Pros and cons of stacking...

[Redbrangus]

That's surprising for me. I have always felt that my rig lost substantial amount of bottom end as soon as I lifted it off the floor...even if it remained close to the floor.

I haven't done any measurements though...

I believe your impressions are correct...the LF acoustic energy drops off when the speaker is not directly on the floor, but I think this poster and I are referring to the mechanical resonance of the floor (platform) itself...at least that's what I was thinking of.

 

[Zbysek]

I believe your impressions are correct...the LF acoustic energy drops off when the speaker is not directly on the floor, but I think this poster and I are referring to the mechanical resonance of the floor (platform) itself...at least that's what I was thinking of.

And what is the difference between the two? I am lost...

 

[Redbrangus]

I'm making a distinction between the source of the waveform--the sound coming from the amp--and the sympathetic vibration of the stage platform. It's vibrating along with the source, but only at it's characteristic resonant points... a sort of 'one note' membrane like a drum head.

 

[Zbysek]

I'm making a distinction between the source of the waveform--the sound coming from the amp--and the sympathetic vibration of the stage platform. It's vibrating along with the source, but only at it's characteristic resonant points... a sort of 'one note' membrane like a drum head.

I can't fully comprehend the distinction, I am afraid.

All I know is that if I want significant bottom end from my small rig, I need to place it on the floor. That way, I get (low end) watts for free...

 

[Rick James]

I have always felt that my rig lost substantial amount of bottom end as soon as I lifted it off the floor...even if it remained close to the floor.
I haven't done any measurements though...

If you had done measurements they'd show no difference until the bottom of the speaker was approaching 1/4 wavelength above the floor. At 80 Hz that's 3.5 feet. Having the speaker high enough so you can hear the mids and highs makes the lows seem less prominent, even though their actual level hasn't changed at all. Another benefit of lifting is that you hear more of what the audience hears. The mids and highs from your speaker radiate out in a cone shaped pattern. When you're close to the cab with it on the floor your ears aren't inside that cone, so you don't hear the mids and highs, especially the highs, because the shape of that cone gets smaller as frequency goes higher. Out in the audience the dispersion cones have expanded so that their ears are all within those cones.

 

[dbase]

beer crates…..


Invalid Link Removed

..... you can also put your beer bottles in them!


Sorry for the derail!!!!


Wise

5 women and 18 guys???

 

[Redbrangus]

5 women and 18 guys???

That was my first thought. And it looks like the women are afraid they might get cooties from those guys.

Having built some structures to contain substantial quantities of water, I was sort of impressed with this build until I saw that the water in the pool is only about knee-deep.

 

[Zbysek]

If you had done measurements they'd show no difference until the bottom of the speaker was approaching 1/4 wavelength above the floor.

They might... still, my experience is different. Isn't there any other explanation what I experience? Isn't it possible that my body feels the floor vibrations when my rig is placed on the floor and translates them as bass sound/frequencies? Such vibrations would not be captured by measurements, I guess...

Another benefit of lifting is that you hear more of what the audience hears. The mids and highs from your speaker radiate out in a cone shaped pattern.

I understand your point. But I am not sure that it's always absolutely valid. Am I correct in thinking that sound of different frequencies travel different distances? If so, my understanding is that lower frequencies travel longer distances than high frequencies, correct? So, listeners who are in the back of the room do not get the same amount of highs/mids as I would get standing in front of the cabinet, correct? Plus, if I did stand in front of the cabinet, I would be blocking the highs/mids with my body. Plus, not all members of the audience are in the range of the cone shaped pattern, right?

 

[EricMordus]

Stack 'em on the floor. I originally bought my Markbass setup because I thought is would be a good idea to tilt the 2x10 combo up while sitting on top of the 1x15 extension cab. No need, but I get why you would want to.
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed

 

[Spidey2112]

Mike, you can stack them any which way, except when competing against this one...



... I'd give it a shot.

 

[Wisebass]

You guys are killing me!

Women to men ratio is off in that picture in that picture! Or not....

Good point! Did you count them?

5 women and 18 guys???

And no food!

That was my first thought.

The other girls are in their beds with a terrible hangover!

Who do you think drank all that beer? (the crates are all empty)


greetings everybody

Wise

 

[AngelCrusher]

+1



I don't think this is the solution for the OP as he clearly stated there is no FOH support...

You can use in ears with no foh support. Just bring your cabs but monitor with your in ears.

 

[Zbysek]

You can use in ears with no foh support. Just bring your cabs but monitor with your in ears.

What do you mean? Do you mean that the OP would be using IEMs to listen to his bass while still carrying the room with his rig? How would he listen to other instruments if his ears would be closed by IEMs?

That doesn't seem to be a practical solution, IMHO.

BTW: the OP's question concerned cab placement, not IEMs...

 

[Redbrangus]

But back to the point...or something at least vaguely tangentially related... (apologies to the OP for the high-jacking)

I also have not made any measurements, but I can definitely hear an audible difference (less LF response) in my sub arrays (in a largish PA system) if I leave the speakers on the dolly boards. That effect seems more pronounced if they're sitting on an actual floor as opposed to a riser or platform, but that's just my subjective response. But the height difference is only 5 or 6 inches, so that, given the effect @Rick James is describing, would seem to indicate that phase cancellation isn't the cause of what I'm hearing. (I'll have to admit that I hadn't really analyzed the actual physics of the thing...I just developed a hard and fast rule of not using the subs while they're on the dolly boards.) So now I'm wondering if that effect isn't due more to the fact that the subs just aren't as 'rigid' sitting on the wheels...that the enclosure is not as effectively 'pushing back' against the excursion of the drivers. And, in post #2....

And I have no doubt that at least one TB-er is going to weigh in with a suggestion of IEMs. Also not a choice I would consider, but everyone has their own thing.

 

[Rick James]

I understand your point. But I am not sure that it's always absolutely valid.

The science always works, whether you understand it or not. If what you think is happening disagrees with what the science knows is happening the sources that explain why are out there. Avail yourself of them.

 

[Zbysek]

The science always works, whether you understand it or not. If what you think is happening disagrees with what the science knows is happening the sources that explain why are out there. Avail yourself of them.

Not so long ago, "scientists" knew that Earth was flat.

Anyways, whether something is a "benefit" (as you put it) is a subjective assessment, not part of science.

And most importantly: I am a musician, not a scientist. My tools are my ears and my hands. When my ears tell me something sounds good/bad, I will not disregard them.

 

[bucephylus]

Indeed, the performance of the cabinet as it interacts with it’s surroundings is a non-trivial combination of otherwise straightforward mechanisms.

As an aside, several years back we were discussing stage coupling as it pertains to bleed into the vocal mics. At the time, I was predisposed that mechanical coupling was the primary factor. @Rick James was posting that I was incorrect and that the primary interaction between the cab and stage plate was acoustic. One great thing about Nature is that it always does the same thing, given the same conditions. So, we can study things as long as we can control the variables; and remain objective with the measurements. That’s Science. I disproved my hypothesis. RJ’s hypothesis remains.

My observations ONLY relate to the interaction between the cab and the stage. What actually gets back to the bassist’s ear is a much more complex thing, of which absorption by the stage plate is only a part. I too prefer to place my cabs directly on the stage. I just think the bass sounds best that way. I suspect that what we actually hear is the convolution of reflections from various boundaries, including the stage plate. One way to think about it is that energy is conserved. So, that part of the acoustic wave projected against the stage plate is either absorbed or reflected. If the absorption in the stage plate increases as the cab is initially elevated, then that must be at some cost to the reflection.

Of course, I have ZERO data to support any discussion about the nature of the signal projection as heard by the player; just my own experience bias. AND, certainly there is no “right” form for the projection. So, what I like may be entirely wrong for the next player.

That all may be TL;DR. I put my cab(s) on the stage and live with it. YMMV

 

[Zbysek]

Indeed, the performance of the cabinet as it interacts with it’s surroundings is a non-trivial combination of otherwise straightforward mechanisms.

As an aside, several years back we were discussing stage coupling as it pertains to bleed into the vocal mics. At the time, I was predisposed that mechanical coupling was the primary factor. @Rick James was posting that I was incorrect and that the primary interaction between the cab and stage plate was acoustic. One great thing about Nature is that it always does the same thing, given the same conditions. So, we can study things as long as we can control the variables; and remain objective with the measurements. That’s Science. I disproved my hypothesis. RJ’s hypothesis remains.

My observations ONLY relate to the interaction between the cab and the stage. What actually gets back to the bassist’s ear is a much more complex thing, of which absorption by the stage plate is only a part. I too prefer to place my cabs directly on the stage. I just think the bass sounds best that way. I suspect that what we actually hear is the convolution of reflections from various boundaries, including the stage plate. One way to think about it is that energy is conserved. So, that part of the acoustic wave projected against the stage plate is either absorbed or reflected. If the absorption in the stage plate increases as the cab is initially elevated, then that must be at some cost to the reflection.

Of course, I have ZERO data to support any discussion about the nature of the signal projection as heard by the player; just my own experience bias. AND, certainly there is no “right” form for the projection. So, what I like may be entirely wrong for the next player.

That all may be TL;DR. I put my cab(s) on the stage and live with it. YMMV

I like the way you put it.

Let me just add that, at least in my case, it's not only bassist's ear what matters. I am controlling my playing not only by listening to the sound produced but also by feeling the vibrations... If I don't feel them from the floor than I have the tendency to either touch the cabinet with my leg or sit on it.

Mere existence of devices such as BackBeat or Bass Board from Eich supports the conclusion that I am not the only one...

 

[bucephylus]

If you had done measurements they'd show no difference until the bottom of the speaker was approaching 1/4 wavelength above the floor.

What do you think happens when the driver is 1/8 wavelength above the deck? If 1/4 wavelength is a destructive interference condition, wouldn’t 1/8 wavelength be a constructive interference condition? Also, the dispersion relations would make the actual situation pretty complicated vs a monochromatic artificial signal, such as I used.

And, I believe you are thinking in terms of reflection conditions. Stage plate absorption is further complicated by uncontrolled resonance characteristics.

As I said, simple concepts; but the real picture is somewhat complicated.

 

[bucephylus]

I like the way you put it.

Let me just add that, at least in my case, it's not only bassist's ear what matters. I am controlling my playing not only by listening to the sound produced but also by feeling the vibrations... If I don't feel them from the floor than I have the tendency to either touch the cabinet with my leg or sit on it.

Mere existence of devices such as BackBeat or Bass Board from Eich supports the conclusion that I am not the only one...

For sure, and this is nothing really new. In orchestral play, the bass is jammed up against your side, allowing the player to both feel and hear. It’s a whole experience that constitutes what we call “feel.”