• 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.

Would 150 watts be the same loudness, same amp but thru larger speakers?

#21
So my original thought was that I have this Minimark 2x6 that I've discovered with an EQ pedal in front of it gives me more of the tones I was looking for. I like the portability. I take it to rehearsals with a drummer and it hangs in there just fine. I wondered if the new one with the 2x8 configuration would be louder so I could use it on those midsize gigs where there is not a front of house to send the DI but the gig is too large for the 2x6 to stand on its own. It seems that regardless of the science, its not going to be significantly louder to make a difference for my application. Can't figure out why Markbass made a newer one with larger speakers if it does not have a more powerful amp. Hey Markbass if you are listening.............................
 
  • Like
Reactions: knumbskull
#22
Omega Monkey said:
Down, is that 1db coming from an educated guess or some published specs somewhere?

Almost universally, larger speakers of the same design (ie they're just proportionally bigger and that's it) will have higher sensitivity, and will go lower.

In this case, a 2x6 is a pretty damn small cab, which I wouldn't expect to get really above bedroom to coffee shop levels. A 2x8 as mentioned is almost 80% more cone area. I dont know if it's possible to figure out a sensitivity curve (ie if doubling area gives you 3 db, where do you hit 1db and 2 db?), but I would guess you'd get at least half of it in broad band terms, and possibly a lot more in the low end (where it's going to be most noticed).

So in real world terms, I wouldn't necessarily expect it to be perceivably louder, but I WOULD expect it to be perceivably fuller sounding. Having said that, I don't think the increase would necessarily be worth it depending on your aims and your budget. If I had the 2x6 and needed more volume for some things, I would be inclined to do a bigger jump to a 2x10 or bigger, and keep the 2x6 for home practice and very low volume situations. But you can get 2x10s these days that weigh about as much as 2 basses in hardshell cases. The added utility vs cost vs volume of anything much smaller than that is questionable at best. A 300-500w 2x10 can cover quite a bit, cost less than $500 brand new for a pretty nice one (or an amazing used one), and fit in the passenger seat of a porsche 911.

Of course maybe you already have a bigger cab and the 2x6 is just too small to be usable for you, in which case replacing it with the 2x8 might make sense.

BUT, the Trace 2x8 is rated 500w and is a pretty great sounding cab (although surely different than the MB, since it doesn't have a tweeter). It's got a bit of a vintage vibe without a tweeter, but it's also a 2x8 so it's still got plenty of highs. And if you used flats you wouldn't be getting anything from a tweeter anyway (not that was very usable at least). They're not exactly cheap though. But they are something like 28 or 30 pounds (maybe less?). And rated at 500w. So 2 of them could probably handle just about any bar or small club gig with a 300-500w head.
Click to expand...

99dB, plus 150W is 121dB, which isn't that bad.
 
#23
don21480 said:
So my original thought was that I have this Minimark 2x6 that I've discovered with an EQ pedal in front of it gives me more of the tones I was looking for. I like the portability. I take it to rehearsals with a drummer and it hangs in there just fine. I wondered if the new one with the 2x8 configuration would be louder so I could use it on those midsize gigs where there is not a front of house to send the DI but the gig is too large for the 2x6 to stand on its own. It seems that regardless of the science, its not going to be significantly louder to make a difference for my application. Can't figure out why Markbass made a newer one with larger speakers if it does not have a more powerful amp. Hey Markbass if you are listening.............................
Click to expand...

I'd look at the +/- 3dB points. Whilst maximum SPLs are 120 and 121dB, that's under reference conditions, typically a 1kHz signal. If the 2x6 is - 3dB at 80Hz and tuned to 40Hz, and the 2x8 is - 3 at 40Hz, same tuning, the 2x6 would eat a lot of power in that lowest octave to get as loud, assuming its Xmax even let it do that. Whilst there's also a good argument for using an HPF to avoid mud, the 2x8 probably sucks less power below 160Hz, so even if you are using an HPF at 60Hz, you are getting more out 160-60, and the roll off of the HPF still leaves some signal below 60.

The ideal is efficient speakers at everything down to 30Hz, and then rolling off and not using it, all other things being equal. Speakers flat to 30 don't tend to be efficient overall, though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JimChjones and ctmullins
#24
knumbskull said:
Completely uneducated non-science answer: adding a 2nd cab is *probably the most straightforward* way of getting more real-world volume.

Now i’m going to run away before someone posts a bunch of stats proving why i’m wrong ;)
Click to expand...

Thank you. Always worked for me without melting down my brain. Oy. :help:. The formula was ms = mam = mv.
 
#25
I dont understand the confusion? Would you expect a 2 x 12 of the same range of cabs to be more capable than the 2 x 10 version with the same amp? Yes I think you would, otherwise we'd all be rocking 2 x 10 rigs. I know that my LM3 into my 2 x 12 Bergs is way louder than into my 2 x 10 Berg. The reason Markbass replaced the 2 and 1 x 6 combos with 2 and 1 x 8 combos is that the 8 inch speaker is appreciably better than the 6 (of similar construction) if you want more volume.
 
  • Like
Reactions: don21480
#26
The sensitivity difference could be explained in a number of ways. Just like there are different standards for rating power, there are also different standards for sensitivity, because the latter is a function of frequency. The published number may be measured at a frequency that happens to give a favorable rating. I'd rather see what the curve looks like in the ballpark of 50 to 250 Hz, which is where the basic electromechanical model of speakers is applicable.

The maker may have had a variety of motives for switching from 2x6 to 2x8. For instance they may have been satisfied with the overall sensitivity, but wanted more response in the lowest frequencies. They may have wanted the speaker to handle the full power of the amplifier more gracefully. Those things would result in more useful volume, without being reflected in a simplistic sensitivity spec.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rich Fiscus, knumbskull, ThisBass and 4 others
#27
don21480 said:
Can't figure out why Markbass made a newer one with larger speakers if it does not have a more powerful amp.
Click to expand...
Well, the answer will always be because they thought it would sell better!!

The 2x8 may well have different characteristics. The 802 has a lower sensitivity than one might expect which one might suspect means the design took a compromise on raw volume in favour of other characteristics they judged to be more important.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nevada Pete
#30
Now that we’ve thrown our techie vocabulary around in order to confuse the issue and baffle the OP, I’ll answer his question:
There is a slight difference in loudness between the two Markbass Mini models but it’s barely noticeable when you play your bass through them and it’ll be unnoticed by everyone who’s not actively seeking it.

Playing your bass through the amp really is the point, right?
Eschew obfuscation assiduously.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ctmullins and don21480
#31
Yes - the only concern I have is will I get a noticeable volume increase by upgrading to the newer amp with the 2x8 speakers? It seems unlikely to make enough difference to upgrade after all the information and science discussed here. Thank everyone for weighing in!
 
#33
They are both two driver setups. If Markbass is using the same metrics to measure the 802 as they did for the 602, they have provided the answer. +1dB in SPL at the measured frequency, which is barely detectable.

However, the 802 may have a different overall response curve, meaning frequencies other than the one they used to measure sensitivity, could be different between the two.
 
#35
With a larger cabinet, you can get a better combination of bass depth and efficiency. It's called Hoffmans iron law- find it, read it and understand it. In this case, Markbass, according to the spec, went for 1dB higher sensitivity and f-3 down 6Hz. If the 602 is not loud enough for you, the 802 probably wont be either (+ 1dB). Adding an extension cab will add some 5dB which is considerably louder.
 
  • Like
Reactions: don21480
#38
fdeck said:
The sensitivity difference could be explained in a number of ways. Just like there are different standards for rating power, there are also different standards for sensitivity, because the latter is a function of frequency. The published number may be measured at a frequency that happens to give a favorable rating. I'd rather see what the curve looks like in the ballpark of 50 to 250 Hz, which is where the basic electromechanical model of speakers is applicable.

The maker may have had a variety of motives for switching from 2x6 to 2x8. For instance they may have been satisfied with the overall sensitivity, but wanted more response in the lowest frequencies. They may have wanted the speaker to handle the full power of the amplifier more gracefully. Those things would result in more useful volume, without being reflected in a simplistic sensitivity spec.
Click to expand...

Indeed, you can have a sensitivity of 98dB, and nominal power handling of 150W RMS, but put a really bassy signal through and you might run out of Xmax from one speaker, but not on another. And you could have a 6 inch speaker with huge Xmax in theory, not just the 8 inch one. But for a given sensitivity, you'd need less Xmax from the 8 inch speaker, which means it's more likely to actually exist in the world we live in, as creating things with massive Xmax is tricky whilst still getting linear reproduction of sound (low distortion).
 
#39
If the 2x8 has a similar frequency curve to my gigging 1x15 I'd be tempted if I could get one at a good price, as the size and weight looks like a good combination. However, it's hard to get that sort of information to make such a decision, and I doubt I can get it at a price I'd find attractive. I think I paid £150 for my 400W RMS Tech 1x15 that weighs 30lbs. I wish I was better at woodwork, but I do have a router and a drill press now.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back