Think A Speaker Is Just A Speaker?

[Superlizard]

One of the most ignored parts (from a tone standpoint) of players' rigs is the speaker.

The wrong speaker can make your rig sound like poo; the right one can make it shine.

Here's an excellent YouTube vid comparing 15 popular speakers:

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWK0sa7tlfI&feature=related[/youtube]

 

[whyachi]

I would have thought those were different guitars completely.. That's pretty impressive.

 

[jackthehack]

Now y'all should see why my answer to any question regarding speakers is "Celestion Vintage 30s"....

 

[CouchSpud]

Now y'all should see why my answer to any question regarding speakers is "Celestion Vintage 30s"....

No doubt about that.

 

[OzziePete]

Hey thanx for poosting that, great comparison....

 

[Panthur]

Cool test but no clean tone. I would have thought a clean tone would show a bit more of the difference in the immediacy of the speakers rather than the compressed sounds coming from the valve distortion.
Still a really cool test though.

 

[Volitions Advocate]

Now y'all should see why my answer to any question regarding speakers is "Celestion Vintage 30s"....

My Rivera has vintage 30s in it and I'd agree.  Although I did like the sound of the Eminence Swamp Thang,  I don't know that I'd build a whole amp around it though...

 

[Mor Paul]

I can't believe I'm saying this, but thanks for posting that, SL.

 

[stubhead]

Yep, it's huge. What I grew up listening to has become the defined types of acceptable classic rock tones, and there are two divergent approaches. One is the Duane Allman (Altec-Lansing) and Carlos Santana (JBL) approach of feeding howling tubes to a dead-clean, high-capacity hi-fidelity PA speaker. The other approach is that of including speaker distortion into the tone, from slicing them up to overdriving them, to just plain shredding them.... Jim Marshall and his addicts are largely responsible for this becoming a "classic" sound, because he packed his cabinet with the cheapest speaker he could buy by the boxcar back then, which happened to be the forerunners of the Celestion "Greenback" and "Classic 30" speakers.

They're called that now - because their fartiness is prized - but back then they were just cheap, exploding speakers. Marshall's plan of giving away stacks and stacks of cabinets to Hendrix, Clapton, Townsend, Page has paid off extremely well over the years, huh? The reason they toured with so many heads and cabinets was because they blew so many up. arty07:

The other aspect of speakers that is hugely important is their response curve, and compression. Every speaker rolls off highs to a greater or lesser degree, which is why PA cabinets have a crossover network powering tweeters or horns too. Try plugging a howling tube head into a full spectrum PA cabinet if you want to split your teeth with harsh icepick highs, huh? Speakers also compress the output to a greater or lesser degree, rolling off attack and limiting peaks - as do all tube amp systems, which means the tubeheads who claim to "hate" compression are a bit under-informed. 

 

[Superlizard]

Extra note:

I posted this only to show the differences speakers can do to your tone, not to show that, "X speaker is the best speaker of them all".

Remember that this is only a reference - unless you have that exact Rivera amp and the exact Les Paul in the vid, you cannot say with 100% certainty, "oh X speaker sounds kick-ass in this vid, so I'm getting it for my Peavey Bandit+PRS combo"... said speaker might sound like crap in your rig.

And I feel sorry for the poor bastard who had to keep playing the same riff/solo 15 times over... man I know what that's like... well done!  :icon_jokercolor:

 

[Superlizard]

Speakers also compress the output to a greater or lesser degree, rolling off attack and limiting peaks - as do all tube amp systems, which means the tubeheads who claim to "hate" compression are a bit under-informed.

For myself, It all depends on how much compression... too much, and the tone becomes flat and non-dynamic... just
like an over-compressed mix.

 

[Death by Uberschall]

Cool test but no clean tone. I would have thought a clean tone would show a bit more of the difference in the immediacy of the speakers rather than the compressed sounds coming from the valve distortion.
Still a really cool test though.

One thing I look for in a speaker is how it smooths out the grit and grind of an amp. Hard to determine that with a pure clean tone. You can use that info to smooth out an overly bright or fizzy amp. Greenbacks are great for that.

 

[Cagey]

I'm sure this is the first time I've ever seen a component critical to live sound reviewed/compared properly. All the variables have been taken out except for the device under test. Here we have the same amp, same guitar, same player, same piece of music, same enclosure, on and on. The only thing that changes is the speaker, so you can judge its performance. That makes this a reference video.

 

[stubhead]

Well, there's certainly nothing wrong with using speaker choice to tune the final output, it's am important part of how it's done. But, there are a lot of people who aren't really aware that what they want to have happen is some tone shaping, some softening of attack, and some compression, and maybe some speaker overdrive. They just keeping changing speakers and amps and pickups etc. over and over (and over) without ever figuring out what it is that's lacking, or over-loud or harsh. There have been a lot of "happy accidents" that resulted in certain great tones, but it's good to know that there are a number of ways to tame a 2K spike, for example (Hendrix actually used a hideous curly cord just for that purpose).

I personally like speakers that play clean, but effectively kill everything above 2.5K or so - EV's, JBL's, Altec-Lansing, Black Widow "PA" or bass speakers all work. I want the same tone at all different volumes, rather than have five different amps for different-sized rooms (I know a bunch of these guys, hmmm - sounds like an excuse to buy a lot of stuff? :toothy12

It just helps to get educated about what components actually do and where frequencies are - the proportions of upper and lower-mids to highs are real important, especially with overdrive. A lot of people actually think that "mid-range" is somewhere in the middle of the guitar neck :toothy12: - did you know that the fundamental D note on the high string at the 22nd fret is only 587Hz? 
I think Larry DiMarzio permanently goinked up the universe when he named his pickup the "Super Distortion" because it had high output - sorry, but if your pickup is distorting, it's fuckin' broke... ccasion14:

 

[Cagey]

There have been a lot of "happy accidents" that resulted in certain great tones, but it's good to know that there are a number of ways to tame a 2K spike, for example (Hendrix actually used a hideous curly cord just for that purpose).

You may be giving Mr. Hendrix a lot more credit than is justified for that happy accident. Back in those days, curly cords were de rigueur. Everybody used them, and the vast majority of them were junk. It wasn't until the mid '70s when Whirlwind came out with their "Cobra" cords that you started seeing high-quality instrument cords used in music, and even then it was a while before straight cords got popular, and that only because a coiled Cobra cord weighed about 2lbs, even more when you considered the pull the coiling added. You could pull over a Marshall stack with a coiled Cobra if you weren't careful. Little combos on wheels would follow you around stage <grin>

Looky here. And stop actin' so crazy!​

 

[Super Turbo Deluxe Custom]

With that video and an un-trained ear, the differences are obvious.  Especially at the beginning.  I think some of that is in the editing of the order of the speakers used.  Several sounded very similar and if all of the similar ones were played after each other, you'd never hear much of a difference except when comparing the 1st and last.  A is like B is like C is like D..........but A is nothing like Z.  Like cutting fence boards and instead of measuring each one, you use the one you just cut and they progressively get longer.  What I'm getting at is, I could hear ones that i liked more than others.  The ones I didn't like, I wouldn't necessarily notice in a real world situation w/out an A/B test.

 

[TBurst Std]

That is a good link for anyone who hasn't. About as differentiating are mikes, mike placements and cabinet design/build. Back when I was analog, I'd carry 4-6 different types of mikes to be able to get the FOH sound I desired.

 

[ORCRiST]

Now y'all should see why my answer to any question regarding speakers is "Celestion Vintage 30s"....

Ah, but are you referring to the Vintage 30's made in England or China...?

 

[Death by Uberschall]

Now y'all should see why my answer to any question regarding speakers is "Celestion Vintage 30s"....

Ah, but are you referring to the Vintage 30's made in England or China...?

Or the the English Vintage 30's that are pulled based on Mesa's specified curve response after initial testing of each speaker...?  :toothy11:

 

[Cagey]

My brother pointed out something I hadn't considered after being so excited to see somebody doing a credible test of a piece of gear. That is, the efficiency isn't shown very well because it's a YouTube recording, so there's little or no change in dynamic range or loudness from one sample to the next. In real life, a speaker that has a 95% efficiency rating and one that has a 98% rating is going to show a doubling of loudness. It's most apparent when you listen to something like the EVM-12L and whatever comes before/after it. They sound a lot more similar to each other than they should.