You done smart @*$ed your way into my signature.You can also do the very fine print thing, like 1MWRMS*
*@0.5Hz, max. 0.001nSec, once per lifetime of the speaker, which we've already done for you.

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.
You done smart @*$ed your way into my signature.You can also do the very fine print thing, like 1MWRMS*
*@0.5Hz, max. 0.001nSec, once per lifetime of the speaker, which we've already done for you.

You'll have to learn to lie on your own, Duke. Guilt fades with time... You can also do the very fine print thing, like 1MWRMS*
*@0.5Hz, max. 0.001nSec, once per lifetime of the speaker, which we've already done for you.
May be the cab impedance is 48 Ohm @ 80Hz for a nominal 8 Ohm cab he might rise the voltage till 1 watt is actually pushed into the cab at maximum impedance 48 Ohm @ 80Hz.
The theoretical 6 dB advantage of a sealed box over a vented box (assuming the same woofers) happens only at the box tuning frequency. The boost extends north of the tuning frequency somewhat, but it does not extend up into the midband.
If you have noticed that vented boxes are generally more efficient than comparable sealed boxes, the primary reason is, woofers whose parameters work well in a vented box tend to have higher efficiency than woofers whose parameters work well in a sealed box.
"Max SPL" figures can have quite a bit marketing/optimism in them! They are probably based on "peak power", which is usually twice "music program power", which in turn is usually twice "RMS or AES" power (the latter standing for Audio Engineering Society), and that could be where the 6 dB discrepancy comes from. And optimistic max SPL figures typically ignore the effects of thermal compression, which is another topic.
Another possible source of SPL optimism is, a peak somewhere in the frequency response. For instance, I make a bass cab that has a deliberate +6 dB peak (which can be smoothed out via a switch). If I had a really well-paid marketing department, it might have been a 104 dB cab instead of a 98 dB cab. Alas, I do not have a well-paid marketing department.
I think it's easily worth an additional 7 db to actually use the internal amp, since you paid for it!What really baffled me is a cab quoting 118dB max SPL in the passive version but 125 in an active version which is just the passive plus an amp pumping out up to the speaker's rated thermal capacity.
Check in at the Fender Ruble club for best advice on these.And talking about know better*, the "best little combo" I tried yesterday was the Fender Rumble 200, which has a 15".
The whole Rumble line is good, I have a 500 combo, but no matter what the specs say, I doubt you're getting much at 64 Hz. Not enough power (only 140w into the onboard speaker), not enough cab volume. But no doubt it sounds good, and that's point - no one cares about specs, it's what it sounds like in the real world that matters.I went to try some (combo) amps yesterday.
I dont remember who said something like "they dont release the fine print because the people buying it dont care" (and i am honestly too lazy to go thru all the pages) I wouldn't say they dont care, but I would say " they dont know better".
And talking about know better*, the "best little combo" I tried yesterday was the Fender Rumble 200, which has a 15". That is what I liked better at the moment as I went a bit late, so I could not go to more stores (just 3). Today I am going back and try every 15" combo I find (and maybe some 2x)
Compared to the 10" and 12" combos I tried it was a HUGE frequency gap.
Just for the sake of informing, the Rumble 200 can deliver at its maximum db level as low as 64 Hertz, then its responce diminish bit by bit as you go with lower frequencies. (Good responce imo, but I could not find a reference to it at its Fender manual nor its website)