• 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.

Entering into big cab territory...

What Giant Cab for awesomeness?

  • 8x10(Carvin, Ampeg, whatever's on CL)

    Votes: 154 38.8%

  • 2x15(GenzBenz, Peavey, whatever's on CL)

    Votes: 61 15.4%

  • Add a 1x15 to my 4x10

    Votes: 58 14.6%

  • 4x12(GK, Avatar, CL)

    Votes: 71 17.9%

  • Carrots

    Votes: 53 13.4%
  • Total voters
    397
#44
CapeScrod said:
A 4x10 and 1x15 are a pretty common combo, as long as the impedance is the same I wouldn't forsee any problems.
Click to expand...

The main problem is that a 1x15 cannot take nearly the same amount of power that a 4x10 can, so when connected to one power source you are limited by the amount of power the 15 can take being the weaker link.

Plus there are phase issues and such That I really don't know too much about, but everyone says they're an issue.
 
#46
nickrs540 said:
The main problem is that a 1x15 cannot take nearly the same amount of power that a 4x10 can, so when connected to one power source you are limited by the amount of power the 15 can take being the weaker link.

Plus there are phase issues and such That I really don't know too much about, but everyone says they're an issue.
Click to expand...

I can see that. My Hartke is 240W and the Trace is 200W, both 8ohms and I think my head is a only 150W so no issues over driving any of the cabs. The rig is still plenty loud for a good mid sized venue and I plan on adding a power amp to the rig to take the load off my GK.
 
#49
CapeScrod said:
A 4x10 and 1x15 are a pretty common combo, as long as the impedance is the same I wouldn't forsee any problems.
Click to expand...

And that's one of the problems. It's engineering by looks and not science.

A 4x10 is a fairly efficient cabinet due to the coupling of the four drivers. Sooo, a single cone cannot compete for efficiency of a 4x10.. Neither can it compete in power handling. Check the power ratings of the two cabinets. The 1x15 will NOT produce any more lows than a ten. That's a myth. That's the explanation.
 
#50
nickrs540 said:
The main problem is that a 1x15 cannot take nearly the same amount of power that a 4x10 can, so when connected to one power source you are limited by the amount of power the 15 can take being the weaker link.

Plus there are phase issues and such That I really don't know too much about, but everyone says they're an issue.
Click to expand...
When you have notes on your bass that pop out really loud and notes that seem to disappear, that's phasing in action. It's not always the mismatched rig that causes it, but it's often a good bet to start looking there.
 
#53
Big cabs I have experience with that will work in a loud band with (2) 100watt(or more) halfstacks:

Mesa's PH610, 810, 215, and 412

SWR's Goliath Sr and Megoliath

Ampeg's SVT810e

I haven't used the 412s by Aguilar and G-K, but I would imagine they'd both work well, too... IMO, the two best 810s on the market are Mesa's and SWR's, in that order...

This is what I use, and believe me - it will handle any band situation with relative ease... I'm up against 2 Triple Rec halfstacks in a modern rock/metal band, playing big clubs, halls, and outdoor shows every weekend - and I never raise my Master volume above 10 o'clock...

IMAG0126.jpg
 
#54
nickrs540 said:
The main problem is that a 1x15 cannot take nearly the same amount of power that a 4x10 can, so when connected to one power source you are limited by the amount of power the 15 can take being the weaker link.

Plus there are phase issues and such That I really don't know too much about, but everyone says they're an issue.
Click to expand...

That's more of a generalization, to be honest. 1x15 cabinet might not need the amount of power that another 4x10 would need, depending on how it's designed. Because people don't hear power handling capabilities. People hear sound pressure levels.

It's like all the folks who claim their car produces 4-500+ horsepower, but get beaten by someone in a drag race with less horsepower. Why? Because of how efficiently the car with less horsepower uses it to maximize how fast it gets where it's going. It doesn't need a ton of power because it's frame is built right, and has the right setup to get traction to the tires. Like my uncle the car nut always says, you can have all the horsepower in the world, but if you don't translate it into torque hitting the pavement, you may as well be walking. The same goes for bass cabinets. Power handling doesn't mean squat. Efficient design is what gets it done.

Cabinet efficiency is precisely what I would take into account here vs. claimed ratings of power handling (and many are wildly off). You don't need to look at the power handling ratings so much as you need to look at the SPL levels created. That's the proof in the pudding. How loud is it really? I've been reading up on the BFM Jacks and plan on building a pair of 1x12s, lately. And some of the SPL charts would surprise you. But do your own digging and figure on what works best for you.

What I found is that these designs, a folded horn and compression driver array, use half the power, and provide noticeable gains in increased sensitivity over higher-rated power-handling cabinets. In other words, less power required, and a whole lot more bass rolling around out there.

Oh, and did I mention that you're fridgeless? A quality efficient design can and should save space, and take advantage of physics to not only increase the amount of bass guitar frequency reproduction, but (at least the BFM Jacks) also decrease the amount of off-axis fall-off. Which means you will hear your bass to a greater degree stepping off axis (left or right vs. in front of it) with an efficiently design cabinet than you would with an inefficient one. Without having to shell out huge bucks for 1,500 watts of power.

But there is one drawback. You don't look nearly as cool in front of a couple 112 cabinets as you do in front of a couple of 810s. While not as visually impressive as an 810 cabinet, think of all the time you'll spend hanging with your groupies after your gig instead of carting off a large cabinet and heading to the chiropractor to get your adjustment.

It's something to consider, anyway. But I wouldn't go by "500 watts this and 1200 watts that." I would go by SPL values, as that will tell me the whole, actual story of the cabinet.
 
#57
rolandm said:
Um, that's what they make monitor mixes for, right?
Click to expand...
Monitors for bass suck.

Anyway, regarding your post about 115's, we are talking about your usual direct radiator cabs made for bass by most major manufacturers, not folded horns. And with direct radiator bass cabs, a 410 will be quite a bit louder than a 115.
 
#58
JimmyM said:
Monitors for bass suck.
Click to expand...


Agreed - and usually, the bassist is the last one considered when assigning mixes... I figure it like this - I play in a loud 2 guitar band, and don't want to depend on anyone else to get my job done, and sound great while doing it - so, I always bring enough cab to get the job done.... As a result, I never end up stressing my gear any, because I'm not pushing it hard to get the volume I need for my particular band situation...

I always have good FOH support these days - usually (4) 18s for subs up front - and decent monitors, too - but I won't stop bringing enough cab for my on-stage needs anytime in the near future...


- georgestrings
 
#59
Sartori said:
Well, aren't you lucky that you apparently usually have PA support, and even monitors.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't consider myself lucky by any stretch. We do have an excellent soundman with very nice pro equipment and we pay for it accordingly. He makes certain everyone's mix is to their liking, and he gets paid to do that. At least in our band, there isn't any "oh, you're the bass player, here you go, just take this monitor mix and deal with it." He grabs his iPad, heads up onstage, hears what we hear, and adjusts it accordingly, and works hard to make sure that the sound coming out of the mains and the monitors is as close as possible to the sound leaving my cabs.

And that's not easy, as I bump from one preset bass sound to another, including a few different fuzzes and a few different bass synths. If he didn't work as hard as he does with my bass sound, the songs would suffer greatly, and the audience wouldn't leave the venue having had the experience we intended them to have. And having an audiophile doing FOH and mons helps us achieve that. And that kind of hard work happens whether it's an indoor gig in a 2-300 seat venue, or a summertime outdoor venue with 1100 sets of ears listening to us.

We also try to keep our stage levels to a respectable minimum. I want to hear the dynamics of the drummer's work, as much as I hear the guitarists. For us, at least, it's not a battle of who has more cabs, it's a joint effort to make good, quality music. I was in a band that was a constant fight for volume before and toted an Ampeg 810 for that purpose and it still got ridiculous. Now, I don't have to, and believe me, I'm a heckuva lot happier for it.

Spoiled? Yes. Lucky? No. I worked damned hard to get where I'm at onstage, and luck had little to do with it.
 
#60
nateynate said:
There is always the fEARful 1515/66 option. This would give you huge sound and light weight. Tons of info on here about the fearful cabs

Http://www.greenboy.us
Click to expand...

I will Give a Second To this!! That 1515/66/1 knock most every 810 out there on its A$$ and go as low and as loud as you want without Farting out!!!:D But if that is not the what gives you GAS then i would vote for the SWR 810. I have one great cab tons of punch and a pretty damn good Bottom end!! Really cant go wrong ether way!! But in the end if i were you i would Check out the fEARful Cabs...if you dont want to build one there are Guys that can do it for you!!!! Cheers Mate!!~Elliot
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back