Peavey Sheffield T/S speaker specs

Discussion in 'Amps and Cabs [BG]' started by Sundogue, Nov 7, 2004.

  1. Sundogue


    Apr 26, 2001
    Wausau, WI
    Does anyone know what the t/s specs are for Peavey's Sheffield 4 ohm bass speakers (the ones in their 210 and 410 TVX cabs)?

    I'm building a new cab and I need the specs on those speakers. I've already sent an e-mail to Peavey, but if anyone already knows the specs, could you please let me know what they are?

  2. I can't find them either.

    If you come across them, please post here and I will add to my spread sheet.

    [ edit ]

    The model number is 1305-8 or 1305-4 for the 4-ohm model. The ones you want are the 8-ohm type.
  3. BillyB_from_LZ

    BillyB_from_LZ Supporting Member

    Sep 7, 2000
    Sundogue...what ever happened to copying a 210 TVX cabinet?

    Anyway...can you post a picture of all the markings on the magnet? Or let me know if there is a silver sticker somewhere with a number that starts with 10 followed by a number of digits.

    To everyone...does Peavey make their own speakers?
  4. ESP-LTD


    Sep 9, 2001
    I used to have an pair of 210-TX cabs; the early model with a round port in the rear. It was my understanding that model was tuned to 40hz. Later, when then made the front shelf ported model, they no longer mentioned the tuning frequency. That was "pre-Sheffield" when the drivers were OEM Eminence. Peavey made the Scorpion and Black Widow line and bought the rest.
  5. Sundogue


    Apr 26, 2001
    Wausau, WI

    I still might do that, but I might make a combo amp with two of the speakers with my own amphead, and then just make an extension cab out of the other two.

    They are 4 ohm speakers, wired to give me a 4 ohm cab, but I'm going to wire two (4 ohm speakers in series) in each cab to give me two 8 ohm cabs.

    The numbers on the sticker on the Sheffield speakers is...
    121-4 #96000416

    I love the sound of the 410TVX, but it's just too much a pain to get in the back seat of my Saturn and it is way too heavy. If I can just get the specs on the Sheffield's, I'd make the cab part of the combo to fit those speakers with the correct port.

    I've been reading everything I can get my hands on about cab building and I even ran WinISD, but without those speaker specs, it's all just a crapshoot.

    I've been toying with the idea of making a sealed cab for the combo, as sealed cabs are more forgiving of design flaws (somewhat). But I guess I'd rather have a ported cab, but I need the specs obviously. I don't play in a very loud band, so I'm still considering all possibilities.

    Part of it is just that I love designing and building things (you know, a source of pride). The other part is I'm just plain tired of lugging around the 100 lb. 410TVX. I also have a bunch of high quality plywood lying around and I don't have the money for new speakers.
  6. BillyB_from_LZ

    BillyB_from_LZ Supporting Member

    Sep 7, 2000
    Even if you decide to make a combo cabinet, there is no need to discard the idea of using the existing 2x10 cabinet design for your speakers.

    You can alter the dimensions as long as internal volume of the cabinet doesn't change (i.e make it narrower to fit a 19 in rack mount head and just make it a little taller, etc).

    Years ago, Peavey made just the cabinet that you described...basically a 210TX cabinet with a 2 space rack on the top.

    If you are using a slot port design, as long as you maintain the port area and shelf depth, the tuning will be close enough. I'm not sure that programs like WinISD, etc. come that close...

    If you wanted to keep the same dimensions for the 210, take a look at the Gallien-Krueger 2x10 combos...they use rack mount width heads in the wider than a rack do Hartke and Carvin. There are lots of sources of inspiration out there.
  7. Sundogue


    Apr 26, 2001
    Wausau, WI
    Yeah, I owned a Carvin 210 combo and also a BAM210 combo.

    I really liked them. But I have a habit of dumping gear when I leave bands.

    But I'm in a very cool band right now that fits my "out of retirement" lifestyle. We are all older and have no desire to gig regularly anymore.

    Funny thing is, I got rid of my BAM210 (traded it on an acoustic guitar) because I was "officially retired". One week later, the only guy who I'd ever come out of retirement to play for, called me.

    I still had my 410TVX, so I got a head. But after a few gigs, the 410 is just a bit much.

    After alot of thinking about it, I thought well, if I'm going to make two smaller cabs (210's) why not make one of them a combo? I'd like to do just that with two of the speakers and then make the other cab a copy of Peavey's 210TVX. I'm just waiting on the specs of the 210TVX from another talkbasser. So that takes care of the extension cab.

    For the combo, I want to make it as compact as possible yet still use the same cabinet volume. I think I've got it pretty well worked out, but I want to be sure before I start on it.

    Can the cabinet really be of any dimension (within reason of course) as long as the volume stays the same? Does it matter what kind of port I use, as long as the port size is the same? I thought for the port I'd use the port tubes they have at parts express, which would allow me to fine tune the port length to tune it.

    I like the idea of having a combo again for small gigs and then bring the extension cab for bigger gigs.
  8. Sundogue


    Apr 26, 2001
    Wausau, WI
    Specs from Peavey on the Sheffield speakers used in their 410TVX.

    Sheffield TVX 1035 - 4 Ohm
    ITEM # 00493630
    Impedance: 4 Ohms
    Power capacity: 300 W Peak 150 W Program 75 W Continuous
    Sensitivity: 91.4 dB 1 Watt I 1 meter
    Usable frequency range: 60 Hz - 4 kHz
    Cone: Kevlar@ impregnated cellu-lose
    Voice coil diameter: 1.75" 144.4 mm

    Voice coil material: 2 layers, thermally bonded copper wire Kaptan former Nomex@ stiffener

    Net weight lb./kg: 7.4 Ibs./3.4 kg
    Znom (ohms) 4
    Revc (ohms) 3.25

    Sd (Square Meters): 0.335
    BL (T/M): 7.97
    Fo (Hz): 44.7
    Vas(liters): 51.7
    Cms(uM/N): 325.2
    Mms(gm): 39.0
    Qms: 4.18
    Qes: 0.520
    Qts: 0.460
    Xmax(mm): 2.5
    Le (mH): 0.11
    SPL (1W/1m): 91.4
    No (%): 0.9%
    Vd (cu. in/ml): 5.1/84
    Pmax (Watts pgm): 150
    Disp(cu. in./m): 83/1360
  9. Thanks for the update. I will add to my spread sheet tonight when I get home.
  10. Eric Moesle

    Eric Moesle Supporting Member

    Sep 21, 2001
    Columbus OH
    Wow, low xmax, low sensitivity.
  11. Petebass


    Dec 22, 2002
    QLD Australia
    Yep, keep the internal volume the same and you'll be fine.

    I'd also replicate the ports exactly. If you know what frequency the cab is currently tuned to, you might think about converting them to round ports and calculating the correct diameter and length. You could, in theory, calculate the vent area of the shelf port, then use that result to come up with a round port version, but I'm not sure how to do it. Bgavin might know?
    PawleeP likes this.
  12. Yep, a cheap driver all the way around. It is nearly identical to an Eminence BP102. The BP102 is a better driver, but it requires a 23% larger volume.

    I've added the data to my spread sheet. Sundogue, do you have this info from any type of printed Peavey literature? I try and keep my spread sheet honest by citing the source of the data. PDF, web site, spec sheet, etc...
    PawleeP likes this.
  13. Sundogue


    Apr 26, 2001
    Wausau, WI
    Is there a reason why low xmax should concern me?

    I mean, I've had these speakers in my 410TVX for a few years now, playing a 5 string bass (low B) through them, and these speakers have a killer, tight sound...even at quite loud volumes.

    All I know about them relative to other speakers is that they are durable, and give a very tight bass sound. Now, perhaps the specs don't measure up to other speakers, but fortunately my ears don't do calculations. Until I started getting into making my own cabs, not once did I ever listen to my bass and think, "Hmmm, the xmax is way too low, I should junk these speakers."

    Seriously though, I've been reading where high xmax is preferred. I'd like to know why?

    EDIT: From what I've been reading, xmax seems to refer to efficiency mainly. That low xmax speakers are more efficient because they are not required to be driven as far, by a lot of power, to obtain the same amount of output, whereas high xmax drivers require more power to move the cone further (i.e. - less efficient). Someone correct me if I've got that wrong.
  14. Sundogue


    Apr 26, 2001
    Wausau, WI

    I got it directly from Peavey. I e-mailed Peavey support and they sent those specs to me.

    I can forward the e-mail to you if you like.
  15. Sure. I noticed they had decimal points off in a few places, such as SD.

    Send to docnospam [at] compudoxnospam [ dot ] com

    Remove the word nospam from both parts of my mail address. I get some 30,000 spams every month, so I'm careful about trying to keep my over tax mail address out of the hands of the autobot harvesters.
  16. Sundogue


    Apr 26, 2001
    Wausau, WI

    Any place else that they were off? I'm trying to plug these numbers into WinISD and I'd like to know where they were incorrect.

    I'll forward the e-mail to you in the morning when I'm at work.

  17. Petebass


    Dec 22, 2002
    QLD Australia
    There's no direct relationship between X-max and efficiency. X-max is simply how far your speaker can travel before it hits it's excursion limit and starts to produce distortion. How much power is required to get it there is a function of the speaker's suspension system and to a lesser extent, the design of the cabinet. So it's not that high x-max drivers require more power, it's more the case that they CAN handle more power.

    Efficiency is simply how loud and low the speaker will go and is usually measured at 1k and at 1w from 1m away. With such a small input signal at such a high frequency, the speaker will barely move at all. Generally speaking a speaker can be loud, low, or small - pick any 2.

    So if it seems that low x-max drivers are usually efficient, it's because they are both characteristisc of a cheap driver. ie, they distort earlier and they don't handle bottom end very well. And lots of manufacturers use cheap drivers..............
  18. Sundogue


    Apr 26, 2001
    Wausau, WI
    But from what I've read, xmax has nothing to do with excursion limits.

    This is from

    Do not confuse xmax with maximum excursion. Maximum excursion is how far the cone will travel before 1. the coil hits the back plate or 2. the cone moves so far that it is limited by its suspension. xmax is how far the cone can travel with the coil still in the magnetic gap.

    I'm curious as to why my cheap Peavey/Sheffield speakers handle the low end (particularly the low B on my 5 string) so well without distorting. Is it just the cab design?

    I realize that in theory, these speakers would never be confused with top of the line speakers. But with such a low xmax, why do they handle the low end so well then?
  19. billfitzmaurice

    billfitzmaurice Commercial User

    Sep 15, 2004
    New Hampshire
    Owner, Bill Fitzmaurice Loudspeaker Design
    They don't. If you were to hear the difference between them and a true low frequency speaker cabinet you'd be amazed.
  20. Take the numbers from my spread sheet. I also provide box sizing for SBB4/QB3/Optimal Flat alignments.

    This driver performs best in the BB4 alignment. Vb is about 1.77 cubic feet (from memory) and tuning is near 41 Hz. Check the XLS for sure.

    I have not run the numbers for this driver in a horn, such as Bill's Tuba 24. Frankly, I wouldn't bother using a driver like this for that purpose. If one is going to the effort of building a horn, use the optimum driver (HL-10a) for horn loading. There is a huge difference between a cheap $30 driver like the Peavey vs a premium horn-loaded driver like the HL-10a ($130 +/-)
    PawleeP likes this.