The 410 + 115 rule?

[Ric5]

The more adamant people are on this topic the more it starts to sound like a myth ... a few years ago people people here were trying to convince us that you can only properly hear bass frequencies 20 or 40 feet away from you amp. Then why can you hear bass so well in a headphone.

I know from experience on of the best gigging bass rigs that I ever used was an ampeg bass head with two cabs. a 2x10 cab at 8 ohms and a 1x18 cab at 8 ohms. There was no crossover ... I actually tried one and it sounded better without one ... That rig would compete well with bigger rigs and it had a great tone. The thing that beat it was when I daisy chained 3 bass amps together. One ampeg head with 2 8 ohm 1x15 cabs, another ampeg bass head with 2 2x10 cabs and a third ampeg bass head with a 2x10 and a 1x18. No crossovers ... 10s, 15s, and an 18 all gloriously projecting my bass lines. But if I were to listen to people here then it would HAVE to suck because there were 3 different kinds of drivers.

I SMELL A MYTH

 

[agedhorse]

From a designer's point of view...

It's pretty easy to get a 15 (or 18) that has nice extended LF response if you don't have to worry about midrange voicing and how it breaks up if it is overdriven. It's also easier to get higher power handling and low frequency sensitivity because the moving mass can be heavier (with a strong motor), and VC inductance can be higher without midrange penalty. In fact, this can be an advantage, as high inductance and moving mass act as a low pass filter in the acoustic response. As soon as you need midrange performance, the job gets a lot tougher.

It's also pretty easy to get really nice midrange voicing if you don't have to worry about low frequency power handling, sensitivity, etc. In fact, generally smaller diameter voice coils have a more pleasing overdrive character, and with low moving mass and lower inductance, there are a lot of tonal options available.

Now, if you were to take a 410 with 100 watt 8 ohm drivers, you could make a very nice sounding (in the voicing areas) 8 ohm 410, the power handling would be 400 watts, and if the low end suffers that's not a big deal, because when you combine with the 8 ohm 115, say 400 watts as well, you might find that if the designer did their homework, a very nice blend of round low end AND pleasing voicing that is not possible (easily or cheaply) with a single 410 alone, or a single 115 alone. The power matching is no problem, the sensitivity should be pretty easy to match up, and it would be nicely driven by a wide variety of the newer amps (in the 500 - 1000 watt range) that are now available. Even a 4 ohm 410 and an 8 ohm 115 might be fine if the 15" driver is chosen with the right properties (and the amp can safely drive 2.77 ohms).

Don't close your eyes to something because all you have heard is the discouragement of some forums, or you heard a bad combination, or you don't understand WHY some combinations may not be so good but others may be just fine. There are a lot of absolutes presented that are nothing more than opinions, and if you don't know why the opinions are made, you might just close your eyes to some exceptional pairings.

 

[B-string]

The only myth being "created" is by folks that don't want to hear what the drawbacks can be. It's not what they absolutely will be.
I didn't find typing all in bold as much fun.

 

[Ric5]

I always get suspicious when people try really hard to convince me of something ...

 

[Ric5]

Somehow that cab may not work with that other cab got changed into that cab will not work with that other cab ... that is what bothers me ...

 

[KickingBass]

From a designer's point of view...

It's pretty easy to get a 15 (or 18) that has nice extended LF response if you don't have to worry about midrange voicing and how it breaks up if it is overdriven. It's also easier to get higher power handling and low frequency sensitivity because the moving mass can be heavier (with a strong motor), and VC inductance can be higher without midrange penalty. In fact, this can be an advantage, as high inductance and moving mass act as a low pass filter in the acoustic response. As soon as you need midrange performance, the job gets a lot tougher.

It's also pretty easy to get really nice midrange voicing if you don't have to worry about low frequency power handling, sensitivity, etc. In fact, generally smaller diameter voice coils have a more pleasing overdrive character, and with low moving mass and lower inductance, there are a lot of tonal options available.

Now, if you were to take a 410 with 100 watt 8 ohm drivers, you could make a very nice sounding (in the voicing areas) 8 ohm 410, the power handling would be 400 watts, and if the low end suffers that's not a big deal, because when you combine with the 8 ohm 115, say 400 watts as well, you might find that if the designer did their homework, a very nice blend of round low end AND pleasing voicing that is not possible (easily or cheaply) with a single 410 alone, or a single 115 alone. The power matching is no problem, the sensitivity should be pretty easy to match up, and it would be nicely driven by a wide variety of the newer amps (in the 500 - 1000 watt range) that are now available. Even a 4 ohm 410 and an 8 ohm 115 might be fine if the 15" driver is chosen with the right properties (and the amp can safely drive 2.77 ohms).

Don't close your eyes to something because all you have heard is the discouragement of some forums, or you heard a bad combination, or you don't understand WHY some combinations may not be so good but others may be just fine. There are a lot of absolutes presented that are nothing more than opinions, and if you don't know why the opinions are made, you might just close your eyes to some exceptional pairings.

Do you know of any specific cabinets that pair up well in this way? Is this the thinking behind those mixed driver Mesa Powerhouse cabs?

 

[Jeff Scott]

Hey, Joe Shimo did it so it's all good right?

That'd be Shmoe!

 

[B-string]

I have a good bud that has run a 410+115 forever. Never any complaints from him, his band, the audience. He did try a move to a newer "mega power" amp head once at an outside gig. Popped his 115 3 songs in, crippled his 410 two songs later. He replaced/reconed the blown drivers, went back to his old amp and been happy as a clam. It can work very well, it can also blow pretty well. Use what lays between your ears.

 

[walterw]

Somehow that cab may not work with that other cab got changed into that cab will not work with that other cab ... that is what bothers me ...

well no, not any of that. one cab will pretty much always "work" with another as long as they're in polarity; the pair will be louder, they'll let the (ss) amp develop more power, and they'll put the top cab up higher so you can hear it better.

if that's what you got, rock it.

the point is that by comparison a matched pair of cabs of similar quality will tend to work better, as in more even coverage, less low end cancellation, that kind of thing.

(that's why this topic rages on endlessly, like jupiter's red spot; folks notice that their pile of whatever cabs is louder and fuller than one cab by itself, so therefore all the science must be wrong.)

 

[walterw]

Do you know of any specific cabinets that pair up well in this way?

+1 to this question

@agedhorse seems to be the one guy with real amp designer credentials on TB defending the mixed-cab thing as long as it's done right, and has said before that (for example) the various genz boxes of the same series were made to be close enough to each other in behavior to work fine together.

so the question becomes, which mixed-cab setups are actually as good or better than comparable matched-cab stuff? what's the reason for choosing that over a matched-cab setup?

 

[agedhorse]

so the question becomes, which mixed-cab setups are actually as good or better than comparable matched-cab stuff? what's the reason for choosing that over a matched-cab setup?

As far as cabinet combinations I have first hand experience with, 2 of the Subway 112 and 115 cabinets work very well and I think there is somebody on TB that has that setup, an Uber 410 with the Uber 115 works well, Focus 410 on top of an Uber 115 is a very close match sensitivity-wise, and that's just off the top of my head. There may be another combination example that I can't talk about yet as well.

All of these fit the criteria that I previously mentioned.

 

[bopeuph]

I must say, I almost bought a Hartke mixed stack last month, and the forum dissuaded me from it. I now have a pair of Bergantino 1x12 cabs, along with a Markbass Little Mark 800 Tube.

The best part for me, is the weight. My heart did a flip flop when I saw the weight of the Hartke cabs. I sure as hell didn't want to lug my gear around after playing a full gig! This whole rig is lighter than a single Hartke cab, and all of it fits in my trunk with plenty of room to spare, so I don't have to play instrument Tetris if the tuba and upright are involved.

And I decided to keep the Polytone around, and will continue to use it in small venues. It's still smaller than either of the Berg cabs, and still much lighter, and I can move that and an electric in one trip.

 

[Downunderwonder]

well no, not any of that. one cab will pretty much always "work" with another as long as they're in polarity; the pair will be louder, they'll let the (ss) amp develop more power, and they'll put the top cab up higher so you can hear it better.

if that's what you got, rock it.

the point is that by comparison a matched pair of cabs of similar quality will tend to work better, as in more even coverage, less low end cancellation, that kind of thing.

(that's why this topic rages on endlessly, like jupiter's red spot; folks notice that their pile of whatever cabs is louder and fuller than one cab by itself, so therefore all the science must be wrong.)

Ya. Louder sounds better. Stacking gets tone in your ears. Instant more better whatever you stack unless the phase match is awful. That's it in a nutshell.

BUT, most 115 410 combos can't get any louder than just the 410 by itself. Getting the 410 up where you can hear it is the thang.

And that dead spot canard is yet to die.

 

[Stevehill]

Would the people using it even know what to look for - doubtful.

It's not like the rig is going to blow up or not work.

What you will see though that people that use this type of rig are oblivious to is:

Why did I blow the speaker in my 1X15 cab ?

Why does the audience complain that there is too much bass in one area, and other places in the room have none.

Ok, I had both these problems using the 410 and 15 together, plus I was never really happy with the sound. Eventually I blew the 15 and had no idea why, it was only a couple of years old and I blamed Ampeg for it. I was using an SVT CL at the time. I replaced the driver and carried on but was never happy till I replaced both cabs with an 810e

 

[RedVee]

You know it is coming......





What's the best pickle for Metal?

Tort?

 

[dincz]

And that dead spot canard is yet to die.

It's in no danger and living happily along with the dozens of other canards in the TB wildlife sanctuary.

 

[Rick James]

They made it because they thought it would sell.
Also, this was before BFM showed us all the light

And still it goes on. It's probably been twelve years since BFM started telling us about what matters where output is concerned, which is the speaker displacement, not watts. But still only one company that I know of even mentions displacement. That's Barefaced.
Barefaced Bass - Volume displacement - it's (almost) all about moving air

The average 4x10 has about 600cc displacement, the average 1x15 about 500cc, so the 1x15 won't move more air than the 4x10, it will move less. A 1x15 might go a bit lower than a 4x10, but not much lower. And it takes more displacement when the speaker goes lower, so a 1x15 needs more displacement than a 4x10, not less. Even if you ignore all the other concerns, like frequency and phase response, the 4x10/1x15 combination just doesn't make sense except for how it looks. A 4x10/1x15 that makes sense would have a 1x15 with more displacement than the 4x10. Good luck finding that out, unless you buy Barefaced.

 

[agedhorse]

Rick, your displacement argument is flawed. This MAY have been the case back when the dinosaurs roamed the earth, but it is quite possible for displacements to be plenty close for mixing cabinets to work, and to work well too. Driver excursion, especially on larger diameter drivers with larger spiders, can safely have linear displacements of perhaps 2x that of a typical 10" driver that would typically be used for bass guitar (because of midrange voicing). SD x linear displacement = volumetric displacement.

THEN, there is the low frequency sensitivity that is easier to achieve with the single LF diaphragm as a single tuned system. This is presuming it is used in a suitable sized cabinet and not stuffed into an undersized box.

 

[ThisBass]

I have to thank all the guys at TB who share there big knowledge of speaker/accoustic theory with us. I have learned a lot from these guys since I joined TB a couple of years before. I have learned a lot of different perspectives but also tried to understand different perspectives in replicable physical perspective.

I think it's absolutely legal to explain complex interrelationships with easy understanding words or some rule of thumb as long as veracity isn't hurt to much. And I also think that a forum isn't a proper place to discuss theory of cab design with mathematical tools like higher order Filter theory and complex methods of Information and Systems Theory. Also it would be the most accurate way to do it this way, any serios discussion would stop immeditaelly cause nearly no one could follow.

A very popular easy understanding "rule of thumb" is to predict moved air by multiply surface x excursion. The rule of thumb implies steady excursion versus frequency. The truth is somewhat different because cab size and tuning has a large effect on max. acoustcal power at the (important) low band. Driver excursion isn't steady anymore thus there is need for a more detailled consideration of acoustic power respectively "moved air". Even for same driver a different cab design may decrease max. acoustic power by around 50%. So this popular "rule of thumb" corresponds at best to nearly "identical" cabs but different driver Xmax consideration.

The rule of thumb also may correspond to different cabs but nearly identical tunings. But the rule of thumb (at the latest) fails for different cabs with different tunings. For example for two cabs with 45Hz verus 55Hz tuning. In this case there is need to consider mechanical power handling and max acoustic power in a rather detailled way than any rule of thumb can ever predicate.

IMO overpowering a 115 cab is more likely if the cab is paired with a different (larger) cab but same cab tuning. Extended low end with a 115 cab is (of course) unlikely if the tuning is just the same. But there are a very lot of cabs out there in a range of 45-55Hz tunings. I don't see any conflict to pair a nice voiced 55Hz cab with some extension that a 45Hz cab can provide.

Of course driver size has nothing to do with low response. 10"s can outperform 15"s easily but, nobody's perfect nor me. Once back in time I tried to achieve as much low end as possible with 12" drivers. Nowadays I prefere to give more respect to the voicing at mids and treble, in trade off with (some) low end. So as usual, it all depends.

 

[micguy]

I design audio gear for a living, have a degree in acoustical Physics, and...I'm not going to take sides. My rig has a 112 long throw cabinet, and a 210 cabinet. It works well because I designed the cabinets to have nearly identical phase characteristics at low freq's. Mixing drivers can be made to work. If you randomly combine cabinets, it may or may not work well. No absolute rules.