I got my hands on a Warehouse Guitar Speaker ET65 so I decided we needed another shootout between it and a Celestion Heritage GT12-65.
For this comparison, I loaded the speakers up into two identical 1X12 cabs with oval open backs. The cabs themselves are 20X18X12 with port size of 14X7. The guitar is an old clip I have courtesy of Stelligan which was re-amped through a recent 50W build (BM, EL-34 with Marshallesque iron). So the playing is IDENTICAL for both trials. Mics are Chinese ribbon and large diaphram condensor. No effects or normalization was done.
What is the condition of the speakers?
I was just wondering because for example if one is new and the other is broken in with 200 hours on it that would skew the results.
I know that Jim Seavall (Scumback Speakers) has stated before that the Celestions take many, many hours to break in.
When the Warehouse speakers first appeared on ebay I bought a Vintage 30 and Classic Lead 80 clone and was very impressed with the quality.
Especially since I only paid about $23 each plus shipping.
Structo wrote:What is the condition of the speakers?
I was just wondering because for example if one is new and the other is broken in with 200 hours on it that would skew the results.
The Celestion is well broken in. Not sure of the exact mileage but easily in excess of 100 hours.
The WGS is only a month old. It is broken in, but has low hours.
"Let's face it, the non HRMs are easier to play, there, I've said it." - Gil Ayan... AND HE"S IN GOOD COMPANY!
When I listened to the clips, I was trying to tell them apart and didn't have much luck.
I had to go back and re-read your post about them because I was thinking, man those sound note for note the same, but then read about the re-amping.
I suppose that is the fairest way but you have to admit that different speakers will make you play a little differently because of the way they feel and obviously sound.
When I was shopping for speakers I really wanted to try the 12-65's but I decided to go for the EVM 12L's. Not sorry I did but would still like to give those a try out someday.
It's hard to hear much difference in those clips. I loaded them into a waveform editor and selected a 5 second section of the OD portion of each, and looped them back to back. I hear a slight difference, which I can only describe as the Celestion being slightly fuller in the upper mid and high end. The WGS is just a hair thinner in that range. I also played the clips at the same time, one panned hard left, one panned hard right. The celestion always appeared a little louder (the balance moved to whichever side I put that earbud in), which I could attribute to the slightly fuller upper mids and highs.
I recently picked up one of the ET-65's and put it in my 808 cabinet. It sounds better than the Celestion Vintage 30 that was in there, that speaker has a very nasal quality to it that I didn't really like. I brought the ET-65 equipped 808 with 100W #124 head to rehearsal last week and the rest of the guys really liked it. I've never tried the real G12-65 so I don't have a comparison, but from the clips it sounds pretty close. For half the price, it seems like a good value.
Bill
The Celestion G1265 sounds warmer and rounder to me.
The WGS ET65 sounds a bit brighter, borderline harsh and brittle to me. Which is the same way I feel about the one I bought. I hope it mellows with age and hours played.
wjdunham wrote:It's hard to hear much difference in those clips. I loaded them into a waveform editor and selected a 5 second section of the OD portion of each, and looped them back to back. I hear a slight difference, which I can only describe as the Celestion being slightly fuller in the upper mid and high end. The WGS is just a hair thinner in that range. I also played the clips at the same time, one panned hard left, one panned hard right. The celestion always appeared a little louder (the balance moved to whichever side I put that earbud in), which I could attribute to the slightly fuller upper mids and highs.
I recently picked up one of the ET-65's and put it in my 808 cabinet. It sounds better than the Celestion Vintage 30 that was in there, that speaker has a very nasal quality to it that I didn't really like. I brought the ET-65 equipped 808 with 100W #124 head to rehearsal last week and the rest of the guys really liked it. I've never tried the real G12-65 so I don't have a comparison, but from the clips it sounds pretty close. For half the price, it seems like a good value.
Bill
I had to compare them in the same manner - my sonic memory is way to short and the differences too subtle for me to draw any conclusions just listening to the two clips back to back.
The differences were more apparent in the room, but the recording process (and perhaps the low bandwidth encoding of soundclick) hid some of those. FWIW, I tried both in TL806 cabs as well and the differences are more obvious. The TS parameters of these speakers I assume are not identical and the tuned cab seems to bring them out more. But in the oval port application, this is the best G12-65 alternative I've tried so far.
"Let's face it, the non HRMs are easier to play, there, I've said it." - Gil Ayan... AND HE"S IN GOOD COMPANY!
I've been contemplating pulling the trigger on a pair of the ET-65's for an empty 212 open back cab (Avatar G212H premier) I have. I have one new EV and considered getting another but I think I'll save it and build or buy a TL cab. For the price of one EV I can buy two ET-65's, the material for a TL cab and maybe enough beer to build one... hell, I could darn near pay someone to build one.
I loaded the clips into Cubase LE and setup loops to a/b compare them phrase by phrase. They both sound great and my comparisons below shouldn't be perceived as a knock against either speaker...
It is very hard to tell a difference on the first 'clean' passages, but differences seem quite apparent in the heavier distorted passages.
The Warehouse seems to have a bit more upper mids but definitely less highs than the Celestion. The WGS has more clarity in some of the parts and I think the upper mids seem to help with presence too.
By comparison the Celestion seems to muddy up a bit in the low mids on the 'heavy' passages, but clearly the Celestion has more highs/brightness.
All-in-all, and especially considering the price, the WGS sounds like an incredible value and very balanced, the Celestion sounds a bit 'fuller' overall but personally I liked the separation in the WGS tone.
I really like the re-amped approach to comparing the speakers (some bias there)!
I'm not a fan of the WGS 65 but I think their BL80 is one of the best single 12 combo speakers money can buy, way better than a single Celestion 65 and a pair of the BL80's is heaven.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
