spectrum II sound

[Isaac]

I agree, the sound is the important thing. From my point of view, testing is so that I can understand why it sounds the way it does. I don't have access to a 2000S cabinet, so there's no way for me to know how it sounds first hand, But, if I can see a FR (frequency response) plot, I can compare that to my recollection of the 200S FR plot, and that will give me an idea of how it might sound.

As for the 200S FR, I recall it being quite flat for a speaker. Speakers, of course, rarely if ever come close to the ruler-flat response of many amplifiers. As I recall, it was ±3dB, but it's been a few years, so I could be misremembering. Greg, SoundmasterG, was also there, and he may remember better than I.

[EdBass]

I agree, the sound is the important thing. From my point of view, testing is so that I can understand why it sounds the way it does. I don't have access to a 2000S cabinet, so there's no way for me to know how it sounds first hand, But, if I can see a FR (frequency response) plot, I can compare that to my recollection of the 200S FR plot, and that will give me an idea of how it might sound.

As for the 200S FR, I recall it being quite flat for a speaker. Speakers, of course, rarely if ever come close to the ruler-flat response of many amplifiers. As I recall, it was ±3dB, but it's been a few years, so I could be misremembering. Greg, SoundmasterG, was also there, and he may remember better than I.

And thank goodness! True "flat" response sounds, well... Flat. No dynamic, no texture; kinda like a normally hearty, chunky, and delicious stew that was cooked without seasoning, pureed in a food processor and sipped through a straw - still retains the basic content but "lifeless" and boring.
Those little peaks and valleys "spice things up" for our ears, and like spice too much is a disaster and not enough is bland.

SR (sound reinforcement) strives for a "flat" system because the MI (musical instrument) input is hopefully colorful enough that with minor tweaking to compensate for the venue/environment it will sound good passing through with only additional gain added, and the SR system will best serve the artists intentions by being sonically transparent. Less is generally better in  SR land, however most modern SR systems surpass the tone shaping abilities of top shelf recording studios of just a few years ago, in case there is some seriously rank crap (or dry DI feeds) coming from the artists' MI gear.

MI gear needs to have character, and "flat" is the antithesis of character, like my "stew" example. Many bass players fail to understand that, and for some  misguided reason think "flat" is the object of their rigs, as is evidenced by the neophyte "me too" types that often bandwagon post on Bass forums.
But that's another story altogether...

Hopefully I get some good 200S/2000S graphs later this year!

[Isaac]

I hope you do, too.

Personally, I like flat. I think the character should come from my instrument and my playing. I've played my bass through home stereos with extremely flat response, and loved the sound. Most rigs, IMO, are lacking on the low end and try to make up for it with a response peak in the mid bass. That's not a bad compromise, and lots of players prefer that sound. That's the same thing Bose does with its home stereo systems. Similarly, I prefer my tone controls set at zero, for the flattest sound the old Sunns are capable of, which is pretty flat as far as musical instrument amps go. From there, I might add a bit of spice with the tone controls, depending on what the room sounds like.

[EdBass]

Spice can come from any tonal variation; fingers, pickups, tone caps in the instrument, cable capacitance, as well as any nuances in the amp, etc. When I speak of "flat", I mean technically and literally flat.
This rig was flat;



Bi-amped using a Carver PM 1.5 for power, an Ashdown ABM-RPM1 preamp and Hartke 215XL sub module, 410XL, and 405XL high pack. What isn't visible is the Ashly GQ231 and the active xover in the back of the rack.
To soundcheck the rig I ran a RTA through channel 2 of the Ashly and adjusted accordingly to get all the drivers and the poweramp as straightline as humanly possible @ 100dB  (my average stage volume in the band I used the rig in from 1990 - 1996) at 2-3 meters (depending on the available stage room at the venue), then I ran the Ashdown through channel 1 of the Ashly at unity gain with it's EQ set flat and readjusted the entire rig to that same straightline.
It was interesting how much compensation was necessary to get the preamp actually flat when its EQ was showing "flat". This is true with every MI amp I've EQ'ed, somewhere I have a chart showing true "flat" using the knobs on a variety of MI amps and its amazing; knobs set all OVER the place!
Anyway, before I adjusted gig tone I would play my bass a little "flat". Flat sounds like mid, mid, mid, mid. The first adjustment was always scooping it out.
It sounds that way because humans don't HEAR flat, the human ear is far more sensitive to 500hz - 3-4khz than to the surrounding frequencies, and rolls off both above and below, generally rolls off harder above and high frequency attenuation is generally even more pronounced with age and EXTENDED EXPOSURE TO SPL'S ABOVE 80dB (does that describe anyone on this forum?). At around 80hz (and 100ish dB) the wavelengths are long enough to physically vibrate internal structures, and around 5hz to 15hz you can pretty much hear without you ears at all. I'm not making this up, ask a Doctor of Audiology.

So... This is why I make the comment that true "flat" response sounds flat; because it does. Like talking into a cup. It's also why SR cabs are tuned with instruments in an anechoic chamber and MI cabs are usually (final) tuned by ears.
If you listen to pink or even more so white noise all you really hear is the midrange hiss, even though 20hz and 20Khz are also there at the same SPL level. Brownian noise compensates in the lower frequencies, but not generally used for anything other than specific lab work, as is purple noise, etc.
Anyone who has experienced white or pink noise at system test levels knows what I'm referring to. It's freekin' midrange obnoxious, I wear head gear and listen with my eyes using a reference mic and meters, it's worse than waterboarding (I think).

But, in summary there is no accounting for what sounds good to any individual, it's personal preference. Which is why there isn't only one amp, bass, guitar, SR system, etc. That would sure be boring.

BTW, Bose "cheats", but I find their sound pleasing to my ears, and I've never tested it but if old Sunns are true flat at zero across the board I would be very surprised indeed. They would be the only amp I've ever heard of that was.

[Isaac]

Yes, Bose does cheat, but a lot of people like it. That's why they're so successful. As for old Sunns being truly flat, of course they're not. Nothing is. But they were intended to be, essentially, high fidelity amps. High fidelity wasn't as high back then as it is now, when even cheap Asian IC amps are orders of magnitude flatter and lower distortion than anything available back then.

The 200S preamp rolls off at 6dB/octave below 80Hz unless the LOW BOOST switch is on. The tone controls are boost only, so should be at their flattest when at zero or thereabouts. Flat for a 60's MI amp is several dB of variation. But even if we assume a relatively flat response for the preamp, essentially flat for the power amp, and nearly so for the speaker, there are still the interactions. Do the frequency response variations add to each other, or do they cancel each other out? And what about the interaction between the amp and its output impedance and the speaker's impedance? Besides, there's a lot more to how a system sounds than just FR. One thing a wide, flat FR contributes to is transient response. And, flat or not, I really like the sound of the 200S into JBLs.

[EdBass]

My definition of "flat" is equal amplitude across the usable audio spectrum of frequency, in the case of humans 20hz-20khz (on a good day). I'm not referring to what sounds balanced to the human ear, which is where the confusion lies IMO. I am talking about true flat response.

Flat in this context, as it relates to MI amplification does not sound pleasing to the ear; it isn't supposed to, the only useful purpose it serves in the live music production world is as a point of reference.
In music re-production (monitoring) "flat" is a goal to be obtained because the idea in reproduction is to recreate the source material as colorlessly as possible by only adding gain. In live music reproduction "pinking" is used to get a starting point or "base mix" to build on, but mostly to even out hot spots, standing waves, etc. because once the people get there it's pretty much like starting over.
If you are at a big live show and the PA sounds killer from the very first measure of the first song, it's either the second (third, fourth, etc.) night for the band at that venue or just a lucky coincidence.

I plug straight in, won't even use a wireless much less any silly pedals or effects. I haven't gigged a transistor amp in about 15 years, my high tech "Seinfeldian" tone days of pursuing high tech, total control over my rig are almost 20 years behind me.
When I listen to/watch recordings of me from those days I'm a bit sad because I had much better chops and was prettier then, but mostly embarrassed because I thought my super scooped, percussive tone and octave popping lightning scales were the shiznit; and even more ashamed by the fact that you can tell I thought so by my elitist stage attitude.

Well, we all live and learn but often things come full circle. I'm right back where I was in the 70's when it come to tone and a 200S/2000S rig is maybe the best tone I know of for a passive bass guitar, and probably my personal favorite.
A B15N sounds pretty good too, it's hard to beat a SVT for loud live R n' R  work, and my Reeves rig just freekin' kills at big, deep, clean and "chimey".



But thankfully none of them even gets close to being "true flat", but it's a moot point because frequency response has little to do with whether or not a rig sounds good.

[Soundmasterg]

I believe it was 3db Conrad was referencing back then since that is what he often deals with, but its been like 5 years or something. I'll ask him if we can get a LMS plot of my 2000S cabinet, and see if I can get those results and the 200S results to share. I may even be able to do a plot for an SVT cabinet, though not sure on that one. I'm trying to sell a couple SVT cabinets so if they get sold before we get around to doing a plot, then thats that...haha.

I'll let you guys know if I can arrange something with him and if we get any useful results to share.

Greg

P.S. One thing I forgot to mention is that the little 1x15 that I made that has the Sunn 200S and 2000S dimensions and half the 200S port size is almost identical to the 200S in its response, but didn't quite go as low... if I remember correctly, it was maybe 10 Hz different on the low end, which makes sense since it is a smaller cabinet overall. It was also a little more peaky. We did it with and without the two 6 inch speakers I added to it and of course with the speakers it goes up much higher than the 200S cabinet. It also uses an E140 instead of the D series, so that makes a difference.

[CLD]

Geez, I'm still horrified about the people who want a dirty sound from their Reeves amp!

 

[EdBass]

Geez, I'm still horrified about the people who want a dirty sound from their Reeves amp!

 

I understand why Reeves felt compelled to explore the "dirty mod" concept, but I'm with you about why someone would want to nasty up a Reeves. Different horses for different courses I suppose.

[CLD]

BTW, I still hope to get a C225 before too much longer. 

[EdBass]

BTW, I still hope to get a C225 before too much longer. 

I personally think the C225 is far more practical for most situations than it's big brother the C400, and has all the power I ever need and then some; but much to my surprise since it's introduction the C400 has outsold the C225 by a greater than 3:1 ratio.
When Reeves told me they were building a 400 watter for me to evaluate, I was concerned that very few buyers would be interested in paying an additional $800 for a 400 watt version of an amp that was already as strong as just about anything available.
I suppose it's just yet another example of why Reeves sells amps faster than they can build them and I still haven't delivered any.
 
In fact this C400/C225 disparity has created a very interesting situation that may be of some interest to you Carter, I'll email you the details once I get an update on it's status...

[CLD]

Thanks, Ed! 

[Soundmasterg]

Just a heads up for you guys. I talked to Conrad last night and he is open to the possibility of getting a nice LMS plot on the 2000S cabinet. We will have to wait until he is doing something else, and I will bring my cabinet over to test. So hopefully sometime this summer. I will make a new post with the results when it happens.

Greg

[Isaac]

Shall I bring my 200S cabinet at the same time?