• 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.

Orange Isobaric Cabs, SP212, SP410 questions

#61
GRoberts said:
Just got an Orange TB500H. Mad freakish Love!! :D:D

So now I am contemplating a single or dual cab solution that is portable but capable.

Consider the pair of SP212's ...or what an a single SP410? My local shop had an SP212 and it sounded great. But I think I would want a pair. But what about a single SP410?
Click to expand...

Isobaric cabs are an antiquated design. Double the drivers to make up for a smaller box, and no volume gain from the second set of drivers.
 
#62
CL400Peavey said:
Isobaric cabs are an antiquated design. Double the drivers to make up for a smaller box, and no volume gain from the second set of drivers.
Click to expand...

Are you saying the SP cabs are not a worthy option? I want small and portable, but capable of delivering the punch when needed. I was impressed with the output of a single SP212 today considering its size and weight. But its not the last word either.
 
#66
CL400Peavey said:
Isobaric cabs are an antiquated design. Double the drivers to make up for a smaller box, and no volume gain from the second set of drivers.
Click to expand...
The isobaric, exponential horn and reflex (vented) cabinets are all the same era, thus all antiquated.
Harry Olson detailed all three designs in his masterwork "Acoustical Engineering" first published in 1940.

The sole intent of the isobaric is reducing the required internal box volume by 50%.
It is not 2x louder, does not clean your room, nor do your homework.

Back in the antiquated era, cone mass was light, Vas was high, and a huge box was required to obtain bass response.
The iso design cut that huge box in half.

Today, a designer can take an Eminence BP102 down flat to 32 Hz in 4 cubic feet, or 32 Hz in 2 cubic feet, isobaric.
Driver cost and weight is 2x.
Cabinet complexity is at least 2x over a simple vented box.
It's all about the tradeoff.
 
#67
A lot of people here dismissing the SP212. I actually own one and its definitely louder than a single 12" cab. I play with 2 Les Paul valved up guitar nuts and animal on drums, they keep complaining that my bass is too loud. I'm using a terror bass 500. Loud enough for any medium bar gig. The only down side is a slight lack of top end due to absence of a tweeter, but that's me being Very fussy. Overall the cab is really well built and versatile. The extra speaker Does make a difference, why else would they add it?
 
#68
Quilbert said:
... The extra speaker Does make a difference, why else would they add it?
Click to expand...

Why don't all cab makers do the same?

If isobaric works for you - all the better but I don't expect a lot of uptake on the design from other makers.

The isobaric isn't too bad of a design. With high power amps of today you can push them loud but not as loud as giving each driver is own space. High power amps were not the norm when original isobaric were designed but they are everywhere these days.

Orange, or anybody could contact a driver maker and have a single driver made with essentially the same specs.

The problem with building a single driver spec'd to work in a small cabinet is it wouldn't sell. Nobody else would want it. It would have bad specs. There is really no advantage. It's a gimmick IMHO.

Well now, some other cab makers make designs that are not isobaric, and are essentially too many drivers in too small a cabinet. These cabs hurt in a much worst way lacking any real bass of an isobaric. They have their supporters - but not due to actual performance.
 
#69
Quilbert said:
A lot of people here dismissing the SP212. I actually own one and its definitely louder than a single 12" cab. I play with 2 Les Paul valved up guitar nuts and animal on drums, they keep complaining that my bass is too loud. I'm using a terror bass 500. Loud enough for any medium bar gig. The only down side is a slight lack of top end due to absence of a tweeter, but that's me being Very fussy. Overall the cab is really well built and versatile. The extra speaker Does make a difference, why else would they add it?
Click to expand...

Thats precious...

Two guitarists with 50 or 100 watt tube amps and 412's would crush any 212 with full range speakers if they wanted to.
 
#70
Quilbert said:
A lot of people here dismissing the SP212. I actually own one and its definitely louder than a single 12" cab. I play with 2 Les Paul valved up guitar nuts and animal on drums, they keep complaining that my bass is too loud. I'm using a terror bass 500. Loud enough for any medium bar gig. The only down side is a slight lack of top end due to absence of a tweeter, but that's me being Very fussy. Overall the cab is really well built and versatile. The extra speaker Does make a difference, why else would they add it?
Click to expand...

It's EXACTLY the same cabinet as one with only one of the same drivers in a box twice the volume except half as effecient. The isobaric cabinet will need twice the power to achieve the same volume because it is sharing that power with a second driver that is not displacing any more air.
 
#72
Link to JLAudio Isobaric Overview

There is a -3dB loss of sensitivity in the isobaric model.
This is offset by the +3dB gain in output from the power draw of two drivers in parallel.
The net result is a zero sum change in loudness at a given knob setting with a SS power amp.

The isobaric downsides:
  • Higher cost of two drivers
  • Weight of two drivers
  • Build complexity for two drivers
  • Halved impedance and 2x power draw with SS amps
The isobaric benefits:
  • Identical bass response from smaller box
The intended upside of the isobaric is reduction in cabinet volume.
When Harry Olson invented these, loudspeakers required very large boxes for bass response.

Assume somebody wants to run an Eminence Delta 15LFa (95 SPL) in the Flat (F3 = 24 Hz) alignment.
This requires 21.8 cubic feet, which is reduced to 10.9 cubic feet with an isobaric design.
The 2nd driver weighs 12.8 pounds, and I suspect the amount of wood saved with the smaller box might balance this.
 
#73
I don't see any advantages of using isobaric for basguitar cabinets.

It was usefull for subwoofers in the days of drivers with a low Fs and large Vas. This would slightly decrease the enclosure volume (most people forget about the coupling volume).
Nowadays we have these über-woofers with bicycle-tyre-suspensions that have a high Mms, high Cms and thus a low Vas (in relation to the Fs and cone area). With these woofers I don't see why one would use isobaric.....

One advantage would be a reduction in 2nd order harmonic distortion, but that's only the case when the drivers are mirror mounted and when both sides "see" the same counterforce (pressure). So only open-baffle-subwoofers will benefit from isobaric (check e.g. the Linkwitz Orion)
 
#74
They work in the real world on stage live.
Whether it,s an isobaric or a conventional cabs doesn,t matter in the real world.
It,s how it sounds,sits in the mix on the night or day in a live situation.
From what I hear and the feedback I get is that it sounds massive with punch,power,great tone and the good bits,looks funky and is small and portable.
I don,t need to go in the PA and the volume is at 10 oclock max.
Would be good to hear 2 of these cabs with the OTB 500 head but I,m happy with one for the moment until my hearing goes.
 
#77
No one is saying an isobaric cab can't sound great. It can, but will do so producing the same volume as a 112 cab with the same driver, require more power to do so, cost more, weigh more and be more complicated. It's ONLY advantage is a smaller box....that's a lot of $$ for the pleasure of a smaller box. Orange makes it sound new and special. It is neither. Period.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back