Low Down Sound 15/6.5 Cab

[Chef]

Haven't done that and probably wont...

 

[Ryan Mohr]

Chef: did you try your G&L JB-2 loaded with NJ4s through the 115/6.5? Thanks

 

[Chef]

nope

 

[rpsands]

Nah no problem. Thanks for the opinions, really. I emailed Don about building a TL606 with a single 3015, and he didn't seem to keen on the idea. He recommended the Eminence CB15 instead for my tonal goals.

The Tl606 is probably a tad big for the 3015 IIRC. You want something like 2.8-3 cubic feet.

I would go with the 3015 - more output (3db more sensitive) and it weighs 9lbs less or so.

The sensitivity will make a pretty good sized difference, as will the higher displacement (in terms of max volume).

 

[rpsands]

rpsands, if I'm not mistaken the displacement-limited power handling that Eminence calculates is based on sine waves, so it doesn't translate directly over to the waveform that a bass guitar generates. The energy is spread out somewhat, with the fundamental and first harmonic being of greatest significance from an excursion standpoint. I would guess that the fundamental carries ballpark 15% of the energy, and the first harmonic maybe 35% of the energy (correction welcomed on these assumptions), so if a given cab could handle 75 watts at the fundamental and 175 watts at the first harmonic then it can probably handle 500 watts, assuming no equalization.

Thanks for the intel man. I think the amount of fundamental varies quite a bit but with a 5-string in particular both the fundamental and the first harmonic are very dangerous to a Deltalite 2515 II, so with the scenario presented I'd still be worried (schmoe pounding away on the B).

Also, you can jack up the fundamental by playing closer to the neck and using a neck pickup, so 15% while a good guess is probably not entirely accurate for a lot of players. Longer scale instruments are more too.

And as you say equalization playing in as well is another concern - what happens if you add 6db of bass? Lots of folks do this.

 

[Ryan Mohr]

The Tl606 is probably a tad big for the 3015 IIRC. You want something like 2.8-3 cubic feet.

I would go with the 3015 - more output (3db more sensitive) and it weighs 9lbs less or so.

The sensitivity will make a pretty good sized difference, as will the higher displacement (in terms of max volume).

Maybe I will just ask don to build a box for the 3015 with 3 cubic feet internal volume, but with the general look of a TL606 (shelf ports).

 

[Bjazzman]

i must have missed it but what is the weight/cost of this cab?

also, would it be fine as a 4 ohm standalone or would it be better to get 2 of these in 8 ohm?

 

[Ryan Mohr]

i must have missed it but what is the weight/cost of this cab?

This is a "Don Built" 15/6, and not a Fearful design. As such, the box is shorter. It measures ~22.5x23x16 @ 42lbs
Em 3015LF, 18Sound Mid driver; crossed at ~ 1.3khz, with an l-pad/attenuator. 8 ohm/500 watt tag on the back.

I think it is $499 before shippping.

also, would it be fine as a 4 ohm standalone or would it be better to get 2 of these in 8 ohm?

Actually, this configuration is fine as an 8 ohm standalone.

 

[Chef]

respectfully disagree...perhaps.
the mesa diesel 115 i used to have measured out to be a nearly exact TL606 clone....IIRC. I did print the EV plans at one point.

While the 3015 might work marginally better in a smaller box, I can tell you it worked supremely well in the mesa diesel 606 clone.

The Tl606 is probably a tad big for the 3015 IIRC. You want something like 2.8-3 cubic feet.

I would go with the 3015 - more output (3db more sensitive) and it weighs 9lbs less or so.

The sensitivity will make a pretty good sized difference, as will the higher displacement (in terms of max volume).

 

[greenboy]

While the 3015 might work marginally better in a smaller box, I can tell you it worked supremely well in the mesa diesel 606 clone.

Yep. It's a pretty insignificant difference between 3 cf and 3.2 cf for this retrofit. Only if someone was bulding their own box and wanted to streamline internally and end up with a slightly smaller package and less box weight would I say 3 cf is Teh Choice.

 

[Passinwind]

Yep. It's a pretty insignificant difference between 3 cf and 3.2 cf for this retrofit. Only if someone was building their own box and wanted to streamline internally and end up with a slightly smaller package and less box weight would I say 3 cf is Teh Choice.

If you're building your own, changing the port runners to 1 X 3s and adjusting baffle and port shelf dimensions accordingly leaves you with the same outer dimensions as a stock TL606, less chance of chuffing when pushed hard, and that little bit less internal volume that looks better "on paper" for the KL 3015 non-LF. I've heard a cab done that way. It sounded really nice IMHO.

 

[Ryan Mohr]

If you're building your own, changing the port runners to 1 X 3s and adjusting baffle and port shelf dimensions accordingly leaves you with the same outer dimensions as a stock TL606, less chance of chuffing when pushed hard, and that little bit less internal volume that looks better "on paper" for the KL 3015 non-LF. I've heard a cab done that way. It sounded really nice IMHO.

That sounds like a great idea, thanks!

 

[greenboy]

If you're building your own, changing the port runners to 1 X 3s and adjusting baffle and port shelf dimensions accordingly leaves you with the same outer dimensions as a stock TL606, less chance of chuffing when pushed hard, and that little bit less internal volume that looks better "on paper" for the KL 3015 non-LF. I've heard a cab done that way. It sounded really nice IMHO.

Yeah, and you only need one port runner. And none of those cleats which are basically weight without bracing benefit (though they do make it easy for a total newbie who doesn't have access to modern glue because he or she lives in the land that time forgot).

 

[Lia_G]

I'll second the fact that 3015's work great in TL606's. My 2 x TL606 stack has them in there now, and it's just supremely nice. Gig review in post 65 on this page:
http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showthread.php?t=528039&page=4

If I were building from scratch, I'd do a couple of things. I'd make them about an inch taller, and make them a little shallower so that they'd fit in the trunk of my Honda Civic.

Cheers,
Liam

 

[Chef]

Well, this isn't as complete as it could be...
Tonight was a big outdoor job, and had massive sound system with two 18 subs, two 2x15/2 big horns per side.

So, the LDS was a very pimp stage monitor for me.

Additionally, the stage as a big flatbed trailer: wide, but shallow. I set up next to the drummer's high-hat, as I always do, so I was essentially on top of the cab. If there had been the additional width, I'd have set up way off the side of the stage. I do know from my limited testing to date, this cab sounds really good from 10-12 feet away. I was way to close to it.

I used my old G&L SB2JJ>Mesa M6>LDS 15/6.
It was fat, clean, articulate, and really punchy. No flab in this cab, the low end is really tight and punchy. It was way more than I needed to hear myself on a 'flatbed stage,' and the soundguy took the Mesa's DI rather than mic'ing the cab, so FOH ''didn't sound like the cab, it sounded like my bass+head."

It had plenty of top end presence for me. Despite this LDS 15/6 being a relatively short cab, and me being right on top of it, I could hear myself very clearly.
I like it, it worked well, I have high hopes for it in the future, but tonight wasn't really the best test bed in the world.

 

[Ryan Mohr]

Well, this isn't as complete as it could be...
Tonight was a big outdoor job, and had massive sound system with two 18 subs, two 2x15/2 big horns per side.

So, the LDS was a very pimp stage monitor for me.

Additionally, the stage as a big flatbed trailer: wide, but shallow. I set up next to the drummer's high-hat, as I always do, so I was essentially on top of the cab. If there had been the additional width, I'd have set up way off the side of the stage. I do know from my limited testing to date, this cab sounds really good from 10-12 feet away. I was way to close to it.

I used my old G&L SB2JJ>Mesa M6>LDS 15/6.
It was fat, clean, articulate, and really punchy. No flab in this cab, the low end is really tight and punchy. It was way more than I needed to hear myself on a 'flatbed stage,' and the soundguy took the Mesa's DI rather than mic'ing the cab, so FOH ''didn't sound like the cab, it sounded like my bass+head."

It had plenty of top end presence for me. Despite this LDS 15/6 being a relatively short cab, and me being right on top of it, I could hear myself very clearly.
I like it, it worked well, I have high hopes for it in the future, but tonight wasn't really the best test bed in the world.

Awesome! That's cool that the low end was fat and deep, yet still tight and punchy! Where did you have the attenuator set?

 

[Chef]

about ten oclock

 

[bassplayer7770]

Thanks for the update, Chef.

 

[Chef]

For those who are curious, this cab is a no go with Double Bass.
It has low end feedback propensities-which can be eq'd out using the walkabouts semi-para eq section, and the mid/top end response seems like bad match for my DB's piezo pickup. Kinda honky.

FWIW; that's been a theme for me with DB use. Very hard to find something that sounds natural. My LDS 2x8+horn remains the best for that. The LDS 4x8+ horn works almost as nicely; as does the Epi 410UL. The Schroeder 1212L is was pretty good...The 2x8+5" mid works decently as well, but still has some problems delivering string and finger noise without sounding "kinda piezo."

The Berg AE410=no good as well.

It could well be that a 15/6+horn would work pretty well, but even with the mid driver off, or nearly off, I wasn't liking what I was hearing from the 15.

 

[DukeLeJeune]

You can jack up the fundamental by playing closer to the neck and using a neck pickup, so 15% while a good guess is probably not entirely accurate for a lot of players. Longer scale instruments are more too.

Very helpful - thank you rpsands!