Go Back   Home > Forums > >
Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Blogs Gallery Wiki Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

real efficiency tham 15 martinsson
real efficiency tham 15 martinsson
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 10th July 2018, 02:18 AM   #21
Djim is offline Djim  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Les Pays-Bas
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Steele View Post
but the sims do suggest that there should be a difference.
Lol, show me a sim of multiple enclosures that is confirmed by a measurement.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th July 2018, 02:26 AM   #22
Brian Steele is offline Brian Steele  Grenada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Djim View Post
Lol, show me a sim of multiple enclosures that is confirmed by a measurement.
Exactly, there has been no empirical confirmation I've seen suggesting whether or not there's a difference. Yet we're parroting the line that there will be no difference with THs. Based on what evidence?

What I'm sure of though is Hornresp is pretty good at simming what happens to the impedance curve when the cabinet is loaded differently, i.e. placed next to a wall (the mouth orthogonal to the wall), something I've also confirmed with measurements. - on a TH that I built. The shift was small, but it was there. As predicted. I'd published the results here some time ago. And if the impedance curve changes, the FR will change too.

So, my bet would lie with the Hornresp sim being correct. Until empirical measurements prove otherwise .
__________________
www.diysubwoofers.org
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th July 2018, 06:13 AM   #23
Cableaddict is offline Cableaddict
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Steele View Post
I've often heard this repeated, but I haven't seen any empirical tests to back it up, and the sims suggest otherwise. Granted, the change is not as large as say that for a FLH (likely due to the difference in mouth sizes), but the sims do suggest that there should be a difference.
I hear you, but Danley claims this is so, (no extra LF extension) as does his main tech who posts on several forums.

I imagine that THEY have done careful measurements. Since TH is Danley's baby, it would be very odd marketing to claim this if it weren't true.


I can't wrap my head around the physics of it, though. It's kind of counter-intuitive. As you say, you'd think there would be less gain, but at least SOME.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th July 2018, 07:26 AM   #24
chris661 is offline chris661  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
chris661's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Sheffield
Quote:
Originally Posted by angelodj View Post
hi, I saw the link, I do not see the plans though! but going back I can not see the images that are no longer present
The plan is in the PDF on the post I linked.

Chris
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th July 2018, 08:07 AM   #25
angelodj is offline angelodj
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
x cableaddictid:
a folded sub, for example the hd15, of how many db improves down in groups of 2 or 4?

I found these simulations, but they are 1.0xpi, so hard to compare ..

15tbx100
Click the image to open in full size.
I said the 1.0xpi simulation is hard to compare, or at least I do not know how to get the 1.0xpi chart from the 1.0xpi: I have combined a wbin and here are the results:

40hz spl 88.1db -1,0xpi 81.8db -2,0xpi
90hz spl 109.6db -1,0xpi 107,2db -2,0xpi
120hz spl 108 db -1,0xpi 104,5db -2,0xpi
so I do not think it's easy to find a transformation formula ..

x chris:

Click the image to open in full size.

in pdf do not understand how to assemble, where does the woofer?

Last edited by angelodj; 10th July 2018 at 08:12 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th July 2018, 10:05 AM   #26
Brian Steele is offline Brian Steele  Grenada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cableaddict View Post
I hear you, but Danley claims this is so, (no extra LF extension) as does his main tech who posts on several forums.

I imagine that THEY have done careful measurements. Since TH is Danley's baby, it would be very odd marketing to claim this if it weren't true.
Perhaps, but then again look what happened to their measurements of the TH118...


Quote:
Originally Posted by Cableaddict View Post
I can't wrap my head around the physics of it, though. It's kind of counter-intuitive. As you say, you'd think there would be less gain, but at least SOME.
If we had a FLH with the same path length and throat and mouth sizes, I bet no-one would question that the resonance frequency would be lowered if we put two side by side. But then it's claimed that doesn't happen if those FLHs are replaced with THs. Why?
__________________
www.diysubwoofers.org
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th July 2018, 10:34 AM   #27
angelodj is offline angelodj
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
I believe that in the real environment the sub goes down a bit, not too much as bph, but the directivity generally helps the bass that are always little direct
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th July 2018, 12:49 PM   #28
TBTL is offline TBTL  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
If a horn mouth is too small to efficiently couple to air, total emitted acoustical power increases fourfold (+6 dB) when you add an extra cabinet. 3 dB is because input power doubles. The other 3 dB is because acoustic pressure doubles at the horn mouth due to the other cabinet, which increases radiated sound power for a given air displacement: power output = pressure * volume velocity (ignoring phase between them). This happens at almost all loudspeakers, except for full sized horns.

If the mouth is sufficiently large, total emitted acoustical power only doubles (+3 dB) as the loudspeaker cannot gain efficiency. It's already as efficient as a loudspeaker can be.

Front loaded horn subwoofers usually are made with a too small mouth for low frequencies, while it is sufficiently large for low-midrange frequencies. Emitted power goes up by 6 dB at low and 3 dB at low-midrange frequencies when another cabinet is added. So it goes deeper.

Tapped horn subwoofers typically have too small mouths to efficiently couple to air, even at the upper end of their pass bands, so they gain 6 dB over their whole frequency range when a second cabinet is added.

Last edited by TBTL; 10th July 2018 at 12:53 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th July 2018, 02:41 PM   #29
Brian Steele is offline Brian Steele  Grenada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBTL View Post
If a horn mouth is too small to efficiently couple to air, total emitted acoustical power increases fourfold (+6 dB) when you add an extra cabinet. 3 dB is because input power doubles. The other 3 dB is because acoustic pressure doubles at the horn mouth due to the other cabinet, which increases radiated sound power for a given air displacement: power output = pressure * volume velocity (ignoring phase between them). This happens at almost all loudspeakers, except for full sized horns.

If the mouth is sufficiently large, total emitted acoustical power only doubles (+3 dB) as the loudspeaker cannot gain efficiency. It's already as efficient as a loudspeaker can be.
Not disagreement there. However, it's not going to be a step change, i.e. the delta increase in efficiency will not suddenly go from 3 to 6 dB, but transitions between the two as mouth size decreases. That means that even with smaller mouths, you should see a measurable difference, even if that difference is very small.

One thing I'm pretty certain of - if there's a change in the system's impedance curve, there will be an observable change in the system's frequency response as well, as the two are linked. With that said, I repeated the impedance curve test with my POC3 TH this morning, with the mouth facing up, mouth on the ground (2PI loading) and mouth adjacent and orthogonal to wall (to emulate 1PI loading). It's a five-minute exercise that anyone can do if they have a TH, DATS and REW (to compare the impedance curves). As I noticed the last time that I did this test, there were minor but noticeable changes to the impedance curve, which suggests that the FR would change as well. This TH has a pretty small mouth (925 cm^2). I suspect any changes will be even more noticeable with THs with larger mouths.
Attached Images
File Type: png 20180710-loading.png (274.0 KB, 47 views)
__________________
www.diysubwoofers.org
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th July 2018, 03:08 PM   #30
angelodj is offline angelodj
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
as I had imagined, even if small changes should be there
  Reply With Quote

Reply


real efficiency tham 15 martinssonHide 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

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2 tham 15 or? instead of the w-bin angelodj Subwoofers 12 18th June 2018 09:44 PM
THAM 15 or this QSC Sub? nunyagd Subwoofers 27 27th October 2016 03:55 PM
Martinsson's TPAM10HTL subwoofer FranciscoPerez Subwoofers 3 6th October 2015 05:30 PM
THAM 12 and THAM 15 cabinets for sale servojohn Swap Meet 0 17th February 2015 02:50 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:31 AM.


Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Resources saved on this page: MySQL 15.00%
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2018 diyAudio
Wiki