I believe you described a High Pass Filter (HPF), where the high frequencies “pass through” the filter and the lower frequencies are cut off to avoid excessive cone excursion trying to reproduce those ultra low frequencies.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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.
New, and confused about size vs. tone
- Thread starter ColoradoRex
- Start date
I believe you described a High Pass Filter (HPF), where the high frequencies “pass through” the filter and the lower frequencies are cut off to avoid excessive cone excursion trying to reproduce those ultra low frequencies.
Erm... it's not the size that counts.
It's how they use it.
... as you were ...
It's how they use it.
... as you were ...
So terms aside, any cone speaker can have a wildly different tone from any other cone speaker. The bigger the speaker, the LOUDER it CAN get, if it's built to certain specifications and with volume in mind. Or, the bigger the cone, the deeper it can get (with useful volume), again IF the speaker was designed specifically to go very low.
Some home subwoofers have a huge 15" or even bigger speaker to get down to 20 Hz about. Some home subwoofers have two 10 inch speakers to get down to about 20Hz. I'm generalizing, but both designs can work perfectly well and sound very similar, if done certain ways.
So it's up to the design of the speaker manufacturer combined with the skills, goals, design and target audience of the cabinet designer and manufacturer to create a speaker cab that performs and sounds a certain way.
And all of the comments about 12" speakers being plenty now but not back in the day?
Interesting. Throughout the 80s I played through one of two amps: an Acoustic combo that was fairly big with a single 12 and a 5 band eq. GREAT amp. Or a Traynor (Canadian brand, same thing as yorkville later on), 112 combo, smaller, also excellent. Both were plenty loud enough for any situation I was in, playing live with bands of all styles, from rock to full jazz big band, in rehearsals and concerts.
So.... I personally loved some of the 12s back in the day, and that was when I came to the conclusion that they are my favorite size for a single, and still is with modern tech, they just weigh far less now being neo.
Some home subwoofers have a huge 15" or even bigger speaker to get down to 20 Hz about. Some home subwoofers have two 10 inch speakers to get down to about 20Hz. I'm generalizing, but both designs can work perfectly well and sound very similar, if done certain ways.
So it's up to the design of the speaker manufacturer combined with the skills, goals, design and target audience of the cabinet designer and manufacturer to create a speaker cab that performs and sounds a certain way.
And all of the comments about 12" speakers being plenty now but not back in the day?
Interesting. Throughout the 80s I played through one of two amps: an Acoustic combo that was fairly big with a single 12 and a 5 band eq. GREAT amp. Or a Traynor (Canadian brand, same thing as yorkville later on), 112 combo, smaller, also excellent. Both were plenty loud enough for any situation I was in, playing live with bands of all styles, from rock to full jazz big band, in rehearsals and concerts.
So.... I personally loved some of the 12s back in the day, and that was when I came to the conclusion that they are my favorite size for a single, and still is with modern tech, they just weigh far less now being neo.
Hahaha that’s right. HPF. Do what I mean, not what I say. Sorry. Good catch.
Cab design is more important than speaker size, or, it isn't the size of the tool, it's the motion of the ocean.
IDK, I had an amp w/a15" speaker it had a good tone, but seemed a bit boomy at times.Until I got use a friends 4-10" cab, it seemed just right, not too boomy or bright sounding. the amp finally gave up on me. so I bought a used 2-10" cab that was good for a while, but I missed the bassiness of the 15" or should i say Depth,which led me to 2-12" cab online after much searching I settled on the 2 12" I thought would be the best of both.
I realize now that the Tech has caught up with the designs! speaker are better & the cab designs are better so it probably matter very little now as it once did. I was more concerned about power/Watts output than Tone but both were considered. I love my cabs but TBH Icant really tell the difference! weight was a big issue as well!
Im sure the amp head is a big factor also!
Perhaps the most important thing to consider is that all bass guitar rigs are targeted at the same instrument with the same frequency range.
On the other hand if a manufacturer intends to have a 2*10 and a 1*15 in their model range, they will want their 2*10 to tend towards the sound the public associate with 2*10s and vice versa with the 1*15, otherwise what would be the point of having both in the range?
On the other hand if a manufacturer intends to have a 2*10 and a 1*15 in their model range, they will want their 2*10 to tend towards the sound the public associate with 2*10s and vice versa with the 1*15, otherwise what would be the point of having both in the range?
Absolutely,
and at some content its (almost always) possible to trade of different variables a little bit just to aim the target.
At some content its possible to trade of for example radiation impedance with cone excursion but its still the laws of physics which determines the limits of what is manageable
The first thing to understand is that "better" is relative. Some people love 15" speakers, some people hate them. 18" speakers aren't super common in the bass cab world, and almost always have to be accompanied by other tweeters to have any detailed fidelity.
Each speaker size will have its own characteristics. As a beginner you probably don't want to hear this, but it isn't as simple as bigger is better, or more is better. Every arrangement of drivers has its own voice to it, and every cab builder tweaks the build to their own personal tastes\marketing goals.
If I had to generalize, and paint with a broad brush that people will immediately find exceptions to:
115 and 215 cabs have solid low mids and deep lows, but can be lacking in clarity. Depending on the build, some people might call them "slow" in that their larger size makes their excursion reaction time lag when compared to 12" or 10" drivers. However, some people want them for exactly that reason.
112 and 212 cabs are often a compromise between 10" and 15" speakers. They are quicker, have a good upper mid response, and can produce solid lows if engineered properly. They lack some of the "girth" of 15" or subby lows of a 10" array (410 or 810)
I don't mess with 110 cabs or combo amps. Not enough of anything for me.
I find that 210 cabs make work well in combination with other things, but by themselves are a little lacking.
To my ear 410 cabs tend to be a little scooped. Good speed and response, thick lows, but lose something in the low mids. That's why pairing them with a 115 was so popular in the 80s and 90s. That combo fell out of fashion for a verity of reasons. Some nerdy, some practical. I personally don't like how low the sit physically. The waves are hitting everyone at the knees un less you are on a raised stage. Not very helpful.
810 cabs used to be viewed as a necessary evil for just producing brutal levels of volume. And there is something to be said for that. Over the years, as the demand for smaller and lighter cabs grew, 810 builders have concentrated on the way the build the cab to give them a particular tone. An SVT 810 is something more than just 2x410 cabs stacked on top of each other. Aguilar's 810 is very articulate and clear for such a monster. Orange has found a way to get more mids out of their 810s that I think their 410s are lacking.
There are a handful of super boutique 8" array cabs out there. I have never heard or seen them aside from people flogging themselves about then here on TB.
Like everything else in the music world, cabs are a bottomless pit of information, and a financial black hole.
You can get great sound out of 10, 12, 15's etc.....depends on the box they're in among other things.
Totally. But that could easily have been true with a 115 being brighter and the 410 being boomy. Just depends on the speakers and how the cab is designed.
Yours is an example that can certainly happen, but there are examples I've come across where a 410 had a lot of deep bass and was sort of scooped sounding. That was back in the 80s... mind you... and tastes have changed.
one thing for sure... current bass cabs are, generally speaking, far better designed and built than the in the old days.
Yea, if you want a mind "freak", check out the jones cabs. Tons of low end, amazing sound, and they have several..what are they, 5 inch speakers in some of them? only? because it's how it's designed, not the size of a single speaker, that counts.
Products – Cabinets | Phil Jones Bass
Products – Cabinets | Phil Jones Bass
If you’re speaking about modern speakers I think your only real limitation, other than overall quality of course, may be trying to amplify 5-string and other sub-standard tuning using very small drivers.
Al Kraft
Supporting Member
- May 2, 2016
- 10,776
- 40,458
- Disclosures
- Mesa Boogie beta product tester and player support
This is a good question and I would say that different players and styles of music tend to look for different cab capabilities and voicings. As a cab designer I would look at readily available speaker products (to keep cost low) and explore effective cab designs and complementary drivers to get different voicings. As long as a cab delivers the sound players/people are looking for I'm not sure the driver size or numbers of drivers matter.
For example...as we know in the GK Neo line their 115 cab is considered by most to be more mid focused than the 10" driver or even 12" driver cabs. I think at the end of the day this boils down to offering as many players with differing tastes and needs as much variety as you can within your product line. Meeting those design goals includes everything from voicing to power handling to portability to being price competitive. I suspect most companies work within the trade space while capitalizing on off the shelf components to the maximum extent possible to offer the broadest range of products they can and still be attractively priced. Speaker size is likely more of an outcome than a driver of design.
Last edited:
Smooth_bass88
vaxx!
- Oct 31, 2006
- 12,122
- 16,796
- Disclosures
- have been on nationally released albums, charting on the Billboard 200
Smaller speakers in clusters move “quicker” than larger ones. At that point, just design a cabinet to handle lots of power and high SPLs that makes a ton of low end. Look at the Ampeg 8x10. To me, that’s the best designed bass cabinet ever.
To The OP - welcome to Talkbass where you now know enough to be thoroughly confused . Suffice it to say as several posters have that nothing is really as simple as you might wish . There is little " black and white " - good or bad etc in this world . Everything is filtered by your own particular ears and tastes . Pick anything that appeals to you now and start there . " Chasing the tone " you hear in your head is the next step and a quixotic journey that can take years so be prepared for a long haul if that's your ultimate goal ..... Kelly
Good points, well taken.
Please note "back in the day", for some of us, was the 60's or 70's.
The 12" speakers sucked, not because 12's suck, but because the 12's sucked.
Leo tried 12 inchers for bass, way back when, with the Bassman, but the enclosure design and speaker manufacturing of the day were not up to the task.
JBL changed that in the late 70's.
More to follow.
Exactly.
Remember, price, weight/portability, and reliability are performance parameters, not afterthoughts.
The best thing speaker enclosure manufacturers ever did was to construct their products so the mechanical components were not visible, thus invalidating any prejudices, and forcing evaluation based purely on performance.
I don't care what's in it, if it meets the objectives I've set for value versus performance, it's good.
We, as a community, spent a long time honing our opinions based on the products available. Modern materials, designs, and manufacturing techniques have rendered them moot.
There is a lot to unlearn, and we are reluctant to begin.
