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

[Coolhandjjl]

People can throw out any amount of numbers, scientific data, practical information, and years of experience. In the end it doesn't mean a damn thing if your ears prefer one thing over another.

The 50 cal. Machine gun, which has been in use for decades, actually should NOT function if you run all the numbers and measurements. By the data, it is a useless chunk of engineering. Somehow though, despite the bean counters and inked numbers on a piece of paper, it's been a proven highly functioning efficient weapon.

Sorry, only car analogies can be used here on TalkBass

 

[Adam Booker]

Admittedly, most of my gigs are on DB, but I always seem to find the sound of small drivers more pleasing than the sound of larger ones. Like many people, when I first started playing bass, I gravitated to big speakers, starting with an old Yamaha combo and later a Bag End cab, both of which had 15s. Next was a move to 12 inch drivers, then 10s, then 8s. Now for years I've been very happy with the 5" drivers in the Phil Jones combos.

All of this points to a preference for smaller drivers, which always seemed counterintuitive, and yet the proof is in the pudding. I was very excited to try the PJB quantum 800 with its array of 2" drivers, but it seems to have gotten indefinitely delayed. At any rate, what is it about small drivers that sounds so good to me?

And we're not getting any younger, but those big cones aren't getting any lighter.

 

[blubass]

I tired that answer, but it was deleted for being political. Careful.

You should have used a car analogy instead, tsk tsk

 

[R Baer]

Admittedly, most of my gigs are on DB, but I always seem to find the sound of small drivers more pleasing than the sound of larger ones. Like many people, when I first started playing bass, I gravitated to big speakers, starting with an old Yamaha combo and later a Bag End cab, both of which had 15s. Next was a move to 12 inch drivers, then 10s, then 8s. Now for years I've been very happy with the 5" drivers in the Phil Jones combos.

All of this points to a preference for smaller drivers, which always seemed counterintuitive, and yet the proof is in the pudding. I was very excited to try the PJB quantum 800 with its array of 2" drivers, but it seems to have gotten indefinitely delayed. At any rate, what is it about small drivers that sounds so good to me?

I think it's more of the overall cabinet design you are attracted to Chris. I could design a single 10" cab that would sound drastically different with drivers from Eminence, Celestion, Faital, B&C, etc. I could also take the same driver and get completely different tones from just changing the box design and crossover. Cabinet design is very much the sum of all the parts.

 

[DukeLeJeune]

All of this points to a preference for smaller drivers, which always seemed counterintuitive, and yet the proof is in the pudding... what is it about small drivers that sounds so good to me?

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.

Most people probably look at the PBJ Flightcase and MAS 45 and see "four small drivers". But look through a different lens and you see "cabs with unusually good dispersion characteristics". My guess is that at least one of the reasons why you like these cabs is because they still sound "right" from most angles.

In my experience there seems to be a correlation between a high ratio of magnet-strength-to-cone-mass, and articulate midrange (other things matter too of course). This is easier to get with small cones than with large cones in part because a large cone must also be thicker in order to maintain rigidity, so the moving mass grows faster than the cone area does. And if we add up the motor strength of a whole bunch of small drivers, it may well be more than the motor strength of a single large driver of comparable SPL capability.

In the low end, imo it's more complicated, many factors come into play. Briefly, imo "punchy" in the context of a bass cab implies a slightly elevated upper bass region, often followed by a fairly gentle rolloff, along with good transient response.

 

[yodedude2]

Back in the day we were doing the equivalent of painting a delicate picture with a 6" fence brush.

These days, with the improvements in speaker design and manufacture, we have access to fine detail paint brushes.

and me over here wanting to paint a rothko.

great thread

 

[fdeck]

Unfortunately, the data we need on the respective frequency response and dispersion (off-axis frequency response) curves of commercial speakers, is practically nonexistent. So all we can do is guess. And transient response is as much of a guess as frequency response.

For mainstream sealed and ported speakers at low frequencies, frequency and transient response are just different ways of expressing the same function, and you can't change the one without changing the other.

One effect of good dispersion is that your bass sounds louder from where you're standing, and louder typically sounds better. But that's not necessarily a bad thing. Being able to hear yourself better without being too loud in the mix is worth the price of admission.