my next controversial question!! bass speakers into a marshall straight cabinet??

[Matthijs]

I read through the whole thread and feel I have to confirm the original question: yes those speakers in that cab will give you a working cab with a vintage low end and reasonable but not great power handling. It might be wise to reinforce the cab a bit and experiment with and without dampening material. It will also be an invaluable learning experience.

There’s nothing wrong with a closed cab and limited low end if that is the sound your after. However there is a very valid reason for all the cautioning your receiving. It is based on our collective experience in losing volume wars. Every octave down needs twice the power to reach the same volume. (or the equivalent in efficiency). You might find your ideal old school sound with this cab with barely enough volume to compete against a halfstack and a drummer. But someday the guys in your band will suggest i.e. a Rage against the machine song for the set and you’ll find your perfect sound is drowned out completely and that is the moment you will blow a speaker. I bet every single TB member has been in a situation like that at one time. That is why most of us like to have extra volume and extra low bass on tap when it is needed and rely on eq and sims and pedals for ‘that’ sound. Although we would prefer the feel of the real thing, we need some versatility.

 

[LetItGrowTone]

I'll pop in here for a minute with actual experience using both Marshall amps and 4x12 speakers. I have used them live as well as recording. Are they going to offer the extension common in many of today's bass systems? No, but I feel like reading a lot of the comments what people aren't getting is you aren't going for the best possible hi-fi low extension. You're going for a specific sound, correct? Overdriven, lots of mids and highs. Not necessarily what's on the studio recordings (which is anyone's guess most of the time), but what's on live recordings or bootlegs

Now, people are correct, the technology has come a long way, we can engineer more efficient and "better sounding" cabinets. But that does not preclude using 4x12s if you want that sound. I picked up a JTM 45/100 a few years back, and ran that on multiple gigs with 4x12s loaded with Celestion V30s. Sounded solid, and with the EQ set right, could definitely deliver, and at lower volumes had a good clean sound without breaking up. I have since sold the JTM 45/100 and those 4x12s, and now run a Hiwatt DR-103 with Vox AD412 cabs (Celestion neo speakers). The cabinets can be beam-y, and they don't have gobs of low end, but I've run that set-up on plenty of gigs and have yet to have a complaint. The worst you can do is try it, and see if you like it. If not, sell it for some other gear.

I will say, I might recommend something along the lines of a Hiwatt or Hi-Tone cab, running Fane or Fane style speakers, which are more robust than Celestions and work a bit better with bass. @Wasnex has experience running 4x12s as well if I recall.

Here's a recording on which I used the JTM 45/100 with two 4x12s in studio, along with a Jazz bass. No DI, mic'd in the room with a 414 clone:


Here's the rig:


Now, while I have run these rigs on their own, my preference is to run a head and 4x12s as the treble/drive side of the rig, and let my Sunn amps handle the clean lows.

I've used vintage gear as my only amplification for the better part of 15 years since I started playing, largely against the advice of plenty of other players (no offense to anyone here on TB, but I do recall getting much the same answers when I stated asking similar questions when I joined in 2008). Ultimately I haven't found any more modern gear that gets me the sound I want, though it obviously works for many many people. Different strokes, but don't let responses discourage you from experimenting with gear. Give it a go, you'll figure out what you do and don't like.

@D.M.N., your post deserves much more than just a "like".
Great post with a great sounding track to back it up. Nice song!

 

[ardgedee]

i’m thinking about using eminence beta 12a speakers, which require a recommended .9-1.25 cubic foot of volume. the cabinet is 30 inches wide, 29 inches tall, and 14 inches deep. 4 speakers in there. does that sound good or not??? i don’t know enough about anything to determine if that’s adequate or not

Are those exterior or interior dimensions? Only interior dimensions matter. Is there bracing? Have you accounted for the volume of the speaker itself within the cabinet?

 

[fretno]

tell me more!!!

Its my “big rig”. I do use single 10’s for everything else. I have a EA and another custom 10. So I have small , med and large rigs +/- for grab and go. I don’t have the dims on hand but these 60’s Marshall cabs are smaller than most other 4x12’s. With the Basslites its light. I can move it easily. I seem to recall Steve Harris uses Sidewinders in his. Good luck carrying one of those lol. So I think why this work for me is I don’t play “loud”. I let the PA do the heavy lifting. In fact I could get by with just a good DI and good monitoring. Back in the day my cab of choice was a single 18. That would fill a room and throw sound so often in a small club PA support wasn’t needed with that 18” If there is one thing I have learned over all these years is what works for some may not work for others so do what works for you. If you are lucky you’ll look good doing it ! Rock on my high SPL Brothers!

 

[bon viesta]

Are those exterior or interior dimensions? Only interior dimensions matter. Is there bracing? Have you accounted for the volume of the speaker itself within the cabinet?

exterior. i’ll post a picture of the insides at the bottom of this post!

I read through the whole thread and feel I have to confirm the original question: yes those speakers in that cab will give you a working cab with a vintage low end and reasonable but not great power handling. It might be wise to reinforce the cab a bit and experiment with and without dampening material. It will also be an invaluable learning experience.

There’s nothing wrong with a closed cab and limited low end if that is the sound your after. However there is a very valid reason for all the cautioning your receiving. It is based on our collective experience in losing volume wars. Every octave down needs twice the power to reach the same volume. (or the equivalent in efficiency). You might find your ideal old school sound with this cab with barely enough volume to compete against a halfstack and a drummer. But someday the guys in your band will suggest i.e. a Rage against the machine song for the set and you’ll find your perfect sound is drowned out completely and that is the moment you will blow a speaker. I bet every single TB member has been in a situation like that at one time. That is why most of us like to have extra volume and extra low bass on tap when it is needed and rely on eq and sims and pedals for ‘that’ sound. Although we would prefer the feel of the real thing, we need some versatility.

this is probably my favorite post in this thread. it answers my question, and gives me additional critical details and explanations so that when i go about this i don’t end up doing something i’ll regret later and be like “why did that happen!!!”

 

[Dirk Diggler]

You do realize there were actual official Bass Marshall's right?
One of Chris Squire's tone secrets.

Including a rig for sale right here.
For Sale - Marshall JCM 800 Bass head with matching 412 cab

 

[MikePlaysBass]

does the cabinet likely require some foam insulation??? i’ve seen those a lot, especially in more diy bass cabinets.

As Bass cabinets have gotten lighter using thinner plywood instead of thicker wood or very dense MDF, the use of foam or other materials helps to absorb some sound and prevent standing waves and resonance. Speaker curves aren’t perfect, so cabinet designers compensate for that to keep cabinet size and weight down. In a DIY project, unless you’re an engineer, you can only experiment with different options to get the best sound you can. In general, guitar cabinets don’t need anything other than a well sealed box. Bass cabinets often have some sort of batting to help tame the low frequencies. I’m not an engineer, so although I understand some basic concepts, the math is way over my head.

 

[bon viesta]

You do realize there were actual official Bass Marshall's right?
One of Chris Squire's tone secrets.

Including a rig for sale right here.
For Sale - Marshall JCM 800 Bass head with matching 412 cab

there were!!! and the cabinets were the exact same 4x12 design as the guitars. that’s what i’ve been saying throughout this thread, saying how in theory im basically upgrading an existing bass cabinet with modern speakers rather than those questionable celestions.

 

[Lobster11]

there were!!! and the cabinets were the exact same 4x12 design as the guitars. that’s what i’ve been saying throughout this thread, saying how in theory im basically upgrading an existing bass cabinet with modern speakers rather than those questionable celestions.

My understanding was that he bi-amped, using the Marshalls for highs and distortion and sending lows to Ampeg SVTs and 8x10s. No?

 

[Analogeezer]

I think the OP (and yes I have read the entire thread) is perhaps over romanticizing the "classic tone" these guys got back in the day using Marshalls and 4 x 12" cabinets. As many have mentioned it was what was available initially in a higher power amp, so bass players used Marshalls.

There is a reason however why the Acoustic 360/361, Sunn Coliseum Bass, and the SVT pretty much had taken over by 1973 with the top touring bands, those rigs just flat out worked better for bass.

But I can understand the intent of the OP, he doesn't care if that sound sucks to most of us, or if it's not a flexible sound or whatever, it's the sound "he wants".

An analogy I would use is the Doors (I was never a big fan of theirs, I mean first off no bass player out live? WTH was that about?); I always wondered why Manzerak insisted on using those damn cheesy organs when a Hammond B3 would have sounded so much better.

Sure starting out, lugging their own gear, playing small venues, etc. the combo organ thing would have made since but once they hit the big time, why not get a B3 and put aside the cheeseball sound.

I would bet you if you had a Doors cover band and the keyboard player used a B3, the songs would sound WAY better; but at the same time it would not be "the sound the Doors had". That thin, reedy, cheesy organ sound is baked into people's brains and if you replaced it with a beefy, overdriven B3 with a Leslie it would not sound like what people's brains expect.

So I guess the OP is like this, he wants that sound, even if that sound is not the best sound for a bass but there's nothing wrong with that really.

True story about my own Marshall dumbazzery......

So as a yute coming up in the 1970's I lusted after Marshalls because that's what the rock gods used and early on the bass players too. I mean nothing looks as cool as a Marshall stack right?

Hell I even had a Marshall T-Shirt (which I wore for like the next 12 years until it just flat out wore out) but was using a Kustom 100 combo; but boy did I ever want a Marshall.

The thing is by then the 15" speakers, particularly the JBL K-140 was considered the stuff for bass, so I was sentient enough to realize what I really wanted was two single 15" cabs I could stack, you know like a Marshall but use a Marshall head to power it. By that point I already had one homemade single 15" cab (but with a Ratshack speaker) so the plan was to build a second cabinet, load both with JBL's and drive the cabinets with a Marshall, because you know Marshall = badass to my 20 year old dumb@zz

So the end of Summer 1978, I had a pretty well paying Summer internship so I bought myself a new Rickenbacker 4001; then I headed up a couple of weeks later to Chuck Levin's to buy that Marshall, IIRC the 50 watt heads were $499 then, the 100 watt heads were $699. I was not even aware Marshall made bass heads I just knew I wanted a Marshall.

I was not that flush with cash so figured I would get the 50 watt head because as anybody back then knew, Marshall watts were like 10 times as loud as Fender watts LOL.

So I get to the store, tell the dude I want to buy a Marshall and he just shakes his head like he had heard all this before and says; "no you don't want that, what you want is an Acoustic"

So he shows me a 220 head and a 320 head, I play both through an Acoustic cabinet in the store and it sounds great.

I still want to try the Marshall though so we go over and plug into a Marshall stack; man what a disappointment; it pretty much sounded like a guitar with a little more bottom end, not like a bass at all. Jacking the bass control helped a little bit but tone controls on a Marshall don't do a lot.

The guy says "see what I mean? Marshalls are great for guitar but not for bass".

So I left the store with a brand new Acoustic 220 head (still own it in fact) and in the process had more than twice the power of a 50 watt Marshall for $170 less.

Over the years I played in bands with a ton of guys who had Marshalls, of all varieties, I would inevitably hook their heads up to my cabinets and no, it didn't sound right. These of course were guitar heads.

Best of luck to the OP in his search for classic tone....

Analogeezer

 

[DJ Bebop]

I will add something that has NOT really been addressed in this thread (and is some what touched on here), is the matter of speaker wattage vs efficiency. Quite often with modern enclosures, yes, they have much higher wattage handling capabilities, in part due to more powerful amplifiers, but wattage does not directly correlate to louder. I have played plenty of more modern cabinets with much higher power handling than the JBL D and K140 2000s cabs I use. And not been terribly impressed by many thus far (personal preference, YMMV). While speaker power has gone up there is a relationship with how efficiently a speaker can handle that power and translate it to volume, and in order to handle that power, often times the efficiency of the speaker is sacrificed. So, let's take a modern 2x15 and modern speakers, vs a 120w amp into 75w 2x15s, they make come out at roughly the same volume. Because those 75w speakers are more efficient, whereas the more modern speakers need to have that higher power to reach an equivalent volume. In some cases I've taken my 2000s and run it through newer cabs (I have used a Mesa 2x15, though I'm not sure if it's the current neo loaded one), and often I have to crank the 2000s to a higher volume on the dial in order to generate the same volume in the room.

Now, are modern amps capable of more volume? Generally yes, however, higher wattage on the amp and speaker does not necessarily mean it will be louder than any other given set-up.



And you see, this is where I take some issue with responses in this thread, 'cause it comes across as a little condescending. Not to disrespect other people's experience, and it's great if you can cover what you want with smaller light weight amps. But it's not "some 'fun vintage-vibey' sort of thing if you never lived it". I'm not talking about a little Kalamazoo amp, or even Fender's less than stellar bass amp offerings at the time. I still gig with a '69 Sunn 2000s and a '69 Hiwatt, with the matched cabs and original speakers, and sure, that was out of reach of everyone but touring acts those days, but it doesn't discount their quality or abilities. I'll grant you PAs have come a long way, but I still lug this equipment around because of how it sounds and my inability to match that sound quality in newer mass market equipment. It's a little annoying to have it written off as "just going for a vibe" cause I didn't live it in the 1960s. Just cause you feel it's outdated doesn't mean it won't work for others.

And maybe it's context. Certainly you want to take something down to the local bar and play covers, you can use whatever you want. But when I'm playing originals in venues and working in my bands, there's the consideration of how to achieve my tone, how I want, not the most versatile or broadly appealing bass tone, and I'll fully admit that there is an aspect of appearance.

I was hip to that! just didn't wanna break it down.
I let you do that!

 

[DJ Bebop]

My understanding was that he bi-amped, using the Marshalls for highs and distortion and sending lows to Ampeg SVTs and 8x10s. No?

Chris Squier did this for a while. He also use Sunn amps for a while too. I saw the Relayer tour and he was using the Sunn gear. That was the same time I was using Sunn and it put a smile on my face because I was expecting to see him play through a Marshall stack

Sunn was made here locally.

 

[Dirk Diggler]

Chris indeed always had his SuperBass Marshall amp, powering a 4x12 cranking straight up under the stage and Andersons feet.
Got to visit the setup several times over a few shows, a good friend was the tech for Alan White.

The Ampeg's were for stage level monitoring, the Marshall was the tone cab, and of course cranked.

 

[Rip Van Dan]

do i just call them??? is there a specific place on their website that i should be directed to to do that? would be appreciated!

Support is where I'd expect to find it. I did find an e-mail address for questions not in the FAQ. It is [email protected]

Here's their Contact Us link:
Contact Us | Eminence Speaker
There used to be a phone number on there somewhere but I'm not seeing it. You'll probably have to e-mail them first, tell then what you're looking for, and then ask for a number to call. There are a few folks here on TB who have talked to them about speaker to cab options.

 

[bon viesta]

Support is where I'd expect to find it. I did find an e-mail address for questions not in the FAQ. It is [email protected]

Here's their Contact Us link:
Contact Us | Eminence Speaker
There used to be a phone number on there somewhere but I'm not seeing it. You'll probably have to e-mail them first, tell then what you're looking for, and then ask for a number to call. There are a few folks here on TB who have talked to them about speaker to cab options.

do you think you can email them questions?

 

[Rip Van Dan]

do you think you can email them questions?

Absolutely! That's the e-mail they want you to send questions to.

 

[DJ Bebop]

I'll leave the technical questions for Andy and Wasnex to figure out, but that was my beginning in those days, so I can only tell you from here today what is was like back in those days . . . . .

So-called 'bass amps' were just that, so-called. Amps themselves and the cabinets and the drivers in them were barely in the 100 watt-ish range, and when the LOUD bands came along (with as someone pointed out earlier, sound reinforcement a similar dream . . . Woodstock scoured the NorthEast for every big MacIntosh power amp that could be had, to run iffy stacks of plywood bins), the amp companies were caught flat-footed. Period. And developing amps and cabinets for bass guitar specifically was in its infancy.

Aside from smooth, recorded bass off Ampeg fliptops (which were next to useless live for anything except a tuxedo, Jazz piano trio in a NICE place), live bass amps were a toss up of whatever you thought might work, and you just had to make do. It wasn't until the advent of the big Acoustics, the SVT's, and the super rare PS300's that makers began to try and put together LOUD and BASS GUITAR in the same sentence. Plus for the average guy playing down that the 19th Hole on Friday and Saturday nights, these were rare and hard to come by . . . .and really expensive, even in the money of those days. Plus remember, SVT's were originally envisioned as a guitar amp.

And basses were half-assed in a lot of ways. I may be the only person you'll ever hear say this, but while I was amazed by his playing, Jack Bruce (especially on the live recordings) just sounded awful, tone-wise. A muddy short-scale EB-something through a creaky Marshall guitar amp just isn't a recipe for success, but . . . . what were his alternatives? Not a lot:

Of course you had Fender Precisions and Jazz Basses. After that, it slid downhill fast, as a lot of the other choices were compromised in one way or another: short-scale, often wonky pickups, a lot of those pickup placements with one at the fingerboard end and the other at the bridge, few string choices (Ric insisted you use their house-brand strings vs. losing your warranty; I never knew if that was really true, but what we all thought), not a lot of string choices. Not a lot of good choices for most of it, really. Coil cords ! !

You just had to make it in loud environments where your rig often could not keep up (I don't know how many times I'd grunt a big bass amp into a stage, only to be killed all night by some guy with a 50-watt single 12 guitar combo), audible unwanted distortion was your constant companion, and it was rare to sound anything like you'd want to, given you're pushing past the redline for 5 hours straight.

. . . . . I often laugh when I read how younger dudes today want that 'vintage' sound, chase after those hoary old monsters we used to have to play through, much less Eastwood making a killing selling re-issue 'Sears catalog' monstrosities like the old Teiscos or Alamos. Lemme outa here ! ! ! !

Let me tell you: It's only some 'fun, vintage-vibey' sort of thing IF you never lived it. But bass guitar was a very new instrument, just invented 15 years earlier in it's useable Fender form, and it took quite a while for the technology to catch up to the players. Of course, it's always been that way for most instruments.

This is why I never, ever complain about ultra-capable 5-pound 800 watt amps and speaker bins that are light years past where I came in, and the same with bass guitars, as well as the rest of the stage, thank goodness.

I like it when a kid hears a record of some bass guy in a field blasting away on a woefully underpowered old amp straining to be heard, fully distorating from 60 years ago. Goes out and buys $10,000 worth of equipment to reproduce it.