Precision devices - Page 4 - 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 29th September 2005, 06:02 PM   #31
jdunham is offline jdunham  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Near London
defr and paulspencer,

The reason for the angled baffles can be read about here:

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=57187&highlight=

In short the reasoning is that they can be used in corners, and in so doing decrease the amount of dipole roll-off by using the walls.

Mine are pretty flat without any EQ from 200hz and downwards.

BTW, derf is correct on his assertions - there are quite a few reasons why a larger cone driver is better than a small/higher excursion one. Ironically, cost is often another one of them!

Regards,

Jonathan
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th September 2005, 06:05 PM   #32
jdunham is offline jdunham  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Near London
Sorry, correct link below:

Corner Dipole Woofer (CDW): info? anyone tried one?
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th September 2005, 06:16 PM   #33
diyAudio Member
 
paulspencer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Quote:
To the best of my knowledge, in it's most basic terms excursion=distortion. Excursion is a product of a driver working hard to reproduce whatever signal it's being fed.
For a given driver, distortion will increase with excursion, but if you are comparing two (very) different drivers, it will not always be true that the one with less excursion will have lower distortion! That would be an apples to oranges comparison. Also drivers can now be designed to have a ruler flat BL curve and suspension curve so that there is a much smaller increase in distortion for excursion.

It is much easier to use drivers with a larger SD and then only have to keep it linear over a smaller xmax. Then again, this requires a larger driver with a bigger basket, and this involves cost. Apparently there isn't really any increase in materials involved in XBL2, it's really just a clever design involving two VC gaps, so in fact it may be cheaper to produce such drivers, as they may in fact require less materials. What they actually sell for, and which is better value, is influenced by a range of factors.

As I recall, there were distortion measurements of the Tumult vs the Maelstrom. IIRC, the Tumult had lower distortion.
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th September 2005, 07:28 PM   #34
derf is offline derf  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
derf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Herts
Quote:
For a given driver, distortion will increase with excursion, but if you are comparing two (very) different drivers, it will not always be true that the one with less excursion will have lower distortion! That would be an apples to oranges comparison.
I'm not sure if you've correctly interpreted what I meant to say or even if I've read what you've said above as you intended it to read.

I'm not trying to say that the driver with less *potential excursion*(in this case X model pro 18") has less distortion because it has less potential excursion, but because it achieves the same spl level for the same input as the (longer excursion) 12" by having a much higher surface diameter and therefore having to move less.

Ok, it's kind of apples and oranges in the way we're pitching 12" drivers in general against 18's, but the intended use is the same(dipole bass).

Quote:
It is much easier to use drivers with a larger SD and then only have to keep it linear over a smaller xmax. Then again, this requires a larger driver with a bigger basket, and this involves cost. Apparently there isn't really any increase in materials involved in XBL2, it's really just a clever design involving two VC gaps, so in fact it may be cheaper to produce such drivers, as they may in fact require less materials. What they actually sell for, and which is better value, is influenced by a range of factors.
From what I can remember the 12" drivers Linkwitz uses cost around about the same price as entry level Eminence 18" woofers, what'd be really nice to see is a tests comparing the smaller Linkwitz drivers and the larger Eminence ones.

That, for me would be very interesting.
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th September 2005, 07:06 AM   #35
diyAudio Member
 
paulspencer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
derf, I think we actually agree in principle, that, all other things being equal, a driver which gets its displacement more from large SD rather than high xmax is likely to be more linear. Although of course there will be examples where the higher xmax driver has a motor system that is more linear over its larger xmax, and will have lower distortion.

Normally those large SD drivers achieve more output but less extension. However, subs with good distortion performance may get the same performance given the same extension, perhaps even better performance. The PD driver with 12mm p-p xmax has only about 2L of displacement, less than some 12" drivers. A pair of XLS 12" drivers have more displacement. I think those PA drivers have the advantage of more top end, however, dipoles often have a limited top end due to resonance issues.

Quote:
Ok, it's kind of apples and oranges in the way we're pitching 12" drivers in general against 18's, but the intended use is the same(dipole bass).
It's an apples - oranges comparison if you say the 18 will have lower distortion due to lower xmax. However, if you measure them both for the same task, it's a fair comparison. It's one I'd be interested to see.

Quote:
From what I can remember the 12" drivers Linkwitz uses cost around about the same price as entry level Eminence 18" woofers, what'd be really nice to see is a tests comparing the smaller Linkwitz drivers and the larger Eminence ones.
I'd like to see that as well ... I'll be even more interested down the track when I have the space and budget to build a very large OB bass array with impressive SPL as well as SQ!
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd October 2005, 01:09 PM   #36
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Pretoria
Default my two cents

I've wondered about this a while ago, but with little practical experience, I am left with rudimentary physics... Apologies in advance if I'm not very clear...

When using a large lower excursion cone vs a smaller large excursion cone, for a given (same) frequency and spl, all that changes is the distance the driver has to move within the period of one cycle... This means that the one driver (smaller one) has to accellerate faster to reach greater distance, even if both drivers are linear at said spl and Hz, the small one is trying to setup the same pressure variations much faster than the large one, actually this is wrong, overall the same pressure variation is set up, but it has to set up a larger pressure variation in a smaller cross section area ( imagine smaller diam tube with longer length). Air is lossy and not an ideal liquid it is compressible, has mass and will move in all direc.s if hit from one side... if you try to move it very fast it will tend not to follow... so maybe we can say the pressure variations are more ordered with lower excursion

OK so first thing, most instruments going low is large with small excursions the bass drum flexes maybe 2 mm... so the type of acceleration we get of the air is similar to the larger cone for most bass instruments... except perhaps pipe organ. the reason is you are creating a similar "looking" pressure wave to the instrument.

Second thing, with large cone, you have a greater surface area to circumference ratio... so you have less "fall-off" of air at the edge because pressure to the side is lower than pressure to the front...
Same effect with hornloading, I think - you are moving the air more effectively, in effect creating large driver / more orderly air movements...

Mmm... this sounds so much more impressive and logical with
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th October 2005, 11:59 AM   #37
diyAudio Member
 
paulspencer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Quote:
When using a large lower excursion cone vs a smaller large excursion cone, for a given (same) frequency and spl, all that changes is the distance the driver has to move within the period of one cycle
Actually I think there is a bit more to it than that.

There is the suspension linearity as it relates to excursion, and the BL curve. An ideal driver would have a perfectly flat suspension and BL curve in its operating range. In practice the BL curve won't be perfectly flat, and an ideal driver would have stiffer suspension at extremes of excursion to compensate for a non flat BL curve.

Pro drivers are designed for higher power handling, hence they will have often have higher inductance. Some argue that this is significant for bass. Adire claim low inductance gives "fast bass," although the validity of this depends on your definition of "fast bass" but in this case they mean in a more literal sense - the speed at which a driver responds to transients.

Compression is also going to be different. There is compression due to the power applied, and how effective heatsinking is. Also there is compression related to the movement of air.

I think in general the bigger driver is favoured in accuracy, however, a better engineered smaller driver may turn out to be more economical, smaller and have better performance.

To give a definitive answer on which is more accurate, however, is something which requires measurements IMO.
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th October 2005, 12:27 PM   #38
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Pretoria
Sorry for giving the impression that cone acceleration and SA to circumference ratio is the only factor that is important, that's certainly not the case.

I just tried give my view that when all the engineering and specifications of the drivers are taken into account - or corrected for - there are still some basic things which are not the same and can probably not be compensated for...

I also should have stated clearly that I don't know if this is, in practice, a very large preactical effect/drawback.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th October 2005, 12:57 PM   #39
Geenius is offline Geenius  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
Geenius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: near Amsterdam
Time for a little update. The Precision Devices PD2150's have been playing for a couple of weeks now in various configurations varying from closed box seperates to stacked di-pole (see photo). The best so far is the stacked di-pole, this has the best bass I have ever heard and I am still only running them on a simple passive 2nd order low-pass network connected parallel to my main speakers. Bass is just there, no colouration, no limited dynamics, no boxy-ness, just clear clean deep bass. Can't image how good it will be when driven active and with digital room correction.

Click the image to open in full size.
__________________
Tony
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th October 2005, 06:19 PM   #40
diyAudio Member
 
paulspencer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Tony, is that a U frame?
  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
Precision Devices 12" woofers Defo Multi-Way 8 30th July 2009 02:05 AM
Precision devices...... Village Plank Multi-Way 10 14th December 2008 08:49 PM
Precision Devices PD.158 Xmax? buggsson Subwoofers 6 20th May 2008 07:55 AM
Precision Devices tinitus Multi-Way 1 8th January 2008 01:57 AM
Compact 15" sub - BMS or Precision Devices? DIAR Subwoofers 7 4th January 2007 05:06 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:33 AM.


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