|
|
|||||||
| Home | Forums | Rules | Articles | Store | Gallery | Blogs | Register | Donations | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read | Search |
| Multi-Way Conventional loudspeakers with crossovers |
|
Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.
Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Sweden
|
Hello!
I'm considering putting 2 parallelled Dynaudio 21w-54:s in a sealed box of 50 litres and a variovent and then raise the total Q again using a Linkwitz transform circuit. However, i'm a little scared about the Xmax of this driver, its only 7 mm linear p-p (max 29 mm). What performance can I expect from this ? My goal is to get deeper bass than with an equally sized vented box and at the same time better transient response... Has anyone here used the 21w-54 in this manner and how was the result ? /Tobias |
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brighton UK
|
Deep bass requires extension and SPL capability.
Vented is the only sensible option. Try a 70 litre box tuned to your wanted bass extension. |
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Switzerland
|
The first Dynaudio box I ever heard used this woofer in an isobaric configuration (more than twenty years ago).
That was one of the cleanest bass-reproductions that I have heard so far ! Depending on how loud you listen and the usual program material your config could be worth a try. Maybe you should use two seperate chambers and Variovents. Regards Charles |
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Sweden
|
Is there a benefit of using separate chambers ? Wouldn't the excursion be halved and the sensitivity increase by connecting them in parallell using the same chamber ?
I've already built the box (albeit no holes yet) so separate chambers would require a lot of more work... /Tobias |
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Switzerland
|
The benefit of seperate chambers would be less influence between the drivers that can be caused by differences in their TSPs.
Regards Charles |
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Sweden
|
The drawback would be the excursion is not halved since the drivers no longer share the same chamber ?
The excursion is what I am afraid of by using this approach, how much can they take. The linear Xmax p-p is only 7mm (max is 29). However, I've heard Dynaudio drivers can take a lot more than they actually specify but I really don't want to blow this driver, it's quite expensive... Rod Elliot describes a subwoofer controller to amplify the whole rolloff. Would this be better than a Linkwitz transform or is it just another namn for the same thing ? /Tobias |
|
|
|
|
#7 | |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Switzerland
|
Quote:
Do you intend to use it as a subwoofer or do you build two of these boxes (i.e. 2 x 2 drivers) ? Regards Charles |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Sweden
|
The 21w-54 are for Puppy "clones" so they will be used as subwoofers.
A Watt "clone" will be placed on each. The rest of the elements are Focal TC120TDX and Seas CA17RCY. I call it "clone" since it is not really a clone, I won't use a passive crossover and the materials used is only MDF. /Tobias |
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Switzerland
|
In this case you can make quite some noise, though not as much as with a reflex enclosure. The original Watt/Puppy is bass-reflex and using the same woofers. I have never hard it (I only heard the Sophia once) but it must be capable of quite some low end SPL.
I currently listen to a system with a 20W75 in the bass and it is sufficient for me. At least the never Dynaudio drivers are very rugged. I managed to run a 300W/ch P.A. amp into clipping on a box with a 17W75 LQ, and the woofer didn't bootom out ! The sound however was quite blurred. So they can take quite some short-term abuse, but this is of course not the intended long term usage. Regards Charles |
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: L.A., CA
|
I have beaten 21w54s to what should have been their death but they would not die! I'm talking a Yamaha P2400 in mono at full blast! The xmax is under rated at 7mm and the power handling is low too. I used a sealed box with three chambers separated by 1" furnace fiberglass(really dense). It was 75l total, 25 in each chamber with the woofer in the center chamber. Tight low base is what I got.
__________________
If it sounds good... it is good! |
|
|
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
|
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| WTB: Linkwitz Transform PCB's | ShinOBIWAN | Swap Meet | 34 | 17th June 2007 09:04 PM |
| Linkwitz Transform PCB help | mikee55 | Subwoofers | 2 | 3rd October 2006 09:36 AM |
| Small sealed box with linkwitz transform | fb | Subwoofers | 7 | 8th April 2005 06:29 PM |
| Small, Sealed Box for Sub; Linkwitz Transform Circuit | wrestlinguy | Parts | 11 | 25th August 2003 08:19 PM |
| Designing a Linkwitz Transform sealed sub | BAM | Subwoofers | 1 | 28th April 2002 11:32 PM |
| New To Site? | Need Help? |
| Page generated in 0.11742 seconds (75.95% PHP - 24.05% MySQL) with 11 queries |