Creative Sound Solutions SDX 10" Ported with Bash 300

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Hi cptnjosh,

If you have another SDX10 you could try mounting both in this same box (maybe the second one in the back?), and connecting the drivers in series. Even without retuning you should get a very nice subwoofer with a lot less driver excursion for a given input voltage level.

Regards,

That would be nice but with 4" port running the length of the box the only place to install another driver would be the front. It would be a fun experiment though.
Thanks for the suggestion..
 
I am leaning toward the driver being the issue as well. The enclosure size is not much bigger than the Quartet 10 design. Same HPF listed in the specs. of that design. I am not sure what to do at this point. Try an alternative HPF, exchange my SDX10 for another one, build another enclosure, or return the SDX10 and get a HIVI sp10 or a Seas L26Roy.

Oh, i tried plugging the port and it seemed to make things worse.

How should i proceed?

Personally I think that CSS only shows one design for the SDX10 for a reason - ie the one with the two PRs that does probably work

So what to do ???

- remove your port and close up the opening for it then spend some money and time to install the two recommended PRs in the CSS design

- If it was me I would just move to a different driver that I was familiar with. Such as the Dayton RSS265HF-4 10" Reference Sub - just for laughs I used the params of that driver in WinISD with your existing enclosure size, port dia and length and BASH300 amp
- guess what, a virtual drop in replacement (except for maybe the mounting holes) !
- SPL 109db (limited by xmax at 250W)
- tuning 22Hz
- f3 20Hz
- f10 16Hz

btw - that Dayton drivers xlim is about 15% higher than it's xmax
 
The enclosure is 2.5 cubic ft or about 72 Liters.

FYI ,A while ago I've made a couple of simulations using the CSS-SDX10 driver in similar size of boxes.. but have no target thread , : joker: I decided post to this one:

b :)
 

Attachments

  • a_CSS-SDX10_Ported-Box_1(2).JPG
    a_CSS-SDX10_Ported-Box_1(2).JPG
    481.3 KB · Views: 375
  • f_CSS-SDX10_OD-TL_(T-TQWT).JPG
    f_CSS-SDX10_OD-TL_(T-TQWT).JPG
    294.7 KB · Views: 90
  • e_CSS-SDX10_OD-TL_(T-TQWT).JPG
    e_CSS-SDX10_OD-TL_(T-TQWT).JPG
    555.1 KB · Views: 337
  • d_CSS-SDX10_T-TQWT.JPG
    d_CSS-SDX10_T-TQWT.JPG
    237.3 KB · Views: 337
  • c_CSS-SDX10_in_Ported-Box.JPG
    c_CSS-SDX10_in_Ported-Box.JPG
    255.8 KB · Views: 342
  • b_CSS-SDX10_Ported-Box_2(2).JPG
    b_CSS-SDX10_Ported-Box_2(2).JPG
    275.8 KB · Views: 357
Cokewithlime- funny you mention that. I plugged the dayton 10" titanic driver in and it seemed to be a drop in as well. Any experience with these?

Mikey P- yeah I saw that design. it is possible. I just think this driver might look better on paper though.

Bjorno- thanks for posting those. without looking through everything, what were your findings on the design?
 
Hi cptnjosh,

Post #18: "...tried plugging the port and it seemed to make things worse."

When comparing your subwoofer's excursion ported v. sealed in Hornresp (for sealed just set Ap to zero), you can actually see where the trouble area might be, and why sealing the enclosure made things worse, as the excursion increases substantially in the 20-30Hz region (This is assuming, that we are not dealing with a defective driver.). This would suggest a higher low-cut filter frequency (or high-pass if you like). You might try something like 30-35Hz.

Regards,
 

Attachments

  • SDX10_ported_v_sealed_all.jpg
    SDX10_ported_v_sealed_all.jpg
    55.7 KB · Views: 91
Cokewithlime- funny you mention that. I plugged the dayton 10" titanic driver in and it seemed to be a drop in as well. Any experience with these?
Lots of experience with the Dayton Reference series but not the older Titanic line. From just a quick look in WinISD the Titanic would appear to work as well, but certainly not as smooth as the HF model with your existing enclosure, port and BASH 300 amp.
 
Ok-so took the driver out today and cleaned it up for return. I have ordered the Dayton Titanic Mkiii to replace it. I considered the Reference HF model but my models indicated this driver might have xmax issues near F3, so I opted for the bigger xmax and power handling of the Titanic Driver. Who knows, maybe I will return it to.
I will let you all know how it goes. I appreciate all the advice and suggestions.
 
I should note, if you are using this for just movies and you have a low XO (~60Hz) the titanic will do effects very well. If you also listen to music with this system the HF is better. At F3 both drivers are primarily controlled by the port so Xmax at 25Hz isn't a problem with either driver unless you boost the signal in that range or have the sub set to go above reference (105db/25Hz).
 
So it would be safe to run the HF in my current configuration, and it will be a more versatile driver? I am crossed over at 80hz and I do enjoy listening to music on the system as well as movies.
Sure, absolutely safe !

No, not more versatile than the HF. But with the tweaks for the Titanic design I PM'd you, it can be made better.

Having multiple subs is really a good thing for both music and HT use so just go with what your planning for now and then think about adding at least one more sub eventually(two more would be better, even if they are small):)
 
Here's the pics. Notice the little dip in the titanic's transfer function chart, that means the box is too large for HF use, although fine for effects.

The roll off of the HF is basically perfect for a subwoofer.

any more questions please ask

cheers,
revb.
 

Attachments

  • 1.jpg
    1.jpg
    270.2 KB · Views: 172
  • 2.jpg
    2.jpg
    251.2 KB · Views: 170
  • 3.jpg
    3.jpg
    266 KB · Views: 163
  • 4.jpg
    4.jpg
    273.9 KB · Views: 155
Nice. The HF does look better according to the sims.
One question though- In the cone excursion graph, should I be concerned that they are both exceeding xmax below 20hz, or am I missing something?
No, not really, the amount that the HF exceeds xmax is very minimal - remember that the xlim of that driver is about 15to20% more that the linear xmax limit.

For the Titanic it's xmax is around 18mm(one way) but that limit is not represented on the graph that revboden posted
 
After returning from a trip I finally had some time today to get the Dayton Reference HF driver into the enclosure. Re-calibrated and then did some listening. The difference was apparent right away. Just when listening to the test tone during calibration, it sounded much smoother and fuller.
Cued up War of the Worlds and went through the same scene (Alien Machine rising from the ground) at the same volume that I was using with SDX10 driver. I did not hear any distortion or mechanical noise and it shook the room like it should. Very pleased with the results now. I will have to wait to test The Hurt Locker scene until no one is home.
So I either had a faulty SDX10 or my enclosure was too big for it. I cannot say for sure, but I think there was problem with driver despite it's robust appearance.

Thanks for everyone's help and guidance.
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.