Double Bass LDS's New 1x8 3 way Speaker Cabinet - Initial Impressions

[Tom Baldwin]

Parametric EQ. Cut 1-2 db at 60hz or so with a medium sized bandwith..........do it again (in tandem) at 120hz or so. In general, use the best buffer pre-amp you can find, and give those poor speakers a rest!

The notes I'm talking about are at 41-49Hz. (mostly the open E at 41Hz). The Focus has a 10 megaohm input, if that's what is meant by buffering. The whole point of my rig is to be as simple as possible. No extra preamps and EQs, just one cord from the bass to the amp. I would think the speakers can handle what I'm putting into them.

This Chuffing, if that's what it is, is absolutely not noticeable on the gig. Still, in the quest for perfection I will see if it can be rectified. The cabinet has really got a sound I can work with. Maybe a bit colored, as mids are emphasized and lows are fat, but I like it. Tonight's gig was in a large room with horrendous acoustics. I coupled the 1x8 with a CXL-110, for added volume. Prolly not an ideal pair, because the efficiencies are mismatched, but it worked in a pinch. In this acoustic nightmare of a room I was able to get a good sound. I am thinking about another LDS for situations when more volume is required.

Daggone GAS!

 

[rpatter]

It's interesting to note that, since port placement is not critical (well at least some people don't think so), the port can also be located on the back or on the side of the box. This is what Andy Lewis of Acme Sound has done with the Acme Low B-1 cabinet. There is a sufficiently large diameter port on the side of the box. It looks kind of odd at first, but seems to work just fine. Some transmission line designs also terminate into openings on the side or back.

I have seen some experimental attempts at adding a little resistance in the port have some success. This could be in the form of some very light-density Dacron poly-fill. The idea is to slow down the velocity of the air in the port a bit. Not really a substitute for a properly designed vent though.

-bob

My point about it being a pain to add another port or lengthening the existing one had more to do with the amount of available space in the box than the port placement. I've never paid much attention to those boxes when I've seen them unloaded in the shop, so I don't know what the bracing looks like. I do know that after you take into account the space the woofer and the cup for the midrange take up, there's probably only 5" or 6" to work with. It could get awefully crowded in there.

I've never tried using dacron as flow resitance in a port. I am more familiar with the use of drinking straws stuffed into the port (ala the Proac Tablette). It will change the tuning frequency, but I can't remember whether it goes up or down. Speaking of alternate tuning methods, a small box like that would be perfect for a passive radiator. Hmm....

Ralf

 

[mrpc]

The notes I'm talking about are at 41-49Hz. (mostly the open E at 41Hz). The Focus has a 10 megaohm input, if that's what is meant by buffering. The whole point of my rig is to be as simple as possible. No extra preamps and EQs, just one cord from the bass to the amp. I would think the speakers can handle what I'm putting into them.
Daggone GAS!

41hz to 49hz should have more space, breathing room if you will, if you you gently eq some of the freqs. above them. That is assuming that the cab can actually sound good down there. FWIW I owned one of the first Clarus amps, and found the EQ to be pretty stiff. Don't know what the case is with the Focus.

I thinks that if you are trying to make a budget single 8" speaker cab do much more than mildly enhance the the sound of your instrument, you are going to have to put up with the sound being less than audiphile. just accept it. Turning the volume up will just bring out the rubbish. And there is nothing wrong with that, as long as we know the limitations of the system and are willing to work with them.

How in the world can a teeny little speaker cab ever do justice for the wonderful complex sound of our acoustic instrument?

Speaker cabs sure have alot of Voodoo, that's why lots of them end up on the "previously owned" market after barely being used.....

 

[Tom Baldwin]

I thinks that if you are trying to make a budget single 8" speaker cab do much more than mildly enhance the the sound of your instrument, you are going to have to put up with the sound being less than audiphile. just accept it. Turning the volume up will just bring out the rubbish. And there is nothing wrong with that, as long as we know the limitations of the system and are willing to work with them.

I appreciate your input, don't get me wrong. The reason I bought this cab is just that - for low volume gigs where I only need a little support. Plus the only commercially made 3-way 1x8 is no longer in production. I don't consider myself an audiophile, all I know is that the LDS for my needs and tastes is as good a match as I've found yet. The thing is, if I can recreate that same effect at higher volumes, I'll be a happy camper. Technology is constantly evolving, so we're getting progressively smaller, lighter, louder, more hi-fi cabs all the time. This is another reason that cabs are being sold used. I find no fault with anyone in pursuit of better sound. On that subject, NO amplification system will ever really "do justice to the wonderful complex tone of our acoustic instrument". It's an inherent compromise, but there's no harm in searching for a way to make it easier to live with.

 

[rpatter]

I appreciate your input, don't get me wrong. The reason I bought this cab is just that - for low volume gigs where I only need a little support. Plus the only commercially made 3-way 1x8 is no longer in production. I don't consider myself an audiophile, all I know is that the LDS for my needs and tastes is as good a match as I've found yet. The thing is, if I can recreate that same effect at higher volumes, I'll be a happy camper. Technology is constantly evolving, so we're getting progressively smaller, lighter, louder, more hi-fi cabs all the time. This is another reason that cabs are being sold used. I find no fault with anyone in pursuit of better sound. On that subject, NO amplification system will ever really "do justice to the wonderful complex tone of our acoustic instrument". It's an inherent compromise, but there's no harm in searching for a way to make it easier to live with.

If you can live with a slightly larger cabinet, I would think that the LDS 10" 3 way would be the way to go.

Ralf

 

[mrpc]

I'd agree, if you go with a slightly larger cab, or think about laying down a few more bucks for a studio quality monitor cab, maybe even a powered one such as the Meyers, you might have more luck. Good luck!

 

[Tom Baldwin]

I'd agree, if you go with a slightly larger cab, or think about laying down a few more bucks for a studio quality monitor cab, maybe even a powered one such as the Meyers, you might have more luck. Good luck!

Are you talking about Meyer Sound? I went to their site but there are so many products I didn't know where to begin. Anything in particular? Not that I am really in the market, but it's fun to look!

 

[rpatter]

I'd agree, if you go with a slightly larger cab, or think about laying down a few more bucks for a studio quality monitor cab, maybe even a powered one such as the Meyers, you might have more luck. Good luck!

I designed the crossover on the LDS 8" cab. It's close to studio monitor quality (pretty flat), it's just a rather small cab to be putting double bass through.

Ralf

 

[robgrow]

I designed the crossover on the LDS 8" cab. It's close to studio monitor quality (pretty flat), it's just a rather small cab to be putting double bass through.

Ralf

I was wondering about that. Are you familiar with the Acme Low B-1, which is exceptionally flat with extended LF response (-3dB @ 40Hz, -6 @ 30) in a fairly small box? If so, how would you compare with the LDS 8" 3-way cab. The single 10" woofer in the Acme has its limitations of course, especially if it's fed full bandwidth with no high pass filtering, so I've had my reservations about using an even smaller diameter driver.

I've found a High Pass filter to be invaluable to help avoid exciting a woofer at sub-audible frequencies and wasting power. I usually set the HP filter on my Acoustic Image Clarus at around 40 to 50 Hz, perhaps even a bit higher as needed. I'm thinking that also may help prevent some port chuffing. Just wondered what your thoughts were here.

Thanks.

-bob

 

[LarryR]

Sorry to hijack this thread for the moment, but,

Bob,

Can you be a dear soul and educate me on High Pass Filtering?
I also run an AI Clarus through a single Acme Low B-1. Sounds like I should be using the HP filter to "save" the woofer from ploofing?

I've never been sure if/when to use the AI filters. That the URB sounds so different 20 feet out than 2 feet behind me has led me to not use it at all. Any info and instruction would be greatly appreciated. For instance, how do you "set" your HP at 50-60Hz? Thanks man.

 

[Tom Baldwin]

Can you be a dear soul and educate me on High Pass Filtering?
I also run an AI Clarus through a single Acme Low B-1. Sounds like I should be using the HP filter to "save" the woofer from ploofing?

I've never been sure if/when to use the AI filters. That the URB sounds so different 20 feet out than 2 feet behind me has led me to not use it at all. Any info and instruction would be greatly appreciated. For instance, how do you "set" your HP at 50-60Hz? Thanks man.

Well I can answer some of that. The high pass filter is achieved on the Focus/Clarus by pushing both buttons in. One turns it on or off, the other switches it from high pass to notch mode. In high pass mode, a steady downward slope in the EQ curve is created, starting at the selected freq and decreasing the lower you go (from right to left) The point at which the slope begins is adjustable from 30 to 700 Hz, and the effect can be anywhere from mild to drastic. There are no markings on the knob, so setting it to a specific frequency would be guesswork. My guess would be pretty close to pinned counterclockwise.

As far as what you're hearing vs what is heard at 20 ft, I don't know. All I know is I need it to sound good where I am, for me to be comfortable.

 

[Tom Baldwin]

I was wondering about that. Are you familiar with the Acme Low B-1, which is exceptionally flat with extended LF response (-3dB @ 40Hz, -6 @ 30) in a fairly small box? If so, how would you compare with the LDS 8" 3-way cab. The single 10" woofer in the Acme has its limitations of course, especially if it's fed full bandwidth with no high pass filtering, so I've had my reservations about using an even smaller diameter driver.

I've found a High Pass filter to be invaluable to help avoid exciting a woofer at sub-audible frequencies and wasting power.

Of course I've been curious about the Acme as well, but here's my question. What the point of having the extended low frequency response if 1.you just filter it out, and 2.you couldn't hear it in the first place anyway?

 

[robgrow]

Sorry to hijack this thread for the moment, but,

Bob,

Can you be a dear soul and educate me on High Pass Filtering?
I also run an AI Clarus through a single Acme Low B-1. Sounds like I should be using the HP filter to "save" the woofer from ploofing?

I've never been sure if/when to use the AI filters. That the URB sounds so different 20 feet out than 2 feet behind me has led me to not use it at all. Any info and instruction would be greatly appreciated. For instance, how do you "set" your HP at 50-60Hz? Thanks man.

There's often information coming from the source (pickup, or mic) that is below the useful range of the instrument, such as rumble, etc. Preventing this low-frequency garbage from being amplified in the first place can be a very good thing, since it helps improve amplifier headroom and prevents needlessly moving woofer cones. A woofer cone has to move a lot more in an attempt to reproduce sub-sonic junk than it does at higher frequencies. At the same time, more amplifier power is required to do this. With speakers that have extended low frequency response, such as the Acme Low B-1, the effects of sub-sonic junk can be very noticeable. This becomes even more pronounced at higher volume levels.

As T-Bal mentioned, engaging both filter buttons on the AI Clarus selects the HP filter. A HP filter simply blocks out anything below the selected frequency. Only higher frequencies are allowed to pass. While it's true the HP filter on the Clarus has a wide range, the sweepable filter is not completely linear: The -3 dB point for 40Hz is around 10 o'clock and 60Hz is around 12 o'clock or so. From aprox 70Hz on up is in the last 1/3 of the pot's rotation. This makes sense to me, since the lower and probably most commonly used frequencies are much more spread out in the lower 2/3's of the pot's rotation.

Don't be afraid to experiment and to use your ears. I've found that the Acme cab sometimes has more low frequency response than I want, and then I tend to use the HP filter as EQ as well as for filtering out the sub-sonic junk. This actually works fairly well. At minimum, you can always leave the HP filter engaged with the sweep control set to the lowest frequency (fully CCW) just to keep out the sub-sonic junk.

BTW I always use my amp primarily as a monitor for myself, and I set it so it sounds right to me. I've found this works best overall.

HTH

-bob

 

[robgrow]

Of course I've been curious about the Acme as well, but here's my question. What the point of having the extended low frequency response if 1.you just filter it out, and 2.you couldn't hear it in the first place anyway?

Good questions. Although I definitely don't have all the answers, I'll take a shot: The Acme Low B-1 is designed to reproduce the lowest fundamental of a 5-string bass, which is approx. 30Hz. If you're not playing a 5-string, this may not be as important. I'm playing a 4-string and the Acme cab's -3dB point is at about 40Hz, which is right around the fundamental frequency of the open E string. While it can be really nice to have these fundamentals reproduced properly, in some rooms, especially at higher volume levels, it can be too much of a good thing, and then a little filtering goes a long way.

In reality, many bass speaker cabs actually only have real response down to 50-60 Hz and 70-80Hz is not uncommon. Some of these also have a bump around 100-150Hz or so, so that they sound warm and like they have good bass response. A very flat and neutral speaker with extended LF response is a very different animal, and may not not be everyone's cup of tea. I also have another cab with a 10-inch Eminence full-range whizzer cone speaker (Legend B102). It doesn't have low frequency response like the Acme, but it has a pleasingly warm sound with really nice and smooth midrange response. It makes a great low-volume monitor in certain situations. Really it's just fun as well as practical having both speakers.

-bob

 

[rpatter]

I was wondering about that. Are you familiar with the Acme Low B-1, which is exceptionally flat with extended LF response (-3dB @ 40Hz, -6 @ 30) in a fairly small box? If so, how would you compare with the LDS 8" 3-way cab. The single 10" woofer in the Acme has its limitations of course, especially if it's fed full bandwidth with no high pass filtering, so I've had my reservations about using an even smaller diameter driver.

I've found a High Pass filter to be invaluable to help avoid exciting a woofer at sub-audible frequencies and wasting power. I usually set the HP filter on my Acoustic Image Clarus at around 40 to 50 Hz, perhaps even a bit higher as needed. I'm thinking that also may help prevent some port chuffing. Just wondered what your thoughts were here.

Thanks.

-bob

I've never had an opportunity to even see an Acme cabinet. Everyone I know that has had one, HAD one. The common complaint is that they're too power hungry. I've got to give Acme props for publishing real specs though. So much of what I see in product literature is of no practical value for comparison. Anyway, I haven't measured the bass response of the LDS 3 way, but being familiar with the woofer, it should be around -3db @ 50hz and -10db at 35hz. Not quite as good as the Acme, but great considering this is an 8" woofer. I still think a 1-10" or 2x8" is a better way to go.

Ralf

 

[Tom Baldwin]

I still think a 1-10" or 2x8" is a better way to go.

Would you guys consider a 3-way 2x8 with 2 mids and a tweeter?

 

[robgrow]

Would you guys consider a 3-way 2x8 with 2 mids and a tweeter?

Sounds like a great idea.

 

[Tom Baldwin]

Sounds like a great idea.

Not mine. It's the EA Vl-208, without the transmission line. Thanks for your input on this thread, BTW.

 

[Chris Fitzgerald]

Would you guys consider a 3-way 2x8 with 2 mids and a tweeter?

Funny you should mention that: a friend of mine, Zach Brock (an excellent jazz violinist out of Chicago) just left me a message saying tht he had just gotten off the phone with ______ at LDS and basically ordered exactly that. I've been trying to help Zach score a VL-208 for some time now, with little or no luck. He's got a VL108 that he loves, but needs something that moves more air for louder venues. With any luck, I'll get to check it out next time he's in town, and I'll be sure to report in if I do. Wouldn't it be great if there was something like the VL-208 that was still in production?

 

[robgrow]

I've never had an opportunity to even see an Acme cabinet. Everyone I know that has had one, HAD one. The common complaint is that they're too power hungry. I've got to give Acme props for publishing real specs though. So much of what I see in product literature is of no practical value for comparison. Anyway, I haven't measured the bass response of the LDS 3 way, but being familiar with the woofer, it should be around -3db @ 50hz and -10db at 35hz. Not quite as good as the Acme, but great considering this is an 8" woofer. I still think a 1-10" or 2x8" is a better way to go.

Ralf

When I ordered the Acme Low B-1, I was a little concerned about efficiency, but, as it turns out, it's not that big of a deal for my application for use with the double bass at low to moderate volume. While the Acme is definitely a lot less efficient than the very highest efficiency speakers, it's not really that much less efficent than many average efficiency cabs I'm familiar with. It's a relative thing I think.

What I think would be more of an issue for many people is the sound of the Acme (or maybe lack thereof). If someone is used to more traditional musical intrument speakers, like me, it can take some getting used to a speaker that is very flat with wide bandwidth and also very neutral -- much like a good professional studio monitor. It takes some getting used to as well as working with to get your sound, as it's more of a blank canvas. Not for everyone I'm sure.

Frankly, I'm not particullarly crazy about the Acme for use with bass guitar or for doubling gigs for the above reason. I readily admit I prefer a more colored sound for that. But for pure reproduction of my double bass in a very nice and portable package, I really like the Low B-1.

Of course I'd love to check out an LDS cab sometime. They sound very interesting -- especially a 2X8 design.

-bob