Hi. This is my first post in the DIY forums. I am in the process of building a nice 3 way setup for music listening. This is my first design attempt and it was going great until I separated the voice coil windings from the former on one of my Scanspeak 23W subs from pushing them too hard.
So, I would like to upgrade my bass to match the spl of the rest of my system. The 23Ws sound awesome to me. Naturally, my first thought was to get 4 of them. They fit in my space, and would give me about as much bass as I think would be necessary without me damaging them (again).
The 2nd guess: I haven't had the greatest of luck with my 23Ws. In the first 2 weeks of owning them, I had to re-do the lead-in in wires because they had over-flexed and lost their ability to conduct electricity. Changing the way the wires were routed allowed me to play them for a year after without further issue (until now).
Going back through my driver research, I looked at some alternatives and narrowed my choice down to two set-ups. 4 x Scanspeak 23Ws or 2 x Aurasound NS12-794s The Aurasounds would be in boxes that are constricted on the sides of the drivers (width is an issue). I'm worried about the 12's not being as musical as the smaller scanspeaks (sounding muddy, distorted, or unclean). I'm also worried about 4 scanspeaks sounding muddy being that there will be two drivers in one channel. Aside from that- I can't decide... help ^_^
Thanks for your input~
-Eric
So, I would like to upgrade my bass to match the spl of the rest of my system. The 23Ws sound awesome to me. Naturally, my first thought was to get 4 of them. They fit in my space, and would give me about as much bass as I think would be necessary without me damaging them (again).
The 2nd guess: I haven't had the greatest of luck with my 23Ws. In the first 2 weeks of owning them, I had to re-do the lead-in in wires because they had over-flexed and lost their ability to conduct electricity. Changing the way the wires were routed allowed me to play them for a year after without further issue (until now).
Going back through my driver research, I looked at some alternatives and narrowed my choice down to two set-ups. 4 x Scanspeak 23Ws or 2 x Aurasound NS12-794s The Aurasounds would be in boxes that are constricted on the sides of the drivers (width is an issue). I'm worried about the 12's not being as musical as the smaller scanspeaks (sounding muddy, distorted, or unclean). I'm also worried about 4 scanspeaks sounding muddy being that there will be two drivers in one channel. Aside from that- I can't decide... help ^_^
Thanks for your input~
-Eric
What is the bandwidth you are expecting them to cover?
If the two drivers centers are within 1/4WL of each other, then there should be no power response aberrations. The Scanspeak 23W has an outside diameter of 10", throw an inch or so between them and you're looking at 300hz for 1/4WL CTC. Shouldn't be a problem using two of them.
If the two drivers centers are within 1/4WL of each other, then there should be no power response aberrations. The Scanspeak 23W has an outside diameter of 10", throw an inch or so between them and you're looking at 300hz for 1/4WL CTC. Shouldn't be a problem using two of them.
Thanks thadman! Since, I prefer a sealed alignment with no means of bass extension and am using a PA processor for x-over, eq, and such the bandwidth is limited by spl. Finding my limits (or the limits of the transducers rather) seems to be my weakness. With my 23Ws, I had a 4th order butterworth centered at 20hz to cut out some lower freq's and the lowpass was usually in the vicinity of 80-100hz with various roll offs.
So, since I only know sound by experience and have little idea of what spl sounds/feels like, I'm flying blind in that regard. I do know the limits of the 23Ws now, however ^_^
The drivers can be stacked vertically as close together as I can get them. I have approx 28" tall, maybe 13-15" of width, and 24" of depth total for each of my sub boxes to live in. Either each channel will have their own amp, or the top subs will have an amp and the bottom subs will have an amp. Right now, I'm running an NAD C272 for my subs (sub, ha) and I have another C272 in the box still.
Alternatively, I have a good amount of power if I bridge each amp for a pair of power hungry drivers.
I read a klippel test done on the Aurasound NS12-794s and it seems promising that they would stand up thermally to any beating I can give them. When I model them, they seem like they would be able to produce lower bass than 4 23W's just as loud or louder without over excursion.
BUT, do they sound musical? Are they articulate? The under-hung motor seems promising. Scanspeak just came out with the Illuminator series with an under-hung motor and the performance is better compared to drivers of equal size in their Revelator line for freq response and lower freq performance. The pdf Aurasound gives for the NS12-794 has a distortion chart on there- approx .5% at 1W/1m for under 200hz. I have no other distortion charts to look at for speakers I've listened to make a comparison.
My other concern is how far away from the interior walls of the enclosure should the driver be spaced, and why? The Aurasounds would be constricted on the sides due to width constraints.
I've been searching the internet for a review of the Aurasound 12" to get a feel how it might sound, but I am having difficulty finding that information. Also, I'm open to other driver options as long as they can meet or beat either of these options; just remember- sealed alignment only with no passive radiators.
Thanks for your time!
-Eric ^_^
So, since I only know sound by experience and have little idea of what spl sounds/feels like, I'm flying blind in that regard. I do know the limits of the 23Ws now, however ^_^
The drivers can be stacked vertically as close together as I can get them. I have approx 28" tall, maybe 13-15" of width, and 24" of depth total for each of my sub boxes to live in. Either each channel will have their own amp, or the top subs will have an amp and the bottom subs will have an amp. Right now, I'm running an NAD C272 for my subs (sub, ha) and I have another C272 in the box still.
Alternatively, I have a good amount of power if I bridge each amp for a pair of power hungry drivers.
I read a klippel test done on the Aurasound NS12-794s and it seems promising that they would stand up thermally to any beating I can give them. When I model them, they seem like they would be able to produce lower bass than 4 23W's just as loud or louder without over excursion.
BUT, do they sound musical? Are they articulate? The under-hung motor seems promising. Scanspeak just came out with the Illuminator series with an under-hung motor and the performance is better compared to drivers of equal size in their Revelator line for freq response and lower freq performance. The pdf Aurasound gives for the NS12-794 has a distortion chart on there- approx .5% at 1W/1m for under 200hz. I have no other distortion charts to look at for speakers I've listened to make a comparison.
My other concern is how far away from the interior walls of the enclosure should the driver be spaced, and why? The Aurasounds would be constricted on the sides due to width constraints.
I've been searching the internet for a review of the Aurasound 12" to get a feel how it might sound, but I am having difficulty finding that information. Also, I'm open to other driver options as long as they can meet or beat either of these options; just remember- sealed alignment only with no passive radiators.
Thanks for your time!
-Eric ^_^
Was this where you found the Klippel results http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...pecs/11335-aura-sound-ns12-794-4a-12-sub.html if not there is some more reading. Also if you search DIYMA you will likely find some more information there from users of Aura subs.
Almost every opinion I have heard on the 23Ws has gone something along the lines of "Really fantastic drivers but they need to be used in multiples". They just play so deep for their size they are going to run out of excursion. It may not represent value for money, but if absolute quality is more of a concern than value then I think 4 23Ws will be hard to beat.
I wouldn't worry about them sounding muddy. When 2 bass drivers are mounted close together they will tend to radiate as one
I wouldn't worry about them sounding muddy. When 2 bass drivers are mounted close together they will tend to radiate as one
valleyman said:
That figures...with Qts/0.47
Its specced fore closed box, where it goes straight to 30hz, which is quite good
But in BR it cant mean anything but trouble
But the sensitivity of 82db
Perless XXLS 12" Alu 830952 will do that too
But with 90db
And better Qts fore better control, and more sensible if used in BR fore 20hz
At a much lower price, making it sensible fore using multiple drivers
A dilemma could be the need fore a bigger box
btw, Vifa has announced a whole new range of heavily improved drivers
Also SB Acoustics woofers have nice specs
I really don't agree with this idea that low Qts means better control over the driver than higher Qts. I admit there may be some correlation, but it si very tentative. Have a look at the Mms and BL of these drivers then decide whether you still think that the scanspeak motor will have worse control over the driver than the peerless.
Efficiency in the bass region also comes from box size far more than driver size. An excellent example of this is the PD2150. That 21" driver works nicely in a 50L sealed box, and yet despite the huge cone area there is little bass extension despite the very low resonance (due to low Qts) and you'll also notice that despite being a 99dB driver its actually around 85dB at 40Hz. Why? because it works in such a small box. The only way to get good bass extension from this driver without electronic assistance is with some EBS alignment which will require much larger boxes.
This all boils down to that iron law that bass extension, efficiency and box size are inextricable linked. The key thing to note is that its box size, not driver size that makes the difference here. Big drivers are more about maximum SPL and power handling in the bass, not efficiency or extension.
Clearly if you want big SPLs are sub bass frequencies however, lots of displacement is required and that means either big drivers or multiple smaller drivers..
The Peerless mentioned no doubt represents great value and loads of bang for buck, but multiple 23Ws will surely perform better if cost is no object
Edit: I should have mentioned I REALLY like the look of some of the Dayton 15" subs in Partsexpress. Mounting them on the sides of the enclosure space you have should be no problem and I have no doubt they would completely satisfy you
Efficiency in the bass region also comes from box size far more than driver size. An excellent example of this is the PD2150. That 21" driver works nicely in a 50L sealed box, and yet despite the huge cone area there is little bass extension despite the very low resonance (due to low Qts) and you'll also notice that despite being a 99dB driver its actually around 85dB at 40Hz. Why? because it works in such a small box. The only way to get good bass extension from this driver without electronic assistance is with some EBS alignment which will require much larger boxes.
This all boils down to that iron law that bass extension, efficiency and box size are inextricable linked. The key thing to note is that its box size, not driver size that makes the difference here. Big drivers are more about maximum SPL and power handling in the bass, not efficiency or extension.
Clearly if you want big SPLs are sub bass frequencies however, lots of displacement is required and that means either big drivers or multiple smaller drivers..
The Peerless mentioned no doubt represents great value and loads of bang for buck, but multiple 23Ws will surely perform better if cost is no object
Edit: I should have mentioned I REALLY like the look of some of the Dayton 15" subs in Partsexpress. Mounting them on the sides of the enclosure space you have should be no problem and I have no doubt they would completely satisfy you
Great stuff ppl- keep it coming! I've been busy these past couple days- so, I haven't had a chance to do much research. I thought I'd throw this post out there to let you know of my interest in your input.
@ Luke352: That was the link I found about the Klippel testing. I, like thadman, would like to see a freq vs distortion chart to have a 3rd party reference to what Aurasound claims. I looked around the DIYMA forum and found only a handful of posts that make mention of Aurasound drivers. The ppl that have owned them all seem to have positive responses to them.
thadman, did you ever do anything with those 15"s? What's your opinion of the performance of the Aurasound drivers?
@ tinitus: I checked out the peerless xxls series when I did my original driver research. You are absolutely right about box volume. It would take around a 4cu ft box to have a Qtc of around .7. Since this was pushing the limit of my available space, I modeled two of them per channel in an isobaric alignment. I have some concerns with this set up. Here they are in no particular order: 1) the xxls subs cannot produce as low of bass as loud as the two other alternatives I have been checking out. 2) I've never heard an isobaric setup and am skeptical of the musical performance of two unmatched drivers working in tandem. 3) Width is an issue. Since, I do not want di-pole bass, one sub would have to be mounted inside the enclosure making it difficult to build and also making it wider on the outside. I'm not really interested in putting the two cones together either, this needs some semblance of wife approval ^_- The pluses are 1) Cheapest setup with the most amount of bass 2) There is an 8 ohm version that would happily cruise along using up only one of my amps for 4 drivers in parallel.
I haven't checked out vifa recently- I shall do that. I have never heard of SB Acoustics- I will be checking them out as well.
@ valleyman: I don't know much about sound, how it's produced etc. I have my own ideas, plus the ones I read about. When I get stuck, I ask one of my friends who works for ElectroVoice, and eventually he gets back to me with answers. Regardless, there's a lot about sound that has yet to be understood. Long story short- I completely agree with you about box size, efficiency, and bass extension being linked and is more of a factor than the transducer specs alone. However, it would be nice to see a distortion vs freq graph for the 23Ws so I could compare it to the Aurasounds.
If I were to mount 15"s in the sides of each enclosure, the drivers would fire at each other instead of at me. Not only does this vibrate me less, but this would also cause more acoustical anomalies as the sound waves bounced back and forth in the space where both sub enclosures would live in. Think of it as a rectangular cave where my feet are pointed towards when I sit at my office desk.
Haha, funny thing: My wife told me to get 2 x 23Ws and 2 x Aurasound NS12-794s and run the 23Ws at a higher freq than the Aurasounds. She said this way, I would have a lot of bass reinforcement and have the best sound of both worlds- loud, and the detail of the 23Ws. She may be more right than she knows. This would involve me getting a new dsp unit with 8 outputs; of which I plan to get in the future anyway. My initial reaction was positive towards this. My secondary response was fear of hitting the thermal limit of the 23Ws again through shear overpowering instead of shear overpowering with over excursion. Food for thought...
Thanks again for all the great input!
-Eric
@ Luke352: That was the link I found about the Klippel testing. I, like thadman, would like to see a freq vs distortion chart to have a 3rd party reference to what Aurasound claims. I looked around the DIYMA forum and found only a handful of posts that make mention of Aurasound drivers. The ppl that have owned them all seem to have positive responses to them.
thadman, did you ever do anything with those 15"s? What's your opinion of the performance of the Aurasound drivers?
@ tinitus: I checked out the peerless xxls series when I did my original driver research. You are absolutely right about box volume. It would take around a 4cu ft box to have a Qtc of around .7. Since this was pushing the limit of my available space, I modeled two of them per channel in an isobaric alignment. I have some concerns with this set up. Here they are in no particular order: 1) the xxls subs cannot produce as low of bass as loud as the two other alternatives I have been checking out. 2) I've never heard an isobaric setup and am skeptical of the musical performance of two unmatched drivers working in tandem. 3) Width is an issue. Since, I do not want di-pole bass, one sub would have to be mounted inside the enclosure making it difficult to build and also making it wider on the outside. I'm not really interested in putting the two cones together either, this needs some semblance of wife approval ^_- The pluses are 1) Cheapest setup with the most amount of bass 2) There is an 8 ohm version that would happily cruise along using up only one of my amps for 4 drivers in parallel.
I haven't checked out vifa recently- I shall do that. I have never heard of SB Acoustics- I will be checking them out as well.
@ valleyman: I don't know much about sound, how it's produced etc. I have my own ideas, plus the ones I read about. When I get stuck, I ask one of my friends who works for ElectroVoice, and eventually he gets back to me with answers. Regardless, there's a lot about sound that has yet to be understood. Long story short- I completely agree with you about box size, efficiency, and bass extension being linked and is more of a factor than the transducer specs alone. However, it would be nice to see a distortion vs freq graph for the 23Ws so I could compare it to the Aurasounds.
If I were to mount 15"s in the sides of each enclosure, the drivers would fire at each other instead of at me. Not only does this vibrate me less, but this would also cause more acoustical anomalies as the sound waves bounced back and forth in the space where both sub enclosures would live in. Think of it as a rectangular cave where my feet are pointed towards when I sit at my office desk.
Haha, funny thing: My wife told me to get 2 x 23Ws and 2 x Aurasound NS12-794s and run the 23Ws at a higher freq than the Aurasounds. She said this way, I would have a lot of bass reinforcement and have the best sound of both worlds- loud, and the detail of the 23Ws. She may be more right than she knows. This would involve me getting a new dsp unit with 8 outputs; of which I plan to get in the future anyway. My initial reaction was positive towards this. My secondary response was fear of hitting the thermal limit of the 23Ws again through shear overpowering instead of shear overpowering with over excursion. Food for thought...
Thanks again for all the great input!
-Eric
tinitus, sorry if my words are confusing. Communication is not a strong suit of mine. We are talking about a future low frequency set up for me. I've already had two Scanspeak 23Ws and blown one of them.
I think it was thadman who asked what bandwidth I needed my subs to play. You never know with a 3 way home stereo set up if the woofers need to play up to 500hz or so to mate with the mid driver. I have Scanspeak 18W-4531G00 Revelator 6.5" for my mids, so the subs only have to play up to approx 200hz accurately for me not to notice ugly sounds before the stop band. I typically had them crossed over anywhere from 80-100hz and they seemed fine with it.
I gave a sort of cryptic answer to thadman's question. To clarify- I would like the subs to play as low as they can (without damage) as loud as I want them (I dunno how loud that is- but it's Fing loud) using a sealed box alignment.
Hope that helps ^_^
I think it was thadman who asked what bandwidth I needed my subs to play. You never know with a 3 way home stereo set up if the woofers need to play up to 500hz or so to mate with the mid driver. I have Scanspeak 18W-4531G00 Revelator 6.5" for my mids, so the subs only have to play up to approx 200hz accurately for me not to notice ugly sounds before the stop band. I typically had them crossed over anywhere from 80-100hz and they seemed fine with it.
I gave a sort of cryptic answer to thadman's question. To clarify- I would like the subs to play as low as they can (without damage) as loud as I want them (I dunno how loud that is- but it's Fing loud) using a sealed box alignment.
Hope that helps ^_^
OK. So, I've made more curvy lines on my here graph.
The SB acoustics 12" is out because it would require too much box volume 4.5 cu ft approx. Otherwise (on paper) a very strong performer for spl and LF.
Nothing Vifa had could hang with the previous mentioned subs.
Seas on the other hand surprised me. I usually stay away from Seas. I dunno why- probably because they seem too hoity-toity and exotic? Anyway, thought I'd check em out. If I run quad W26FXs either aluminum or paper cone, they will come close to the level of bass I'm looking for. Since they fall short of the 23Ws and the NS12-794s, they would need to sound better in order for me to choose them. Anyone have any experience with Seas 10" woofers?
The SB acoustics 12" is out because it would require too much box volume 4.5 cu ft approx. Otherwise (on paper) a very strong performer for spl and LF.
Nothing Vifa had could hang with the previous mentioned subs.
Seas on the other hand surprised me. I usually stay away from Seas. I dunno why- probably because they seem too hoity-toity and exotic? Anyway, thought I'd check em out. If I run quad W26FXs either aluminum or paper cone, they will come close to the level of bass I'm looking for. Since they fall short of the 23Ws and the NS12-794s, they would need to sound better in order for me to choose them. Anyone have any experience with Seas 10" woofers?
HyperAnimeSpeed said:
Then you should look at it once again...you may have been looking at wrong driver
10" XXLS 830951 ALU in BR of proper size will do as good as the best of the others
And you get twice the Xmax as with Seas
http://www.tymphany.com/830951
You said that SBAcoustic would need too big box, but that you liked it...well, the 10" would be excactly the same 75liter BR as all the others
The problem I had with the Vifa 10"s was determining the Xmax. There is height of the coil and height of the gap. If you subtract the gap H from the coil H and divide by 2 you get 4mm. Can anyone confirm this, or have other information?
I also checked out quad SB Acoustic 10"s, quad Peerless XXLS 10"s (which have the lowest bass of all), and quad Eaton Hexcone 12680 drivers.
Thanks to the help of the ppl here, I am convinced there are many ways to achieve the low freq and spl that I'm looking for. Now it's a matter of low distortion and linearity. Thanks to the folks over at DIYMA, I was able to start to get a clue about what I'm looking for using their Klippel charts.
It seems Aurasound (although excellent) is not as low distortion as Peerless XXLS. I would presume that Scanspeak is also lower in distortion.
So for this thread, I'm going to say that 2 Aurasound NS12-794s are a tie against 4 Scanspeak 23W4557Ts in a sealed enclosure, however for my taste, I will be going with quad 23Ws or quad Peerless XXLS 10"s with the eventual addition of some 8"s for midbass re-enforcement and sound stage enhancement (you'd have to see my placement to see what I mean).
More information is always welcome, but for now I'm going to give this project a rest while I research more about how loudspeaker attributes effect sound quality.
-Eric ^_^
I also checked out quad SB Acoustic 10"s, quad Peerless XXLS 10"s (which have the lowest bass of all), and quad Eaton Hexcone 12680 drivers.
Thanks to the help of the ppl here, I am convinced there are many ways to achieve the low freq and spl that I'm looking for. Now it's a matter of low distortion and linearity. Thanks to the folks over at DIYMA, I was able to start to get a clue about what I'm looking for using their Klippel charts.
It seems Aurasound (although excellent) is not as low distortion as Peerless XXLS. I would presume that Scanspeak is also lower in distortion.
So for this thread, I'm going to say that 2 Aurasound NS12-794s are a tie against 4 Scanspeak 23W4557Ts in a sealed enclosure, however for my taste, I will be going with quad 23Ws or quad Peerless XXLS 10"s with the eventual addition of some 8"s for midbass re-enforcement and sound stage enhancement (you'd have to see my placement to see what I mean).
More information is always welcome, but for now I'm going to give this project a rest while I research more about how loudspeaker attributes effect sound quality.
-Eric ^_^
I wonder has anybody really compared nearfield measurements of this subs? its not true that 23w goes almost deep as big drivers. actualy I made few comparisions in 60litr closed box with changeable panel to fit 10-15drivers. we tested nearly 10 items,some car subwoofers. the least deep bass was produced by infinity kappa perfect 12.1 (datasheet says 18hz and 96db sensitivity!) closely folowed by 10inch peerles xxl. 23w was the most deepest driver of all(I am not speaking about quality here or maximum SPL) closely folowed by vanderstten double push pull subs from 15 000$ cs5.
23w was the most accurate audiophilic driver. but there is 2 "problems" with them-
1) they need to be at least 6-8psc per set to achive realistic spl and maintain low discortions. and its especialy well designed to be passive bass withoiut any EQ. I run total 8psc and thinking to add extra 8psc. they are so good.
2) as for deep bass, actualy they resproduce 35-40hz in -3db in nearfield response comparing with 1khz. this is not everyday you see.most subwoofer drivers in nearfield msr have -15/-20db down
so 23w is doing job where others dont. its just very hard to heard ,unless there is low FR information, people used to thing that low bass is 50hz.
23w was the most accurate audiophilic driver. but there is 2 "problems" with them-
1) they need to be at least 6-8psc per set to achive realistic spl and maintain low discortions. and its especialy well designed to be passive bass withoiut any EQ. I run total 8psc and thinking to add extra 8psc. they are so good.
2) as for deep bass, actualy they resproduce 35-40hz in -3db in nearfield response comparing with 1khz. this is not everyday you see.most subwoofer drivers in nearfield msr have -15/-20db down
so 23w is doing job where others dont. its just very hard to heard ,unless there is low FR information, people used to thing that low bass is 50hz.
elviukai, thanks for posting your experiences measuring subs. I am curious about your tests- how did you perform the measurements? How did you rate how good the subs sounded compared to each other?
It does not surprise me the the xxls did not produce a lot of bass in your tests. When I modeled it with 2 drivers per channel, the only way they produced more bass than the other drivers I was looking at was through shear spl alone. My PA processor can attenuate (flatten) the freq response to make them play low, but still play flat to the rest of my music. By itself, one xxls could not play very low.
How are you using your 8 23Ws? Are they in two enclosures, or multiple? How far away do you listen to them? How many does it take to make the kind of bass that hits you in the chest?
I wonder what kind of deals we could get with a group buy? ^_^
It does not surprise me the the xxls did not produce a lot of bass in your tests. When I modeled it with 2 drivers per channel, the only way they produced more bass than the other drivers I was looking at was through shear spl alone. My PA processor can attenuate (flatten) the freq response to make them play low, but still play flat to the rest of my music. By itself, one xxls could not play very low.
How are you using your 8 23Ws? Are they in two enclosures, or multiple? How far away do you listen to them? How many does it take to make the kind of bass that hits you in the chest?
I wonder what kind of deals we could get with a group buy? ^_^
tinitus said:
That would be more like 50hz midbass
23W is designed fore a closed box
no wonder it goes very low in BR
not so sure its wise to do though
Port length seems to get retty exstreme
And with box within VAS, Q gets higher with peak, and less controlled
Right, but as another user put it on the DIYMA forum: The scans just don't sound like other subs...
And, they don't, but I don't know why. From my experiences with the two that I had, they don't move much air. Almost like they are tactile transducers as much as they are normal ones. They vibrate to create the low tones and blend it together with the little air they move to sound musical. So, I'd like to know @ what spl with the 23Ws, or how many of them would be needed for that satisfying punch feeling?
HyperAnimeSpeed said:
how I tested drivers? well first I dismount every driver to see what inside
23w has double sd, very long 4layers VC on titanium former, it has double magnet,similar to 26w revelator but second magnet 4mm longer. airgap is pretty big and inductance is low for that reason. next -
all drivers was mountened at 70liters or so box(closed) both measured at nearfield 3mm from cone edge(not center) its better represent what driver are capable off independable of room EQ.
second I listened for few track-
for music - organ works
for HT alpication jurasic park soundrack from telarc
evaluating is subjective however I looked not for some boomy or impressive sound but for naturality impresion- flat on last 3 octaves ,discortion free organ reproducing(organ by its nature is tight intrument)
I also repeated- i looked for PASSIVE and no EQ driver in closed box to work in range 25-50Hz. frequency higher than 50hz in my speakers are reproduced by 8x acuton c220 per stereo set.
23w was the closest sound to mach acctuons. 23w do not add discortions as long as you dont push it higher than 40-50 w input aproximately 88db from 3meters. then discortions starts increasing slowly until one pont where driver ovrbotoming and sound rather unpleaseant(worst of all tested drivers) that is pretty low values for all bas freaks
this is reason why they need to be used by quads per channel (i use in serial /paralel cosnfiguration)
23w do not have any chest ratling kick drum ith rather clinic neutral sounding driver. with music its actualy have "room information" which I love , and all others drivers lack. with home theater its also unseen. with 8x 23w each in 38liters closed listening to juracic park t-rex! (they claim 7hz LF in this track) you sudenly starting to have bad felling that something will happen
then door windows starts to ratle without any audible bass bloom which is common to most subwoofers . than comes dinosaur and then I swiching out record because my girl few times was really scared the only thing I cound want from 23w more is suspension compliance- supension could be softer. I am thinking to redesign suspensions to soften them. i did one prototype and Fs from 26Hz falled to 14Hz(thats REAL measurement -best I have ever seen no matter 18inch ,and this is tiny 9inch sub) . that did not afected LF a lot , but driver comes allive from low level input now- its more subtile. of course I lost some power handling but 23w is not fow power freaks anyway so why not make it only audiophile
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.