The Lab12 PA Subwoofer Smack Down/Death Match - Page 5 - 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 11th February 2014, 11:06 PM   #41
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by weltersys View Post
What was the Xmax of the previous drivers?
Published Xmax for them is 12mm. From observation, it looks like the suspension brings the cone to halt not much longer after that.
__________________
www.diysubwoofers.org
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th February 2014, 11:19 PM   #42
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Bateman View Post
Click the image to open in full size.

^^^ This pic says a lot. You can see the Alpine's 70mm of xmech is no joke. I see a lot of car audio drivers where they slap a huge surround on a woofer to give the impression that it has a lot of xmax, but then you flip it over and the woofer is 5" deep. The Alpine Type R eights are nearly as deep as they are wide.
The driver pictured next to the Alpine 12D2 is the Infinity 122.7W. That's what I used previously in my car. Interesting driver, but not a match for the 12D2s. t/s parameters suggest that it's a better fit for a sealed cab at home (F3 around 30 Hz), but did reasonably well in-car. The suspension suggests it might be a better fit for a vented alignment (which is what I'll be trying them in next, in-house). Neo magnet motor (most of what you're seeing in the picture is the heat-sink for the motor), 3" voice coil and 350W RMS, 1.4kW peak rating. I got them for about $100 each.
__________________
www.diysubwoofers.org
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2014, 03:00 AM   #43
DHAA is offline DHAA  United States
diyAudio Member
 
DHAA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Bateman View Post
http://support.alpine-usa.com/produc...01215_D4_2.pdf

IMHO, those Alpines are tough to beat. Even at $200-$300 each, they offer features that the Lab12 doesn't have. A flat BL curve and higher displacement. The higher FS is very useful for a tapped horn, as the bandwidth of a TH is highly influenced by the FS of the driver. Basically a driver with an FS of 22hz tends to work well in a sub-20hz TH, and that's often more sub-bass than you need for music.

SWS-15D4 : $129 delivered(!)

Also Mr. Bateman, in post #50 of Alpine SWS-15D2 Tapped Horn you also commented on the Alpine 15", saying:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Bateman View Post
One thing that I'm exploring is whether front loaded horns have more 'impact' than THs and BLHs. I've read this on forums, so I'm building a FLH with a TC Sounds eight to find out. The Alpine 15" would make a great candidate for a big FLH. In fact, it's probably better suited for a FLH than a TH, unless you need ultra low LFE (which you might, depends on application.)
When I first started experimenting with Hornresp, I found it amusing to substitute different drivers in existing designs to see how well they worked. I had tried a lot of the Alpine and Infinity "auto sound" subwoofers, and got some funky response curves - which I now realize that the designs I substituted them into were really optimized for a higher Fs driver.

But your comment above that the Alpine 15" may be better suited for a FLH instead of a TH spurred me to try a new idea over the weekend. Go ahead and laugh, but here is my first attempt at a FLH. I didn't put a lot of thought into it, just played around with the "Loudspeaker Wizard" until I got something that didn't look too ugly. I would appreciate you thoughts on this. Thanks.
Attached Images
File Type: png Alpine HR Inputs.png (27.3 KB, 25 views)
File Type: png Alpine SPL.png (24.1 KB, 41 views)
File Type: png Alpine Displacement.png (23.4 KB, 34 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2014, 04:13 AM   #44
diyAudio Member
 
Patrick Bateman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Diego
Quote:
Originally Posted by DHAA View Post
Also Mr. Bateman, in post #50 of Alpine SWS-15D2 Tapped Horn you also commented on the Alpine 15", saying:



When I first started experimenting with Hornresp, I found it amusing to substitute different drivers in existing designs to see how well they worked. I had tried a lot of the Alpine and Infinity "auto sound" subwoofers, and got some funky response curves - which I now realize that the designs I substituted them into were really optimized for a higher Fs driver.

But your comment above that the Alpine 15" may be better suited for a FLH instead of a TH spurred me to try a new idea over the weekend. Go ahead and laugh, but here is my first attempt at a FLH. I didn't put a lot of thought into it, just played around with the "Loudspeaker Wizard" until I got something that didn't look too ugly. I would appreciate you thoughts on this. Thanks.
Click the image to open in full size.
Fifteens need a big box; so using the same parameters there wasn't a whole lot I could do. But on the upside you can't do a lot better in this footprint!

Click the image to open in full size.
Enlarging the back chamber extends the low bass a bit, reduces that low frequency peak, but at the expense of a bit higher displacement. But with a highpass at 30hz you won't hit it excursion limits. Without a highpass you'll exceed them by a single millimeter, which probably won't do anything to a driver with an xmech of 70mm.

Move the highpass to 40hz and you could probably double the power handling.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2014, 07:42 AM   #45
sine143 is offline sine143  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
patrick, your s12 segment is too small for a 15
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2014, 08:21 AM   #46
sine143 is offline sine143  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
DHAA, you want the response shape of a FLH to slope the other direction generally, because FLHs exhibit a unique trait, when you add more cabs to the stack (or wall/corner load) the low frequency droop is "filled in".

Heres my take on the driver keeping with the 340 liter parameter. as you can see in the picture, it will take about 60v before exceeding xmax (35hz filter for 1 cab, 30hz filter for 4 or more cabs). I've shown the response for 1 cab (standard FLH "rising response" as freq increases), and 8 cabs (pretty darn flat)

The Alpine seems to like a lower compression ratio (helps fill in the 70 to 100 range).

this is a quick 10 min sim.

however, givin 340 liters, you can get within a db of this sim with the lab12 driver with 300 watts per box (45volts) (vs the almost 1000 per box the alpine will take)
Attached Images
File Type: jpg alpine sws15dr.jpg (510.9 KB, 54 views)

Last edited by sine143; 12th February 2014 at 08:41 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2014, 04:47 PM   #47
DHAA is offline DHAA  United States
diyAudio Member
 
DHAA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Thanks Mr. Bateman and Mr. 143 for you comments - they were very helpful.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sine143 View Post
The Alpine seems to like a lower compression ratio (helps fill in the 70 to 100 range).
How can you tell that - is there a particular TS spec. you are looking at? Thanks.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2014, 07:10 PM   #48
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Originally Posted by sine143
The Alpine seems to like a lower compression ratio (helps fill in the 70 to 100 range).
Quote:
Originally Posted by DHAA View Post
How can you tell that - is there a particular TS spec. you are looking at?
You can tell by comparison-sine143's sim using a lower compression ratio than Bateman's (or yours) has a smoother response in the 70-100 Hz range, but a slight reduction in the low frequency.

Last edited by weltersys; 12th February 2014 at 07:13 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th February 2014, 07:18 PM   #49
sine143 is offline sine143  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Yeah, pretty much just trial and error. with a higher compression ratio it was basically impossible to fill in that gap in the 70 to 100 range, and as you saw, it required a slightly larger rear chamber (as per PBs sim). with a lower compression ratio and a slightly smaller rear chamber I was able to fill that section in (significantly I might add) and only sacrifice about a db of sensitivity down low (Which is compensated for as soon as you add multiple cabs, considering the mouth on my horn is larger than those on yours or patricks).
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th March 2014, 03:27 PM   #50
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Minnesota, Land of 10,000 lakes
Guys,
Seems like most of your discussion here have evolve around either car or PA applications. I have a pair of Lab 12's and am curious about using them in small enclosure, push pull configuration. I've looked around a bit and haven't found anything specifically addressing this approach. Any thread suggestions or insights would be appreciated.
Thank you.
  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
tube driven subwoofer...25w death box? gsdurrant Subwoofers 2 20th August 2013 03:29 AM
FS: Eminence Lab12 Generation II 12" Subwoofer Derrick Swap Meet 0 25th October 2008 06:53 PM
PA Subwoofer suchuwato Subwoofers 22 30th September 2008 04:48 PM
Suitable subwoofer to match FRS 8 Cyburg's Needle stobiepole Full Range 1 22nd December 2005 11:14 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 02:07 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2