• 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 Smart Power!!!

#41
Kingkananga said:
im lost, far too technical depth here now.
Click to expand...

If you like the way it sounds and can afford it, and approve of the weight, I see no reason not to go for it.

But bear in mind if you did a little looking you could easily find a comparable performing cabinet that weighs half as much and costs half as much.

That's pretty much what everything I've said boils down to :)
 
#43
Awesomenaut said:
So people will go "HOLY CRAP! This cab is rated at 1200 watts, it must be LOUD!"




No offense to you, but that's a really weak argument. It's not hard to look at the performance of a cab vs another cab when they give you specs. Even then, isobaric cabs are nothing new.

OP, read this thread:

http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showthread.php?t=604366

Both Bill Fitzmaurice and Greenboy weigh in on the science involved in these cabs.
Click to expand...

I consider myself a pretty open-minded and objective guy. I accept & rely on scientifically repeatable results and measurements - but, at the same time, I've also seen/heard/used equipment that shouldn't be as loud/clear/whatever based on the data. So, before passing ultimate judgement, I like to actually try stuff. I respect your choice to rely on specs- I've just had enough experiences playing equipment not to discount emperical evidence.

Greenboy & Bill's knowledge of acoustic physics and how they apply to loudspeakers is acknowledged. But, I hope they will forgive me, that before I proclaim their designs "the best sounding ever", I'd need to actually play through them in real-world conditions. :)

Again, I can accept the science- but I let my ears make the final determination & then try to figure out "what gives".
 
#46
scotch said:
I consider myself a pretty open-minded and objective guy. I accept & rely on scientifically repeatable results and measurements - but, at the same time, I've also seen/heard/used equipment that shouldn't be as loud/clear/whatever based on the data. So, before passing ultimate judgement, I like to actually try stuff. I respect your choice to rely on specs- I've just had enough experiences playing equipment not to discount emperical evidence.

Greenboy & Bill's knowledge of acoustic physics and how they apply to loudspeakers is acknowledged. But, I hope they will forgive me, that before I proclaim their designs "the best sounding ever", I'd need to actually play through them in real-world conditions. :)

Again, I can accept the science- but I let my ears make the final determination & then try to figure out "what gives".
Click to expand...

True, and I'll give you that for all I know the cabs may sound amazing, and I'll say nothing about how they sound until I hear them.

But back to the point at hand. I think OP was hoping he could put one of these iso 410s on top of his existing 410 to save space and weight while getting the performance he has come to expect from his 410. Well, science says that it will be as loud as a 210, so in essence he'll have a 6x10 rig and not an 8x10 rig in a 6x10 body...with at least some of the, if not all of the 8x10 rig's weight.

Now granted there are 2x10 that "are as loud" as a 4x10, is that the case with this Orange cab? Maybe, maybe not. In this instance, where it sounds like OP wants what seems like two 8ohm cabs to make a 4 ohm load, he's going to be under powering what seems like a power hungry cab and then he's going to stack it on top of a 410. Doesn't sound like a good idea to me.

Bi-amping is a different story...
 
#47
Spinal Tapper said:
I'm sort of confused why people here don't understand why the iso 4x10 cab would be better than your standard mid-level 4x10 cab...it seems pretty common sense to me...

IMO, it's more compact - literally half the height, higher wattage
Click to expand...

...less sensitivity.

A similar priced 4x10 (or even one significantly cheaper) will be louder, and take less power to get there.
 
#48
Awesomenaut said:
True, and I'll give you that for all I know the cabs may sound amazing, and I'll say nothing about how they sound until I hear them.

But back to the point at hand. I think OP was hoping he could put one of these iso 410s on top of his existing 410 to save space and weight while getting the performance he has come to expect from his 410. Well, science says that it will be as loud as a 210, so in essence he'll have a 6x10 rig and not an 8x10 rig in a 6x10 body...with at least some of the, if not all of the 8x10 rig's weight.

Now granted there are 2x10 that "are as loud" as a 4x10, is that the case with this Orange cab? Maybe, maybe not. In this instance, where it sounds like OP wants what seems like two 8ohm cabs to make a 4 ohm load, he's going to be under powering what seems like a power hungry cab and then he's going to stack it on top of a 410. Doesn't sound like a good idea to me.

Bi-amping is a different story...
Click to expand...

Great points.
 
#49
aborgman said:
...less sensitivity.

A similar priced 4x10 (or even one significantly cheaper) will be louder, and take less power to get there.
Click to expand...

This.

It will take a rack rig, or a monstrous amp, to make the 4x10 ISO get louder than a standard 2x10. How many amps are there on the market that put out more than 200-400 w @ 8 ohms? It's not as many as you'd think :)

If you ran Orange's AD200b with an SP410, it'd be no louder than the AD200b with any other high end 2x10, no matter what.
 
#51
scotch said:
That said, it cracks me up how people who have never tried something can have any type of educated opinion?
Click to expand...

Physics.

I've never tried your perpetual motion machine either, but I know it doesn't work.

This is all real basic stuff old Harry Olson understood when he came up with the design in the 1950s.

The two drivers operating in tandem exhibit:

* A resonant frequency that is lower than that of the single driver by a factor of .707

* Twice the moving mass compared to the single driver (this is essentially the same statement as the previous one), but without the concomitant rise in mechanical Q factor an ordinary doubling of mass would entail.

* Lower even-order distortion above the resonant frequency, due to the lack of air compression in the front chamber

* Halving of the electrical impedance. This may produce an apparent 3 dB increase in sensitivity because of the lowered impedance.

The result is that the coupled driver pair (iso-group) can now produce the same frequency response in half the box volume that a single driver of the same type would require. For example, if a speaker is optimized for performance in a 40 litre enclosure, one iso-group of the same speakers can achieve the same low frequency extension and overall response characteristics in a 20 litre enclosure.

Note - you're using 2 speakers, to get the same response as 1 - but in a smaller enclosure.

Which means an isobaric 4x10 can use an enclosure 1/2 the size of the optimum for a 2x10 and still get the SAME response. So you're 4x10 is as loud as a 2x10, but in a box half as big.
 
#52
One caveat to that; your 4 drivers also displace twice as much cabinet volume as 2 do, and with small drivers in a tiny cab, that's a not-insignificant amount. You're not literally halving the cab volume required, since you have to fit the drivers in there.
 
#54
Heres' my last test today... With the same amp (Terror Bass set the same) playing my pbass (low B) the Orange played about 1.5db louder than my SVT also played about 3hz lower as well. All this coming from my "ear-o-meter"...
Don't get me wrong I love the sound of my SVT, I will never get rid of it.. it's a keeper. As for my Orange rig. It out performs my SVT and day of the week in all aspects lighter the Neo drivers, Louder (when I need it) and better low end response. Now I do find I have to turn up the treble on the Orange rig a little more then my SVT. But that is just a turn of a knob.. Other than that I just want to see my Orange rig last on the road like an SVT has done for years.... if so it will be a great day for me!
l_06432e1598954d539351e67319cd7980.png
 
#56
GCool said:
l_06432e1598954d539351e67319cd7980.png
Click to expand...

I'm going to ignore the fact that putting the same amp on two different speakers (or sets of speakers, etc) isn't really an accurate way to test loudness or performance of said speakers...

but let's do a quick Google search:

Orange SP410s will run you about $1200 dollars in the states, give or take, according to my quick Google search. You have two, so you have a $2400 stack of speakers.

An Ampeg SVT 810E will run you about $1000.

Is the increase in performance you experience with the Orange stack versus the Ampeg cabinet worth $1400 to you?

Honestly, I'm not trying to be a smart alec here, I'm just wondering.
 
#57
GCool said:
... the Orange played about 1.5db louder than my SVT also played about 3hz lower as well. All this coming from my "ear-o-meter"...
Click to expand...

To each his own, but imo this is about the point where the thread dies.

I'll have to say that imo
1) the cabs LOOK awesome. I love white/light/classic looks.
2) size does matter, and halving the cab volume (size) in some instances would be a huge benefit and worth some extra $ or effort. Personally, for me the Orange would be evena remote consideration. However, if money is no option then I suppose for you it works.
 
#60
aborgman said:
I'm not the one complaining because people are pointing out the physical limitations of the design. I don't need to hear it to know how it works.
Click to expand...

I'm not complaining, just asking a question.

That's true, you don't need to hear it to understand the technology. No problem there, you're absolutely right! :)

Now, to understand how something sounds, you need to hear it, right?

No hyperbole required to communicate. Less feathers ruffled. More information exchanged without sidetracking.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back