SICKO-18" Project

klh · « **Reply #20 on:** 7 Mar 2008, 09:20 pm »

Now there's something to imagine! I think you have another project ahead of you

. I'd say chances are pretty good something like that would probably go in a walk out basement

.

Kevin Haskins · « **Reply #21 on:** 7 Mar 2008, 10:23 pm »

Quote from: klh on 7 Mar 2008, 09:20 pm

Now there's something to imagine! I think you have another project ahead of you . I'd say chances are pretty good something like that would probably go in a walk out basement .

I think you would need a DRIVE out basement.

I have no plans for building one. I'll leave that to others. I get by just fine with a Shiva-X in my house.

Larry McConville · « **Reply #22 on:** 7 Mar 2008, 11:25 pm »

Kevin,

This is going to be a fun process to watch develop; can't wait to get my 'pair'

Voodoo Rufus · « **Reply #23 on:** 13 Mar 2008, 09:31 pm »

Hmm, that resembles the Parthenon a bit...

tvyankee · « **Reply #24 on:** 13 Mar 2008, 10:05 pm »

Hello,

Is the reason for building this just for fun or is to get a certain type of performance out of it? Because if it's performance their is a sub that does this type of thing already but uses a 15 inch and a couple of passive's.

Not saying that your sub won't be better just wondering.

Thanks

Craig Treusdell · « **Reply #25 on:** 13 Mar 2008, 10:25 pm »

Quote from: Voodoo Rufus on 13 Mar 2008, 09:31 pm

Hmm, that resembles the Parthenon a bit...

That's what I was thinking. Although I think I remember Dan saying something about a potential 12 inches of displacement and a 4x4 foot diaphragm (if that's the right term). Only $8000+. I never did hear any more about it. New thread Kevin? I've always wanted to know if there are any in use today (if any were ever made), how much power they put out and the SPL at say 5, 10 and 20 Hz... Come on - I've read you got Dan's number. I had planned on buying one at some point in my life.

Kevin Haskins · « **Reply #26 on:** 13 Mar 2008, 10:41 pm »

Quote from: Voodoo Rufus on 13 Mar 2008, 09:31 pm

Hmm, that resembles the Parthenon a bit...

It more than resembles. aa

Kevin Haskins · « **Reply #27 on:** 13 Mar 2008, 10:43 pm »

Quote from: tvyankee on 13 Mar 2008, 10:05 pm

Hello,

Is the reason for building this just for fun or is to get a certain type of performance out of it? Because if it's performance their is a sub that does this type of thing already but uses a 15 inch and a couple of passive's.

Not saying that your sub won't be better just wondering.

Thanks

There will be NOTHING on the planet that will compete with this product. In terms of drivers, its going where nobody has gone before and in much more than just displacement and output. Our goal is nothing less than the most linear transducer ever made.

JeffB · « **Reply #28 on:** 13 Mar 2008, 11:16 pm »

If the driver is going to be really linear, what will the upper frequency useable range be.
Is there any possibility of a 2-way design with a compression driver or is that just crazy thinking.

Kevin Haskins · « **Reply #29 on:** 13 Mar 2008, 11:21 pm »

Quote from: JeffB on 13 Mar 2008, 11:16 pm

If the driver is going to be really linear, what will the upper frequency useable range be.
Is there any possibility of a 2-way design with a compression driver or is that just crazy thinking.

That is crazy thinking.

This is a subwoofer, optimized for the first & second octave and since the inductance is extremely low its upper-end usability will be mainly limited by the cone break-up and the off-axis narrowing that you would see in a 18" driver.

The cone break-up and how it performs over 100Hz is not really even on our radar though.

AK · « **Reply #30 on:** 27 Mar 2008, 02:23 pm »

Kevin, what software are you using to design motors? Looks like you can build 3d model and simulate results, all in one software, that's quite impressive

Thanks.

Kevin Haskins · « **Reply #31 on:** 27 Mar 2008, 04:06 pm »

Quote from: AK on 27 Mar 2008, 02:23 pm

Kevin, what software are you using to design motors? Looks like you can build 3d model and simulate results, all in one software, that's quite impressive Thanks.

Dan wrote the software from scratch so I guess you would say it's DIY in nature.

Craig Treusdell · « **Reply #32 on:** 30 Mar 2008, 07:22 pm »

Couple of Q's here Kevin:
1. Will it be capable of an inverted mount?
2. What would be an approx sealed box size to get a Q of .7? What would the f3 be in that box?
3. It looks like your Widget does indeed have LT capability. Will it also low-pass at 20Hz? The parametric EQ appears to be notch only. Can that be changed to allow a boost as well?

I'm thinking: low-pass that puppy at 20Hz and use it for things such as, say, a haunted house with some serious infrasonic modulation. It'd also be cool to use it ported with my outdoor speakers since as of now I only have the QSC HPR153s and they could use a little bass help!

That motor is wicked! Keep the pictures coming!!!

Kevin Haskins · « **Reply #33 on:** 31 Mar 2008, 04:32 pm »

Quote from: Craig Treusdell on 30 Mar 2008, 07:22 pm

Couple of Q's here Kevin:
1. Will it be capable of an inverted mount?
2. What would be an approx sealed box size to get a Q of .7? What would the f3 be in that box?
3. It looks like your Widget does indeed have LT capability. Will it also low-pass at 20Hz? The parametric EQ appears to be notch only. Can that be changed to allow a boost as well?

I'm thinking: low-pass that puppy at 20Hz and use it for things such as, say, a haunted house with some serious infrasonic modulation. It'd also be cool to use it ported with my outdoor speakers since as of now I only have the QSC HPR153s and they could use a little bass help!

That motor is wicked! Keep the pictures coming!!!

All of these are questions that I cannot answer at this point. We are still at the stage of designing and modeling parts on the computer. Once we build a couple engineering samples (which is still months away) I'll have more to talk about. For parameters I'm aiming at the Maelstrom-X parameters.

The Widget information I've show is all pre-production. We are thinking of removing the exposed LT circuit for a couple technical reasons.

justinc2 · « **Reply #34 on:** 8 Apr 2008, 02:08 pm »

what kind of sensitivity are we looking at for this monster? anywhere near the seismic 8196?

Kevin Haskins · « **Reply #35 on:** 8 Apr 2008, 04:23 pm »

Quote from: justinc2 on 8 Apr 2008, 02:08 pm

what kind of sensitivity are we looking at for this monster? anywhere near the seismic 8196?

It will be much like the Maelstrom-X and about 88-90dB @ 2.83V. Our market is not pro-sound, where 30Hz is considered low frequency. We have to design around smaller boxes and systems that go about an octave lower than what you see in the pro-sound world. Those are the factors that set the efficiency.

If we decided to do a pro-sound version it would loose bandwidth, work in somewhat larger boxes and we would focus more on power handling rather than raw mechanical excursion. In most pro-sound applications you are running the drivers in power-limited mode. That is why you see the big focus on power ratings in those types of systems because ultimately, they are power rather than mechanical limited.

To do that you either drop the moving mass or increase the BL, both of which will cut into the low frequency bandwidth.

justinc2 · « **Reply #36 on:** 11 Apr 2008, 06:39 pm »

any idea of how much weight the passive should be able to handle? with over 60mm of excursion if it could handle 4000g or more that would be killer! I've been modeling a few designs of the AE and CSS passives but I think they can only handle 2500g and that just isnt enough to tune them as low as I would like...

Kevin Haskins · « **Reply #37 on:** 11 Apr 2008, 08:51 pm »

Quote from: justinc2 on 11 Apr 2008, 06:39 pm

any idea of how much weight the passive should be able to handle? with over 60mm of excursion if it could handle 4000g or more that would be killer! I've been modeling a few designs of the AE and CSS passives but I think they can only handle 2500g and that just isnt enough to tune them as low as I would like...

You won't find something that handles that much mass using traditional suspension components. You are just asking the device to handle more than it can take.

davepete · « **Reply #38 on:** 16 Apr 2008, 07:15 pm »

I just stumbled across this thread - might I say....GOOD LORD!!!

Reading this thread really heated up my heart rate, I can tell you that... I want about 10 of these puppies!

Kevin, are you going to be offering these drivers as a standard product once they're released, or is this kind of a single production run for a special purpose thing? I definitely will be buying more than one of these when they come out, assuming finances allow.

Sounds like FedEx will need to buy fork lifts for their drivers once these start shipping...

Kevin Haskins · « **Reply #39 on:** 16 Apr 2008, 07:31 pm »

Quote from: davepete on 16 Apr 2008, 07:15 pm

I just stumbled across this thread - might I say....GOOD LORD!!!

Reading this thread really heated up my heart rate, I can tell you that... I want about 10 of these puppies!

Kevin, are you going to be offering these drivers as a standard product once they're released, or is this kind of a single production run for a special purpose thing? I definitely will be buying more than one of these when they come out, assuming finances allow.

Sounds like FedEx will need to buy fork lifts for their drivers once these start shipping...

It is going to be a standard Exodus product. We have bumped the overall diameter up to 21", since 18" just wasn't SICK enough.

Parameters are going to stay much the same except Sd is about 30-40% higher. Vas goes up too and the box size the driver will be optimized around is going to jump about the same amount, 30% or so. The PR version should still work good in 8-10 cubic feet and the sealed in even smaller so this driver will work in reasonable enclosures and deliver output unavailable in any single production driver on the planet. In fact, I think it eclipses any TWO production drivers on the planet in terms of pure swept volume.