Jensen C10R vs Eminence Copperhead: samples with a PRRI

[Soopajeanmi]

For those interested, I recorded these 2 tracks in the same conditions, with a Gibson 339, a vovox cable, and a Princeton reverb reissue:

Jensen c10r : http://www.soundclick.com/bands/page...songID=7515387

Eminence copperhead: http://www.soundclick.com/bands/page...songID=7626342

[Wally]

Interesting, Jean. I prefer the EMinence cut...much more clarity and articulation. The Copperhead presents more trebles, so one could roll off a bit on the guitar's tone, I suppose if one didn't want qutie as much high end coming through. I am not a fan of the new JEnsens. so I halfway expected these results for my ears. A 'blind' test would have been interesting, I suppose. I would have chosen the same cut, but I wouldn't have known which was which, perhaps, until you revealed it.
Nice playing, by the way.

[strat a various]

Just for you-alls information, Copperhead is a 75 watt speaker with a 20 oz. magnet and a 99 dB sensitivity ... C10R is a 25 watt speaker, 10 oz magnet, 94.7 dB sensitivity.

The wattage of the test amp is irrelevant as long as the speakers being tested are so remotely related. The logic that both speakers could arguably be considered for installation in a Princeton has nothing to do with a side by side comparison unless the point is that many prefer a Copperhead for their PRRI, hardly a scientific comparison.

A 12 watt Princeton could develop wattages approaching the reasonable limits of a 25 watt speaker, but a 75 watter will barely be warming up. Let's just declare: Jensens suck, Eminence and Weber rule! That's an opinion. This test proves nothing except that you can take humbucking pickups and make a puny speaker sound worse than a beefy speaker. That's news how?

Compare a 25 watter to another 25 watt speaker, maybe in the same price range. Put the Copperhead up against a MOD 10-70, if you're inclined to pick on Jensens.

The more we pat each other on the back and say, "See, the cool speaker kicks the uncool speaker's ass," the less we really learn. Next comparison: JBL vs. Oxford, guess who wins.

[tonfarbe]

Originally Posted by strat a various

Let's just declare: Jensens suck, Eminence and Weber rule! That's an opinion. This test proves nothing except that you can take humbucking pickups and make a puny speaker sound worse than a beefy speaker. That's news how?

Compare a 25 watter to another 25 watt speaker, maybe in the same price range. Put the Copperhead up against a MOD 10-70, if you're inclined to pick on Jensens.

Cool down!
The poster only gave us 2 recordings of 2 different speakers in a PR without comment.

Everything else is just your personal interpretation.

Peace

[Wally]

Stratavarious.....If the OXford is an early narrow gap speaker, I'll take the Oxford over the JBL. If the Oxford is a later wide-gap speaker, then the comparison is a comparison of one speaker that isn't worth putting into an amp against one that some folks like in guitar amps. I am not a big fan of JBL's in guitar amps....harsh and cold to my ear. I have A/B'd orange frame JBL's and OEM EMi's in two '74 TR's...even ran the speakers out of the other amps to verify things. I picked the Emi's there, too. JBLs....thin and harsh in comparison. Different strokes for different folks...YMMV.
I have heard other 25-30 watt speakers that I prefer over that C10R. I found it muddy....and the player wasn't pushing the amp/speaker into OD/distortion.
Here's a better test...try the new C10R against a real JEnsen C10R. There is no comparison. The vitnage speaker has my nod. I have heard too many of them to not notice the difference. MOds....good speakers for the money. I prefer the WEber Signatures for the same kind of money, though.
YMMV.
Since when did Eminence speakers attain 'cool' status and new JEnsens attain 'uncool' status? Strikes me that a large part of the speaker-buying public is drawn to the JEnsens for the name. I am sure that is why there was a large amount of money paid for the brand, right? Before Fender dropped Eminence speakers from their Reissue amps and started using the JEnsen for the 'vintage vibe' connected only to the name, there wasn't much clamor about the new JEnsens. The blue Emi Alnicos that came in the early Bassman RI's are regarded by many to be right in the same category as the highly regarded WEber Alnicos. ...some even prefer them. FEnder made a big mistake imho going to the JEnsen "reissue' speakers. The American-made WEbers and Emi's come closer to cloning the vintage JEnsens, imo.
We all have our preferences due to our own ears and our own experience, right? I don't know what the OP's point in posting the two cuts was. I just gave my unsolicited opinion.....and that is what it is....an opinion of the two speakers performance in that amp with his playing. IF he put an EV in there, I would probably prefer that to either one of those.
You seem to be rather pointed in your assesment of the 'comparison'. SCientific? A comparison can be 'scientific' without being a comparison of equal wattage capabilities and efficiency. THe comparison is valid. Many folks on these pages are looking for more headroom....that Copperhead will give it. (FWIW, I didn't know the specs on either speaker.....didn't even care.) Comparison.....how about the WEber 'vintage' clone of a
C10R against that JEnsen? I'll even take the Emi Legend series 10 ceramic American clone over the new JEnsen.
Your attitude makes me wonder if you have stock in JEnsen? LOL....in good spirit, okay?
OPinions....I have 'em like everyone else....don't let it bother you.
By the way, which sonic result did you prefer?

[strat a various]

My two favorite speakers, out of honestly a couple hundred in the amp rooms, are both Eminence. My most used speakers are vintage Jensens, C12N, C12Q, a few others. I have a MOD 12 that gets rehearsal use and as backup.
I don't give a darn about Jensen as brand name, but a 25 watt speaker vs. a 75 watt speaker, not even close in terms of efficiency, is a comparison aimed at non sequitur result.
I don't need to defend Jensen, but I speak in the defense of sensible side by side tests ...especially those submitted with no accompanying commentary.
Here's my side by side test of a Pignose battery power amp next to a Tweed Champ.

Well, I guess they both could be used for recording.

One reaction- hey the Pignose sounds like a cool toy, the Tweed sounds like a landmark guitar tone, the Grail of small wattage amps.

Or...
The Pignose presents more trebles, so one could roll off a bit on the guitar's tone, I suppose if one didn't want quite as much high end coming through. I am not a fan of the Pignose. so I halfway expected these results for my ears.

If we may all submit apples vs avocados side by side comparisons, may we not all also submit "What's with the big-ass loud powerful speaker vs. the low end, cheapest of the line speaker getting sand kicked in it's face?"

That's an invitation for soopajeanmi to eventually present context ... they could both be considered for a Princeton, "see I saved you from trying the weeniest Jensen available". Or, dogfight video: cocker vs. bull terrier, hey they both bark.
Wait, now only one is barking.

If the test was presented like this:
Eminence Copperhead vs. Jensen MOD 10-70, can YOU pick which is which?... that would be interesting and instructive. At least similar specs, and the suspense til we find out which is which.

Wally, I'm criticizing the nature of the presentation. It neither amuses nor educates me. I'll grant that for someone with little experience with these or similar speakers who was considering one or both as an upgrade in a PRRI, it may narrow the choices, but, presented without comment, we're left to our own interpretations.

I infer that the choice of amp implies the suitability of both speakers for that particular amp. I'll accept that. I also infer that the choice of speakers to be tested implies some sort of commonality beyond the 10" nominal diameter.

Here's where the test becomes limited - Humbuckers, low wattage amp with limited gain, two speakers on extreme opposite ends of a spectrum of suitability. We learn, if you have a 335-type guitar and always wondered which of these two speakers to install in you PRRI, and you play like soopajeanmi, with his tone settings, the powerful, sensitive, efficient speaker will sound better. I was always wondering just that.

There are low price, low powered Webers that could kick that Jensen all over the room at similar specs. Now that would be interesting, to me at least.

[SimpleOne]

I find it always amazing, the level of sensitivity of such a high watt 10, such as the latest Emi's. Though as you say Strat, it is subjective and truly some prefer a less sensitive speaker, anecdotedly speaking. And there are those here who really like all such comparisons, and enjoy the playing too! YYWV, IMHO

[Bob Arbogast]

Is there a simple and direct relationship between a speaker's power handling ability and its tonal character? I suspect there's more to it than that. The Copperhead, to take the current example, may have a fairly high power handling ability, but it also breaks up fairly early. That's a function, I think, of the cone and the spider more than anything. Am I wrong about this?

Related, is there a simple and direct relationship between a speaker's power handling ability and its sensitivity? I have my doubts about that one, too. I suppose the factors that determine a speaker's sensitivity overlap with the factors that determine its power handling ability, but surely some factors apply to the one and not to the other. Am I wrong about this?

Bob Arbogast

[strat a various]

To get the most out of any speaker, you should adjust the pick up selection, guitar tone settings, amp tone settings and input attenuation according to the qualities and idiosyncrasies of the particular speaker. Power handling, sensitivity, tone, break-up point ... all related but not necessarily dependent on each other directly.
Magnet size, coil mass, cone weight, all are juggled to achieve aspects that appeal to the intended user. But, again, if the basics aren't equal, vastly different speakers will require vastly different tone and gain settings to be used to their best advantage.
I have achieved great results with low wattage speaker like old Jensen "s" or "r" series, but the bass response and volume have to be carefully monitored.

Running dissimilar speakers through the same amp with the same settings and conditions tells me one thing, players need to adjust the guitar and amp to suit different types of speaker.

[Jack Knife]

Be that as it may...I prefer the sound of the Jensen in these clips.

[SimpleOne]

Originally Posted by strat a various

Running dissimilar speakers through the same amp with the same settings and conditions tells me one thing, players need to adjust the guitar and amp to suit different types of speaker.

No doubt, though if a fellow, or gal, just wanted to show some of the subtle tonal differences, perhaps just leaving the settings on the amp alone and going with that, might be valid also. Might allow the listener to judge what is accentuated and what is left behind, no?

Gotta say also...I just ran through something remarkably similar, with a Ragin Cajun and a C10Q (vintage '84) and I know there is no way I could not turn the knobs to find the sweet spot on each speaker, were I in the room. So maybe next time show the spekaers with the same settings then dial them in with further explanation? Or just mail in your opinion

[Wally]

Originally Posted by SimpleOne

No doubt, though if a fellow, or gal, just wanted to show some of the subtle tonal differences, perhaps just leaving the settings on the amp alone and going with that, might be valid also. Might allow the listener to judge what is accentuated and what is left behind, no?

Gotta say also...I just ran through something remarkably similar, with a Ragin Cajun and a C10Q (vintage '84) and I know there is no way I could not turn the knobs to find the sweet spot on each speaker, were I in the room. So maybe next time show the spekaers with the same settings then dial them in with further explanation? Or just mail in your opinion

I could be wrong, but I don't think there is such a thing as a JEnsen guitar speaker from 1984. THe late '60's saw the end of JEnsen in the guitar speaker world, IIRC. IIRC, the Italian 'reissues' came to market in the mid
'90's.
RE: speakers comparison versus playing situation. .....imho to compare the difference in efficiency and tonal qualities, one would want to run the speaker with identical settings. For a playing situation, I agree that one would want to turn the control knobs to effect desired tonality and volume.

[SimpleOne]

Originally Posted by Wally

I could be wrong, but I don't think there is such a thing as a JEnsen guitar speaker from 1984. THe late '60's saw the end of JEnsen in the guitar speaker world, IIRC. IIRC, the Italian 'reissues' came to market in the mid
'90's.
RE: speakers comparison versus playing situation. .....imho to compare the difference in efficiency and tonal qualities, one would want to run the speaker with identical settings. For a playing situation, I agree that one would want to turn the control knobs to effect desired tonality and volume.

Yeah...thanks for the correction!...shoulda said clone...or just "Fender Special". Would you believe Eminence? Forgot the code# for manuf. Gotta say after having a Ragin Cajun in the '79 PR for a few weeks, the later model speaker sounds quite good. Less pronounced bass and overall sweeter and smoother. Less thumper.

[Soopajeanmi]

Wow. What a discussion!!

I just wanted to show the relative tone of those 2 speakers. The copperhead seems relevant in a princeton, Allen for example put one in is classic 10 which is a 10W amp, and Headstrong puts a 50w GB12 in it's princeton clone. Many people try the ragin cajun in princeton too.

What i read is that is that power rating is not the main thing to look except to check if the speaker can handle the max wattage of the amp. And speaker break-up is actually not directly related to power handling.

So I just compared 2 speakers that one may be interested in putting in his princeton. That's it.

The copperhead is indeed louder than the C10R, but i adapted the record level so that it's not showing on the recording.

So what's my opinion? I much prefer the copperhead, even if on that track the c10r is prettier I think. The problem i have with the C10R is that it's so scooped in the mids that I don't recognise my guitars: on that c10R track I don't recognise my neck humbucker. The mids are gone.

I feel much more at ease *playing* the copperhead, even if the C10R is a good speaker, with a different EQ shape. I prefer the bass of the c10r, like its brightness even if it can be too much and feel uncomfortable with its mid-scoop, I like the natural EQ shape of the copperhead and the added volume it brings as I'm mostly interested in clean tones.

They are both good speakers, with a very different EQ shape, I hope my tracks show that. And by the way, I adjusted the controls slighty to match the speaker (like trebles were on 4 for the jensen and on 5 for the eminence, bass were on 7 for the jensen and 5 for the copperhead, volume was on 4 for the jensen and on 3 for the eminence).

Here's the copperhead on the princeton in differents contexts and playing:
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/page...songID=7626412
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/page...songID=7621098

[Wally]

I went back and listened to the first recordings again...didn't change my mind. I still like the articulation of the EMi. On the C10R recording, the lower mids are so muddy that the individual notes have no beginning or end. I prefer the definition of the EMi. I also have to add that I find the Emi to be sweeter sounding. IT demands more of a personal connection with the guitar andmore control becasue it so well defines what is being done by the player. I liek the nicely formed low end of the EMi. I like the sparkle of the high end.
A C10N or K might reveal a different thing compared to the C10R and get closer to the articulation and tonal production of the Emi (this is a nod to STratavarious), but that isn't what we are listening to, is it?

[JohnnyCrash]

APPLES AND ORANGES
Apples and oranges comparison. Even more different if not broken in.

Regardless, very cool. Thanks for making those recordings available!

For an overly bright amp lacking warmth, a C10R or C10Q reissue might help. For an overly dark amp, a Copperhead might be better. Neither is "better" than the other - just different.

BRAND NAME HASN'T CARRIED THEM
New Jensens are generally NOT preferred by internet dwellers... they get nothing but a bad rap by almost everyone online. For new speakers with "authentic" aged "real" Jensen sounds, Webers are almost always preferred - afterall, they're good speakers. Eminence currently has a great marketing strategy as well as product lineup/variety... but their "American" speakers also don't sound like real aged Jensens (again Weber's forte).

The last "real" American Jensens ever made were around 1969 - every sample we've ever heard has seen a ton of use/abuse... again, Weber has nailed that aged, original Jensen sound in spades.

STILL GOOD SPEAKERS
BUT, that is not to say new Jensen reissues suck. They're great speakers at a good price. Pummel them for 30+ years and they just may sound closer to originals... even if not, even the reissues (accurate or not) sound great, and are most times very affordable. Don't count on all of their speakers for 100% authenticity - but do count on finding the right one for the job (and avoiding their "wrong" ones).

(Depending on the amp) I like their AlNiCo 10"s, I generally don't prefer their Ceramic 10"s (though some folks I know do); and depending on the model, their 12"s are either (A) great, (B) OK, or (C) kinda bad (all in my opinion). I absolutely love their P15N reissue 15" AlNiCo though... right now I'm putting their new Jet series Electric Lightning (sorta their take on a smoothed out Celestion V30) through the paces for my isolation cabinet, I'll post if I like it or not soon...

[Soopajeanmi]

Ok. I think I'm missing something here. I don't get why it's an "apple and orange" comparison.

Yes they are different wattage speakers: but I read this doesn't have a direct influence on tone and that high wattage speakers are totally valid in a low wattage amp, *contrary to popular belief*

Yes they have different efficiency: but that's just make one louder than the other (roughly 2 numbers on the volume control).

If I choose the copperhead it's because Guitar Player described them as "The Copperhead is an excellent choice if you’re looking for a vintage-voiced 10 that sounds great in a variety of situations" and the tone quest report said: "Nothing else sounds quite like a great 10" speaker(except four), and the
Copperhead is just that. Warmer and fuller than the familiar Eminence blue AlNiCo 10’s commonly found in Fender reissue Bassman and early VibroKing amps"

The copperhead is actually a modified version of their legend 102 (their "blue alnico"), according to eminence. It's undopped and breaks up relatively fast.

So can you get me schooled and explain why this speaker can't be compared to a C10R??

[strat a various]

Mon ami, you can compare these two speakers all you want. They are both 10" guitar speakers. My frustration is with the general tone of the forum, since a palpable bias has been established by some of the most vocal regulars in favor of certain brands and companies, and with a negative prejudice toward others, including Jensen.
Opinions are often in lockstep with the usual suspects, and as Johnny pointed out:
"New Jensens are generally NOT preferred by internet dwellers... they get nothing but a bad rap by almost everyone online ...They're great speakers at a good price."
Unfortunately, lots of the information being passed off as fact or wisdom amounts to anecdote and repetition. Posters say so much the same things, that I can see what archive posts they are repeating when they wax eloquent on lo these many subjects.
If you think these speakers are likely candidates for a PRRI and you like to post comparisons, have at it. Be prepared for opinionated players, maybe with several decades of experience in the field, to critique the methodology and even the relevance of your comparison.
I owned an vintage Princeton, and I'm familiar with old Jensens, new Jensens and the Eminence line, save the Neo type speakers.
I don't consider either speaker you tested to be a first choice for a Princeton, for reasons too lengthy to belabor. You could make the argument, as you have , that they are comparable, but claims of "early breakup" notwithstanding (Eminence claims 'breaks up sweet for that classic vintage tone'), there is a connection between magnet weight , voice coil diameter, efficiency and other parameters of speakers and the overall quality and tone.
I know some speakers break up early, but can handle high wattage.
I still feel you picked the bottom of the line Jensen, probably their worst ceramic speaker, and are comparing it to a very heavy duty Eminence that is double the muscle in most respects.
I'll add that designing a light weight cone to break up while pairing it with a heavy magnet and larger voice coil is a different animal than a little, low powered speaker that, at best, will translate some funky, old blues mojo like a low end Jensen or (hi Wally) wide coil gap Oxford.
As I said earlier, The MOD 10-70 approximates the specs of the Eminence and they are more comparable. Also reiterating, Weber has light, low powered speakers that are interchangeable with the C10R, they would make a good comparison.
A high powered speaker designed to break up earlier and a low powered speaker with a frequency response like an antique are two different things. I'm not berating you, you're entitled to your opinion, but in the end, if no one makes the case that this test isn't testing real rivals, as speakers go, the less experienced reader will make erroneous inferences needlessly.

[Soopajeanmi]

Originally Posted by strat a various

I still feel you picked the bottom of the line Jensen, probably their worst ceramic speaker, and are comparing it to a very heavy duty Eminence that is double the muscle in most respects.
I'll add that designing a light weight cone to break up while pairing it with a heavy magnet and larger voice coil is a different animal than a little, low powered speaker that, at best, will translate some funky, old blues mojo like a low end Jensen or (hi Wally) wide coil gap Oxford.

Thanks for your explanation. I don't really understand half of the technical stuff you're describing...

I picked the jensen simply because it's the speaker that the PRRI comes equipped with...That's the speaker Fender chose to put in that amp.

I picked the copperhead because it's a speaker readily available here in Europe (weber are double the price than in the US) and I thought it was supposed to be in the same ball park, being described as vintage flavor.

If I made a comparaison meaningless to experts, sorry. For unschooled players like me, the comparaison is still valid to hear a good candidate for replacing the stock c10r in the PRRI. And actually the 2 speakers are good, yet different. If one was to study what speakers are available for cheap on the market for replacement in a princeton and get a vintage tone, wouldn't he put the c10r and the copperhead in the list ??

[Jack Knife]

I think it's a perfectly valid comparison, and one that is relevant to a lot of people. You took the stock speaker and compared it to a popular replacement speaker. Many people do exactly as you did, they replace a stock speaker which they may not be fond of with a speaker that is popular, affordable and obtainable. To those who may have been wondering what this particular comparison sounds like...here it is.

[strat a various]

soopajeanmi, I'm not trying to be condescending. As a snapshot of "before and after", it's an acceptable comparison. If you presented the clips with the disclaimer:

"I picked the jensen simply because it's the speaker that the PRRI comes equipped with...That's the speaker Fender chose to put in that amp.

I picked the copperhead because it's a speaker readily available here in Europe (weber are double the price than in the US) and I thought it was supposed to be in the same ball park, being described as vintage flavor."

I simply felt the specs of the two speakers was a relevant bit of information, and that they had less in common (because of those differences) than a direct comparison would suggest.

No insult was intended, just a differing opinion.

I once put a 12" EV in my Princeton. It blew the original speaker away, literally no comparison. I mean, by replacing one with the other, I was really comparing them, but the sound was so different, the amp lost some of it's quirky personality. In contrast, your choice was much more realistic, so let's just agree to having different viewpoints, not trying to offend you.

[Soopajeanmi]

Thanks Strat a various for making your point clear. I must admit I have no idea about the consequences on tone of bigger magnets, different cones, etc.

Still, I'm willing to learn more on that topic. What speakers do you think would be good candidate for a princeton, in the jensen/eminence/celestion catalog (sorry, but that's what readily available here, i know webers are great)?

[strat a various]

In those brands I like the Eminence 102K for vintage bluesy tones. I have a MOD 12-50 that sounds better than anything else I've tried in the price range, so I'd probably pick a Jensen MOD 10-50 for a Princeton, personally. I like a dark tone, so for brighter timbres, the Emi alnico may be more to your liking.
If you like the Copperhead, it's a great speaker. I find it a bit congested sounding, but my tone settings are going to be different from yours. I have a 10" Jensen C10Q that I don't care for by itself ... the mids are scooped too much, the bass is too rich, but the highs are beautiful. Paired with a speaker with tight bass response and good mids, it adds a lot. I used it with a 12" last week and the sound was superb, but by itself in a combo, don't like it.
I don't have that old blackface Princeton anymore, but it had a open, airy sound that suited clean tones, and I had finally settled on an Eminence stock MusicMan speaker for it. Those old MusicMan speakers from the late 70s sounded great in smaller amps.
I spend too much money buying used speakers on ebay, and I've been lucky so far. Most of them have been fully functional, a couple were blown, but that's a risk I'm willing to take. Contrary to the majority opinion hereabouts, I like the sound of an old JBL in a Princeton, used to see those once in a while in Silverface Princeton Reverbs in big recording studios.

[rickso]

Thks for the demo, the jenson sounded warmer to my hears,I guess it depends what you play, it's all subjective-there is no good or bad--
I play jazz the jenson would work better-

[still_fiddlin]

Didn't see this before. I just tried an Eminence Ragin Cajun in my PRRI. Did not work for me. I had it sitting in a box - previously was in an Epiphone Valve Special, where it was an improvement, but in the Fender, uh uh. I know it's probably more sensitive, but it felt like there was a hump to get over to get it moving, and that was past where I usually play (mic'd). Not a bad sound, but I'm back to the stock, made in Italy, C10R.

[rickso]

some nice playing, great demo, love that jazz, would liked it heard with the jenson, but i liked the tone of the Eminence
Thank you, great job

Originally Posted by Soopajeanmi

Wow. What a discussion!!

I just wanted to show the relative tone of those 2 speakers. The copperhead seems relevant in a princeton, Allen for example put one in is classic 10 which is a 10W amp, and Headstrong puts a 50w GB12 in it's princeton clone. Many people try the ragin cajun in princeton too.

What i read is that is that power rating is not the main thing to look except to check if the speaker can handle the max wattage of the amp. And speaker break-up is actually not directly related to power handling.

So I just compared 2 speakers that one may be interested in putting in his princeton. That's it.

The copperhead is indeed louder than the C10R, but i adapted the record level so that it's not showing on the recording.

So what's my opinion? I much prefer the copperhead, even if on that track the c10r is prettier I think. The problem i have with the C10R is that it's so scooped in the mids that I don't recognise my guitars: on that c10R track I don't recognise my neck humbucker. The mids are gone.

I feel much more at ease *playing* the copperhead, even if the C10R is a good speaker, with a different EQ shape. I prefer the bass of the c10r, like its brightness even if it can be too much and feel uncomfortable with its mid-scoop, I like the natural EQ shape of the copperhead and the added volume it brings as I'm mostly interested in clean tones.

They are both good speakers, with a very different EQ shape, I hope my tracks show that. And by the way, I adjusted the controls slighty to match the speaker (like trebles were on 4 for the jensen and on 5 for the eminence, bass were on 7 for the jensen and 5 for the copperhead, volume was on 4 for the jensen and on 3 for the eminence).

Here's the copperhead on the princeton in differents contexts and playing:
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/page...songID=7626412
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/page...songID=7621098