• 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.

Sealed Crossfiring 6x10 build

I meant that one weber driver is a cts vintage ampeg clone (light) and the other is at least twice as heavy and more efficient with more low end.
Without specs you have no way of knowing what you're actually dealing with. Weight means nothing.

I've read all over that parallel sounds tighter. Doesn't mean that it's true but, it seems to be the overall opinion.
I could bring up the analogy between opinions and the exit of the alimentary canal. :hmm:
 
Just one more thing that I'll have to try myself and see what my ears tell me. If I end up liking both drivers from weber, and a pair of 8ohms in a sealed cab in series doesn't negatively effect the tone, I would use four of the more heavy duty drivers in series parallel and gain some more sensitivity and low frequency handling.
 
JGR. I just got the specs from fliptops on their neo 32ohm drivers. They look almost identical to the B810 specs but, 2db more sensitive. Thats a really good thing! About 3lbs lighter and about the same price if ordered in multiples. They both have that 5db dip around 600hz that needs to be eq's out. For my tastes anyway. Anyway, they are a contender for this cab and I'll put the specs into winisd later tonight.
 
Thanks Bill, after asking I started looking at different drivers and figured it out. Oh yeah, I will once again say that the stock nv610 drivers sound like beta 10a's. Exactly. And, there is a good reason for that. Learning how to use winisd basics is very eye opening. At this point I would definitely use 6 betas wired series parallel but, I'll wait to see what the webers sound like.
 
Highpass, yes, but you don't have to go anywhere near 2k if you don't want to to not incur a power handling penalty, 200-400 hz, depending on the slope, is enough for that, the rest is a matter of tone and balance with the other drivers.
 
I've read all over that parallel sounds tighter. Doesn't mean that it's true but, it seems to be the overall opinion.

JBL published a paper years ago that perpetuated, if not originated, the myth that wiring drivers in series doubles the electricial Q of the paired speakers, relative to the single-driver or parallel-wired cases. They said that the first voice coil acted like a resistor in series with the second voice coil, and vice-versa.

The effect of adding a series resistor equal to the voice coil's DC resistance would indeed double the electrical Q, but that's not what happens when you add a second speaker in series. You're not adding a resistor, you're adding a motor (that has resistive and inductive components).

According to my measurements, the electrical Q stays the same regardless of series, parallel, or series-parallel wiring.

I manufacture three home audio speakers that use series-wired 8-ohm woofers, and this is something I investigated before introducing the first one back in 2007.

In fact, if the amplifier has a relatively high output impedance, it will actually have a higher effective damping factor (ratio of speaker input impedance to amplifier output impedance) with series-wired drivers than with parallel-wired drivers.
 
According to my measurements, the electrical Q stays the same regardless of series, parallel, or series-parallel wiring.
+1. I saw a quote from another manufacturer touting the supposed advantages of all parallel wired drivers, to explain the use of 32 ohm drivers in 8x10s. That original decision by Ampeg had nothing to do with Q, a factor which wasn't even known of outside Australia in 1969. It was done so that the assembly workers would be less likely to mis-wire them.
 
i thought the all-parallel thing was so that if one speaker died, the rest would keep going, unlike series, where the other ones would die too like old-school christmas lights. (it certainly ties in with the amp's design which was supposed to take a dead power tube in stride and keep going with the other 5.)
 
also, what good does angling in the speakers do? is it just about getting them physically closer together to "narrow up" the vertical column so the dispersion is better?

hell, how important is onstage dispersion anyway? if the 6x10 or 8x10 cab creates a beam of mids and highs that hits the player, but doesn't spread to the rest of the band, maybe that's a good thing? the bassist happily hears his notes, while the others don't get blasted with midrange gank that interferes with their own (higher) frequency range?
 
also, what good does angling in the speakers do? is it just about getting them physically closer together to "narrow up" the vertical column so the dispersion is better?

hell, how important is onstage dispersion anyway? if the 6x10 or 8x10 cab creates a beam of mids and highs that hits the player, but doesn't spread to the rest of the band, maybe that's a good thing? the bassist happily hears his notes, while the others don't get blasted with midrange gank that interferes with their own (higher) frequency range?

Imagine a laser beam coming straight out of the center of each cone, that's what the highs are doing. The upper mids, a slightly wider beam but still fairly narrow in the grand scheme of things, the low mids, spread widely, more like a floodlight and the deep lows go everywhere, more like ambient lighting. Crossfiring them makes those 2 narrow beams cross and spread wider in front of the cab, the uppermids, with their slightly wider, but still narrow beam, make a wider arc in front of the cab, spreading the sound wider, to more people, rather than having a hotspot in the focus of the beam and little off to the sides. The lowmids and lows are going to be spread widely anyway, as the lower you go in frequency, the less directional and the more widely spread things become.

It's for this reason the 410 bass cab, and worse yet, the 412 guitar cab are among technically the worst designs out there, even though they're the most common. Because that's the way they did it back before somebody figured all this out, and because that's what we've been fed all these years, we figure it's good enough and have come to expect that's the way things sound.........like a monster....slowly eating itself.:p
 
i thought the all-parallel thing was so that if one speaker died, the rest would keep going, unlike series, where the other ones would die too like old-school christmas lights. (it certainly ties in with the amp's design which was supposed to take a dead power tube in stride and keep going with the other 5.)

In fact the tube amp would blow if all of a sudden it saw infinite impedance.
 
In case the webers don't have the top end I want, I've started looking at soft dome midranges. Apparently they sound smoother than tweets and have good off-axis response. Not very efficient but, Im really only looking to add from about 3khz to 5 or 6khz. Just alittle top end sparkle that sounds crappy with most tweets. One would sit over each columb of 10's. They may just be enough and not add much height to the cab.
 
I gain matched a berg/beta 10" driver to a mod8 driver and used a 3rd order crossover at 2khz. It's the best tone for me that I've heard yet. The steep 2k lowpass on the 10" got rid of any clack but still left in some growl and definition. Hipassing the 8" at 2k brought in the clarity and some more dispersion without being harsh at all. What I need to find are a pair of small mids that can handle 2khz on up at around 97db. Aside from using a pair of faital pro 6FE200's which would make the cab alittle taller than I want, the only other thing I can see is using four of the faital 3" mid drivers. But, they would have to be put next to each other to keep height down on the cab. It may not matter too much though since the cab could be crossfiring. I can't find any soft dome mids that are anywhere near sensititve. Im starting to get this thing dialed in though.
 

Latest posts