Yeah, it seems as if their site kinda sucks when it comes to getting information on their drivers. Parts Express is where I first saw them also. I'm guessing for the money, you can't go wrong.
Considering what I'm using right now and how good it sounds, these have to be a better way to go for more low bass and SPL.
Considering what I'm using right now and how good it sounds, these have to be a better way to go for more low bass and SPL.
JOE DIRT® said:
I only used particle board because it's what I had sitting around and didn't want to blow a lot of money on something that was going to sound like junk. Not to mention that great top and bottom piece from an old entertainment center.
On my quad 15" dipoles, I will be using real 1" MDF board if I can find any, if not, 3/4" will have to do. Besides, there will be very little, if any stress on the enclosure since the whole thing is open on both sides, so I don't think thickness will be a big concern.
Cool - I was actually just going to post asking what your time frame was.
Your timing on this is great. I'd just started re-working my Carver 60" ribbon baffles to add a set of 7" woofers (stryke sa071) to handle ~60-300. I have two NHT 1259's that I didn't really know what to do with, as the sealed cabs won't fit in my room with the new ribbon baffles. Trying them as dipoles was attractive, but as SL points out on his site the 1259 has too much 'chuffing' noise to be a great dipole woofer - it limits Xmax to about 6mm, or the same as the Pyles. (assuming the pyle is one-way xmax, which it should be)
So, my plan is to throw the 1259's into an H-frame (alredy done, except for driver cut-outs) as a trial. Assuming I like it, I can either:
- get two more 1259's (~$300)
- ditch the 1259's and get Adire DPL12 (~300 for 2)
- see how you like the Pyles (<$200 for 4)
I'm very interested in seeing how your project goes.
Your timing on this is great. I'd just started re-working my Carver 60" ribbon baffles to add a set of 7" woofers (stryke sa071) to handle ~60-300. I have two NHT 1259's that I didn't really know what to do with, as the sealed cabs won't fit in my room with the new ribbon baffles. Trying them as dipoles was attractive, but as SL points out on his site the 1259 has too much 'chuffing' noise to be a great dipole woofer - it limits Xmax to about 6mm, or the same as the Pyles. (assuming the pyle is one-way xmax, which it should be)
So, my plan is to throw the 1259's into an H-frame (alredy done, except for driver cut-outs) as a trial. Assuming I like it, I can either:
- get two more 1259's (~$300)
- ditch the 1259's and get Adire DPL12 (~300 for 2)
- see how you like the Pyles (<$200 for 4)
I'm very interested in seeing how your project goes.
I am very interested in seeing how this project turns out also. I am hoping that I will still get the punchy, tight, extremely low bass that my sealed 15" is giving me now, even at high volumes.
However, I am not sure if I should go with the Phoenix design or the "H" frame design. There really isn't a whole lot of information on which will reproduce a better sound. If anyone has any thoughts about this, please let me know!
Right now I'm listening to Sarah McLachlan's Mirrorball album. If anyone know how this cd sounds, then you know what kind of bass I'm looking to get out of the dipoles, if that's possible. Plus I listen to a lot of pipe organ music, (imagine that...), orchestra, jazz, etc... If these dipole subs are capable of doing all of that, I'll be extremely happy to say the least.
If anyone has any experience with dipole subs, please share your experiences with me. I would like to hear what other folks have to say about them.
However, I am not sure if I should go with the Phoenix design or the "H" frame design. There really isn't a whole lot of information on which will reproduce a better sound. If anyone has any thoughts about this, please let me know!
Right now I'm listening to Sarah McLachlan's Mirrorball album. If anyone know how this cd sounds, then you know what kind of bass I'm looking to get out of the dipoles, if that's possible. Plus I listen to a lot of pipe organ music, (imagine that...), orchestra, jazz, etc... If these dipole subs are capable of doing all of that, I'll be extremely happy to say the least.
If anyone has any experience with dipole subs, please share your experiences with me. I would like to hear what other folks have to say about them.
I have heard a phoenix sub at Ozaudio's house.
I only heard it on one occasion, but it was one of the best I have heard.
The strengths: very natural sound, very transparent. It was the first sub I ever heard that could integrate perfectly with the main speakers. Fantastic timing, bass wasn't 3 days late like some I have heard.
The weaknesses: difficult to get very high SPL's, difficult to get very deep extension (unless you use eq, etc) but SPL and extension were adequate in the environment I heard them in...
Maybe if you like "punchy" bass, the open baffle style is not for you, but I have always associated "punchy" with "boxy".
Maybe you could PM Ozaudio and ask him more, he is a nice bloke.
I only heard it on one occasion, but it was one of the best I have heard.
The strengths: very natural sound, very transparent. It was the first sub I ever heard that could integrate perfectly with the main speakers. Fantastic timing, bass wasn't 3 days late like some I have heard.
The weaknesses: difficult to get very high SPL's, difficult to get very deep extension (unless you use eq, etc) but SPL and extension were adequate in the environment I heard them in...
Maybe if you like "punchy" bass, the open baffle style is not for you, but I have always associated "punchy" with "boxy".
Maybe you could PM Ozaudio and ask him more, he is a nice bloke.
sfdoddsy said:
You know, I think you are about the fourth person I heard saying that they want to add a normal sealed sub into their system to "beef up" the bottom end of the dipoles.
Are they really that lacking on the bottom end? Will building an H-frame be better than building a Pheonix? Will the fact that I will be using four 15" drivers make a difference on the bottom end than most people using the typical 12" Peerless drivers?
These are some of the questions I would like to have answered. If viewing the specs will help out with the answers, here's the link to PartsExpress' site with the drivers.....
Parts Express ---- Pyle Pro PPA15 driver....
It's all about how much air you can move. Your 15" drivers, with only 6mm of Xmax, actually move less air than the 12 inchers many people are using. Probably (doing the math in my head) only half as much as a Dayton Titanic 12 and 2/3 as much as a Peerless 12. But then the cost is much less for those 15 inchers so you are still hanging in there in the liters/dollar race.
About how loud they will go, it depends on how low you want them to play and how big the baffle is. Bigger baffles give more SPL at low freqs. But, if you go too big with the baffle, you can't play them too high before you hit cancellation effects. Read Linkwitz's site carefully. He has everything there if you dig around. Look for his spreadsheet named something like Max SPL. It will compare how much SPL you can get out of a dipole vs. a monopole. As a rule of thumb, at the lowest frequencies, it will take somewhere between 4 and 8 dipole drivers to play as loud as one monopole driver. That's why many people go monopole below 40 Hz.
About how loud they will go, it depends on how low you want them to play and how big the baffle is. Bigger baffles give more SPL at low freqs. But, if you go too big with the baffle, you can't play them too high before you hit cancellation effects. Read Linkwitz's site carefully. He has everything there if you dig around. Look for his spreadsheet named something like Max SPL. It will compare how much SPL you can get out of a dipole vs. a monopole. As a rule of thumb, at the lowest frequencies, it will take somewhere between 4 and 8 dipole drivers to play as loud as one monopole driver. That's why many people go monopole below 40 Hz.
I agree with catapult on reading SL's site carefully - everything is there if you read carefully and think about the problem.
Since I haven't yet put my drivers in a baffle, my take is simply interpreting what I've read - so take this for what it's worth.
The benefit of dipoles is largely due to 2 things:
- velocity source and dipole radiation pattern mean that room modes are not energized to the same degree as monopoles, resulting in both more even response and 'cleaner' bass due to lack of mode-related 'smearing'
- lack of a box means that the system is 'flat' (with appropriate dipole cancellation eq) down to the Fs of the driver.
The problems with the dipole are:
- need 6db/octave more excursion for the same SPL as a monopole below the path-length frequency. (which is typically 150-300Hz)
- below the lowest room mode, they do not benefit from 'room gain' the way a monopole does
These two negatives are what leads to the 'monopole below 40' perspective, since 40 Hz is frequently where the transition points are for both aspects. Down to ~40Hz or so, dipoles have all the advantages, but below that point they lose ground at between 6 and 12 dB/octave. For most music, this is a perfectly acceptable compromise. For music with *real* bass like your organ recordings, and for HT with it's unnatural LFE demands, dipoles will probably be found lacking.
A dipole/monopole hybrid approach can be great, particularly for HT, and *expecially* if you can put the monopole-dipole transition right around the lowest room mode. It can get rather complicated though, since both the monpole and dipole will undoubtedly need eq, and getting a seamless blend will not be trivial.
Since I haven't yet put my drivers in a baffle, my take is simply interpreting what I've read - so take this for what it's worth.
The benefit of dipoles is largely due to 2 things:
- velocity source and dipole radiation pattern mean that room modes are not energized to the same degree as monopoles, resulting in both more even response and 'cleaner' bass due to lack of mode-related 'smearing'
- lack of a box means that the system is 'flat' (with appropriate dipole cancellation eq) down to the Fs of the driver.
The problems with the dipole are:
- need 6db/octave more excursion for the same SPL as a monopole below the path-length frequency. (which is typically 150-300Hz)
- below the lowest room mode, they do not benefit from 'room gain' the way a monopole does
These two negatives are what leads to the 'monopole below 40' perspective, since 40 Hz is frequently where the transition points are for both aspects. Down to ~40Hz or so, dipoles have all the advantages, but below that point they lose ground at between 6 and 12 dB/octave. For most music, this is a perfectly acceptable compromise. For music with *real* bass like your organ recordings, and for HT with it's unnatural LFE demands, dipoles will probably be found lacking.
A dipole/monopole hybrid approach can be great, particularly for HT, and *expecially* if you can put the monopole-dipole transition right around the lowest room mode. It can get rather complicated though, since both the monpole and dipole will undoubtedly need eq, and getting a seamless blend will not be trivial.
My dipole subs go very low, and in fact sound great on organ music. However, I have a few tracks that will bottom them at high levels, which is why I am pondering the monopole.
As mentioned above, the trick is to cross it over below the lowest room resonance.
I use a pair of DPL12s a side, and these will give greater volume than the 15 inchers with 6mm xmax so that helps.
Incidentally, there is another consideration with the Peerless XLS drivers when used as dipoles. Due to the very low Qtc of the drivers, you need extra boost on top of the dipole EQ. This further limits their volume capabilities, and is another reason I chose the DPL12s.
Steve
As mentioned above, the trick is to cross it over below the lowest room resonance.
I use a pair of DPL12s a side, and these will give greater volume than the 15 inchers with 6mm xmax so that helps.
Incidentally, there is another consideration with the Peerless XLS drivers when used as dipoles. Due to the very low Qtc of the drivers, you need extra boost on top of the dipole EQ. This further limits their volume capabilities, and is another reason I chose the DPL12s.
Steve
catapult...i feel that you are not taking into consideration cone area, and if you are, you see that the pyles match up pretty closely to the peerless subs give or take a little...the higher q of the pyles will be easier to work with than the peerless drivers that linkwitz uses...i think they have somewhere around .21 for the peerless drivers...at least the xls series...maybe a little lower fs than the peerless...but overall at steal if they end up turning out how i assume they will...
how about 8 malestrom 18's in a dipole array...i think ill try it when my bonus comes in with a little help from the driverack pa eq...sounds promising
how about 8 malestrom 18's in a dipole array...i think ill try it when my bonus comes in with a little help from the driverack pa eq...sounds promising
It seems as if the dipole subs create some mixed feelings around here. Actually, for a little while there, I thought I was going to "scratch" the whole idea and just go sealed with these four 15 inchers from what people have been saying.
However, last night, I was listening to my experimental dipole sub again and still cannot believe how great it sounds. And that is where I get confused.......
How is it that these old 8" Rockford Fosgate sub drivers in this configuration be reproducing bass notes WELL below 40Hz with plenty of "omph", but everyone seems to be saying that dipole subs have virtually no or little output below 40Hz while using 12" drivers??
And the funny thing is, those 8" drivers have no where near the required specs for dipoles.
However, last night, I was listening to my experimental dipole sub again and still cannot believe how great it sounds. And that is where I get confused.......
How is it that these old 8" Rockford Fosgate sub drivers in this configuration be reproducing bass notes WELL below 40Hz with plenty of "omph", but everyone seems to be saying that dipole subs have virtually no or little output below 40Hz while using 12" drivers??
And the funny thing is, those 8" drivers have no where near the required specs for dipoles.
any way you can measure it? I'd be interested in knowing how it sounds.
I am interested in PA sound almost exclusively, and with PA systems, clarity is the second biggest problem, next to SPL. I went to a dance Saturday night in a tile hall, and the DJs had these 18" vented woofers and I was like man.... it would sound hella better if they stuffed the vents with old socks!!
So, if it turns out dipole works well for bass extension / SPL, I might use that for my next pair of PA speakers.... right now I'm drawing up plans to completely scrap the boxes I've build and start over from scratch, except drivers. So, let me know how dipole works--I have a vested interest in it!
I am interested in PA sound almost exclusively, and with PA systems, clarity is the second biggest problem, next to SPL. I went to a dance Saturday night in a tile hall, and the DJs had these 18" vented woofers and I was like man.... it would sound hella better if they stuffed the vents with old socks!!
So, if it turns out dipole works well for bass extension / SPL, I might use that for my next pair of PA speakers.... right now I'm drawing up plans to completely scrap the boxes I've build and start over from scratch, except drivers. So, let me know how dipole works--I have a vested interest in it!
i am confused too chops.
i was going to break open my dual sealed 12" subs and build dipoles. then I heard that there is little bass and 4 12" in dipole produce about as much bass as 1 12" in sealed. Now I am thinking of push push TL but the TL is getting to big. so I am sitting on 4 12" in sealed boxes till all this is clarified.
i was going to break open my dual sealed 12" subs and build dipoles. then I heard that there is little bass and 4 12" in dipole produce about as much bass as 1 12" in sealed. Now I am thinking of push push TL but the TL is getting to big. so I am sitting on 4 12" in sealed boxes till all this is clarified.
It really depends on how loud you like to listen. I was using 10 inch drivers in an H-frame and they sounded wonderful at reasonable levels.
Going to the 12 inchers gave me enough volume for all but a few tracks.
This spreadsheet makes it easy to work out what volume you can get. Don't forget to add 6dB for floor placement.
Volume for dipoles
Steve
Going to the 12 inchers gave me enough volume for all but a few tracks.
This spreadsheet makes it easy to work out what volume you can get. Don't forget to add 6dB for floor placement.
Volume for dipoles
Steve
sfdoddsy said:
This brings up another question I've been thinking about.....
Which is better to build, a Pheonix style enclosure or an H-frame?
Is there any type of sonic improvements over either one?
Obviously, the H-frame would be easier to build and use less wood, but I don't care about that.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.