[Duke]

I've done some research and prototyping and tried several promising-looking drivers, and found what I think is a very nice (if somewhat unorthodox) combination that works well for a two-way bass guitar cabinet (woofer + midrange).  Not surprisingly my driver cost is on the high side, so I'll be competing in the same arena as some of the higher-priced "boutique" bass cabinet manufacturers.

I also took a look at some of the specialty bass guitars on the market, in particular those designed for low-B or lower tunings.  The Quake from Knuckle Guitar Works is an interesting and rather extreme example, as it's designed for tunings lower than low-B, such as low-A, low-F#, and even the ultralow-E below normal low-E. 

Now, a note about bass guitar cab tunings:  As a general rule, it is not necessary to reproduce the fundamental.  In fact, most bass cabs are -8 dB or more at 41 Hz, the fundamental of low-E.  Most of the energy of the note is carried by the first few harmonics, and the ear reconstructs the missing fundamental from the harmonic sequence.  But obviously if we want to reproduce the ultralow-E below low-E, then we need to have strong output down to 41 Hz.  I think that only a handful of manufacturers offer anything in this category.  Fortunately most bass players don't need that much extension, and so paying the price in cabinet size and weight to get such capability makes no sense most of the time.

So anyway, back to the bass cabs I'm working on.  Why would the world need yet another bass cab?   Well, I think there's room for improvement in radiation pattern uniformity over what's currently being offered.  Specifically, I think that reasonably uniform coverage over a fairly wide frontal arc is desirable, and I don't think any off-the-shelf bass cabs are offering what I can in this regard.  And if I can offer something competitive to the ultra-low-tuning end of the market while I'm at it, so much the better. 

My plan is to offer three different-sized cabs, all with the same nice driver complement and desirable radiation characteristics mentioned above. 

The smallest cab will be very good for a normal 4-string (low-E tuning), and good but not ideal with a normal 5-string (low-B tuning).  Weight will be ballpark 45-50 pounds.   

The middle-sized cab will be very good all the way down to low-A tuning, and good but not ideal with low-F tuning.  Weight will be ballpark 60-65 pounds.

The biggest cab will be very good all the way down to ultralow-E below low-E tuning.  Weight will be ballpark 75-80 pounds.

At this point I'm not sure what the prices will be, because I don't yet know what my total cabinet cost is going to be.  But I would expect them to end up scattered between $1100 and $1500 apiece.

Another niche market that I might make a run on is the amplified acoustic double-bass player.  For that application, very high quality definitely takes precedence over high output, and powerful bottom-end response is actually undesirable; what is prized is tight, fast bass.  Well, it just so happens that if we plug the port on the smallest cab, we end up with a quite decent sealed box.  At this point I don't yet have any feedback from double-bass players, but when I get the chance I'll have a DB player see what he thinks of the smallest cab in sealed box mode.

Obviously I've left out quite a bit of information and specs that bass players would be interested in knowing; all of that will be coming along in due time.  This is just the teaser.

Anyway, thanks for taking a look.

Duke

[Ericus Rex]

Very interesting!  What size cones would each cabinet use and how many?  Would you get the added extension of the larger cabinets by the size of the cabinets alone?  or do you also change the cone size and/or quantity of drivers?

I'd say there's definitely a market (though small) for a cabinet that can do what you're proposing.

Good luck!

[Duke]

Hi Ericus,

Thanks for your encouragement!

All of the added bass extension in the larger versions comes solely from increased internal volume.  All three versions use the same bass driver, and I would guess that several manufacturers besides myself are rushing to put this relatively new driver into a bass cab.  Specific details on the design will have to wait a bit.

[Duke]

The smallest cab described above might go on hold and be replaced by a 35-40-pounder that would use a different driver complement and not play as loud, but would be one-hand portable for smaller gigs.  It would be very good with low-B tuning, so it would go a bit deeper than the more efficient 45-50 pounder.  Seems to me there's a market for "easy carry" cabs, and 35-40 pounds is at the upper end of that market.   Price would probably be in the $700-$900 ballpark. 

[Quiet Earth]

How's the cab work coming along Duke? Making any progress?

Any plans to build a trickle-down combo amp for the traveling garage bassist? Maybe that could be your entry level model. I'll bet there are lots of guys like me who have to go over to the drummer's house for band practice, or over to someone's garage (or back yard) for a party. The things that I would look for to replace my little Ampeg practice amp would be :

1. Reasonably Portable. No point in hurting myself.
2. Everything in one box. By the time the drummer and guitar player lay out all their stuff, there's very little room for me and more stuff.
3. Sounds good in multiple locations. A small room, a garage, or a back yard patio. Placement, as you say, should be less of an issue. Gee, is this even possible? I would love to hear more about this!
4. In keeping with item #1, would I still be able to play loud enough with Mr. Guitar Hero and the deaf drummer? Well, I suppose that's asking too much ............ 

[Duke]

Hello Quiet Earth,

I've been on a road trip so sorry this reply is late...

The bass cabs have ungone a few revisions.   

I won't be doing a combo amp because investing in a custom amplifier section is too much for me right now.   Besides, advances in avaliable lightweight head amps are taking place fairly rapidly, so compatibility with available and future lightweight head amps would probably be more useful.  In this case, "compatibility" means four-ohm load and high power handling.  There are a lot of lightweight cabs out there, but relatively few that can both draw and handle the full output of a 500 or 600 watt ultralight head.  Many claim to handle that much power, but an analysis of their excursion capability reveals that their real-world power handling is much less - meaning they will "fart out" long before taking full advantage of the amp's output.

One of the cabs I'll be testing in the next few days will be about 37 pounds and handle 600 watts input with normal 4-string tuning.   It will measure about 21" by 19" by 10" deep, and will carry sort of like a medium-sized suitcase.  The tradeoff for the shallow depth of the enclosure is reduced low bass output; it probably wouldn't be an ideal cab for five-string.

Duke

[Quiet Earth]

Thanks Duke!

It actually never occurred to me that I could manage a head and a lightweight cab easier than a big bulky combo. Me thinks me needs to rethinks! 

I'll keep a watchful eye on your progress..................

[Duke]

I have two bass cabinets on their way to beta testers right now.

One is a 36-pound 2x12 cab (no mid or tweeter) that is shaped sort of like a suitcase at 22" by 20" by about 11" deep.  It's best suited for low-E tuning, and the bottom end could benefit from a little bass boost (that's the tradeoff for using an undersized cab).  But the drivers I'm using have enough excursion that they can take some boost.  With 3 dB of boost below 100 Hz and low-E tuning, this cab can handle 900 watts thermal and mechanical.  Note that most bass cabs are only spec'd thermally; often they run out of excursion and "fart out" well below their thermal limits.  Air-moving capability (based on woofer cone area times excursion) is greater than that of a typical 4x10. 

The other cab is considerably larger and more complex.  It's a 58-pound 2x12 with a midrange (no tweeter; the mid goes up to about 7 kHz).   The woofers in this cab have more excursion than the ones in the lightweight cab (ths cab exceeds the air-moving capability of most 6x10s), but it gives up some efficiency.  Where the woofer's pattern has narrowed to 90 degrees, it is crossed over to a 90-degree (in the horizontal plane) constant-directivity waveguide-loaded midrange.  Power handling is 900 watts thermal or mechanical with low-B tuning.

Pending the outcome of beta testing, I have several other cabs in mind. 

Assuming these cabs go into production I'll post some pictures, probably in a new thread, but I'm holding off on pictures in case I need to make some changes. 

Duke

[Duke]

One of my beta-test cabs will be revised significantly, and one will be revised just a little.

The latter cab gets a good review in a post on a TalkBass forum by its beta tester, whose moniker is JimmyM:

http://www.talkbass.com/forum/showthread.php?t=565114&highlight=

While at first glance there doesn't appear to be a connection between bass cabs and home audio, one will become apparent at some point.   I've learned a few things that will translate into the world of home audio.

[Quiet Earth]

Great beta-test review Duke!

Keep us posted on the little one's progress too.