stevie

[quote name='alexclaber' post='221271' date='Jun 18 2008, 11:48 AM']How many bass cabs do you see with midrange drivers? It's a very short list... A 4x12" is a side-by-side design. 2x12" guitar amps, whether open-backed or not, consistently work better if you turn them on their side - it gets the speakers closer to ear level and significantly improves off-axis response. If you can persuade your guitarist to do this it can do wonders for the sound of your band, I know my guitarist is a total convert. Personally I don't have a problem with people doing whatever they like to get the sound they want - but surprisingly often their decisions are based on faux science and witchcraft rather than the claim of just using their ears! If you are going to use science to aid your decisions, use good science! Alex[/quote] Indeed it is a short list - more's the pity. I certainly think a midrange driver is of more value than a tweeter for bass. I suppose a 4 x 12" could be considered a side-by-side design. Limiting vertical dispersion to control unwanted reflections is common practice but a 4 x setup limits dispersion by lobing both vertically and horizontally. So, to be fair, it's not strictly side-by-side. I'm not arguing against positioning a 2 x 12 or a 2 x 10 vertically, by the way. On the contrary, your experience is perfectly valid and there are sound technical reasons why it should be so. What I don't agree with is the blanket statement that the only, or best, way of arranging the speakers in a bass rig is in a column. But there has already been some backtracking on that assertion. Use good science, of course. The problem is knowing what is good and what is bogus. Or perhaps more aptly, what is important and what isn't.

[quote name='lowhand_mike' post='220785' date='Jun 17 2008, 05:39 PM']basically stevie take a look at this, it should explain everything. [url="http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=21267"]http://basschat.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=21267[/url][/quote] Oh dear me, it gets worse!!

[quote name='Bill Fitzmaurice' post='220794' date='Jun 17 2008, 05:56 PM']Foremost, placing drivers horizontally.[/quote] Shouldn't that be placing drivers horizontally without crossing over to a midrange unit? Leo Fender and Jim Marshall didn't make sde-by-side bass cabs in the 1950s. Marshall bass cabs were 4 x 12, 1 x 15 and 1 x 18 and Fender had the Bassman, which was a 1 x 15. The side-by-side 2 x 12s these companies built were guitar amps. The Fender Twin and the Marshall Bluesbreaker (and the Vox AC30 before it) used open back cabinets based on a perfectly valid dipole design that still enjoys popularity today.

Studio monitors from ATC, Quested and Dynaudio, by the way. And when these guys need four drivers, guess what?

[quote name='Bill Fitzmaurice' post='220794' date='Jun 17 2008, 05:56 PM']Foremost, placing drivers horizontally. For an example of how drivers should be placed investigate the circa 1950 PA installation in St. Paul's Cathedral in London, which was only recently upgraded because it worked so well for a half century plus despite being in the most difficult of environments. Assumption is Jim Marshall was not a parishoner.[/quote] You think a bass rig should be designed on the principles of a public address system? The mind boggles. Of course, if you are going to build column speakers, placing drivers horizontally is a no-no. Similarly for hi-fi, where slim cabinets are fashionable. By 'placing drivers horizontally', I assume you mean like this:[attachment=9729:SCM200ASL_Pro.JPG]

[quote name='Bill Fitzmaurice' post='220024' date='Jun 16 2008, 04:55 PM']+1. The engineering used by the vast majority of musical instrument cabs has not changed significantly since the mid 1970s, and it was 30 years obsolete even then. If either Leo Fender or Jim Marshall had possessed beyond a rudimentary knowledge of audio theory in general and loudspeaker design in particular the vast majority of musical instrument speaker topologies introduced since 1955 would never have appeared in the first place. Fender was a machinest who didn't even play guitar or bass, and Marshall was a drummer. Their method of speaker design was 'stick some drivers in a box'. Unfortunately they set a flawed standard that still dominates the marketplace today.[/quote] I think you'll find that Leo Fender was an accountant by profession. I must say, I've never heard a guitar of bass player who has ever expressed anything but the utmost admiration for both Leo Fender and Jim Marshall. In fact, whenever anyone mentions that Leo Fender wasn't a guitar player, it's always to draw attention to the enormity of his achievement in producing the designs he did. What exactly is this "flawed standard"? Can you be more specific?

[quote name='Bill Fitzmaurice' post='219597' date='Jun 16 2008, 02:39 AM']'No trouble' is a matter of opinion. Mine is that of a bass player who also happens to be an audio engineer. As for specific examples, that would be the simultaneous using of any two cabs that don't have identical phase response. Since no two cabs that don't use identical drivers in identical alignments can have identical phase response that makes every use of non-identical cabs a specific example. I'm not saying they can't sound acceptable, but they would sound better properly matched. Amongst other things. Just the instrument cab industry. The hi-fi, theater and PA guys got it right a half century ago, the instrument market segment is a wee bit slow on the uptake. [/quote] So, in your audio engineer's opinion 2 x 15s or 8 x 10s will always sound better than a 1 x 15 and a 4 x 10 because they are "properly matched". Is that right? And bass players, unlike the hi-fi, theatre or PA guys, have failed to realize this because they are "a wee bit slow on the uptake". Bill, have you heard of a book called "How to win friends and influence people"?

[quote name='Bill Fitzmaurice' post='219554' date='Jun 15 2008, 11:35 PM']I'm assuming he is not using a crossover. Tens will naturally have a wider midrange dispersion angle and a higher frequency response than fifteens, so the caveat applies with or without being crossed. Because no manufacturer had, or has for that matter, any incentive to do better when they sell all the mediocre high profit margin junk they can crank out. And bassplayers are artists, not engineers, so by and large they just don't know any better.[/quote] Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't midrange dispersion a function of total radiating area? In other words, a single ten will have a wider midrange dispersion than a single 15, but two tens won't. Are you seriously saying that no manufacturer of bass gear has any incentive to produce anything but mediocre, high profit margin junk because their target market is too ignorant to appreciate it? That's a bit arrogant, don't you think?

[quote name='bass player spinn' post='209187' date='May 29 2008, 09:32 PM']cool so i prob need to look at the vintage one? thats a tip i got from someone else to.. thanks much..[/quote] You *never* see any of the vintage SPB-1s for sale secondhand (because players hang on to them). Hot pickups for bass are just a marketing ploy. What you want from your pickup is *tone*, not output. Increasing the output of a pickup normally results in higher inductance, which cuts the higher frequencies and gives you a muddier sound. The same principle applies to guitar, of course, although there are times when fitting hotter pickups to a guitar can be worthwhile (the bridge position on a Strat, for example).

I've tried all the Duncans for P-Bass apart from the Antiquity (which sounds like a total rip-off to me). The SPB-2 was a bit muddy. The Quarter Pounder was punchy but lost quite a lot of the bass's tone. The Vintage SPB-1 was superb. Very close to the SPB-1, but with a slightly deeper bottom end and the same kind of punch as the Quarter Pounder, was the active APB-1. I bought the APB-1, although I'd be interested to revisit the SPB-1 sometime. Just one man's experience.

The original Bass Pod seems to be selling for quite an affordable price now on eBay. I want one mainly for the compressor and the eq, and perhaps for some of the amp models (I'm not interested in the effects). Would I be better off spending more and getting the XT version?

My 1961 Strat. Sold it around around 1980 for £125. Not one of my best decisions.

What's the difference between the models (XT and non-XT)? Would I be right in assuming these are better than the Behringer copies?

[quote name='alexclaber' post='204474' date='May 22 2008, 06:19 PM']Well I've just ordered a pile of grills for these cabs, five for the compact 15" and four for the big 15"+6.5", so I'm committed to making at least nine of them! Alex[/quote] Have you considered using poplar ply, Alex?

[quote name='Huge Hands' post='203553' date='May 21 2008, 10:23 AM']They look like 18s to me, but then again I never was good at judging sizes. Just ask my missus......[/quote] No, these definitely look like JBL K140s. I've got a brand new one here ready to fit into a cab when I find one cheap enough. (Any unloaded Trace 1153s for sale out there for ?) Some say it is the world's best driver for bass guitar. I notice that Rocco Prestia has these in his cabs, too.

[quote name='Lo.' post='202529' date='May 19 2008, 11:53 PM']Thanks - it was a quick take and I didn't have time to learn the verse, but I hope it helps. Sorry - I don't write stuff down, and just learn it by ear. Is it too difficult to see the notes on my vid, or is it just too fast or something? Heh, unless you were getting paid a lot of cash to get it spot on, I wouldn't try to learn the verse note for note, but the intro riff and chorus are worth tryin to pick up accurately.[/quote] No, it's clear enough - it's just that I would find it much easier to figure out if I had the dots as well. Just discovered your contributions to YouTube - wow! I am starting to work my way the the Jamerson book and will be paying you a regular visit on there from now on This particular track certainly has a Jamerson flavour. I tried to find out by googling "Frankie Valli" "James Jamerson" (both in quotes). Guess what? Your YouTube video comes in at number 1! (Fame at last!).

[quote name='Lo.' post='200829' date='May 17 2008, 12:20 AM']I couldn't resist a quick jam along for you: [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opISPvcdoAI"]The Night [/url] I did not try to learn the verse - some of my passing notes are very dodgy - if I played it right it should have been Fm/Bb/Gm/Cm sequence, I think [/quote] Really nice job, Lo. You didn't happen to transcribe it while you were at it, did you?

[quote name='bnt' post='199320' date='May 15 2008, 09:36 AM']At least bass amp marketing is honest compared to the marketing you get with e.g. car stereos. The RMS figure is the one that matters, not "peak music power", whatever the heck that is. I also agree with the need for headroom, and the components last longer if they are run underpowered. (Heat is the #1 killer of transistors.)[/quote] They may not be as bad as the car stereo makers, but I do think there's a certain amount of wishful thinking involved on the part of bass amp manufacturers' when they specify power output. After all, have you ever seen an independent test of a bass amp's distortion at maximum output? I've looked inside a few of them and they seem woefully underspecified in terms of mains transformer and reservoir capacitor size. I did find one independent test on the web of a well known and respected American bass amp, whose actual output was only two thirds of its rated output. It could be that many bassists don't actually have as much power as they think they do. I'd feel more confident judging an amp's output by weighing it rather than looking at its specification. Just a theory, of course.

[quote name='TimmyC' post='198215' date='May 13 2008, 07:57 PM']I'm looking for someone who does a really professional job on setting up basses, fret levelling, distressing and the like. Someone you'd trust with a 2k bass and you'd know it would come back perfect! Any guitar techs or luthiers you know to hand. I'm looking for someone preferably within an hours drive of the B'mouth area. And yes, I’ve checked the sticky but they are all a little far for me. Thanks Tim[/quote] Get in touch with Derek Halliday. He's not too far from you. I can tell you from personal experience that he is astonishingly good. Derek Halliday Grosvenor House Fern Hill East Stour Dorset SP5 5ND Tel: 01747 838 732

[quote name='bass_ferret' post='195594' date='May 9 2008, 05:43 PM']How is having an 8 ohm 2x10 with a 4 ohm 1x15 going to help?[/quote] Upon reflection, perhaps not. I was assuming that the Mark Bass would be comfortable with a load of 3.5 ohms or so, which a lot of power amps are. This might be sailing a bit close to the wind. If it were my amp I'd probably not want to risk it though.

Minty, the limiting factor in your current system is not necessarily your amp. It's probably the 2 x 10. The cheapest way of sorting your system out would be to find someone willing to swap your 4 ohm 2 x 10 for an 8 ohm version. That shouldn't actually cost anything and it will re-balance your system. If you think that's an option, I'd be glad to explain why it should work.

[quote name='Bill Fitzmaurice' post='194969' date='May 8 2008, 08:30 PM']A first order crossover at 150 Hz would route the lows to the 15, the highs to the 2x10, and keep the overall load at 4 ohms. Get component values at [url="http://www.lalena.com/Audio/FAQ/XOver/"]http://www.lalena.com/Audio/FAQ/XOver/[/url][/quote] Wouldn't you be concerned about mis-termination? As system output would still be limited by the excursion of the bass driver, what exactly would be the advantage over just using the 15?