I've been up all night so I hope I did this right, my brain already shut down a few hours ago. Anyway here's a stab at it. Tuning isn't quite the same but it's close enough. Size isn't quite the same but it's pretty close, the Labhorn stack is about 300 liters bigger. I didn't want to mess with filters right now so what you see is what you get, both shown at about 10 mm excursion but both need hpfs applied. I know you asked for a 6 on 6 comparison but I don't care, I'm tired so you get 8 on 8 because I already had the tbw sim done that way in my records.
Labhorn up first x8 cabs, 10000 watts applied (625 watts per driver). This is over three times the rated power for these drivers so compression is a very likely issue and thermal meltdown is a possibility at this level. Oh well. The LAB12 would be awesome if it had more power handling.
Next is 8x tbw horns with 12000 watts, or 1500 watts per driver. This driver is rated at 1500 AES and this is shown at 1500 RMS so we're at double the driver's power rating. Compression might be an issue depending on the signal (crest factor, duty cycle) but it should be fine. This horn needs a bit more aggressive hpf to tame that huge excursion peak and the low knee is a couple hz higher than Labhorn but I'm not messing with that right now. This horn should beat the pants off Labhorn, in large part due to thermal considerations but also for a bunch of other reasons.
Last edited:
Thanks guys! Why I asked for a 6vs6 comparison was due to the fact that there is where the labs supposedly run to their full potential. I believe you that the tbw would smoke the labs, would it be more than the graphs tell due to HR not taking power compression into consideration and lab 12 is an older driver with worse heat dissipation?
Thanks JAG and tb46
Thanks JAG and tb46
Last edited:
You would have to measure and play with both to see how they handle heat in real life. As shown, the Labhorn is more than 3x past it's thermal rating and the tbw horn is 2x past. But they were made by different companies and probably rated for thermal capacity in different ways so it's hard to make any judgements based on specs alone. Refer to Weltersys' comments on these drivers in the first posts of the Keystone thread. He has a wealth of experience with LAB12s and B&C drivers. Based on his comments the B&C drivers handle heat MUCH better than LAB12s in the Keystone.
I know B&C rates the drivers with a band limited AES signal (from fs to 10x fs I think) and the driver has to survive that signal and power level for at least 2 hours. But they don't tell how much power compression occurs at the end of the test.
18 Sound goes a lot further, they have to survive for 10 hours at full rated power and they give ratings for power compression losses after 2 hours and after 10 hours right on the driver spec sheet. This is a fair way to rate thermal capacity and I wish all drivers were rated in the same manner.
I don't know how Eminence comes to a thermal rating.
And I don't know what type of enclosure any of these companies use to test thermal rating.
And like I said before, if the signal and power level is demanding (high power, low crest factor, high duty cycle) the thermal rating is extremely important. But if the signal is not as demanding (like girls and guitars music or classic rock or country that only has a laid back bass guitar and no other bass other than kick drum to keep the rythm - in other words high crest factor, low duty cycle) then heat is not really too much of an issue at all. So YMMV. Sometimes thermal rating is extremely important and sometimes it's not even a little bit. Depends how you use the subs.
Based on the sims alone it certainly looks like the tbw wins by no small margin. And it doesn't have that horrid dip right above tuning that the Labhorn has due to the ridiculously small rear chamber. The Lab's small chamber probably also aggravates the thermal issue too, ambient heat in there will rise faster in a smaller chamber. But it's a very complex topic and comparisons are best made with proper measurements under a variety of conditions. But based on sims alone it looks like the tbw wins.
Oh, and a 6 on 6 or 8 on 8 comparison isn't going to change much. You could even compare 1 on 1. The important thing is to make a fair comparison, it doesn't really matter how many cabs you compare, they will both endure the same conditions if you use the same amount of similar sized cabs with same low knee and similar Sd per cab.
I know B&C rates the drivers with a band limited AES signal (from fs to 10x fs I think) and the driver has to survive that signal and power level for at least 2 hours. But they don't tell how much power compression occurs at the end of the test.
18 Sound goes a lot further, they have to survive for 10 hours at full rated power and they give ratings for power compression losses after 2 hours and after 10 hours right on the driver spec sheet. This is a fair way to rate thermal capacity and I wish all drivers were rated in the same manner.
I don't know how Eminence comes to a thermal rating.
And I don't know what type of enclosure any of these companies use to test thermal rating.
And like I said before, if the signal and power level is demanding (high power, low crest factor, high duty cycle) the thermal rating is extremely important. But if the signal is not as demanding (like girls and guitars music or classic rock or country that only has a laid back bass guitar and no other bass other than kick drum to keep the rythm - in other words high crest factor, low duty cycle) then heat is not really too much of an issue at all. So YMMV. Sometimes thermal rating is extremely important and sometimes it's not even a little bit. Depends how you use the subs.
Based on the sims alone it certainly looks like the tbw wins by no small margin. And it doesn't have that horrid dip right above tuning that the Labhorn has due to the ridiculously small rear chamber. The Lab's small chamber probably also aggravates the thermal issue too, ambient heat in there will rise faster in a smaller chamber. But it's a very complex topic and comparisons are best made with proper measurements under a variety of conditions. But based on sims alone it looks like the tbw wins.
Oh, and a 6 on 6 or 8 on 8 comparison isn't going to change much. You could even compare 1 on 1. The important thing is to make a fair comparison, it doesn't really matter how many cabs you compare, they will both endure the same conditions if you use the same amount of similar sized cabs with same low knee and similar Sd per cab.
Last edited:
Right now I'm using 4x t30 27" 3012lf loaded and I'm curious if it is possible to implement a high power driver and get the same kind of visceral bass you get from them at a much higher spl.
I'm playing techno/trance with very much compressed bass lines(not as much as d'n'b, hiphop or trap tho) so thermal handling is important in the kind of music I play.
I'm playing techno/trance with very much compressed bass lines(not as much as d'n'b, hiphop or trap tho) so thermal handling is important in the kind of music I play.
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.