Why isn't the Ampeg 8X10 ported?

[billfitzmaurice]

Thanks for the info! When were speakers designed largely based on the parameters instead of trial and error? The 70s?

I got my first hi-fi vented box in 1973, by that time vented versus acoustic suspension split the hi-fi market pretty equally. {BTW, while an acoustic suspension cab is always sealed, a sealed cab is not always acoustic suspension. For the most part true acoustic suspension speakers disappeared from the marketplace by 1990, and as far as I know they never existed in pro-sound at all.} I don't recall seeing many pro-sound vented boxes much before 1975 or so, and those were mostly PA cabs. The most notable exceptions were the ducted port Kustoms and Sunns of the late '60s, but they pre-dated T/S and were empirical designs.

 

[fdeck]

{BTW, while an acoustic suspension cab is always sealed, a sealed cab is not always acoustic suspension. For the most part true acoustic suspension speakers disappeared from the marketplace by 1990, and as far as I know they never existed in pro-sound at all.}

What's the difference? I am just interested for the sake of understanding the history.

 

[Blues Cat]

WOW! No offense, I am not an engineer, but I highly doubt they didn't know what they were doing and just happened on a concept that works to this day!

Also, your comments are beginning to paint a picture for me. First, you claim that you can build a Meyer system for 10% of the cost (impossible), then say wouldn't build it to prove your claims and NOW Ampeg were clueless and didn't know any better.

I see you sell "plans" for cabinets while Meyer actually builds their product. There is an old saying 'those who can, do. those who can't, teach". This seems to be an accurate statement based on what I have read from you.

Chill BigMike.

The reason Ampeg "happened on a concept that works to this day" is that Traynor designed the 810 in the first place.

 

[billfitzmaurice]

What's the difference? I am just interested for the sake of understanding the history.

A driver made for acoustic suspension has a mechanical suspension that's so loose it can only be used in a sealed box. The benchmark Advent 10 actually used a twelve inch frame and ten inch cone in order to get a 'floppy' enough surround. It also had a very low fs, 17Hz or so, which when put into a sealed box resulted in a 41Hz fb. That was something special in 1965 or so, when reflex boxes capable of going that low were both rare and large.

Today's drivers for sealed alignments tend to have high Qts and low EBP figures, but their suspensions aren't so soft that they can't be used in VB or IB alignments as well.

 

[Jerrold Tiers]

I think you are failing to credit the earlier folks on ducted ports, ported designs, etc.

I built speakers from plans originating in the 50's and 60's that had ducts. It was well enough known to be in the hobby magazines, and to get into actual commercial speakers.

The main reason for large enclosures was efficiency. Amplifiers of all types were low powered, 40W was quite a bit, 70W was for theatre use.. The Klipschorns were very loud on 10W, which was a good feature then.

The electrical analogs of acoustical elements were well known, etc. I have old textbooks covering that.

The key ingredient T-S supplied was tying it all up and connecting speaker and box parameters with electrical filter components, and then using well known filter theory to predict and analyse speaker performance.

That was a large step forward, simplifying the designs into groups based on the filter orders etc, clearly demonstrating the combinations that worked best for particular uses. A very valuable tool for understanding performance in a rational way.

But it wasn't quite the one missing item that had always prevented any use of ports......

As far as the Ampeg 810 designers? I would bet they tried a lot of stuff that calculated OK and came up with the volume and final design based on tweaking that.

After all, they probably didn't have a clear idea what specifications they wanted for the best sound. You need to input your desired response to get good results out of T-S techniques. People STILL don't agree on the proper specs.....to this day.

 

[BigMikeW]

Chill BigMike.

The reason Ampeg "happened on a concept that works to this day" is that Traynor designed the 810 in the first place.

Bro, it isn't about that. It is about someone who is a manufacturer who makes wild claims and doesn't back them up.

THEN, he bashes other manufacturers saying that "they didn't know any better". Seems very arrogant to me.

There are a lot of amateurs, newbies and youngsters on here that read this stuff and based on those wild claims buy his products.

This is more about truth in advertising than anything. If I get a cab that says it can do "A" then it better do "A" or that company will never get my business again.

If a manufacturer/owner/engineer says that ABC company doesn't have any "magic" and that their products could be easily duplicated for a fraction of the cost, then I want to see proof. When that manufacturer/owner/engineer can't prove it and more to the point won't prove it I am highly suspicious.

Like I said, this is EXACTLY like the AccuSwitch controversy. The company made a claim that it worked, others revealed it didn't and Accugroove never said a word and quietly took the switch out of their product and stopped advertising it.

Bill Fitzmaurice seems to be along those same lines and I for one am tired of seeing B.S. thrown around as truth and fact.

The day Bill builds a rig that equals a Meyer system in everyway for, his words now "10% of their price" then I will apologize, eat my words, and buy three!!! Something tells me this day will never come and THAT should be a big clue!

 

[i_got_a_mohawk]

Bro, it isn't about that. It is about someone who is a manufacturer who makes wild claims and doesn't back them up.

THEN, he bashes other manufacturers saying that "they didn't know any better". Seems very arrogant to me.

There are a lot of amateurs, newbies and youngsters on here that read this stuff and based on those wild claims buy his products.

This is more about truth in advertising than anything. If I get a cab that says it can do "A" then it better do "A" or that company will never get my business again.

If a manufacturer/owner/engineer says that ABC company doesn't have any "magic" and that their products could be easily duplicated for a fraction of the cost, then I want to see proof. When that manufacturer/owner/engineer can't prove it and more to the point won't prove it I am highly suspicious.

Like I said, this is EXACTLY like the AccuSwitch controversy. The company made a claim that it worked, others revealed it didn't and Accugroove never said a word and quietly took the switch out of their product and stopped advertising it.

Bill Fitzmaurice seems to be along those same lines and I for one am tired of seeing B.S. thrown around as truth and fact.

The day Bill builds a rig that equals a Meyer system in everyway for, his words now "10% of their price" then I will apologize, eat my words, and buy three!!! Something tells me this day will never come and THAT should be a big clue!

Without saying anything else

A big +1 to that post, i will avoid saying anything else and getting me in trouble tho

 

[Skel]

Wow - touchy subject. After reading just about everybody's posts, my opinion is that Bill is not critical of Ampeg or sealed cabinets, just that the technology is from 1968 and at the time, Ampeg and everybody else really didn't know any different. I don't see what is wrong with pointing that out. Since "modern" day boutique equipment makers like Bergantino are producing sealed cabinets, there must be a market for them, which tells me they must sound good to many players. I now think the 8X10 isn't ported simply because Ampeg doesn't want to fix something that ain't broke. Some players like them, and think they sound very good. I'm definitely going to get one, but I'm keeping a ported cab as well. I want the '68 GTO *and* the 2000-something model. I realize I would be wise to check out the Bergantino NV610, but I'm going to by the Ampeg even if it's not the best choice. I've had enough experience with Ampeg to know that it's built well, looks and sounds great, and is easy to get at my local GC.

 

[Psycho Bass Guy]

I think you initally voiced your opinion of the Ampeg 8x10 cabinet with the thread question. It implies that the cab would be a better if it were ported and asks why it is not. It's immediately a predjucial question and will naturally provide two types of answers: those who agree with the premise and those who do not.

I disagree with that notion that by being sealed, the Ampeg 8x10 is inferior to a ported design for several reasons, but with a large exception. I make a distinction between the old SVT 8x10 cab and the new one. The older 8x10 cabs up to the early 1980's sound very similar, even with large variations in speakers and cabinet design, but the post SLM era SVT 8x10's do not sound anywhere near as good. When you just say 'Ampeg 8x10' you are referring to any one of at least five design variations BEFORE you reach the SLM era.

Without hearing at least one of the old models, I feel that youl don't know what an SVT 8x10 is SUPPOSED to sound like before you decide it needs to be ported.

Allow me to highlight some things you've written that support this:

Wow - touchy subject. After reading just about everybody's posts, my opinion is that Bill is not critical of Ampeg or sealed cabinets, just that the technology is from 1968 and at the time, Ampeg and everybody else really didn't know any different.

This has been disproven by a number of posters, one even from Ampeg itself, regardless of the self-aggrandizement and revisionist history of a vocal cabinet designer. (I remember a similar misrepresentation of Peavey's early days from him.) Ampeg had made successful ported speaker cabinet designs for nearly a decade BEFORE the SVT 8x10 was made. They certainly knew exactly what they were doing design-wise. Why else specify an odd impedance driver (32 ohms) for a sealed cabinet and require all the connections to be parallel? The cabinet was purpose-built to match the SVT head and provide a new type of bass instrument amplification. The fact that over 35 years later that original amps AND cabinets are still slagging it out attests to Ampeg's expertise and the robustness of the design.

I don't see what is wrong with pointing that out.

Does the fact that it's not true enter into that equation?

I now think the 8X10 isn't ported simply because Ampeg doesn't want to fix something that ain't broke. Some players like them, and think they sound very good.

Since perception IS the market, making the distinction that players think they sound as opposed to just saying they must sound good indicates that you evidently believe they really must not sound good, but lots of otherwise knowing players are duped into liking them.

I've had enough experience with Ampeg to know that it's built well, looks and sounds great, and is easy to get at my local GC.

I take notable exception to that. The current 8x10e is an extremely fragile cabinet made out of substandard material that breaks and mars easily (IMO) and has virtually NO true low end whatsoever. If you want to know why the Ampeg 8x10 is a standard, you owe it to your self to check out a vintage SVT cabinet and compare it to the modern 8x10e. This comes from someone who owns multiple sealed and ported cabinets, 8x10 and otherwise, BTW

 

[BigMikeW]

I think you initally voiced your opinion of the Ampeg 8x10 cabinet with the thread question. It implies that the cab would be a better if it were ported and asks why it is not. It's immediately a predjucial question and will naturally provide two types of answers: those who agree with the premise and those who do not.

I disagree with that notion that by being sealed, the Ampeg 8x10 is inferior to a ported design for several reasons, but with a large exception. I make a distinction between the old SVT 8x10 cab and the new one. The older 8x10 cabs up to the early 1980's sound very similar, even with large variations in speakers and cabinet design, but the post SLM era SVT 8x10's do not sound anywhere near as good. When you just say 'Ampeg 8x10' you are referring to any one of at least five design variations BEFORE you reach the SLM era.

Without hearing at least one of the old models, I feel that youl don't know what an SVT 8x10 is SUPPOSED to sound like before you decide it needs to be ported.

Allow me to highlight some things you've written that support this:



This has been disproven by a number of posters, one even from Ampeg itself, regardless of the self-aggrandizement and revisionist history of a vocal cabinet designer. (I remember a similar misrepresentation of Peavey's early days from him.) Ampeg had made successful ported speaker cabinet designs for nearly a decade BEFORE the SVT 8x10 was made. They certainly knew exactly what they were doing design-wise. Why else specify an odd impedance driver (32 ohms) for a sealed cabinet and require all the connections to be parallel? The cabinet was purpose-built to match the SVT head and provide a new type of bass instrument amplification. The fact that over 35 years later that original amps AND cabinets are still slagging it out attests to Ampeg's expertise and the robustness of the design.



Does the fact that it's not true enter into that equation?




Since perception IS the market, making the distinction that players think they sound as opposed to just saying they must sound good indicates that you evidently believe they really must not sound good, but lots of otherwise knowing players are duped into liking them.



I take notable exception to that. The current 8x10e is an extremely fragile cabinet made out of substandard material that breaks and mars easily (IMO) and has virtually NO true low end whatsoever. If you want to know why the Ampeg 8x10 is a standard, you owe it to your self to check out a vintage SVT cabinet and compare it to the modern 8x10e. This comes from someone who owns multiple sealed and ported cabinets, 8x10 and otherwise, BTW

+1 all the way around. Two SVT cabs I owned were from the 70's and I wish I had never sold them. Not sure I'd be lugging them around today BUT I wish I still owned them.

 

[Skel]

I think you initally voiced your opinion of the Ampeg 8x10 cabinet with the thread question. It implies that the cab would be a better if it were ported and asks why it is not. It's immediately a predjucial question and will naturally provide two types of answers: those who agree with the premise and those who do not.

I honestly did not voice an opinion that I feel the 8x10 would be better if it was ported. I was simply asking a logical question since most of Ampeg's cabinets are ported. I have no idea whether the cabinet would be "better" ported or not, nor do I believe ported is better than not ported.

As far as trying out vintage Ampeg 8X10 cabs - I wouldn't even debate that they sound better than a new one. I don't know if they do, but if anybody who has experience with both thinks the vintage ones are better quality, I wouldn't doubt them.

I still believe that if I buy a new 8X10e, which again, is an easy trip to my local GC, I'm going to get a nice cabinet. Call me ignorant but that's what I think. Maybe I've just been lucky with the Ampeg gear I've had in the past couple of years but I've had no problems with any of the heads or cabinets I've owned.

 

[Skel]

Hmmm. After really reading your entire post, PBG - I think I will try to at least hear an older cab. I do appreciate natural low end and I don't want to miss out on that.

 

[Skel]

Since perception IS the market, making the distinction that players think they sound as opposed to just saying they must sound good indicates that you evidently believe they really must not sound good, but lots of otherwise knowing players are duped into liking them.

No. I was just saying that players think they sound good...as in players like the way they sound. I don't *really* believe they don't sound good. I've never even really heard one except one time in a GC when I was patched to one while testing out an SVT-3 PRO head. The sales person clicked me to the 6X10, where I told him to stop there - that cabinet sounded really good to my ears, but I am now realizing that initial perception from inches away from the cabinet, using a hybrid head is completely different from using an all tube head and hearing it from 15 feet away. When I try an 8X10, I'll be trying it with my SVT-II, using one of my own basses, and standing 15 feet away, moving around from side to side. And I do want to try an older cab out, but these are hard to find.

 

[Chris Breese]

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

This is a reproduction of an early SVT cab. It says the power handling is only 250 watts (?).
(insert announcer's voice) Yes, you too can have an early SVT cabinet - BRAND NEW! It's like stepping into a time machine, folks!

If only I had the $$$$.

 

[Thakid2u]

Hmmm, Did I understand this right that companies didnt make ported cabs before Kustom and Sunn? Maybe it was the bit about No pro audio did it back then? Maybe I am just totally lost!!! I would think that companies like Vox and Fender would tend to disagree. Vox made a "sealed" and "ported" version of many of the their cabinets. Take the Beatle for example. Closed and Open back version.

AS far as the whole mess with "build it or shut up about it", I havent seen the whole thread about the other stuff, but from what I have read, I have to agree to a point. If you talk alot of stuff, you should be able to walk the walk. There is a BIG difference between knowing how to do something and actually doing it. I build custom cabinets and restore vintage stuff. I like to think I have a good enough background to comment on this. My point on this issue is, just because you state that you are an eng. (which Im not, but my partner is) doesnt mean you can build stuff. It means you have the know how on how to design it, or atleast should know how to design it. Also, just because someone states that they are an eng., doesnt mean that they are any better than someone that has done the same job for 20+ yrs.
Im not saying that anyone was stating they are better, but just adding that in.

Bill, just your statements made in this thread, I can understand the neg. towards you. To me, you come off as an arrogant ass. I dont know you either though, so dont take offense to that. If someone that is in a business as yourself, (I dont know what business that is, other than selling some kind of designs for something), I would think that person would be a bit more customer oriented and would back their claim up a bit more than.....I just dont want to and I just dont need to. I personally like to have pics of stuff I have done. We have built a bunch of stuff and restored a bunch also. We have pics of mostly everything we have done. It just gives a person a better understanding of how work is done.

That's just my .3 cents worth.

 

[i_got_a_mohawk]

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

This is a reproduction of an early SVT cab. It says the power handling is only 250 watts (?).
(insert announcer's voice) Yes, you too can have an early SVT cabinet - BRAND NEW! It's like stepping into a time machine, folks!

If only I had the $$$$.

Sounds about right, if i remember right (from reading), you could only get a warranty on the svt amp or cab if you had two cabs for the amp, because its so powerful!

 

[Chris Breese]

Sounds about right, if i remember right (from reading), you could only get a warranty on the svt amp or cab if you had two cabs for the amp, because its so powerful!

That may be why people blow speakers when they use the SVT but only one of those vintage cabs. I wonder what would happen if you changed out the speakers with the modern versions...

 

[Espidog]

Ported and reflex cabs tend to have lots of "throw", which is great if you want your low notes to reach the back row of the festival, but not much help for anyone standing right in front. Years ago, as an impoverished youth, I practiced playing my bass at home through a massive reflex bin given to me by my brother from his PA rig. I thought I was playing at fairly civilised levels: the people two streets away thought otherwise!

The cushion of air in a sealed cab damps the cones' excursion (how far and how fast the voice coil can travel). This can be useful for bass players because it helps the cones to cope with the massive transients that bass guitars can produce. The effect is like playing through a very subtle compressor: the louder you play, the more compression is being applied. Result: less "boom", more "wall of sound".

By the way, if anyone out there is having any mad ideas about putting a port into their Ampeg 8x10 - dont! The drivers will have been chosen especially for optimal performance in a sealed unit. Mount them in a ported enclosure and crank up your SVT, and you're likely to end up with 8 very expensive shredded paper napkins!

 

[metron]

I disagree with that notion that by being sealed, the Ampeg 8x10 is inferior to a ported design for several reasons

Isnt the sealed design inferior to a ported tuned design strictly in terms of capability of accurate "sound spectrum" reproduction? I mean isnt a ported box better suited for a wider range of 20 - 20kHz reproduction if thats what you are trying to accomplish?

Not that it matters if a players preference is what a sealed speaker offers. My preference is sealed. While it may be inferior to my ported cabinet with a tweeter in the 30 - 40 Hz and 7kHz - 18kHz range, thats exactly the reason I prefer it.

 

[Jerrold Tiers]

I take notable exception to that. The current 8x10e is an extremely fragile cabinet made out of substandard material that breaks and mars easily (IMO)

This is not true.....

All the CURRENT "SVT" series cabinets, AND some of the others, including some of the ones from china, are made of 15MM "baltic birch" for the main cabinet panels and many of the main internal parts also

Yes it is a change, so PBG just hasn't seen the newer ones yet.