The SS15 with a 3015LF will give more > 50 Hz bass than most anything in the size and weight range.
A pair of Lab 12" speakers in a smaller BR cabinet (22.5 x 22.5 x 26.5 inch exterior, 36 Fb, 32 F3) will put out a lot more level below 50 Hz, but will weigh more.
For the type of music you want to bang out, a subjective choice. The 2x12" Lab is almost perfectly flat from 36 Hz to around 120 Hz, with a 2 dB "lift" in the 40 Hz range.
Last edited:
You could also consider the Tham 15 from Martinsson which is a little smaller and a little lighter (if you work with the same sheet thickness) then Jbells SS15. It is capable of a little more low end but at cost of total efficiency. You can make it up with a better (more expensive) driver and at least double the power.
THAM15 - a compact 15" tapped horn
THAM15 - a compact 15" tapped horn
That is correct, as I mentioned before. The cabinet will weigh 100 pounds made from decent 3/4" birch, but is slightly smaller than the SS15.
There may be some neo drivers that have similar specs as Lab 12" to keep the weight down, but would probably cost more.
When I designed the ported Lab 12, it was after using horn loaded subs that had plenty of upper bass, but lacked below 50 Hz. I was tired of lugging in four big cabinets to get LF extension, the ported cabinet goes low with just one.
Jbell's SSTH is a great cabinet for upper bass, but does little in the octave below 50 Hz . If you are willing to trade upper bass level for more lower frequency level, the WS 2x12" is for you.
It is a simple build, two front loaded cones in a ported box. Nothing special, other than the amount of LF from a relatively small box, and very flat frequency response. I did not bother with PPSL, the distortion specs are below 10% at full power sine wave testing.
Details are here:
FREE SUB PLAN: Dual Lab12 (Front Loaded) by Welter Systems
Let me remind you of your own statements before you go crazy 
Right now its up in the air. all i know is that i have 500 RMS and want the loudest sub setup possible...BUT...portability is a big issue. it can be a decent size, i will use 1/2" plywood to keep the weight down.
one last thing, price. i'm not made of $$ (hence some of the driver choices, some stuff was left over, some was purchased cheap) i would like to keep this thing down in cost. i was thinking about $150-200 max for drivers.
I know I remember all of that. That's why I am still leaning towards the ss15.
It's in the price range I wanted (probably $230 all said and done)
It's only 50lbs. ThAts a breeze for me And one friend. Even me myself (I'm 240lbs lol)
It will do 45hz with some authority. Maybe not 40, but 45 looks good from the sim. That's right around what I was looking for.
It's in the price range I wanted (probably $230 all said and done)
It's only 50lbs. ThAts a breeze for me And one friend. Even me myself (I'm 240lbs lol)
It will do 45hz with some authority. Maybe not 40, but 45 looks good from the sim. That's right around what I was looking for.
Now, I’m not saying build this or that, it’s all your choice. All I’m saying is the THAM gives more low-end that can be essential for dance music. The real question for you is what do you need most:
1.) Low extension at cost of total SPL
2.) Highest SPL at cost of low extension
Another thing you need to consider, if you going to load these cabs with 250 watts you don’t need expensive drivers with high Xmax. So if you want to make a economic decision you shouldn’t pay for ‘extra’ excursion you are never going to use
Your worry about the ¾ suggestion for the THAM, please do read the thread of Jbells carefully. You will understand why Jbell isn’t worried to use thinner sheets. The same counts for the THAM. The ¾ suggestion was based on the maximum refinements for lowest THD in a THAM. Your goal is more like Jbell’s; Practical! And that few extra dB’s of THD don’t make up for that extra weight in his view…
1.) Low extension at cost of total SPL
2.) Highest SPL at cost of low extension
Another thing you need to consider, if you going to load these cabs with 250 watts you don’t need expensive drivers with high Xmax. So if you want to make a economic decision you shouldn’t pay for ‘extra’ excursion you are never going to use
Your worry about the ¾ suggestion for the THAM, please do read the thread of Jbells carefully. You will understand why Jbell isn’t worried to use thinner sheets. The same counts for the THAM. The ¾ suggestion was based on the maximum refinements for lowest THD in a THAM. Your goal is more like Jbell’s; Practical! And that few extra dB’s of THD don’t make up for that extra weight in his view…
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.