You can put the twelve inch neo S2012 in a sealed cab.
Get an amp which allows you to send your line out/XLR out, before the EQ. ; )
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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.
Ported cabs. Yes/No/maybe?
- Thread starter bottomfeeder33
- Start date
Although there are bad and good examples of both enclosure types I prefer to use a ported design which is tuned slightly lower then "optimal" to get the best of both worlds (sort of). I find this especially true for home audio loudspeakers.
About closed basscabs.
When I hear bassplayer's comments on closed cabs it's clear they like the more tight/punchy sound. This is in one part due to the fact that it's a closed cabinet(better in reproducing transient wave forms) but in a larger part due to the completely different low-end response. With most of these cabs the response already starts to drop at 100hz, this highlights the upperbass and lower mids more then a ported cab and this is the biggest reason for the more tight and punchy sound. Add the extra 2nd and 3rd order harmonic distortion when the driver in a closed cab is cranked(it will reach xmax sooner then in a well designed ported cab) and you get the juicy lows that some bassplayers prefer.
Ported cabs that are tuned to high for our application(basscab) sound to unclear in the lows. This is especially true with basscabs tuned between 60-80hz, this is the area where the reproduction of transients is bad and where the 2nd harmonic of most low basstones are situated. Basscabs that are tuned somewhere between 45-55hz will sound a bit more lean but they will have much better transient response in the 60-80hz range.
IMO/IME a slightly lower tuned ported enclosure is the best compromise:
pros(vs closed cab):
-better low-end extension
-lower distortion within the working range due to reduced cone excursion
-better efficiency
-transient response around the 2nd harmonic of low basstones as good as a closed cab
cons:
-worse transient response of the fundamental of the low basstones
ME is that a smooth phase-response in the mid/high frequency range of the bassguitar improves the perceived attack in the lows of the played note (one of the reasons I use a well designed coaxial driver and cross-over for the 400hz-18khz range). This has to do with how our ear/brain processes "sound", it's not only how the loudspeaker behaves down low.
About closed basscabs.
When I hear bassplayer's comments on closed cabs it's clear they like the more tight/punchy sound. This is in one part due to the fact that it's a closed cabinet(better in reproducing transient wave forms) but in a larger part due to the completely different low-end response. With most of these cabs the response already starts to drop at 100hz, this highlights the upperbass and lower mids more then a ported cab and this is the biggest reason for the more tight and punchy sound. Add the extra 2nd and 3rd order harmonic distortion when the driver in a closed cab is cranked(it will reach xmax sooner then in a well designed ported cab) and you get the juicy lows that some bassplayers prefer.
Ported cabs that are tuned to high for our application(basscab) sound to unclear in the lows. This is especially true with basscabs tuned between 60-80hz, this is the area where the reproduction of transients is bad and where the 2nd harmonic of most low basstones are situated. Basscabs that are tuned somewhere between 45-55hz will sound a bit more lean but they will have much better transient response in the 60-80hz range.
IMO/IME a slightly lower tuned ported enclosure is the best compromise:
pros(vs closed cab):
-better low-end extension
-lower distortion within the working range due to reduced cone excursion
-better efficiency
-transient response around the 2nd harmonic of low basstones as good as a closed cab
cons:
-worse transient response of the fundamental of the low basstones
ME is that a smooth phase-response in the mid/high frequency range of the bassguitar improves the perceived attack in the lows of the played note (one of the reasons I use a well designed coaxial driver and cross-over for the 400hz-18khz range). This has to do with how our ear/brain processes "sound", it's not only how the loudspeaker behaves down low.
Last edited:
- Mar 8, 2011
- 12,232
- 51,187
- Disclosures
- Authorized greenboy designs builder/Owner of BNA Audio
It really doesn't matter to me what anyone prefers...strong arguments for both...the things that stuck with me Are;
When the port starts interacting with the woofer, note definition is diminished...
I CAN NOT make a comparable sealed cab sound like a ported cab and vice versa, I've tried. Hard
Again, I work mostly with ported designs and they're terrific. The sealed thing was something I've been experimenting with for fun. It's been really fun and has opened up a can of worms!
When the port starts interacting with the woofer, note definition is diminished...
I CAN NOT make a comparable sealed cab sound like a ported cab and vice versa, I've tried. Hard
Again, I work mostly with ported designs and they're terrific. The sealed thing was something I've been experimenting with for fun. It's been really fun and has opened up a can of worms!
Arjank and nephylimbass get it. Hey, my supertwin is the ported ported cab on the planet, but I still slightly prefer my sealed nv610 for the feel. Anyway, this has all been discussed in many threads. Some of these guys are VERY gracious to be going over this again.
Some examples of GREAT sealed bass cabs:-
Bergantino NV412, NV610, NV115, NV215. ..... Some of these aren't made anymore but you might find used ones.
Ampeg SVT810 E / Heritage. SVT410HE
Hartke make a few I think.
And K-Tel's famous. ....'And many more'
Bergantino NV412, NV610, NV115, NV215. ..... Some of these aren't made anymore but you might find used ones.
Ampeg SVT810 E / Heritage. SVT410HE
Hartke make a few I think.
And K-Tel's famous. ....'And many more'
Last edited:
When the port starts interacting with the woofer, note definition is diminished...
I CAN NOT make a comparable sealed cab sound like a ported cab and vice versa, I've tried. Hard
Again, I work mostly with ported designs and they're terrific. The sealed thing was something I've been experimenting with for fun. It's been really fun and has opened up a can of worms!
Please elaborate for clarity. Thanks!
Riis
"note defenition is diminished" is the same thing as what I mentioned in my post, transient response is worse compared to a closed cab.
This is most apparent with short staccato notes where the 2nd harmonic(and fundamental) are around the port's tuning frequency, it's not much of an issue with a long sustained note (synth bass).
Also read this:
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
Back when I sold Hi-fi in the 1970's, ported meant more efficiency and sealed (air suspension) meant deeper bass.
But thanks to computers, modern ported cabinets go excruciatingly deep. I can't even remember the last time I saw a pro sound system cabinet that was NOT ported, other than stuff like some isobaric speakers.
I think this is why the Acme speakers have a midrange, and the fEarful stuff (and avatar TB153) are so popular right now.
Porting the woofer can really give you that bottom but you sacrifice the upper frequency range of the driver. It's why I love subs for the deep stuff.
As I understand it, transient response and frequency response can't be separated from one another in mainstream sealed and ported speakers. If you extend the low end response of either, you also slow down the transient response. For this reason, it might be hard to "hear" transient response effects that are not masked by changes in frequency response.
My own experience as a DIY'er has been that it's hard to find drivers that are happy in relatively small sealed boxes, yet I was interested in a frequency / transient response curve similar to a particular system that happened to be sealed. The compromise that I found is documented in my little article on small ported box design. I'm happy with the results.
My own experience as a DIY'er has been that it's hard to find drivers that are happy in relatively small sealed boxes, yet I was interested in a frequency / transient response curve similar to a particular system that happened to be sealed. The compromise that I found is documented in my little article on small ported box design. I'm happy with the results.
True, there are other things that make it even more difficult to hear.
E.g. if you electronically adjust the response of a closed cab to mimic that of a ported one(exact same driver) you may get the same frequency response but still it sounds very different. The driver in the closed cab will have a larger cone-excursion in the freq range where normally the port would aid the driver, this will cause added harmonic and intermodulation distortion. The ported cab on the other hand will have lower distortion but worse transient response in the freq range where the port aids the driver. There's no free lunch here, each enclosure type has it's own cons 'n pros.
Hartke AK 410 (sealed) & Genz Benz Focus 410 (ported) are both non-neo cabs that are 64 lbs. (27 lbs. lighter than the 410he). I love the way the 410he sounds but it is a bit on the heavy side.
Last edited:
What we need is an electronic air exciter with no moving parts. There was actually talk of such a fabulous device decades ago. Unfortuanately, like Warp Drive, it has yet to materialize.
Did you get the weight looking at them on musicians friend? Because that is incorrect. On mf it says the 410he is 91lbs and the 410hlf is 76lbs when the 410he is actually a noticable amount lighter than the 410hlf (I've owned both at the same time) I think that was a typo. I can literally pick up the 410he by a handle with one arm.
I got it from the Ampeg website which lists the HE as 91 lbs. and the HLF as 110 lbs.
I looked on the ampeg site myself I think the deal is while they show shipped weight and handling weight for some cabs they don't show both for the 410he which makes my think 91lbs is the shipping weight and not the weight of just the cab
To work best in a sealed cabinet, the driver should be designed to work in a sealed cabinet.
In home audio that is usually foam surrounds. Just not a good choice for pro drivers.
On transient response, the best most used, best FOH subs are all ported. Things have changed over the decades in driver design. And software to help cab designers use the drivers.
For a bass cab as a monitor, I expect it works a lot like playing a double bass. Double bass are not ideal in response. So the brain picks some notes a little sooner to compensate. That would be "if" it's really in some audible range.
If it really does matter so much it would be an easy thing to scope and measure.
For a bass cab as a monitor, I expect it works a lot like playing a double bass. Double bass are not ideal in response. So the brain picks some notes a little sooner to compensate. That would be "if" it's really in some audible range.
If it really does matter so much it would be an easy thing to scope and measure.
One thing to mention--which Arjank and Duke alluded to.
Back in the 80's I was experimenting with port tunings. I knew nothing technically-well, I had the Vance Dickeson book. I made cabs where the port was mounted to a removable plate. So--I could easily change tunings.I found that I preferred tunings that were lower and less "flat" than the optimal reflex tunings.I later found out that what this did was to present a n enclosure that behaved like more of a hybrid.The speaker felt like it was seeing a sealed box until the lowest octave--so the port was only reinforcing the absolute lowest notes. The net effect---to me---was a tighter, more focused low end . But the frequency response did slope down more gently, but starting at a bit higher frequency.So I had to boost the bass one or two notches. The other down side is that you do lose some efficiency and maximum volume. But not much.
With current drivers with a very high excursion makes it easier to deal with this type of tuning. Andy Lewis of Acme tunes more in this way He OEM's his driver to perform optimally in this situation. When I was playing Duke's Thunderchild ( one of the best bass speakers on the planet) I would always plug one port. Which yielded exactly this sort of tuning. I think that Duke's cabs have a HUGE advantage in their ability to actually change their type of tuning and response by the use of his custom "port plugs". (actually readily available plumbing plugs!)
Back in the 80's I was experimenting with port tunings. I knew nothing technically-well, I had the Vance Dickeson book. I made cabs where the port was mounted to a removable plate. So--I could easily change tunings.I found that I preferred tunings that were lower and less "flat" than the optimal reflex tunings.I later found out that what this did was to present a n enclosure that behaved like more of a hybrid.The speaker felt like it was seeing a sealed box until the lowest octave--so the port was only reinforcing the absolute lowest notes. The net effect---to me---was a tighter, more focused low end . But the frequency response did slope down more gently, but starting at a bit higher frequency.So I had to boost the bass one or two notches. The other down side is that you do lose some efficiency and maximum volume. But not much.
With current drivers with a very high excursion makes it easier to deal with this type of tuning. Andy Lewis of Acme tunes more in this way He OEM's his driver to perform optimally in this situation. When I was playing Duke's Thunderchild ( one of the best bass speakers on the planet) I would always plug one port. Which yielded exactly this sort of tuning. I think that Duke's cabs have a HUGE advantage in their ability to actually change their type of tuning and response by the use of his custom "port plugs". (actually readily available plumbing plugs!)
