LawrenceH

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]

Use a DI box to sort out the impedance mismatch, those active Behringer ones are probably the most cost-effective solution

The ubiquity of Mustang Sally at pub gigs is a strange sociological phenomenon that, however it started, becomes self-perpetuating, like salt crystals growing in a cube or CFCs destroying the ozone layer. Will it ever go away? Who knows - the more bands play it the more punters expect bands to play it, the more bands feel they have to play it. It's just the same from the other perspective; the more women of a certain age dance around drunkenly waving handbangs to it, the more it becomes an essential rite of passage into that phase of womanhood, the more they will seek out venues to enact this tribal ritual. There are only two possible outcome scenarios, it'll either quietly and mysteriously subside, like an ebbing spring tide, or it'll rise up unstoppably and engulf us all in an apocalyptic musical tsunami of sh&*(e. Actually I quite like the Wilson Pickett version of Mustang Sally, but he did have better stuff, and I don't really feel the need to ever hear it again probably thanks to a million pub bands.

If the slap sounded weird then it's the TV mix, not Larry himself, live you can hear him just fine believe me! His voice is epically deep and powerful too, actually rumbles your bones through a sound system that's capable of reproducing it. I don't get what's wrong with the gooseneck - he can't use a fixed stand mic unless he stays still, which he never does, and he can't use a headset mic without losing the ability to use mic technique. His voice doesn't exactly make you think 'Madonna' after all...

[quote name='funkle' timestamp='1353168360' post='1872350'] Thanks for that! Interesting that the graphs only go down to 100hz. I'd like to know what's happening below that. I'll keep hunting. [/quote] At 100Hz and below it's far easier to look at the simulations, which are pretty accurate at these frequencies, often more than measurements done under non-ideal conditions

I have a 75RI jazz with 7.25", chunky (front-to-back) neck and an aerodyne jazz with a 9.5", slimmer-profile neck. Both are totally playable and adjusting between the two has never been an issue. There's something indefinably nice about the feel of the vintage profile neck, but the more modern neck might have the slight edge for preciseness. OTOH I could be imagining it. I would care a lot more about the balance of the instrument, so in a custom-build would want to make sure the neck wasn't too heavy if going for a chunkier vintage profile. If it was made of a nice lightweight piece of maple, I wouldn't care and would probably choose the vintage just for the old-school aesthetic.

Here's some for a 15" variant, I'm sure I've seen others though. They might be buried on old talkbass threads from when people were experimenting with different crossovers: http://greenboy.us/forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=32&start=60

If you join the Greenboy forum there are broadband spl charts (measured, not theoretical). Bear in mind different crossover/mid-driver/tweeter combinations will give slightly different results.

Just looking at EQ is not the whole solution - the loudness curve by its nature means that dynamics are very important, the louder it is overall the better you can hear the quieter parts of a note. Bass guitar on records, designed to sound good at moderate volume, is very heavily compressed and limited, typically in a frequency-conscious manner.

1981 Gold-on-Gold jazz fior me, thanks

[quote name='fretmeister' timestamp='1352889282' post='1868785'] I have a Marleaux Consat Custom 5 I gave some serious thought to selling it as it doesn't quite sound how I want it to. BUT it has the only 5 string neck I have ever loved so I'd like to try and get it sounding different. This might be impossible given the construction (mahogany body with a ziricote top) but I want it to sound more like a Marcus jazz bass. It has Delano humbuckers in it at the moment. They are very humbuckery and lack the single coil sizzle. There are not many true single coils that are a direct replacement, size-wise, but the Nordstrand Big Singles appear to be a straight swap. Any idea if these will give me a push to the sound I'm looking for? I had a chat with Mark at Bass Direct and he thought the preamp was very neutral and wouldn't need changing at all, so that leaves the pickups. All suggestions for my impossible holy grail are welcome! [/quote] I put these in an Ibanez SR500, a similarly unsuitable bass for a Marcus Miller sound! They had a solid sounding bottom with a smooth top-end, freq response extended high as you'd expect from a single coil but didn't have the upper-mid 'bite' of Fender jazz pickups where a lot of the character is. I used them with 250k pots, with 500k pots I'd expect to get a little more out of them. But, looking at the Marleaux the pickup positioning is so far from a 70s jazz (looks close to my Ibanez actually) that it'll never sound like one regardless of other aspects of the construction. I sold my Ibanez and bought a jazz, it's the only way I'm afraid.

The speakers Ashdown use have really varied over the years. My old and very humble entry-level Electric Blue model (150 watt, made in UK) had a very respectable large heavy magnet Sica 12" driver that was rated at 250 watt RMS and had quite a reasonable excursion capability. Not the brightest speaker, probably started dropping off above 2k, but it was overspecced compared to most entry level combos. I am sure they don't use the same model on the modern Chinese versions.

The guy you were talking to is wrong, but it's a poorly-understood topic and there is an element of truth in the idea that clipping can be dangerous. As has been said, in a system employing passive crossovers it is a particular issue. But something that's often overlooked is that speaker thermal power handling is rated in watts RMS, an average power value. A sensible measure for a driver where heat dissipation is a limiting factor. Amplifier outputs are also rated in watts RMS, however this will be to a rated or derived distortion value. Amps are often limited by peak voltage output. By driving an amplified into clipping, you can (if the amp's power supply is good enough) push out an average power value beyond its clean RMS capability. If you get really extreme, this could allow an amp to fry a speaker despite the RMS rating suggesting otherwise. The solution assuming you need more volume isn't a more powerful amp though - that'd allow you to push out a cleaner signal but the average power to get to similar perceived level would still be too high -you need more speakers.