I really liked your cabinet test. I also really like that you played it clean…and not your typical thrash metal soloist or classic rock metal type sounds. Thank you! Cheers to ya! Great vid!
Thanks for doing this experiment - as the owner of JCM900-era 1936, I've seen the noise in the forums for years re: ply vs. MDF - and I supposedly have the inferior MDF in my cab. I think you clearly showed that the cab material was not a significant variable, and I wonder if most of the perceived differences are due to different speakers, and/or placebo effect. Another TH-camr recently did a breakdown of speaker cab variables (cab size, depth, amount of porting, etc.) and came to the same conclusions you did re: cab materials (he even made a cab with styrofoam sides that didn't sound significantly different from ply) - so good to have a few data points on this issue now. Thanks again!
Thanks for the comment, glad it was helpful!! My approach to anything acoustic is not does it make a difference but how much of a different does it make? Everything will make some difference at the end of the day because sound is vibrating air molecules and the air is excited by something be it a cabinet, or a speaker. Not even two CNC machined MDF cabs with matching speakers will sound exactly identical, there are always variables. It is just the difference is so tiny that it is irrelevant. Same goes for electronic devices such as pickups or microphones or DI's, etc. Only digital can exactly duplicate the same information over and over again.
Thumbs up my friend, I wanted to do this for a long time but you accomplished all I wanted to know. Excellent work !!! I guess plywood could be banged around more or not absorbing water as much if wet, but sonically, it looks identical and not a difference a human ear can make. I am glad you destroyed that old myth because a lot of guitarist think the cab companies like marshall, fender, blackstar, etc. use MDF to rip people off and offer low end product. They make a bit more margin, sure, but it makes product more accesible to musicians on all budget and with the same sonic quality. I am glad you did this.
Thanks for for your comments! Great to hear it was useful. My conclusion is there's certainly a lot of snake oil going around. Absolutely ply is more durable and lighter but as for tonal differences, close enough to call identical. And yeah, if we want great but cheap tube amps still with Celestion speakers in then the manufacturers are going to have to trim their costs somewhere.
We are talking closed back, right? With mdf you hear the speaker. TS values do matter in bass cabinets only. If the cabinet is not too deep low frequencies are not an issue anyway. Some cabs are made fr ply front and sides w an mdf back. Ultimate stiffness of the back= everything out the front.
Thanks for the comment and appologies in advance for the long message! Yes, in this example we are using a closed-backed cabinet, most open-backed (unless ported or vented) are so 'open' that the speakers effectively act as in free air resonance so the enclosure has little, if any, affect on the tone. This is one reason I used a sealed enclosure, to give the wood the most opportunity to 'talk'. Turned out it didn't talk much regardless of the material used. Thiele-Small parameters are irrelevant in this video as we are using the same speakers in the same enclosure dimensions so even if there was an impact to the response of the speaker, it would be doing the same for both play and MDF and therefore mitigated. I would argue that your right about TS parameters 95% of the time. They are usually irrelevant for guitars but not always depending on the type of speaker and the tuning of a guitar. Two of the most important parameters for loudspeaker design are related to the resonance frequency (fs) of the speaker and how much the speaker moves when that frequency is excited (Qts). The fs of many guitar speakers is well below the lowest note in standard E tuning (82Hz) but if you play in drop D (73Hz) then you into resonance territory with some speakers for example the G12H-75 and a baritone tuned to B goes down to 62Hz! Now the G12H has a pretty high Qts meaning it is stiff so doesn't go that wild at its fs so problems are avoided, however, a EVM12L has a low Qts so if your were playing a baritone into an open back with one of them fitted your amp might start walking.
Just installed new speakers in two tube combos and had to make new baffles for them. Used 15 mm plywood, just in case. Price of material makes no difference in such minute quantities. Thank you for confirming that the cabinet material really has no practical impact on tone, at least not in a guitar cabinet.
Thanks for the message. Glad you found it helpful. I think the only advantage, especially in heavy tube combos, is that plywood is lighter. Your back will thank you for every gram you can shave off the weight of a combo!
Great video, and a very logical approach to the subject. Very well done. I can't hear any noticeable difference in the audio examples and your frequency graphs showed a similar lack of difference. What volume levels were you recording at? I noticed the attenuator on top of the amp, so whilst the amp may be working hard, I'd imagine the volumes were brought down to neighbour-friendly levels. If there were going to be any differences between MDF and ply, then I'd suggest they would be at higher volumes, where you've got a lot more energy to excite the cabinets. You can only work with what you have available, but you may find that any differences will show up more on a 4x12 cab than a 2x12 one, with the larger panel areas.
You brought up good points, and the mic-setup is not optimal for actually capturing the cabinet-sound. What we have at the moment is meaningful data for the question: "how do ply- and mdf-caps differ when close-miking a speaker."
@@johannalvarsson9299 I've just reopened the ProTools session to double check and the microphones in the audio comparison are a blend of the 414 2ft back (cardioid) to capture the front baffle as well as both speakers and the 414 room mic (omni). The SM57 was only used for the frequency response graphs at the end of the video. I did a close mic as you might expect the increased stiffness of ply to particularly impact the high frequencies, it didn't.
MDF is more inert....deader. That's why it's almost universally used for hi-fi speakers. Hi-fi speakers don't want resonances. In guitar cabs, resonance can be part of the sound of the cab. A guitar cab is a music "producer", a hi-fi speaker is a music "re-produer"
It is, and this is why I thought there would be more of a difference between how MDF and plywood sound but the difference is so marginal the only useful difference is durability and weight. I suspect there would be a more noticeable difference in the very low or high frequencies outside the guitar speakers frequency response (roughly 75Hz-5kHz for a G12M). This would be a lot more critical with hi-fi listening. If the wood was thinner, I would expect a bigger difference as it would be less rigid. The result would be less energy required to generate free air resonance and the movement of the wood can counter the movement of the speaker and reduce high frequencies (as the speaker moves oneway the force will cause the wood to move slightly the other way)
Thank you for doing this! Very well done and really sheds some light on a topic that could obviously end up saving someone a lot of money over “snake oil”. Well done sir!
Heard a touch more low mid with the ply.. Call it more body maybe. Agree it was very slight. The MDF seemed a frog hair brighter, almost like I was hearing more direct speaker vs getting a little more cab resonance from the ply.. Using good headphones, decent DAC & HP amp.
Thanks for your comment, I'm interested to hear what peoples own reactions are. I compared on my Sennheiser HD 650's and audio monitors and frog hair is the word. Frog hair is the word, I thought the difference would be quite apparent! Just to add, the amp was cranked so I made sure there was plenty of energy to excite the speaker cabinet.
They sound exactly the same. Speaker make a huge difference though. I building my cabinet and I literally came here to decide what I'll be using for the material. Plywood it is. Thank you for this video.
I am a bit suprised that noone points out that your mic-setup is such that you blend out the cab pretty effectively. sm57 is very unsensitive to reflected sound and that close to the speaker, the volume-difference between speaker and cab is very high. It would be nice if you had 2 more mics: 1 pointing at the flanks of the cabinet and 1 room-mic. I don`t expect much of a difference there either, but it would surely be a safer approach with more meaningful results.
Hi, thanks for your reply. I should have pointed this out in the video but I can put your mind at rest. What you hear in the video is a mix of the 414, in cardioid, placed about 2ft back to capture the whole of the the front baffle as well as both speakers and the 414 omni room mic. I only used the SM57 close mic in the frequency response graphs I compare towards the end of the video. I did also put a RE20 on the back of the cab but didn't end up using this in the video because of a dodgy XLR causing a bit of a crackle. Your hypothesis is correct thought, there was almost no decreeable difference in sound, except crackle.
@@thegrooveallotment OK, thanks for your effords! I should have pointed out that so or so, close-miking is how most people today capture their amp-sound anyway, if they don`t use IR´s. Thanks a lot for taking my comment serious!
I think mdf can sound good depending on the design and build. Speaker choice can offset any mdf issues. However, proper wood is always best. Birch is nice.
I like plywood because its usually a lot lighter and a lot more durable. Can probably throw a ply cab out of a 2 story window and it would be fine. Seen too many mdf cabs get swelled up and fall apart to moisture. Never had any issues with one sounding better than the other.
Hmm, I hadn't considered the grill cloth till now. I wouldn't expect much of a difference though as both the 'salt and pepper' and bluesbreaker grills are about the same width. Zilla did a bit of a video looking at grill cloths which seems to suggest pretty much no difference. th-cam.com/video/70dYZm79nQQ/w-d-xo.html
A question I have is what kind of MDF was used. In my findings in high end audio cabs, there is a different type of MDF used for making speaker cabinets
I suspect you are right, with high end audio, they are not driven so much by price but by quality so I expect use very high density fibreboard for it's acoustic properties. Mass produced guitar cabs however, have more of an eye on price.
Given that may be negligible sonic differences it seems the difference comes down to the structural and/or cost differences in materials. I would imagine MDF would be a cheaper build, but birch would be a more structurally durable and lighter weight build.
@@jeffrobuck6338 Go out, and see for yourself. It sounds like you could use some real world experience instead of regurgitating shit you read that someone else mad up. How misinformation spreads so rapidly. People think they know what they know until they find out.
@@qua7771Easy dude ... I was just trying to add what l did know, basically about materials and construction, because l do have some experience along those lines. And l was asking you, because you seem to have some strong opinions on the subject of how they sound. This was a thread that seemed to elicit opinions that were negligible, if l remember right, and while l don't have a dog in that hunt, l think l am qualified to comment on my particular field of expertise. Everybody's just trying to figure it out. If you've got something to share, l'm all ears
@@jeffrobuck6338 I had both cabinets, and the particle board cab got gutted, and went in the trash. I've been tone chasing since 1980, and I've made mistakes that I regret. We live in an age of cheap throw-away crap. My biggest regrets are impulse buying cheap gear that I would quickly grow out of. I spent more cheaping out than if I would have gotten the higher quality gear to begin with. Not every player is a gear head, but they'll still feel compelled to give advice. That said, lets keep in mind that particle board cabinets are usually loaded with budget speakers, and are intended for budget amps. It's not budget friendly if you get tired of it in short time, and take a financial it. Speakers contribute substantially to an amps sound, (perhaps half). So lets say later, you decide to go with Celestion Greenbacks, Creambacks, or V-30's etc... Are you really going to load $600+ worth of speakers in a cheep particle board cabinet that dulls the tone? What is the point? I found a used 1960 cab after I got rid of the PB cab and couldn't be happier. I also got a clone from Mojo which was an excellent option. I'm not trying to be rude, I'm being direct, and honest. Delusion hates honesty. All I see in these budget gear videos are players who want a new shinny thing. Been there, done that. They'll say that expensive gear is all marketing. The same can be said for "budget" items except they don't retain value, and are not made to last.
You have a keen eye although the speakers are actually the same height. If you look closely in the timelapse section you can see the cabs are different ways up when I'm swapping the speakers (look at the handles), this is why one looks higher than the other.
Is you plan on talking the back on and off for open back/closed back options i think plywood or real wood keeps thread intact much better than MDF where they just deteriorate and become useless and chewed up.
I only ever use these cabs as closed backs. TBH I've never even tried it as a open back as I have other open back cabs and I love the sound of it as it is.
Long response but: In theory the stiffness of plywood should make it resonate a bit better (more highs because less vibration is absorbed, as high frequency equals less kinetic energy typically) but then again it is not like an acoustic instrument where the physical body material is more important, because the speaker cone and motor (coil) , magnet etc. produce the sound here. In HIFI you'd typically go for MDF because of the density and lack of colouring and reflection properties - but here you have ported and tuned (Thiele Small parameters). Guitar is a very narrow band which use low excursion speakers that produce a tight response that is coloured, unlike HIFI where you'd want the flattest response possible aka the highest fidelity meaning true to original. So yes mostly snake oil and probably just a vintage factor like old Fender amps used pine for cabs. People swear by these. MDF can be brittle, HIFI is stationary guitar amps get lugged around and damaged. That's probably the most logical reason: vintage factor and durability.
Spot on! Durability is definably a difference but I don't plan on dropping my cabs out of windows or soaking them in beer yet. The difference in rigidity would mostly impact the very high and low frequencies so not as relevant to guitar cabs. I did expect the plywood to add a little 'resonance' to the sound but then again it used 11-ply birch plywood, 5/8" thick and covered in tolex so not much flexibility to allow for free air resonance unlike say an 3-ply acoustic guitar soundboard
Hi, the attenuator was off for the recordings as I wanted lots of energy to 'excite' the cabinets. I only used it to be kind to my ears when placing the microphones. I didn't take a dB reading but I would guess at around 95-100dB. I regularly mix at just shy of 90dB and it was much louder than I have monitors!
The difference is durability. If you tour a lot and your cab takes a beating, sure, birch is better. Otherwise, a similar speaker in a cab with similar dimensions will be indistinguishable to the unbiased ear (and, of course, to various sound metrics). The room, mics, and speakers are what determine the tone.
I agree durability, and weight, are the biggest differences between these materials. I wouldn't say it makes no difference to the sound, just so small we can ignore it. At the end of the day, if it vibrates, then it will impact the sound in some way, it's just a question of how and how much. In this case extremely little. I expected more of a difference TBH, a piano soundboard is made of 3/8" strips of wood glued together and that has a huge impact on its sound, I bet an MDF soundboard wouldn't have quite the same tone but that's another experiment for someone else to carry out.
My experience has been that MDF had slightly less mids and slightly more low end….hard to tell hear. I really wish you would’ve done some higher gained sound comparisons (cranked)….I think it would have showed more differences. My $.02.
@@thegrooveallotmentthat's weird. My JTM45 2245 sings when cranked, slightly less with single coils but still, it roars. Your amp behaves more like a Fender Twin Reverb.
@@mladengrubelic873 I'm running mine at the edge of breakup so it's not fully cranked although it's still flipping loud! Depending on the circuit, you may have a different negative feedback resistor. Crudely put, this controls how much distortion is added by the power tubes. The original JTM45 with KT66 tubes is actually a cleaner amp than the Fender Bassman it was based on opposite to the usual Fender = clean, Marshall = distortion assumptions. Changing the value of the resistor is a fairly easy and common mod to these amps if you want to alter how 'aggressive; it is.
@@thegrooveallotment mine is completely stock, with factory installed 5881's. It's clean 'till about 1/3 on the volumes. After that it starts to break up in a glorious way. The sweet spot is around 3 o' clock, when the guitar's volume control reigns supreme: from super clean to searing leads. I forgot to mention I use my JTM with a pair of Alnico Golds. They match perfectly!
The only reason for a specific material being chosen by the cab maker is its price. Assuming it performs acceptably in other respects of course. But price is the reason. I worked for a chipboard manufacturer in the early 1990s, and this was the material of choice for many amp makers. Then MDF was developed (a new production line went in in 1993), and as the price fell, so this material became more common. If amp and cab cases could be made more cheaply using birch ply, or solid oak, or aluminium sheet (for example), that's what they'd use. I couldn't hear any difference in the sounds, by the way. At my age I'm more interested in the weight, in any case.
Agreed, price is a massive factor as with any manufactured product although I would add that the customers preferences also drive the decision. MDF is still cheaper than plywood today but most manufacturers these days use ply. I assume greater durability and lower weight are the factors driving that decision not price alone. Both important to the customer.
@@thegrooveallotment Thank you. I'm considering making new cases for my heavier amps, using solid pine with dovetail joints. That should a) save a bit of weight, b) make the amps look better, c) allow me to sell the old cases on eBay, and (most important) d) give me an excuse to persuade my wife that I need a dovetail jig and new router!
Cabs need to be pine - ask Clapton 🙂 It also depends on the thickness of the wood, smaller thickness, more color. And old Fender cabs had floating front panels.
Would be interesting to do a similar experiment with different width baffles. I would expect thinner baffles to have a much greater impact on the sound.
@@thegrooveallotmentcontrolled resonance. I can see why companies like MDF, everything is a compromise somewhere. But I don't see any MDF acoustic instruments anywhere. Just saying.
It was loud, close to 100dB! Increasing the wattage might make a small difference but interestingly an increase in the wattage by x3 would only increase the SPL by about 4.5dB. I also recorded a second take with the attenuator on to see if there was any noticeable difference with less 'energy;' exciting the cabinet. Didn't make a scrap of difference so didn't include those takes in the final edit.
Am not sure if there is nearly enough of a difference for a non musician to be able to hear, especially if sitting in a mix, and whatnot. There is a difference, however! MDF breaks and bends a lot easier than plywood does, had a head cabinet made of MDF that was legit bent. When it comes to this, it should be a lesson that cheap isn't always the way to go, cheap medium is best, and try to avoid MDF.
Yeap, seems to be the general consensus. Pretty much zero difference in sound. Only factor is weight, durability and maybe cost. I'd say there's barely enough of a difference for a musician to hear let alone non-musician. Certainly in the mix wouldn't make a scrap of difference.
Thanks for this fascinating test. Not much difference, if any. In terms of acoustic theory, actually, MDF "should" sound better, at least in terms of providing "hi-fi" sound. OTOH, most would agree that plywood is superiour from a structural/quality standpoint. So, simce the sound basically is the same, ply looks lile the clear winner to me!
Hey, that's a really interesting factor I didn't consider, the build quality. I complexly agree that in say, studio monitor design, MDF is acoustically superior, especially in the very low and very high frequencies. I expected plywood to have much more of an impact like the soundboard on an acoustic guitar and add something, hopefully musical to the sound but, as you say, not much difference!
Why do so many people think that Marshall would change something like this if they knew it sounded WORSE?...even they wouldn't kill the golden goose. Just more corksniffers out there who think they know more than Marshall.
Not sure, I think MDF has some sort of stigma, maybe people compare it to guitar woods solid, 2 or 3-piece, ply, I wouldn't buy an MDF guitar myself but speaker cabs are a different application so different rules apply. Or maybe it just seems to 'manufactured', glueing together the ground up wood leftovers doesn't sound as appealing as birch ply. That said, not all innovations and changes did sound better. For example, I would argue that the switch from valves to solid-state transistors that most major amp manufacturers made in their amps in the 70's and 80's sounded worse and it wasn't long before valves made return in most applications.
Dont use particle board subfloor in your kitchen or bathrooms. Or around your ac unit or in your kids rooms. Matter of fact just dont use it why do they even sell it?
That is what I thought, I assumed the plywood would resonate more, I can't imagine an acoustic guitar made of MDF having much life in it! However, it seems the there is not any real difference. I guess that 1) the wood it thicker and much more rigid so harder to 'excite' and 2) it has a greater mass so the resonance frequency is much lower than on an acoustic, too low to make a noticable difference. That might explain a tiny difference at about 150 Hz.
The problems with these tests is the lack of thoroughness and unanswered questions. Increase the test case coverage. Play at the very least 1-2 Guitars, 1-2 Pickups types, 1-2 Clean/Dirty/Really Dirty riffs. Calling this test and slapping a headline over it is just pure kaka. Downvoted.
Hi thanks for your comment, I am always interested in other ideas and how things can be improved/critiqued. Maybe if I explain my methodology then you can input based on that. I figured that as we are only testing the effect the cabinet has on the sound and not anything else we need to consider two things: 1) The sympathetic resonance of the cabinet. The cabinet acts as a passive resonator so to test this, it just needs 'exciting'. 2) The flexibility of the wood. Newtons 3rd law states for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. This means that as the speaker moves one way it also pushes back on the baffle in the opposite direction. If there is flexibility in the wood it will 'cushion' the speaker and impact how the air vibrates out of it and therefore impact the sound. TBH I assumed that the input source (Strat in this case) that we used would not make a difference to the results as long as it was loud enough to 'excite' the cabinet and it contained all the frequencies necessary to cover the range of the guitar speakers. With this in mind whether we used a guitar or even piped Justin Bieber into the amp, any changes in bass, mids or treble would be evident and translate across any source. The thing I tried to focus on in this test was that everything remained consistent with as few variables as possible hence why I re-amped the guitar riff rather than play it in each test. Hope that goes some way to explain why I didn't use different gain settings or guitars, etc..but happy to take any constructive input and feed it into any future videos (if I get time!)
I really liked your cabinet test. I also really like that you played it clean…and not your typical thrash metal soloist or classic rock metal type sounds. Thank you! Cheers to ya! Great vid!
Thanks, glad you enjoyed it.
Thanks alot @@thegrooveallotment
Thanks for doing this experiment - as the owner of JCM900-era 1936, I've seen the noise in the forums for years re: ply vs. MDF - and I supposedly have the inferior MDF in my cab. I think you clearly showed that the cab material was not a significant variable, and I wonder if most of the perceived differences are due to different speakers, and/or placebo effect. Another TH-camr recently did a breakdown of speaker cab variables (cab size, depth, amount of porting, etc.) and came to the same conclusions you did re: cab materials (he even made a cab with styrofoam sides that didn't sound significantly different from ply) - so good to have a few data points on this issue now. Thanks again!
Thanks for the comment, glad it was helpful!!
My approach to anything acoustic is not does it make a difference but how much of a different does it make? Everything will make some difference at the end of the day because sound is vibrating air molecules and the air is excited by something be it a cabinet, or a speaker. Not even two CNC machined MDF cabs with matching speakers will sound exactly identical, there are always variables. It is just the difference is so tiny that it is irrelevant.
Same goes for electronic devices such as pickups or microphones or DI's, etc. Only digital can exactly duplicate the same information over and over again.
Thumbs up my friend, I wanted to do this for a long time but you accomplished all I wanted to know. Excellent work !!! I guess plywood could be banged around more or not absorbing water as much if wet, but sonically, it looks identical and not a difference a human ear can make. I am glad you destroyed that old myth because a lot of guitarist think the cab companies like marshall, fender, blackstar, etc. use MDF to rip people off and offer low end product. They make a bit more margin, sure, but it makes product more accesible to musicians on all budget and with the same sonic quality. I am glad you did this.
Thanks for for your comments! Great to hear it was useful. My conclusion is there's certainly a lot of snake oil going around. Absolutely ply is more durable and lighter but as for tonal differences, close enough to call identical.
And yeah, if we want great but cheap tube amps still with Celestion speakers in then the manufacturers are going to have to trim their costs somewhere.
We are talking closed back, right? With mdf you hear the speaker. TS values do matter in bass cabinets only. If the cabinet is not too deep low frequencies are not an issue anyway. Some cabs are made fr ply front and sides w an mdf back. Ultimate stiffness of the back= everything out the front.
Thanks for the comment and appologies in advance for the long message! Yes, in this example we are using a closed-backed cabinet, most open-backed (unless ported or vented) are so 'open' that the speakers effectively act as in free air resonance so the enclosure has little, if any, affect on the tone. This is one reason I used a sealed enclosure, to give the wood the most opportunity to 'talk'. Turned out it didn't talk much regardless of the material used.
Thiele-Small parameters are irrelevant in this video as we are using the same speakers in the same enclosure dimensions so even if there was an impact to the response of the speaker, it would be doing the same for both play and MDF and therefore mitigated.
I would argue that your right about TS parameters 95% of the time. They are usually irrelevant for guitars but not always depending on the type of speaker and the tuning of a guitar. Two of the most important parameters for loudspeaker design are related to the resonance frequency (fs) of the speaker and how much the speaker moves when that frequency is excited (Qts). The fs of many guitar speakers is well below the lowest note in standard E tuning (82Hz) but if you play in drop D (73Hz) then you into resonance territory with some speakers for example the G12H-75 and a baritone tuned to B goes down to 62Hz! Now the G12H has a pretty high Qts meaning it is stiff so doesn't go that wild at its fs so problems are avoided, however, a EVM12L has a low Qts so if your were playing a baritone into an open back with one of them fitted your amp might start walking.
Just installed new speakers in two tube combos and had to make new baffles for them. Used 15 mm plywood, just in case. Price of material makes no difference in such minute quantities. Thank you for confirming that the cabinet material really has no practical impact on tone, at least not in a guitar cabinet.
Thanks for the message. Glad you found it helpful. I think the only advantage, especially in heavy tube combos, is that plywood is lighter. Your back will thank you for every gram you can shave off the weight of a combo!
Great video, and a very logical approach to the subject. Very well done.
I can't hear any noticeable difference in the audio examples and your frequency graphs showed a similar lack of difference.
What volume levels were you recording at? I noticed the attenuator on top of the amp, so whilst the amp may be working hard, I'd imagine the volumes were brought down to neighbour-friendly levels. If there were going to be any differences between MDF and ply, then I'd suggest they would be at higher volumes, where you've got a lot more energy to excite the cabinets.
You can only work with what you have available, but you may find that any differences will show up more on a 4x12 cab than a 2x12 one, with the larger panel areas.
Glad you found it informative. Was surprised at how little a difference there was myself.
You brought up good points, and the mic-setup is not optimal for actually capturing the cabinet-sound. What we have at the moment is meaningful data for the question: "how do ply- and mdf-caps differ when close-miking a speaker."
@@johannalvarsson9299 I've just reopened the ProTools session to double check and the microphones in the audio comparison are a blend of the 414 2ft back (cardioid) to capture the front baffle as well as both speakers and the 414 room mic (omni). The SM57 was only used for the frequency response graphs at the end of the video.
I did a close mic as you might expect the increased stiffness of ply to particularly impact the high frequencies, it didn't.
MDF is more inert....deader. That's why it's almost universally used for hi-fi speakers. Hi-fi speakers don't want resonances. In guitar cabs, resonance can be part of the sound of the cab. A guitar cab is a music "producer", a hi-fi speaker is a music "re-produer"
It is, and this is why I thought there would be more of a difference between how MDF and plywood sound but the difference is so marginal the only useful difference is durability and weight. I suspect there would be a more noticeable difference in the very low or high frequencies outside the guitar speakers frequency response (roughly 75Hz-5kHz for a G12M). This would be a lot more critical with hi-fi listening.
If the wood was thinner, I would expect a bigger difference as it would be less rigid. The result would be less energy required to generate free air resonance and the movement of the wood can counter the movement of the speaker and reduce high frequencies (as the speaker moves oneway the force will cause the wood to move slightly the other way)
Thank you for doing this! Very well done and really sheds some light on a topic that could obviously end up saving someone a lot of money over “snake oil”. Well done sir!
Thanks for the encouragement!! Glad it was helpful.
Brilliant. Just what i wanted to find out. Great video thankyou
Glad it was helpful!
Very interesting outcome. Thank you!!
Glad you found it interesting.
Heard a touch more low mid with the ply.. Call it more body maybe. Agree it was very slight. The MDF seemed a frog hair brighter, almost like I was hearing more direct speaker vs getting a little more cab resonance from the ply.. Using good headphones, decent DAC & HP amp.
Thanks for your comment, I'm interested to hear what peoples own reactions are. I compared on my Sennheiser HD 650's and audio monitors and frog hair is the word. Frog hair is the word, I thought the difference would be quite apparent! Just to add, the amp was cranked so I made sure there was plenty of energy to excite the speaker cabinet.
They sound exactly the same. Speaker make a huge difference though. I building my cabinet and I literally came here to decide what I'll be using for the material. Plywood it is. Thank you for this video.
Glad it was helpful! Plywood is definitely lighter and more durable but the sound is pretty much identical!
@@thegrooveallotment That's my reasoning as well. Also MDF is a nightmare when it comes to moisture and I live in a moist climate 🤷♂
I am a bit suprised that noone points out that your mic-setup is such that you blend out the cab pretty effectively. sm57 is very unsensitive to reflected sound and that close to the speaker, the volume-difference between speaker and cab is very high. It would be nice if you had 2 more mics: 1 pointing at the flanks of the cabinet and 1 room-mic. I don`t expect much of a difference there either, but it would surely be a safer approach with more meaningful results.
Hi, thanks for your reply. I should have pointed this out in the video but I can put your mind at rest. What you hear in the video is a mix of the 414, in cardioid, placed about 2ft back to capture the whole of the the front baffle as well as both speakers and the 414 omni room mic. I only used the SM57 close mic in the frequency response graphs I compare towards the end of the video.
I did also put a RE20 on the back of the cab but didn't end up using this in the video because of a dodgy XLR causing a bit of a crackle. Your hypothesis is correct thought, there was almost no decreeable difference in sound, except crackle.
@@thegrooveallotment OK, thanks for your effords! I should have pointed out that so or so, close-miking is how most people today capture their amp-sound anyway, if they don`t use IR´s. Thanks a lot for taking my comment serious!
I think mdf can sound good depending on the design and build. Speaker choice can offset any mdf issues. However, proper wood is always best. Birch is nice.
I like plywood because its usually a lot lighter and a lot more durable. Can probably throw a ply cab out of a 2 story window and it would be fine. Seen too many mdf cabs get swelled up and fall apart to moisture. Never had any issues with one sounding better than the other.
Absolutely, I think the only significant difference is weight and durability.
The grill material seems to be different, so maybe that explains the very slight differences.
Hmm, I hadn't considered the grill cloth till now. I wouldn't expect much of a difference though as both the 'salt and pepper' and bluesbreaker grills are about the same width.
Zilla did a bit of a video looking at grill cloths which seems to suggest pretty much no difference.
th-cam.com/video/70dYZm79nQQ/w-d-xo.html
A question I have is what kind of MDF was used. In my findings in high end audio cabs, there is a different type of MDF used for making speaker cabinets
I suspect you are right, with high end audio, they are not driven so much by price but by quality so I expect use very high density fibreboard for it's acoustic properties. Mass produced guitar cabs however, have more of an eye on price.
Given that may be negligible sonic differences it seems the difference comes down to the structural and/or cost differences in materials. I would imagine MDF would be a cheaper build, but birch would be a more structurally durable and lighter weight build.
Have you actually tried the two, and compared them? There is a substantial difference in sound.
@@qua7771 Well ... which sounds better?
@@jeffrobuck6338 Go out, and see for yourself. It sounds like you could use some real world experience instead of regurgitating shit you read that someone else mad up. How misinformation spreads so rapidly. People think they know what they know until they find out.
@@qua7771Easy dude ... I was just trying to add what l did know, basically about materials and construction, because l do have some experience along those lines. And l was asking you, because you seem to have some strong opinions on the subject of how they sound. This was a thread that seemed to elicit opinions that were negligible, if l remember right, and while l don't have a dog in that hunt, l think l am qualified to comment on my particular field of expertise.
Everybody's just trying to figure it out. If you've got something to share, l'm all ears
@@jeffrobuck6338 I had both cabinets, and the particle board cab got gutted, and went in the trash. I've been tone chasing since 1980, and I've made mistakes that I regret. We live in an age of cheap throw-away crap. My biggest regrets are impulse buying cheap gear that I would quickly grow out of. I spent more cheaping out than if I would have gotten the higher quality gear to begin with. Not every player is a gear head, but they'll still feel compelled to give advice.
That said, lets keep in mind that particle board cabinets are usually loaded with budget speakers, and are intended for budget amps. It's not budget friendly if you get tired of it in short time, and take a financial it. Speakers contribute substantially to an amps sound, (perhaps half). So lets say later, you decide to go with Celestion Greenbacks, Creambacks, or V-30's etc... Are you really going to load $600+ worth of speakers in a cheep particle board cabinet that dulls the tone? What is the point?
I found a used 1960 cab after I got rid of the PB cab and couldn't be happier. I also got a clone from Mojo which was an excellent option.
I'm not trying to be rude, I'm being direct, and honest. Delusion hates honesty. All I see in these budget gear videos are players who want a new shinny thing. Been there, done that. They'll say that expensive gear is all marketing. The same can be said for "budget" items except they don't retain value, and are not made to last.
This is a good video. Thank you.
Did you compensate the mics height since the plywood cab has the speakers right in the center while the mdf has them off-centered?? Great video
You have a keen eye although the speakers are actually the same height. If you look closely in the timelapse section you can see the cabs are different ways up when I'm swapping the speakers (look at the handles), this is why one looks higher than the other.
@@thegrooveallotmentyes, you are right, thanks!
Is you plan on talking the back on and off for open back/closed back options i think plywood or real wood keeps thread intact much better than MDF where they just deteriorate and become useless and chewed up.
I only ever use these cabs as closed backs. TBH I've never even tried it as a open back as I have other open back cabs and I love the sound of it as it is.
Long response but:
In theory the stiffness of plywood should make it resonate a bit better (more highs because less vibration is absorbed, as high frequency equals less kinetic energy typically) but then again it is not like an acoustic instrument where the physical body material is more important, because the speaker cone and motor (coil) , magnet etc. produce the sound here.
In HIFI you'd typically go for MDF because of the density and lack of colouring and reflection properties - but here you have ported and tuned (Thiele Small parameters).
Guitar is a very narrow band which use low excursion speakers that produce a tight response that is coloured, unlike HIFI where you'd want the flattest response possible aka the highest fidelity meaning true to original.
So yes mostly snake oil and probably just a vintage factor like old Fender amps used pine for cabs. People swear by these.
MDF can be brittle, HIFI is stationary guitar amps get lugged around and damaged. That's probably the most logical reason: vintage factor and durability.
Spot on! Durability is definably a difference but I don't plan on dropping my cabs out of windows or soaking them in beer yet.
The difference in rigidity would mostly impact the very high and low frequencies so not as relevant to guitar cabs. I did expect the plywood to add a little 'resonance' to the sound but then again it used 11-ply birch plywood, 5/8" thick and covered in tolex so not much flexibility to allow for free air resonance unlike say an 3-ply acoustic guitar soundboard
What was the volume in the room (dB)?
How much volume were you reducing with the attenuator?
Hi, the attenuator was off for the recordings as I wanted lots of energy to 'excite' the cabinets. I only used it to be kind to my ears when placing the microphones.
I didn't take a dB reading but I would guess at around 95-100dB. I regularly mix at just shy of 90dB and it was much louder than I have monitors!
Were the baffle materials the same?
No the baffles as well as the enclosures were either MDF or Plywood.
@@thegrooveallotment Thanks.
The difference is durability. If you tour a lot and your cab takes a beating, sure, birch is better. Otherwise, a similar speaker in a cab with similar dimensions will be indistinguishable to the unbiased ear (and, of course, to various sound metrics). The room, mics, and speakers are what determine the tone.
I agree durability, and weight, are the biggest differences between these materials. I wouldn't say it makes no difference to the sound, just so small we can ignore it. At the end of the day, if it vibrates, then it will impact the sound in some way, it's just a question of how and how much. In this case extremely little.
I expected more of a difference TBH, a piano soundboard is made of 3/8" strips of wood glued together and that has a huge impact on its sound, I bet an MDF soundboard wouldn't have quite the same tone but that's another experiment for someone else to carry out.
My experience has been that MDF had slightly less mids and slightly more low end….hard to tell hear. I really wish you would’ve done some higher gained sound comparisons (cranked)….I think it would have showed more differences. My $.02.
That was cranked, for a JTM45 at least. I'd need higher wattage speakers and amp to go further!
@@thegrooveallotmentthat's weird. My JTM45 2245 sings when cranked, slightly less with single coils but still, it roars. Your amp behaves more like a Fender Twin Reverb.
@@mladengrubelic873 I'm running mine at the edge of breakup so it's not fully cranked although it's still flipping loud!
Depending on the circuit, you may have a different negative feedback resistor. Crudely put, this controls how much distortion is added by the power tubes. The original JTM45 with KT66 tubes is actually a cleaner amp than the Fender Bassman it was based on opposite to the usual Fender = clean, Marshall = distortion assumptions. Changing the value of the resistor is a fairly easy and common mod to these amps if you want to alter how 'aggressive; it is.
@@thegrooveallotment mine is completely stock, with factory installed 5881's. It's clean 'till about 1/3 on the volumes. After that it starts to break up in a glorious way. The sweet spot is around 3 o' clock, when the guitar's volume control reigns supreme: from super clean to searing leads. I forgot to mention I use my JTM with a pair of Alnico Golds. They match perfectly!
@@mladengrubelic873 Nice
PLY with a little more high frequencies
Did they sound different in any way in person to you?
Barely, maybe a 1dB difference in the low end about 15Hz that's about it. Last listening on high end PMC monitors and Sennheiser 650 headphones.
@@thegrooveallotment nothing an eq can't resolve
Actually preferred the MDF in this test, all my cabs are vintage plywood
Internet audio is not reliable to trust. There are exceptions but its generally true.
The only reason for a specific material being chosen by the cab maker is its price. Assuming it performs acceptably in other respects of course. But price is the reason. I worked for a chipboard manufacturer in the early 1990s, and this was the material of choice for many amp makers. Then MDF was developed (a new production line went in in 1993), and as the price fell, so this material became more common. If amp and cab cases could be made more cheaply using birch ply, or solid oak, or aluminium sheet (for example), that's what they'd use. I couldn't hear any difference in the sounds, by the way. At my age I'm more interested in the weight, in any case.
Agreed, price is a massive factor as with any manufactured product although I would add that the customers preferences also drive the decision. MDF is still cheaper than plywood today but most manufacturers these days use ply. I assume greater durability and lower weight are the factors driving that decision not price alone. Both important to the customer.
@@thegrooveallotment Thank you. I'm considering making new cases for my heavier amps, using solid pine with dovetail joints. That should a) save a bit of weight, b) make the amps look better, c) allow me to sell the old cases on eBay, and (most important) d) give me an excuse to persuade my wife that I need a dovetail jig and new router!
Cabs need to be pine - ask Clapton 🙂 It also depends on the thickness of the wood, smaller thickness, more color. And old Fender cabs had floating front panels.
Would be interesting to do a similar experiment with different width baffles. I would expect thinner baffles to have a much greater impact on the sound.
@@thegrooveallotmentcontrolled resonance. I can see why companies like MDF, everything is a compromise somewhere. But I don't see any MDF acoustic instruments anywhere. Just saying.
Maybe one is better for "road worthiness"... or maybe the cabinets should have been tested with two 90 watt creambacks at full power.
It was loud, close to 100dB!
Increasing the wattage might make a small difference but interestingly an increase in the wattage by x3 would only increase the SPL by about 4.5dB.
I also recorded a second take with the attenuator on to see if there was any noticeable difference with less 'energy;' exciting the cabinet. Didn't make a scrap of difference so didn't include those takes in the final edit.
@@thegrooveallotment Then Mr. Groove, I'd say you've been allotted two cabs to kick ass with.
Am not sure if there is nearly enough of a difference for a non musician to be able to hear, especially if sitting in a mix, and whatnot. There is a difference, however! MDF breaks and bends a lot easier than plywood does, had a head cabinet made of MDF that was legit bent.
When it comes to this, it should be a lesson that cheap isn't always the way to go, cheap medium is best, and try to avoid MDF.
Yeap, seems to be the general consensus. Pretty much zero difference in sound. Only factor is weight, durability and maybe cost.
I'd say there's barely enough of a difference for a musician to hear let alone non-musician. Certainly in the mix wouldn't make a scrap of difference.
Thanks for this fascinating test. Not much difference, if any. In terms of acoustic theory, actually, MDF "should" sound better, at least in terms of providing "hi-fi" sound. OTOH, most would agree that plywood is superiour from a structural/quality standpoint. So, simce the sound basically is the same, ply looks lile the clear winner to me!
Hey, that's a really interesting factor I didn't consider, the build quality. I complexly agree that in say, studio monitor design, MDF is acoustically superior, especially in the very low and very high frequencies. I expected plywood to have much more of an impact like the soundboard on an acoustic guitar and add something, hopefully musical to the sound but, as you say, not much difference!
That would make difference with a pole inside, like in a 4x12.
MDF wouldn't last long in the weather...that's for sure!
Why do so many people think that Marshall would change something like this if they knew it sounded WORSE?...even they wouldn't kill the golden goose. Just more corksniffers out there who think they know more than Marshall.
Not sure, I think MDF has some sort of stigma, maybe people compare it to guitar woods solid, 2 or 3-piece, ply, I wouldn't buy an MDF guitar myself but speaker cabs are a different application so different rules apply. Or maybe it just seems to 'manufactured', glueing together the ground up wood leftovers doesn't sound as appealing as birch ply.
That said, not all innovations and changes did sound better. For example, I would argue that the switch from valves to solid-state transistors that most major amp manufacturers made in their amps in the 70's and 80's sounded worse and it wasn't long before valves made return in most applications.
I don't think wood makes a difference, But the dimensions of the cabinet
Oh yeah, dimensions make a massive difference.
I tend to take the view that everything will make some difference it's a question of how much.
Dont use particle board subfloor in your kitchen or bathrooms.
Or around your ac unit or in your kids rooms.
Matter of fact just dont use it why do they even sell it?
I look at a cabinet like an acoustic guitar or a room. Keep that in mind. Just saying.
That is what I thought, I assumed the plywood would resonate more, I can't imagine an acoustic guitar made of MDF having much life in it! However, it seems the there is not any real difference. I guess that 1) the wood it thicker and much more rigid so harder to 'excite' and 2) it has a greater mass so the resonance frequency is much lower than on an acoustic, too low to make a noticable difference. That might explain a tiny difference at about 150 Hz.
Mdf is cheap heavy weak material compared to good quality birch ply.
The problems with these tests is the lack of thoroughness and unanswered questions.
Increase the test case coverage. Play at the very least 1-2 Guitars, 1-2 Pickups types, 1-2 Clean/Dirty/Really Dirty riffs.
Calling this test and slapping a headline over it is just pure kaka. Downvoted.
Hi thanks for your comment, I am always interested in other ideas and how things can be improved/critiqued. Maybe if I explain my methodology then you can input based on that.
I figured that as we are only testing the effect the cabinet has on the sound and not anything else we need to consider two things:
1) The sympathetic resonance of the cabinet. The cabinet acts as a passive resonator so to test this, it just needs 'exciting'.
2) The flexibility of the wood. Newtons 3rd law states for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. This means that as the speaker moves one way it also pushes back on the baffle in the opposite direction. If there is flexibility in the wood it will 'cushion' the speaker and impact how the air vibrates out of it and therefore impact the sound.
TBH I assumed that the input source (Strat in this case) that we used would not make a difference to the results as long as it was loud enough to 'excite' the cabinet and it contained all the frequencies necessary to cover the range of the guitar speakers. With this in mind whether we used a guitar or even piped Justin Bieber into the amp, any changes in bass, mids or treble would be evident and translate across any source. The thing I tried to focus on in this test was that everything remained consistent with as few variables as possible hence why I re-amped the guitar riff rather than play it in each test.
Hope that goes some way to explain why I didn't use different gain settings or guitars, etc..but happy to take any constructive input and feed it into any future videos (if I get time!)