• 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.

Mixing driver sizes

#65
There is science and there is unfounded unsubstantiated opinion.
There is the science fact and science fiction. There is also listening with your eyes .
Not to mention one persons tonal result goals fly in the face of someone else's. PA full range 3way cabs perfectly crossed over are perhaps inappropriate for a guy running an Ampeg V4 with a pbass strung with flats foam under the bridge and tone control rolled down 3/4. As a 1x18 tweeterless cab driven by a 2000 watt Acoustic Image amp is inappropriate for a mark king type slapper.
By the way hi Andy. I value your scientific real world opinions.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jim Carr
#66
gln1955 said:
I love these discussions.

Here's a question specifically fro agedhorse: I have a GB Contour 500-115. At some point I'd like to add an extension cab. The matched Contour extension cabs are hard to find at this point, so when a used one appears I'm tempted. Since these come in 115 and 210 flavors, could these be effectively mixed, or am I much better off waiting for a 115?
Click to expand...

The 115 and 210 in this series were designed specifically to mix well, and the 115 in this case is thicker sounding because it does have greater LF extension than the 210. If you can't find a contour extension, the focus is very close, just different cosmetics.
 
#67
i recall an acquaintance from my college days. he had damaged his hearing by listening to loud distorted music. when he would play music on his stereo, he would crank the treble to harsh, distorted, painful levels--for me. for him, it sounded just fine.

perception is a funny thing.
 
#69
Don't know if this has been brought up or not regarding bi-amping.

One could run the 210 or 410 and cross it where response starts to fall off, a bit below the -3dB point. Usually around 55Hz for most cabs.

Then the bottom cab runs 55Hz and lower. That rules out quite a few commercially available cabs. Contenders might be an Acme, might be a one of Mike's MAS110 subs, might be one of BFM's horn loaded subs, a fEARful 12 or 15 sub, (I think Greenboy also offers 18" PA subs) but would certainly have to be something other than an off-the-shelf type of cab.

If the efficiency of each box is similar, it may work passively, an HPF on the 210 or 410, and an LPF on the sub.

Either way, not really a plug and play type of set-up.
 
#70
davy4575 said:
...I guess I wonder why people do the mixed sizes if you do. Also, why does it sound to a lot of us that the 115 is lower. I totally understand the science that its not necessarily, but my ears (preconceived visual notions?) tell me it is frequently lower sounding. Help. thanks.
Click to expand...

I think a lot of mixing comes about because of simple budget and availability facts. It is certainly louder to have a 210 + 115 than to have just one of the cabs. Mixing is promoted by amp vendors, as a way to convince buyers that they are getting something really powerful and capable. "Look Ma, it has 10's for punch and a 15 for lows, I'm golden!" It's listening with your eyes. And yes, the bi-amping thing of 30+ years ago kicked it off.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: iualum
#71
Add to that, audio testing is really, really hard to do. Often, our brains will convince us that something is better solely because it is louder in frequencies we are more sensitive to. Add to that, most peoples biased perception that a 15 must be lower in frequency response. So right off the bat, the 410/115 has won. That's a tough preconception to fight.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CL400Peavey
#72
Jim Carr said:
I think a lot of mixing comes about because of simple budget and availability facts. It is certainly louder to have a 210 + 115 than to have just one of the cabs. Mixing is promoted by amp vendors, as a way to convince buyers that they are getting something really powerful and capable. "Look Ma, it has 10's for punch and a 15 for lows, I'm golden!" It's is listening with your eyes. And yes, the bi-amping thing of 30+ years ago kicked it off.
Click to expand...

The other thing, is that as agedhorse suggests, some companies are 'stuffing drivers' and others are designing speaker cabinets, and some are designing 'suites' of cabinets that work cohesively together, and anywhere in between. Now that you know that, informed consumer...go out and try to differentiate based on "manufacturer published materials" which companies are doing it and which are not. You can't even get decent and honest spec listings from most companies, much less a straight line on their design process.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jim Carr
#73
Coolhandjjl said:
Add to that, audio testing is really, really hard to do. Often, our brains will convince us that something is better solely because it is louder in frequencies we are more sensitive to. Add to that, most peoples biased perception that a 15 must be lower in frequency response. So right off the bat, the 410/115 has won. That's a tough preconception to fight.
Click to expand...

Part of that 'lower' is a miss-attribution too. Because the 15's tend to beam pretty well in the mids and above, and because that lil' 15 is on the floor down by your knees and our ears are usually not mounted on our knees, we hear them as being 'lower'. To the same extent that having high content also 'fools' a listener to believe that there's less low content...so those 410's perched on top of a 15 at closer to ear level comes off as sounding brighter but with less deep low. Sorta like a Jazz bass with the tone control full up doesn't sound bassy...until you attenuate the highs.
 
#74
I have an old 115 Black Widow from 1980 and a 210Tx from about 92. The 115BW is much brighter in the mids and upper mids than the 2 10s. If I were to biamp them, I'd actually make the 10s the low and the 15 the high.. I looked and that old 1501 was/is used by a lot of steel guitar players because of it's range.
 
#75
Remember these bad boys? My first "I'm a big boy now" amp. Had the matching black tolex and silver faced 410 and 115 cabs too. The world didn't end, it was the norm for the time. Kept it for about 6 months until I realized I "needed" a Trace Elliot AH500X. :smug: Take it from an old guy, yes with a serious science education(PhD level), which makes me laugh because I actually know first hand how full of c**p scientists often are, I am one, just play the bass, it ain't nothing but a big stage monitor anyway.

18696609.jpg
 
#76
Jim Carr said:
I think a lot of mixing comes about because of simple budget and availability facts. It is certainly louder to have a 210 + 115 than to have just one of the cabs. Mixing is promoted by amp vendors, as a way to convince buyers that they are getting something really powerful and capable. "Look Ma, it has 10's for punch and a 15 for lows, I'm golden!" It's is listening with your eyes. And yes, the bi-amping thing of 30+ years ago kicked it off.
Click to expand...
Yes. 100%.

When push comes to shove, though, a 210/115 mixed set-up is almost surely the single best/most likely to work cab mixture.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jim Carr
#77
spectorfreak said:
Remember these bad boys? My first "I'm a big boy now" amp. Had the matching black tolex and silver faced 410 and 115 cabs too. The world didn't end, it was the norm for the time. Kept it for about 6 months until I realized I "needed" a Trace Elliot AH500X. :smug: Take it from an old guy, yes with a serious science education(PhD level), which makes me laugh because I actually know first hand how full of c**p scientists often are, I am one, just play the bass, it ain't nothing but a big stage monitor anyway.
Click to expand...

1)Biamping can be a great thing...if the speakers are designed for it as well as the amp setup. Mostly one of those components is falling down on the job in the bass world.

2) It's ain't nothing but a big stage monitor anyway... Maybe your PERSONAL experience. And not that if it is just a monitor its bad for someone to chase an ideal tone (in fact, I'm all for it, or why bother playing). For many of us, some if not most of our amp use is decidedly NOT for stage monitoring but full FOH. 25 years ago, I would have agreed. Good clubs, big stages and decent PAs. Not so much of that in the world these days. I use my amp for FOH bass representation the bulk of the time.
 
#78
BurningSkies said:
...and because that lil' 15 is on the floor down by your knees and our ears are usually not mounted on our knees, we hear them as being 'lower'...
Click to expand...

Putting my "tweeter off" SWR Son of Bertha on top of a 410 was an ear opening experience. I could hear it starting to break-up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BurningSkies
#79
Jim Carr said:
Putting my "tweeter off" SWR Son of Bertha on top of a 410 was an ear opening experience. I could hear it starting to break-up.
Click to expand...

Yep, and when I had a Schroeder 1212 I tried it up on end (slanted speaker angled up) and really HATED what I heard. When I regularly gigged with a 410 I always put it up on something...whether it was Jimmy Miller's much hated milk crate, or a chair, it really helped to bring those mid and higher frequencies up to your ear-height.
 
#80
BurningSkies said:
...When I regularly gigged with a 410 I always put it up on something...whether it was Jimmy Miller's much hated milk crate, or a chair, it really helped to bring those mid and higher frequencies up to your ear-height.
Click to expand...

I think the "Miller's much-hated milk crate" thing actually sounds better than adding a weak 115 as a de facto amp stand for a 410.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BurningSkies

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back