• 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.

Speakers...Why Does The Myth that Size Matters, Still Exist?

An array of 3"s with the same cone area as one 15", ok, maybe even better in some ways (I have an 8x8" that's pretty awesome).
But one 3" (manufactured within the limits of current materials/physics, in a cab idealized for it) being no different from one 15" (manufactured within the limits of current materials/physics, in a cab optimized for it)? No, I don't see why I should believe that.

If you aren't convinced yet, make it a 1" versus a 30". If not convinced yet, I wish you well.

I think this is one of our almost perverse, "Worst of Talkbass" topics.
 
I have a 210 cabinet, a 115 cabinet, and 112 combo. They're all fine alone or in any combination.

What has not been fine, to my ears, are any of the PJB and Trace Elliott cabs I've tried over the years that have 8" or smaller speakers in some quantity. Some people love them, I've never test driven one that had even just adequate low end.

Now, I've never taken the opportunity to seek out something like that ridiculous cabinet pictured earlier in this thread. It all comes down to moving air, and enough tiny speakers will move as much as a lesser number of big ones. But I'm not going to want to haul around a cabinet with a ridiculous number of tiny speakers in it.

I don't even want to haul around the cabinets I currently own. A direct box and in ears are the way to go.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DJ Bebop
I have a 210 cabinet, a 115 cabinet, and 112 combo. They're all fine alone or in any combination.

What has not been fine, to my ears, are any of the PJB and Trace Elliott cabs I've tried over the years that have 8" or smaller speakers in some quantity. Some people love them, I've never test driven one that had even just adequate low end.

Now, I've never taken the opportunity to seek out something like that ridiculous cabinet pictured earlier in this thread. It all comes down to moving air, and enough tiny speakers will move as much as a lesser number of big ones. But I'm not going to want to haul around a cabinet with a ridiculous number of tiny speakers in it.

I don't even want to haul around the cabinets I currently own. A direct box and in ears are the way to go.
I had played through those two cabinets that I posted earlier, the Phil Jones. It was impressive in the low end. The weight was impressive too, or more like oppressive when it came time to move it. Fortunately it wasn't mine 😊
 
Last edited:
I have a 210 cabinet, a 115 cabinet, and 112 combo. They're all fine alone or in any combination.

What has not been fine, to my ears, are any of the PJB and Trace Elliott cabs I've tried over the years that have 8" or smaller speakers in some quantity. Some people love them, I've never test driven one that had even just adequate low end.

Now, I've never taken the opportunity to seek out something like that ridiculous cabinet pictured earlier in this thread. It all comes down to moving air, and enough tiny speakers will move as much as a lesser number of big ones. But I'm not going to want to haul around a cabinet with a ridiculous number of tiny speakers in it.

I don't even want to haul around the cabinets I currently own. A direct box and in ears are the way to go.
I have heard that PJB cabinet, and there is no shortage of low end and low end extension. Well beyond adequate IMO.

The irony of this is that your in ear transducers are much smaller than the drivers in the PJB cabinet and won't have issues with bass either... and there are just as many folks who would call that ridiculous too... think about that.
 
Imagine a 15" funneled into and sealed into your ear canal. If that's no different from an ear bud you have nothing to worry about.
1774152184601.jpeg
 
Very funny. :-)
So, are we saying that the size of ear bud drivers matters (.5" vs 15")?

Anyone (I don't mean you, DJ Bebop) saying that those are the same, right beside your ear, I can't help. The end.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: DJ Bebop
Take a good headphone, listen to it, and then move both cups an inch away from your ears. As soon as the seal is broken, the bass drops. With an extra inch between the driver and your ear, the whole experience is ruined.
Headphones follow a completely different concept. The room size plays a role. Earbuds have a tiny room to fill, and their dynamic drivers are seldom larger than 10mm.
Circumaural headphones have a slightly larger space to fill and good ones have dynamic drivers in the 30-50mm range.
However, if you compare the "speaker size" to the size of the room they operate in, it'd be like having 30" woofers in a small bedroom.
 
I have two instances where speaker size seems to matter. Anecdotal yes, but here they are. First, understand that my pair of 4x10s (Peavey, Ashdown, both with horn) are great for electric bass. They handle my Tobias 6 string just fine. Ok, onward.

1. I play upright bass. I have a Crate BX100 combo amp with a 15” speaker that sounds far better with the mic’ed upright than does my bass stack. I’ve tried using a 4x10 extension cabinet instead of the 15” for this, and it does not sound as good. That amp with that 15” sounds like the bass, only louder.

2. I run a Hammond organ emulation app into a rotary horn (MotionSound Pro3T), which has left and right low rotor simulation outputs. It sounded good thru those 4x10s, but I also own an actual Hammond A100 and Leslie… and something was missing from the sound of the Pro3T low rotor outputs. The Leslie uses a 15” for its low rotor. So I took the Peavey out of the emulation setup, and added a GK Backline 1x15. It fleshed out the low end, and now my Hammond emulation sounds right.

From my standpoint, the 15” clearly moves the air differently. My hypotheses: for the Hammond, nothing emulates a 15” speaker better than a 15” speaker! For the upright, its own sounding surface is very large - to best reproduce that, a large diameter speaker is the best option.
 
There’s also the fact that some designers just get tired of fighting the fight, trying to educate folks that will cling to their traditions because that’s all they have to cling to, and don’t want to learn.

The first speakers I ever heard with very small drivers were the Bose 901 speakers meant for home stereo use. Bose later took the basic design and turned it into a PA cab, the Bose 800. Along with the speakers themselves there was an EQ box, tuned to smooth out the frequency response I suppose.

The 901 used nine 4.5” drivers with 8 in the rear of the cabinet, meant to reflect off the wall, and one in front. The 800 reversed that, eight speakers in the front but no ninth speaker and built into a road case.

OIP-1125559247.jpeg


430391-a8d66ddd-rare_bose_800_vintage_old_school_pa_speakers_in_road_cases-4265250412.jpeg


The first time I heard an 800 was when I was in the army and a Bose rep visited the local PX. He set up outdoors with two 800s on pole, a Bose 800 watt power amp and a Bose mixer,playing music while talking about the various Bose cabinets (at the time the 901 and 501 for home use, and the 800). I heard the music from a quarter mile away as I was out walking. I had no idea where it was coming from, but as I got closer, it got louder and louder until finally I could see the parking lot and two tiny boxes up on the poles. When I got back to the USA I started seeing the 800s in use all over the place, both as mains and as monitors. Some other old timers here may have used them.

Bose sold a ton of 901s and 800s, but they were often derided as “no highs, no lows, must be Bose”. In fact they are still controversial almost six decades later. Bose just went in a totally different direction and has continued to do so. Their L series PA speakers have been copied by everybody else…EV, JBL, Fishman, Yamaha, Samson, RCF and Turbosound and they’ve become commonplace…a vertical array of small drivers on top of a subwoofer. Yet almost nobody uses these as the Bose designers intended…that each performer in an ensemble would have one and no need for a large PA system or floor monitors. Just make each performer louder and the sound emanating form their location instead of all the performers run through a mixer and the same speakers. That idea wasn’t well received (too expensive?), instead people started using them to replace larger, bulkier systems.

Bose finally got out of the home stereo speaker business altogether and today only sells home theater products (they were one of the first in that market), noise cancelling headphones (originally designed for helicopter pilots!), Bluetooth speakers and the L series PA systems.
 
Bose 800s are absolutely need that massive EQ “fix” to be useful.

One great application of the 800 was at the Canal Street Tavern in Dayton, OH, 1980’s. We had a regular night there for a few years. The 300 cap club had a bunch of 800 dispersed throughout and ran essentially vocal only (for rock anyway).

Any spot in the place had intelligible, non-harsh vocal sound. No 1” horns beaming and rasping anywhere.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DJ Bebop
There were applications where Bose 802’s were used in vertical arrays. Their performance changed considerably, making longer throw applications possible with a smaller cabinet (at the time). Is not a surprise that the K1 was a follow-up.

IMO, the error Bose made was their persistent claims and heavy marketing that a small number of cabinets were suitable for loud Rock and metal bands in concert. This caused unrealistic expectations and unsatisfied customers. It was not a failure of their technology or the basic designs, it was an application issue.