• 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.

Eminence B102 as a replacement speaker?

Sundogue

Sundogue

Apr 26, 2001
8,795
481
65
Wausau, WI
#1
A while back I built a combo amp/cab.

The combo I made holds my Eden WT400 head and 2 - 10" speakers.

I took two of my Peavey 10" speakers out the 410 cab they were in and put them in my 210 combo.

The cab sounded awesome, but they are only 80 watt speakers and wired up as an 8 ohm cab it only gave me half my amp output (200 watts).

I'd like to put some new speakers in my combo. I was thinking of getting two Eminence B102 speakers (8 ohm, 200 watts each). I'd wire it up as a 4 ohm/400 watt cab.

I realize that I built my cab for the Peaveys, and it's kind of a crap shoot as to how well they'll sound. I've been down the whole WinISD road before when I built the cab...I just want to know if the Eminence B102 speakers are a decent drop in solution.

I only play a four string so I don't need to go below 40 Hz and I'm not looking for a 210 that will be used on large concert gigs...just something easy to haul around to small club gigs.

Any thoughts on this speaker as a drop in replacement?

Link Removed
 
#3
Well, if I recall my Peavey speakers had somewhat similar TS Specs, except that the B102's handle more watts and have a higher XMAX than the Peaveys' (and of course, are 8 ohm speakers that I can wire up as a 4 ohm cab).

I think BGavin had said the the Eminence ones would be about the same, only a little better than what I had. I can't recall specifically...but I just want some opinions on those speakers.

The cab specs are 20” X 20” X 18”...and yes I know a cube is not ideal. I have acoustic foam on the bottom and sides inside, and with the Peavey's in it, it had an awesome sound. But I need some new speakers as I am selling the 410...preferrably ones that can handle the 4 ohm, 400 watt load of my Eden head (i.e - Eminence B102).
 
#4
i dont have the time or ability to run numbers, but i think this could be a starting point for you...

(It is a not so subtle variation of what Bill FM recently posted on here in response to someone else.)

your dimensions are 20 x 20 x 18. assuming this is external, you have 4.2 ft3. subtracting for the cab walls, driver disp, and port, i bet you are still plenty large enough to correctly enclose the BP102 running the lows/mids. A high cut around ????hz. Then , a b102 in a separate SEALED cab (within your existing cab) with a high pass set to lop off the low lows (keeping maybe around 100hz and up or so... i dont know offhand) so that it is a low-mid through high-mid driver.

you can add an interior wall easily, and that will soak up some of the the excess cab volume you likely have anyway. It shouldnt be directly bisecting things either, since the BP needs more volume and the B needs far less. PLus, it eliminates the "cube-ishness, and will stiffen things considerably.

This way you have a cab that is approximately 4+ ohms (since the 2 drivers overlap a fair ammount in freq response) though not exactly 4 ohms, yet most likely not 8 either. Sorta maybe 6ish ohms.

This is superior to the 2 x b102 solution since the bp goes lower, but cuts off useable freqs farily low too.

In fact, it sounds pretty interesting to me... 6ohm cab with a box in a box configuration. just add a switch to the back and praise the lord a little and you could be onto soemthing big!!! :hiding: (ok, that wasnt entirely fair.)
 
#5
OK...so just for the heck of it...you had a 210 cab and just needed to replace some speakers and the original speakers for that cab aren't available anymore.

Are the Eminence B102's fairly decent replacements? I understand all about ideal cab tuning...but say you already have a cab and need to drop in some replacements and weren't expecting the ideal.

What are the pros/cons of Eminence B102's? What can one expect from these speakers? I'm guessing a bit mild on the low end...and perhaps worthwhile above 100Hz? I can live with decent low end, even if not overpowering.

I just want to use my cab for small/mid-size clubs. It sounded awesome with some cheap 80 watt Peavey speakers...I would think that 200 watt Eminence should sound at least as good plus be able to handle more power than the Peavey's did.
 
#7
Crockettnj said:
as a "jsut for the heck of it" thing, they are cheep enough so you might as well jsut try it and see. if its horrible, you can pawn them off and not have a huge$$$ loss . let US know!
Click to expand...

I can't see where they'd be any worse than what I had in there (the Peavey speakers).

According to specs, my cab should have sounded like crap because even after all the WinISD calculations and building it to specs...I made a mistake on the depth and realized (before it was completely done) that the cab wouldn't fit in the back seat of my car). Thus it ended up at the dimensions I listed and had to live with it.

Fortunately for me, my mistake proved to be advantageous in that the sound was so good I had three bass players offer to buy it and the guitar player I played with at that time (who is literally a genius and builds gear...and is a total freak of nature on any instrument) told me he'd never heard a bass cab that sounded that good.

But...at times, I was pushing those Peavey 80 watt speakers a bit too much. I kept thinking that I didn't need much more volume out of that cab...just a bit. So, ideally I'd like to throw some speakers in it that can handle more power.

I just want to know what people's opinions are on the Eminence B102's. Are they crappy? Good? Great? Can they handle the low end on their own (even if it's not the way a 15" could)?

If anyone has any opinions on these (or any other decent, full range bass speakers) throw it up here. I'd like to hear what anyone has to say about them.
 
#8
The B102 is the one with the whizzer cone. I own three of them.

The volume requirements are 0.4 to 0.6 cubic feet, each. These are high rolloff drivers and have no bottom. The F3 is 97 Hz in QB3, which is the best case F3.

The Flat alignment handles the most power, but power handling drops like a rock below 65 Hz. I doubt these drivers will survive low E at full power.

Using the BP102 (no whizzer) will result in better low end, but with a distinct, Eden-link bump in the midbass. The BP102 offers far better power handling characteristics.
 
#9
bgavin said:
The B102 is the one with the whizzer cone...
0.4 to 0.6 cubic feet, each. These are high rolloff drivers and have no bottom... I doubt these drivers will survive low E at full power...the BP102 (no whizzer) will result in better low end, but with a distinct, Eden-link bump in the midbass. The BP102 offers far better power handling characteristics.
Click to expand...
Agreed, and why combining a B102 in a sealed sub-enclosure along with a BP102 vented, along with a 100Hz HP filter on the B102, is a viable option, provided the cab is large enough to allow the BP102 to do its thing. There's really no such thing as one driver that's perfect across the entire spectrum, but using two with different characteristics can work well if properly implemented. If the box is too small to support this option I'd go with a single BP102 and an Alpha 8MR, with a crossover at 800 Hz. The sealed back mid makes an separate sub-enclosure unnecessary.
 
#10
The new Basslite S2010 is the Neo replacement for the BP102 driver. It is quite interesting, for the vented box crowd. It requires 0.86 to 0.94 cubic feet per driver, which is MUCH less than the BP102 it replaces.

Each S2010 is 5.2 pounds lighter than the BP102, or a 20+ pound weight savings in a 4x10 box. F3 on the new driver is not bad at all, considering. I have a feeling this one is going to be popular in a hurry... probably in the Avatar 4x10 boxes before long.
 
#11
bgavin said:
The B102 is the one with the whizzer cone. I own three of them.

The volume requirements are 0.4 to 0.6 cubic feet, each. These are high rolloff drivers and have no bottom. The F3 is 97 Hz in QB3, which is the best case F3.

The Flat alignment handles the most power, but power handling drops like a rock below 65 Hz. I doubt these drivers will survive low E at full power.

Using the BP102 (no whizzer) will result in better low end, but with a distinct, Eden-link bump in the midbass. The BP102 offers far better power handling characteristics.
Click to expand...


I kind of like the mid-hump...and I'd certainly want something that handles the low end better. From Eminence's literature, the BP102 has an xmax of 6.2mm, whereas the B102 only has an xmax of 3.0.

So you think the BP102 is a better drop in for my cab? I understand we aren't dealing in ideals here, as my cab is already built and I'm trying to find a replacement.

So...BP102 is a better alternative than the B102?
 
#12
Ehh, it's certainly different. Just look at the efficiency difference between them. The B102 is IMO better suited for upright players or as a mid-high driver in a multi-driver cab; it needs help in the bass department. The BP 102 puts out a lot more bass but is not very efficient: more suited for a 4x10 cab. In a 2x10 cab you will have a not-so-loud result.
 
#13
link wray said:
Ehh, it's certainly different. Just look at the efficiency difference between them. The B102 is IMO better suited for upright players or as a mid-high driver in a multi-driver cab; it needs help in the bass department. The BP 102 puts out a lot more bass but is not very efficient: more suited for a 4x10 cab. In a 2x10 cab you will have a not-so-loud result.
Click to expand...

Well, my cheapo Peavey 10" speakers sure sounded great in it, and I could get quite loud with it...and never really had to max it out either. There was only one gig, in a rather large hall that I really pushed the speakers a little too hard.

There has to be a worthwhile replacement for it somewhere.
 
#15
link wray said:
Well, if i had to choose, i would go with the BP102's . Just be prepaired to open up the amp a bit more. Fortunately the power handling of the BP102's is good enough to open the amp up fully.
Click to expand...

Well, when I had the Peavey's in there, my only option was wiring it up as an 8 ohm cab so my Eden head was at half power...200 watts (give or take).

With two 8 ohm speakers I can wire up the cab as a 4 ohm cab and get the full 400 watts out of my head. So I will have more power available.
 
#16
Don't ignore the new Basslites that Eminence just released. Either the CH2010 or S2010 might be just what you want.

All the new ones are in my spread sheet.

1) Figure how much net volume you have available for each driver.

2) Sort my spread sheet on the Vb column.

3) Find the closest match, and see if the tuning and F3 work for you.
 
#17
Thanks. I already have your spreadsheet downloaded, but I'll look at the updated one...and see what I come up with.

I'll just throw this out there...my cab sounded great with two 10" Peavey Sheffield speakers (75 watt, 4 ohm, wired up to 8 ohm).

I would think the BP102's would be an improvement, in that they are 8 ohm, 200 watt speakers (wired up to 4 ohm total), with 6.22mm xmax. though they have an SPL of 91db.

I'll have to look at the specs again of all these speakers.
 
#18
Well, my total cab volume (for two speakers) is almost 4.2 cu.ft.

According to Bruce's spreadsheet, the Vb on the BP102 is 2.19, so with two of them I'd need a cab with a volume of 4.38. Is that correct? Mine is a tad shy of that...but to me is close enough.

I'm only going to be using a 4 string (with standard tuning). I also do not play a whole lot of notes very high up, and I don't like a lot of what I call, "hissy highs" in my sound...basically lows and mids do it more for me.

Of course the tuning of my cab was at about 39 Hz...so maybe these will be ideal replacements for me.

I'll have to run the BP102's through WinISD with my cab setup and see what I come up with there.

EDIT: After running the specs through WinISD, it doesn't look too bad. I'm not getting a lot of db out of it (around 95 max at 68Hz, and about 91 at 40Hz). It actually looks a little better than it does in comparison to my Peavey specs in WinISD. I'll have to keep looking into it.
 
#19
The volume is close enough, and so is the tuning. The BP102 wants 40 Hz, so 39 Hz is great.

The closer the actual volume to the required volume, the less the hump. Remember to calculate *internal* volume, then subtract about 0.10 cubic feet per driver. This is nit picking, but will give you an idea where your cab actually falls in volume.

The BP102 is a good driver, but all done by 2,000 Hz. You will need a tweeter to get the rest of the way to 7,500 Hz for all the bass harmonics.
 
#20
bgavin said:
The volume is close enough, and so is the tuning. The BP102 wants 40 Hz, so 39 Hz is great.

The closer the actual volume to the required volume, the less the hump. Remember to calculate *internal* volume, then subtract about 0.10 cubic feet per driver. This is nit picking, but will give you an idea where your cab actually falls in volume.

The BP102 is a good driver, but all done by 2,000 Hz. You will need a tweeter to get the rest of the way to 7,500 Hz for all the bass harmonics.
Click to expand...

I can add a tweeter at any time as I used the tweeter from my Peavey cab. I was going to just put a plate over the tweeter hole...but since it's all ready for one...I can add one at any time. You can see the tweeter in the pic in my first post.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back