Orange Isobaric cabs. WTF?

[fretmeister]

Why?

How does having the cones directly behind each other work? Surely the front cone blocks everything the rear one does?

I am conflustered.

[yorick]

Works very well for me with the SP210 and the Terror Bass head.

[discreet]

[quote name='fretmeister' post='784442' date='Mar 24 2010, 10:28 AM']How does having the cones directly behind each other work?[/quote]

Linn Hi-Fi and others have been doing this for years:

[url="http://wapedia.mobi/en/Isobaric_speakers"]http://wapedia.mobi/en/Isobaric_speakers[/url]

Edited March 24, 2010 by discreet

[Low End Bee]

Me too. Sounds like a sports drink.

[Mr. Foxen]

The speakers help each other, its basically like doubling the motor strength, to the same cone. It means you need half the amount of air in the box behind them, but correspondingly twice the amp power, and it has the same max output as a single speaker (in a 2 speaker sized box, if that makes sense, like you could put one speaker in a 2 speaker sized box and get lots of bottom, 2 speakers in a 1 speaker sized box gives same bottom, but up tot he maximum of a single speaker.).

[stevie]

For bass guitar, isobaric is a waste of time (and the benefits are marginal at best for hi-fi). The second driver effectively adds weight to the speaker cone, which improves the low-end extension and reduces efficiency.

Edited March 27, 2010 by stevie

[alanbass1]

Wouldn't mind trying them

[Mr. Foxen]

[quote name='stevie' post='787666' date='Mar 27 2010, 09:39 AM']For bass guitar, isobaric is a waste of time (and the benefits are marginal at best for hi-fi). The second driver effectively adds weight to the speaker cone, which improves the low-end extension and reduces efficiency.[/quote]

Time isn't the issue, its a space one. Power is cheap now, you can get a lot of watts for not much money, but space is always a premium. This design means you get a lot of bottom from a small box, the extra speaker takes up space, but not as much as you'd have to increase the size of the box for the same bottom. I'd guess the point is mostly that you can use two standard speakers, rather than getting a very custom heavy one like Acme use.

[stevie]

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' post='788247' date='Mar 27 2010, 11:19 PM']Time isn't the issue, its a space one. Power is cheap now, you can get a lot of watts for not much money, but space is always a premium. This design means you get a lot of bottom from a small box, the extra speaker takes up space, but not as much as you'd have to increase the size of the box for the same bottom. I'd guess the point is mostly that you can use two standard speakers, rather than getting a very custom heavy one like Acme use.[/quote]
An isobaric speaker doesn't save any space, i.e. it is not any more efficient than a normal direct radiator. It trades efficiency for bass extension. The two drive units basically work as one drive unit with a cone of double the mass. That's why you get more bass out of a particular cab. You can pull off exactly the same trick by increasing the weight of the cone - and save yourself the cost and complexity of a second driver. The main drawback is that maximum output is the same as that of a single driver.

You'd be better off putting the money into a better quality drive unit.

Edited March 28, 2010 by stevie

[Mr. Foxen]

[quote name='stevie' post='788467' date='Mar 28 2010, 12:52 PM']An isobaric speaker doesn't save any space, i.e. it is not any more efficient than a normal direct radiator.[/quote]

The bass extension is the space saving, otherwise, you need more air behind the driver for the bass extension, hence using two speakers instead of one saves air volume, smaller cab, same limits as the single speaker in a double sized cab.

Edit: I'm seeing it as a 1x12 with bass extension of a 1x12 in a double sized box, rather than a folded up 2x12 that they market it as.

Edited March 28, 2010 by Mr. Foxen

[51m0n]

Search for Alex Clabbers post on them, he took them apart based upon the physics alone.

If it were such a great design you'd see subs based upon the principle.

Truth is it isnt that great a design really.

[Moos3h]

[quote name='51m0n' post='789207' date='Mar 29 2010, 10:18 AM']If it were such a great design you'd see subs based upon the principle.[/quote]

Not taking sides here, but you DO see subs with this design, in the snake-oil infested world of Car Audio.

[Mr. Foxen]

You also don't lose any top compared with a single speaker, not a consideration with a sub, that can use a heavy sub driver, which provides the low extension, at the cost of top.

The advantage of isobaric is greater low end extension compared with a single speaker with an equivalent sized enclosure. From the makers point of view the additional advantage is using generic drivers. They are pretty much the antithesis of Claber's designs (based on his own requirements) of light weight, high sensitivity and high max SPL. Basically, his boxes are big but light and loud, these can be small, although heavy and quiet. They would also probably be cheaper if their business model were comparable, since they use two cheap drivers rather than one very expensive one.

[discreet]

Anyone actually heard these cabs apart from yorick?

If they sound hot, I'm not too bothered about the physics

[Anders]

[quote name='discreet' post='789237' date='Mar 29 2010, 12:02 PM']Anyone actually heard these cabs apart from yorick?

If they sound hot, I'm not too bothered about the physics [/quote]
Second that,i'm kind of interrested in the actual sound of the actual cab.Especially the SP410.
So,i can expect the sound of a 2x10 with lots of lowend for a 2x10,but does it sound plastic like other neo cabs,anyone?
The OBC cabs have great warm rock sound.Are the neo's anywhere near that?

[Mr. Foxen]

[quote name='Anders' post='790819' date='Mar 30 2010, 05:18 PM']Second that,i'm kind of interrested in the actual sound of the actual cab.Especially the SP410.
So,i can expect the sound of a 2x10 with lots of lowend for a 2x10,but does it sound plastic like other neo cabs,anyone?
The OBC cabs have great warm rock sound.Are the neo's anywhere near that?[/quote]

Are they neo loaded? And what do you mean by 'plastic'?

[Anders]

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' post='791006' date='Mar 30 2010, 08:51 PM']Are they neo loaded? And what do you mean by 'plastic'?[/quote]
[url="http://www.orangeamps.com/products.asp?Action=View&ID=111"]http://www.orangeamps.com/products.asp?Act...View&ID=111[/url]
It says neo on the website.
What i mean by plastic is the eveness of respons through the frequencies that is too even and too tight to sound natural/musical.
Kind of the sound like you have a crappy limiter somewhere in the signal,when you're using a good tube amp and expect natural,breathing,warm sound.Instead the sound gets boxed in in a way that sounds artifitial.
Not the best ways to put it but i hope you can imagine a little bit of what i mean.

[Mr. Foxen]

[quote name='Anders' post='791189' date='Mar 30 2010, 09:49 PM'][url="http://www.orangeamps.com/products.asp?Action=View&ID=111"]http://www.orangeamps.com/products.asp?Act...View&ID=111[/url]
It says neo on the website.
What i mean by plastic is the eveness of respons through the frequencies that is too even and too tight to sound natural/musical.
Kind of the sound like you have a crappy limiter somewhere in the signal,when you're using a good tube amp and expect natural,breathing,warm sound.Instead the sound gets boxed in in a way that sounds artifitial.
Not the best ways to put it but i hope you can imagine a little bit of what i mean.[/quote]

"Neo-Dineum", looks like they've invented their own tech, only references I can find to it is orange cabs. I figured the weight I'd heard about was from ceramic drivers, looks like heavy woodwork though.

[Anders]

[quote name='Mr. Foxen' post='791214' date='Mar 30 2010, 11:04 PM']"Neo-Dineum", looks like they've invented their own tech, only references I can find to it is orange cabs. I figured the weight I'd heard about was from ceramic drivers, looks like heavy woodwork though.[/quote]
Yea,i don't know why they keep using such thick heavy boards compared to others.It's Orange and Marshall against the rest of the world

If anyone has tried one of these cabs,please post....

[joegarcia]

[quote name='Anders' post='791229' date='Mar 30 2010, 10:13 PM']Yea,i don't know why they keep using such thick heavy boards compared to others.It's Orange and Marshall against the rest of the world [/quote]

It really does sound better! The standard Marshall cabs aren't even that thick or heavy compared to the beastly Orange ones. I have two Marshall cabs, one standard 1960a and one oversized one from the Mode Four range with way thicker ply (built pretty much the same as the Orange PPC412). They both have the same speakers and the Mode Four one is much bigger and deeper sounding. Wins hands down.

[Mr. Foxen]

[quote name='joegarcia' post='791433' date='Mar 31 2010, 02:09 AM']It really does sound better! The standard Marshall cabs aren't even that thick or heavy compared to the beastly Orange ones. I have two Marshall cabs, one standard 1960a and one oversized one from the Mode Four range with way thicker ply (built pretty much the same as the Orange PPC412). They both have the same speakers and the Mode Four one is much bigger and deeper sounding. Wins hands down.[/quote]

Get out my forum with your guitar cabs.

[Anders]

[quote name='joegarcia' post='791433' date='Mar 31 2010, 03:09 AM']It really does sound better! The standard Marshall cabs aren't even that thick or heavy compared to the beastly Orange ones. I have two Marshall cabs, one standard 1960a and one oversized one from the Mode Four range with way thicker ply (built pretty much the same as the Orange PPC412). They both have the same speakers and the Mode Four one is much bigger and deeper sounding. Wins hands down.[/quote]
Mode four range,What is that?Sorry for the ignorance.
I guess i was a bit unfair saying Marshall's are bulky/heavy. Ampeg classic line aren't that lightweight either but they also have a great sound,like Orange for instance.
But,Ampeg heritage is lighter.I have big hopes they sound as good as the standard svt classic.(I'm kind of interrested in the Heritage 410hlf cab.)

I agree from experience that heavy/cabs with thick walls sound better.I have yet to hear a lightweight cab sound as good as a heavier one(atleast those i have tried,and i haven't tried Tecamp for instance).
However,I have heard theories saying,cabs doesn't have to have that thick walls and can be braced interally to do the same job,ending up with less weight.And the new models from most companies seems to lean towards those more lightweight solutions.

[joegarcia]

[quote name='Anders' post='791712' date='Mar 31 2010, 11:40 AM']Mode four range,What is that?Sorry for the ignorance.
I guess i was a bit unfair saying Marshall's are bulky/heavy. Ampeg classic line aren't that lightweight either but they also have a great sound,like Orange for instance.
But,Ampeg heritage is lighter.I have big hopes they sound as good as the standard svt classic.(I'm kind of interrested in the Heritage 410hlf cab.)

I agree from experience that heavy/cabs with thick walls sound better.I have yet to hear a lightweight cab sound as good as a heavier one(atleast those i have tried,and i haven't tried Tecamp for instance).
However,I have heard theories saying,cabs doesn't have to have that thick walls and can be braced interally to do the same job,ending up with less weight.And the new models from most companies seems to lean towards those more lightweight solutions.[/quote]

Sorry, I'm talking about guitar amps/cabs. This is a Mode Four:



It was a ridiculously powerful amp Marshall made a few years ago with a big solid state poweramp. The amp was a bit crap IMO and was a bit of a flop but the cabs they made to go with them were amazing. They had either Celestion Vintage 30's or GK100 speakers and were oversized and really well made. They can still be found pretty cheap.

[Anders]

OK thanks