The 410 + 115 rule?

[cfsporn]

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.

Here is the thing though, and I have struggled a long time with conveying this as you are undoubtedly an expert on this and I really don't want to be construed as saying "you're wrong". While it is totally possible to design a 115 to work well with a 410 in terms of displacement, driver excursion, group delay, phase response, and frequency response, how many bass cabs companies actually go through the time and expense required to do that?

You would have a better idea than I would having been in this business for longer than I've been alive, but I would guess that the majority do not. Most of the companies I associate you with are higher end companies, companies that would put in the effort to make sure their mismatched stuff sounds good together. If someone asked if it would be okay to pair their Über 115 with their Über 1288, I would reply with a resounding yes as I know that you designed them to work well that way. Same thing if someone asked about combining their Subway 115 and their Subway 112. But when someone posts on here about trying to get more bass out of their Ampeg SVT410HLF/SVT-7Pro rig by adding an SVT115HE, I don't want to confuse them with unfamiliar terms and conditionals.

 

[Rick James]

While it is totally possible to design a 115 to work well with a 410 in terms of displacement, driver excursion, group delay, phase response, and frequency response, how many bass cabs companies actually go through the time and expense required to do that?

+1, and if they do why don't they prove it? AFAIK only Barefaced gives players all the information that they're entitled to. If everyone did like Barefaced does we could finally end the need for threads like this one. Instead when other manufacturers say anything at all it's with a 'circle the wagons, boys' attitude.

 

[drummer5359]

I play in a band with a 66 year old bassist who just bought a brand new rig this year. Ampeg PF800 driving a PF-210HE AND a PF-115HE. I tried to enlighten him that he would been better served to have two matching cabs before he ordered his rig.

He was absolutely sure that he needed at least 2 10" speakers for the highs and a 15" for the lows. He can't understand why I bought a pair of 2 12" cabinets.

What could I possibly know? I'm a drummer.

 

[agedhorse]

+1, and if they do why don't they prove it? AFAIK only Barefaced gives players all the information that they're entitled to. If everyone did like Barefaced does we could finally end the need for threads like this one. Instead when other manufacturers say anything at all it's with a 'circle the wagons, boys' attitude.

I am in fact saying that for cabinets that I have designed, absolutely they are designed (using real engineering principles) to work together as intended. There are others that do as well, but I have always backed up the talk with the walk. The current Subway models are a specific example, but all of the GB speakers over the last almost 10 years have adhered to the same proven engineering principles.

 

[Jeff Scott]

What could I possibly know? I'm a drummer.

Let's not go there, okay?

 

[cfsporn]

+1, and if they do why don't they prove it? AFAIK only Barefaced gives players all the information that they're entitled to. If everyone did like Barefaced does we could finally end the need for threads like this one. Instead when other manufacturers say anything at all it's with a 'circle the wagons, boys' attitude.

Duke from Audiokinesis has confirmed that his cabs are designed to work together. So has Rodger from Baer. Andy has confirmed that the cabs he designed at both Mesa and at Genz-Benz were designed to work together as well. I commend all of these designers for their attention to detail in design and their forthrightness with information.

However, none of these companies (GB and Mesa excepted) are common in the bass world and these explanations have (to the best of my knowledge) been confined to this forum. I would love to see bass cab companies post extensive information about their designs a la Hi-Fi, but I don't really see that happening.

 

[B-string]

One thing to keep in mind with cabs made in the past possibly as late as the mid '90s is they were a box made for a look and a speaker dropped in it all too often. Heck there are folks still doing that, fortunately most companies these days are making real design effort. I have an old pair of Soundtech 15" 3 way mains, that I have re-tuned three times now bought in the mid '90s. First was the original Eminence drivers then two different drivers since (now 3015s).

 

[hintz]

I play in a band with a 66 year old bassist who just bought a brand new rig this year. Ampeg PF800 driving a PF-210HE AND a PF-115HE. I tried to enlighten him that he would been better served to have two matching cabs before he ordered his rig.

He was absolutely sure that he needed at least 2 10" speakers for the highs and a 15" for the lows. He can't understand why I bought a pair of 2 12" cabinets.

What could I possibly know? I'm a drummer.

I would imagine a 2/10 paired with a 15 is more likely a better match than a 4/10-15 combo even though I wont argue against matching cabs being the best option!

In fact I got both these Hartke cabs off my local CL and the seller refused to split them up

but for $300 it was a good deal considering the lack of music stores here!! Anyways they sound great with my amps, especially in bi-amp mode on the 800RB or even full range!!
In bi-amp I run the lows to the 15, and not because I think it has more low end either, but because its an 180 watt cab where the 2/10 is 120, from my understanding lows require more wattage than high's, plus both have separate volumes so everything is easy to control!

 

[walterw]

Duke from Audiokinesis has confirmed that his cabs are designed to work together. So has Rodger from Baer. Andy has confirmed that the cabs he designed at both Mesa and at Genz-Benz were designed to work together as well.

that's good, and encouraging.

my question is though, what's a good reason for mixing these boxes; when is it better?

 

[agedhorse]

that's good, and encouraging.

my question is though, what's a good reason for mixing these boxes; when is it better?

Yes, sometimes, for some player's goals and tastes, it can be better.

 

[HaphAsSard]

my question is though, what's a good reason for mixing these boxes; when is it better?

Yes, sometimes, for some player's goals and tastes, it can be better.

Some posts by Mr. Field about this very same topic:

When combining ANY speakers, as far as the acoustic environment is concerned, each source looks like a radiator (or emitter) and there is no knowledge what makes up the emitter other than the mathematical mechanics of the radiated wave. A 4 driver grouping will have a different radiation pattern than a single driver , but size doesn't enter into the equation, only the pattern.

Now, once you have a pattern, each radiating source will have both level and phase associated with it. With ANY multiple driver grouping, you will have a more complex phase element because there will be more than one possible phase pattern, but again, this is not related to size, just to the number of drivers and the response.

The goal is to design each source so that the SUMMED response is what you are looking for, there may be several ways to accomplish exactly the same thing depending on the goals. Ideally (for my goals anyway), I like the phase responses to be similar or "familial", in that they combine in a predictable way with a minimum of negative artifacts. Phase response and group delay are different ways of saying a similar thing, but essentially the wave fronts are not dis-similar and combine smoothly. For example, a pair of 410's, while similar as a pair of radiators, look different when broken down into their respective components with multiple lobes to the summed response because of the multiple sources (doesn't matter what size the source is). A combination of a single 15 and a 410 will also have multiple lobes, BUT, will have fewer of them (if the 15" design is appropriately chosen) and the result may be better, or may be worst depending on the goals.

Regarding the choices, while a 410 may appear to have a greater power handling and sensitivity, it pays to look more closely at any numbers. There are some 15" drivers that are available that have very good sensitivity numbers and good power handling and have good low frequency extension (in an appropriate box of course) and might match up quite well with a 410 that maybe is voiced for a particular midrange character. If both boxes are 8 ohm, it is quite possible for the sensitivities to be plenty close, and depending on the power compression characteristics of the particular components, the 15 may outrun the 410 at lower frequencies (again with the right choices being made). Now, if you can adjust the balance between the 15 and the 410, there are even more possibilities.

I would say that it "MAY" be better not to mix cabinets but I don't think that I would choose the word "usually".

One place where matching cabinets can be a challenge is where the tuning gives an under-damped response (pretty common), which can cause the mid bass bump to become more overwhelming. Often (though not always) the mid bass bump is high enough to be really distracting, so doubling up, and it being under-damped, can be worse than mixing one cabinet that is under-damped with one that is looser to critically damped. The drawback is that the phase response may be different enough to cause a different problem... but this new problem is unlikely to be worse (and likely to be better) than doubling up on under damped response.

Note that I am using terms that are used to describe electronic filter response. This is because the mathematical models for speakers are heavily influenced by electronic filter theory.

Should my quoting of them be seen as advocating mixed stacks, it's not meant as such: I don't mix myself (don't need to, I only do coffeehouse gigs) and understand the merits of matching. I do advocate doing away with absolutes.

 

[walterw]

Some posts by Mr. Field about this very same topic:

OK, i'll buy that last one (about the "under-damped" cab)

still, that kinda sounds like "mixing a cab with a problem and one without that problem", which prompts the question "why not just match two cabs without the problem?"

a cab you like on top of a cab you don't might be better than a matched pair of cabs you don't, but wouldn't the matched pair of cabs you like still win?

 

[HaphAsSard]

OK, i'll buy that last one (about the "under-damped" cab)

still, that kinda sounds like "mixing a cab with a problem and one without that problem", which prompts the question "why not just match two cabs without the problem?"

a cab you like on top of a cab you don't might be better than a matched pair of cabs you don't, but wouldn't the matched pair of cabs you like still win?

I hear you. Maybe it's a matter of, two different cabs, like them both for what they do alone and use either on occasion, they also complement each other when stacked (as in, they really do, providing slices of bandwidth each one lacks on its own and cohering in the overlap area). I guess you could say a multiway cab with a sub-type woofer and a mid is all that and a bag of chips, and I wouldn't argue, except it may or may not be a true J-O-A-T for the individual player, and not cover all his/her needs.

 

[agedhorse]

OK, i'll buy that last one (about the "under-damped" cab)

still, that kinda sounds like "mixing a cab with a problem and one without that problem", which prompts the question "why not just match two cabs without the problem?"

a cab you like on top of a cab you don't might be better than a matched pair of cabs you don't, but wouldn't the matched pair of cabs you like still win?

You might try re-reading my post #62, you appear to have misunderstood most of what I said in my comments.

 

[walterw]

You might try re-reading my post #62, you appear to have misunderstood most of what I said in my comments.

OK, so a deep, dark, high-excursion 15 under a less loud, grindy, even bass-shy 4x10, such that it really is "10s for the highs and a 15 for the lows"?

that makes sense i suppose, as long as you don't end up with two cabs that are each disappointing on their own.

 

[ashtray]

Holy h3ck - I did't realize Mesa Boogie still made a 4x10 + 1x15, and that it was $1,600 (?!!) and that it weighed 137 pounds?!!! There's three things that are tough for me to wrap my brain around. Does the 15" get half the wattage? Its listed as a 4 ohm cab, not 5.7, so guessing they split up the 4x10's and the 15 to 8 ohms each. Wow. Wow.

Mesa/Boogie PowerHouse 1000 Cabinet - 1x15

 

[Sputnik Monroe]

This may not be the first .... but I'll nominate this as the most civil, intelligent and long lastng thread on this subject. I've only ever owned one 4x10 and just used it alone, but did design a 2x10 sealed top box with a steep low end roll-off to go over a deep tuned 1x15, it worked quite well actually. I've since moved on to using mostly vintage voiced mid focused 15s in both 1x15 and 2x15 configurations. I personally have no problem with using whatever means to find your sound.

 

[agedhorse]

OK, so a deep, dark, high-excursion 15 under a less loud, grindy, even bass-shy 4x10, such that it really is "10s for the highs and a 15 for the lows"?

that makes sense i suppose, as long as you don't end up with two cabs that are each disappointing on their own.

This is ONE example, but I have discussed many other possible scenarios where it's likely to work well also.

The combination doesn't automatically work poorly, there are some decent speaker designers out there who actually understand the engineering and use those principles to do things that otherwise are either difficult or otherwise not possible. I am not the only one doing this (successfully)

I also agree that there are some poor examples of the same combination, but then there are poor examples of just about everything, right?

 

[mmd]

So, after having read this entire thread (and getting a science based headache) I have a question about my choices in gear.

I recently purchased two of those new Acoustic BN cabs with the Neodymium speakers - the BN210 and the BN115. Here is the spec page:

Invalid Link Removed

I am using the cabs with a Markbass LMT800. Where does this all stand in the land of physics?

Thanks!!

 

[CL400Peavey]

So, after having read this entire thread (and getting a science based headache) I have a question about my choices in gear.

I recently purchased two of those new Acoustic BN cabs with the Neodymium speakers - the BN210 and the BN115. Here is the spec page:

Invalid Link Removed

I am using the cabs with a Markbass LMT800. Where does this all stand in the land of physics?

Thanks!!

The manufacturer doesnt provide any meaningful spec on their cabs. The weight of the cabs makes me scratch my head, as they are not particularly light for Neo cabs.