• 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.

Small drivers... why do I like that sound?

Driver size doesn't have a sound.

As agedhorse said, it may be the specific drivers you like, and not all small drivers.

I have a feeling it could have to do with the cab design required to house the drivers in question, as cab design is inseparable from the equation. Physical volume, porting, driver alignment, and a host of other factors come into play. Part of a 410 behaving differently from a 115 is the fact that 10's have a variety of ways to be installed and aligned, all impacting the overall sound. I'm sure a skilled engineer could make a 410 and a 115 cab which sound similar, if that was the goal.
 
Interesting! I was aware of the ongoing mixed driver "debate" and several others relating to specific brands and builders, but not the aspect of driver size. I wish life permitted more time to read more of the BG forums, but I do well to cover what's going on with the crusty old prune-juice-drinking DB crowd most of the time. :D

But I thought to post this up in this forum because I know a lot of builders/designers etc. hang out up here and they might be able to give a little insight. At any rate, I don't claim anything empirical about my strange movement toward small drivers, just an observation that it has happened and wondering aloud about it. in the end, I'll play whatever sounds good to me no matter what the science behind it may or may not be; sort of like my preference for modern DB's over the hallowed and iconic 100-200 year old instruments that so many upper level players cherish. They just feel better to me and I like the way they sound for whatever reason.

But back to the small drivers, in the PJB combos I've noticed that the cabinets on the Flightcase models are very deep, and I suspect that their design helps compensate for the small driver size. My intuition tells me that this is what makes them sound "fat" and "deep", especially because I also own a PJB CUB with a tiny cabinet that only retains that aspect at the lowest volume levels and becomes boxy and tubby (at least compared to the Flightcase amps) above those volumes. I'm just curious about the acoustics that are going on, but will play whatever amp gets me the sound I want regardless of driver size.

The whole PJB small driver thing kind of fell into my lap when i was send two Flightcase combos to review and was shocked at the counterintuitive way the small drivers sounded so big.... but just the right kind of big. I have since reviewed a MAS 4x5" cab and noticed much the same phenomenon at work.
 
Why is it when some people bring this topic they get destroyed, but not all?

See those "staff member" and "administrator" badges by his name?

The OP also also phrased the question in a politely curious fashion. Those who barge in with righteous "15's are better at lows" as a statement tend to be off putting. The OP also didn't tread into the murky topic of mixing drivers.
 
It seems to me that often times members try to "over-make" a point, that speaker size has little or nothing to do with ... the frequency response of a speaker. That said, it's obvious that various speakers do SOUND different, size being one factor. I have gone from 2 and 3 way cabs using multiple small drivers, to mostly 15s now, everything from Eminence neos to ancient Altecs. All are more of the "sound" I want to hear.

Your mileage may vary ... and there is nothing wrong with that!
 
That's possible, but I think it may be something more than that. The 15's I started with aside, the 12's were EA and/or Bergantino, the 10's and 8's were either EA or locally made ported PA speakers. I could be wrong, but I seem to have noticed this phenomena across the board. Which is not to say that I didn't enjoy the sound of the bigger speakers - the 12's in particular had a cool "Hulk/Smash" vibe that could be really effective in some situations, but over the years the gravitation was to smaller and smaller drivers.



For the DB, I think this certainly has a lot to do with it, which goes along with why I never go anywhere without a high pass filter any more. And I've considered the possibility that the 90+% of the time that I play DB colors the remaining time that I play BG in terms of what I want to hear from a bass. That is entirely possible.

I suspect that you would find a cabinet using say JBL E-110's, D/K120's, D/K130's to have similar properties as well, even though they are larger diameter drivers.

Some of what you are hearing may be the distribution of distortion products combined with the driver's native bandwidth.
 
maybe because you can hear them better at a closer range ... bigger speaker = longer standing wave kinda stuff , where you hear the lows a bit further away ...

i've never ventured into PJB stuff , mainly because it seemed a bit over-priced to me ... especially now being MIC .. ?!? but they are the king of tiny speakers .. !
 
See those "staff member" and "administrator" badges by his name?

The OP also also phrased the question in a politely curious fashion. Those who barge in with righteous "15's are better at lows" as a statement tend to be off putting. The OP also didn't tread into the murky topic of mixing drivers.

So it's all right to pile on a normal member when he/she asks the same question? Plenty of threads where people do the same thing - saying "I like larger drivers because they have a deeper sound? or some such, and trolls attack him/her saying speaker size has absolutely no relation to sound - "GK 10s are voiced lower than the 12s and 15s" and such.

I just find it interesting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bassist4Eris
So it's all right to pile on a normal member when he/she asks the same question? Plenty of threads where people do the same thing - saying "I like larger drivers because they have a deeper sound? or some such, and trolls attack him/her saying speaker size has absolutely no relation to sound - "GK 10s are voiced lower than the 12s and 15s" and such.

I just find it interesting.

I'm not saying it is all right, I'm just saying it could be a factor.

Don't ignore the fact that the OP doesn't assert anything abut the quality of the sound attributable to the specific driver size, but rather indicates his personal trend and a curiosity as to why. I think people get into trouble here when their posts say "i like X size of driver because it has more highs/lows/mids/etc."
 
Not aimed at you, but the membership in general. It is common that people start thread stating that they prefer one size of speakers over another, or that difference sizes in general sound different (smaller speakers sound tight, larger speaker sound deeper, etc.). Then they are excoriated and bombarded with comments about how the size of the driver makes no difference as to sound.

Very true and find it frustrating and annoying and don't like the behavior or approach of many. Often times I've posted opinions and facts and get hammered or discredited as being wrong. But many just repeat and agree to my facts. But completely reword it making me look wrong or discredit me. So I show empathy and understanding to your statement

Cause without getting to long winded post. its absolutely related to statements about many variables. But yes likewise yes, the size of the speaker can have a huge impact on the sound. And has alot to do with efficiency and bandwidth. And yes its absolutely obvious that larger speakers are very much capable of producing more bass and smaller speakers more highend.

And I don't like it either when many make claims the size doesn't matter. When yes we as players in the real world have observed it absolutely does. And don't wanna be told that our ears and brains are wrong lol. That's for sure. Cause we know we have observed a legit phenomena.

And yes when people start talking about clarity, fast response, punch or accuracy.

Has alot to do with transient response. And frequency range. So yes understanding a large transient can be a sudden change in amplitude or volume. And transients can be a sudden change in frequency from high to low.

So yes absolutely not only can a smaller speaker have more frequency response in the upper range of a instrument. Which would be very pleasing and preffered by a acoustic player.

Smaller speakers can definetaly be "faster" or basically reproduce transients from amplitude and frequency changes in certain frequencies much better than larger speaker can.

And the annoying arguments or corrections that come about come from many reasons. Some people have egos and wanna through their technical weight around. Others just don't understand cause technically on paper or little graphs on computers that doesn't happen.

But yeah in the real world our ears and expierence tell us. I've expierenced this phenomena and nobody is gonna tell me it didn't happen lol.

But for the most part addressing why the op likes smaller speakers is yes.

Smaller speakers can produce more highs and midrange and is pleasing for reproduction of timbre rich acoustic instrument. And also yes smaller speakers can't reproduce deep lows and the speaker/enclusure has a high pass response. Which is non issue with most acoustic players. Cause a majority of them use high pass filters to eliminate more than one variables low frequency can have. So yes just enough bass to be considered...."bass"

and the limited bandwidth of the bass being produced can also have excellent transient response and does not have smearing or muddyness associated with larger speakers.

So yes smaller speakers reproduce the timbre of acoustic instruments better and also can have good transient response in the low end.
 
Last edited:
I think some of us here (me included) are concerned that technically accurate information is presented clearly. It is frustrating when folks pretend to know what they are talking about yet regurgitate factually incorrect information in a way that is misleading.

Folks arguing that something can not possibly be done by regurgitating factually incorrect and simplistic information IN THE FACE OF COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE and VERIFIABLE examples gets very old, and is IMO a disservice to those TB members who are trying to learn more about how equipment and approaches to amplification actually work, as well as how it is evolving.
 
It's complicated......:cigar:

But one thing is certain. Those old adages like 10's are tight, punchy & fast; and 15's are slow, thick & fat are completely false.

Kinda yes ....but likewise no. And again people have stated that they have frustrating opinions . compared to well known observed artifacts and non linear behavior of larger drivers. And yes because of their size and also the type of enclosure they are in. Distortion caused by poor transient response. And distortion caused by a larger speaker cones. Very much attributes to observing or hearing of "faster" or "slower" or punchy and accurate... Blah blah blah.

And again related to the topic, the reason why many players prefer smaller speakers is because of the fact they are punchy or faster or more accurate and offer more clarity within the bandwith a player finds more pleasing. And likewise no matter what frequency we are talking about. Any speaker that can produce transients more accurately is more pleasing to hear. And transients involve large amplitude changes. And large frequency changes. Which the acoustic and electric bass produces a fair amount of.
 
Last edited:
What do you mean by "less stored energy in the midrange"?

Larger drivers might have more cone and suspension resonances in the sensitive midrange frequencies resulting in a more colored(not necessarily bad!) sound. Small drivers will often have the same resonances higher in frequency where it has less of an impact.

All depends on many variables of course. One thing that cannot be underestimated is frequency response. It's the driving force behind most gear changes based on tone. Many less knowledgeable players will spend big coin on changes that could've been made with small eq adjustments. Wide dispersion speakers will let you hear "Your Sound" at more locations than narrow ones.
 
I'd be interested to know the frequency response of the drivers in the Phil Jones cabs... I'm guessing that the enclosures have a wider low end response than the individual drivers themselves and it's the overall package that gives the sound you like.


Right? No point in considering a CPU without the RAM, or an engine without a transmission.
 
I'd be interested to know the frequency response of the drivers in the Phil Jones cabs... I'm guessing that the enclosures have a wider low end response than the individual drivers themselves and it's the overall package that gives the sound you like.
Driver coupling, baffle step comp, porting and cab design can only extend the low end from dropping off as fast. IOW, instead of -10dB @ 60HZ, maybe it's -3dB @ 60Hz. Can't generate what's not there. (numbers are fictitious, for illustration only.)
 
Driver coupling, baffle step comp, porting and cab design can only extend the low end from dropping off as fast. IOW, instead of -10dB @ 60HZ, maybe it's -3dB @ 60Hz. Can't generate what's not there. (numbers are fictitious, for illustration only.)

Actually given the scenario of a port potentially acting as a Helmholtz resonator that may not be the case, going to wait for someone more knowledgeable about enclosure design to respond though :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: agedhorse