Maplins close-out on Audax bass units

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
What do you guys think of the AP210M0?

Do you think that 2 of them in one enclosure would work as a semi decent sub for my PC.

How about a 3 way with AP100Z0 and a TM025F1.

Or would I be better off selecting one of the other Audax 8 inchers?

Later
Mark:)
 
richie00boy said:
Do a search for AP210M0.

In the either the Loud Budget Monitor (UK) or the AP100Z0 thread, I did some comparisons between Audax 8 inch units. Conclusion: AP210M0 isn't up to much.

maybe you could summarise those findings for us in this thread RB?

In terms of absolute bass extension the M0 looks bad, it's Fo is at least 15 Hz higher than the G6 or Z0.

However, looking at the data sheets the M0 seems to have at least some parameters on its side:

It has about 1/2 the moving mass of the G6 and Z0
it has +/- 1mm extra excursion
the VAS is a lot lower, which i'm guessing allows a smaller cab -> higher WAF.


on the negative side:
Qts is 0.72, pointing towards sealed and the magnet looks to be a lot smaller.

I have 2 G6's and 2 Z0's for comparision, not sure if there's any value in getting 2 of the M0's as well the see what all these parameters mean in listening terms! any thoughts?

I'm not sure about the M0 response curve though, the impeadance peak of resonance seems to be at 150 Hz, not the 47 Hz quoted!
 
Kram, if you do want to go for one of the two cheeper eight inchers go for the G6 variant over the M0 any day, as these have coated paper cones and a rubber surround in place of the M0's un treated paper cone and foam suround (if you can get down to your local shop and ask them to see the two you will clearly see the difference).

also, if you are going to use any of these with the AP100Z0's, then I would keep an eye on the sensitivities of all of your drivers, as the bigger ones have a fair bit more sensitivity to them compared to the four inchers (you could try using only one eight, with two fours and a single tweeter to help ballence things out a bit, but you would still probably end up needing to balance things out somewhere else).
 
Mark, you pretty much summed it up there anyway. Bigparsnip also added some good comments, particularly about the surround material.

Fs - too high. Not really much scope for boosting either.
Qts - high, but can be made sensible by Linkwitz Transform or -ve impedance, but useless if you want to go for a normal unaided vented box.
Vas - may be lower than the others, but put an AP210Z0 in the same size box and it will go lower and have lower Qtc. i.e. low Vas does not automatically equate to smaller cabinet - Qts plays a part here as well.

AP210Z0 in 18 litres sealed box
Qtc 0.8074
F3 63.9412
Fc 71.7648

AP210G6 in 18 litres closed box
Qtc 0.6463
F3 86.5931
Fc 78.5249

AP210M0 in 18 litres closed box
Qtc 1.5332
F3 68.8656
Fc 98.8413

mms is not a parameter I look at. Using a sealed box as an example, if 2 drive units when in a box result in the same Qtc and Fc then they will sound the same (with an obvious caveat on SPL) even is one has mms, Qms or Qes 10x that of the other. Impulse response is dictated by Qtc, if these are the same, end of story.

Fs, Qts and Vas are all you need to know about in terms of how it will sound (disregarding SPL).

The Audax data sheet (like all other manufacturers data sheets) measures frequency response in a closed box, hence why resonance has shifted up the band.
 
Mark25 said:
Thanks for that comprehensive breakdown Richie. I'm away for 3wks now, should be interesting to see how this thread is developing when i get back.

If I were you, I would be worried that the drivers were discontinued and out of stock by the time that I got back.

I buy first, plan later. Then you can use the left over drivers as an excuse for the next project... :D
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.