Peaveys best kept secret!!!

Bobbe Seymour · Post by **Bobbe Seymour** » 8 Apr 2002 6:14 pm

Steve, this is a Mike Brown question.
Hey MIKEEEE !

Paul Graupp · Post by **Paul Graupp** » 8 Apr 2002 6:44 pm

Bobbe; I hestitated for some time now not wanting to post this but I'm not new to a controversy so here goes.

There is a theory in speakers that goes somnething like this: Each time you double the number of similar speakers, you half the low frequency responce of the unit/assembly.

I really think this is the effect Curly Chalker found when he used two Fender Bassman amps that had 4/10's in each amp. It was the main factor I was looking for in the Texas Sound series and I believe I read once where someone of the Forum said " You would not believe the low end of these speakers " in regards to those units.

I no longer make those things and haven't for years but you have heard them and you know from where I speak. So I think I would say 4/10s have a lower bottom than 2/12s. A guy who played bass with Marty Stuart said the best bass amp made was a Peavey 8/10 but it didn't come with a fork lift.......

Eight seems to be a commonly recurring figure in the number of speakers and maybe that is a question someone else might be more qualified to consider. It just happens too often not to be noticed.

Regards, Paul

Steven Welborn · Post by **Steven Welborn** » 8 Apr 2002 7:44 pm

If more bottom end is to be had with 410's than 212's, I'm wondering if you still reap the benefit of the top end that 10 inchers offer? In other words, if the low frequency responce is halved when the number of similar speakers are doubled, is high frequency responce lowered as well?

Bobbe Seymour · Post by **Bobbe Seymour** » 8 Apr 2002 7:56 pm

Yes Paul, You and I both have a lot of experience with this subject, but most of my building and expermenting has come in the form of enclosed, or baffeled speakers. This means that you have the upper hand in your extensive experience in building multi speaker, open back cabnets. I bow to you on this and am willing to learn more.I think your work on the enclosers you manufactured was beyond reprouch and can't understand why folks didn't beat your door down to get more! I love em'.
Are you saying that 4 10" spkrs that equal the same amount of square inches that 2 12" spkrs do, will make more bass? Inquiering minds want to know. I love knowledge! (I'm even learning to spell!)
What about 8 6" spkrs compared to one 18" spkr, if the "wetted area" is the same?
Your brother, Bobbe

Bobbe Seymour · Post by **Bobbe Seymour** » 8 Apr 2002 8:00 pm

Steve, quit thinking! Yes, tho, I think you are right, and this is one reason Pauls Speaker cabnets sounded so great! The highs AND lows were there! The highs were not lowered! He reaped the benifit of both, little speakers for the highs and a lot of them to make bass, Hummmmmmm, Paul ain't to dumb! And you think pretty good Steve![This message was edited by BobbeSeymour on 08 April 2002 at 09:02 PM.][This message was edited by BobbeSeymour on 08 April 2002 at 09:03 PM.]

RichardMcKinney · Post by **RichardMcKinney** » 8 Apr 2002 9:32 pm

In response to Bobbe's reference to the Blazer 158 I bought one just as a starter steel amp last year. The amp with only 15 watts / 8" speaker does o.k. However I just purchased a Nashville 400 minus the Lemay mod from Larry Behm.I must say that the difference between these two amps is amazing. My Carter sounds like a powerhouse now. The lows, mids, highs are crystal clear. With the 158 I could'nt get the chord seperation that the 400 offers.
I'm sure that when I get my Derby it will sound even sweeter. Just my thoughts. I'm considering selling the 158.

------------------
Keep on Steelin
Carter 4/k 3/p Thanks Larry

Paul Graupp · Post by **Paul Graupp** » 9 Apr 2002 5:26 am

Bobbe: I tried to post this three times last night but my server kept dropping the connection; finally I gave up.

The surface area isn't a factor in my speakers since the low responce is created by the multiple elements acting in concert.
Somewhere in front of the baffle board, the waves combine and act that way. You can't change the design parameters of any individual speaker but like an ILS Localizer which uses many yagi antennas, the result is in the space forward of the antennas when all of those signals combine.

The surface area of 8/5" spkrs is 14.2xx inches so actually it is close to a 15 inch unit in surface area. Each speaker is rated at 80 Hz to 15KHz and power at 50 watts continuos. The result is a cabinet capable of 400 watts continuos at 10Hz to 15KHz.

Of the original 400 spkrs, I have never heard of one failure. I think the wiring arrangement of series/parrallel presents a different load to the amp although it is a nominal 4 ohms. Perhaps this is why none have failed to my knowledge.

I know longer make the units and haven't for years. So I'm not looking for kudos or such. If you have some left, they are the last. I still use two with closed backs; infinite baffles. Eddy Thomas still swears by them and a guy in Dallas and one in St Louis still use them to my knowledge. I won't mention names as they may have gone elsewhere as well.

Build a better mouse trap and the world will..... One well known user said I was sitting on a gold mine. I told him to send me a shovel because I couldn't see any !!

Best Regards, Paul

[This message was edited by Paul Graupp on 09 April 2002 at 06:28 AM.]

Paul Graupp · Post by **Paul Graupp** » 9 Apr 2002 9:46 am

Bobbe: I apologize for missing your question!! The answer is yes if you had 2x12s that went down to 60 Hz each then a pair would reproduce 30 Hz as I explained above.

On the other hand; 4x10s where each would reproduce 80 Hz would go down to 20 Hz. This is where the detractors come flying out at me but if you haven't heard it you could never believe it. Bigger is lower and smaller is higher. Combine them and you get both. Popular Electronics began this principle back in the 60s but until today's modern speakers became a reality, it wouldn't work for music amplification. That's all I did, an old idea with new speakers.

Sorry, Paul

[This message was edited by Paul Graupp on 09 April 2002 at 10:47 AM.]

Doug Childress · Post by **Doug Childress** » 9 Apr 2002 12:37 pm

One of the best small Peavey amps for the bedroom is an Encore 65 with a 12" speaker. I have used mine in Stereo with a Nashville 400 played through a profex II. The sound was great. The 65 has pre and post amp with a pump adjustment, High/mid/low freq., presence, and reverb. I have thought about getting a second one and reduce my load for gigs.

Doug Childress · Post by **Doug Childress** » 9 Apr 2002 12:40 pm

I forgot to mention that on the Encore 65 it has a tube pre-amp section which gives it a warm tone. I wish Peavey would go back to this design. I do not like the transtube amps for steel. In my opinion they don't reproduce the lows that are necessary for the instrument.

Randy Pettit · Post by **Randy Pettit** » 9 Apr 2002 1:19 pm

May I chime in and sing the praises of the Peavey Classic 30 amp? I tried going the small home practice amp route (Fender Frontman 15R), but couldn't stand the 8" speaker or crummy reverb, so I went with versatility. I wanted something I could play guitar with, as well as give a decent sound for steel. I think the Classic 30 does both jobs very well. The 12" speaker and smooth EL84 power tubes are more than adequate for steel at home or rehearsal session. Plus for guitar, it's got more power than a Fender Blues Jr., has an effects loop, and costs less!

Bobbe Seymour · Post by **Bobbe Seymour** » 9 Apr 2002 4:15 pm

Randy, yes, I agree, I have sold several Classic 30 amps to many very happy users!
Paul, Wow! You do know your stuff, as if I didn't already admire you!
Bobbe

Paul Graupp · Post by **Paul Graupp** » 9 Apr 2002 5:33 pm

Bobbe: Check the Humor Forum....you may want to change that statement !@!

Steven Welborn · Post by **Steven Welborn** » 9 Apr 2002 8:28 pm

Paul, Since you no longer make these 4/10 speakers systems/cabs(thats what they are right?), would you be willing to share the essentials in their design? Dimensions, components,etc.
This threads got me all goo-goo about gettin one of these classic 50 babys right away(thanks Bobbe!), particularly since my webb,s takin ill. Local music store has one 212 in stock and I dont really want to wait TWO WHOLE WEEKS for a 410. My thought is to get the "twin" model and make a seperate custom 410 cab. I appreciate you knowledge in this area of speaker science. Facinating stuff.

Paul Graupp · Post by **Paul Graupp** » 10 Apr 2002 1:15 pm

Steven: There isn't a whole lot to tell about the cabinets but I'll share what I have found.

The speakers were found at MCM Electronics in Dayton, Ohio. We used three different types in the project; paper cones, smooth aluminum cones and wavy aluminum cones. They are all 5 inch units and with exception of the wavy alum which was 35 watts, were all 50 watt units.

Wood was usually 3/4" birch ply with no voids and sometimes we used walnut or oak solid wood. There were many tonal qualities to each wood and speaker used but basically were all very loud and very clear.

The first cabinets were rather crude but later we used a glued datoed structure with the baffle board enclosed by the sides and top & bottom. We experiments with full open backs, half backs or less and fully closed backs (infinite baffles) with no ports.
Had we ever gone into production, we had a design for a removalble baffle board but that never happened.

The first units had 3 spkrs down each side and two in a middle row. We learned that they sounded better or their sides so we then went to 3 on the top and bottom rows and two in the middle.

The cabinets were roughly 17.5" H x 18.5" W x
11" deep and with spkrs, weighed between 33 and 35 pounds. The cabinets were painted or stained and had we gone into production, would have had several other covering options.

All spkrs were 8 ohms. When wired into four legs of two spkrs in series. 8 + 8 = 16/four= 4 ohms nominal output impedance. 50 watt units netted a cabinet with 400 watt capacity continuous/800 watts peak power capacity. And I stated earlier, a calculated frequency bandwidth of 10 Hz to 15 KHz.

Born to soon ?? Born too late ??

Regards, Paul

Bobbe Seymour · Post by **Bobbe Seymour** » 10 Apr 2002 7:36 pm

Paul G., stay out of the humor section, you have no business there! You belong here!
Richard Mc. No kidding? Look at the difference in the money! You belong in the humor section!--------(just kidding)

Don Rickels!

Steven Welborn · Post by **Steven Welborn** » 12 Apr 2002 10:21 pm

Paul G., gee whiz..I thought Bobbe was using the 5" speaker as an extreme example. I would imagine some might of had a pschological thing about playin pedal steel thru a 5 incher..even if there were eight of em. I believe the testimony about the results though. Now I've gotta bug in me to build one of these things or something like it. Maybe something in between a 4/10 and 8/5 such as a 6/8, resulting in a "twin" shaped cabinet(two horizontal rows of three). In this case, if each speaker was 8 ohms and you had three legs of two speakers per leg in series (16+16+16), what would that yield something like a 6 ohm load? That's still works for most of our amps right? Another question... whatever the combined wattage output of the speakers are, wont it require an amp with a matching power output (or actually somewhere not far below it) to drive them? Please, anyone else chime in on this. Thanks for sharing all this info Paul. this is extremely intrigueing. BTW, did you favor any one of those types of speakers? Never heard of aluminum cones before. [This message was edited by Steven Welborn on 12 April 2002 at 11:24 PM.]

Paul Graupp · Post by **Paul Graupp** » 12 Apr 2002 10:58 pm

Steven: In one of my answers to Bobbe I mentioned about 8 fives being about 14.25"
surface area. Since all the units react as one, that's almost a 15 inch speaker. Perhaps you are right in folks thinking you couldn't play steel through a 5" spkr and that may be why they never went any where.

I use paper cones but a friend here in town prefers a brighter tone and uses the wavy aluminum cones. It's a personnal taste thing. He has open backs, I have closed.

I'm not sure but I think I'd keep the speaker (s) power rating near the amp rating.
A low rated amp may run into the power supply rails and put DC on the speakers which would harm them. An overpowered amp to spkr situation could also damage the voice coils. I use a DPC-1000 on two 400 watt speaker cabinets. My friend uses a DPC-750 on two 280 watt cabinets. So we're both a little over but we never get into the really high powered music so no risk is involved. You'd have to evaluate your playing requirements.

Your load of 5.3 ohms would fit common 4 ohm amplifiers OK.

Regards, Paul

[This message was edited by Paul Graupp on 12 April 2002 at 11:59 PM.]

Hamilton Barnard · Post by **Hamilton Barnard** » 13 Apr 2002 8:12 am

I remember seeing some Bose stereo speakers in the 70's in which each cabinet had 9 three inch speakers. I laughed...until I heard them; I was stunned at the amount of bass coming from those cabs.

Changed my thinking forever...maybe for the worse. Heck, Bobbe's even my friend...

------------------
My Marshalls.

Andy Greatrix · Post by **Andy Greatrix** » 13 Apr 2002 12:20 pm

Has anyone ever tried Kevlar
(the stuff they put in bullet-proof vests)
for speakers,instead of paper, aluminum, etc.

I don't know what I'm talking about,
so I don't know that it can't be done.

Does it come in various consistencys?[This message was edited by Andy Greatrix on 13 April 2002 at 04:23 PM.]

Paul Graupp · Post by **Paul Graupp** » 14 Apr 2002 9:10 am

Andy: It seems to me I've heard or read somewhere about Kevlar in speakers cones. I have loaned out my MCI catalog so I can't look there, but yes it does ring a bell.

Hamilton: You have reminded me of a gig we played once at a Florida State Sorority. They had set up two Bose speakers on either side of the bandstand for intermission music.

Our bass player sorta mocked them but I told him: Wait until you hear them......I can recall his amazed expression to this day. I still don't think he believes what he heard !!

Regards, Paul

Dennis Detweiler · Post by **Dennis Detweiler** » 14 Apr 2002 2:01 pm

The early Bose was unique. I worked with a show from Branson in the late 70s-early 80s that used this system. The amp had two handles and usually required two people to carry it. It took a big amp to drive the lows through the sealed cabinets(no ports). Bose came out with a ported model soon after, but I did't know of anyone using that model. I also heard a band out of Wisconsin that used the Bose system. They mic'ed all the instruments through it. A very compact and powerful unit.
The bullet proof speakers would be handy in some night clubs! :~)[This message was edited by Dennis Detweiler on 14 April 2002 at 06:08 PM.]

Rick Garrett · Post by **Rick Garrett** » 15 Apr 2002 12:53 pm

Looking forward to getting that new Classic 50/212 Bobbe. COMON UPS.

Rick

Roger Crawford · Post by **Roger Crawford** » 16 Apr 2002 6:29 pm

Bobbe...any experience with the Tube Sweetener?

Paul Graupp · Post by **Paul Graupp** » 16 Apr 2002 7:59 pm

Roger: Bobbe's best best man, Jeff, may help you on this. Back in the Electronics Forum, 26 Feb is a thread started by Mike Brown of Peavey and it begins with the words: Jeff Peterson.....

Regards, Paul