• 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.

Efficient Bass Cabs

Calaverasgrande

Calaverasgrande

Apr 22, 2006
4,698
223
Not on Talkbass.
#1
I have been looking for a 3rd or 4th cab to use in my current band. The two guitars have 4 cabs and 3 amps between them so I am looking to beef up my sound.
At first I was thinking well just get a 2nd amp and a 4x10 or 6x10.
Then it occured to me why not just get more efficient cabs.
If I have two very efficient cabs it should be as good as doubling my amp power, in theory.

I looked at some cabinets online and quickly noticed that the ones with the tweets are coming in 2-3db higher efficiency than the ones without.Obviously because a compression driver is more effective at spewing mid and treble in one direction vs a 12" or 15" which radiates omnidirectionally at lower freqs.
I couldn't care less about freqs above 4k. I want an efficient cabinet at bass freqs.
Any suggestions?
I am thinking of a couple 2x12" or a 4x10 and a 2x12".
 
#3
You are going to have a hard time finding a cabinet that putts out more volume per watt of input power than a Euphonic Audio Wizzy...and since they are wizzy cone speakers there is no crossover or tweeter..no hiss and no power loss.
I have a wizzy 10 and it was amazing how loud that thing would get with nothing more than a phil jones bass buddy driving it (I think the bb is rated at 10 watts output power)

I've heard a couple wizzy 12's and they have great sound and are very efficient

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

good luck in your quest
 
#4
dlmarquez said:
You are going to have a hard time finding a cabinet that putts out more volume per watt of input power than a Euphonic Audio Wizzy
Click to expand...

I have to respectfully disagree with that!! I've had the Wizzy's( had the stack you talk about). Nice cabs but the new kid on the block IMO is the TC Electronic RS112. Very efficient and sound fantastic!! Put out much more sound and better tone than the Wizzy IMO.

But the question that needs to be asked is what amp are you using? You're talking about adding a 3rd or 4th cab? What is the ohm load of the cabs you are using now and what is your amp rated for?

Check out the TC RS212's!
 
#6
get one of those big fearful style cabs with two 15" 3015lf's and a 6" mid cone that cuts off at 5k. and if that's not enough, get two. you'll get way more air movement out of one of them than an 810 and about the same efficiency. low down sound in detroit is the only place i know making them, but if you're handy with wood and saw, a fun diy project and the plans are on here in the fearful wiki.
 
#7
Sensitivity is a product of the cab design and the drivers. The truth of the matter is that there's precious little difference between most cabs because they all use similar cab designs and drivers. You can get more dBs per cubic foot from cabs like the fEarfuls with extra long excursion drivers, but because they have higher displacement limits, not higher sensitivity. To take advantage of that higher displacement you'll need adequate power.
 
#10
Well I am using a Mesa 400 (non plus). It does 4 ohms minumum. When I say 3rd or 4th cab that would mean me getting another head, or relegating some cabs to the practice space only.

I am not interested in the paradigm of using less efficient cabs that are small and clobbering them with 1500 watts of digital amplifier. Sounds good for some folks but I need tubes in abundance.

There is a lot of difference between cabinets. Anyone who has gigged 4 or 5 different brands of cabs has no problem hearing that. Running a Mesa 4x10 next to an Ampeg 4x10 made it abundantly clear that Ampegs are low efficiency and not very happening in the midrange.
Carvin cabs I have checked out are crazy low efficiency and not very clear at all. Maybe they sound better with a Carvin head?
Mesa GK and SWR have been good so far. But I feel like a whole bunch of new brands are out there that have passed me by.
I notice that nobody makes any horn loaded designs anymore? I know they are heavy and big but they are hard to beat for loud and efficient. I cant help but wonder what yesteryears hornloaded cab with todays drivers would be like.

The redstar cabs were not very interesting. Mostly about 99db sensitivity. Which is ampeg land. Of course it is hard to make real comparisons when they dont specify what the sensitivity means. Is that broadband pink noise? 1khz at 1m? 1k is the first freq I pull DOWN on my bass!

The EA 4x10 looks interesting at 106db. If it has any bottom to it I may get that. The specs quote 45hz to 16khz. That may be kind of loose sounding since I tune to C.
What I really am interested in is cabs that are efficient at putting out bass. I am playing a Sterling into a Mesa. I have no problem with my treble and midrange! I get plenty of bass in the practice space but I have to crank my amp pretty good to keep up! Not looking forward to playing out with these guys if my amp cant deliver.

My other misgiving is that a lot of these cabs (EA for instance) seem to be oriented to guys that want hi-fi tone.
Not me, I want loud and low and some smooth midrange.
 
#11
Saying a cab has 106dB efficiency doesn't mean much. That could refer to one frequency. It's much more informative to look at a plot across the frequency spectrum. Also, when they say it has a response from 45hz to whatever, it's the same kind of misinformation. It might be -8dB from it's max at 45hz. So while it will reproduce a 45hz signal, you might not hear it in the mix at all.
 
#12
Calaverasgrande said:
The EA 4x10 looks interesting at 106db.
Click to expand...
Very interesting, as when measured in accordance with EIA standards no direct radiating 4x10 is capable of 106dB sensitivity. :rollno: An SPL chart would reveal that, while capable of reaching 106dB in the mids, it doesn't come close to that in the low end. Sensitivity ratings without an SPL chart are of no value whatsoever.
Running a Mesa 4x10 next to an Ampeg 4x10 made it abundantly clear that Ampegs are low efficiency and not very happening in the midrange.
Click to expand...
Measured in accordance to EIA standards they're probably within a dB or two. That's because EIA sensitivity is measured in the vicinity of 100Hz, where power demands are high. Some drivers can have much higher midrange sensitivity than others, but power demands in the midrange are minimal. And a major drawback to very high midrange sensitivity is that it often comes at the cost of low end sensitivity. Bottom line, there are no magic drivers, and no manufacturer has access to technology that every other doesn't as well. The differences between what's out there are matters of degree, not orders of magnitude.
 
#13
billfitzmaurice said:
Bottom line, there are no magic drivers, and no manufacturer has access to technology that every other doesn't as well. The differences between what's out there are matters of degree, not orders of magnitude.
Click to expand...

Well having been a live sound guy for about 20(?) years and a bassist for almost 30 I will have to respectfully disagree.

I have hooked up sub horns by different companies in very similar configurations and been able to tell which one is more efficient.
Same for bass cabinets. Heck the main reason I got into live sound was to better understand bass cabs!
Mesa bass cabs are generally mid heavy so it would make sense that they are louder in that fashion. As far as efficiency, it isnt a level playing field. Some companies are content to put out the minimum product that will hold an amp head about 4 feet off the ground. Other companies try to make a great product so they can enlarge their market share. (I have worked for both types of companies, in a different industry, and the species do exist!).
Some speakers (in free air) simply have greater sensitivity than others. Either due to a stronger magnet, lighter cone or some fancy spider. Who knows? But you can look up speaker models by eminence, JBL or EV and see multiple different 12" woofers with different efficiency and freq response. Enough that 2 different companies 2x12 will be very different in actual use as a bass cab. Some just cant handle real lows at all or they are poorly built and muddy sounding. We all know that 103db of muddy isnt as good as 99db of clear!
I'm just curious if there is a general consensus on who makes the loudest cab these days. As you have pointed out better than I, you just cant depend on the specs that are posted on a manufacturers site to get any idea. And darn if GC wont let me crank an SVT through each one of their cabs(foot controlled speaker switcher?) until I am satisfied.
 
#17
Cates said:
Something tells me that with your exacting specifications, you won't come out of Guitar Center satisfied...even if you play every cab they have.
Click to expand...

Not really exacting specifications. I just want a bass cabinet that is efficient at bass. Not some pingy "hi-fi" cabinet.
I have played horn loaded cabs before. Mostly various Peavey and CV horns. They tend to really kill at a narrow band of freqs. Like 70-300hz but quickly roll off outside of that. Still, 300 watts of 80hz sounds bassier than you would think.
I have tried a few horn/direct radiating designs like the GK 4112. 4x12 horn loaded with 2x10 in the middle of the "w". It gets loud but has phase lumps up and down the neck. Also heavier than an 8x10!
I may just track down another twelve pack or twelve stack. I like those. They get pretty loud.
Any opinions on 4x10" vs 4x12" vs 4x15" for efficiency?
 
#18
well if you want loud and vintage sounding, i think the 810 is still the best way to go. personally, i think you could smack a big fearful or bfm style rig with 400w and it would take your head off (and you could voice it to sound more vintage if desired). but if you want brute power, the 810 is still king. i find the differences in sensitivity ratings to be pretty irrelevant in the real world, so i couldn't tell you which 810 or pair of 410's is the loudest, but as a whole they're definitely as loud as it gets in bass cabs that work well with 300-400w.
 
#19
yeah the 8x10 thing used to be my touchstone, but gas mileage has decreed I can no longer own the rquisite ford econoline! So I am looking for more modular cabs Maybe 2 - 4x10? There is also the whole over 40 thing. My back is great these days. Probably a lot to do with my heaviest cabinet is a 2x12 (I also dont keep a wallet in my back pocket anymore, really try it).
I am wondering how a 4x12 measures up to a 4x10 efficiency-wise. I know it'll be heavier but not like 8x10 heavy! Besides it will be doable in a toyota.
 
#20
For maximum sensitivity at minimum cost, complexity and space, I'd probably roll with a pair of Avatar 2x10s @ 8 ohms (parallelled to 4 ohms).

Aligned vertically, the difference in sensitivity between a 4 ohm 4x10 and a 4 ohm 8x10 is extremely small, and the reduction in off-axis performance is bad news with the 8x10.

The main reason an 8x10 sounds so loud near-field is because it's got drivers right next to your ears, anywa.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back