Phil-osopher10 Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 So looking at cabs and the different configurations that you can get, it got me thinking what are the difference in the sizes of the speakers? Do they produce different wave lengths and thus produce different sounds? I just don't get it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xgsjx Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 (edited) Different sizes of drivers move different amounts of air (but you also have to take in several other factors such as excursion, cab size, etc). Moving more air means more sound Vertical arrays also give a better dispertion of sound. Edit to say, there's a topic (or several) somewhere that will give you loads of info on this. Edited February 8, 2011 by xgsjx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Foxen Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 [quote]Due to wavelength, drivers of different diameters beam (become unpleasantly directional) at various frequencies. Here's a table of various driver sizes and the frequencies where their pistonic movement causes beaming: speaker beaming limit ------- ------------- 18" 903 Hz 15" 1052 Hz 12" 1335 Hz 10" 1658 Hz 8" 2105 Hz 6" 2672 Hz 5" 3316 Hz 2" 6840 Hz 1" 13680 Hz[/quote] That is the only bit directly affected by diameter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexclaber Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 2" and 3". And the beaming limits bit only holds completely true when the drivers are operating pistonically throughout their bandwidth, which would only be the case for those with incredibly rigid and self-damped cones, i.e. not bass guitar drivers! [url="http://barefacedbass.com/technical-information/speaker-size-frequency-response.htm"]http://barefacedbass.com/technical-informa...cy-response.htm[/url] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Fitzmaurice Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 [quote name='Phil-osopher10' post='1119991' date='Feb 8 2011, 07:45 AM']So looking at cabs and the different configurations that you can get, it got me thinking what are the difference in the sizes of the speakers? Do they produce different wave lengths and thus produce different sounds? I just don't get it.[/quote]In and of itself the only factor influenced by driver size alone is the angle of dispersion. The larger the driver the lower the frequency where beaming takes place. Nearly everything else is determined by the driver T/S specs. [url="http://www.eminence.com/support/understanding-loudspeaker-data/"]http://www.eminence.com/support/understand...udspeaker-data/[/url] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bozzie Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 id be interested to see how this thread develops, as in the past i've always liked the sound of single 15" speakers, however as I'm on the lookout for a cab, I'm considering other configurations. The favourite so far has been the markbass 4x10, but like I said I'm still looking. The 2x10 and 1X15 sounded good (ashdown abm), but i wasn't so sure about the 2x10 configuration on its own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Foxen Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 [quote name='bozzie' post='1120168' date='Feb 8 2011, 03:24 PM']id be interested to see how this thread develops, as in the past i've always liked the sound of single 15" speakers, however as I'm on the lookout for a cab, I'm considering other configurations. The favourite so far has been the markbass 4x10, but like I said I'm still looking. The 2x10 and 1X15 sounded good (ashdown abm), but i wasn't so sure about the 2x10 configuration on its own.[/quote] I don't see it going anywhere far, or good. The bit where it is made clear there isn't a link between speaker size and the sound in front of it has been covered already, so there isn't much else to say. Find a cab you like the sound of, add more the same until volume requirements are met. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bozzie Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 [quote name='Mr. Foxen' post='1120171' date='Feb 8 2011, 03:29 PM']I don't see it going anywhere far, or good. The bit where it is made clear there isn't a link between speaker size and the sound in front of it has been covered already, so there isn't much else to say. Find a cab you like the sound of, add more the same until volume requirements are met.[/quote] ooh thats me told then Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conan Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 [quote name='bozzie' post='1120258' date='Feb 8 2011, 04:39 PM']ooh thats me told then[/quote] I'm sure it wasn't meant in a snotty kind of tone... but there are very similar threads to this one every few weeks on here, and there are still some people who refuse to accept that the sound that comes out of a bass cabinet has very little to do with the size (i.e. diameter) of the drivers in it. There are lots of other variables that DO have an effect, but the old chestnut that tens are faster to respond and have more mids, and that fifteens are somehow warmer but tend towards wooliness, so twelves are a perfect compromise between the two.... Is bollocks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bozzie Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 nah i hear what you're saying, I will just have to look into it further and test more cabs lol, to get the sound i want rather than get hung up on which configuration is best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost_Bass Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 [quote name='Conan' post='1120286' date='Feb 8 2011, 04:55 PM'](...) There are lots of other variables that DO have an effect, but the old chestnut that tens are faster to respond and have more mids, and that fifteens are somehow warmer but tend towards wooliness, so twelves are a perfect compromise between the two.... Is bollocks.[/quote] You're right! If we were to analise speakers of the same make/model/materials with a perfectly tuned cab for each one (perfect conditions) we could see that we would get more bottom in the 15" cab but that's just due to bigger cab dimensions. If we were to do a comparison betwen a Bergantino 12" and a Behringer 15" (same RMS rate) i seriously doubt we could get more bottom (with definition, i mean) from the 15"... Diferent speaker sizes only mather if we're comparing them in the same brand/range and even doing so we ALWAYS have to take the cab in consideration, IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LawrenceH Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 [quote name='Conan' post='1120286' date='Feb 8 2011, 04:55 PM']the old chestnut that tens are faster to respond and have more mids, and that fifteens are somehow warmer but tend towards wooliness, so twelves are a perfect compromise between the two.... Is bollocks.[/quote] I'm going to be controversial here and say, no it isn't! Simply because (read this before you castrate me), once there is an established idea that influences purchasing perception then it encourages conformity among manufacturers. Added to that, forced limitations due to price can lead to them all making similar compromises. I'm not actually disagreeing with anything on this thread from Mr Foxen, Bill et al as it's self-evident, but there is a big difference between what is possible and what is prevalant. New, higher end manufacturers using decent drivers can buck these trends happily (epitomised by eg Acme) but for plenty of cabs at the mid/lower end of the market and cetainly historically, these cliches have rung largely true - we've all heard it ourselves. For that reason, if buying on a limited budget I'd be tempted to go for the classic 2x10, 1x15 set-up even though if I was going high-end I'd be better off choosing cabs with identical drivers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexclaber Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 Except that I've heard plenty of Peavey 2x10"s and 4x10"s with more bottom and less midrange than many Peavey 1x15"s and 2x15"s. And so on and so forth... It's still bollocks. The old rule of thumb only holds up if you ignore the numerous exceptions - but they really are too numerous to ignore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Fitzmaurice Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 [quote name='alexclaber' post='1120399' date='Feb 8 2011, 01:35 PM']Except that I've heard plenty of Peavey 2x10"s and 4x10"s with more bottom and less midrange than many Peavey 1x15"s and 2x15"s. And so on and so forth... It's still bollocks. The old rule of thumb only holds up if you ignore the numerous exceptions - but they really are too numerous to ignore.[/quote] +1. When the exceptions are the rule there is no rule. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LawrenceH Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 Well, I said I was being controversial There's a big difference between a 'rule' and a 'trend', and my personal experience has conformed to that trend much more often than not...though I'll admit that all Peaveys I've heard (older ones only) have been mud-tastic whatever the speaker diameter. Perhaps, to be fair, because I only ever encountered them lying knackered in rehearsal rooms and music pubs. The first cabs I tried that really opened my eyes to what was possible with modern/more expensive technology were Markbass - 15" drivers that thumped and snarled like a mad thing, I loved it. But even looking at modern drivers (rather than cabs), although there are plenty of 12s and 15s that extend up quite high there are comparatively few PA-type 8s/10s that cut off around 1.5k (plenty of LF-specialist larger drivers), I assume it's just not something there's much perceived demand for. So the trend is still evident in one direction at least. It's not a rule! Just a trend... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil-osopher10 Posted February 9, 2011 Author Share Posted February 9, 2011 So Tonal difference are much more defined by many other factors excluding cone diameter. Do the more expensive cabs merit their price tags? How much influence do cabs have on tone? Ps. was tempted by a barefaced, but unsure because of the the tag line 'hear every mistake' Not sure if I'm good enough to want to.. haha. That was also a good technical article. On another note: What is the purpose of mesa boogies 'passive radiator' on it's scout combos? Would I be right in thinking it is a touch gimicky? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Foxen Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 [quote name='Phil-osopher10' post='1120886' date='Feb 9 2011, 01:19 AM']On another note: What is the purpose of mesa boogies 'passive radiator' on it's scout combos? Would I be right in thinking it is a touch gimicky?[/quote] A passive radiator is another means of tuning the cab, like a port, but they can be adjusted a bit more by changing their weight. I'm not sure of what advantage other than that they have, much more complicated than a port. As for cabs influence on 'tone', most of the midrange part is determined by the speaker, and that bit is where your ear pics up most 'tone', but the reflections inside the cabs if it isn't lined properly can carve out chunks. The box and porting (the winISD stuff) is mostly below 200hz, so is more 'bottom end' than 'tone'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LawrenceH Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 The advantage of a passive radiator is that it can let you tune a small cab low whilst eliminating port resonance and 'chuffing', without having a port that takes up significant internal volume - ie adding to the size of the cab. The disadvantage is that the radiator has to have a really high excursion capability itself or it all goes horribly wrong. IIRC the Mesa design has been revised at least once, I'd guess for this reason. They're used more often in the hifi/studio monitor world, the Mackie HR studio monitors are quite a successful series that utilises passive radiators. But probably for bass guitar cost versus benefit isn't worth it except possibly for a really tiny cab. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexclaber Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 An interesting thing about the Walkabout cabs is that they have a passive radiator and a tuned port! Normally with PRs you need much more Vd from the radiator than the woofer so they're often larger in area. I guess in this case it wasn't big enough so there's a port helping out too. Complicated! How an enclosure is sized, shaped, damped and ported can have a pretty huge effect upon the midrange and treble tone. If you got a 10" and 15" with proportionally similar T/S specs and similar cone/suspension construction and then compared the two, one in a guitar style enclosure (no damping, unengineered shape) and one in a hi-fi style enclosure (thorough damping, acoustically designed shape), you'd notice the enclosure makes more difference to the sound than the speakers' nominal diameter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 [quote name='Phil-osopher10' post='1119991' date='Feb 8 2011, 12:45 PM']So looking at cabs and the different configurations that you can get, it got me thinking what are the difference in the sizes of the speakers? Do they produce different wave lengths and thus produce different sounds? I just don't get it.[/quote] Smaller speakers like 10s are better at reproducing higher frequencies than larger speakers like 15s. This has nothing to do with dispersion. Because there are plenty of exceptions in the real world, this is not a hard and fast rule but rather, as Lawrence has pointed out, a general trend. Indeed, the bigger the difference in driver size, the more apparent this characteristic becomes. As Alex says, there are more factors at work in determining 'tone' than speaker size, but the impression most people have that smaller drivers are 'faster' and 'cleaner' has a factual basis. As always, trust your ears. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janmaat Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 after so much talk about speaker diameters - i would really like to hear some more about the dimension of the cab, how that relates to the speakers etc. - and the volume. how much air any driver moves depends on the volume too - and hence, each cab will have a certain volume at which it will sound "best". so again, it depends on the setup - and the setup of the band, stage, and so forth. after all, one can hunt for the perfect sound - - or leave that to the specialists. I think as a player, being able to move that damn thing seems more important than what it is. Hence the trend to smaller, more flexible gear. Add huge cabinet if you find one in the venue. Spend your cash on bass guitar, head, preamp, or lessons... or a DI box. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beer of the Bass Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 It took me a while to realise that the biggest difference in sound between 10" and 15" cabs at the low end of the market (peavey etc.) is that most manufacturers 2x10" or 4x10" cabs have a tweeter and most 1x15" cabs don't. This is a bit of a sweeping generalisation, but is true for most of the cheaper cabs that are knocking about at the kind of gigs I do. And it has nothing to do with the driver diameter! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Starr Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 I'm going to back up Lawrence here. The information on beaming is spot on with Mr Foxen's figures but with Alex's proviso that this refers only to the theoretical piston region and that all practical drivers operate under cone break-up which both extends their frequency response and affects their dispersion characteristics. Diameter also affects the weight of the cone which affects its resonant frequency, big cones can and do go lower. Diameter affects the area of a cone which affects efficiency and maximum volume. It also affects the amount of air that can be moved needing lower excursion for the same volume. Excursion limiting is a big factor in bass speakers design and something both Bill and Alex pay a lot of attention to. In fact most of the T/S parameters are affected by the diaphragm mass so to say that all the rest is Theile/Small is missing something. On top of all this are all the practical considerations like changing the suspension to accommodate a bigger heavier cone and probable changes to coil diameter, diaphragm thickness etc. etc. The problem is that all speakers are compromises, change one thing and you gain in one area but lose elsewhere. A thick heavy cone will lower your resonant frequency but has all sorts of other implications for the sound of a speaker. It is easier to get certain things out of a big speaker and easier to get other things out of a small speaker but the world of speakers is a Venn diagram where there can be a lot of overlap. Saying Usain Bolt can run faster than me because he is so tall is missing an awful lot of other differences but a good big un cvan do things that a good little un can't Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xgsjx Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 [quote name='Phil Starr' post='1121469' date='Feb 9 2011, 03:26 PM']Diameter also affects the weight of the cone which affects its resonant frequency, big cones can and do go lower. Diameter affects the area of a cone which affects efficiency and maximum volume.[/quote] Where as I can agree with some of what you're saying, I don't with the above in relation to my experience. Having listened to 15" cabs I've used in the past from Trace Elliot, Marshall & Peavey, non of these had as much bass as my 2x10 combo or the PJB rig with 5" drivers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LawrenceH Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 (edited) The Phil Jones uses pretty atypical custom drivers - you couldn't buy cabs like that 10 or so years ago, as far as I'm aware as no-one was making drivers like that. But, the mid/treble extension they give is still way higher than you'd get off any 'normal' 15. There aren't many 'full-range' 15s out there! Thinking about it though my 'stereotype' 15 sound wouldn't be so much bassy as just lacking in top end, and often lacking real bass as well - all those cabs that were just too small with a 15 packed in so they gave a good lower-mid hump and died underneath it, ugh. Given driver and cab economic/size constraints it was probably easier to get a more even response from 10s because they extended higher but could be put in cabs that matched the T/S specs better. Edited February 9, 2011 by LawrenceH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.jpg.7e18f76540598a8efc0e6ca9be453059.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.