PD1550 is a very OK driver but has a low Xmech (older design motor) and tends to bottom out the VC when overdriven. Adding mass would make the issue even more severe.
Why not just EQ it, that's more elegant than throwing away motor force. You'd need some voltage headroom of the amp to overcome the back-EMF so a class-D type is best suited in terms of total true efficiency which is much higher than when loaded down with additional mass.
Why not just EQ it, that's more elegant than throwing away motor force. You'd need some voltage headroom of the amp to overcome the back-EMF so a class-D type is best suited in terms of total true efficiency which is much higher than when loaded down with additional mass.
Last edited:
bottoms at 22mm
PA disco, or quality hihi ?
why is EQ more elegant
isnt it just spoiling the Q electrically ?
but you are right
it should to be considered carefully
I might prefer adding mass to the PD186
would result in very low Fs, and a Qts suited for closed design
has more Xmax, and its a better size
and for low bass I would suggest a heavier and more sturdy cone anyway
higher Qts should not be any problem at all with my preferred SPL(low)
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.