customized specifically for our gear, so transport really isn't an issue. Also, I have found used, St. Louis made Ampeg 8x10s in the neighborhood of $500 so with any luck I will go that route.
 
#70
walterw said:
what keeps getting sort of glossed over is that adding a 15 under the 4x10 will make the whole thing bigger and louder, due to just having more speakers going at the same time in a bigger, taller stack. so in that respect, a 4x10+15 is "better" than either by itself.

that's where all the players who use this combo (pros included) stop in the argument.
Click to expand...

Yes it will be better than a single cabinet, any two cabinets will, BUT it doesn't make it any better in real life. The 4x10 will always be more efficient than the single cone due to coupling. That makes the 4x10 louder. It will also be able to handle more power. In trying to keep up and be balanced, even in a bi-amped rig, the single cone doesn't have a hope and will eventually fail. The whole concept is based on the faulty premise that a larger cone will be able to push more lows than a smaller one. Ask PJB about that myth. It's typical engineering by "looks" rather than acoustical science. Marketing instead of actual engineering. It's kinda "if we build it they will come" mentality. Even the actual 4x10 concept is a flawed one. The side by side drivers reduce the dispersion possible with a vertical alignment of the same drivers.

Players who use this configuration, including pros, do so because they know no better. Read though any copy of Bass Player magazine and count the amplifier ads showing the pairing. The last time I did this there were six. If a pro endorses a manufacturer, he uses what he is given or chooses from the product list. If they recommend a 4x10 plus 1x15, times two or three, then that's what he or she will go with.
 
#72
Floyd Eye said:
While I got you here though and since you are familiar with Carvin, do you think I would be doing myself a favor if I got another 8 ohm 4x10 cab and ran it with my current 8 ohm 4x10? This would give me a 4 ohm load and jack the wattage up to ( allegedly) 1000 watts right?
Click to expand...

in a bi-amp rig you are essentially using two amplifiers to reproduce one signal. As most cabs today have fairly good crossovers built into them there is much less need for bi-amping in todays world than in days of yore. Yes it has its place but for the average bass player not so much. My Carvin BX1500 has the capability but I use the two amps in parallel into a 4Ω load each. This gives up to 900W available. My main rig is run the same way trough a DCM1000L for 650W. Naturally I don't get even close to using that power at the gig.
 
#73
Joe Louvar said:
I guess you’re saying a lot of artist don’t know what they like. For example - the Fender Twin is still one of the most popular guitar amps used today. Just for fun you should checkout how many pro guitarist use Fender Twin amps and two of them side-by-side. No argument - just saying. ;)
Click to expand...

Joe, the side by side concept is a standard from looong ago. Having been used before, it'll be used again. The fact that, had the drivers been vertically aligned, the twin would have been even better doesn't come into it. Amps are built to conform with what players expect to see, what they are used to seeing.

I have a friend who plays through a twin which he positions on its side. He prefers how he sounds with it that way. Just because something is done by tradition doesn't make it the best way.
 
#74
Question for BassmanPaul and billfitzmaurice, why would turning the tweeter level down damage a crossover?

I've read a fair number of threads on this forum with your contributions, plus the fEarful stuff, but I've never heard that before.
 
#76
paul_s said:
Question for BassmanPaul and billfitzmaurice, why would turning the tweeter level down damage a crossover?

I've read a fair number of threads on this forum with your contributions, plus the fEarful stuff, but I've never heard that before.
Click to expand...

Because power doesn't disappear. It just gets used in different ways. In the case of a variable L-pad on the tweeter, if you turn it all the way off, the L-pad is 'soaking' up the power that was meant for the tweeter in the form of heat. Therefore it's prone to overheating, and burning out. Once the L-pad is dead, your crossover isn't seeing the load it wants to see and then can also self destruct in a similar fashion.

Turning your tweeter off is basically asking the l-pad to become a space heater for your cabinet...until it doesn't work anymore. Also, most variable L-Pads are under-spec'ed for their use.
 
#77
I experimented a lot with one Hydrive 410 and one Hydrive 115, tried both full-range and also bi-amped using the Yamaha PB-1 pre-amp w/crossover and QSC PLX1804 900w/ch power amp. Never liked the sound from the 115 no matter what I tried. Sold the 115 having never gigged with it. Now use the Hydrive 410 alone, with a second Hydrive 410 for larger gigs or one SVT-810E. Remembering the "don't mix driver types driven by a single amp" rule, prolly should not do the 410 with 115 full-range on the same amp for this reason alone..... but then again, your customer likes it and "the customer is always right".
 
#79
paul_s said:
Question for BassmanPaul and billfitzmaurice, why would turning the tweeter level down damage a crossover?

I've read a fair number of threads on this forum with your contributions, plus the fEarful stuff, but I've never heard that before.
Click to expand...

Removing a tweeter from the circuit can cause the amplifier to "see" a short in the crossover components. Somewhere in an old thread is an electrical diagram showing this. You basically still have the lowpass filter rolling down the frequencies played by the next driver down (woofer or mid) and nothing to take the higher frequencies.

Just turning it down with the lpad won't hurt anything although, if the lpad has to absorb a lot of heat, it can burn out. Also many bass cabs still have the woofers recieving a fullrange signal, no low pass, that changes things too. I'm sure Paul or one of the others here could do a better job of explaining it.
 
#80
BurningSkies said:
I'd be happy to do this, once my 135w Twin returns from the amp doctor. :)
Click to expand...

Why haven’t already tried it - and always do it already? No reply necessary. ;)

BurningSkies said:
Because power doesn't disappear. It just gets used in different ways. In the case of a variable L-pad on the tweeter, if you turn it all the way off, the L-pad is 'soaking' up the power that was meant for the tweeter in the form of heat. Therefore it's prone to overheating, and burning out. Once the L-pad is dead, your crossover isn't seeing the load it wants to see and then can also self destruct in a similar fashion.

Turning your tweeter off is basically asking the l-pad to become a space heater for your cabinet...until it doesn't work anymore. Also, most variable L-Pads are under-spec'ed for their use.
Click to expand...

There must be a way to protect the crossover so the tweeter can be turned off like on the GK MB’s, etc - no?
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back