• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Peavey Sheffield T/S speaker specs

I'm still going to build the cab from the plans I got from you...but it will have to wait until I get enough cash for a different speaker as I want to put my speakers back in the 410TVX if I decide to sell it in the future, or I'll keep them in my new custoim built cabs.

It is a very interesting design to say the least.

billfitzmaurice said:
They don't. If you were to hear the difference between them and a true low frequency speaker cabinet you'd be amazed.

I've been playing bass professionally and semi-pro since 1979. I've played through most every piece of gear to come out. I have played through and heard quite a variety of speakers and speaker cab setups in the past 25 years.

I seriously doubt I'd be amazed. However, while I know my cab/speakers are not the best, they sound great to me. I've played through professional cabs loaded with JBL's, Eminence, EV, etc, etc., etc. Having said that, the speakers in my Peavey cab do not distort, the lows are quite clean, even at a fairly loud volume. And in side by side comparisons, my 410TVX has bested the likes of SWR, Eden, GK and others. And of course, I know how to EQ and work a system to get any sound a cab can deliver. But that is my subjective opinion...and, of course, how they sound to me, is all that really matters to me.

My current gear is more of a reflection of my income and the fact that I have three kids and another on the way, than it is about not wanting to have the "best" gear. If I had the money I'd probably go a different route. And at some point, I'm going to get to those plans of yours, because it seems a very worthwhile pursuit to have that small of a cab deliver that big of a sound. Though I'll have to actually hear it to know how much I'll like it.

Perhaps my speakers do distort, perhaps they don't handle the low end very well...perhaps they are just junk speakers. Apparently the specs tell me, and everyone else, that my speakers are cheapos that can't handle the low end. My ears hear otherwise. In fact, I only expected this cabinet to be adequate for me. What amazed me was how good it actually sounds.

Aside from the weight and size, I like it. But I need something easier to haul around. I ain't getting any younger. :)

Interestingly enough, the guitar player in my band uses 4 Peavey SP2's for the PA. He's tried every PA cab there is (he used to work at a music store and still has connections and access to everything out there). He's one of the most respected musicians around Wisconsin and he's friends with top notch musicians all over the country. Every single gig we play, musicians ask what he's got loaded in those Peaveys, because they all say we have an awesome sound. They are just plain old Peavey's...nothing special about them. But he does know how to work them.

And maybe that's what it all boils down to. Put cheap speakers in the hands of someone who knows how to actually use equipment and they might sound great. Conversely, put top of the line equipment in the hands of a novice and that gear might sound like crap.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PawleeP
bgavin said:
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 +/-)

Thanks. I'll see what I come up with then. I appreciate the input from everyone.

When I do get around to building the DR250a, from the plans I downloaded from bill's site, I'm going to go with his recommended speaker. He obviously knows what he's doing, so if he knows that speaker works in that cab, then that's what I'll go with.

As far as my Peavey speakers go, I'm just trying to lighten the load of a 410 cab I like, using existing speakers. Otherwise I'd just start from scratch with new speakers.
 
Find the internal dimensions for your existing 4x10. Divide the volume by 4 to get the gross volume available to each driver. Subtract from this, the displacment of your selected driver. I have this info in my spread sheet when it is published. If not published, guess at 0.1 cubic foot or slightly less.

Sort my spread sheet by Vb and find the driver(s) that are the closest match to your net volume. If the driver Fb and F3 are acceptable, that is your choice. This is always more difficult than picking your ideal driver then building a matching cabinet.

I really like the Deltalite 2510, but it wants some breathing room for proper tuning. The Kappa Pro 10 and B102 work in a very small volume, but neither has much bottom end response. I own several B102 specifically for the Highs of a bi-amped rig.
 
What about bracing displacing the volume of the cab? There is a ton of bracing in the 410 cab.

Also one other question, if anyone can answer it...

I've read where cubed dimensions are not wanted as it leads to standing waves. If I use the correct volume, how far can I go in altering the dimensions before I might cause standing waves?

Let's say my design accounts for the correct volume, but I'd like to use dimensions that are closer to a cube, rather than a rectangular shape. Is there any kind of baffling, bracing or something that could be put in to keep standing waves at bay? Say something along the lines of an angled board behind the speaker that would reflect the wave away from a direct shot to the backboard?

Obviously one can direct sound in different directions. What causes standing waves in the first place, and what's the best way to avoid it?

Just curious. The more one learns about it all, the more you need to know. It's addicting.
 
Sundogue...congrats on staying focused on your original quest...to find the T/S parameters of your Peavey speakers so that you can built two lighter boxes...

We armchair loudspeaker enclosure designers seem to excel in studying the specifications of a woofer and deeming it substandard, when the reality of the matter is that the speaker in question in the right cabinet (right and optimal are not necessarily the same) serve the purpose beautifully...

Since you know that you like the sound of the speakers in the exisiting cabinet, to me it seems perfectly logical (and desireable) to keep the cabinet volume-per-speaker and tuning frequency the same. If it wasn't a very good design in the first place, I'm sure that the engineers at Peavey (a company that is constantly innovating) would change it.

Anyway, those are my 2 cents...

Good luck on your projects!!!!
 
BillyB_from_LZ said:
If it wasn't a very good design in the first place, I'm sure that the engineers at Peavey (a company that is constantly innovating) would change it.
I seriously doubt that.

All these companies are heavily driven by price-point performance. They all have to conform to a look-and-feel, and make the best from sticking drivers into boxes that conform to sales requirements.

A bass cab optimized for a single BP102 10" is overly large by comparision to the typical 4x10, and it won't sell. Since they cannot bang out Tuba 24s on a viable commericial level, there is no market for an optimum tuned 1x10.

There are lots of listeners who find AM Radio serves the purpose beautifully... until they hear something better like FM Stereo.
 
Sundogue said:
But from what I've read, xmax has nothing to do with excursion limits.

This is from speakerplans.com...

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.

Perhaps I should clarify. Speakers have 2 different excursion limits. The first being x-max which is the excursion limit before distortion, the second being X-mech which is the limit before physical damage occurs. Your description above refers to X-Mech. Modern speakers often have a generous X-mech which is why you can drive them into distortion all day and not blow them up. In fact, most guitar speakers employ this principle deliberately. Ask you guitarist abour speaker cone break-up and he'll talk for hours.


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?
It's a combination of these things. The speaker itself has a relatively low sensitivity rating. This is often done in favour of making the speaker more capable of handling lows. Look at the Acme cabs as an example. The efficiency specs are rather low but the cabs are flat to 30Hz. They get away with it by making them capable of handling lots of watts and therefore capable of the a health level of dB. They also employ 5" mid driver because with low/ineffieient woofers, the mids would be otherwise non existent.

See how every decision involes a trade off and a work-around? That's a big part of speaker cab design and by the sounds of it, Peavy did a pretty good balancing act with your speaker/cab.

The interesting thing about low frequency distortion is that the human ear has a lot more trouble identifying it than distortion at mid and high frequencies, especially at band volume and with other instruments to drown it out. This is another reason why you probably haven't noticed your speaker distorting before. But just because you haven't heard it, it doesnt mean that the speaker isn't stitting on the edge of it's suspension all night, thus limiting it's ability to handle transients and nuances. There are a lot of cab manufacturers who bank on this phenomenon. Try playing your speaker by itself in a quiet room at gig volume. I'd be very surprised if you can't hear it complaining....


And maybe that's what it all boils down to. Put cheap speakers in the hands of someone who knows how to actually use equipment and they might sound great. Conversely, put top of the line equipment in the hands of a novice and that gear might sound like crap.
This is absolutely true. None of my speaker cabs, either purchesed or built, are acoutsically perfect. But I always manage to pull a good sound to my ears. My limited but growing knowledge of how speakers and cabs interact has helped me in this regard enormously, which is why I'm pointing out some of the theory to you now. I guess i found it easier to establish the short-cuts once I knew the rules.
 
bgavin said:
All these companies are heavily driven by price-point performance. They all have to conform to a look-and-feel, and make the best from sticking drivers into boxes that conform to sales requirements.

I don't disagree with the fact that the bean counters have a strong hand in commercial designs, but with the resources of a company like Peavey, they're able to specify woofers that behave a certain way given the constraints of cost and cabinet design, etc. They're not forced to design from the other direction like we are...start with an off the shelf driver and then try to make the best of it.

If the 410TVX or 210TVX cabinets didn't sound good to a large enough segment of the bass playing community, Peavey would change the designs until they did. It might not make them optimum in the eyes (or to the ears) of someone with the chops to design and build a system that conforms to a broader set of specifications, but they are still certainly worthy of being played through and enjoyed by those that like them.
 
I have played it quite loud in a room by myself (that's usually how I check out and adjust my gear, at first anyway)...and it takes a ton of volume (much louder than I play onstage with the band) without breaking up. And I like a clean sound.

I really did not hear distortion. Honestly. :)

But I also know my gear and I get a very good clear sound out of it. Perhaps if I muddied it up with alot of lows and played it loud it would distort. But I don't add lows. If anything, I cut the lows on my amp. I think alot of bass players add too much low, thinking it's bass so one should add more "bass" to the sound. I tend to not purposely try to distort my speakers in the first place, and I am quite happy with the tone as is.

I agree with you. The more I learn about cab design, the more aware I am of, not only what my amp/cab is doing, but why as well.
 
Using WinISD and plugging in specs I have for the Peavey Sheffield speakers and also the volume of Peavey's 210TVX, I come up with some interesting things.

For instance, if I go with Peavey's 210TVX cab volume (combined with the T/S specs for those speakers), I get a total cab volume of only 6603 cubic inches. By using Peavey's own speaker/cab specs, their 210 cab starts dropping off at roughly 67 Hz...with a huge drop off of almost 4 db at 40 Hz.

Going with strictly the T/S specs of the Sheffield speakers, WinISD comes up with an ideal of 9753.4 cubic inches for cab volume. This gives a drop off starting at 45 Hz, with only a 1.18 db drop off at 40 Hz. At that cab volume, a 4 db drop off occurs at 34.58 Hz.

I can see why bgavin mentioned how companies put speakers in less than ideal sized cabs. I can also see how altering cab volume has a huge affect on performance.

Very interesting stuff! I'm learning a lot and it is increasing my awareness of how much speaker/cab combinations and designs make dramatic differences in sound.

Having said that, my 410TVX still sounds great...but I bet it could sound even better with the existing speakers by making new cabs.

Thanks again guys for all your input.
 
Sundogue said:
U
I can see why bgavin mentioned how companies put speakers in less than ideal sized cabs. I can also see how altering cab volume has a huge affect on performance.
.
You're a fast learner, that's for sure.

Are you using WinISD Pro or the standard WinISD? The Pro version has a graph called "Max Power" which gives us another reason why cab manufacturers often use undersize cabs. This graph gives you an idea of how much power the cab/speaker combination can take before hitting X-max, and at what frequencies this is likely to happen.

The interesting thing about reducing the cab size is that it seems to improve performance in this area. Often it also creates a hump in the frequency response in the 100Hz region, creating more lows at the expense of sub lows. Of course this all varies from speaker cab to speaker cab, so the result may or may not improve things overall.

So at the end of the day, it's all about sifting through all this info, sorting the knowledge to somehow work out how to achieve what you set out to achieve. You've gotta admit, it's fascinating stuff :)
 
Trying to hit a few points: these drivers wouldn't make it in a Tuba 24 with their low Bl, small Xmax and low SPL; they'd be better than in the present box, but not by enough to make it a worthwhile task. They'd work reasonably well in a DR250a, but still not as well as a driver with a better SPL, even a $40 Alpha 10.

As to their sounding good in the 4x10 compared to other commercial gear, probably. Their main shortcoming there is in the SPL, as even a Beta 10 would be a vast improvement, and virtually a drop in replacement as far as specs go. But compared to a wideband high efficiency cab, not only is it not close but it's not even playing in the same game. The subjective problem is trying to compare this or any 4x10 with something that the owner has likely never heard, as when it comes to off the shelf commercial bass cabs there aren't any wideband high efficiency cabinets on the market to compare to. You absolutely will never see anything like a Tuba 24 being sold on a wide basis, as no commerical outfit with their high overhead could afford to sell one for less than $1,000.
 
QUOTE]Blades has $535 +/- invested in his Tuba 30, and nothing for his labor[/QUOTE]
Exactly. To sell a commercial Tuba 30 at a profit would require a minimum $2k price tag, probably closer to $3K, even with the prices manufacturers pay for their supplies because of dealer markup/marketing/distribution/endorsements/$2M CEO's/etc,etc,etc. Check out the prices on the reissue Altec A7, and we both know the build cost on that is way under $1k (or however many yuan that is). Good stuff don't come cheap unless you build it yourself.
 
OK, here's a bump from waaaay back, but I have new question:

since this thread, has anyone managed to find a higher-quality, better low-end response driver that would be a suitable replacement for the Sheffields BUT STILL USING the 410TVX enclosure?

Help a brother out, I'm trying to improve my cheap rig!
 
  • Like
Reactions: PawleeP

Latest posts