• 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.

Does anybody else dislike Neo speakers?

#101
The assumption is being made that the drivers are identical except for the magnet material. This is not the case, the drivers are not identical, the ability to do things that we (as designers) have wanted to do before but couldn't because of the limitations in the ceramic based motor structures have been eliminated.

The end result is that we can now improve some of the specs like sensitivity and power handling and we can alter gap geometries to decrease HF rolloff result in a new generation of bass cabinets. I can design a Neo driver to sound exactly like a ceramic driver, but what I am doing specifically is taking advantages of the new driver materials to expand performance to where we wanted to go years back but were unable to. There is absolutely no reason why a Neo can't have identical performance to a ceramic (assuming the design target was to do so) by manipulating the appropriate parameters to do so. Our Neos do not sound appreciably "Neo-like", but they are a progression and evolution of our sound based on customer feedback from players like you guys.
 
#102
I never cared much for them myself. I've wondered if maybe the extra mass of the ceramic magnets adds something to the mix, maybe allowing the bass frequencies to develop differently. Kind of how heavier wood often makes a bass cabinet come alive vs cheapo light weight or manufactured wood. Just a thought. Plus, when Neo heats up to a certain temp it loses it's magnetism, so they have to be a lot more careful how they design the cooling mechanism on Neo speakers.
 
#103
Maybe I'm hearing more of the lighter woods used. In the guitar world, the Orange cabinets dominate over the Marshall cabs with their huge sound...and yep the Orange cabs are heavier with thicker wood.

In addition, how has Jim Berg managed to make such popular non neo cabs like the NVs etc etc, and the very very sensitive and loud HS series which is ceramic yet again.

Another view - you won't get a guitarist to move onto neos...most won't move from all tube amps!
 
#104
pvbassfan said:
I never cared much for them myself. I've wondered if maybe the extra mass of the ceramic magnets adds something to the mix, maybe allowing the bass frequencies to develop differently. Kind of how heavier wood often makes a bass cabinet come alive vs cheapo light weight or manufactured wood. Just a thought. Plus, when Neo heats up to a certain temp it loses it's magnetism, so they have to be a lot more careful how they design the cooling mechanism on Neo speakers.
Click to expand...

Heaviest wood is MDF
Plywood is lighter and is more durable.

Neo's get nowhere hot enough to loose magnetism. All construction power tools are using neo's to be lighter - and they get hot.

I think it's a good idea that some really think they like ceramic speakers. It give people buying neo's the chance to sell off the old ceramic speakers.

You still see Cabinet manufacturers boasting about magnet weight when ceramic speakers are inside.
 
#105
I don't know a single gigging guitarist who uses anything bigger than a 212 combo. I'm sure they are out there, but I never see them in clubs except really young kids :)

I see mixes of Peavey Classics and Fender Devilles mostly. Both of which would shed maybe a few pounds by switching to Neo magnets, but are quite light already.

Guitar drivers are so much lighter by nature that the gain by going to neo is going to have to be increased sensitivity or different tone, or else no one's going to do it.
 
#106
rpsands said:
I don't know a single gigging guitarist who uses anything bigger than a 212 combo. I'm sure they are out there, but I never see them in clubs except really young kids :)

I see mixes of Peavey Classics and Fender Devilles mostly. Both of which would shed maybe a few pounds by switching to Neo magnets, but are quite light already.

Guitar drivers are so much lighter by nature that the gain by going to neo is going to have to be increased sensitivity or different tone, or else no one's going to do it.
Click to expand...

The majority of the older guitarists I've worked with won't be happy without at least a 2x12...4x12 is their tonal nirvana.

No matter what neo fans say, the ceramics simply won't go out of fashion. Too many people I know personally have sold their lightweight cabs to get smaller ceramic cabs. I'm all for light amps, but cmon, a little lifting with a friend to help keeps the pounds off :)
 
#107
Eventually people will realize that they can sound as good or better than traditional speakers. Similar to the dodgy way that CDs sounded before the industry figured out how to master for them correctly.

As has been said, neo magnets have allowed some of the design and performance barriers that once existed to be breached. It will only get better from here, and if the Em 3015, 3012 series are any indication of where things are going, we bass players are going to be entering a golden age of great new gear.
 
#108
We had lots of players at our NAMM booth ask us if the cabs had neo or ceramic drivers and my response was always "What do you think are in there?". As expected, about 50% guessed wrong.
 
#110
agedhorse said:
The assumption is being made that the drivers are identical except for the magnet material. This is not the case, the drivers are not identical, the ability to do things that we (as designers) have wanted to do before but couldn't because of the limitations in the ceramic based motor structures have been eliminated.

The end result is that we can now improve some of the specs like sensitivity and power handling and we can alter gap geometries to decrease HF rolloff result in a new generation of bass cabinets. I can design a Neo driver to sound exactly like a ceramic driver, but what I am doing specifically is taking advantages of the new driver materials to expand performance to where we wanted to go years back but were unable to. There is absolutely no reason why a Neo can't have identical performance to a ceramic (assuming the design target was to do so) by manipulating the appropriate parameters to do so. Our Neos do not sound appreciably "Neo-like", but they are a progression and evolution of our sound based on customer feedback from players like you guys.
Click to expand...

When you can design a neo 15 that sounds like a JBL K140 or E140, let me know, I will be your first customer. And I'm really talking about the tone of those JBL's. No neo 15, or ceramic 15 for that matter, that I have tried sounds like those JBL's.
 
#111
jnewmark said:
When you can design a neo 15 that sounds like a JBL K140 or E140, let me know, I will be your first customer. And I'm really talking about the tone of those JBL's. No neo 15, or ceramic 15 for that matter, that I have tried sounds like those JBL's.
Click to expand...
A simple matter, but they wouldn't sell because they'd run at least $500 each. Much of what made those JBLs work as they did was very tight manufacturing tolerances, allowing much smaller coil to polepiece and plate distances than usually employed. Achieving those tolerances was the entire reason for their cast frames. EV famously tried to compete with JBL with their SRO series and failed, as their frame was inadequate and they suffered from coil rub if you looked at them cockeyed. One reason why JBL dumped the E series was their high manufacturing costs due to those tight tolerances, making them non-competitive. And it's why the similar 2200 series remains very high priced, despite the tooling for them having been fully amortized 20 years ago.
 
#112
R Baer said:
We had lots of players at our NAMM booth ask us if the cabs had neo or ceramic drivers and my response was always "What do you think are in there?". As expected, about 50% guessed wrong.
Click to expand...

Don't own any new cabs so have no basis for comparrison.
Do think the big question is:
If they weighed the same, had the same effeciency, and cost the same; which would you buy?
To me the cost difference is not the issue but equal or higher effeciency as well as weight savings would be appreciated.

I guess it's not surpising to see such vast differences of opinions on the tonal characteristics.
Question for you engineers; is there measurement data from credible sources published with the same cabinet and test equip to show what (if any) differences exist?
 
#113
billfitzmaurice said:
A simple matter, but they wouldn't sell because they'd run at least $500 each. Much of what made those JBLs work as they did was very tight manufacturing tolerances, allowing much smaller coil to polepiece and plate distances than usually employed. Achieving those tolerances was the entire reason for their cast frames. EV famously tried to compete with JBL with their SRO series and failed, as their frame was inadequate and they suffered from coil rub it you looked at them cockeyed. One reason why JBL dumped the E series was their high manufacturing costs due to those tight tolerances, making them non-competitive. And it's why the similar 2200 series remains very high priced, despite the tooling for them having been fully amortized 20 years ago.
Click to expand...

Exactly. There's so much to the sound of a speaker that has nothing to do with the most heavily advertised "feature" magnet weight.

Some things that make the D/E/2200 series JBLs sound different are the 4" voice coil with the aluminum (or in the case of the 2220, thin hard paper) dust cap bonded directly to the top of the bobbin, the thin curve-linear cone (except the 140), very short very light voice coil, high Fs and very tight clearances between the VC and the magnet gap. They were expensive to build and also more expensive to repair (properly). The voicing of these drivers is midrange oriented (mid-bass up) and have very limited power handling at low frequencies. For some applications they are the best speaker on the market but for others they are not a good choice.

If anybody out there is restoring an older collectable, I have a freshly reconed 2220 here in the shop looking for a home. I also have a couple of fresh reconed Altec 421's which were similar though the refinements were not taken to quite the same level as the JBL's. They also used a 3" voice coil, a benefit when overdriven intentionally.
 
#114
Guess I've been basing most of my impressions of 'neos' on the Markbass stuff, which always sound very fluffy and loose to me, because of the suspension. The Genz, Mesa, and others I have heard do sound harsh and lack bass, but I was attributing that to cabinet design and overly hot tweeters which seem to be the norm in the bass world.

Cheers,
Cameron
 
#115
Try turning the tweeter down to evaluate the voicings of the LF drivers. Tweeters have their place for folks who prefer them, some players do, some do not. You can turn the tweeters all the way down on our cabinets without the fear of burning anything up. It seems (based on some PMs I have received) that this is not true of all manufacturer's product so I want to be sure we are not lumped into an urban myth here.
 
#116
agedhorse said:
Try turning the tweeter down to evaluate the voicings of the LF drivers. Tweeters have their place for folks who prefer them, some players do, some do not. You can turn the tweeters all the way down on our cabinets without the fear of burning anything up. It seems (based on some PMs I have received) that this is not true of all manufacturer's product so I want to be sure we are not lumped into an urban myth here.
Click to expand...

Very true. I think one of the reasons some people at NAMM thought we use ceramic drivers was actually due to the fact that the lack of a tweeter in the cabs makes them a bit warmer sounding in the upper mids and top end than their tweeter loaded brethren. Many players still think that warmer=ceramic, brighter=neos.
 
#117
agedhorse said:
Try turning the tweeter down to evaluate the voicings of the LF drivers. Tweeters have their place for folks who prefer them, some players do, some do not. You can turn the tweeters all the way down on our cabinets without the fear of burning anything up. It seems (based on some PMs I have received) that this is not true of all manufacturer's product so I want to be sure we are not lumped into an urban myth here.
Click to expand...
2nd order (12dB/octave) high-pass filters, which don't adequately restrict low frequency content resulting in both toasted LPads and tweeters for that matter, are hardly mythical. They should be, but for the sake of a $2 capacitor they sadly are not. :rollno:
 
#119
[QUOTE="Q";9130662]I think the myth being referred to is "that all tweeters fail if you turn them down" not "tweeters can fail if you turn them down".:hiding:[/QUOTE]No, it's the potential for an LPad to overheat and fry when turned all the way, or even almost all the way, down. That potential is real. Do everything right and you won't have any problems, but not everyone does everything right.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back