Author Topic: Speaker size: 10" vs 15" (Read 835 times)

lidon2001 · « **Reply #15 on:** October 20, 2005, 10:27:44 PM »

Speaking of small boxes with better bottom end, here's my current setup. But after playing nothing but 15's, I felt I needed the Ashdown to make it feel right. Of course, the limited power and headroom of the WT400 doesn't push the AccuGroove to its full potential, so that adds to needing the additional 15 IMHO. But in the end, very portable, very nice tone, and the Ashdown 15 gave me what the AccuGroove was missing.

(Message edited by lidon2001 on October 20, 2005)

bigredbass · « **Reply #16 on:** October 21, 2005, 06:06:25 PM »

I'm old enough to remember the folded 18 bins. Talk about rumble . . . . although of course when I see the old pictures of Jaco playing through a pair of Acoustics thru the old MXR rack mount delay, it reminds me how cyclical this all is.

Of course all of this re-arranged landscape is possible NOT because speaker/cabinet design is vastly improved since the 60s/70s. The horsepower increase in amps really makes using these toy-sized cabinets possible, especially with the vastly improved PAs available now.

Remember, a DC300 Crown was thought of as a MONSTER powerplant in those days. The thought of cheap, light, and reliable 1000 or 2000 watt amps was a pipe dream. With the materials improvements in speaker fabrication to stand up to those current levels, there you are. And remember, FOUR 10s divides that power to acceptable warranty claim levels a lot easier than sending it all to ONE 15 or 18.

I prefer 15s. But I do admit it's easier to hear myself on 4-10s because of the interaction between the four drivers instead of a single-point source I get with a single 15 bin.

J o e y

keith_h · « **Reply #17 on:** October 22, 2005, 06:25:38 AM »

Joey,
Lugged 2 of those 301's around in my younger years along with 2 370 heads (pretty heavy themselves). My back is glad we can use toy-sized cabinets these days.

Keith

bigbadbill · « **Reply #18 on:** October 22, 2005, 06:28:45 AM »

Jim, I'll let you know about the Aguilars asap. Although as I haven't got any gigs coming up in the immediate future I'm not quite sure when!

jet_powers · « **Reply #19 on:** October 23, 2005, 08:06:36 AM »

I have an early '70's Peavey 612 w/ horn cabinet (I believe it was their answer to the SVT) that I reloaded with, gasp!... Carvins. It sounds better than any of the other combinations I can put together, i.e. a 115 and 410, a 215 alone or with the 410. The 215 and 410 makes an inpressive looking skyscraper stack but I've never been one for image, give me the sound. And the sound is best out of the 612. Unfortunately, unless I have help to move it and someone's truck to move it in, it stays in the band's rehearsal space. My bandmates not so lovingly refer to it as the Queen Mary's anchor but they love the sound it generates and usually don't bitch too much about helping me move it.

My Exploiter is the only bass amongst my arsenal of axes that actually sounds good with the 215 alone as it has a nice, punchy sound to begin with.

When I do fill in gigs or work with my cover band in clubs the 115/410 combo covers the sonic spectrum pretty well regardless of which bass I use....

I know this doesn't answer Greg's original question, but thought I would share it anyway.

JP

gbarchus · « **Reply #20 on:** October 23, 2005, 08:47:00 AM »

Back in the good ol' days when my back was still good, I played with two Acoustic 360s (each with a Cerwin Vega 18), then an Ampeg SVT with two cabinets (16X10), Swithed to two Sunn 200s cabinets (2X15 JBLs each) with the SVT head. They all did different things. You could hear the 360s at the back of the room without going through the PA. The 16X10s would rumble the stage so much the soundman couldn't turn up the vocal mics. That was a sound I really loved, but it faded not far out into the audience. Switching to the 4X15 JBLs with the same SVT the sound punched farther out into the audience and I still got some solid low end on stage. Part of the equation depends on whether or not you are going through the PA, if your stage rig is just your personal bass monitor or necessary for the overall mix of the band.

I'm still a big fan of JBL 15s and 12s (w/ 4 in. voice coils) and you'd be surprised how much high end comes out of them with a good tube preamp like an F2B. I put flatwound strings on my 20th Anniversary so I could use more of the high end on the filters and still couldn't use the treble on my F2B past the 12 o'clock position with JBL 15s without being too bright ...with flatwounds and no tweeter! http://club.alembic.com/Images/411/1941.html?1033976607

There are so many variables in the matrix: bass, strings, amp/preamp, speakers, cabinet...

Then there are players who sound the same no matter what rig they are using. Is it all in the fingers?

Gale

ed_r · « **Reply #21 on:** October 23, 2005, 09:36:42 AM »

Back in the good ol' days when my back was still good, I played with two Acoustic 360s (each with a Cerwin Vega 18), then an Ampeg SVT with two cabinets (16X10), Swithed to two Sunn 200s cabinets (2X15 JBLs each) with the SVT head.

No WONDER your back went out.

raffy · « **Reply #22 on:** October 23, 2005, 02:06:18 PM »

Right now I'm using a new Aguilar GS 410. It's 4x10 with some front ports and a tweeter, and it really hits the lows but is also very punchy and clear. I tried it with a bunch of diferent heads when I was shopping, and they all sounded good through it. Unfortunately it's really heavy, but it sounds great.

gbarchus · « **Reply #23 on:** October 23, 2005, 06:09:45 PM »

ed r,

Yeah, my doctor says there could be any number of contributing factors including family history, but I'm pretty sure lugging those cabinets around set up the stage for my back failure. I was never SO happy as to be in a band with a road crew!

Gale

gare · « **Reply #24 on:** October 24, 2005, 06:20:43 AM »

In reference to Gregs original question, if it was me, I'd checkout the Bag End 2x10 w/out the coaxial speaker. And combine that with the 2x15's. The cabinet should be close to same design, same speaker mfgr (in theory). You should maintain your sound plus a little depth, definition, and range.

As a yutte in 'the good ole days' I was foolish enough to haul around 2 Sunn Coliseum 880 heads, 2 4x12 cabs and 2 1x18 cabs, which I finally narrowed down to the 880's and 2 Sunn 200s's. That final configuration is still one one my favorite amp setups.
At one point I used 2 few DC300's that Joey mentioned.
Thank God the technology has allowed for substantial downsizing.
I swear, some of that older gear had to have bricks inside those cabinets.

alembic76407 · « **Reply #25 on:** October 24, 2005, 02:19:59 PM »

you guy's have to admit, as big and back breaking as those monster amps were, it was sure was fun to walk up to an amp that was taller than you!!!!

there are times I wish I could use Tornadic Thunder again!!!!! but nobody will let me !!!

David T (The loud One)

palembic · « **Reply #26 on:** October 24, 2005, 11:16:20 PM »

Yeah David ...and you forget the influence it has on dancing girls!!!
Hehehehehehe

Paul TBO

jacko · « **Reply #27 on:** October 25, 2005, 12:35:46 AM »

Just to stick my two-pennorth in - I've been using a trace elliot 4x10 combo and 1x15 extension cabinet and although I like the sound, they both weigh a ton so they're going to have to go. I'm currently looking at either Eden or Markbass speakers - probably Markbass (they're cheaper than Eden and lighter) - and the dealers have recommended I use the 4x10 with a 2x10 rather than going for a 1x15. They seem to think I'll get all the warmth and punch I can handle but I'm not convinced so I'm going to have to do some comparison testing.
Front end will be an Eden navigator and QSC power amp.

Graeme

ajdover · « **Reply #28 on:** October 25, 2005, 03:17:15 AM »

I've been an Ampeg user for years now, though I've used Fender, Peavey, Hartke, and others. What I've found is this:

More power is better for most folks.
More power generally means more headroom.
Better to divide your signal, if you can, amongst different speaker sizes so you can get a balanced sound.
If you can't divide your signal, decide which tone/sound appeals to you most and go with that.

Like Keith, I remember the days of heavy amps and cabinets. I still live those days now due to my choice of Ampegs. However, the tone is perfect for me. I run my SVT IV through an SF-2, and the outputs go to two Ampeg BXT series cabinets (1X15 and 4X10). I run the Low Pass to the 15, and the high pass to the 4X10, which I run full range. It works for me. With 490 watts per side (the SVT IV has a built in crossover) at 4 ohms, it's plenty loud, too. Keith has played through it, so he can vouch for the tone/power. We couldn't turn it up too loud when he visited, though!

Bottom line is get what works for you. I've been playing for 28 years, and I'm still learning about tone, rigs, power, etc. If you like 15s, that's all that really matters. After all, it's your money and your choice.

My two cents,

Alan

keith_h · « **Reply #29 on:** October 25, 2005, 05:03:07 AM »

Yep, Alan's rig has very good tone and balance between highs and lows. It confirms my opinion that using a mix of 10's and 15's give the best overall sound. A mix of 10's and 18's might be good also but I have never tried the combination to see how they sound.

Keith