• 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.

Need a new cabinet

#61
One possibility might be two 4-ohm 12's in series, and that pair paralleled with a single 8-ohm 12. Separate chamber for the 8-ohm 12. We'd want the single 8-ohm 12 to have approximately twice the thermal and mechanical power handling of one of the 4-ohm 12's, and probably need to juggle the chamber sizes and tunings accordingly.

I don't have time right now to chase down whether this can actually be done with off-the-shelf woofers, much less come up with an optimized design, but if anyone wants to, maybe start by looking at a series-wired pair of 4-ohm Faital 12PR300's or 12PR310's, paralleled with a single beefy 8-ohm "uber 12".

Or maybe two 16-ohm Faitals (again 12PR300 or 12PR310), depending on how the parameters shake out, and a single 8-ohm uber-12, all three wired in parallel. Again, separate chamber for the uber-12 (because the math to see what the net effect on excursion would be by having them share the same chamber is way more than I want to tackle now).

Not saying either of these would be any better tasting sandwich.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: dannster
#62
dannster said:
Yeah...Bill doesn't like them(isobarics) either:
Click to expand...

Bill and I disagree on the subject. He's on record saying that "the output is the same as it would be with one driver in a larger box", and that's what the textbook theory predicts.

Year ago I built and carefully measured theoretically equivalent isobaric and conventional enclosures and got results that were significantly different from what the current theory predicts. My measurements indicated a parameter shift that isn't part of the current theory, which resulted in significantly deeper low-end extension than expected for the isobaric box.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: dannster
#63
Thanks Duke!! A preliminary solution.

I see an attitude that if it isn't facing forward it isn't doing anything and it's somehow inherently terrible no matter what. Orange builds them. Wether you take issue with them or not they are being built and sold.

Once I'm done with my 15's builds I think I might take a stab at this "problem".

Where is the OP?
 
#67
I am North of Chicago.. finding 12 ohm drivers is just kind of odd?? I thought I had called about getting a new cabinet built with 3x12" drivers, but have been so caught up in life, I have not followed through. The 3x12 thing would give me something like 5.6 ohms or something crazy like that. While I am not completely convinced about not providing my Ampeg with the full capability of 4Ohms, I think it should be ok.
 
#68
Oh, I never actually thought of going back to a dual 15 cab. I really love my 12's, but running separate cabinets is just not working as well as it should. The whole goal is to get the most out of my amp and speaker cab at the same time without it sounding like ass.. I do not want crazy ohm speakers that are impossible to find and lds said a 3 driver cab would be 5.33 ohms.. The whole idea is to get better efficiency from my system since running the SVT7Pro to a Single 12 cabinet to a 1212 cabinet. Seems the solution would be a single cabinet at 4 Ohms... Then, to load that with 12's like I like or change it all together.. That is the question
 
#70
iriegnome said:
lds said a 3 driver cab would be 5.33 ohms.
Click to expand...

Which is so close to a nominal 4 ohm rating that many manufacturers would just call it 4. In any case, you don't get the most out of your amp simply by using a certain nominally rated cab, you also get it by using the most sensitive drivers that still provide whatever native tone you prefer. Speaker design is always about tradeoffs. Link Removed
 
  • Like
Reactions: CL400Peavey

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back