Take the speakers to the beach, nice and uncluttered
I do!
Well, the TABAQs anyway.... It's great to have nice beach music playing... at the beach!
I put them on the van at this camping location because there are so many ants on the ground there. I'm afraid they would start a colony inside the speakers!
Attachments
This post still rings in my head. It is something I have often thought about, even researched before my arrays were finished. I figured I'd build them as is and see if I needed the subs.
For music? I really don't. The bass power is overwhelming as found in the reviews I got. But.... I like what I could do with it, as an engineering challenge.
I have often spoken about the fact that I have a dip at 60 Hz in the left channel, due to room placement, and make up for it with the right. And vice versa the right channel has more difficulty to get to 30 Hz (too much boost needed) while the left doesn't have that same problem being more "planted" in a corner.
It's there that I expect to be able to play with additional subs. If I can balance the left channel with the left sub, and the right channel with the sub on the right, it would reach a new level of performance.
Not happening any time soon though. But I kinda got permission as long as nothing visually changes compared to the current setup.
I will go for 12" subs, either Peerless XXLS or Scan Speak 30W. Unless there are smart other choices to consider. I'd like to find an affordable sub with lower mms than these two have to offer. So that leaves out Dayton subs (all higher mms) and a lot of Car subs. And that other key word: "affordable" is why I do consider both options I mentioned.
The volume displacement gain would be huge with a pair of these. The expected loss in the wallet is still to big to be able to start right now.
Ron,
I've used the Peerless 10" low frequency drivers in the past to great effect. The only problem with them is that they need a big box to get down to the fs capabilities. The vas is pretty high when you look at them and box size can become a real problem with the WAF that most have to deal with. I surely wouldn't call the bass the tightest sounding with any of the poly cones but that is what you find in most of the speakers for consumers that work this low. As long as you cut them low enough which you would have no problem with then you get the real bite of the bass from your line arrays, just move lots of air with the subs and leave the other speakers to take care of articulating the bass to get that sharp bass note I think you are after. As I'm sure you know there are more muddy sounding sub speakers than nice sounding ones, all the car speakers I have heard fall into that category, just boomy bass with no definition.
Personally with your line arrays I would probably build a similar enclosure to mount multiple smaller devices, say 6" drivers in a line array that fit right next to the existing enclosure and then have a couple of others that go in other locations to smooth out any room modes. Why mess with a great thing, be careful with how you integrate these subs with such acutely accurate speakers you have already developed.
I've used the Peerless 10" low frequency drivers in the past to great effect. The only problem with them is that they need a big box to get down to the fs capabilities. The vas is pretty high when you look at them and box size can become a real problem with the WAF that most have to deal with. I surely wouldn't call the bass the tightest sounding with any of the poly cones but that is what you find in most of the speakers for consumers that work this low. As long as you cut them low enough which you would have no problem with then you get the real bite of the bass from your line arrays, just move lots of air with the subs and leave the other speakers to take care of articulating the bass to get that sharp bass note I think you are after. As I'm sure you know there are more muddy sounding sub speakers than nice sounding ones, all the car speakers I have heard fall into that category, just boomy bass with no definition.
Personally with your line arrays I would probably build a similar enclosure to mount multiple smaller devices, say 6" drivers in a line array that fit right next to the existing enclosure and then have a couple of others that go in other locations to smooth out any room modes. Why mess with a great thing, be careful with how you integrate these subs with such acutely accurate speakers you have already developed.
The SS W30 and XXLS from Peerless both have alu cones. They are smoother in charts than the 12" XLS shows. I will use Linkwitz transform (well, my version of that) to be able to use the bottom end in a small enclosure. Like Linkwitz has done in his Thor setup.
The only difference, I'll EQ them with FIR to a specific target. That's what I do with the arrays as well. No way they would pump that low without lifting up the bottom end.
I agree in an ideal world I would have gone array with the subs, though that will never happen in this living room. If I ever have a separate space, I'd build more arrays for 5.0.
The only difference, I'll EQ them with FIR to a specific target. That's what I do with the arrays as well. No way they would pump that low without lifting up the bottom end.
I agree in an ideal world I would have gone array with the subs, though that will never happen in this living room. If I ever have a separate space, I'd build more arrays for 5.0.
Yes I will use the Linkwitz transform in my smaller speakers. The only thing is that comes at a cost of much needed amplifier power. I didn't look up those Peerless drivers so didn't realize they used aluminum cones. I prefer paper myself if the driver is going to do anything more than really low bass.
I'm definitely biased to paper myself. Like I said, this choice is based on a mix of what I want and what I can afford. As they will function as helper woofers for the most part I expect they should be able to do what I want.
Even the Beolab 90 uses 3 10" 'Discovery line' subs (26W) in their huge pile of drivers. It gave me a chuckle to read about them on the Parts Express forum where a member called them: The Discovery Disco trio.
The bigger one is the 13" Revelator (32W) subwoofer.
Even the Beolab 90 uses 3 10" 'Discovery line' subs (26W) in their huge pile of drivers. It gave me a chuckle to read about them on the Parts Express forum where a member called them: The Discovery Disco trio.
The bigger one is the 13" Revelator (32W) subwoofer.
Attachments
Last edited:
These two provided they can fit inside max allowed box volume will bring mms to Sd area down closer to TC9 numbers, UK £ is cheap these days so first is close to cost of XXL/SS and second bit more costly.
Precision Devices PD.1550 PD1550 600W 15" Driver 8 ohm from Precision Devices 199.99 IN STOCK (20 Dec 2016)
Precision Devices PD.155N01 - 15" 700W Bass Driver 8Ohm 295.00
Precision Devices PD.1550 PD1550 600W 15" Driver 8 ohm from Precision Devices 199.99 IN STOCK (20 Dec 2016)
Precision Devices PD.155N01 - 15" 700W Bass Driver 8Ohm 295.00
Attachments
Ah.. those are 15", that's way too large. I was eyeing the SB 34NRXL75-8 as a viable candidate, lower mms, higher BL than the 30W/XXLS. Paper cone even.
This one from SB has a slightly larger cone, with 10mm x-max. The upper trace in the graph (obviously) is the SB driver.
This SB driver is already going to be a tight fit.
Mms of the Sb one is 93 gram with BL16.6 compared to 135 gram with 10.5 BL of the 30W.
This one from SB has a slightly larger cone, with 10mm x-max. The upper trace in the graph (obviously) is the SB driver.
This SB driver is already going to be a tight fit.
Mms of the Sb one is 93 gram with BL16.6 compared to 135 gram with 10.5 BL of the 30W.
Attachments
The cones are made of paper but they are so hard that they behave much more like aluminium in that the breakup is more pronounced. That is not an issue for sub use with plenty of filtering but something to consider if the choice of material is important.
I know funds are tight at the moment, and your preference for paper cones plus low MMS... but...
These Stereo Integrity look like small beasts!
2000W, 30mm Xmax, Fs 19Hz, with a low VAS to keep them in a small enclosure.
Check out the "Mick Jagger's" lips on that one!
Double the price of the other models, but just wanted to throw something else in the fire!
HST-12 mkII 12″ Subwoofer | Stereo Integrity
These Stereo Integrity look like small beasts!
2000W, 30mm Xmax, Fs 19Hz, with a low VAS to keep them in a small enclosure.
Check out the "Mick Jagger's" lips on that one!
Double the price of the other models, but just wanted to throw something else in the fire!
HST-12 mkII 12″ Subwoofer | Stereo Integrity
Perceval,
according to the data sheet they are saying they have 76mm of excursion peak to peak! The only problem with such a large 1/2 roll surround like that is that it will create one H*ll of a null in the response due to the fact that the surround will be out of phase with the cone, a given with any 1/2 roll surround. I did notice they give no efficiency numbers nor any information about the gap length vs voicecoil length.
according to the data sheet they are saying they have 76mm of excursion peak to peak! The only problem with such a large 1/2 roll surround like that is that it will create one H*ll of a null in the response due to the fact that the surround will be out of phase with the cone, a given with any 1/2 roll surround. I did notice they give no efficiency numbers nor any information about the gap length vs voicecoil length.