I was just browsing around Parts Express and came across two new Dayton Audio PA subs, which have about double the spec's of their previous PA subs. It looks like they stove to copy B&C drivers. Check them out:
https://www.parts-express.com/dayton-audio-pa385s-8-15-pro-subwoofer-4-vc-8-ohm--295-040
https://www.parts-express.com/dayton-audio-pa465s-8-18-pro-subwoofer-4-vc-8-ohm--295-042
Has anyone tried these yet or know anything about them?
https://www.parts-express.com/dayton-audio-pa385s-8-15-pro-subwoofer-4-vc-8-ohm--295-040
https://www.parts-express.com/dayton-audio-pa465s-8-18-pro-subwoofer-4-vc-8-ohm--295-042
Has anyone tried these yet or know anything about them?
Compared to the B&C 18tbx100 (which is what I am assuming they are trying to clone here) the Dayton fs and qts are noticeably lower but Le is dramatically higher. Not sure if that's just a difference in how they are measured but 1.6 and 4.9 are worlds apart.
The frame is different but it looks very similar and it seems Dayton also used the 4 inch VC with split inside/outside winding, but the Dayton power handling is a bit lower than the B&C. The Mms is higher on the Dayton (209 vs 249.5) so hopefully the Dayton cone is strong like the B&C. The B&C 18tbw100 has a 245 g cone. The Dayton xmax is between the tbx and tbw and it says Klippel verified but I would like to see the graphs to compare to B&C's Klippel graphs.
I haven't simmed it yet but I will soon.
Hopefully someone with experience with B&C drivers picks one of these up, measures them and compares them for us. The Dayton price is nice so hopefully it sims and performs well. It would be nice to see higher power handling though (closer to the tbw power handling) but again that could be just a difference in how they are measured.
I've had my eye on the tbw for quite awhile now but at this price I might not be able to ignore the Dayton.
The frame is different but it looks very similar and it seems Dayton also used the 4 inch VC with split inside/outside winding, but the Dayton power handling is a bit lower than the B&C. The Mms is higher on the Dayton (209 vs 249.5) so hopefully the Dayton cone is strong like the B&C. The B&C 18tbw100 has a 245 g cone. The Dayton xmax is between the tbx and tbw and it says Klippel verified but I would like to see the graphs to compare to B&C's Klippel graphs.
I haven't simmed it yet but I will soon.
Hopefully someone with experience with B&C drivers picks one of these up, measures them and compares them for us. The Dayton price is nice so hopefully it sims and performs well. It would be nice to see higher power handling though (closer to the tbw power handling) but again that could be just a difference in how they are measured.
I've had my eye on the tbw for quite awhile now but at this price I might not be able to ignore the Dayton.
Last edited:
One?
Out of stock due 1/2/14. They're not helping anbyone keep their new years resolutions, are they?
Are you going to do the comparison? PE has a black Friday sale on now. If you order now the sale price will apply even though they are not currently in stock.
The specs are clearly different but a lot of those differences could be from being measured in different ways. PE will publish whatever any given company's spec sheet says regardless of whether it's correct or complete fantasy. Dayton and B&C might measure in different ways, although if both specs sheets are based on Klippel results they should be directly comparable. I guess we won't know until someone measures them side by side. I do see distinct difference in the cone, motor and frame (basically everything you can see in the pics is slightly different) between the Dayton and B&C.
Anyway, here's the results of a quick 5 minute sim comparison. This shows a stack of 8 B&C 18tbw100 (left) vs a stack of 8 Dayton clones (right). Each cab is around 1000 liters net, about 25 percent bigger than the original (unfolded) Labhorn design. I let Hornresp's "System Design - with driver" give me an ideal horn for each driver (low corner 26 hz, .6 flare T for each gives a nice response with a reasonable throat area and rear chamber size), each shown with 2500 watts per driver (20000 watts per stack). That's way beyond what both drivers are rated for but let's be optimistic. Even at the power level shown they will not hit xlim even without any protection (assuming the Dayton has the same 70 mm xlim as the B&C drivers). As you can see the main difference is rear chamber size, although there are minor differences in throat area, flare length and front chamber volume.
Not sure yet if these could be interchangeable in smaller (not ideal full size) designs. But so far I kind of like what I see if the Dayton can take significantly more power than it's rated for, but again this is based on a single 5 minute sim so far.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Last edited:
Seems the dayton has better excursion control despite lower fs, considering it takes more voltage and still maintains lower excursion across the board.
The tbw100 xlim is 60mm, not 70. Considering the tbw100 is rated at 1500 AES, 750 RMS, we can assume 1000 watt rating of the dayton is AES, making rms 500. I believe voice coils will be cooking if you hit either with sustained sine waves at those voltage levels.
The tbw100 xlim is 60mm, not 70. Considering the tbw100 is rated at 1500 AES, 750 RMS, we can assume 1000 watt rating of the dayton is AES, making rms 500. I believe voice coils will be cooking if you hit either with sustained sine waves at those voltage levels.
More voltage is due to different impedance. Total watts for each design is the same.
Not sure where I got 70 mm from, you are right, the spec sheet says 57. Sorry about that.
Anyway, I thought I saw Weltersys say he tested the 18sw100 at 3000 watts, which is twice it's rated power handling. I don't remember the thread or context but maybe he will say something about this if he sees it.
EDIT
Forgot to mention this. The excursion control is courtesy of the smaller rear chamber, the Dayton has 66.25 liters rear chamber per cab, the tbw is 82.625. This is what Hornresp recommended based on the low corner and T I requested. (26 hz low corner and .6 flare T for both designs.)
Last edited:
You have an eye for detail, you got me again. It was the sw115, and the sw115 is rated for 1700 watts nominal. (Nominal is defined by B&C as 2 hours of pink noise with 6 db crest factor within the range of fs to 10x fs.)
And I found a quote, it wasn't the one I was thinking of but I think the context here is that the driver can handle quite a bit more than it's rated for, and if that's the case I would expect this trend to extend across all of B&C's products (at least products in the same category).
quote from here - http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/subwoofers/190635-th-18-flat-35hz-xoc1s-design-13.html#post2608206
I'd prefer if he would comment himself though, I may be misinterpreting his intentions wrt this quote. I don't have any personal experience with this driver or any driver of this calibre.
Last edited:
I spend far too much time reading, when I'd rather be building. I recognize that quote. I also realize that the applications Mr Welter and myself have in mind are quite different... thus my bias.
I play music with a very low crest factor (as far as subwoofers are concerned with their lopassed signal), almost pure sustained sine waves (in the 30 to 50hz range).
Art definitely has me outgunned, in both intelligence and experience... but I'm trying to catch up. I am VERY close to pulling the trigger on 4 tbw100s, or 4 sw100s (although I really want sw115s). These daytons are very interesting though... and I suppose I will HAVE to buy one when I make my B&C order... as well as a WT3. I'll unbox one and the daytons and put them through the paces, maybe I"ll get to make a return
. unfortunate the daytons are not available for two months.
that high LE is somewhat concerning though. I understand thats just the 1 khz measurment, I believe theire has to be a reason for the LE reducing factors BC and other manufacterers undertake (shorting rings etc) .
I play music with a very low crest factor (as far as subwoofers are concerned with their lopassed signal), almost pure sustained sine waves (in the 30 to 50hz range).
Art definitely has me outgunned, in both intelligence and experience... but I'm trying to catch up. I am VERY close to pulling the trigger on 4 tbw100s, or 4 sw100s (although I really want sw115s). These daytons are very interesting though... and I suppose I will HAVE to buy one when I make my B&C order... as well as a WT3. I'll unbox one and the daytons and put them through the paces, maybe I"ll get to make a return
. unfortunate the daytons are not available for two months.that high LE is somewhat concerning though. I understand thats just the 1 khz measurment, I believe theire has to be a reason for the LE reducing factors BC and other manufacterers undertake (shorting rings etc) .
Last edited:
Yeah, context is everything. In this case of that particular quote I'm not sure how he was "using" the driver. When he "tests" I think he uses pink noise but when he "uses" a driver it's usually for rock music, I think. These are very different, obviously, so hopefully he will make a comment here at some point.
A lot of my music is like what you describe, I'm always pointing out that this type of music actually does exist to people that don't understand the implications and stress this places on a system.
Anyway, the way B&C test for their "nominal" power spec is brutal, even the most demanding music would have trouble competing with that kind of torture test, which is why I don't feel too bad about showing a B&C sim at 2500 watts.
Art definitely has me outgunned, in both intelligence and experience... but I'm trying to catch up. I was VERY close to pulling the trigger on 4 tbw100s, or 4 sw100s (although I really want sw115s). These daytons are very interesting though... and I suppose I will HAVE to buy one when I make my B&C order... as well as a WT3. I'll unbox one and the daytons and put them through the paces, maybe I"ll get to make a return
Please don't forget to update when this happens. I'd appreciate it if you PM me too in case I miss it somehow. I'm very interested.
Last edited:
I have tested the B&CSW115-4 with 77.5 volt (around 1500-1800 watts depending on frequency, nearly double the AES rating) sine waves for distortion testing.
While setting up the tests, I mistakenly hit the driver with 120 volts 60 Hz "sine wave" (probably more square). The amp blew its circuit breaker three times in a row before I realized I was turning down the wrong setting.
That's around 3600 + watts, about 4 times the AES test.
The amp was quite hot after that bit, but the driver was not. Did not sound distressed, though was shockingly loud.
The B&CSW115-4 gets rid of heat much better than anything else I have tested, I am interested if the Dayton products actually get rid of heat as well as the B&C products they emulate.
Dayton does not specify what power test they use, making direct specification comparisons between the two brands "iffy".
Art
Last edited:
Nice. At a glance that looks like an even closer to the B&C than the Dayton clone and it's the least expensive of the 3. The spec sheet doesn't say if this one is inside/outside wound like the other two, and gives no indication of how the power and xmax specs were measured. No Le listed at all, not even on the spec sheet. That's usually not a good sign. Very high Mms and Bl. Time for a trip to the PRV site to see if there's any more info there.
Hopefully someone will buy all 3 of these drivers and let us know how they compare.
Hopefully someone will buy all 3 of these drivers and let us know how they compare.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.