AudioCircle
Audio/Video Gear and Systems => Open Baffle Speakers => Topic started by: cr_otmopo3ok on 27 Mar 2007, 04:52 pm
-
I'm building B200 OBs so i need to augment it with 15" OB woofer (doing 40-200Hz duty). It will either be just a plain small baffle or a stuffed U baffle.
My room is 16'x11'x9' with speakers along a longer wall (1-2' off the back wall) so I'm wondering if i should buy 1 or 2 woofers per side? I'm a bit of a "fast+clean bass" head but i don't listen too loud, i just want doublebass to sound like it should. I'm SO tired of boomy bass with my room modes and TL sub. I have active XO + EQ so matching SPL is not a problem.
Music preferences are mostly Jazz, Prog. Rock.
Here are my options:
Eminence Alpha-15A $59
*Frequency range: 46-3,500 Hz
*Magnet weight: 25 oz.
*Fs: 41 Hz
*SPL: 97 dB 1W/1m
*Vas: 9.2 cu. ft.
*Qts: 1.26
*Xmax: 3.8 mm
http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/pshowdetl.cfm?&DID=7&Partnumber=290-407&ctab=2#Tabs (http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/pshowdetl.cfm?&DID=7&Partnumber=290-407&ctab=2#Tabs)
GOLDWOOD GW-1558 15" PRO WOOFER $45 (read 1 very good review)
* Frequency response: 31-2,500 Hz
* Magnet weight: 50 oz.
* Fs: 31 Hz
* SPL: 95.6 dB
* Vas: 14.19 cu. ft.
* Xmax: 3.9mm
* Qts: .63
http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/pshowdetl.cfm?&Partnumber=290-384
PYLE PRO PPA15 $47
* Frequency response: 27-4,000 Hz
* Fs: 26.7 Hz
* SPL: 90.2 dB
* Vas: 11.36 cu. ft.
* Qts: .67
* Xmax: 6 mm
* Magnet weight: 70 oz.
http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?&Partnumber=292-218
Eminence Delta-15LFA $96
*Frequency range: 42-3,200 Hz
*Magnet weight: 56 oz.
*Fs: 41 Hz
*SPL: 96 dB 1W/1m
*Vas: 6.6 cu. ft.
*Qts: 0.58
*Xmax: 4.8 mm
http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/pshowdetl.cfm?&DID=7&Partnumber=290-417&ctab=2#Tabs (http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/pshowdetl.cfm?&DID=7&Partnumber=290-417&ctab=2#Tabs)
Knight-15 $50
Frequency Response: 35 to 4500hz
FS 35 hz
VAS 4.48
Qts 1.006
Xmax 4.5mm
Magnet weight: 50 oz.
http://www.musicsupplycenter.com/ProductDetails.asp?ProductCode=813%2D013 (http://www.musicsupplycenter.com/ProductDetails.asp?ProductCode=813%2D013)
Warrior-15 $35
Frequency Response: 35 to 4600hz
FS 36 hz
VAS 8.29
SD 143.13
Qts 0.826
Xmax 4.5mm
Magnet weight: 50 oz.
http://www.musicsupplycenter.com/ProductDetails.asp?ProductCode=813%2D021 (http://www.musicsupplycenter.com/ProductDetails.asp?ProductCode=813%2D021)
And of course:
Silver Iris Augie $150
Fs: 27.0 Hz
SPL: 88.7 dB 1w/1m
Qt: 0.92
Vas: 250.3 liters
Xmax: 7.15 mm
Magnet weight: 67ounces
http://www.hawthorneaudio.com/drivers.htm (http://www.hawthorneaudio.com/drivers.htm)
Can Qts be too high?
Visaton BGS 40 has Qts 0.4
http://www.visaton.de/en/chassis_zubehoer/musiker/bgs40_8.html (http://www.visaton.de/en/chassis_zubehoer/musiker/bgs40_8.html)
and people reported it sounding very good in OB while at the same time MJK really liked Alpha15A for their high Qts=1.26.
http://www.quarter-wave.com/Project07/Project07.html (http://www.quarter-wave.com/Project07/Project07.html)
I chose drivers with accordion surrounds since I believe low excursion sounds more accurate but will 3.8mm Xmas be enough? (Alpha15)
And finally the $300 question should i bother with all these cheap drivers of just get 2 Augies and a peace of mind? But then maybe at such price i should be looking at better drivers than Augie?
I wanted to save money with Alpha15 but if I need 2 of them to match the capability of 1 Augie then i'd rather get Augie ?!?
Suggestions?
Thank you.
-
Augie :wink:
-
From what I know, the Machs are more for subwoofer applications, like an IB, not necessarily a woofer going to 200hz, but may work. :scratch:
-
Ciare 18.00 ND W1 or Ciare 15.00 ND W1....assistance audio or other pro dealer have them.
-
Thank you Bob I expected nothing less of you. :)
Thanks zapper i'm deleting them from the list...
Josh thanks i'm checking them out right now....Ouch ($200) they are even more expensive than Augies... but if you say they are good this may be my next step in upgrading..but first i wanna get my feet wet.
Any other suggestions guys?
-
Mach5Audio Mach12 or Mach15.
I use the 12's, they work nicely with just one of the 2 voicecoils connected, thus doubling the stated QTS.
Solid build quality, affordable, not sure how they act above 150Hz, the highest I have crossed mine over to my b200, and I prefer around 90-100Hz in my room.
http://www.mach5audio.com/ (http://www.mach5audio.com/)
-
Thank you Bob I expected nothing less of you. :)
:o I'm getting a reputation....aren't I?
Bob
-
Thank you Bob I expected nothing less of you. :)
:o I'm getting a reputation....aren't I?
Bob
Yeah, Bob, but it may not be for what you think... :lol: :icon_twisted: aa aa
Dave :green:
-
I always here that you can't judge a speaker by its graph.
I also here that plots of bass below 200Hz are often not accurate.
I have found graphs for the Ciare speakers here
http://www.assistanceaudio.com/08_CIARE.html#neo
It seems natural to want a subwoofer to have a flat response between 20Hz and 200Hz.
One never see this on a graph.
However, the Ciare graphs look exceedingly poor to me.
Most of these speakers have a very sharp roll-off below 100Hz.
The 15.00NdW1 is relatively good compared to other Ciare graphs as its sharp roll-off starts at 70Hz.
Even the graphs of the 18s start a sharp decline at 100Hz.
The graph of the 12SW looks the best with sharp roll-off starting at 50Hz.
The 15.00 SW is maybe second best.
Are these graphs useful? Am I misinterpreting something here?
The graph of this 2" driver looks better than the Ciare 15" subs.
http://www.ejjordan.co.uk/drivers/jxr6.html
-
Bob it's not scary thinking your are earning a reputation, it's scary when everyone else (Dave,...) start believing in that too. :D I've been reading different forums long enough to get to know the real gurus - people who are always willing to help others. :thumb: Somewhat knowing your tastes I anticipated your response.
Dave's sense of humor took over him and he just couldn't let such a chance pass him by. :lol: :icon_lol:
Thanks everyone for your input,
Ciares seem fishy and even more expensive than Augie. Augies to me right now seem like perfect OB drivers so if I were to splurge $300 i'd get them, anything more expensive is not necessary.
However the main point of this post is to get my feet wet with OB bass so i highly desire to get some *excellent* drivers in $50 range.
I'm sure if i really like what i hear i'll buy Augies in couple of months and use the less expensive drivers to make a ripole sub, so they won't go to waste.
However Knights and Warriors seem to 'scream' BAD QUALITY (glue on 50% of drivers' surrounds) and most specs lie.
Right now it seems i have 3 major contenders based on different recommendations i read:
GOLDWOOD GW-1558 $45 Qts:0.67
Pyle PPA15 $47 Qts:0.67
Eminence Alpha-15A $59 Qts:1.26
I always felt that Alphas had a weak motor and weak surround and Dick Olsher confirmed my suspision when he said that Q factor was just too high -> less control, all in a race for lower extension. I don't want that. So I think i'm ruling out Alphas due to their 'too high' Qts and weak damping. He also mentioned that Q factor should be closer to 0.6 (he even damped Augies with 25Oohm resistor :o).
http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/equipment/0107/diy_loudspeaker_project.htm
I've seen PPA15 being used for U,H dipole, ripole sub (<80Hz) duty by several people over the years on different boards but i just have a 'gut feeling' they ain't good in midbass region. (from someone's comment of their rising, bumpy response higher).Plus i just feel a driver with cheesy picture on the front can't sound good up higher.:)
Brad convinced me from his 'extreme' testing that Goldwoods can take a beating and sound great (and he is hard to please he says) :
http://www.hawthorneaudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=634&highlight=poor+mans+augie
So at least I'm not worried about Xmax there. I don't know anything else about these drivers (manufacturer doesn't even provide freq. plot) but for some reason i'm still drawn to them. I've heard about the other 2 drivers but i learned about Goldwoods just today and yet after Brad's review i feel they deserve a chance. I' falling for them right now the most. :oops:
PS: Both PPA15 and 1558 have Qts:0.67 just like Dick Olsher recommended.
What do you think?
-
BTW i've read that Eminence posts it's Xmas peak values so Alphas 3.8mm is in fact 7.2mm total.
I suspect that PPA15's 6mm is total while i'm not sure about Goldwood's 3.9mm.(i hope it's only one way) But from the review it seems that's more than enough for them.
PS: interesting read where Darrel himself compares Alphas to Augies.
http://www.hawthorneaudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=403&highlight=alpha
Still puzzled on the selection... :duh: :duh: :duh:
-
CR,
OB woofer selection has to start with performance goals and how much cab you can live with. Linkwitz's DipoleSPLmax spreadsheet can tell you your limits at whatever bottom frequency you desire. For bottom end performance the primary consideration is how much air you can move. This makes the Augie worth 2 of the other drivers, due to double the Xmax. I don't use very high Q drivers like the Alpha because I use EQ. If you're going for a minimalist approach without EQ, or without flattening response via a mechanical means like with a ripole, then a high Q might be what you want.
So much of the Goldwood stuff is pure junk, along with alot of the Pyle stuff. While these drivers might be exceptions, I'd have a hard time trusting either of them. In that price range, I'd prefer to take the sloppy gluing risk of the Knight, and at least get the wide open cast frame Knight 15". If price is less of an object and/or you are limited to small form and only 1 driver per side, then I'd go with the Augies. Though they take more power, they also give you lower natural extension.
-
Thanks John,
I was waiting for a response from you. :green:
My system is active PC XO + EQ so i can 'perfect' any ugly duckling.
If you say they are junk your word alone is enough for me.
I guess there is no denying it, i have to go with Augies!
Ohh man this is SO dangerous if I go to THAT web site I might 'accidentally' order SI Coax to try them too. And i JUST got my B200 a week ago. :bawl: :bawl: :bawl:
Little OT:
I'm afraid of the harsh sounding crossover point between 15" and horn tweeter in SI coax. B200 has better mid response.
BTW John how are our experimentation with Ringed baffle that you mounted directly to B200 (stack of rings equivalent of 18" baffle)?
How does it sound? Would you go back to regular baffle?
I'm very interested in the design i might do that with a matching Ringed Augie underneath it (both magnet mounted of course).
(http://1stlines.net/DiffractionRing.JPG)
If it doesn't sound too good then i might do do something similar to your other baffle only 40" tall:
(http://1stlines.net/B200baffle2.JPG)
Thanks for all your help, experimentation and for sharing it with us!
-
CR,
I didn't say those drivers were junk, but those companies put their name on a lot of stuff that is.
The rings have a serious flaw, which is equal "D" all around the baffle which maximizes the dipole ripples.
The pretty baffle is an easy build, but having your main driver so close to the floor can be problematic, especially if you have a reflective floor.
-
Here's a note that may be of interest. Darrel Hawthorne is planning on having the new Sterling Silver Iris 15 OB Coaxial and the Sterling Silver Iris 15 Augie out in a few months. I can't go into a lot of detail at this point, but I can say that the Sterling Silver Augie is a heavier driver than the standard Augie. It has a substantially lower Qt, a bigger magnet and much more X-max. Same great build quality. Is that enough to start a few of you drooling?
Dave :)
-
A B S O L U T E L Y
:drool: :drool: :drool: :drool: :drool: :drool: :drool: :drool: :drool:
Oh Dave you made my day
:bowdown: :bowdown::bowdown: :bowdown::bowdown: :bowdown:
-
Here's a note that may be of interest. Darrel Hawthorne is planning on having the new Sterling Silver Iris 15 OB Coaxial and the Sterling Silver Iris 15 Augie out in a few months. I can't go into a lot of detail at this point, but I can say that the Sterling Silver Augie is a heavier driver than the standard Augie. It has a substantially lower Qt, a bigger magnet and much more X-max. Same great build quality. Is that enough to start a few of you drooling?
Dave :)
Not drooling yet, waiting for the 10" Augies, now THAT has me :drool:
impatiently,
Lin :D
-
Here's a note that may be of interest. Darrel Hawthorne is planning on having the new Sterling Silver Iris 15 OB Coaxial and the Sterling Silver Iris 15 Augie out in a few months. I can't go into a lot of detail at this point, but I can say that the Sterling Silver Augie is a heavier driver than the standard Augie. It has a substantially lower Qt, a bigger magnet and much more X-max. Same great build quality. Is that enough to start a few of you drooling?
Dave :)
Not drooling yet, waiting for the 10" Augies, now THAT has me :drool:
impatiently,
Lin :D
Those are getting real close. I have the protoype drivers here now, and my first attempt at an XO for them. The baffles are due via UPS today. Will start testing shortly.
Dave
-
Dave if you can't tell, don't say anything but i was wondering, :)
Will the Sterlings be complementary to the current driver line up (for a premium price) or will they replace the current SIs ?
Too much Xmax is not always great...it would seem like a driver is turning into one of the usual long throw designs...
I'm not saying anything bad at all, it's just that something about accordion surround and low excursion that sound right, quick and effortless.
But if it's designed specifically for OB espesially by Darrel than it's gotta be good.
Plus now i remember that i heard Darrel talking that Sterling is the BEST driver he's ever heard (now i realize what sterling he was talking about)
Few months is SO far aways it seems... what to listen for now?
Another question:
I know all the negative sides of 10"SI coax and that it's designed for smaller rooms.
But even if i can accommodate 15" coax easily is there a additional advantage to buying 10" coax that would make me buy it over 15" like better imaging due to smaller wave launch cone? Better dynamics?
I mean if they are complemented by Augie on the bottom then the negative side of 10" (lower extension) goes away in an instant, then maybe 10" has other advantages?
-
I can't go into a lot of detail at this point
Maybe YOU can't........ :o aa
Bob
-
I learned long ago that drooling over a new driver coming out will just leave you with a dry mouth. The 10" Hawthorne coax was supposed to be out last July, and the new Hemp offerings were supposed to become available a couple of months ago. At this point I'm just patiently waiting, and making other options work in the meantime.
-
How would the A. Brown Hemptone 8 in OB with a pair of Augie's perform in comparison to B200/Augie combo?
http://www.abrown.com/home.htm
-
Max, I haven't heard that 8" Hemp driver so i don't know how it sounds.
But when someone finally makes a good Hemp 8" full-ranger WITHOUT a whizzer cone I sure will try one. In fact that's what I'm waiting for.
Good Luck!
-
Max, I haven't heard that 8" Hemp driver so i don't know how it sounds.
But when someone finally makes a good Hemp 8" full-ranger WITHOUT a whizzer cone I sure will try one. In fact that's what I'm waiting for.
Good Luck!
No can do :nono: ToneTubby's hemp is @ 100% and will not do high frequencies without a whizzer.
Any 8" hemp driver without a whizzer is NOT a true hemp but a mixture like hemp matrix.
I bet you lose tone.
Lin
PS I believe TT is still working on an OB 8" 16 ohm driver.
-
Re Hemp Acoustics drivers,
I received an email response to a status request that the suggested retail of the new coax 10" was $600. I haven't bothered to respond or request further info after than bit of info. I forget the price of the new 8" fullranger, but it seemed reasonable, just not what I'm looking for.
-
Dave if you can't tell, don't say anything but i was wondering, :)
Will the Sterlings be complementary to the current driver line up (for a premium price) or will they replace the current SIs ?
There is no plan to discontinue the old SI coaxials. The new ones are a more high-end alternitive.
Too much Xmax is not always great...it would seem like a driver is turning into one of the usual long throw designs...
I'm not saying anything bad at all, it's just that something about accordion surround and low excursion that sound right, quick and effortless.
The excursion on the new Sterling Augie will be greater than the Augie, but not as much as many of those sub drivers made just for low frequency rumble. The new Sterlings are designed with music as the first priority, home theatre is second.
But if it's designed specifically for OB espesially by Darrel than it's gotta be good.
Plus now i remember that i heard Darrel talking that Sterling is the BEST driver he's ever heard (now i realize what sterling he was talking about)
Few months is SO far aways it seems... what to listen for now?
Another question:
I know all the negative sides of 10"SI coax and that it's designed for smaller rooms.
But even if i can accommodate 15" coax easily is there a additional advantage to buying 10" coax that would make me buy it over 15" like better imaging due to smaller wave launch cone? Better dynamics?
I mean if they are complemented by Augie on the bottom then the negative side of 10" (lower extension) goes away in an instant, then maybe 10" has other advantages?
I need more time to compare the 10" Coaxial to the 15" Coaxial to answer your question completely. Right now, only having heard the 10" with the wrong XO, I prefer the 15 Coaxial. The bigger soundwave and punchier bass impact just do-it for me better. However, I can't tell about imaging until I get the crossover right. I'll be breaking in the 10 inchers more with the newest XO over the next few days and can maybe answer your questions better then. The 10" baffle I'm using does take up less space, though. I need to play with a higher crossed sub some, also, with the 10 inchers.
Dave :)
-
I learned long ago that drooling over a new driver coming out will just leave you with a dry mouth. The 10" Hawthorne coax was supposed to be out last July, and the new Hemp offerings were supposed to become available a couple of months ago. At this point I'm just patiently waiting, and making other options work in the meantime.
John,
You wouldn't believe the headaches and patience-trying that has went into the development of this new 10 inch SI Coaxial. Darrel is determined not to release this driver until it is good enough to wear the Silver Iris name. The earlier versions just weren't quite up to it. The wait is almost over, though. Now it's my turn to have the pressure on me for a while... :scratch: :duh: :o :roll: :? etc...
Dave :)
-
I learned long ago that drooling over a new driver coming out will just leave you with a dry mouth. The 10" Hawthorne coax was supposed to be out last July, and the new Hemp offerings were supposed to become available a couple of months ago. At this point I'm just patiently waiting, and making other options work in the meantime.
John,
You wouldn't believe the headaches and patience-trying that has went into the development of this new 10 inch SI Coaxial. Darrel is determined not to release this driver until it is good enough to wear the Silver Iris name. The earlier versions just weren't quite up to it. The wait is almost over, though. Now it's my turn to have the pressure on me for a while... :scratch: :duh: :o :roll: :? etc...
Dave :)
Some people may want to hear about the labor pains, but for me just deliver the baby.
-
Max, I haven't heard that 8" Hemp driver so i don't know how it sounds.
But when someone finally makes a good Hemp 8" full-ranger WITHOUT a whizzer cone I sure will try one. In fact that's what I'm waiting for.
Good Luck!
No can do :nono: ToneTubby's hemp is @ 100% and will not do high frequencies without a whizzer.
Any 8" hemp driver without a whizzer is NOT a true hemp but a mixture like hemp matrix.
I bet you lose tone.
Lin
PS I believe TT is still working on an OB 8" 16 ohm driver.
According to a recent post by Vinnie R. there will not be an 8" OB Hemp driver from Tone Tubby. :cry:
Lin
-
Lin,
Do you mean other than the Hemptone 8" that looks like it's already out? The one I like is that 6.5", though it needs a tweet and some power. That response up to 5khz looks sweet. Plus with 7mm of Xmax I can stretch the bass by leaning on the EQ a bit.
-
Lin,
Do you mean other than the Hemptone 8" that looks like it's already out? The one I like is that 6.5", though it needs a tweet and some power. That response up to 5khz looks sweet. Plus with 7mm of Xmax I can stretch the bass by leaning on the EQ a bit.
Yes, Tone Tubby was working on an 8" 16 ohm OB driver for Omega and apparently the development cost was getting high? and they wanted Louis to buy in large quantities. The project has been sacked as I understand it.
Perhaps they did not understand the potential the driver might have had with DIYers.
I agree on the smaller Hemptone driver, a few months back a friend (with more speaker building experience than me, but no OBs) was looking at drivers for a 3 way OB. One of the drivers I suggested was the old Hemp Acoustics 6.5" as a widerange mid.
Lin
-
I have found some 15" Bass drivers, that could be interesting:
MB Quart RWE 354/RWE352
TSP
RE: 3.2/6.4
QMS: 6.37/6.24
QES: 0.531/0.541
QTS: 0.49/0.498
FS: 20/21
VAS: 157/157
SPL: 90
XMAX: ???
Impedance: 2x2/2x4 Ohm
Pyle PLM 1590 BL
TSP
RE: 2
QMS: 5
QES: 0.9
QTS: 0.75
FS: 22
VAS: 147
SPL: 84
XMAX: 15
Impedance: 2x4
Both not too expensive. I couldn´t find graphs for those. What do you think?
-
Hi Schrottie,
Sorry to say that the first driver doesn't seem suitable for OB. Sure, the FS looks tempting, but I wouldnt choose it myself. QTS is just to low. And unless you're biamping the SPL is on the low side too. My guess is that it will sound _very_ lean in the bass when used in OB. If it has double voice coils however, the QTS can be increased in favor of SPL.
Regarding the Pyle driver, the QTS looks good. The low Re of only 2 ohm shows that this is a speaker made for car audio use. It could definitly work well in a OB setup but the SPL is painfully low. The low impendance together with low SPL will put some hefty requirements on the amplifier.
-
Maybe this one>
http://www.monacor.de/typo3/index.php?id=75&artid=1873&spr=DE&type=u&L=0
-
Why does one never hear about the Delta-15B?
Any experiences?
-
Re the Monacor SP-382C
Suits car, but not OB;-
cms = 0,58mm/N (too stiff)
mms = 113g (too heavy)
More AF energy goes into moving the cone than displacing air !
Cheers .......... Graham.
-
This Selenium looks promising and has had very good reviews as to its suitability for this purpose on "other" forums.
http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=264-338
A Google on the model number brings up a detailed pdf on specs. qts 0.61; mms = 75gm; cms = 265 mm/N; sensitivity 98 dB/W; kapton VC former, $60 ea in lots of 4. This driver is said to actually sound very good through the midrange, presumably because of the glitch-free roll off at the top end (around 4 kHz).
-
Re the Monacor SP-382C
Suits car, but not OB;-
cms = 0,58mm/N (too stiff)
mms = 113g (too heavy)
More AF energy goes into moving the cone than displacing air !
Cheers .......... Graham.
Learning all the time. :D
-
This Selenium looks promising and has had very good reviews as to its suitability for this purpose on "other" forums.
http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=264-338
FYI, here's a frequency response on the 15PW3 driver driver: http://www.prodance.cz/protokoly/15PW3.pdf (http://www.prodance.cz/protokoly/15PW3.pdf)
Cheers!
/Jon
-
If you click on tech data for another relevant pdf on this page there is a response chart which looks as though the vertical scale was compressed, although close analysis shows the same scale, I think. Puzzling - this one is much more flattering.
http://www.iakn.com/prosound/pwline.html
Actual listening tests have been encouraging, apparently, and DIY'ers more experienced than myself attribute this largely to the clean roll off at higher frequencies and how a simple low order crossover could be used to good effect with this response pattern.
-
Thanks John,
I was waiting for a response from you. :green:
My system is active PC XO + EQ so i can 'perfect' any ugly duckling.
If you say they are junk your word alone is enough for me.
I guess there is no denying it, i have to go with Augies!
Ohh man this is SO dangerous if I go to THAT web site I might 'accidentally' order SI Coax to try them too. And i JUST got my B200 a week ago. :bawl: :bawl: :bawl:
Little OT:
I'm afraid of the harsh sounding crossover point between 15" and horn tweeter in SI coax. B200 has better mid response.
BTW John how are our experimentation with Ringed baffle that you mounted directly to B200 (stack of rings equivalent of 18" baffle)?
How does it sound? Would you go back to regular baffle?
I'm very interested in the design i might do that with a matching Ringed Augie underneath it (both magnet mounted of course).
(http://1stlines.net/DiffractionRing.JPG)
If it doesn't sound too good then i might do do something similar to your other baffle only 40" tall:
(http://1stlines.net/B200baffle2.JPG)
Thanks for all your help, experimentation and for sharing it with us!
Hi Everyone,
These are very nice OB I have never seen.
I am Newbie in this thread and plan to build an OB speakers with anilco magnet Stephen Trusonic 12" woofers and JBL 375 Horn/tweeters lying around. Have anyone tried building this before? Any opinions and suggestions would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.
Cr_otmopo3ok,
Based on the nice pictures do you have any dimensions of the wooden frame in details? Thanks.
Best regards,
Tan
-
If you click on tech data for another relevant pdf on this page there is a response chart which looks as though the vertical scale was compressed, although close analysis shows the same scale, I think. Puzzling - this one is much more flattering.
Puzzling? Not at all. One graph is directly from the vendor while the other one isnt. A good rule of thumb is that graphs from vendors should be taken with a grain of salt (tm). :-) In this case the graph is cut at 60 dB (Showing 10 dB less) effectively removing most of the breakup region, and one can also see that they've applied some octave smoothing to make it even more "flattering".
Let me by the way be clear that I consider the response to look fairly normal for a pro 15 incher and not bad at all. Conebreakup doesn't look to nasty, it is fairly linear with no crazy dips or peaks. For comparison, have a look at the Eminence Alpha (that's been used in many succeful builds!), it has a rough peak (+10 dB !) between 2kHz and 3 kHz. http://www.prodance.cz/protokoly/alpha_15a.pdf (http://www.prodance.cz/protokoly/alpha_15a.pdf)
Rgrds,
Jon
-
If you click on tech data for another relevant pdf on this page there is a response chart which looks as though the vertical scale was compressed, although close analysis shows the same scale, I think. Puzzling - this one is much more flattering.
Puzzling? Not at all. One graph is directly from the vendor while the other one isnt. A good rule of thumb is that graphs from vendors should be taken with a grain of salt (tm). :-) In this case the graph is cut at 60 dB (Showing 10 dB less) effectively removing most of the breakup region, and one can also see that they've applied some octave smoothing to make it even more "flattering".
Let me by the way be clear that I consider the response to look fairly normal for a pro 15 incher and not bad at all. Conebreakup doesn't look to nasty, it is fairly linear with no crazy dips or peaks. For comparison, have a look at the Eminence Alpha (that's been used in many succeful builds!), it has a rough peak (+10 dB !) between 2kHz and 3 kHz. http://www.prodance.cz/protokoly/alpha_15a.pdf (http://www.prodance.cz/protokoly/alpha_15a.pdf)
Rgrds,
Jon
Yes, I am aware of smoothed manufacturers' graphs!
I don't think the 60 dB cut off vs 50 dB is significant - 50 dB is a long way down, but closer inspection reveals that the graph you linked to is taken at 1 watt, whereas the Selenium published graph is at 10% AES input power, or 25 watts. The published power compression at that power is .6dB.
This, plus inherently different response curves at different output levels, would affect the outcome more than smoothing, which I can see through to an extent.
I imagine that the test procedure was quite different, because the differences go beyond scaling and smoothing.
Anyway bottom line is listening and apparently this driver passes that test with flying colours, according to those WEIT (whose ears I trust).
Add to that good sensitivity, appropriate qts, high power handling and reasonable tariff and that is why I brought it up!
-
I asked this last year without an answer, so I think I will try again.
This link shows the graph for the Selenium 15"
http://www.iakn.com/PDFs/15PW3_i.pdf
This link is to the tone tubby speaker list. Click on the 8ohm specs for the Tone Tubby 8".
It will bring up a spreadsheet with a graph and specs.
It is the only Tone Tubby you can get specs on.
http://www.tonetubby.com/speaker.htm
The Selenium 15" graphs drops straight off a cliff below 90Hz.
The Tone Tubby 8" graph hangs pretty flat until 50Hz.
For $90 I am seriously thinking about a Tone Tubby 8" for bass duties.
However, the physics of it just don't make sense to me.
How can a smaller cone with less xmax have deeper bass?
-
Jeff,
In OB the Tone Tubby 8" will play less bass than a Visaton B200 fullranger. Tone Tubby has an X-max of 1.9 mm the B200 has 3.5 mm.
It will reach X-max at about .6 watt.
/Erling
-
Anyway bottom line is listening and apparently this driver passes that test with flying colours, according to those WEIT (whose ears I trust).
I agree, Listening should always be the final judge. By the way, I like the acronym - WEIT. :D
-
Scorpion, your comment may save me some money which is good.
However, I am still trying to understand the graphs.
The 8" Tone Tubby graphs shows it
-3db at 50Hz with an SPL of 90.
-6db at 40Hz with an SPL of 87.
The 15" Selenium
-14db at 50Hz with an SPL of 84
-18db at 40Hz with an SPL of 80
A B200
-14db at 50Hz with an SPL of 82
-16db at 40Hz with an SPL of 80
According to the graph the Tone Tubby is the clear bass winner by a long long way.
So what am I missing in the graphs?
I am assuming these measurements are taken on a large or infinite baffle at 1 watt/1meter.
I guess if the Tone Tubby were in a box when measured then I could see how the response would be very different than on an open baffle.
But why would anyone do this. How would you adjust for baffle step compensation?
I would think the driver would behave the same on infinite baffle as on open baffle, because there is no pressure on the cone from a box.
I understand that the open baffle is going to have cancellation issues, but I would think that if a driver were good in infinite baffle then it would be good on open baffle.
-
I asked this last year without an answer, so I think I will try again.
The Selenium 15" graphs drops straight off a cliff below 90Hz.
The Tone Tubby 8" graph hangs pretty flat until 50Hz.
For $90 I am seriously thinking about a Tone Tubby 8" for bass duties.
However, the physics of it just don't make sense to me.
How can a smaller cone with less xmax have deeper bass?
According to the graph the Tone Tubby is the clear bass winner by a long long way.
So what am I missing in the graphs?
I am assuming these measurements are taken on a large or infinite baffle at 1 watt/1meter.
Hi Jeff!
It's easy to stare yourself blind on measurements. :-) Remember: how much bass you can produce pretty much correlates to how much air you can move.
For example, I know of a guy that have a 3" fullranger in a transmission line pipe that goes fairly flat down to 40 Hz. That is incredible low bass for such a small element. However, it is really limited in how high he can play.
The same applies to the elements mentioned above. A 15 incher has a roughly cone area around 10 dm2 and a 8 incher around 3 dm2. Multiply that by the xmax and you'll get the maximum volume displacement (in the linear territory). Obviously the selenium can move a lot more air then the B200 or the TT. In other words, the TT will "run into the wall" first, then the b200 while the selenium would still have more to give.
Indeed, You _could_ use the tone tubby for bass - If you have very modest requirements on volume or if you used several of them, (For every doubling in cone area you will effectively reduce cone excursion requirement by half),.. but it seems like a wasteful way to use a nice fullranger. :wink:
I think that when dealing with this kinds of stuff it is really useful to do simulations too see if your design meets the desired sound pressure level. Good luck with your continuous efforts!
-
I agree strongly with iOn here.
I exaggereated a bit but at 30-40 Hz the Tone Tubby will bottom with less than 1 watt power.
The Selenium 15 PW3-SLF is a very capable unit more so if you feeed it with a 5 ohm series resistor then it will produce in the neighbourhood of Eminence Alpha 15.
But the Eminence is a very good unit to use as it is in quite different circumstances, see this new paper by MJK: http://www.quarter-wave.com/OBs/OB_Theory.html .
Good Luck !
/Erling
-
I think where the Tone Tubby 8 should be examined VERY carefully is in use as a midrange driver that happens to be easy to integrate with a real bass driver, your choice of 15 incher, all of which will work, some better than others. The 8 looks to me like a bullseye winner of a midrange candidate, which is good apparently to 9KHz, and would very easily work down to 150Hz in my opinion. I would bet that with its dust cap removed and a phase plug installed, many people would be satisfied with it, tweeter optional.
Using the eminenice Alpha, or the Selenium, both of which are known to work, you could be looking at a VERY cost-effective 2 way OB, and if addition of a tweet were essential, it would be easy, and also inexpensive. Dayton has cheepie teensytweets galore, a few of which are similarly sensitive to the Tubby.
Getting abit more involved, and representing far greater potential would be the forthcoming DIY Cable Dipole 15 bass driver with XBL/2 motor, using a larger Hemp Tone cone such as the Eminence Lil Buddy, a 10 inch with Tone Tubby cone, and for a tweet, the inexpensive but reportedly fantastic B&C DE-10 compression driver, and a Dayton waveguide, or one of the small waveguides designed for 1 inch compression units. You could pull in all the components for this build for a tad under $500 making it still very affordable. Using inexpensive switching amps for bass speakers leaves the door wide open in both scenarios for the use of flea amps to power the mains. Now you are into an optimal situation on the cheap. Plate amps become less and less costly, and are much better apparently, than they were a few years ago; SET amps can be had on the cheap, the Bottlehead SEX amp still amazes me, an extremely good amp for little $. A whole new system using all of the best thinking could be done for under a thousand, and the speakers for very, very little. Exciting stuff.
www.svvintageamps.com for best prices on Tone Tubby stuff