51m0n

[quote name='dan670844' post='866533' date='Jun 13 2010, 10:07 PM']I still think it could be a porting issue. the whole idea of ports is to help with the lows / make the cab more efficient at the low end. to do this they need air.[b] I used a couple of front ported 2x10's once (they where avatars) all I had to do a gig. On there own they sounded great, stacked they sounded like a tranny radio. There was some crazy air robbing thing going on I guess[/b]. My advice would be try one cab on its own and play with the EQ. See what you get at low volumes. I don't know what 10's you have in your cab but most (except high end stuff) can only handle 70Hz at the low end with any sort of efficiency. So if you want the low end beef you need a matched 15" that can handle 35Hz. But don't loose heart if its an old Peavey, Trace Elliot, Carlsbro or Laney. They where pretty amazing and there isn't much these days with that low punch at a reasonable price point, Different days![/quote] That sounds much more like an out of phase pair of speakers to me. That is internally wired out of phase - yes it can happen! Porting the cab adds that lower octave back - that is the point of it. 35Hz is an octave below 70Hz... The point is cab design defines the cabs frequency range, not driver design (so much). Example:- I have a couple of pairs of old TDL hifi speakers at home, Studio 0.75ms and RTL3s, the .75s have a 6" metal cone, the RTLs have a pair of 8" reinforced paper cones. The RTLs are significantly larger. Which is bassier? Well on first listen the .75s are far deeper, they are a Transmission Line 1/4 wavelength design, massively efficient in extremely deep bass - they go way lower than anything else I've heard, even though they only have a 6" cone! They suffer a lack of low mid detail though. The RTLs have masses of low mid detail: one of the pair of drivers provides for low mid, the other is at the end of a transmission line. In fact they extend about as deep as the .75s but as they are so even it doesnt really sound like they do - they dont rob the mids to show off the bass in other words. The RTLs have a higher impedance but are nevertheless way more sensitive than the .75ms My point? Speaker diameter alone does not bear relevance to the depth a cab can deliver, the timbre of the cab, or its sensitivity. Alex C and BFM have both repeatedly stated that getting hung up on driver diameter and wattage (thermal handling) is missing the point completely.

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' post='865869' date='Jun 13 2010, 12:31 PM']You do have boundary cancellation, which leads to the apparent effect that lows don't become audible until you reach a distance from a cab. The explanation offered there might be wrong. [url="http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=38232&view=findpost&p=380903"]Citation.[/url][/quote] Yes, I agree, I even mentioned this! Thus 'throw' is not real, instead it is the result of cancellation with boundary reflections giving the impression of 'throw'. [quote name='Mr. Foxen' post='865869' date='Jun 13 2010, 12:31 PM']Speaker diameter does effect the dispersion pattern or a speaker though, and since that would effect what frequencies are radiating around the driver sides and back, would therefore effect which ones are going to be bouncing off the walls there. There is also a correlation between cone diameter and frequency response off axis, which is where most ears will be, so there is an audible difference. [url="http://lowdownlowdown.com/greenboy/DL/tablesfrequency.htm"]Beaming frequencies[/url]. Bigger speakers also tend toward great volume displacement and sensitivity, because they are bigger, so you can get more lows than from an otherwise equivalent smaller diameter speaker.[/quote] Beaming is where the frequencies [b]above[/b] a certain point disperse less well. Look in the table you linked to and that is 1Khz for a 15" and 1.6KHz for a 10" cone. Below that you have less beaming issues. Low frequencies disperse evenly. He was lacking oomph, which is to be found in the lo mids normally, or around 250-400Hz. Where beaming is not an issue. These are the frequencies that [b]do[/b] radiate around the back and sides, and that therefore [b]do[/b] suffer cancellation from rear wall refelcetions out of phase.

[quote name='Count Bassie' post='864361' date='Jun 11 2010, 02:31 PM']Pretty good point- location in relation to ears! I was hearing a band once at a bar in Miami (Churchill's Hedeaway, if any of you "blokes" have spent any time in Miami)- Charlie Picket and the MC3. The bass player (Marco Petit, gone now, sorry) was playing his old Precision through an SWR Bassic 350 / Goliath II cab. Loud and clear, it was the most beautiful wooly sound I'd ever heard. The stage was about 4' off the floor and from a sitting position it was coming right at my head and chest. And it was perfect for the band. Wow. The way you percieve sound as a player and from out front are quite different. And... what you dial into your rig on your own and what it sounds like in the band mix-very different. What can come off as 'ugly' solo'd might really be perfect in the band. I'd consider that adding a lot of low-bass boost can bury your band in murk, and takes more power from your amp to produce. Also, the bass guitar isn't really a "fundamental bass" instrument by nature- it's really producing mids and harmonics, mostly. So rather than trying to produce lows, you want to discover what feels and sounds good in the band's mix. And now I'm going off, I'll stop... But, don't spend any more money- spend some time. Here's a link with some basics that seems solid: [url="http://bassguitarrocks.com/bass-amp-eq-for-beginners"]http://bassguitarrocks.com/bass-amp-eq-for-beginners[/url] Here's an interesting eq experience from an electric/upright doubler: [url="http://www.premierguitar.com/Magazine/Issue/2008/Mar/Bass_EQ_Basics.aspx"]http://www.premierguitar.com/Magazine/Issu..._EQ_Basics.aspx[/url][/quote] Sorry but the information in the first link is just utter nonsense. No bass cabs 'throw', rather sound gets quieter according to the [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse-square_law"]Inverse Square Law[/url] in all cases, bass is no different. In other words the volume decreases by half as the distance from the source is doubled. That is an immutable law of acoustics. If you walk through a room and the sound level in the bass raises and lowers this is a result of standing wave nodes within that space, additive nodes increase the volume where reflections from the walls combine with the sound from the source in phase, subtractive nodes decrease the volume where reflection from the walls combine with the sound from the source out of phase. Putting blankets and egg boxes on a wall will change the way bass reflects of it in no way at all. Bass travels directly through these. Egg boxes have no practically useful acoustic properties whatsoever. Studios use serios depths of high and mid density rockwool in corners from floor to ceiling behind acoustically suitable fabric to act as bass traps, not egg shells. The rule of thumb in that link about speaker diameter and distance from a wall is also tosh. There is no such link at all between cone diamter and distance or indeed speaker frequency response. Keep your cab as close to the wall as you can. Bass frequencies radiate in all directions equally regardless of source (ie rear vs front ported). Over a couple of feet to about 10ft is a bad place to put a cab, since the reflection off the backwall will be out of phase with the directly radiated sound from the speaker in frequency ranges very important to your bass sound (ie below 150Hz), precise frequncy of phase cancellation is dependant upon the distance. In contrast putting your cab in the middle of the room is not an issue at all. Except for the audience tripping over it. Bottom line, if you cant hear your cab, start with the eq flat, the cab up high so that its pointing at your head, get the back of the cab within 6" of the back wall. Get the whole band to play, turn up your rig until you can hear yourself clearly. Have a long lead/wireless wander into the room and listen to the balance of the bass. Too much boom - knock back the bass Too honky - knock the mids back a bit Too bright - knock back the top Simple. However remember that if a venue fills up with a lot of soft bodies then they will soak up treblle and mids and reflections in those frequencies. If the in empty venue you sound just right, then you probably need a tad more mids and treble, so knock the bass back a smidge, and turn everythin up....

Nice link, sounds the canine undercarriage doesnt it!

The diameter of the driver is not that relevant to timbre or loudness. Cab design, internal volume, porting etc are far more relevant. Also important is XMAX of the drivers, thermal rating etc. Diameter is about the one thing that isnt particularly relevant to something as gross as overall tonality/timbre/frequency range/volume/sensitivity of a cab. A 410 will usually be larger (thus go deeper) than a 115. A 410 moves more air than a 115 if they all have about the same XMAX. Some modern drivers have significantly higher XMAX than older drivers though, they need more wattage to make use of that XMAX. Quick and dirty supporting calculation (not giving a damn about cone depth): [u]115[/u] 1 * (pi * (7.5^2)) = 176.714587 [u]410[/u] 4 * (pi * (5^2)) = 314.159265 2x210s is usually pretty equivalent to 1x410 assuming the total volume is also equivalent, same drivers in both blah blah. The sensitivity of the finished cab is very important, unfortunately the manufacturers specs are generally utter tosh (they are ususally measured at 1KHz, and are often liberally coated with marketting fairy dust, or lies as I like to think of them). So you just cannot trust them... My 410 is louder (significantly) than Plux's 210, 115 stack. By rights his stack should move more air, (larger cone area), but my cab is more sensitive, and I suspect the cones have a higher XMAX than the older cones in his stack. Timbrally they are actually not a million miles apart however, different for sure, but not chalk and cheese. Another filthy rough calculation... [u]210 + 115 stack[/u] (2 * (pi * (5^2))) + (pi * (7.5^2)) = 333.794219

[quote name='Musicman20' post='863926' date='Jun 11 2010, 12:58 AM']I'd love to know how the SD1200 compares to the LM2/3. Does it match up tone wise?[/quote] Do a search on Talkbass, KJung went into a lot of detail about the SD800. He prefers the LMII (F1 is his favourite), maintaining that the SD800 was a bit too wide (low extended). The SD1200 is closer to an SD800 than an LMII (SD means a digital power section, the LMII has a switch mode power supply but old school power section), just more grunt I'm lead to believe. Of course that wasnt into an NV series sealed cab, which I could see it working brilliantly with...

KWOARRRRR! HAve fun knocking over those walls!

Pluggin the speaker cable back into the speaker (two speakons in one cab). Thought the whole shooting match had broken! What a numpty The sense of relief when it all springs back into life is palpable though!

There is plenty of mid there, but the tone stack is very unituitive (to my addled brain). Set mid on max, treble on about 1, bass on about 1. Really! I find that a 2,10,2 starting point, then roll off the treble to taste and bring up the bass, whiclst slowly rolling back the mids is the easiest way, damned fiddly though. But it can do a very wide range of very nice tones.

[quote name='cheddatom' post='862964' date='Jun 10 2010, 09:38 AM']... Recently i've set up to record every practise, which means the mics now go to a mixer, and a line out from that goes into the PA. [b]The mixer has a better EQ on it, and by cutting some frequencies I got a little more level out of the PA before it started to feedback.[/b] More recently I bought a couple of Peavey PA speakers which are 12" and have tweeters. These sound a lot clearer, and it seems I could get more level out of them than the other speakers, [b]but I can't turn it up because the point of feedback seems to remain at the same point[/b]. Also now that it sounds clearer it seems i'm getting some distortion from somewhere. ....[/quote] I'd agree his entire setup defines the word shonky. However his feedback is still going to be there if he swaps out the power for a seperate better quality amp and simplifies his signal chain, unless he either moves cabs, moves mics or gets some proper eq. With proper eq (set up well) he will be able to get more volume before feedback, potentially significantly more volume, even with a crud underpowered amp. The quality will still be crap, but it will be louder and crap, which was the requirement. Although still probably not loud enough. The question was 'how do I get the feedback to stop?', it may have been better if it had been 'is this a viable solution at all?' It is as you say, a turd being badly polished, put on a plinth amongst a collection of other turds. Or - not the way to go about it.... Oh and a huge +1 to the Senn E series mics, chuffing excellent for the dosh!

[quote name='acidbass' post='852783' date='May 31 2010, 05:37 PM']Cool - they look to be really good speakers for the money! I wonder if the matching subwoofers are as good? I've always been suspicious of subs with 12" drivers, call me old fashioned but there's nothing to beat a good 18" cabinet for rumble![/quote] Hmmm you should take a look at the [url="http://www.billfitzmaurice.com"]Bill FitzMaurice[/url] website, and reevalute your thinking regarding subs, how they work, and what size cones are best for them. Once again lowest useable frequency is entirely unrelated to driver size in a cab, its related to cab design and more volume....

It cant be the power amp. Thats daft, a bigger power amp will still feedback at the same point! His volume issue is not that the amp is crapping out, its that he gets feedback before its loud enough. If you buy a bigger power amp it will just feedback at the same volume. Net gain in volume = 0 You have to attenuate the problem frequencies (using a graphic). Problem with a 7 band is its too wide band. Thus you knock out one band and then cant hear anything for a significant amount of frequencies either side. Another thing you can do is buy mics with a more Cardioid response, of course you need to position them such that the off axis is where the PA cabs are.

Assuming you can insert one into the output then what you need is a 31 band graphic or a good feedback destroyer (probably worth more than the rest of the PA). Should be able to get over 6dB more out of it if you set up the graphic right. Which is 4 times louder....

18-25, nah mate, thats almost insulting! Experminental anything is fine by me, boundaries are there to be pushed, but you better mean you are pushing them hard, or anyone into really experimental music may think you are not nearly experimental enough. Influences would be a must whenever you say experimental, the term covers a vast range: Zorn, Zappa, Can, Throbbing Gristle, Helios Creed, Tomas Kerner etc etc, all can honestly claim to be experimental, none sound remotely alike... Aside from that Brighton is a bit of a way to go Good luck with the search!!

Oh man, enjoy it!!!!

[quote name='silddx' post='862096' date='Jun 9 2010, 02:05 PM']It happens once in a while that the PA is sh*t, I talk to the sound guys and they are usually totally cool with it. I live with it if I get no monitor or if the PA is pants. It's the venue that's crap, not the band, we don't play there again.[/quote] Fair enough, every now and then I play in a room thats acoustically pants and no one can do anything about it, same deal really I'd still think that you are more likely to have monitoring issues, or do you have your own In Ear monitoring solution?

Out of interest Silddx, what happens if you turn up at a venue and the PA is pants, or the soundengineer cant deal with what yuo are doing? Part of the reason I so dearly love carting a great big heavy rig about is that I'm not entirely at the mercy of the PA with it, in most cases I do have the option of leaning over and turn up the Whumpulator Knob, ensuring satisfactory deafness to all around me....

Can of worms opened I think. Its as was said before, since everything colours the sound (cables, room dimensions, playback system, air temperature, humidity) then unless you are in very specific environments, with very specific parameters I think that with the very best implementations its very hard to be able to tell the difference (I'm thinking along the lines of a mastering suite set up), and have much of a hope of telling which was which. Thats not to say they sound the same, but being able to identify them is very very hard (I dont think I can now, with the good implementations, I could with earlier poorer quality kit though). I think top quality digital modelling can deliver fantastic quality sounds. Are they the same as what they are purported to emulate? Well in the case of vintage kit (old SVTs etc) how the hell can you hope to tell, the variance in performance of all vintage gear is massive, no two of the real things sound alike, as often as not the difference between a 'good' and 'bad' vintage amp are far larger than the difference between the 'good' amp and a digital model of it though. Can you program the device to sound how you want to? Is your idea of a good sound consistent with the audience? Do you prefer to work in the digital domain rather than the analogue domain? These questions are more valid now I think...

I use my ears.....

[quote name='poptart' post='861481' date='Jun 8 2010, 09:08 PM']Ah - the secret is out, this is a cab I have asking to be made for a while now and Jim Bergantino seems to have got it right. I have yet to hear the cab, however I am sure it will be the biz as all of these cabs are all road tested through some shops and users before they get the okay. Stocks should be arriving at the end of the Summer and will be in 4Ω only. We toyed with using a "kick up" stand but this seemed a little unstable, however those who use these cabs are aware of how "transparent" the sound is even off axis so intelligibility is always first class. Regards Mark [b]PS - There is another very cool Bergantino cab coming out soon......[/b][/quote] Oh man, give over!!!! Now I am going to have to pester you for clues

Why do you need more than 10 minutes for a changeover of gear?? I've been in bands on the original circuit and we could change the entire two bands' gear out (inc drums) and line check within ten minutes. You have to know what you are about, you have to be prepared to do it, you need a decent sound guy. It can certainly be done, 10 minutes is a long time, you do also need somewhere to ferry the other gear to off stage, sinice this is stage one though, you can leave band a to pack down that kit whilst band b is doing their line check. I've never been to a gig where the audiemce went home because the next band took 15 minutes to start....

[quote name='goingdownslow' post='860792' date='Jun 8 2010, 10:50 AM']Will do, when he comes out of his bedroom.[/quote] I'd quite like to have his bedroom then mate, it looks a fair bit bigger than either mine or yours does I reckon:-

[quote name='velvetkevorkian' post='860048' date='Jun 7 2010, 04:27 PM']Agree 100%. There are numerous reasons why a band may not have all the gear they might want, or may not be able to bring it, and its incredibly elitist IMO to suggest that they should all stay in their bedrooms until they can get both a gig-worthy amp and a car to put it in. If you don't want to lend your kit, that's fine, and that's your prerogative, but sweeping assumptions like that are frankly insulting.[/quote] Go on then list me "numerous reasons" why a band might not have a ~150w Peavey 115 TNT combo off ebay?? They go for about £100!! They are enough (if you learn how to eq) to get heard on a stage, they will be DI'ed. I know, I've used them many times as an onstage monitor. It isnt a nice sound, it doesnt look pretty,m there are no flashing lights, and it will not ever sound 'great' but it will do the job (just). If thats all you can afford then tough. Its not "incredibly elitist" to expect people to bring the tools they need to do the job they intend to do. Its common sense. It is however incredibly thoughtless (to the point of either mindless ignorance or supreme arrogance) to presuppose that you will be allowed to use someone else rig (be it a similar combo or several grands worth of kit) because you haven't even sorted out the bare minimum essentials required to actually be gigging. Worse yet to tell someone that they will have to lend their gear to someone else that they dont know from adam and accept all the associated risks. I insure my gear, in case its stolen or breaks whilst I am using it. If that were to happen I would still be out of pocket by a significant amount as a result of the way insurance works, not to mention the time taken to get replacement kit. So it doesnt mean I am willing to, or would advocate ayone else, lending their kit. You do so at your own risk, and all those who are lending away like happy bunnies will be happy until the day comes that a couple of grands worth of their kit gets busted by one of a group of people borrowing it on the night, none of whom has the honesty to own up to what they've done. At which point you will change your mind. Or you are a fool. I couldnt really care which, cos I'll still be able to play through my rig beacause I didnt lend it to some git who should have brought his own kit.

Find out the cost of replacing every single item of gear you will take. Plus P&P etc. Factor in the cost of your time to replace your kit, and say 15% more for the frustration, damage to your practice routine etc etc. Add it all up. Tell them that that is the cost of hiring your kit for the night, in cash, up front. Or no dice. Find out where the nearest hirer of kit to the venue is, and send them the address, and a link to a cheap rubbish practice amp on ebay and explain that those are other options they have if they want to play music in a band at a gig. I could not give a damn what the sob story is, if they dont own kit they cant play so they can f*** right off. NEver lend gear ever ever ever ever. As you already know.