• 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.

Paring Cabs

#121
mentalpatient said:
No worries about the amp, it can handle 2.67. I have thought about going 8Ω 2x10 with a 4Ω 4x10 as I already have the 4x10, that was until someone told me adding an 8Ω 4x10 would be better because :
Click to expand...

i see where hes going with the idea but if you just start out with the normal 8x10 it solves all the problems.
Otherwise 2 x 8 ohm cabinets would be ideal now. Because in parallel that would be 4 ohms. And most modern class d or switching garbage amps are only 4ohm stable. 2 ohm loads are too much for low cost modern amps.

billfitzmaurice said:
Fender and Marshall put drivers side by side because it looked better that way, and they also didn't know that they shouldn't have. Since they set the standard they could have done vertical drivers and that would have become the standard. But they didn't.
Click to expand...

I think SUNN got it right in 66/ 67 with the vertical 2x15 loaded with JBL speakers. Then Fender and Acoustic Control Corporation followed up. With sealed and ported Vertical 2x15 speakers.
Sunn and Fender already had it a longgggg time ago. Vertical speaker arrays for Guitar and Bass.
Sunn =100s guitar, 200s Bass
Fender = Dual Showman Guitar, Bassman 100 Bass

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

The only company to change the bass amp was ampeg in the 70's with the 8x10 and all these horried 4x10's from the 80's.

Funny the first to fail with the 4x10 was Fender with the open back 4x10 bassman. Which inspired and copied by marshall for the JTM amp and 4x12 sealed cabinet.

So blame Marshall and Ampeg.
Fender, Sunn and Acoustic had the vertical JBL arrays.

Dont forget the Super Showman the idea of the future was already here.

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
 
#124
Joe Louvar said:
+1
I agree, and it’s sure to be better in the future - but if software was used back in the day your favorite 810 may have never been built. I’m just saying ~
Click to expand...
I can dig. But even though they didn't have software, there was a level of high end engineering principle of the time going on. By that time, Ampeg and Acoustic weren't just throwing speakers in boxes and calling it good. They at least put some thought into the boxes. Plenty of companies did throw speakers in boxes, but the Ampeg and Acoustic stuff was engineered to the level that they could back then.
 
#125
JimmyM said:
I can dig. But even though they didn't have software, there was a level of high end engineering principle of the time going on. By that time, Ampeg and Acoustic weren't just throwing speakers in boxes and calling it good. They at least put some thought into the boxes. Plenty of companies did throw speakers in boxes, but the Ampeg and Acoustic stuff was engineered to the level that they could back then.
Click to expand...

Absolutely, and I like the Ampeg 810 too - in fact, anyone who doesn’t like it I think might be a little wired. ;)
 
#126
jnewmark said:
What were some of those JBL bass speakers from the '60's ?
Click to expand...
The oldest that I recall were called the Cabaret Series, but I think those were 70s vintage. I don't remember the name of JBL cabs from the 60s, which were quite rare as few could afford them.
I think SUNN got it right in 66/ 67 with the vertical 2x15 loaded with JBL speakers.
Click to expand...
They were the best of that era, because of the JBLs and because they were ported cabs. But they weren't rear loaded folded horns as advertised. Sundholm saw that term and applied it to his cabs, but he didn't actually know what a rear loaded folded horn was, so it was a misnomer.

The vertical Dual Showman ended up that way for cosmetic reasons, as did the larger 2x12 vertical Bassman and Bandmaster cabs that came along in late '68. They were large enough for the amps to sit atop them with the cab vertical with no overhang. When the vertical Bassman and Bandmaster were introduced the Marshall stacks and Vox Super Beatle had hit the scene, and there was a bit of a 'size war' going on. We thought Fender was playing a shell game with those, as they were loaded with the same 2x12 as the smaller cabs they replaced, when of course the Marshall and Vox were 4x12.

But as to where to lay the blame for horizontal drivers, Leo Fender. He set the standard first with his 2x guitar combos in the fifties, and then with the first separates, the Bassman and Bandmaster 2x12s in '61.
 
#129
mentalpatient said:
No worries about the amp, it can handle 2.67. I have thought about going 8Ω 2x10 with a 4Ω 4x10 as I already have the 4x10, that was until someone told me adding an 8Ω 4x10 would be better because :

1) More cost effective, you can keep using the 4Ω.
2) It will be louder (810).
3) You will not notice any difference with the 4x10 putting out different amount of power.
Click to expand...
yeah, i'd expect the 8Ω 4x10 to not really "pull its weight" in that situation, since it would be getting a lot less power. why drag out something that big if you're only gonna hear the other cab?

i like the idea of the 8Ω 2x10 (assuming its design was sufficiently similar to the 4Ω 4x10 underneath it, the point of this thread). power would be evenly distributed between the 6 tens, creating a virtual 6x10 cab. if the amp was 2ohms stable, it could be pretty strong.
 
#131
Melvin7822 said:
I was thinking of mixing an 8 ohm 4x10 with an 8 ohm 2x10 (both of the same brand and a stack that would allow the drivers to align). I'm assuming this is a bad idea for the sake of phase response? Bill?
Click to expand...

The main potential problem with that setup is each cabinet will be receiving the same output from the amp, which is to say that each speaker in the 210 will receive twice the power of each in the 410, putting them at greater risk of damage.
 
#132
GrowlerBox said:
The main potential problem with that setup is each cabinet will be receiving the same output from the amp, which is to say that each speaker in the 210 will receive twice the power of each in the 410, putting them at greater risk of damage.
Click to expand...
+1. If you want to run a 210/410 the 410 should be half the impedance of the 410, preferably with the two cabs loaded with the same drivers.
 
#133
Sadly, I don't have an amp that will run safely below 4 ohms. So impedance being the same, what if the 410 has a higher senstivity than the 210. For example, the 410 has a sensitivity of 103 dB SPL and the 210 has a sensitivity of 101 dB SPL. Would not the 410 be pulling more power anyway? Excuse my ignorance, I'm just trying to learn something. ;-)
 
#134
Melvin7822 said:
Sadly, I don't have an amp that will run safely below 4 ohms. So impedance being the same, what if the 410 has a higher senstivity than the 210. For example, the 410 has a sensitivity of 103 dB SPL and the 210 has a sensitivity of 101 dB SPL. Would not the 410 be pulling more power anyway? Excuse my ignorance, I'm just trying to learn something. ;-)
Click to expand...

The sensitivity is the measured sound pressure achieved by the speaker with a standard voltage applied at a standard distance (usually 2.83 volts at 1 metre as I understand it). The impedance essentially determines the "power draw" of the cabinet. In your case they are nominally the same, and therefore each cabinet will "pull" the same amount of power, completely independently of their sensitivities.

The difference in sensitivities you quote is about what you'd expect from doubling the drivers.
 
#136
billfitzmaurice said:
+1. If you want to run a 210/410 the 410 should be half the impedance of the 410, preferably with the two cabs loaded with the same drivers.
Click to expand...

Bill did you mean to say "the 410 should be half the impedance of the 210?" I have this exact setup for very large gigs (until I build my Jack 12s, of course), but I run the 410 (4ohm) off one channel of my 2 channel power amp and the 210 (8 ohm) off the other channel. I use to just adjust the volume on the 410 to be "twice" that of the 210, but (I think) I've learned here that it's better to run the 2 cabs in series off of one channel. Have I been saved?;)

Also, does this 6x10 setup count as a vertical array, or do all 6 10s need to be stacked, e.g. the GDs wall of sound?
 
#137
DLaunder said:
Bill did you mean to say "the 410 should be half the impedance of the 210?"
Click to expand...
Yes. My bad.

Also, does this 6x10 setup count as a vertical array, or do all 6 10s need to be stacked, e.g. the GDs wall of sound?
Click to expand...
A vertical array has no drivers side by side. Between the improved dispersion and higher profile most players will find a pair of 210s vertically stacked will sound better than a 610, at lower cost and less pack space.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back