How do you select cab configuration? (10's,12's,15's,18's?)

[Munjibunga]

You start with a driver that's large enough to go to the lowest frequency you want to reproduce, at the volume you want to reproduce it at. You measure that driver's high frequency response, and where it's response either is down 3dB on-axis with falling response above (upper f3) or is down more than 6dB at 30 degrees off-axis you then cross over to a smaller driver, as small as will handle the output requirements at the crossover frequency. You cross over to a third smaller driver when the second driver is unable to provide adequate response, either on or off-axis, assuming that you wish response to go high enough to require the third, or for that matter a fourth or even fifth driver.

That's if you want quality sound reproduction.

OK, so Bill, do you think Eden is overstating the specs of their D-210XST?

 

[greenboy]

OK, so Bill, do you think Eden is overstating the specs of their D-210XST?

Edens may be the bee's knees but last time I looked at their site they were one of the more laughable examples of bass cab specsmanship I've seen, up there with SWR of about the same period.

I take it they have working cold fusion too.

 

[Munjibunga]

Edens may be the bee's knees but last time I looked at their site they were one of the more laughable examples of bass cab specsmanship I've seen, up there with SWR of about the same period.

I take it they have working cold fusion too.

I meant a different Bill.

 

[greenboy]

Maybe he can spend a moment on Eden's website chuckling too ; }

 

[jimb213]

just to throw this into the mix:
I bought a new bass amp earlier this year. I got an ashdown abm300 evo II with an aguilar GS112 cabinet, a 1x12. I went for the aggie over the ashdown cabs they had in stock (a 210 and a mag series 410) because the aggie was tighter, punchier, and less wooly than the two ashdowns. So while generally speaking, 10s are tighter than 12s and 15s, yadda yadda yadda, there are exceptions to the rules.

So definitely try before you buy, and don't worry about "mis/matching" brands!!

 

[fdeck]

hmm..

lots of differing theories, so i might as well throw my hat in there as well..

the smaller the speaker, the more responsive, punchier and tighter the sound. but larger speakers have more natural cushy low end.

thus, a cab loaded w/ 10" speakers will punch and cut thru a dense mix, much easier than a slower moving 15" speaker. while a single 15" speaker wont need extra goosing of the bass knob for the pillowy fat bass feel.

and yet, while EQ does change things to a certain degree, speaker size does dictate the overall sound. i.e. adding more bass to a single 10" speaker will still sound like nothing more than a thick guitar string. and vice versa, adding more lower mids to a 15" speaker still wont punch or cut like a 4x10 cab.

and like munji and others alluded to, there are MANY 10" loaded cabs that thx to creative porting and well engineered drivers allow those cabs to reach crazy low lows, as skeptical some maybe.

The notion that smaller speakers are more responsive or faster is a myth, because speed is not what you hear. What you hear is sound. Naturally, there is a relationship between cone speed and sound, but if anything, the relationship shows that driver size is not what determines tone quality. If different driver sizes within a product line sound or perform differently, it is not out of any physical necessity, but because of market driven design choices.

Porting is a matter of choosing a single number -- the port resonance frequency -- and then designing the port correctly to avoid distortion. There is not much room to move the port resonance around, so it is unclear what "creative porting" consists of.

I am not calling Eden liars. Also, I don't disagree with anybody's ears. All I am saying is that they have not provided enough information to make a useful evaluation of their cabinets. This is more of a complaint against the entire industry than against Eden in particular.

Let me step back and make a general comment on what is happening here. I think there is a growing sense of discontent about how bass speakers are rated. I think it's because two things are going on at once. First, there is a proliferation of speaker brands, and more variety than ever before. Second, it is gradually becoming possible for regular bassists to gain a fundamental understanding of how speakers actually work, and to share their knowledge to a community that also has ready access to driver data and design software.

 

[IvanMike]

I close my eyes and listen to the cab.

I also use my amp and my bass.

There are Waaaaaay too many variables in speaker and cabinet design to make generalizations about the sound or performance of a particular speaker diameter.

 

[jokerjkny]

I close my eyes and listen to the cab.

I also use my amp and my bass.

There are Waaaaaay too many variables in speaker and cabinet design to make generalizations about the sound or performance of a particular speaker diameter.

i take back my post and will now repeat word for word what ivanmike just posted.

 

[jokerjkny]

The notion that smaller speakers are more responsive or faster is a myth, because speed is not what you hear. What you hear is sound. Naturally, there is a relationship between cone speed and sound, but if anything, the relationship shows that driver size is not what determines tone quality. If different driver sizes within a product line sound or perform differently, it is not out of any physical necessity, but because of market driven design choices.

Porting is a matter of choosing a single number -- the port resonance frequency -- and then designing the port correctly to avoid distortion. There is not much room to move the port resonance around, so it is unclear what "creative porting" consists of.

I am not calling Eden liars. Also, I don't disagree with anybody's ears. All I am saying is that they have not provided enough information to make a useful evaluation of their cabinets. This is more of a complaint against the entire industry than against Eden in particular.

Let me step back and make a general comment on what is happening here. I think there is a growing sense of discontent about how bass speakers are rated. I think it's because two things are going on at once. First, there is a proliferation of speaker brands, and more variety than ever before. Second, it is gradually becoming possible for regular bassists to gain a fundamental understanding of how speakers actually work, and to share their knowledge to a community that also has ready access to driver data and design software.

good stuff, fdeck,

but truth be told, this is pretty much reflective of my real world gigging experience. no matter how hard i've tried with upper echelon 12" and 15" speaker loaded cabs, i just cant get that same fat, rounded, hammer like punch that 10" speakers give me. *shrug*

 

[savit260]

I close my eyes and listen to the cab.

I also use my amp and my bass.

There are Waaaaaay too many variables in speaker and cabinet design to make generalizations about the sound or performance of a particular speaker diameter.

That's exactly how I do it. My bass, My head, even my cord!!Try 'em all and weed out the ones you don't like.

I found when I was first getting into bass that, going out and seening as many bands as I could was a help as well. I'd get right up close to the stage so I could hear the amps without hearing the house system. After a lot of observation, and listening, I started to get an idea of what I liked and didn't like. All the spec sheet stuff is great, and can help point you towards something you might like, but in the end it all comes down to what sounds best to YOU!

Just my 2 cents.

 

[PaulMacCnj]

This is an interesting thread. The term "faster" when applied to speakers has to do with how fast a speaker responds to a given input signal. The larger the speaker, the more mass there is to move and the slower the speaker. Plus, there is the decay when the input signal drops. A larger speaker will take longer to decay because our good old friend mass plays into the inertia.

About specs, I remember when I was working in an audio store (Tech Hifi - Remember them?) back in the early 1980's. Most people looking for speakers wanted 12" to 15" woofers and would use the frequency response specification, instead of their ears, as the buying guide. Then the Ohm loudspeaker company released a new version of the Lincoln Walsh speaker design called the Walsh 2 in 1981. The main driver was a tiny 6 1/2 inch Walsh driver mounted on top of a tower cabinet for handling the bass and midrange. The frequency response "only" goes down to the mid-40's in Hz. Based of the driver size and frequency response, it was a hard sell. But, if you could get a customer to simply _listen_ to them, they would pick them as the best sounding speaker in the store. Why? They had a tight, well defined sound with a huge soundstage. I still have a pair as my main speakers.

With all this said, that's why I chose an Eden CXC 210 combo amp. The 2-10's sound great.

Paul Mac

 

[billfitzmaurice]

..and the AccuSwitch??

OK, so Bill, do you think Eden is overstating the specs of their D-210XST

Answer: 'Bassplayer' and Petebass haven't measured an Eden's SPL. Yet. bgavin promises to do so, along with other cabs as well, and post the results so that everyone can finally see whether the Emperor is wearing any clothes. Or not.

 

[amper]

In my experience, 15's generally give me the sound I'm looking for. I find that cabinets with 10's tend to need a lot of eq help to sound like I want them to sound, and 12's a bit less so. 18's I've found too flubby. I also tend to dislike tweeters in my bass cabs.

Given traditional designs, I think the 15" driver has the right combination of low end thump and high-end roll off to give me sound I want without too much difficulty.

But, I *own* a 2x10, two 1x15's, and a 4x12 w/ a horn. And I sold another 1x15. Still, the combination of two 1x15's is what I like best, and as soon as I can afford it, my main rig is going back to two 1x15's, with no tweeters. I just have to find the right 1x15's for this stage of my life.

I *am* considering something like the Mesa Scout 12" cab for lower volume/higher portability work.

 

[fdeck]

This is an interesting thread. The term "faster" when applied to speakers has to do with how fast a speaker responds to a given input signal. The larger the speaker, the more mass there is to move and the slower the speaker. Plus, there is the decay when the input signal drops. A larger speaker will take longer to decay because our good old friend mass plays into the inertia.

You don't hear speed. You hear sound. Of course there is a relationship between cone speed and sound, but when you look at the details of that relationship, the dependence on driver mass disappears because frontal area tends to increase in proportion to mass. The reference efficiency of the driver accurately captures this relationship.

In addition, a 4x10 has more moving mass than a 1x15, yet nobody complains that a 4x10 is slow.

Here is a good treatment of speaker theory:

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

The site covers closed-box systems, but not ported systems. I plan on rectifying that situation myself, soon as I get my new web page up and running.

 

[fdeck]

..and the AccuSwitch??


Answer: 'Bassplayer' and Petebass haven't measured an Eden's SPL. Yet. bgavin promises to do so, along with other cabs as well, and post the results so that everyone can finally see whether the Emperor is wearing any clothes. Or not.

Any hope of a DIY'er like me making an accurate SPL measurement? I have a Radio Shack SPL meter

Can it be done in my basement, or do I have to wait for better weather and do it outdoors?

 

[georgestrings]

I tried a few different setups and personally I prefer a combination of a 4x10 and an 1x15 cabinet. This brings not only enough deep frequencies but also the right attack if needed. If I had to choose betweenn my two cabinets I'd take the 4x10, but you get the best sound with both of them running.

That's my current setup, also - and I feel the same way, on all points... For many years I played through 2x15s - and still have 2 of them.... While I've found that a 410+tweeter, with both my 15s sounds fantastic, it's really not necessary - the 410 and a 1x15 gets it done just fine for me... I play anything from blues/classic rock to hard rock/metal, and play down to low B...



- georgestrings

 

[georgestrings]

I close my eyes and listen to the cab.

I also use my amp and my bass.

There are Waaaaaay too many variables in speaker and cabinet design to make generalizations about the sound or performance of a particular speaker diameter.

Makes absolute sense to me - when thinking about a purchase, I try to bring everything with me that will be interacting with the prospective new piece of gear - and try it all out together, to see how everything interacts with each other... There really is no substitute for that type of approach, IMO...



- georgestrings

 

[PaulMacCnj]

I'm not following you on this. A 15" speaker has a single "motor", the combination of the voice coil and the permanent magnet, to drive the larger cone. A 4x10" has 4 "motors" driving 4 smaller cones. The reason why nobody complains that a 4x10 is slow is because each 10" speaker is "fast".

This still all comes down to what sound you like. Unlike sound reproduction where it is desirable to have a sound system that is sonically accurate, we are musicians that are creating sound, not reproducing it. Therefore, we will use whatever it takes to get our sound. If somebody wants to commission a builder to make a 60" speaker because that's what sound they want, great. It's what they want, period.

Paul Mac

In addition, a 4x10 has more moving mass than a 1x15, yet nobody complains that a 4x10 is slow.

 

[billfitzmaurice]

The term "faster" when applied to speakers has to do with how fast a speaker responds to a given input signal.

It does so at approximately .7 x the speed of light (the speed that electrons travel through the voice coil) irrespective of cone size. The notion that a larger/heavier cone is incapable of moving as fast as a smaller/lighter one in response to a signal seems logical, but this is an example of where logic and physics part company. It is true that a larger/heavier cone will not respond as accurately at higher frequencies as a smaller/lighter one. However, the mass differential required to do so is along the lines of a 10:1 ratio or more; the difference between a fifteen inch and ten inch cone in this respect is insignificant.

 

[K Dubbs]

There's another fairly easy test which can be performed here. I've done it myself a few times. Munji, hook up your 210xst or 410xlt to your amp, set your eq flat, and connect the input of your amp to the subwoofer out of a home theater receiver (the typically unpowered jack). It may require a jack adapter. Then pop in your favorite movie with explosions or deep bass effects and listen to whether or not your cab really sounds like it produces subwoofer frequencies. If your experience is anything like mine when I performed this experiment with several cabs, you'll hear that commercial bass cabs with high spl figures sound thin and fairly pathetic down in this 30-60hz region where their engineers claim they dominate.

This experiment is only really effective if the rest of your home theater setup satellite speakers are playing the movie score as well. Commercial bass cabs of high spl are designed for hard impacting midbass with SOME supporting bass frequency reproduction, but not enough to claim subwoofer performance (except perhaps the El whappo, some 15" and 18" bona fide subs, or the acme series)