You're kidding
or are totally unaware of Speaker engineering and how to interpret HR simulation graphs. You must (In head) extrapolate HR to include damping materials..in the enclosure volumes.b
This fact can be seen here:
b
PS: My posting to this thread was not in the first place to show my weird 'Bowl'
design but the supplied 'rookie' calculations of the consequences when
using the TangBand driver in different configurations.
Attachments
I run mine in a 11L ported box, 2" tube, 11" long, light stuffing in the port. They hit 40Hz clean but there's nothing useful below ~35Hz.
The thing with projects like this is you very quickly hit the limitations given by Hoffman: small size, bass extension, efficiency. Pick any two.
The Tang Band driver (for me) represents a decent compromise: you get to use small boxes. They'll go to ~40Hz at decent SPLs (a pair was enough for a room 20m by 10m playing Metallica and some others at decent levels), but you'll need plenty of clean power to get there.
At excursions passing 5mm one-way, distortion begins to increase. Its clearly audible on test tones (especially below port tuning), but on music it's not too bad. Even so, if you're repeatedly running these drivers to that sort of excursion, I'd recommend the use of larger drivers.
We use my speakers for movies - tried Terminator, Resident Evil, etc. In a UK-sized living room, a pair of these drivers will hit cinema levels. Put them against a wall for even more output. An infrasonic filter should be considered essential, for sealed or ported designs: these drivers will not go properly low, nor should they be asked to.
Using a sealed cabinet means you'll likely hit output limitations earlier than ported boxes, however...
- despite being a teenager (you know what teenagers can be like with volume), I haven't managed to cause these drivers any great strain. They cope with movies and everything else as well as I could ask.
- because they're in a dedicated subwoofer, you can stick it in a corner or against a wall. I don't have that option (they're built in to the main cabinets), so you'll likely gain some SPL there.
- the slot loading will also, I suspect, gain you some extra output.
Methinks you'll be fine with a pair in sealed cabinets, but if you want a little more output, a pair of
W5-1138SMF - TB speakers 5 inch paper cone subwoofer - Europe Audio
Will have more cone area than a single 6".
Alternatively, perhaps look at the 8" drivers and Linkwitz Transform circuits
Chris
This design is always going to use two drivers.
I had a big 15" pro woofer, held up by a big spike running open with no baffle, really liked the sound, just supper low level bass re-enforcement. I'd like to see how a properly designed small(ish) sub will work.
I think I'll wait until I eventually build my large horn system before I approach the 15" woofer route again. Small subs for now.
Thanks for all the graphs. I will try and study them.
I had a big 15" pro woofer, held up by a big spike running open with no baffle, really liked the sound, just supper low level bass re-enforcement. I'd like to see how a properly designed small(ish) sub will work.
I think I'll wait until I eventually build my large horn system before I approach the 15" woofer route again. Small subs for now.
Thanks for all the graphs. I will try and study them.
Ran some quick numbers using the older version of the 5" woofer (the specs of the newer one are similar).
4 of those drivers (total) in a 22L (again, total) sealed cabinet without slot loading would give a Qtc of 0.75 (slight rise in response - nothing to worry about).
Keeping excursion sane at a mere 5mm one-way would give a SPL of 98dB at 40Hz. Remember winISD gives figures for half-space.
I've done a comparison between 4x 5" drivers sealed vs 2x6" drivers ported.
With a suitable highpass added to prevent the drivers bottoming out below port tuning, the pair of 6"ers appear to win this one - see attached. Note the Xmax for the 5"ers are ~9mm, so both systems are being pushed hard here.
If you're willing to go ported, the 6"ers would better use the cabinet volume IMHO.
If you want to stay sealed, the 5"ers will give decent performance. You might like to read this - rather useful information about getting the most out of a sealed subwoofer.
Chris
4 of those drivers (total) in a 22L (again, total) sealed cabinet without slot loading would give a Qtc of 0.75 (slight rise in response - nothing to worry about).
Keeping excursion sane at a mere 5mm one-way would give a SPL of 98dB at 40Hz. Remember winISD gives figures for half-space.
I've done a comparison between 4x 5" drivers sealed vs 2x6" drivers ported.
With a suitable highpass added to prevent the drivers bottoming out below port tuning, the pair of 6"ers appear to win this one - see attached. Note the Xmax for the 5"ers are ~9mm, so both systems are being pushed hard here.
If you're willing to go ported, the 6"ers would better use the cabinet volume IMHO.
If you want to stay sealed, the 5"ers will give decent performance. You might like to read this - rather useful information about getting the most out of a sealed subwoofer.
Chris
Attachments
You could (for a clean aesthetic) fire the ports into the slot between the two halves, but I've no idea how that'll affect the output.
Note: to avoid chuffing, a 2" port should be used. This comes to be around 11" long, so a 90 degree bend may be needed to fit it in the small space.
You could go for a smaller diameter port to then reduce the length, but chuffing might become an issue.
The author here seems to think you'll be okay:
Cerberus
Better in what way?
Note: to avoid chuffing, a 2" port should be used. This comes to be around 11" long, so a 90 degree bend may be needed to fit it in the small space.
You could go for a smaller diameter port to then reduce the length, but chuffing might become an issue.
The author here seems to think you'll be okay:
Cerberus
Better in what way?
Quick sketch, but to scale (magnet size was a guess)
4x5" drivers, or 2x6"
I don't personally like the larger gap
4x5" drivers, or 2x6"
I don't personally like the larger gap
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Yep.
A series-parallel arrangement of all 4 would give a 4 ohm (nominal) load for a single amplifier channel.
You could wire each pair in series to give an 8ohm load for 2 channels of amplification.
For the 6"ers, you'd have either a single 8ohm or 2ohm, or two lots of 4 ohm if you have a stereo amplifier.
Chris
Nice drawings P10. Should clear up come comments in several threads.
My take:
isobarik is an expensive way to not buy a more expensive driver.
The idea of big metal bowls gives me shivers, but as subs, well it's the volume that matters. The ones in the photo look WAY too small to be subs. Please do your T/S calculations.
My take:
isobarik is an expensive way to not buy a more expensive driver.
The idea of big metal bowls gives me shivers, but as subs, well it's the volume that matters. The ones in the photo look WAY too small to be subs. Please do your T/S calculations.
We are talking about 11" bowls, 5" drivers, and the word "sub" in the same thread?
Here is an idea. Pull up a copy of WinISD. Pick any speaker and do a sim of a sealed box. Make the box 11L. Then go into the editor and keep changing Fs and Qts until you get numbers that look like a sub. Look around for drivers like that. When you find one, let us all know.
For what I consider a real sub, the Peerless 12" in 60L is one of the smallest and one of the cleanest. Very good efforts have been done with several 8's, but the total box size goes up a lot. 200L is not an unreasonable size for a sub.
Subs don't have to be in the same room. Only their output. They can be in attics, adjacent rooms, under the floor, outside. Creativity here is the rule.
Here is an idea. Pull up a copy of WinISD. Pick any speaker and do a sim of a sealed box. Make the box 11L. Then go into the editor and keep changing Fs and Qts until you get numbers that look like a sub. Look around for drivers like that. When you find one, let us all know.
For what I consider a real sub, the Peerless 12" in 60L is one of the smallest and one of the cleanest. Very good efforts have been done with several 8's, but the total box size goes up a lot. 200L is not an unreasonable size for a sub.
Subs don't have to be in the same room. Only their output. They can be in attics, adjacent rooms, under the floor, outside. Creativity here is the rule.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.