Difference between 10" an 12" Speaker?

[Mr. Foxen]

[quote name='4 Strings' post='1053303' date='Dec 9 2010, 08:18 PM']No, no, no, no, no.

Did a gig like that, electronic drums to boot. It was a horrible (an horrible?) experience. No idea what the sound was like, no feeling at all, just away in my little world. Its one thing getting things accurate in the studio but this was so sterilised for a live performance that the word 'clinically cold' would be best used to describe it.

Another subject, I know.

btw, here's a pic of the 18 I'm always looking for opportunities to use:[/quote]

That was ironic. Obviously the ideal setup is all of them. At once.

[Billy Apple]

Thanks to everyone who has taken time to reply.

Big cheers,

Billy

[algmusic]

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' post='1053318' date='Dec 9 2010, 08:31 PM']That was ironic. Obviously the ideal setup is all of them. At once.[/quote]

Agreed.. :-)

[4 Strings]

Phew. Although I'd still prefer to hear properly than back through headphones.


[quote name='Mr. Foxen' post='1053318' date='Dec 9 2010, 08:31 PM']That was ironic. Obviously the ideal setup is all of them. At once.[/quote]

[Bill Fitzmaurice]

[quote name='jonthebass' post='1053221' date='Dec 9 2010, 02:07 PM']Am I right in thinking this is why the two 2x10" cabs stacked vertically is pretty much the ideal setup?[/quote]Yes, that way you don't reduce horizontal dispersion, you do reduce vertical dispersion to limit the output wasted going to the floor and ceiling, and you can hear your mids better as they pass closer to your ears rather than below the waist. Maybe not ideal per se, but for sure the best way to employ 2x10s. This explains why many players prefer a vertical 2x15 to a 4x10. Even though the individual tens have wider dispersion than the individual fifteens the 4x10 configuration squanders the potential offered by the tens.

[Billy Apple]

[quote name='Bill Fitzmaurice' post='1053496' date='Dec 9 2010, 11:01 PM']Yes, that way you don't reduce horizontal dispersion, you do reduce vertical dispersion to limit the output wasted going to the floor and ceiling, and you can hear your mids better as they pass closer to your ears rather than below the waist. Maybe not ideal per se, but for sure the best way to employ 2x10s. This explains why many players prefer a vertical 2x15 to a 4x10. Even though the individual tens have wider dispersion than the individual fifteens the 4x10 configuration squanders the potential offered by the tens.[/quote]

So would having two 410's (or indeed an 810) on top of each other be like having two vertically stacked 410's next to each other?

[Mr. Foxen]

[quote name='billyapple' post='1054707' date='Dec 11 2010, 09:35 AM']So would having two 410's (or indeed an 810) on top of each other be like having two vertically stacked 410's next to each other?[/quote]

The 8x10s speakers are probably gonna be closer together side to side and therefore better, but not by much. You could angle the two vertical 4x10s inward a bit which helps. Best plan is just using one with better drivers though.

[Bill Fitzmaurice]

[quote name='billyapple' post='1054707' date='Dec 11 2010, 04:35 AM']So would having two 410's (or indeed an 810) on top of each other be like having two vertically stacked 410's next to each other?[/quote]I think you meant to say two pair of vertically stacked 2x10s next to each other, to which the answer would be yes if the horizontal driver spread is the same. IMO there's no reason to need more output than what three 2x10s will give, and they could all be vertically stacked. If the form factor allows it the amp could be placed beneath the uppermost cab for ease of access.

[LawrenceH]

I've been thinking recently about the issue of vertical versus horizontal driver stacking, after my interest was piqued by the very unusual approach taken by Phil Jones Bass kit using multiple small drivers (with comparatively large voicecoils/magnets) in tandem, typically arranged in a grid.

First, it made me question the assumption than in terms of controlling directionality we should always be focused on reducing vertical dispersion whilst maintaining wide horizontal dispersion. This probably only applies at half of the small pubs/clubs/etc that I've played/engineered/spectated at, where the typical set up can be long and narrow or in some cases short and shallow but with an upstairs gallery! Stage sound again, from a sound engineer's perspective limited dispersion is your friend as much as your enemy if you take it into account when setting up.

Second, regarding the more complex comb filtering that one gets at greater-than-1/2-wavelength spacing, I wonder about allowing full-range signal to (or exit from) only a subset of the drivers in the stack, it's an obvious idea so it must have been implemented in some systems in the past. Even considering the typical 4x10 though, I wonder how much difference it really makes in practice to perceived (rather than measured) tonal consistency. Ears tend to be a lot more forgiving of changes to electric instrument sounds than, say, vocals.

I must say I've not heard the PJB stuff, I would be interested to.

(edited for typo)

Edited December 11, 2010 by LawrenceH

[Mr. Foxen]

"Tonal consistency" is very apparent in some scenarios, mostly guitarists pointing their cab at you some distance away and sitting on their cab so it shreds you with treble they can't hear. Also the old not being able to hear your folded horn cab from right in front whilst people at the back of venue are melted. I've also had mad comb filtering from running an 8x10 either side of the drummer.

[LawrenceH]

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' post='1055070' date='Dec 11 2010, 03:56 PM']"Tonal consistency" is very apparent in some scenarios, mostly guitarists pointing their cab at you some distance away and sitting on their cab so it shreds you with treble they can't hear. Also the old not being able to hear your folded horn cab from right in front whilst people at the back of venue are melted. I've also had mad comb filtering from running an 8x10 either side of the drummer.[/quote]

Most guitar cabs are VERY directional, yeah - but that applies even to single driver cabs and is then to do with beaming and open backed cabs, I've not had serious problems with multiple drivers comb filtering per se (not saying it's not audible, clearly it is, but it's not normally the weakest link in the sound). One of the most useful bits of kit I used to take out with PA gear was a small tilt-back guitar stand, point it right at their ears and it's amazing how much (most) guitarists will turn down and roll the treble back. Then go away and immediately forget the lesson they've just learned (sigh).
Separating out the bass cabs by a couple of metres or so must have sounded pretty crazy though! Pretty much everything 100Hz up would have been interfering, I'm not surprised it was audible. A lot less of an issue with the PJB stuff presumably, those small driver spacings shouldn't start combing until well into the midrange.

[Hoffbass]

I've heard a very exciting combination with 2x10 and 2x12 inches speakers in one cab and sounded amazing.Check Schroeder cabs mate

[warwickhunt]

[quote name='Hoffbass' post='1055278' date='Dec 11 2010, 07:09 PM']I've heard a very exciting combination with 2x10 and 2x12 inches speakers in one cab and sounded amazing.Check Schroeder cabs mate[/quote]

I don't think that's a lot to do with the fact that it is a combination of 10's and 12's and more a case of the cab design having a mid range bump that makes them sound the way that they do.

[Bill Fitzmaurice]

[quote name='LawrenceH' post='1055062' date='Dec 11 2010, 10:43 AM']Second, regarding the more complex comb filtering that one gets at greater-than-1/2-wavelength spacing, I wonder about allowing full-range signal to (or exit from) only a subset of the drivers in the stack, it's an obvious idea so it must have been implemented in some systems in the past. Even considering the typical 4x10 though, I wonder how much difference it really makes in practice to perceived (rather than measured) tonal consistency. Ears tend to be a lot more forgiving of changes to electric instrument sounds than, say, vocals.

I must say I've not heard the PJB stuff, I would be interested to.[/quote]I can't say what PJB does, but to work as well as possible they should have the outermost drivers low-passed at their 1 wavelength center to center distance, the next set lowpassed at their 1wl/CTC, etc., culminating in a center row run full range. This is a commonly seen scheme with horizontal TV center channel speakers, and for that matter it's how the crossover points are determined with multiway PA line array cabs with with woofers outermost, the tweeters in the center and the mids between the two. The short CTC distance of the PJBs is no panacea. The result of using a number of drivers horizontally placed without appropriate filtering can be seen in applets such as those found here:
[url="http://www.falstad.com/mathphysics.html"]http://www.falstad.com/mathphysics.html[/url]

A 4x10 done correctly would low-pass one vertical pair of drivers at the 1wl/CTC frequency.
A friend built a 4x12 for his guitar playing son, including what he called a 'sweet switch'. The son greatly prefers the sound of the cab with the switch engaged. Unbeknown to him so doing turns off one of the vertical driver pairs.

Edited December 11, 2010 by Bill Fitzmaurice

[Noisyjon]

[quote name='Bill Fitzmaurice' post='1055348' date='Dec 11 2010, 08:05 PM']...A friend built a 4x12 for his guitar playing son, including what he called a 'sweet switch'. The son greatly prefers the sound of the cab with the switch engaged. Unbeknown to him so doing turns off one of the vertical driver pairs.[/quote]

Love it!

[LawrenceH]

[quote name='Bill Fitzmaurice' post='1055348' date='Dec 11 2010, 08:05 PM']This is a commonly seen scheme with horizontal TV center channel speakers, and for that matter it's how the crossover points are determined with multiway PA line array cabs with with woofers outermost, the tweeters in the center and the mids between the two. The short CTC distance of the PJBs is no panacea. The result of using a number of drivers horizontally placed without appropriate filtering can be seen in applets such as those found here:
[url="http://www.falstad.com/mathphysics.html"]http://www.falstad.com/mathphysics.html[/url][/quote]

Ah I knew it must be used somewhere, cheers. Not sure I get the sense of what you mean with the arrays though, crossover points there are more determined by the constraints of the vertical spacing with respect to the lows and mids. I wondered if someone had done an applet and nearly asked if anyone had one, very useful thanks!

[Bill Fitzmaurice]

[quote name='LawrenceH' post='1055428' date='Dec 11 2010, 04:25 PM']Not sure I get the sense of what you mean with the arrays though, crossover points there are more determined by the constraints of the vertical spacing with respect to the lows and mids.[/quote]
The vertical spacing doesn't enter into it, as the distance between the LF and mid elements of adjacent cabs in stacked arrays is less than the CTC distance between those within each cab. For example, the JBL Vertec VT4888. The woofer CTC is about 24 inches, which is 1wl at 565 Hz. The CTC distance from woofer to woofer in adjacent cabs is about 15 inches, 1wl at 900Hz.
The actual crossover used is 350Hz, well below the maximum allowable of 565Hz. That's all about system efficiency, as the direct radiating woofer sensitivity is only 98dB, whereas the horn loaded mid sensitivity is 102dB.

[LawrenceH]

[quote name='Bill Fitzmaurice' post='1055608' date='Dec 12 2010, 01:30 AM']The vertical spacing doesn't enter into it, as the distance between the LF and mid elements of adjacent cabs in stacked arrays is less than the CTC distance between those within each cab. For example, the JBL Vertec VT4888. The woofer CTC is about 24 inches, which is 1wl at 565 Hz. The CTC distance from woofer to woofer in adjacent cabs is about 15 inches, 1wl at 900Hz.
The actual crossover used is 350Hz, well below the maximum allowable of 565Hz. That's all about system efficiency, as the direct radiating woofer sensitivity is only 98dB, whereas the horn loaded mid sensitivity is 102dB.[/quote]

Ahh I think we're talking at cross purposes slightly, never mind I didn't get from your description the cab layout you were talking about. Still, slightly different to the situation where you allow low end signal to every driver but full range to the centres. The JBL crossover point still makes sense wrt CTC distances if you aim for half-wavelength rather than 1, but point re horn efficiency taken.

[AttitudeCastle]

I'm only going on my (small amount of) common sense,

But 12" speakers have more low end than 10" speakers?

(in regards to 2 or 4 of them)

Or is it just more mids? (which is what i have been told)

THANK YOU in advance

[Noisyjon]

Bill said this earlier in the thread:

[quote name='Bill Fitzmaurice' post='1051192' date='Dec 8 2010, 12:40 AM']The only factor purely attributable to cone size is dispersion. Everything else is based on driver specs. Well explained here:
[url="http://www.eminence.com/resources/data.asp"]http://www.eminence.com/resources/data.asp[/url][/quote]

[warwickhunt]

[quote name='AttitudeCastle' post='1055835' date='Dec 12 2010, 11:24 AM']I'm only going on my (small amount of) common sense,

But 12" speakers have more low end than 10" speakers?

(in regards to 2 or 4 of them)

Or is it just more mids? (which is what i have been told)

THANK YOU in advance [/quote]

12" speakers to not in themselves have more low (mid/top) than 10" speakers... in fact some 12" speakers don't have as much low (mid/top) as some other 12" speakers! Aside from the spec of the actual speakers/drivers you have to factor in the design of the cabinet that they are fitted into.

There is no universal law that the larger the speaker the more bottom end you get from it as there are a multitude of other factors to consider and unfortunately 'common sense' doesn't enter into the equation.

Drawing from personal experience, I've owned 2x10 cabs that produce as much bottom end as 2x15 cabs and on numerous occasions over the last couple of years I've been in close confines of a massive array of cabs with all sorts of driver sizes that have reinforced that you can't make assumptions based on driver size; thinking in particular of an old 2x15 cab (no horn or tweeter) with (IIRC) EV drivers that reproduced more top end than any 2/4/8 x10 I've ever heard!

<edit>

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QTRhgg1FEs"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QTRhgg1FEs[/url]

In NO WAY scientific but this was a little gtt with 5" 10" 12" speakers involved. It doesn't serve as any way of demonstrating the merits of one speaker against another (especially as the sound is from a little digital camera on video mode and there is a different amp being used in each case; all be it with EQ flat) but standing in the room doing that little clip, you wouldn't say that the PJB 'lacked' low end or that the 4x10 had more top and the x2 1x12 had more mids etc.

Edited December 12, 2010 by warwickhunt

[AttitudeCastle]

[quote name='warwickhunt' post='1055898' date='Dec 12 2010, 12:06 PM']12" speakers to not in themselves have more low (mid/top) than 10" speakers... in fact some 12" speakers don't have as much low (mid/top) as some other 12" speakers! Aside from the spec of the actual speakers/drivers you have to factor in the design of the cabinet that they are fitted into.

There is no universal law that the larger the speaker the more bottom end you get from it as there are a multitude of other factors to consider and unfortunately 'common sense' doesn't enter into the equation.

Drawing from personal experience, I've owned 2x10 cabs that produce as much bottom end as 2x15 cabs and on numerous occasions over the last couple of years I've been in close confines of a massive array of cabs with all sorts of driver sizes that have reinforced that you can't make assumptions based on driver size; thinking in particular of an old 2x15 cab (no horn or tweeter) with (IIRC) EV drivers that reproduced more top end than any 2/4/8 x10 I've ever heard!

<edit>

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QTRhgg1FEs"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QTRhgg1FEs[/url]

In NO WAY scientific but this was a little gtt with 5" 10" 12" speakers involved. It doesn't serve as any way of demonstrating the merits of one speaker against another (especially as the sound is from a little digital camera on video mode and there is a different amp being used in each case; all be it with EQ flat) but standing in the room doing that little clip, you wouldn't say that the PJB 'lacked' low end or that the 4x10 had more top and the x2 1x12 had more mids etc.[/quote]

So at the end its all just down to how everything adds up?

THANKS

As always, always best to get out and try things, and ask about

[Mr. Foxen]

[quote name='warwickhunt' post='1055898' date='Dec 12 2010, 12:06 PM']Aside from the spec of the actual speakers/drivers you have to factor in the design of the cabinet that they are fitted into.[/quote]

Can one of the experts confirm/disprove this?: the effect of the design of the box generally (unles you get horn loaded and suchlike) mostly affects 200hz and below, the mids are affected to an extend by the lining of the box and how reflective it is, but most of the upper stuff is down to the speaker's own properties. Which is why guitar speakers have their own sound since that low stuff isn't very relevant, but a bass cabinet is down to the box design relating to the speakers.

[warwickhunt]

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' post='1056163' date='Dec 12 2010, 04:27 PM']Can one of the experts confirm/disprove this?: the effect of the design of the box generally (unles you get horn loaded and suchlike) mostly affects 200hz and below, the mids are affected to an extend by the lining of the box and how reflective it is, but most of the upper stuff is down to the speaker's own properties. Which is why guitar speakers have their own sound since that low stuff isn't very relevant, but a bass cabinet is down to the box design relating to the speakers.[/quote]

Not sure what you mean! You've asked if it be confirmed/disproved that design of a cab affects the sound but then you've gone on to say that the design generally affects frequencies below 200hz, that the mids may be affected by lining materials and finally "a bass cabinet is down to the box design relating to the speakers"... surely all of those things are exactly what is being discussed or am I misunderstanding something?

Aside from what you've confirmed can/does affect the sound coming from a speaker that is housed in an enclosure, all you've got to do is consider what happens if you take the same driver and fit it into a completely different enclosure. Even the materials that the cab is made from affect the sound, added to which if you don't brace a cab effectively that alters the tone; I'd think that design of a cab and its affect on tone would be apparent by comparing a ported and a sealed enclosure.

[Mr. Foxen]

[quote name='warwickhunt' post='1056174' date='Dec 12 2010, 04:42 PM']Not sure what you mean! You've asked if it be confirmed/disproved that design of a cab affects the sound but then you've gone on to say that the design generally affects frequencies below 200hz, that the mids may be affected by lining materials and finally "a bass cabinet is down to the box design relating to the speakers"... surely all of those things are exactly what is being discussed or am I misunderstanding something?

Aside from what you've confirmed can/does affect the sound coming from a speaker that is housed in an enclosure, all you've got to do is consider what happens if you take the same driver and fit it into a completely different enclosure. Even the materials that the cab is made from affect the sound, added to which if you don't brace a cab effectively that alters the tone; I'd think that design of a cab and its affect on tone would be apparent by comparing a ported and a sealed enclosure.[/quote]

I'm talking in frequency bands though. Ported or sealed, I don't think there is much difference below 200hz (unless the sealed is seriously tiny and already rolling off by then). The cab material stuff, with flexing and suchlike is when it is acting as a pressure device, so is losing energy where that matters, which is low, but the stuff above that, aside from the out of phase reflection from a smooth surface, are down to the speakers own properties. This is what I am trying to confirm, with someone who actually knows. Maybe rephrase; 'what about a speaker enclosure affects the frequency response above 200hz, aside from internal reflections that are avoidable through lining?'.

I know a the effect of a port is in a band about the tuning frequency of the port (not sure how wide, an octave or two?), and doens't do much outside of that to the sound, but the excursion below that band is increased beause the speaker acts like it is not in an enclosure.

Edited December 12, 2010 by Mr. Foxen