Guitar Cabinet - DIY

D

David Katauskas

New member
I think it's just rediculous that we have to spend almost $1,000 on a good guitar cabinet that consists of $300 in retail materials...seemingly.
I'll probably get some nice speakers, but what does the actual cabinet consist of? (baffles, instulation, ...?)

Can anyone recommend information on building a good guitar cabinet? Has anyone ever taken one apart? Other than speakers and wires, what's in there?

Most of the google sites made it look too easy...hence my apprehension. I've made a lot of good speaker boxes, but never for a guitar.

So far, I've looked at about 30 different replacement speakers. For some reason, they all seem to have the low-pass starting around 4k. Then it drops like a rock.

The strange thing is that some of the heavy metal CDs that I have, the guitars have strong frequencies in the 5k to 15k range. That just seems weird, since the speakers drop off at 4-5k.

The more I learn, the less I understand. :(
 
TravisinFlorida said:
check out www.avatarspeakers.com for a low price cab
Click to expand...
Ditto that.

If you want to do a DIY, though, it's not that tough. Most of the hard work goes into making a cabinet attractive. Guitar speakers are tolerant of a pretty big range of enclosure sizes (unlike good stereo or monitor speaker drivers, for which enclosure size and damping is critical). To get an idea of the appropriate dimensions, just take a tape measure into a music store and measure some cabs.

The most important thing is to make the enclosure as non-resonant as possible, and that means using very thick walls that are internally braced. MDF is considered the best material as it is homogeneous and has no voids. The last cabinet I built, a 2 X 12, has doubled-up 3/4" MDF walls so it's heavy as hell, but I don't lose much energy from the cabinet vibrating!

The bigger music stores will sell cabinet handles, corners, and covering material.
 
David, on THIS PAGE there are some projects in Speaker Cabinets/Cases/Wood Items section ... I don't know if this will be any help .. , but something to look at, if you have not seen it yet
good luck building

/respects
 
Is this for gigging or recording? If it is for recording, a a cab that resonates might be just what you want (according to Emery Sound http://www.emerysound.com). I certainly do not know, but their concept for a recording cab is very interesting--so much so that I am thinking about trying to build one out of a solid tone wood like mahogony or maple. I don't think the box materials would even cost $100.
 
tdukex said:
If it is for recording, a a cab that resonates might be just what you want (according to Emery Sound http://www.emerysound.com). I certainly do not know, but their concept for a recording cab is very interesting.
Click to expand...
It looks like junk science to me. Those cabs are attractive, but if you were to build a resonating cabinet, the number of variables that would be introduced would make an intelligent design almost impossible.

Also, if this is supposed to be for studios, how are you supposed to mike a resonant cab if so much of the energy is being radiated via something other than the speaker?
 
Thanks for the help folks...here are the current plans for my recording cab:

Mesa Dual Rect or Krank Revolution head (mostly high gain metal)

Cabinet :
* 2 x 12 parallel, 1/4" in, 1/4" serial out
* V30 Celestion 8 ohm
* Classic Lead Celestion 8 ohm
* closed back, non-ported, and insulated
* all the fancy trimmings
 
Zaphod B said:
It looks like junk science to me. Those cabs are attractive, but if you were to build a resonating cabinet, the number of variables that would be introduced would make an intelligent design almost impossible.

Also, if this is supposed to be for studios, how are you supposed to mike a resonant cab if so much of the energy is being radiated via something other than the speaker?
Click to expand...

Zap, I don't know anything about cab design, and I am not an expert on micing cabs either as I mainly play acou guit. From what I've read in various gear forums, however, Emery Sound seems to have an excellent reputation with recordists. I can only assume they know what they are doing. Of course, before I attempt to build my cab I will do more independent research in addition to contacting Emery Sound to discuss their design. If you happen to beat me to it (contacting Emery Sound to discuss their design) definitely report back to us, I would be interested in further input from you regarding this design topic.
 
tdukex said:
Zap, I don't know anything about cab design, and I am not an expert on micing cabs either as I mainly play acou guit. From what I've read in various gear forums, however, Emery Sound seems to have an excellent reputation with recordists. I can only assume they know what they are doing. Of course, before I attempt to build my cab I will do more independent research in addition to contacting Emery Sound to discuss their design. If you happen to beat me to it (contacting Emery Sound to discuss their design) definitely report back to us, I would be interested in further input from you regarding this design topic.
Click to expand...
tdukex, I've done quite a bit of research on high-fidelity speaker building from the DIY perspective. I won't try to pass myself off as an acoustic engineer but one of the standard assumptions of speaker building is that the enclosure itself be made to:

#1 Lose as little driver energy as possible due to driver backwave stimulating the cabinet. A vibrating cabinet = loss of efficiency.
#2 Design the cabinet for the sole purpose of ensuring that the driver(s) achieve the desired operating characteristics (via appropriate enclosure size, porting, bracing, stuffing with sound absorption material of the correct densities, etc....)

If you have an enclosure that vibrates, then you are faced with about a zillion variables (none of which would be used in any current state-of-the-art speaker design, IMO), but the biggest question is "What are the desired acoustic characteristics, and how do I make them occur?"

I suspect that Emery Sound isn't doing any research, but that they are building a very lossy (but attractive!) enclosure and calling a nicely-appointed pig's ear a purse.

One other note. Guitar cabs are infamously lossy - even open-backed! Crank up a guitar head on top of a 4 X 12 Marshall cab and put your hand on it - the walls are moving like crazy. Does that add to the "character" of the cabinet? Sure, in the same way that any design compromise will. Does that make it fundamentally any "better" or "worse?" No, it just is what it is. When you are miking it with that SM57 shoved right in the speaker cone, it doesn't really matter much.
 
OK, I had another look at the Emery Sound web site.

Their speakers are thin-shell (1/2") with fully open backs.

Given that the backs are completely open, the cabinets aren't going to be contributing much to the sound unless they are being pushed. There's no question that an open-back cabinet provides a nice three-dimensional sound when it's close to a back wall. (But they sound weak in open-air situations, IMO.) Some guitar speaker drivers are recommended for open-back rather than enclosed design.

Anyway, there's nothing unusual about Emery's speakers except that they are using a thinner wall thickness than most, but with their design I don't see that it matters one way or the other. They are attractive.
 
Zaphod B said:
OK, I had another look at the Emery Sound web site.

Their speakers are thin-shell (1/2") with fully open backs.
Click to expand...

Their speakers AND amps look VERY nice...and I LOVE the sounds bites they have up. WOW, what sweet tones!
 
Zaphod B said:
OK, I had another look at the Emery Sound web site.

Their speakers are thin-shell (1/2") with fully open backs.

Given that the backs are completely open, the cabinets aren't going to be contributing much to the sound unless they are being pushed. There's no question that an open-back cabinet provides a nice three-dimensional sound when it's close to a back wall. (But they sound weak in open-air situations, IMO.) Some guitar speaker drivers are recommended for open-back rather than enclosed design.

Anyway, there's nothing unusual about Emery's speakers except that they are using a thinner wall thickness than most, but with their design I don't see that it matters one way or the other.
Click to expand...

Dude, yer frickin' killin' me.

No, there is nothing unusual about the design, but it's very effective. No "junk science" or "mystery design". Just a cabinet made of solid wood, with a floating speaker baffle. Some of the best-sounding amps in the world use that design. It is not by any means a compromise, as you said before. It is choosing that the guitar cabinet will be part of the sound, rather than simply passing it on. This design gives a nice "alive" quality to the sound, and at low volumes, too.

You are operating from some incorrect assumptions, as I see it. Guitar cabs aren't hifi cabs. The same rules don't have to apply to make a good cab. An inefficient cab that resonates can actually be a good thing for guitar playing. I like my cabs to "sing" a bit. Personally, I think a big box made of MDF and damped all to hell is a crime against guitar music. Stomps the life out of it. That same concept would be great for some studio monitors, though. But hey, do what you want.

Except- no MDF. Please. That shit is for amateurs, home stereo speaker builders, and Marshall Valvestate cabs. ;) It's heavy, fragile, and absorbs moisture. 13 ply Baltic birch, marine grade, baby. The only way to fly.
 
boingoman said:
Dude, yer frickin' killin' me.

No, there is nothing unusual about the design, but it's very effective. No "junk science" or "mystery design". Just a cabinet made of solid wood, with a floating speaker baffle. Some of the best-sounding amps in the world use that design. It is not by any means a compromise, as you said before. It is choosing that the guitar cabinet will be part of the sound, rather than simply passing it on. This design gives a nice "alive" quality to the sound, and at low volumes, too.
Click to expand...
Don't mean to kill ya! :)

You're absolutely correct - it's just the way they are labeling the speakers, and their fuzzy description of the design, that got my back up.

When I was talking about compromise, I was referring to Marshall (and similar) cabs that are made with less-than-optimum design to make a price and profit point.

boingoman said:
You are operating from some incorrect assumptions, as I see it. Guitar cabs aren't hifi cabs. The same rules don't have to apply to make a good cab. An inefficient cab that resonates can actually be a good thing for guitar playing. I like my cabs to "sing" a bit. Personally, I think a big box made of MDF and damped all to hell is a crime against guitar music. Stomps the life out of it. That same concept would be great for some studio monitors, though. But hey, do what you want.

Except- no MDF. Please. That shit is for amateurs, home stereo speaker builders, and Marshall Valvestate cabs. ;) It's heavy, fragile, and absorbs moisture. 13 ply Baltic birch, marine grade, baby. The only way to fly.
Click to expand...

We'll have to agree to disagree about the MDF. Your points about moisture absorption and weight are correct, but I've never seen a properly built MDF cab have a problem with moisture (but I've never seen any that have been left out in the rain, either!). Correct construction techniques eliminate any problem with the brittle nature of the stuff. Laminated baltic birch is an excellent material, no question, but it's not readily available to everyone and its pretty pricey for a beginner looking to knock something together. (And a shame to waste it if the best you can do is nail something together. ;) )

As far as the acoustic qualities of a well-built, well-damped cab versus one that sings - that comes down to taste, I guess, but as far as I'm concerned the purpose of the cabinet is to allow the driver to do its job as efficiently as possible. Your mileage may vary! :)
 
Zaphod B said:
Don't mean to kill ya! :)

You're absolutely correct - it's just the way they are labeling the speakers, and their fuzzy description of the design, that got my back up.
Click to expand...

I hear that- there are so many bullshit products out there, it's almost criminal. $700 wooden knobs, $10,000 cables, etc., backed up by the flimsiest information and marketing.

Zaphod B said:
When I was talking about compromise, I was referring to Marshall (and similar) cabs that are made with less-than-optimum design to make a price and profit point.
Click to expand...

My mistake- gotcha. I still wonder about optimum design- what it means- I'll have to give it some thought. And it seems to me that at least in the case of a cabinet on the level of a Marshall 1960 series and similar, the design may be intentional sound-wise. It may not be optimal in terms of being completely non-resonant and directing as much energy forward as possible, but that may not be the point of the design. Though I will say, even if the current design is sonically-, not economically-driven, Marshall sure has spotty QC sometimes.

Fender knew what made their sound, and they got some shit when they switched to glued-in baffles in their combos. Much easier and cheaper to make. Also much less Fender-y sounding. The floating baffle had an undeniable effect on the sound of a tweed or blackface combo. Though definitely not an optimal design by some measures, it was the way it was for a reason.

Zaphod B said:
We'll have to agree to disagree about the MDF. Your points about moisture absorption and weight are correct, but I've never seen a properly built MDF cab have a problem with moisture (but I've never seen any that have been left out in the rain, either!). Correct construction techniques eliminate any problem with the brittle nature of the stuff. Laminated baltic birch is an excellent material, no question, but it's not readily available to everyone and its pretty pricey for a beginner looking to knock something together. (And a shame to waste it if the best you can do is nail something together. ;) )
Click to expand...

Word. I just hate banging the edges, like I did with my new studio monitors. :mad:

Zaphod B said:
As far as the acoustic qualities of a well-built, well-damped cab versus one that sings - that comes down to taste, I guess, but as far as I'm concerned the purpose of the cabinet is to allow the driver to do its job as efficiently as possible. Your mileage may vary! :)
Click to expand...

From that, I think optimum design may depend on what you want at the time. My next project is a 2X10" cab to go with a modded Bandmaster. I like the tone of the amp so much that I have decided to build a very solid cab using some 300W EV drivers I have that have been great guitar speakers. I want nothing but pure amp tone. As little box sound as possible, and no distortion from the speakers.

Thanks for the conversation. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top