Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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 free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Why are our 412 cabinets different from guitarists?
- Thread starter remainthesame
- Start date
Proportions and layout are totally arbitrary. It's whatever the maker wants, typically whatever's easier to sell and/or produce.
Marshall, square: it's always been done that way.
Aguilar DB412, big staggered: it's the same size as our 8x10.
Bergantino NV412, small staggered: it's the same size as the NV610.
Ampeg V4, square: it's always been done that way.
Marshall, square: it's always been done that way.
Aguilar DB412, big staggered: it's the same size as our 8x10.
Bergantino NV412, small staggered: it's the same size as the NV610.
Ampeg V4, square: it's always been done that way.
ive always thought that the 4x12 were more vertical for stacking purposes. regardless of the argument about mixing speakers, bassists do it, and who wants to deal with cabinets that arent the same size when stacking.
a guitar and a bass are two different instruments despite their similarities. The amplification needed for each is completely different.
I post this in nearly every thread about 412s but I've got the Marshall VBC412 and the tone kills. I thought I liked the Ampeg 410s but after listening side by side to recordings of my bass and amp through the HE, HLF, and VBC, I can't believe I ever did.
Square cab, maybe only an inch or two deeper than a Marshall straight 412 guitar cab. Sounds great to me.
Square cab, maybe only an inch or two deeper than a Marshall straight 412 guitar cab. Sounds great to me.
To each his/her own and that is ultimately what counts.
Beaming I agree is the answer. With guitar being mid heavy the 4 squared arrangement makes a crunchy cab (lacking in overpowering mids). With bass being more mid shy losses from beaming becomes more apparent with the "squared" arrangement.
Beaming I agree is the answer. With guitar being mid heavy the 4 squared arrangement makes a crunchy cab (lacking in overpowering mids). With bass being more mid shy losses from beaming becomes more apparent with the "squared" arrangement.
Is the diagonal beaming slightly less?...yes
Did the designer give a rats about beaming?...no
Did the designer think they would sell better as taller and less wide? ...yes
Did the designer give a rats about beaming?...no
Did the designer think they would sell better as taller and less wide? ...yes
Because speaker size has nothing to do with how it performs
Not true. Speaker size is one of the parameters that determine the performance. Xmax, Fs, Sensitivity etc, are all important but like the driver diameter give us no real idea of how a driver performs on their own,
True enough I keep my mids cranked; where the Ampeg 410s just got honky the VBC disperses them in a really natural way.
Mr. Foxen
Commercial User
4x12 guitar cabs are bass cabs, from the day when bass amps were 100w. Guitarists got jealous, and bassists moved on to better things since they didn't need to compensate for a short scale.
Hi.
They try to fight comb filtering that plagues any horizontal arrangement of (low frequency) drivers.
Plenty of manufacturers do offer "traditional" 412 bass cabs for the more 70's and 80's stadion rock oriented bands/bassplayers.
And for those who listen with their eyes and are more concerned about the look than they are about how their rig actually performs
.
The comb filtering isn't as pronounced with guitars higher frequencies, obviously, but the beaming on high frequencies can be even worse when the square arrangement is used. Horizontal 212 combos are the absolute worst with their narrow high-frequency "power alley".
That beaming and even the comb filtering can be used to ones advantage though if the stage rig is only the monitor for the band.
As a stand-alone IME/IMO the square arrangement of drivers, regardless of the instrument or the diameter of the driver, is always less than optimal if not downright bad.
Sure, it can sound decent, or very good (if one doesn't have anything to compare it with) on stage, but in the audience things are very different.
With a non-traditional, vertical or staggered 412 or even a more PA cab oriented bass rig cab, both the on- and off-stage sound is as good as it gets.
As for the reason why the guitar (and older bass) 412's are constructed and the way they are, and the driver arrangement is what it is, Jim Marshall (RIP) is mostly to blame.
Since even the narrow headcase of the JTM series is still pretty wide, the logical way to arrange the drivers is a square.
The Bassman Jim copied, had the 10" speakers in a square arrangement as well, so that obviously played a role there.
The main dimensions of the classic 412 Marshall cab on the other hand were chosen for the most economical use of a standard (in UK at that time anyway) sheet of plywood.
The cab was sealed, because the low power handling, low excursion drivers of that time did not work very well without the cushion the sealed box provided.
Messiers Thiele & Small hadn't published their findings on the parameters that matter on low end reproduction optimizing yet either, not that it would've matter much for Jim anyway.
That's pretty much how deeply they thought about the physics in that classic design
.
Not a bad design at that though if You ask me. Still in production and in use after 50+ years after its introduction and copied by EVERYONE.
And probably will be to the unforeseeable future I'd guess.
A square 412 can be made to work better by either time-aligning or splaying the drivers, something a very few manufacturers do though, but for bass use it'll be one hell of a beast to move in any case.
At least if traditional drivers and traditional construction methods are used.
There are more economical (size-/weight-wise, not necessarily price-wise) ways to get the bass heard, and more and more players are realizing that.
Outside hard-rock circles where the way the rig looks still matters a great deal, You'll probably never see a traditional square 412 for bass.
Regards
Sam
They try to fight comb filtering that plagues any horizontal arrangement of (low frequency) drivers.
Plenty of manufacturers do offer "traditional" 412 bass cabs for the more 70's and 80's stadion rock oriented bands/bassplayers.
And for those who listen with their eyes and are more concerned about the look than they are about how their rig actually performs
.The comb filtering isn't as pronounced with guitars higher frequencies, obviously, but the beaming on high frequencies can be even worse when the square arrangement is used. Horizontal 212 combos are the absolute worst with their narrow high-frequency "power alley".
That beaming and even the comb filtering can be used to ones advantage though if the stage rig is only the monitor for the band.
As a stand-alone IME/IMO the square arrangement of drivers, regardless of the instrument or the diameter of the driver, is always less than optimal if not downright bad.
Sure, it can sound decent, or very good (if one doesn't have anything to compare it with
) on stage, but in the audience things are very different.With a non-traditional, vertical or staggered 412 or even a more PA cab oriented bass rig cab, both the on- and off-stage sound is as good as it gets.
As for the reason why the guitar (and older bass) 412's are constructed and the way they are, and the driver arrangement is what it is, Jim Marshall (RIP) is mostly to blame.
Since even the narrow headcase of the JTM series is still pretty wide, the logical way to arrange the drivers is a square.
The Bassman Jim copied, had the 10" speakers in a square arrangement as well, so that obviously played a role there.
The main dimensions of the classic 412 Marshall cab on the other hand were chosen for the most economical use of a standard (in UK at that time anyway
) sheet of plywood.The cab was sealed, because the low power handling, low excursion drivers of that time did not work very well without the cushion the sealed box provided.
Messiers Thiele & Small hadn't published their findings on the parameters that matter on low end reproduction optimizing yet either, not that it would've matter much for Jim anyway.
That's pretty much how deeply they thought about the physics in that classic design
.Not a bad design at that though if You ask me. Still in production and in use after 50+ years after its introduction and copied by EVERYONE.
And probably will be to the unforeseeable future I'd guess.
A square 412 can be made to work better by either time-aligning or splaying the drivers, something a very few manufacturers do though, but for bass use it'll be one hell of a beast to move in any case.
At least if traditional drivers and traditional construction methods are used.
There are more economical (size-/weight-wise, not necessarily price-wise) ways to get the bass heard, and more and more players are realizing that.
Outside hard-rock circles where the way the rig looks still matters a great deal, You'll probably never see a traditional square 412 for bass.
Regards
Sam
