No Substitute for... - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Subwoofers

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
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 14th January 2011, 07:18 PM   #1
mcd99uk is offline mcd99uk  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: UK
Default No Substitute for...

Do you agree with the following?

For producing bass there's no substitute for cone area, watts (Amps) and Iron. For example, the chosen amplifier doesn't have to be high end (eg Leach Amp) but needs to be able to produce large amounts of current. Following on from that a huge power supply is required (eg Large Transformer). Any filter circuits won't benefit from high end op amps or being discrete but only need to produce the correct x over and/or eq. And for large cone area either one large driver or several small.

There appear to be many "exotic" ways (eg DSP, TL, Horns, small woofer with large Xmax) of producing bass but do these equal a big powerful vented or sealed enclosure?

Any thoughts
Cheers
Paul
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th January 2011, 11:17 PM   #2
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Indiana
No I don't. One might be able to say with all else being equal (how often does that happen) there is no substitute for displacement but that is even a bit of an over statement.

Like most things in life subs are a series of compromises. It is often said that you can get deep bass, high efficiency, small size... pick any two. This is essentially true but there are other factors as well such as distortion.

As an example compared to a sealed direct radiating enclosure you can get more output with less power required and lower distortion with a horn. It will not be small though and you may need a driver of different design from that used in the sealed direct radiating enclosure.

Pick you priorities then pick you poison. As to whether a horn would equal a sealed or ported design. No probably not, it would likely exceed it. But in all seriousness it might exceed it in the amount of relatively distortion free output and efficiency but not necessarily in small size and bandwidth (on the top end).
__________________
If We The People refuse to hear the truth we will be ruled by liars.
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th January 2011, 06:31 AM   #3
Calvin is offline Calvin  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Calvin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: close to Basel
Hi,

I assist Mike. As long as you donīt define certain parameters/surroundings the answer must be as Mikeīs, "No, I donīt".
In extreme think about Headphones.

jauu
Calvin
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th January 2011, 11:12 AM   #4
Scott L is offline Scott L  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Knoxville, TN
Default For the most part: YES ( but )

There's always going to be some nit-picking. The OP's opening statement is generally true. The secondary posts are also true to a certain extent.

1) as far as sheer undistorted output, a horn can not be bettered. Does that mean it's the best bass? NO, not necessarily.

2) You will most likely never be able to build/ or house a horn large enough to
do the fullest range of bass frequencies.

To wit: I watched over the years as one guy built these huge bass horns into his listening room. No I don't mean that Royal sub floor bass horn. There's another one where he built them floor level, and had like a closet entrance door access. Sorry I don't have the link pulled up just at the present moment, but, never-the-less ultimately he augmented that bass sytem with an infinite baffle subwoofer system. In my experince that's the best way to get full scale bass performance in a domestic setting AND it still requires plenty of cone area and horsepower. So, back to square one being correct, and I agree with the OP.
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th January 2011, 01:09 PM   #5
Ivo is offline Ivo  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Amsterdam
I don't know if this is exactly the one you mean, but it's pretty much the same story. FWIW, I heard the big bass horns (sub 20 Hz response) and later his Swing cabinets without the IB subwoofer, but the Swing has response into the 20's and didn't ever appear approaching its limits with any of my material. The bass horns were IMO more textured (even though there shouldn't really be texture down in subwoofer range), but the delay was too significant and ultimately led to its conversion to IB subwoofer. While I use DSP to solve (amongst other things) delay issues, I agree with Bert that an analog solution is generally to be preferred (because that's resolutionless, whereas my digital solution is only optimal with one fixed resolution and sample frequency, messily converting everything else).

BD-Design - Showroom Bert Doppenberg
__________________
We want to be happy, bold and free
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th January 2011, 02:02 PM   #6
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Indiana
Just to clarify. In general I like big cones loafing along rather than little cones huffing and puffing. In that sense I agree with the OP. What I don't agree with is that there is NO substitute. Depending on the application there is generally more than one way to skin the cat. When you define the requirements of a particular application you begin to narrow the slate of available options and then pick what you find optimum. For simple direct radiator designs, yes I like big high efficiency drivers and big boxes where possible. I would go to smaller only when the application demands it. With any enclosure design however there will be a point where larger diameter causes more problems than it solves such as inadequate cone stiffness or strength, sag, etc.

So up to a point larger cone is better. As to power you need to have whatever is required. As to current you need however much is required. If you have adequate power and current to drive the system to maximum excursion and maximum voice coil dissipation at the all frequencies of interest then no more is needed IMO.
__________________
If We The People refuse to hear the truth we will be ruled by liars.
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th January 2011, 02:32 PM   #7
Scott L is offline Scott L  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Knoxville, TN
Default Here's my reference to:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivo View Post
I don't know if this is exactly the one you mean, but it's pretty much the same story. FWIW, I heard the big bass horns (sub 20 Hz response) and later his Swing cabinets without the IB subwoofer, but the Swing has response into the 20's and didn't ever appear approaching its limits with any of my material. The bass horns were IMO more textured (even though there shouldn't really be texture down in subwoofer range), but the delay was too significant and ultimately led to its conversion to IB subwoofer. While I use DSP to solve (amongst other things) delay issues, I agree with Bert that an analog solution is generally to be preferred (because that's resolutionless, whereas my digital solution is only optimal with one fixed resolution and sample frequency, messily converting everything else).

BD-Design - Showroom Bert Doppenberg
Here's the Bass Horn system i was writing about:Vincent Brient
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th January 2011, 01:17 PM   #8
diyAudio Member
 
chris661's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Sheffield
Blog Entries: 8
I think I'd disagree that a large cone is always better.

What matters is how well the moving voice coil is coupled to the air. A small driver moving a long way doesn't mechanically couple as well as a large driver moving not very far.
Give the small driver a horn, and it'll do just as well as the larger driver (provided Vd is equal), as the coil is mechanically coupled to more air.
However, as we've seen, it's possible to tune horns to give a compromise between efficiency and extension. This is within the user's control. A 12" driver in a standard ported/sealed box doesn't have the same controlability about it - you buy the specs that the manufacturer offers, and work with them, even if they're not completely optimal for what you want.

Chris
__________________
"Throwing parts at a failure is like throwing sponges at a rainstorm." - Enzo
My setup: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi...tang-band.html
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th January 2011, 01:58 PM   #9
mcd99uk is offline mcd99uk  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: UK
Default Thank you all for commenting.

My thoughts so far are.

1) Horns appear to have controllability and efficiency on their side. But, in my limited knowledge, they seem to only have a small working frequency range. After that they seem to do strange things like have a very lumpy response.(May make them harder to integrate for different systems)

2) Sealed enclosures seem to have one big advantage of being equalized to a given response. Eg Boosting the amplifier at 12db / Octave theoretically allows extension to whatever frequency is required.

3) Vented enclosures can be tuned to different allignments, so do have some user defined controllability as to outcome.

As for my opening comment on watts / Amps. I was more getting at output impedance of the amp and keeping control of the driver.

Ivo - I know what you mean about texture. I noticed this when going from my (rubbish) Paradigm PS1000 band pass subwoofers to Peerless xls 10s in sealed equalized enclosures. The paradigms produced muffled tones as opposed to real bass sounds.

Cheers

Paul
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Substitute for BUZ23? Vivek Parts 5 21st December 2012 07:46 AM
possible substitute for BC556? juneray Parts 1 15th August 2010 02:02 PM
Help with part substitute HIPCHECK Parts 0 6th June 2008 01:03 PM
irfp Substitute Ipanema Parts 1 13th January 2005 01:29 PM
substitute of Attiny12 ladybird Parts 1 14th December 2004 06:53 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:29 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright Đ1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2