stupid question..

[LimDidit]

why would someone consider a 1x15 vs a 2x10 cab if for example they both produce 400watts of power or output 400RMS watts? how much different could they sound?
same brand btw

 

[SundanceChile]

why would someone consider a 1x15 vs a 2x10 cab if for example they both produce 400watts of power or output 400RMS watts? how much different could they sound?
same brand btw

Incredibly. IMO/E, 15's have a lot more bass, while 10's are known for their punch.

 

[martin shane]

the 2x10 will have a little more volume due to more cone area >

 

[TNT]

Lim,

Not in the least a stupid question!!

In addition to the comments made above: 10's can be a little more narrow in scope, less dynamic "coverage", breaks down a little easier, can be a tad "edgy, a tad less dimensional.

Also, more (or less) 10's does not make up for the qualities loss or gained in comparision to 15's, simply by the number of speakers. You may have additional volumn coverage but not dynamic coverage.

Also, speaker "direction" is as critical as anything else!

 

[oli@bass]

Larger cone = less precision in reproduction of the original sound due to all sorts of flexations within the cone material. In general, larger cones (e.g. 15" vs. 10"), have less highs and a slower response, therefore they sound softer, less focused, less accurate. Depending on playing style, that may be more or less desirable for a bass sound, e.g. for pick players it softens the sharpness of the pick sound, while slappers will miss the direct response of small speakers.

Regarding the above idea of less dynamic coverage by 10" speakers, I can't relate at all, and it also defies the laws of physics -- smaller speakers = less weight = more dynamic.

Since it's always the whole package (size/cone material/coils/encloser construction) that matters, it's pretty hard to have a general consensus. There are 2x10 cabs that have more bottom than 1x15 cabs, and there are 15's that sound more focused than 10's.

As always with cabs: Try them out, listen, and use what works for you.

 

[martin shane]

As always with cabs: Try them out, listen, and use what works for you.[/QUOTE]

+1

 

[pjc812]

I'd do the 10's first then get the 15.

Here's a question for you. What's the ohm rating? If they're rated 400@4 and they are 8Ohm spkrs, then you are really only getting about half rated power. You'll need both cabinets bridged to get full power. I suspect they're 8 (most common) but could be wrong.

 

[strummer]

Regarding the above idea of less dynamic coverage by 10" speakers, I can't relate at all, and it also defies the laws of physics -- smaller speakers = less weight = more dynamic.

I must object to this, oli, and I'm not trying to be a smartass here...
But laws of physics?
You miss at least one critical bit in your analysis, and that is motor strength. If a 15" and a 10" had the same coil/magnet structure your reasoning might be correct, but since they don't there is no way your reasoning works.
The same can be said about the assumption that a smaller cone is better because it is stiffer and somehow faster. First off that would mean that the cone materials are the same and that the 15" is just a bigger version of the 10", and also it would mean that a stiffer cone is plain better. The truth is that any given cone will break up, or reach a point where the cone/dustcap no longer works as one piston, but any decent speaker manufacturer knows this and makes cones specifically for 10 and 15's. Also, I don't really understand the use of "faster", as the only thing moving is the cone and that will move at a certain pace depending on which note is plucked, or else you'd hava every 15" box make your bass sound flat
One thing that is undeniably true is that the dispersion pattern of a 15" and a 10" woofer differ radically. At wavelengths shorter than twice the cone diameter the sound will become more and more directrional, which means that at an angle a 15" will seem to roll off earlier than a 10".

However, I do agree with all the previous posts in the analysis of general sonic differences between the 2x10 and the 1x15, but that is I think because manufacturers know what we as bassplayers look for when getting one or the other woofer size.

Ugh that was long and maybe totally irrelevant, but getting the laws of physics into the discussion really hit my button

 

[tkarter]

He he I just thought 10 + 10 = 20 and 1 x15 equaled 15.

tk

 

[Mongo]

I use a 1x15. It sounds better than a 2x10 to me.

If I were to get another cab it'd be another 1x15.

 

[Psycho Ward]

Size doesn't matter, it's how many speakers you have that makes you cool! You should have a wall of speakers, hundreds really...

 

[mynan]

Size doesn't matter, it's how many speakers you have that makes you cool! You should have a wall of speakers, hundreds really...

Actually, you could have thousands of speakers, but if your volume knob only goes to 10...

 

[LimDidit]

Here's a question for you. What's the ohm rating? If they're rated 400@4 and they are 8Ohm spkrs, then you are really only getting about half rated power. You'll need both cabinets bridged to get full power. I suspect they're 8 (most common) but could be wrong.

if u must know
im planning to get a Little Mark II (500Watts)accompanied with either a
Traveller 102P(2x10) or 121H(1x12) or 151P(1x15)but at 8ohms of resistance
so im assuming thats 300watts from head to cab


Orrr

Im planning to go cheaper and get the combo versions of that
CMD102P(2x10) or CMD 121HF(1x12) or mini cmd151(1x15)
which is basically the same setup as above but in combo form
(same amphead little markage II with what looks like the same cabs)

on a side note... GC is having a 10% discount sale off any item in the store this weekend and there seems to be NO restrictions on MARKBASS GEAR woo hoo!!!!
so i remember someone buying a markbass rig over the Blackfriday sale at GC and posting about it (and thats what kinda got me into this whole Markbass fiasco) maybe u can get a price adjustment ehy ehy??

 

[Smallmouth_Bass]

Or you could go with 12s, which is a good middle ground between 10s and 15s.

 

[Aussie Mark]

SPL, frequency response, cone recovery speed = projection, weight, etc. Lots of things to consider.

 

[AnthonyD]

For me it's 10s - I like a thump that goes right through you and 10s do it for me.

I've gone through a few combinations of 10s and 12s and I keep going back to just 10s. I used to struggle finding "my tone" in the rehearsal studio (4x10 on a 1x15) then realized I can just unplug th 1x15!

For you, I suggest you need to hear them... Too many factors to consider. In a very general sense, 10s will have more punch - but I'll stop there for fear of getting under Strummer's skin... (/jk)


And Psycho Ward is absolutely right - it's not the size of your speaker that matters...

 

[thunder]

As always with cabs: Try them out, listen, and use what works for you.

+1[/QUOTE]

yep! +2

 

[RobertB]

Also, I don't really understand the use of "faster", as the only thing moving is the cone and that will move at a certain pace depending on which note is plucked, or else you'd hava every 15" box make your bass sound flat

I would think that what Oli was implying/referring to, was the idea that given ideal construction and efficiency for both, the simple reason a 15 with a given dynamic range cannot reproduce a frequency - mid-range frequency, for example - which is outside/above that 15's range, yet which can be reproduced by a given 10, is that the 10 is able to actuate at a higher frequency, i.e., faster. Sure, there are exceptions in the form of some 15's with broader ranges, & vice versa; but generally speaking, that's the norm, right?

I have an SWR Super Redhead 2x10 combo. Prior to that, I had an SWR Workingman's 1x15. The lows of the 1x15 were nice, for sure - could definitely move more air, but I found it really hard to cut through drums and guitar - even with mids boosted on my SR. That speaker simply could not reproduce the mids, and as a result, the sound was very inarticulate. As someone mentioned, for many, that's THE tone - a la Rocco Prestia, for example. But we MM players typically tend to not gravitate in that general tonal direction, right? Otherwise, we'd play passive instruments & be talking on a Fender forum.

Now, for fun, I bought an SWR 1x15 extension cab & tried it out on the Redhead. Of course it added a nice bottom end, but not as deep as I would've imaged. In fact, the difference was so minimal, that I returned the 1x15 the next day ... just not $500 worth of difference. I couldn't imagine playing through just a 1x15 anymore, but the 2x10s by themselves do the job nicely. And that rig does not want or suffer for low end either - that's my point ... it's a totally self-sufficient, standalone rig, whereas I've never tried a 1x15 that was.