efficient cabs for low power tube amps

[4Mal]

Maybe not as modern as some but aren't the BagEnd S15 speakers pretty efficient?

=wr=

Very. They don't make much bass though. They roll off very high. They have a sound. It isn't for everybody but for some, the BE's are a definite choice. I had a set for a while. Moved over their or 2x10 deep cabs which for my tonal goals were a better fit. They were also rather heavy and ultimately didn't make the cut.

 

[Bassmec]

Lansing inovation transformed the transducer market. Altec or JBL inovations or their predessessor or related companies (Bell Labs, RCA, Western Electric, etc.).
Resulted in the development of.
Cast not stamped frames
Alnico V magnets
Ceramic magnets
Edge wound voice coils
Aluminum voice coils
Horn loaded bass cabs
Machined pole plates
Phase aligned drivers

There is a lot more in this list but Lansing innovation of Edge wound voice coils put them far ahead of everybody else without having to drive ever more watts, those patents have all lapsed and have been copied by (modern loudspeaker manufacturers)
The current competition have no fresh ideas at all but for resorting to winding heavier longer voice coils for more power handling.
Believe it or not JBL have also finally responded to the sudden availability of countless cheap watts, their new right bang up to date designs include really novel things like spun Neodinium magnets developed as recently as within 20 years of the end of the last millenia and monsterously huge coils of very thick recently mined copper wire, even going as far as making a 15" driver innovative enough to be quite useless for modern bass guitar and or low frequency elephantine infrasound transmission at anything below a couple of Kilowatts RMS, simply by adding two equally thick voice coils per sub bass driver, this groundbreaking innovation is known in today's parlance as Dual Drive.

 

[DavidEdenAria]

I've got a pair of Altec home speakers from the 60's....15 inch alnico, white cast frames but have the weird looking cone with the 4 or 5 inch midrange.

I haven't decided what to do with them but they aren't well regarded for hi-fi.

Will recone into a guitar or bass speaker most likely.

 

[vdub75]

try the normal delta 15. it's not a sub bass monster but in a cab tuned to something about 55 htz this thin goes pretty loud at low amp settings and has lots of sensitivity in the high mids and highs

 

[CL400Peavey]

Lansing inovation transformed the transducer market. Altec or JBL inovations or their predessessor or related companies (Bell Labs, RCA, Western Electric, etc.).
Resulted in the development of.
Cast not stamped frames
Alnico V magnets
Ceramic magnets
Edge wound voice coils
Aluminum voice coils
Horn loaded bass cabs
Machined pole plates
Phase aligned drivers

There is a lot more in this list but Lansing innovation of Edge wound voice coils put them far ahead of everybody else without having to drive ever more watts, those patents have all lapsed and have been copied by (modern loudspeaker manufacturers)
The current competition have no fresh ideas at all but for resorting to winding heavier longer voice coils for more power handling.
Believe it or not JBL have also finally responded to the sudden availability of countless cheap watts, their new right bang up to date designs include really novel things like spun Neodinium magnets developed as recently as within 20 years of the end of the last millenia and monsterously huge coils of very thick recently mined copper wire, even going as far as making a 15" driver innovative enough to be quite useless for modern bass guitar and or low frequency elephantine infrasound transmission at anything below a couple of Kilowatts RMS, simply by adding two equally thick voice coils per sub bass driver, this groundbreaking innovation is known in today's parlance as Dual Drive.

Whats your point?

 

[Kaa]

Having read this thread, I'm confused by some of Bassmec's comments. Is he stating that modern speakers are bad, due to the raw materials used in them?
I can see why someone would speak out about exploitation of people in a copper mine, but, I don't really feel that the amount used by modern manufacturing in the loudspeaker realm would amount to anything compared to the amount of copper that goes into, say, an electric motor.

 

[Bassmec]

Whats your point?

I am bored brainless by hearing all about the fabulous advances in modern loudspeaker design, since there haven't been any at all, this is a very very mature technology, nothing is new, the only advances since the early1970's are in two pack epoxy adhesives and they existed since the beginning of the 1980's.
If someone posting in this thread can understand the very simple concept of choosing an engineering design based on the power you actually have available, It might help me out considerably, if that person could explain concepts like power to weight ratios. The effects of increasing mass and thus inertia and its maximum frequency limiting effects on reciprocating systems and suspensions. I would be chuffed sick.

No wonder BFM has better things to do, A long time ago when Stan Whitworth, Ed Form, Jeff Knights and I persuaded Celestions management to invest in flat wire winding machinery and developed the sidewinder range
at Foxhall Rd, replacing the previous stacked round wire technique in high power voice coils. We were stealing real technological improvements by Lansing. So my challenge here is to name a single real technological change to the basic design of a loudspeaker since that advance?.
There is so much utter buffalo bagels talked on this site it's unreal.
An average power level over a projected frequency response is an easily calcutatable quantifiable figure and sales executives aside, engineering equipment has been available to measure this standard measurement for a very long time.
It's known as SPL @ 1watt one metre, if you make a speaker vibrate at a lower frequency or handle more power by adding reciprocating weight to the voice coil you will reduce this figure. Simples.
We all know it takes enormous amounts of power to make VLF but here we have a maximum figure of 50 watts per voice coil. In order to get as much level as possible, the intelligent amoung us are left choosing between existing exceptionally sensitive loudspeakers that have very little inherent redundancy to this task.
In this thread, We simply can't afford the loss of output, enormous power handling inevitably forces.
Unless of course if we decide to use superconductors and have a system that refrigerates the loudspeaker voice coils to below at least the boiling point of Nitrogen!.:-(

 

[CL400Peavey]

TL;DR

Who are you even talking to?

The OP asked for a modern driver, that would work with his current low powered amp. Some of those were provided.

Also people shouldnt be so short sighted, and think that one may only use a low powered amp for the rest of forever.

@Bassmec You have experience with vintage drivers, they are not relivant to this discussion as the OP is looking for a modern driver. Do you have any experience with drivers that are applicable to the conversation?

I am bored brainless by hearing all about the fabulous advances in modern loudspeaker design, since there haven't been any at all, this is a very very mature technology, nothing is new, the only advances since the early1970's are in two pack epoxy adhesives and they existed since the beginning of the 1980's.
If someone posting in this thread can understand the very simple concept of choosing an engineering design based on the power you actually have available, It might help me out considerably, if that person could explain concepts like power to weight ratios. The effects of increasing mass and thus inertia and its maximum frequency limiting effects on reciprocating systems and suspensions. I would be chuffed sick.

No wonder BFM has better things to do, A long time ago when Stan Whitworth, Ed Form, Jeff Knights and I persuaded Celestions management to invest in flat wire winding machinery and developed the sidewinder range
at Foxhall Rd, replacing the previous stacked round wire technique in high power voice coils. We were stealing real technological improvements by Lansing. So my challenge here is to name a single real technological change to the basic design of a loudspeaker since that advance?.
There is so much utter buffalo bagels talked on this site it's unreal.
An average power level over a projected frequency response is an easily calcutatable quantifiable figure and sales executives aside, engineering equipment has been available to measure this standard measurement for a very long time.
It's known as SPL @ 1watt one metre, if you make a speaker vibrate at a lower frequency or handle more power by adding reciprocating weight to the voice coil you will reduce this figure. Simples.
We all know it takes enormous amounts of power to make VLF but here we have a maximum figure of 50 watts per voice coil. In order to get as much level as possible, the intelligent amoung us are left choosing between existing exceptionally sensitive loudspeakers that have very little inherent redundancy to this task.
In this thread, We simply can't afford the loss of output, enormous power handling inevitably forces.
Unless of course if we decide to use superconductors and have a system that refrigerates the loudspeaker voice coils to below at least the boiling point of Nitrogen!.:-(

 

[Bassmec]

There is no conflict between the two answers. In their day, the JBL and Altec were both built 'tougher' than their contemporaries. The trend continues. While books could be written in answer, there is really no reason for it.

Not "tougher" they designed edge wound flat wire voice coils that concentrated more turns into the voice coil gap for a given power and reciprocating weigh, and patented this technological advance.

 

[Bassmec]

TL;DR

Who are you even talking to?

The OP asked for a modern driver, that would work with his current low powered amp. Some of those were provided.

Also people shouldnt be so short sighted, and think that one may only use a low powered amp for the rest of forever.

@Bassmec You have experience with vintage drivers, they are not relivant to this discussion as the OP is looking for a modern driver. Do you have any experience with drivers that are applicable to the conversation?

Look I have plenty of experience with "modern drivers" my son Henry for instance is the british champion at 30hz in all officially measured ICE competition.
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Harwood-Acoustics/549668248483213
PS I will check as to the type of adhesives used by Bill to assemble a brand new improved 418-II clone, I would expect he will be using "modern" adhesives.
I will also expect him to be able to improve on the delivery time of a factory, based rather close to Fital in Italy also involved in production forms of utterly exceptional performance products.
Invalid Link Removed

 

[Stealth Fighter]

Bassmec, I'm listening. Thank you for sharing your obvious knowledge.

 

[will33]

Those vintage drivers were made at a time when people focused on making LOUD loudspeakers, to take best advantage of the relatively low amp power that was available then. Huge power handling wasn't a requirement, high spl was. Cones and coil assemblies were light and agile with tight manufacturing tolerances.

OP's rig is from that era. Was a completely different approach than todays high mass, high excursion woofers that can eat lots of power, at the expense of HF ability and SPL.

The Faital and Eminence models already mentioned probably be the closest "modern" approximation of that sound.

Yes, the basic loudspeaker is a very old thing, like the internal combustion engine. Lots of "refinements", but not much for "new innovation" in quite some time.

 

[jnewmark]

Ya know, looking at the original post, he says he would be ok with " a bigger box " and then asks about modern " speakers " . I wonder if he's talking about cabs, instead of individual drivers? We all know that " drivers " go inside " speakers " .

 

[AstroSonic]

Not "tougher" they designed edge wound flat wire voice coils that concentrated more turns into the voice coil gap for a given power and reciprocating weigh, and patented this technological advance.

Yes, tougher in context. Tougher, superior, better. And there was much more to their superiority than the edge-wound voice coil. Their superiority relative to their peers was due to a combination of features. Consider a cast and machined magnetic structure with a tight magnetic gap that both increased the amount of flux and provided superior heat transfer, an aluminum dust cap attached directly to the VC former that wicked heat from the VC former and allowed extended high frequency response, a 4-inch diameter voice coil for improved heat transfer, a vented pole piece that together with the dust cap substantially improved cooling. They investigated thermal and mechanical compression, optimized their drivers for this and published the results. Their curvilinear cone provided a remarkably smooth frequency response that was well maintained off-axis thanks to engineered progressive cone decoupling with increasing frequency. Very few drivers at that time employed that combination of features.

We are all waiting for you to provide a constructive answer to the OP's question, like a specific driver recommendation.

 

[Bassmec]

Having read this thread, I'm confused by some of Bassmec's comments. Is he stating that modern speakers are bad, due to the raw materials used in them?
I can see why someone would speak out about exploitation of people in a copper mine, but, I don't really feel that the amount used by modern manufacturing in the loudspeaker realm would amount to anything compared to the amount of copper that goes into, say, an electric motor.

I don't mind copper apart from what it weighs and its low melting point, its a "modern must" but are you really aware of the level of pollution spinning Neodynium magnets produces just to save your aching back.
Invalid Link Removed
With all the recent advances in ultra efficient lightweight switch mode DC power supplies a "really modern" high power, high sensitivity bass driver would not have a permanent magnet.
PS So I am only changing one letter of my advise so far, the OP should be looking for a nice pair of JBL D130e's as they are certainly really the most forward looking designs mentioned so far in this thread.
http://www.audioheritage.org/html/readers-photos/d130e.htm

 

[CL400Peavey]

Per JohnK:
Their sensitivity (@ 1w/1meter), frequency response, and X/max specs are:
E130: 105db 50hz-6khz 2.54mm
E140: 100db 40hz-2.5khz 3.56mm
K140: 98db 40hz-2.5khz 5.09mm

http://www.talkbass.com/threads/vintage-15-jbl-comparisons-w-soundclips.809918/

Ok so lets look at these drivers and compare them to some modern ones.

The 3015 has a sensitivity of 100.8 dB/w/m. It also has an xMax of 5.9mm. That is average sensitivity, and it peaks to about 104 dB/w/m around 2kHz. Oh and it weighs 7.9 pounds, and is very well regarded in terms of tone and response.

The Faital Pro is rated at 99 dB/w/m, conservatively as it also rises well above 100 dB/w/m in the upper mid range. It has an xMax of 5.75mm, and weighs 7.9 pounds. Tonally it is a dream either with low powered tube amps, or being driven by something bigger.

The JBL E130 is rated at[Invalid or Expired Link Removed], It is no more efficient in the lows than the Neo drivers. Those mids and upper mids are easy to get loud in. That sensitivity doesnt matter nearly as much as some want to believe. Guitarists have been cutting off heads in those bandwidths with single 12's since the dawn of electrified music.

The Link Removed and the Link Removed, Both also illustrate this rise in the mids/upper mids, and this is where their sensitivity figures are quoted from. I am going to go out on a limb here, and say that broad band, you are not going to have much increased sensitivity over something like the 3015, maybe marginally over the 15PR400, but if you can hear that 1dB difference, then you have some golden ears.

 

[Stealth Fighter]

Ok so lets look at these drivers and compare them to some modern ones.

The 3015 has a sensitivity of 100.8 dB/w/m. It also has an xMax of 5.9mm. That is average sensitivity, and it peaks to about 104 dB/w/m around 2kHz. Oh and it weighs 7.9 pounds, and is very well regarded in terms of tone and response.

The Faital Pro is rated at 99 dB/w/m, conservatively as it also rises well above 100 dB/w/m in the upper mid range. It has an xMax of 5.75mm, and weighs 7.9 pounds. Tonally it is a dream either with low powered tube amps, or being driven by something bigger.

The JBL E130 is rated at[Invalid or Expired Link Removed], It is no more efficient in the lows than the Neo drivers. Those mids and upper mids are easy to get loud in. That sensitivity doesnt matter nearly as much as some want to believe. Guitarists have been cutting off heads in those bandwidths with single 12's since the dawn of electrified music.

The Link Removed and the Link Removed, Both also illustrate this rise in the mids/upper mids, and this is where their sensitivity figures are quoted from. I am going to go out on a limb here, and say that broad band, you are not going to have much increased sensitivity over something like the 3015, maybe marginally over the 15PR400, but if you can hear that 1dB difference, then you have some golden ears.

TLDRDC

 

[Stealth Fighter]

Ya know, looking at the original post, he says he would be ok with " a bigger box " and then asks about modern " speakers " . I wonder if he's talking about cabs, instead of individual drivers? We all know that " drivers " go inside " speakers " .

"love the sound of my 40 and 100 watt tube amps.
love the sensitivity of the older speakers, but they can be fragile.
i'm ok with a bigger box, if needed.
Any modern speakers that would get me there?"

It sounded to me as if the OP liked the vintage speaker and didn't mind needing a larger box for it, but he was under the false impression that the vintage drivers were fragile. Several TB members have vintage JBL drivers and we know that they are plenty tough to handle small wattage amps, such as the OP mentioned, and just as importantly, they don't require huge amounts of power to produce very large amounts of volume. I gigged for years with two D140F JBL drivers, which I still own, each driven by one side of a Peavey CS 400 amp. I had all the volume I could ever need, and the drivers never complained one iota. I and I believe others were trying to point out to the OP that he could have his cake and eat it too. FWIW. I'm sure some will want to argue the point.

 

[jnewmark]

"love the sound of my 40 and 100 watt tube amps.
love the sensitivity of the older speakers, but they can be fragile.
i'm ok with a bigger box, if needed.
Any modern speakers that would get me there?"

It sounded to me as if the OP liked the vintage speaker and didn't mind needing a larger box for it, but he was under the false impression that the vintage drivers were fragile. Several TB members have vintage JBL drivers and we know that they are plenty tough to handle small wattage amps, such as the OP mentioned, and just as importantly, they don't require huge amounts of power to produce very large amounts of volume. I gigged for years with two D140F JBL drivers, which I still own, each driven by one side of a Peavey CS 400 amp. I had all the volume I could ever need, and the drivers never complained one iota. I and I believe others were trying to point out to the OP that he could have his cake and eat it too. FWIW. I'm sure some will want to argue the point.

I did pretty much the same thing with a pair of K140's for about 20+ years, used with amps from 400 watts to 1500 watts. The cab wore out before the drivers did. The title of the thread asks about " cabs ", so that's where I got the idea. The Faital 15 previously mentioned gets pretty close to the tone of a JBL K140, imho, but not quite the same " sheen " as the JBL. I was more concerned about copping that tone, than anything else, when Dave Green suggested the Faital. When weight became an issue, it was a no brainer for me, but, if I could, I would still be lugging around a 215 loaded with JBL's.

 

[Blank_0101]

TLDRDC

Solid retort!

"love the sound of my 40 and 100 watt tube amps.
love the sensitivity of the older speakers, but they can be fragile.
i'm ok with a bigger box, if needed.
Any modern speakers that would get me there?"

It sounded to me as if the OP liked the vintage speaker and didn't mind needing a larger box for it, but he was under the false impression that the vintage drivers were fragile.

Sounds like you read what you want to read.

I think he's simply saying he wants the best cab he can get and size isn't a factor, because a lot of people (me included) do not have the means to carry large cabs.

I think the main point is even if the older speakers are tough it's more of a risk running a discontinued part (not saying obsolete). So if a newer speaker can achieve similar or better results and stay in the guys budget and size requirements why not? If technology developments have stalled then new drivers should be no better or worse right? Only you can order them right away if there is an issue.