Just opened up my 210MBE...

[rpsands]

Bill Fitzmaurice told me that it would be OK to use the mattress topper (in this thread, a couple pages back). It was a learning experience for me, at least. At this point, I'll be building a fEarful in a few months so I'm not too worried that this experiment failed. I did get a shiny new staple gun out of it, at least.

When you do the fEarful, use quilt batting. It gives you much more fine grained control over how much you use - you layer it until the desired thickness is arrived at.

Mattress topper stuff seems to vary a lot, and I wouldn't be shocked if some of them were partially closed cell foam or took up a significant amount of cabinet volume. I always recommend quilt batting because I am positive it won't change your cabinet volume seriously. Can't say that for sure bout the mattress stuff.

 

[mikeddd]

Thanks, rpsands. I will say that the mattress topper I used felt pretty dense. Not very "squishy" at all. It was that "memory foam" stuff. Oh well, I chalk it up to experimentation and experience. Just seems that the more I do of the former, the less I seem to retain of the latter. LOL! When I build my fEarful, I will be back in the states and have easy access to all the little things I need. You'd be surprised how hard it can be to source (simple) things like quilt batting and plastic zip ties (not that they're related) in some parts of the globe.

 

[SpectorDetector]

The benefits of cabinet damping have nothing to do with psycho-acoustics....

You are twisting the point, maybe I didn't make it clearly enough. Deciding to make the mod to this particular amp, then listening to it and wanting to hear an "improvement" is what I am talking about. The word is that listening tests were done with and without at GK and they preferred without. It's like the high end audio game, some guy plugs a digital clock in to the wall and talks about how it is aligning the electrons or some BS and people start agreeing because they want to hear the difference. Here is something I found on the web about it:

"Let me start out with the Tice Clock. This clock is a basic LED digital clock, substantially identical to a $30 clock sold by Radio Shack. But George Tice sells this for $270. He makes some very lavish claims that by plugging this clock into your audio amplifier's main 115-V power socket, the clock will make all your audio equipment sound much better—that is, if you have a "Golden Ear." However, if you can't hear any difference, then you're admitting that you don't have a Golden Ear—that you have only limited auditory capability to appreciate the BEST in audio.

Many reviewers for hi-fi magazines have agonized over this. A few think it's great—the reviewer can really hear the improvement. Others search for any plausible technical reason for improvement. One reviewer observed, "If Mr. Tice enclosed a Negative Ion Generator in his clock, maybe people really WOULD think the music sounds better." But he had to concede that there was NOT any ion generator in there. So, many people have come to the conclusion that this clock is (at best) a hoax.

They can't hear any difference, and there's nothing to measure. There's no subjective or objective reason to think that Tice's "clock" can make the music sound better. But it sure takes a lot of brass to make such claims....."

Psycho acoustics....

 

[SpectorDetector]

Oh well, maybe the Tice clock is not a good example, being that cabinet damping is not some crazy voodoo like the clock thing is. But the point of wanting to hear an improvement is still valid.

 

[Emprov]

Oh well, maybe the Tice clock is not a good example, being that cabinet damping is not some crazy voodoo like the clock thing is. But the point of wanting to hear an improvement is still valid.

Tone is also a subjective thing -- what is the bee's knee's to one may sound like doggie dung to another.

 

[PunkSweeper]

What's your problem?
Another long post.

Whoa man, I was actually thanking you. I made the comment about irony because my reply to you was admittedly a bit of an attack on rpsands. As for the post length thing; It's just a pet peeve of mine when people quote really long posts in their entirety, so I abbreviated it. Sorry.

Perhaps. But that's not the question here. The question is whether this particular cab sounds better after being braced and/or damped. Those who have done so say that it does, and that's all that matters.

Fair enough. It just seemed strange to me how you kept referring to a damped cab as "better" especially when GK's are known for nasty, impolite midrange. Now I see your basis in empirical data- everyone who tried it liked it!


I can admit when I'm wrong...

 

[billfitzmaurice]

Oh well, maybe the Tice clock is not a good example, being that cabinet damping is not some crazy voodoo like the clock thing is.

That's just it, speaker enclosure damping isn't voodoo, it's accepted practice, and has been since well before G-K existed. How and why it works is extremely well documented. There's certainly room for placebo effect with damping, as there is with any change in any system. But to dismiss its value out of hand only shows a complete lack of any understanding of how speakers work.

 

[Emprov]

But to dismiss its value out of hand only shows a complete lack of any understanding of how speakers work.

And again, I don't think that anyone in this thread has dismissed its value.

 

[SpectorDetector]

But to dismiss its value out of hand only shows a complete lack of any understanding of how speakers work.

Who has done that? We are talking about cabs that have been "designed" without it, not saying it is bunk. Who is "dismissing it out of hand"?

 

[SpectorDetector]

Too many people on this board just want to prove what they know instead of comprehending what other people write.

 

[Emprov]

Who has done that? We are talking about cabs that have been "designed" without it, not saying it is bunk. Who is "dismissing it out of hand"?

Honestly, I think that the monkey wrench was right here:

I just love the "i know better than Bob" attitude, it's kinda funny...

It could be interpreted that Bob thinks that he knows more than the rest of the world by choosing not to dampen some of his cabs, which is entirely untrue....

... He did a lot of A/B testing using a variety of dampening materials, and in all of their listening tests, they preferred the un-damped cab.

I'm not trying to defend the science/engineering behind this decision, but I must say, Bob Gallien tends to do things his own way,...

My point is that, if Bob likes the tone of the unlined cab, then good for him! To suggest that he doesn't know what he's talking about because he prefers the tone of the unlined 210 is arrogance IMO. Tone is subjective and there's no rule that says that everyone has to like the same thing.

 

[billfitzmaurice]

Thanks, rpsands. I will say that the mattress topper I used felt pretty dense. Not very "squishy" at all. It was that "memory foam" stuff. .

I haven't tried memory foam for damping, but it's becoming so common that I'll have to do some testing with it. Memory foam uses a denser material, with much smaller air pockets, than standard urethane. I would guess that it would require far less of it to do the job, and that it would be easier to overdamp with it.

 

[rpsands]

What I can say is that lots of us have listened to damped and undamped cabinets and know what to expect ahead of time - and can discern whether that is indeed the case or not.

I've lined a lot of cabs correctively and it's never failed to make a remarkable difference.

 

[MikeBass]

There is plenty of bracing in these cabinets, they are very stiff which is why they sound a good as they do. Also do not add any material to the inside, they are designed to work best just the way they are!
Bob Gallien

Wouldn't it be nice to see a frequency response graph for a cabinet with no acoustic dampening material compared to the same cabinet with the material? Then we'd know who to believe.

That wouldn't really prove anything really.
Maybe the cab sounds fine like it is. Or maybe not.

The guy in charge of the whole company says NO, don't do this, yet TB internet experts still insist.
I'd like to see some science with measurements and samples of padding v. no padding.

$5 and you can find out what sounds the best yourself.

But I do kinda giggle a bit when Bob Gallien himself, the "G" in "GK" pretty much one of the companies that really IMO opened the door to much of the "modern" sounds in bass, says it's designed to be the way it is, and yet, TB'rs with pretty much nothing in comparison, but are held as "experts" want to debate him on it.

Yank out the speaker, staple in some eggcrate foam, put it back together and see what you like regardless of what everyone here says.
You didn't say that you had an issue before you discovered this, so why now would you have one?

 

[rpsands]

Listen, I've played these things. Lots of other people have too. The 2x10 sounds like a boomy piece of junk. I love GK stuff and I'm a huge fan, but that cabinet is underbraced and underdamped.

If you play through it and put your hand on it you can feel the panels flexing in and out. You can also feel the whole wall reverberate when you bang on it.

The MB115 is far less resonant, and feels like it suffers from the midrange mess far less for some reason. Could be due to the shape of the enclosure. I believe it could benefit significantly from a gentle lining with a half inch or so of quilt batting but I wouldn't obsess over it.

The 2x10 on other hand needs a lot of work to reduce its boom. I'd expect some bracing and damping both to be required.

You can disagree with that, Bob G can disagree with it, but I'll put my opinion up against his in this instance...the MB2x10 is a boomy mess of a cabinet. Suitable for reggae or old school and not much else. Go try it and see if you disagree!

 

[MikeBass]

Listen, I've played these things. Lots of other people have too. The 2x10 sounds like a boomy piece of junk. I love GK stuff and I'm a huge fan, but that cabinet is underbraced and underdamped.

If you play through it and put your hand on it you can feel the panels flexing in and out. You can also feel the whole wall reverberate when you bang on it.

The MB115 is far less resonant, and feels like it suffers from the midrange mess far less for some reason. Could be due to the shape of the enclosure. I believe it could benefit significantly from a gentle lining with a half inch or so of quilt batting but I wouldn't obsess over it.

The 2x10 on other hand needs a lot of work to reduce its boom. I'd expect some bracing and damping both to be required.

You can disagree with that, Bob G can disagree with it, but I'll put my opinion up against his in this instance...the MB2x10 is a boomy mess of a cabinet. Suitable for reggae or old school and not much else. Go try it and see if you disagree!

A "boomy piece of junk" is pretty harsh.
It may be- to you. And maybe me too. I may have played through one in the past- I don't recall (a friends shop is a GK dealer- I'm sure I have played through one, just don't recall).
Sounds like the OP had zero issue with the cab before this "discovery", and now, the placebo effect may be taking hold as the OP might think there is now something wrong. When in fact, there really may be no issues if it [DEL]is[/DEL] WAS meeting his tone/gig requirements.

Again, to the OP, spend a few $$ and find out what works.
Pretty simple really.

 

[My name is Mudd]

Pretty simple really.

But not nearly as much fun as arguing about it with people for weeks on end...

 

[baddarryl]

Ok boys you have me off to the store to get some material for my MB115. I would like to tighten up the sound a little. It has one brace running 45 degrees on the left lower corner anchoring side to bottom, the amp case I think braces the rear. There is no bracing on the top or sides. I am thinking of running 1x3's horizontally centered along the sides just for giggles. Waste of time or not?

Definitely gonna dampen it, why not kill a rainy day!

 

[greenboy]

Ok boys you have me off to the store to get some material for my MB115. I would like to tighten up the sound a little. It has one brace running 45 degrees on the left lower corner anchoring side to bottom, the amp case I think braces the rear. There is no bracing on the top or sides. I am thinking of running 1x3's horizontally centered along the sides just for giggles. Waste of time or not?

If you want that much lumber in there rip each 1x3 and distribute the results in 4 places nearer panel centers, rather than using it all in only two. Check this: [Invalid or Expired Link Removed] (each "stick" in there is 1.5" wide and 1/2" thick).

 

[baddarryl]

Also where to I find quilt batting?