Hi,
I consider a bass system for a 3-way, efficient rock rig. It’s for high quality music listening at home - not PA. I primarily listen to rock music. Goals for the bass system:
• Shall cover the 35-150 Hz range
• Max 230 liters net (or app. 8.1 cubic feet) per side
• > 95 dB efficient, preferably higher
• Serious punch and slam with a lot of ‘weight’ with kick drums etc.
I have considered either:
1. A tapped horn with a single 15” woofer (e.g., Eminence 4015LF/3015LF, B&C 15TBX100)
2. A vented box loaded with 2 x 15 woofers (e.g. B&C 15TBX100, Ciare 15.00 SW, or AE TH15H)
3. A vented box loaded with a single 18” woofer (e.g., 18Sound 18LW1400, B&C 18TBX100, Eminence 4018LF, Ciare 18.00 SW, or Precision Devices PD.186)
At the moment I have a 180 watts (8 Ohm) SS amp for the bass and use active filters, but I may consider going for a bigger amp.
Which of the above suggestions would be best considering my preferences? I would especially appreciate to hear from people who have actually compared some of the possibilities, I consider.
Thanks a lot!
Best regards
Peter
I consider a bass system for a 3-way, efficient rock rig. It’s for high quality music listening at home - not PA. I primarily listen to rock music. Goals for the bass system:
• Shall cover the 35-150 Hz range
• Max 230 liters net (or app. 8.1 cubic feet) per side
• > 95 dB efficient, preferably higher
• Serious punch and slam with a lot of ‘weight’ with kick drums etc.
I have considered either:
1. A tapped horn with a single 15” woofer (e.g., Eminence 4015LF/3015LF, B&C 15TBX100)
2. A vented box loaded with 2 x 15 woofers (e.g. B&C 15TBX100, Ciare 15.00 SW, or AE TH15H)
3. A vented box loaded with a single 18” woofer (e.g., 18Sound 18LW1400, B&C 18TBX100, Eminence 4018LF, Ciare 18.00 SW, or Precision Devices PD.186)
At the moment I have a 180 watts (8 Ohm) SS amp for the bass and use active filters, but I may consider going for a bigger amp.
Which of the above suggestions would be best considering my preferences? I would especially appreciate to hear from people who have actually compared some of the possibilities, I consider.
Thanks a lot!
Best regards
Peter
Mmm, stereo subwoofers would be better than a larger mono one.
Having two coherant sources for bass in different locations in the room means the effects of the room (peaks and nulls) are cut back somewhat, leading to a smoother response at the listening position.
What will these be crossed over to?
Having two coherant sources for bass in different locations in the room means the effects of the room (peaks and nulls) are cut back somewhat, leading to a smoother response at the listening position.
What will these be crossed over to?
Hello 2x15 is always better than 1x15 in punch and db.You will have though to make sure you use the same woofers in order to get higher db's.
If you use 2 different woofers db is going down.
I think 2 of the same kind is 2 to 3 db up and 2 different speakers is 2 to 3 db down.
Also 18'' is a good choise as well.
Consider that the more power you want in watts the less quality you ll have,
(unless you go for expensive 3 way systems line array etc...)
You ll have to find the perfect balance for the space you want to hear music.
Are you gonna play the subs mono or stereo?
Although stereo is good for listening, mono in bass has always more punch.
If you use 2 different woofers db is going down.
I think 2 of the same kind is 2 to 3 db up and 2 different speakers is 2 to 3 db down.
Also 18'' is a good choise as well.
Consider that the more power you want in watts the less quality you ll have,
(unless you go for expensive 3 way systems line array etc...)
You ll have to find the perfect balance for the space you want to hear music.
Are you gonna play the subs mono or stereo?
Although stereo is good for listening, mono in bass has always more punch.
I would very strongly suggest you don't go bigger in the amplifier department.
Go for more amplifiers.
Two 180W amplifiers give you an extra 3dB capability.
Four 180W amplifiers give you an extra 6dB capability.
Dedicate one amplifier to every driver. If you have two double 15"s for the stereo bass channels then you can use 4off 50W amplifiers.
with 95dB/W @ 1m speakers, you will have the capability of maximum SPL of ~113dB @ 2.5m listening distance. This is loud for home listening.
If you replace the 50W amps with 180W amps you gain a further 5dB for 118dB @ 2.5m
But there is a flaw.
I have used the figures you have given and assumed that 95dB/W @ 1m is available at all frequencies in your desired pass band of 35 to 150Hz.
You will almost certainly find that you cannot afford the space nor the money to give you 95dB/W @ 1m @ 35Hz.
This is PA:
http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g196/dkleitsch/CoePA-2009.jpg
This is a home version of the PPSL woofer system:
http://www.waveboxes.com/Wave%20G/gi.gif
http://gallery.audioasylum.com/cgi/view.mpl?u=33876&f=100b_1147.jpg&v=f&UserImages=33876&session=&&moniker=Les%20Hudson&invite=&w=644&h=483
http://gallery.audioasylum.com/cgi/view.mpl?u=33876&f=100_1485.JPG&v=f&UserImages=33876&session=&&moniker=Les%20Hudson&invite=&w=1288&h=966
8 cu ft net dual 15 PPSL (as used in the PA above):
http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g196/dkleitsch/Eminence151269.gif
A 2 cu ft 2nd order sealed box with an F3 of 30hz can only be 0.18% efficient (84.55dB).
A 2 cu ft 4th order vented box with an F3 of 30hz can only be 0.36% efficient (87.56dB).
A 2 cu ft 6th order vented box with an F3 of 30hz can only be 0.90% efficient (91.54dB).
http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g196/dkleitsch/CoePA-2009.jpg
This is a home version of the PPSL woofer system:
http://www.waveboxes.com/Wave%20G/gi.gif
http://gallery.audioasylum.com/cgi/view.mpl?u=33876&f=100b_1147.jpg&v=f&UserImages=33876&session=&&moniker=Les%20Hudson&invite=&w=644&h=483
http://gallery.audioasylum.com/cgi/view.mpl?u=33876&f=100_1485.JPG&v=f&UserImages=33876&session=&&moniker=Les%20Hudson&invite=&w=1288&h=966
8 cu ft net dual 15 PPSL (as used in the PA above):
http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g196/dkleitsch/Eminence151269.gif
A 2 cu ft 2nd order sealed box with an F3 of 30hz can only be 0.18% efficient (84.55dB).
A 2 cu ft 4th order vented box with an F3 of 30hz can only be 0.36% efficient (87.56dB).
A 2 cu ft 6th order vented box with an F3 of 30hz can only be 0.90% efficient (91.54dB).
Last edited:
Sure, it's a preference
Greetings,
Given your situation, and what you are asking, I'd use 2x Acoustic Elegance TD15H per side, both woofers facing fowards in a conventional set up, vented. The T/S parameters, if spot on, fit your requirements almost exactly. Be sure to make the vent(s) large enough as to avoid dynamic compression. This setup will bring the house down ! Should I have to mention
sturdy construction of the box is a MUST with plenty of bracing?
Have a great time; I've used a similar set up to this for years!
Greetings,
Given your situation, and what you are asking, I'd use 2x Acoustic Elegance TD15H per side, both woofers facing fowards in a conventional set up, vented. The T/S parameters, if spot on, fit your requirements almost exactly. Be sure to make the vent(s) large enough as to avoid dynamic compression. This setup will bring the house down ! Should I have to mention
sturdy construction of the box is a MUST with plenty of bracing?
Have a great time; I've used a similar set up to this for years!
You may not need or want a 15" for the TH - check this thread if you haven't :
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/subwoofers/182885-ideas-35-150-hifi-tapped-horn.html
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/subwoofers/182885-ideas-35-150-hifi-tapped-horn.html
Djn, chris661, and Ellenic: Thanks for your replies! Just to clarify: The idea is two stereo speakers with a bass ‘module’ in each.
AndrewT: Fb=35 Hz is perfectly adequate, so I still hope it is possible
. But you are probably right, that a bigger amp for the bass would be better by all means.
djk: Thanks for replying! I have been intrigued by the PPSL approach for quite some time, and really wish I had the chance to compare the PPSL to a ‘standard double’ vented box without having to actually build the boxes.
One question: On the AA board Les Hudson – who also endorses the PPSL approach - said (IIRC) that they were his favorite system for bass, and that a PPSL was the way to go if the goal was ‘accuracy’, but that PPSL may not be configuration with most ‘slam’. Since I specificly seek the weighty punch, Les’ statement made me hesitate!? Do you think the PPSL have the same punch/weight as conventional BR boxes? (A long time ago I had pair of JBL 250Ti’s and I actually liked the bass from these, although I would like a steroid version of these). Thanks!
Scott L: Thanks for the suggestion. I really wish I had a chance to the AE drivers on this side of the Atlantic!
IslandPink: Thanks for the direction - yes I already saw the thread. I have read quite a bit about TH, but haven’t had a chance to hear one - yet. I may be dead wrong, but somehow doubt that a fairly tight 10” woofer will provide the punch, I’m seeking – even when horn loaded.
Best regards
Peter
AndrewT: Fb=35 Hz is perfectly adequate, so I still hope it is possible
. But you are probably right, that a bigger amp for the bass would be better by all means.djk: Thanks for replying! I have been intrigued by the PPSL approach for quite some time, and really wish I had the chance to compare the PPSL to a ‘standard double’ vented box without having to actually build the boxes.
One question: On the AA board Les Hudson – who also endorses the PPSL approach - said (IIRC) that they were his favorite system for bass, and that a PPSL was the way to go if the goal was ‘accuracy’, but that PPSL may not be configuration with most ‘slam’. Since I specificly seek the weighty punch, Les’ statement made me hesitate!? Do you think the PPSL have the same punch/weight as conventional BR boxes? (A long time ago I had pair of JBL 250Ti’s and I actually liked the bass from these, although I would like a steroid version of these). Thanks!
Scott L: Thanks for the suggestion. I really wish I had a chance to the AE drivers on this side of the Atlantic!
IslandPink: Thanks for the direction - yes I already saw the thread. I have read quite a bit about TH, but haven’t had a chance to hear one - yet. I may be dead wrong, but somehow doubt that a fairly tight 10” woofer will provide the punch, I’m seeking – even when horn loaded.
Best regards
Peter
"One question: On the AA board Les Hudson – who also endorses the PPSL approach - said (IIRC) that they were his favorite system for bass, and that a PPSL was the way to go if the goal was ‘accuracy’, but that PPSL may not be configuration with most ‘slam’. Since I specificly seek the weighty punch, Les’ statement made me hesitate!? Do you think the PPSL have the same punch/weight as conventional BR boxes? (A long time ago I had pair of JBL 250Ti’s and I actually liked the bass from these, although I would like a steroid version of these). Thanks!"
'Slam' is a function of a steep wavefront in the music and the leading edge is all the higher harmonics. The PA stack shown will absolutely knock you flat on dynamic program material, being horn-loaded and time-aligned.
What Les was referring to is the fact that speakers with high 2nd harmonic distortion have high 'jump factor', or 'punch'. I used to build a dual 12 three-way with 2mm x-max drivers that had an incredible amount of that 'jump factor' or 'slam' at low and moderate volume levels. This speaker made everything 'jump' at low levels, but went into compression at high levels.
So, what were you planning on doing for the mids and HF? That will probably determine more of the sound quality that you are looking for, especially with the 150hz crossover point that you infer.
'Slam' is a function of a steep wavefront in the music and the leading edge is all the higher harmonics. The PA stack shown will absolutely knock you flat on dynamic program material, being horn-loaded and time-aligned.
What Les was referring to is the fact that speakers with high 2nd harmonic distortion have high 'jump factor', or 'punch'. I used to build a dual 12 three-way with 2mm x-max drivers that had an incredible amount of that 'jump factor' or 'slam' at low and moderate volume levels. This speaker made everything 'jump' at low levels, but went into compression at high levels.
So, what were you planning on doing for the mids and HF? That will probably determine more of the sound quality that you are looking for, especially with the 150hz crossover point that you infer.
Peter, you also can put two Beyma’s 12B100/R in a PPSL setup in a 160Liter bass-reflex cab + cavity (total of around 190 litres) and you might recognise the familiar JBL sound of your old 250Ti’s with the advantages of PPSL. It will also meet your efficiency target of 95dB. It will be capable in reaching <35Hz in your home setup. All that at lower costs than most other examples you had in mind.
Yep, you are right in both... And the Beyma uses foam surrounds just like the 250Ti's...
Didn't say I like it or that you need to like it...
Plans?
Not really, it's a principle or concept that can be adapted to sealed, vented, open baffle, etc. As such, you only need determine what your requirements are and what drivers are available to you. Every box will then be a little different. Just keep the plenum small, size the back volumes for your drivers, and it should work out fine.
I've made dual 8s, dual 12s, quad 12s, dual 15s, and dual 18s. The dual 15 version in my PA photo seems to be the most popular, and it may be the easiest to build. There are also some 18s that will fit in the same sized box (but with a different plenum). The first model had ports similar to the Jensen/Onken style (although I had seen neither at the time).
Not really, it's a principle or concept that can be adapted to sealed, vented, open baffle, etc. As such, you only need determine what your requirements are and what drivers are available to you. Every box will then be a little different. Just keep the plenum small, size the back volumes for your drivers, and it should work out fine.
I've made dual 8s, dual 12s, quad 12s, dual 15s, and dual 18s. The dual 15 version in my PA photo seems to be the most popular, and it may be the easiest to build. There are also some 18s that will fit in the same sized box (but with a different plenum). The first model had ports similar to the Jensen/Onken style (although I had seen neither at the time).
djk: Thanks for the elaboration, I think you have convinced me
The tweeters will be the Beyma TPL-150H, which I already have and like a lot. I haven't decided on the mids yet. But I would like to try out an idea from Aleksandar Radisavljević (Raal ribbons), who in another thread talked about the benifits if using a cluster of 3" FR drivers for mids. Aleksandar specified a number of parameters that such a driver should fulfill, and the Failtal Pro 3fe20 (see attachment) fulfills all these requirements and is >3 dBs more efficient than any other 3" drivers I have come across. I would like to try a tightly packed 4x3, 5x3, or 4x4 cluster of these. A single one of these doesn't exactly imply 'slam' by any means, but for instanse a 5x3 cluster (5 drivers in parallel, each 'pack' of 5 drivers in series) will give 105 dB/1 watt, and a power handling of 300 watts. However, this is all just on paper, and I haven't got a clue how it sounds - yet. In case this does not work out, then either a JBL 2123H, or a PHL 3451 as DR, but in the latter case, it will probably raise the crossover point betwen the mids and the bass cabs to 200-250 Hz.
Djim: Thanks for suggesting the Beyma 12B100Rs - I will have to take a look at those.
Best regards
Peter
Hi,AndrewT: Fb=35 Hz is perfectly adequate, so I still hope it is possible
you miss read my comments.
Do not go for a higher power amplifier.
The example I gave you used four 50W amplifiers and it was capable of ~113dB @ the listening position.
Even using two 50W into 4ohm chipamps to drive the four 8ohm 15" drivers gives ~110dB @ the listening position, using 95dB/W @ 1m speakers.
The problem is not the power required. As I see it, the problem is how do you get 95dB/W @ 1m down at 35Hz. Tapped Horn ?
Last edited:
Hi AndrewT,
You are right of course, sorry, my bad! Thanks for clarifying that. Actually, I may have the possibility of adding another 180 watt amp(!)
TH's: I have modelled some using HornResp, and it seems a fairly easy way to get serious output down low. Besides size, it's more the quality of the uppper register (say, above 100 Hz) that I am worried about. I guess I will have to hear one!
Best regards
Peter
15TBX40 (close to 100) is pretty much punchless in a reflex - maybe with 500W and small living room...
the higher mass needs more power than a lighter class 15 -
A Karlson coupler can have a lot of punch at the expense of small signal low frequency response
the higher mass needs more power than a lighter class 15 -
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
A Karlson coupler can have a lot of punch at the expense of small signal low frequency response
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.