Do you prefer rear ported, front ported cabs or sealed bass cabs?

[Geddaric]

I have a checkered history when it comes to cabs.

Hold me closer Tony Danza! Or maybe Louie or Rev. Jim.
(For you young`uns, that`s a "Taxi" reference).

 

[LetItGrowTone]

Ok, I have it all figured out now:
"95%" of us don't want hifi @ 41Hz (or 31Hz); almost all prefer some degree of one of several iconic shapings of the low end. Our El Maestro O'Cabthreads already told me this more than once, thank you. So, this is like threads about different kinds of strings. All strings are imperfect in various ways and to differing degrees, and we each "pick our poison" and embrace a favorite. Since "there's no accounting for taste", that's the end of it. It's just opinions.

To the 5%: If you're bothered by the mysteriously unsatisfying low E from your ported bass cab which is otherwise "the greatest bass cab (you've) ever heard", I hope my explanation was helpful. The End.

 

[agedhorse]

Ok, I have it all figured out now:
"95%" of us don't want hifi @ 41Hz (or 31Hz); almost all prefer some degree of one of several iconic shapings of the low end. Our El Maestro O'Cabthreads already told me this more than once, thank you. So, this is like threads about different kinds of strings. All strings are imperfect in various ways and to differing degrees, and we each "pick our poison" and embrace a favorite. Since "there's no accounting for taste", that's the end of it. It's just opinions.

To the 5%: If you're bothered by the mysteriously unsatisfying low E from your ported bass cab which is otherwise "the greatest bass cab (you've) ever heard", I hope my explanation was helpful. The End.

There’s no need to be rude with your references to me as well as “95%” of other members here.

Are you always this obnoxious, or are you just having a difficult day?

 

[LetItGrowTone]

I didn't intend to be obnoxious with that post. I'm sorry.

I repeatedly put quotes around "95%" because you said that (which gives it authority).
And in that post I'm not criticizing them (and I said "us" and "we"); I said it's just a matter of taste.
And "El Maestro O'Cabthreads" was meant affectionately. I apologize for how it sounded.

 

[bucephylus]

I didn't intend to be obnoxious with that post. I'm sorry.

I repeatedly put quotes around "95%" because you said that (which gives it authority).
And in that post I'm not criticizing them (and I said "us" and "we"); I said it's just a matter of taste.
And "El Maestro O'Cabthreads" was meant affectionately. I apologize for how it sounded.

Being a player is a journey, which we all have to investigate in our own ways.

I believe the “95%” reference was due to the fact that while we are bass players, we are entertainers first, hired to provide entertainment to audiences. Said audiences are accustomed to hearing things in certain ways; and that “95%” thing applies to that part of our job.

At the same time, it is a good thing for some of us to push boundaries and try things outside the normal modes. Our audiences seldom listen to any sound reproduction equipment with extended lows. The one exception possibly is the very small fraction of the heavy sub woofer crowd. But, they also don’t tend to listen to mainstream entertainment fare.

IIRC from some of my testing, the wavelength of a 120 Hz fundamental is something like 1.5 m; so, I suppose your 40 Hz fundamental would be around just shy of 5 m (no calculations, so could be wrong).

Most of us perform on stages. I’m not exactly sure how a 5 m fundamental behaves on a performance stage from a mix standpoint. So, I can’t say if it would be a good thing or not. For the most part, one of your earlier posts referred to most amps being stage monitors. This has become true in many cases, since the PA is commonly used to project sound to the audience; even for standard club gigs. My stage mixes all prefer lighter bass tones, so that vocal harmonies are emphasized. But, I recognize that non-Pop playfare may prefer other mix styles.

Still, that V4B design, which triggered this thread, was a design from the days when we put most of our eggs on the backline, and used the FoH primarily for vocals. That has changed. I too like the older cabs. For example, I dragged an Acoustic 360/361 rig around for several years in Holiday Inn lounges etc; and always thought that one sounded fantastic. But, I also recognize that rig would be completely useless for practically all of my gigs present day.

Probably TL;DR. Just lending some perspective for consideration.

 

[agedhorse]

Years back, there was a player here who was utterly convinced that a bass produced only fundamentals, and that their cabinet must be able to reproduce that fundamental or the note wouldn't be heard.

If all that was produced was the fundamental, it would be the equivalent of a sine wave generator and very unmusical at best. I even posted a link to a 41Hz sine wave... but all that resulted in was further and more ignorant arguments. At low frequencies devoid of harmonics, it's also very difficult to discriminate pitch without the harmonics, and without being very careful in a mix, it's easy to negatively impact a mix with excessive LF material. ESPECIALLY in a smaller room, or one with a long low frequency RT-60 value.

The bass guitar is rich in harmonics, in fact at low frequencies the harmonics are about 2/3 of the total signal (it changes with time and how the string is plucked) which is why it's so important to focus on the whole signal rather than just the lowest notes.

 

[agedhorse]

I didn't intend to be obnoxious with that post. I'm sorry.

I repeatedly put quotes around "95%" because you said that (which gives it authority).
And in that post I'm not criticizing them (and I said "us" and "we"); I said it's just a matter of taste.
And "El Maestro O'Cabthreads" was meant affectionately. I apologize for how it sounded.

Sorry, that's not how I read it.

 

[LetItGrowTone]

I accept your apology.

Just kidding.

Thank you for accepting my apology.

 

[Snert]

IIRC from some of my testing, the wavelength of a 120 Hz fundamental is something like 1.5 m; so, I suppose your 40 Hz fundamental would be around just shy of 5 m (no calculations, so could be wrong).

344/120 = 2.87m
344/40 = 8.6m

 

[retslock]

Years back, there was a player here who was utterly convinced that a bass produced only fundamentals, and that their cabinet must be able to reproduce that fundamental or the note wouldn't be heard.

If all that was produced was the fundamental, it would be the equivalent of a sine wave generator and very unmusical at best. I even posted a link to a 41Hz sine wave... but all that resulted in was further and more ignorant arguments. At low frequencies devoid of harmonics, it's also very difficult to discriminate pitch without the harmonics, and without being very careful in a mix, it's easy to negatively impact a mix with excessive LF material. ESPECIALLY in a smaller room, or one with a long low frequency RT-60 value.

The bass guitar is rich in harmonics, in fact at low frequencies the harmonics are about 2/3 of the total signal (it changes with time and how the string is plucked) which is why it's so important to focus on the whole signal rather than just the lowest notes.

I have always been under the impression that for low frequencies to be faithfully reproduced they needed to travel the distance of one complete cycle and that could be several feet or so. I remember older folded cabinet designs.
Ear buds, bluetooth technology and tiny speaker enclosure designs have set my understanding on it's ear - pun intended. I recently borrowed a very small Bose bluetooth speaker while on holiday and as they often do, it punched way above its weight in sound. What I noticed though and this has been my experience with ear buds too is that moving away from the speaker reduces low frequencies quite a lot very quickly. Does that pertain to the lesser distance the sound waves travel with such tiny enclosure designs? Even a phone will allow better low end if you put your ear up close to the tiny speaker.