LawrenceH

[quote name='Dingus' timestamp='1354198668' post='1883436'] So my conservative side says alder , but ash would be lighter and might sound just as good or better . I've got to make my mind up soon , so I welcome anybodys input on what I should choose and why . My main cocnern is whether lightweight ash will sound as powerful and as forthright as alder in the midrange . [/quote] Why not look at the Warmoth in-stock offerings in alder and ash? They go by weight, you can get lightweight for either type, and I've not hear of anyone being disappointed by their sound

[quote name='4 Strings' timestamp='1354144841' post='1882837'] I know I've said this before but why isn't there the same mystique about what wood is used to hold up the pickups and support the tone wheels on a Hammond? Or in the wood used for speaker cabinets. [/quote] The wood used for speaker cabinets is extremely important. If it's not rigid enough then panel resonances mess up the sound. A speaker driver is an electro-acoustic transducer and what it's mounted in is part of that - rigid bracing is required in most cabinets to compensate for inadequate material rigidity. Luthiers do the same thing with acoustic guitars etc. to manipulate resonance frequencies. A bass guitar is ALSO an electro-acoustic transducer but the other way round. Any in-band resonances affecting string vibration in the system of string/bridge/support system will transfer through the pickup. Construction methods altering body mass/rigidity can be used but there's less options for a solid-body instrument since it's inherently a simpler construction. On the other hand a hammond tonewheel relies on rotation, not vibration. Wheel shape and rotation speed determine the frequency and tone.

[quote name='51m0n' timestamp='1354117926' post='1882278'] Its not the quality of the CD player that I'm suggesting is at fault its the possiblity that CD audio is not nearly as hifi as people would like to presume, and although there are great arguments for 44.1KHz being a high [i]enough[/i] sample rate, going higher can improve things further. 96KHz can sound rather fantastic IME, and you wouldnt have to spend 2000Euros to try it out for yourself either.... [/quote] None of that matters if you're comparing a relatively early high quality vinyl pressing with a bad, overcompressed remaster from 30 year old tapes. CD can sound amazing but rarely does when you AB the same material with a vinyl copy, and I wonder if the quality of the master is often why rather than being intrinsic to the format. Back to the OT, I've kind of gone the opposite. I've always played with a clean sound but recently got into using a Peavey TB Raxx valve preamp. I am in sonic love, it's a world away from the junky pedal format preamps, Sansamps and the like.

[quote name='Doddy' timestamp='1353954358' post='1880234'] If there is a lot to learn I'll jot bits down on manuscript,but again I can usually remember them after a couple of play throughs. [/quote] Fair enough, so I guess you're not someone who's ever needed to analyse their own process of memorisation per se? I'm not a natural at remembering structures etc and certainly not lyrics, I've had to break it up and work out where exactly I fall short. Interestingly though (to me at least) I've found myself getting better at it since I started approaching it more systematically.

[quote name='Myke' timestamp='1353948986' post='1880124'] Oh? That's strange because does it not have a switch that cuts the Mids to make a more slap kinda tone? [/quote] A more recent revision than mine, might help for a certain type of slap sound but I found that however I EQ'ed it both at bass and amp, I was always fighting against the inherent sound (I wanted an up-front growly sound for funk) unless the strings were brand new. For a good slap sound I wanted more (upper) mids, not less. Having tried a lot of Soundgear basses in shops with various different pickups, plus trying Nordstrands in mine in place of the Bartonlinis, I've found a dark, thick character pretty inherent to all of them even those with maple fingerboard. You might have a really different idea of what sound you're after especially coming from a Thunderbird, but I'd really recommend going and trying out a couple of Soundgear basses in a shop, directly up against a decent jazz/stingray to see if it works for you. Definitely the easiest bass to play I've ever had, so if you like the sound it's a great choice.

I had one, it felt great but I didn't think it was very good for slap, it had an inherently dark tone.

Like Mr F says, you can't do it with jacks, it's not safe. You could use a lead wired to a jack socket mounted on the hole in the back panel, like a typical FX rack patchbay.

[quote name='Doddy' timestamp='1353942133' post='1879985'] I'm guessing that it doesn't as much as you think. [/quote] Hmm, gigs with a 'bandleader', that's already pretty far out in rock terms surely?! (not that I'm a rock fan). There's a difference in expectation between reading gigs where the line-up is fluid, and the kind of work where a stable line-up are expected to 'perform' a stable set beyond the playing of music, especially originals. But the OP was asking for ideas on how to aid memorising music, not the 'reading or not' debate. You play an awful lot, so must be a pretty efficient learner when you need to with ways of streamlining that process, no?

[quote name='Highfox' timestamp='1353929357' post='1879742'] Anyone else out there have trouble remembering what you play? We have about 40 of our owns songs and it seems every week at rehearsal I forget some parts of the songs I'm getting stressed with this as it makes me feel I'm letting the other guys down. [/quote] I find that I need to apply a little discipline to the actual process of remembering/learning. Playing till it's mindless, a bit like riding a bike with no hands, it's ok til you wonder how you're doing it and then it goes wrong! Paying attention to where I make mistakes (it's not usually random in my case) makes me focus on actively remembering what happens just that part. I can use this as a backup to the mindless playing! Does that make sense? Probably not... I think I mean target your memory where it's needed, makes it much more efficient.

Given the massive disparity in cost and size between the different options out there, it's pretty useful to know what you actually 'need' in terms of performance! What kind of venues is the sub for?

If you want Barefaced, why not the Baby Sub? That's as much a PA sub as it is a bass cab.

[quote name='3below' timestamp='1353791567' post='1878578'] agree, and put another way, when it sounds like you are destroying your speakers, you are. [/quote] Except if you're using fuzzy distortion. Fairer to say inexperience, rather than stupidity. More generally, a factor that people preaching about excursion versus thermal limits ignore, is that the magnet is itself a major thermal design element. Push the voicecoil out of the gap and you rapidly reduce thermal capabilities unless the design allows for this. The thermal rating tests are bandwidth-limited, but a 'modern' xmax definition can allow the voicecoil to leave the gap by as much as 1/3rd total gap height, greatly reducing the thermal capability. Factor in a player's (perhaps subconscious) compensation for gradually increasing speaker power compression and you can potentially hit a new, compromised thermal limit [i]before you hit xmax, ie no easily audible warning.[/i] Add to this that newer generation premium drivers can show a less rapid transition from clean to gak [i]above[/i] xmax, all the while reducing thermal capability further and further, and it can be very difficult to judge where the limits are unless you are pretty experienced at blowing that particular speaker model! I have heard rubbing voicecoils that are probably damaged by overexcursion, but the few times I've looked at the voicecoil of a fully 'blown' speaker I've seen signs of heat damage.

I used maple veneers from ebay stuck in with superglue, worked perfectly. I did use a radius sanding block from StewMac to flatten them off afterwards which was the most expensive element

Another cab is great and all that, but changing the EQ is free (edit: and fully reversible!)

I love the logic employed; 'but the tone isn't the same at lower volume', maybe not but drowning out the drums, let alone anything else, is less than ideal too no? When I did sound regularly, if I got this I'd ask (as diplomatically as I could) if they wanted a totally rubbish sound for the whole band, or if they could accept a slightly less good guitar sound but a band mix where vocals etc were actually audible. Most of the time this worked, and I'd often feed a bit of guitar back into the monitors and they'd think it was louder than ever since it was actually aimed at their ears! If you want speaker break-up at small gigs then use 1x12" driver, not 8 of them...

That's a really interesting article! I actually thought it was pretty consistent once you take into account the woolliness of the language used to describe sound and their emphasis that overall construction method plays a defining role. They were all clear that they believe wood plays a role along with how it is used.

[quote name='bob_pickard' timestamp='1353660308' post='1876994'] The idea of a preamp and a PA power amp is interesting as well as I think I can get hold of a decent power amp pretty cheap. Absolutely no idea where I start with bass pre-amps tho! here we go again [/quote] It's a nice modular solution. I am currently using a little markbass F1 as a 'clean' amp into pretty flat response woofers, and doing my toneshaping with an old Peavey TB-Raxx - an amazing all-valve bargain 2ndhand, takes a bit of getting used to the EQ section but once you do it's very versatile. It would cost 10 times as much if it didn't look so 80s hair-metal! With this I could transition easily to a separate power amp set-up and it also means that my DI sound through the PA (post-preamp) is very similar to the stage sound. The thing to look for is matching the preamp output to power amp input sensitivity. PA gear is designed to 'pro' standards so can be a bit unforgiving of bass kit, it needs a strong signal to get the most out of the amp. Some amps are more demanding in this respect than others. I'd imagine the rackmount POD would do the job fine for a digital solution but I'd be more wary of small pedal-format stuff. I believe one chap by the name of Claber, who cares a bit about sound quality, uses an Avalon U5/power amp into some cabs he knocked together himself.

[quote name='chris_b' timestamp='1353542153' post='1875992'] Bergantino have speakers made to their spec. [/quote] In the case of the neos that's based, I believe, around a Deltalite magnet/frame ie the same one as the EADs/many others. Doesn't mean they'll all sound the same but they'll all be in the same ballpark in terms of maximum output. Barefaced and Vanderkley (edit: Baer as well, forgot about them) are using the most powerful 12" drivers in commercial bass cabs that I know of. Whether you need that volume and power handling is another matter, a pair of 12" Em Deltalites, or B&C hpl/cl series as used by Markbass will go very loud indeed with 350 watts behind them! If you don't care about weight then there's more options still.

Since you want rackmount, you want headroom and you've got the cab to handle it then why not get a decent PA amp to handle the power side of things? I don't do it currently but if ever I need a 'big rig' sound then I've got a QSC PLX2402 sitting around that will kick the trousers out of any bass amp going. An amp that can handle real PA subwoofer duty without coming up short will give you incredible clean power. Then pick the pre of your choice.

If the budget can stretch, I'd think separates is the way to go if you want the ultimate in lightweight flexibility, simply because it allows you to distribute the load better or even do it in two trips. Even when the amp weighs just 2kg, add that to the 10 or so kilos of a small cab and it'll make a difference in some situations. It depends how bad the problem is. Separates also lets you match the lightest head with the lightest cab, even when they're not from the same manufacturer Gallien Krueger amps are pretty much the lightest around at the moment, the MB200 and 500 particularly, and as a bonus they sound great. Cab-wise Barefaced use the lightest construction technique apart from a few specialist builders in the US who're using composite materials. Barefaced don't use quite the lightest drivers, but they are pretty much the loudest and most powerful for their weight and I've not seen any commercial offerings in the UK that are lighter overall (DIY's a different story). Regardless of the combo v separates issue, how much volume do you need? You've got a lot of drivers currently with 3 fifteens and 4 tens!

[quote name='voxpop' timestamp='1353345096' post='1873998'] Would I be better off perminatly blocking off the cab ports / holes and making a sealed cab with the celestion driver. [/quote] If the sound works for you and is still loud enough then why not? [quote name='stevie' timestamp='1353344836' post='1873987'] Massive humps and bumps have no place in any speaker system. They are usually caused by bad design or skimping on cost. The 100Hz bump that is common in bass guitar cabs is usually caused by using an undersized magnet to save money. [/quote] For PA I agree, but not necessarily for an electric instrument where 'flat' is somewhat arbitrary. The massive resonance peak in a magnetic pickup respose is an example of a bump that's desirable to many electric guitar/bass players. There's nothing that says you have to EQ only at a given stage in the signal chain. I often find myself bumping up around 80-100Hz on my (smooth roll-off, relatively flat) speakers to give a bit more authority to the sound in a small venue.

[quote name='Bill Fitzmaurice' timestamp='1353338082' post='1873776'] I have [i]never [/i]said flat designs are superior. If I thought they were that's what I'd offer. [/quote] That's not quite what I said. I was pointing out that your criticism of a design for having a built in hump was apparently at odds with your own design philosophy, you just have a different preference. [quote name='Bill Fitzmaurice' timestamp='1353338082' post='1873776'] That gives a strong low mid presence to offset the accentuation an octave below typical of most rooms, quite the opposite of having a midbass hump in the same region where stages/rooms also contribute to response, adding to the problem of boom. [/quote] I was at pains to point out that it works for a lot of people and I was not criticising the design. However, that assertion of where you find boom is at odds with my own experience doing a lot of FoH work in small/medium venues - the range where I've encountered the most trouble is between 200 and 300Hz, the point where the horn loading of your Jacks kicks in. Sub-150 is much easier to control with placement by comparison. [quote name='Bill Fitzmaurice' timestamp='1353338082' post='1873776'] Compared to what? [/quote] Compared to themselves in the higher register - if you needed much true bass for volume perception then there would be no benefit to a low-mid horn loading that didn't increase the low power handling, since that would already be the limiting factor. As it is, it's a question of voicing preference. [quote name='Bill Fitzmaurice' timestamp='1353338082' post='1873776'] They better most commercial cabs. Just look at the SPL charts for commercial cabs... oh, yeah, right,[i] there aren't any. [/i] [/quote] There's no question horn loading makes them louder per woofer employed. Whether that's better is a matter of opinion. There are plenty of charts in the sound reinforcement arena where your cabs are competing. I actually liked the sound of your Jacks once (heavily) EQ'd, up to about 1kHz, but found them very troublesome beyond that point and could not correct it with digital EQ. I imagine the more broad-band omnitop designs would serve me much better. For many people though box size is more of a limiting factor than number of woofers, and that's where a 'compact' hybrid design relying on reflex loading for the bottom 2 octaves loses out at the low end, as it's necessarily bigger per woofer unit. It's no accident that horns are near-ubiquitous for treble and rare for lower frequencies, and it's not just a question of build complexity. [quote name='Bill Fitzmaurice' timestamp='1353338082' post='1873776'] And some prefer Lexus to Mercedes. To each their own. [/quote] Exactly, hence me wanting to point out that actually those old-school 'thoughtless' designs aren't chosen purely at random or just to 'trick' people, they have their place from a price/size/performance perspective just as your own designs do.

Depends a lot on the exact size of the box - a 90 litre cab with 2x7cm holes comes in about 60Hz. With that particular Celestion it'll still give a hefty 4dB hump centred around 100Hz. More than I'd want but it's not such a bad sound for a lot of scenarios and it makes the box able to go very loud without too much power and it will sound bassy - an old-school solution. Don't forget a lot of mixing desk shelving bass EQ shelves/cuts are set around 80-100Hz, the extra octave below requires a BIG size/cost premium. 42Hz is a lot deeper than most people think! I find it odd that Bill is always so down on other people's non-flat designs, when his own Jacks are very deliberately designed this way with a massive hump in the low mids, a BIG drop between 1 and 2kHz and comparatively little deep bass. I imagine they really suit a certain P bass vibe, but it didn't work for me - it's always a compromise and different people prefer the sound of different solutions. Even damping in cabs is something of a personal taste thing for bass, it's not always meant to be hifi.

Because the 400 watt rating is based on the speakers' continuous average thermal power handling. Under normal circumstances a 500 watt amp couldn't put out 400 watts average power using a bass guitar (or any musical) signal, so unless you use test tones rather than play music you won't be able to destroy those speakers by overheating. In the interests of a complete answer, too much very low bass WOULD let you damage them with less than 500 watts, but this is true of nearly every cab even some with much higher thermal power handling, and it's really not something to worry about with your Matamp.

[quote name='seashell' timestamp='1353266352' post='1873060'] Will people please stop going on about women of a certain age? I am of an interesting age and I have never knowingly waved a handbag. Lol :-) [/quote] Oops, sorry! [size=2]But nonetheless, one day, you will hear Mustang Sally calling you, urging you to leap up on the dancefloor like a salmon leaps upstream and try as you might you won't be able to resist. Call of the wild, innit. Nature in action[/size]