Electrovoice shows 1-watt/2.83 volt measurements. As I said in my previous
posts:
Right! Every other cabinet except, the Electrovoice MTL 1X. Because if you had the measured graphs at high SPL pitting the the Keystone versuss the Electrovoice MTL 1X you would have posted them two pages ago.
Previous pages in which I asked for measured results amongst the Keystone & the Electrovoice MTL 1X tested side by side.
Your reply
That is all I wanted to hear. I acknowledged it and left a reply in regards to your reply.
So what are we going on about here?
Last edited:
What we are going on about is your failure to understand and interpret manufacturer's specifications.
EV and JBL use 2 volts for testing four ohm cabinets, one watt in to a nominal four ohms.
EV and JBL both publish reliable specifications.
I have compared my Keystone to the JBL SRX 728 cabinet, the Keystone has (slightly) higher sensitivity.
I have tested both up to their thermal limits, the Keystone gets considerably louder with 2000- 3000 watts than the SRX 728.
The SRX 728 has a higher sensitivity than the Electrovoice MTL 1X, therefore it is obvious that the Keystone, which handles more power, has greater Xmax, and goes far lower, also has more SPL capability than the MTL 1X.
One does not need a side by side check to know a Ferrari is faster than a Volkswagen their top speeds can be read in their specifications.
We don't need a side by side check to know the Keystone is louder than the MTL 1X, we can see that in measured results.
If you have any information showing EV's published sensitivity for the MTL 1X is incorrect, go ahead and post it.
Art
Last edited:
Hi!
This thing comes from this another thing:
http://www.loyola.com/av/products/audio/pdf/T18.pdf
95dBs at 50Hz and 105 at 150Hz. Before 50Hz? Nothing!
Regards,
This thing comes from this another thing:
http://www.loyola.com/av/products/audio/pdf/T18.pdf
95dBs at 50Hz and 105 at 150Hz. Before 50Hz? Nothing!
Regards,
Last edited:
Hi!
To complete the family:
Electro-Voice Subwoofer Specification Sheet | ManualsOnline.com
Regards,
To complete the family:
Electro-Voice Subwoofer Specification Sheet | ManualsOnline.com
Regards,
PASC,
The T18 uses the DL18MT, which has a little less Xmax than the EVX180B, 5.59mm compared to 6.4mm.
The distortion test is telling, 100% 3rd harmonic distortion at 30 Hz with only 30 watts !
At around 80 Hz the 3rd HD is about 25 dB down from the fundamental, 5.6% distortion.
The Keystone has less 2nd HD distortion at 1500 watts...
Also interesting that 3rd harmonic distortion is higher than 2nd, that would explain the aggressive sound these cabinets have when driven hard.
Hard being much more than 30 watts
.Got to hand it to EV in the old days, their spec sheets tended to show what the cabinets actually could do (or not do) if you look at them closely.
Thanks for sharing.
Art
Attachments
"Hi!
This is it:
http://www.loyola.com/av/products/audio/pdf/mtl1x.pdf
Maybe a kickbox.
Regards,
__________________
PASC "
I see you found where I got the graph in post #26 from.
If you take my PPSL and mount both drivers facing the plenum you will get a peak looking similar to the EV one (and it will sound just as poor as the EV too).
This is it:
http://www.loyola.com/av/products/audio/pdf/mtl1x.pdf
Maybe a kickbox.
Regards,
__________________
PASC "
I see you found where I got the graph in post #26 from.
If you take my PPSL and mount both drivers facing the plenum you will get a peak looking similar to the EV one (and it will sound just as poor as the EV too).
Last edited:
The "horn" or plenum angles, depth and height enclose a specific volume that will determine the upper peak.
The enclosed volume of the plenum will be different for standard, reverse or push pull loading, all resulting in a slightly different frequency upper peak.
What upper peak is "right" would be a matter of preference.
All three designs share a "V" shaped plenum/horn forming the terminus of the enclosure.
The SB1000 "V" plenum is much smaller than the other two designs, primarily used simply to allow two 18" with round ducted ports on either side to fit in a frontal dimension of 21" x 30".
Later versions, the SB 1001, SP 1000ZP moved the port to behind the plenum, allowing the "V" termination to be a flared port.
There was one version that utilized both round ducted ports and the "V" termination flared port.
The SB1000 primarily is a bass reflex, the large rear chamber volume allows a low tuning (29 Hz) and much more LF output than the MTL 1X.
The MTL 1X leans more towards the "horn" end of the spectrum, but being so short, the horn primarily works above 80 Hz, the small BR chamber provides some gain in the 50-80 Hz range.
The larger, deeper Funktion One F-218 has a longer horn, and from what I gather uses a sealed back chamber, it appears to be a front loaded horn, not a hybrid reflex horn.
Art
You keep mentioning boxes that no one inquired about. Considering the title of the thread is "EV MTL 1x Subscoop Speaker plans" and you took it upon yourself to bring your design (Keystone) to the table, I have no idea why you are talking about JBL as some means of reference. What you are doing is putting down every other Manufacture's design except the Keystone which, happens to be your design...
Once you said,
In which I said,
It should have ended right there.
There is no reason to put your design on a pedestal and discredit other manufactures. For all it shows is your biasness towards your own product.
Nevertheless,
I am looking forward to hearing your design at a Subwoofer Shootout in the near future. If you or somebody else who has built your design is willing to bring some Keystones feel free to make it be known on the usual sound reinforcement forums. I will be there to hear them and make my own unbiased judgement.
Cheers!
Last edited:
Omnifex,
In no way have I discredited any manufacturers.
I was a dealer for EV for many years, they made some great (and not so great) products.
I have compared the EV MTL 1X to a variety of different designs by a variety of different companies including EV.
Interested parties can draw conclusions from those comparisons, which are needed for an informed decision.
Pointing out the fact that the MTL 1X frequency response and sensitivity is inferior compared to other designs of similar and smaller size is all I'm attempting to do, so people don't waste their time, money and drivers on an inferior design by an otherwise very good company.
There are good reasons why EV no longer produces the MTL 1X.
But if you or others want to build the MTL 1X, go ahead, the plans have already been posted.
Art
Last edited:
FWIW, I found it pretty easy to draw an informed conclusion from your information, Art. Basically it boils down to if subwoofer A is better than subwoofer B, and subwoofer B is better than subwoofer C, then subwoofer A is better than subwoofer C.
Now I just wish someone would post some impedance curves, so I can see how well each of these designs was actually implemented
.
Glad that you can understand the logicFWIW, I found it pretty easy to draw an informed conclusion from your information, Art. Basically it boils down to if subwoofer A is better than subwoofer B, and subwoofer B is better than subwoofer C, then subwoofer A is better than subwoofer C.
Now I just wish someone would post some impedance curves, so I can see how well each of these designs was actually implemented
.As far as I recall, of the various designs discussed, only EAW includes a impedance plot, but makes comparisons a bit more difficult as their spec sheet measurement graph is done in full space, while all the others are half space.
My designs have included measured excursion at various frequencies, in as much as the excursion matches simulations, using the same logic you mentioned above, impedance should also
.Art
Last edited:
Hi!
A MTL1X pdf, showing also harmonic distortion at 120W:
http://pdf.textfiles.com/manuals/STARINMANUALS/Bosch - EV/MTL-1X.pdf
Cannot understand 1W and 120W response curves difference at low end; increasing Pe makes it go a bit lower?
Regards,
A MTL1X pdf, showing also harmonic distortion at 120W:
http://pdf.textfiles.com/manuals/STARINMANUALS/Bosch - EV/MTL-1X.pdf
Cannot understand 1W and 120W response curves difference at low end; increasing Pe makes it go a bit lower?
Regards,
The point by the arrow is simply a transposing mistake by whomever was "drawing in the lines", they made the fundamental line dashed at the point of the red arrow, it should continue down.
The line going up at that point is distortion exceeding 100%, but whether second or third harmonic can't say, the graph is not labeled.
Tish happens, especially back in the old days when graphs had to be done "by hand" to show up well on spec sheets.
Attachments
I’ve already stated in a previous post you could have showed a comparison to the Phoenix 2181 versus keystone in a single chart, which is the updated version of the MTL 1X.
Surely, if you had literally compared the Phoenix 2181 to your design, having both frequency responses on a single chart, I would have welcomed it.
You are basing your facts on the manufactures specification chart on a sine wave from a 1-watt/2.83-volt, 1-metre perspective and, have no idea how the boxes will perform once they are fed with various types of music material on a high powered amplifier.
You are taking 1-watt/2.83-volt measurement sheets from different manufactures placing your chart next to them, and concluding your design is more efficient under 1-watt/2.83 measurements. However, you have no idea how your design is going to compare to models in which, you stated you have not compared side to side to under high power conditions (a Powersoft K 10 or amplifier of similar wattage) when faced with various types of music.
That is something the charts cannot tell you for music material is far more complex than 10-second sine wave sweep from 250 Hz – 20 Hz.
This is why you should bring your box to a subwoofer shootout where there will be 50 or so soundmen which travelled from different parts of the world to hear what your design (amongst other manufactures) can a cannot do with various types of music on a Powersoft K10 or similar power in terms of amplification.
THere's nothing wrong with what he's doing. The performance of an ENCLOSURE is going to be mainly linear until some aspect of that enclosure is too small to linearly contain the velocity of air. (For example if a port gets overloaded.)
On the other hand, the performance of a driver is much less linear and can change dramatically from 1mm excursion to xmax. The specs change completely, so much that it could be a completely different driver. Also, different drivers will behave differently thermally, some will be on fire at the same level that others are still cruising comfortably.
The conversation about impedance, tuning, frequency response, is all related to the enclosure. The conversation about max spl and output levels is all about the driver. We have charts and graphs for the former, Weltersys has experience with the latter.
Weltersys has used the drivers in question so I would be inclined to trust his analysis even though it's not side by side like you want.
OMNIFEX,
In your previous post you did not give the proper model number for the Phoenix PX2181, you called it an EV 2181, which is not a valid EV model #, so I could not find specifications.
Closest thing I found using the EVX180B was the EV QRX-218S, the specs of which I listed.
Now that you have given me the proper model number your wish is my command
.Per your request, the Keystone compared the Phoenix 2181 are below, "0" on the Keystone measurement is 100 dB.
The EVPX2181 uses different drivers and cabinet design than the MTL 1X, and has a much improved response, though it is larger and has less output potential than the EV QRX-218S.
I have not found TS parameters for the DVX3180 drivers used in the EVPX2181, but having lesser power handling, lets assume a similar or slightly less excursion capability until proven otherwise.
So now, the line up for sensitivity, excursion and power looks like this:
EV QRX-218S 100 dB @40 Hz, 105 dB @100 Hz (6.4mm Xmax) 1200 watts
EVPX2181 95 dB @40Hz, 105 @100 Hz (Xmax unknown, probably <6.4mm)1000 watts
Keystone 98 dB @40 Hz, 103 dB @ 100 Hz (14mm Xmax, 16mm Xvar)1700 watts
EV MTL-1X 83 dB @40 Hz, 100 dB @ 100 Hz (6.4mm) 1200 watts
JBL SRX728 96 dB @40 Hz, 99 dB @100 Hz (8mm Xmax) 1600 watts
Doubling power up to reaching Xmax allows +3 dB untill the voice coils heat up and power compression sets in.
Doubling Xmax allows 6 dB more output.
As is obvious to any one that has been to, or looked at the results of a sub shootout, (which I have conducted many times), a sub with the same sensitivity but higher Xmax is louder when given more power.
Subs will in general "flap" and distort when hit with power much below F3 or pushed above Xmax in their usable pass band.
Subs pushed above their AES power rating generally suffer from thermal compression, more power does not make them louder, and eventually burn up.
Using the above observations and some common sense, it does not take a rocket scientist to predict the outcome of a high power shootout for the above subs, it would look like this:
1) Keystone
2) EV QRX-218S (slightly louder lows and softer top at low power levels, above 1200 watts Keystone takes over at 40 Hz)
3)JBL SRX728 (+3 at 40Hz and below, EVPX2181 + 6 in the top end)
4) EV MTL-1X (- 13 the low end, -5 dB in the top )
Cheers,
Art
Attachments
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.