Question about speaker sizes - are they all created equally?

[Makten]

See it as a statistical thing. The likelyhood of a large speaker to have its resonance frequency lower, is greater than for a small speaker. The likelyhood for a large speaker cone to be as stiff as a small one, is lesser.
So, there will most likely be some correlation between size and sound if we look at a large population of speakers, but you will never know what exact models that lie where in the distribution of sound parameters.
Also, the size and shape of the cabinet is very important as it directly changes the resonance frequency.

There is a reason for a tweeter being smaller than a woofer.

 

[Rip Van Dan]

Say I try Brand A's 10"-, 12"- and 15"-speaker cabinets and prefer the sound of the 12"-speaker cabinet. Can I make a general assumption that I will also prefer Brand B's 12"-cabinet? Put differently, are speaker sizes like basses where if I prefer a Fender Precision to a Fender Jazz, I can safely assume I will prefer a Lull Precision to a Lull Jazz?

Now, if I try 10"-, 12"- and 15"-speaker cabinets with Amp A and prefer the sound of the 12"-speaker cabinet, can I make a general assumption that I will also prefer the sound of the same 12"-speaker cabinet with Amp B? More specifically, local stores have the Aguilar Tone Hammer in stock, but I want the AG, and they don't have Aguilar cabinets in stock. My intention is to test different Aguilar cabs using the IR on the Tone Hammer. Can I assume the one I prefer with the Tone Hammer will also be the one I prefer with the AG?

Thanks!

Back in the 60's and 70's those generalization about 10", 12", and 15" speakers was fairly valid. The 15" speakers gave the best lows and the 12" didn't quite have the lows but were punchier because the smaller driver moved faster. The 10" speakers were guitar speakers at the time right up until the first Ampeg 810 cabs came out. Then the SWR Goliath 410 cab with built-in tweeter horn was the harbinger of modern speakers. I toured with a nightclub group from 1971 through 1973.

The amp and cab I started with in 1966 was a 1966 Fender Bassman. It was a 50-watt all-tube amp into a large 212 cabinet. Within about 2-months of touring with a nigthclub group, that amp and cab proved to be incapable of filling the needs of the venues we played (I was getting buried by 2 Vox Super Beatle amps). That Fender 212 cab looked great but was terrible. If I turned the amp above #7 on the dial, those poor Jensen 12" speaker would fart out. The cab was built before the Thiele-Small parameters for building bass cabs came out, so most of it was trial and error instead of science. The cab on that amp was a fail. I replaced two speakers from that cab before I broke down and bought new amp, a Standel MCIIb/SAM20b, piggy-back amp

The Standel used a powered 215 bass reflex speaker cab. It was a 200-watts amp as was acoustic 360/361 and Ampeg SVT with 810 cab loud. Acoustic's 360/361 was a 200-watt rig using a powered cab with an 18" folded horn speaker and Ampeg's 810 was a 300-watt all-tube amp. My Standel amp was loud and very clear. I could run it all the way up and it would not distort. But, it was so loud I found I couldn't turn it above #3 on the dial (call it 9 o'clock) indoors without being too loud.

About the time the Goliath 1 by SWR came out, size of the speaker meant much less on how it sounded than speaker size meant in the 60's. Now days, they are all over the place. It depends on the designer of the cab and virtually all the speakers from major manufacturers are far superior in sound to the stuff I was using in the 60's and 70's. For instance, a bass amp back then would be exceptional if it could replicate the fundamental at 41Hz (low E string). My two best cabs now are the DNS-210 and DNS-410 cabs by DNA. Their 210 cab can replicate the fundamental down to 34Hz and their 410 goes down to 37Hz. The clarity and articulation I get out of those cabs were not even imaginable back in 1965 when I started playing bass. I still do have two 112 cabs, but my 210 cab sounds better and is louder than my 2x112 cabs. Those cabs are Eden EX-112 cabs and they sound great, but my DNS-210 sounds better.

I do however still use one EX-112 along with a 225-watt rms Eden TN226 amp for small venues like the brewpubs that abound in Washington state. It sound really good and I can carry all my gear for a small venue in or out in one trip. I wish I had 12" speakers like that back in the 60's, but I couldn't even imagine that a 210 could produce a better bottom end than a 212 or 215 cab, let alone be loud enough to fill the room of even large indoor venues. I'll still use my 410 for outdoor venues and Music Festivals and get told to turn down if I turn the master on my 800-watt Eden amp above 10:30. So I don't need to worry about lugging around a 200-lb. 810 cab. Modern speakers typically sound better and can play louder than the gear I used in the 60's and mid-70's.

 

[Deleted member 271037]

No, you definitely need to evaluate all speakers/cabs individually. In the past (decades ago) I definitely thought there were certain tonal characteristics that were closely related to speaker size, but speaker technology has come a long way since then.

Having said that, for some reason I often seem to prefer cabs with 12" speakers. The amp/speaker interaction is very important to me, and by this I mean the dynamics or "feel" rather than just the frequency response. This is a huge part of why I still prefer tube amps over solid state or hybrid amps. Tube amps generally seem to interact very differently with the speakers. With the amps I use (typically vintage British tube amps) and for the tone/feel I want, 12" equipped cabs generally seem to "feel" right to me more often than cabs with other speaker sizes, even when I test different brands.

I honestly don't know if there's some kind of confirmation bias involved (doing a proper blind test of cabs isn't easy...) or if cab manufacturers even today deliberately voice 12" cabs to sound the way people would perhaps EXPECT from a 12" equipped cab. But time and time again I've ended up choosing 12" equipped cabs.

Ported vs sealed would be a much bigger concern for me than speaker size though. I've always preferred ported cabs, although I would of course rather play a great sounding sealed cab than a poor sounding ported cab. Just like I would rather play a great sounding 10" or 15" cab than a poor sounding 12" cab.

But I still always end up with 12".

 

[Ritter667]

Nope, speakers size is just one variable in a speaker, often not terribly important, though a designer can use this to their advantage (or disadvantage) depending on their skill.

I am no expert, so please don't take this as I am arguing against you, just what my common sense and relatively limited understanding of physics tells me, but I might very well be wrong.

I would think though that it would be easier to get a 15" speaker to produce lower frequencies and harder to produce higher frequencies, than say a 10" speaker.

That said, yes, you can absolute find 10" or even 8" speakers that has a lower frequency response than certain 15" speakers.

At very least I would think that is a lot easier to make a 15" that reproduces low frequencies at high volumes than it would say an 8" speaker.

So what I am saying is that while the frequency response and character of a specific size of speaker depends on design, I would think that the size of the specific speakers does possess some inherent qualities, that can be drawn advantages of when designing.

Is this a correct assumption, and is this what you are saying, or am I way off?

 

[BruceG68]

Some things to take into consideration.1st above do you like the way the cabinet sounds despite speaker size.2 Is it the right ohm rating to work with your amp.3 Is it portable enough such as maybe it would be easier to move a pair of 210 cabs instead of a single 410.4 is it cost feasible.5 etc.I guess I could have put the ohm rating of the cab 1st but if you don't like the way it sounds you shouldn't buy it anyway.Your choice is usually a compromise of all these factors.Thats why years ago I built my own cabs so I had exactly what I needed/wanted.There are a lot of choices.Happy hunting.

 

[agedhorse]

I am no expert, so please don't take this as I am arguing against you, just what my common sense and relatively limited understanding of physics tells me, but I might very well be wrong.

I would think though that it would be easier to get a 15" speaker to produce lower frequencies and harder to produce higher frequencies, than say a 10" speaker.

That said, yes, you can absolute find 10" or even 8" speakers that has a lower frequency response than certain 15" speakers.

At very least I would think that is a lot easier to make a 15" that reproduces low frequencies at high volumes than it would say an 8" speaker.

So what I am saying is that while the frequency response and character of a specific size of speaker depends on design, I would think that the size of the specific speakers does possess some inherent qualities, that can be drawn advantages of when designing.

Is this a correct assumption, and is this what you are saying, or am I way off?

It depends, but with the right choices, some of this is true.

 

[monsterthompson]

I am no expert, so please don't take this as I am arguing against you, just what my common sense and relatively limited understanding of physics tells me, but I might very well be wrong.

I would think though that it would be easier to get a 15" speaker to produce lower frequencies and harder to produce higher frequencies, than say a 10" speaker.

That said, yes, you can absolute find 10" or even 8" speakers that has a lower frequency response than certain 15" speakers.

At very least I would think that is a lot easier to make a 15" that reproduces low frequencies at high volumes than it would say an 8" speaker.

So what I am saying is that while the frequency response and character of a specific size of speaker depends on design, I would think that the size of the specific speakers does possess some inherent qualities, that can be drawn advantages of when designing.

Is this a correct assumption, and is this what you are saying, or am I way off?

I think some of this feels like it could or should be the case, and I’ve certainly had similar thoughts over the years. I think the way to consider it is that there’s a range of useable sizes for a particular goal. At the extremes certain sizes of drivers become impractical for certain applications.

There are earbuds and headphones that produce huge bass sounds, and they use relatively small drivers to achieve this, so the driver diameter isn’t the limiting factor in low frequency reproduction. However, those headphones can’t be used for a gig. On the other end of the spectrum you have PA systems. If you browse Sweetwater’s PA options you’ll see mostly 12 and 15 with some 10 inch options. Subs commonly are 12, 15, and 18 inch sizes, so it might seem like larger diameters for lower frequencies. Why no 24, 30 or 36? At some point the driver size becomes impractical. My point is that from earbuds to PA subs there’s a variety of speaker sizes that produce the full spectrum of frequencies at varying levels of output.

Consider that bassists commonly see cabs that use 10, 12, or 15 inch drivers and we know lots of guitarists using 12 inch cabs. From PA subs to mains to guitars to bass, the 12 shows up in a lot of places. I think that makes it pretty hard to define a 12 simply by its diameter without considering other design elements including the cab it’s going into.

 

[JimChjones]

There's also the consideration that, while a competent manufacturer can probably design and tune a 2x10 cab to sound more like everyone else's 1x15s, and vice versa, they'll probably sell more if the 15 sounds 15ish and the 2x10 tenish...

 

[monsterthompson]

I think another factor in the confusion is that marketing materials often use coded “wink wink” language in product descriptions to reference the sonic intent and influence. Something might be described as sounding like an 810 as a reference to an Ampeg fridge. That could later be shortened to sounding like 10s. Before long the average consumer sees this in enough places that they assume 10s have a sound.

 

[Raf Seibert]

Keep in mind, a very general rule is that transducers effect the flavor of sound the most. That is, pickups and speaker drivers can have a larger impact on sound quality than amplifiers, withstanding that amplifier makers can build in considerable flexibility in this regard.

 

[agedhorse]

Keep in mind, a very general rule is that transducers effect the flavor of sound the most. That is, pickups and speaker drivers can have a larger impact on sound quality than amplifiers, withstanding that amplifier makers can build in considerable flexibility in this regard.

Depending on the amp… just like with speakers, amps can be mildly or heavily voiced too.

 

[Hoochie Coochie Man]

Like so much in life, t's not the size that matters, it's what you can do with it

I am reminded by your post of a song that says "It's not the meat it's the motion. It's the movement that gives it the pop" True for speakers and other things.