Hello,
I want to built 2 subwoofers to support my Mordaunt Short MS902 bookshelfs. I was thinking about the ripole described by Rudolf some time ago. This because their compact size and usable as a small speaker stand.
Just looking for a nice driver here in the netherlands. I found the following options:
Peerless SLS-315 (€70)
http://www.tymphany.com/datasheet/printview.php?id=38
Raveland AXX1515 (€90)
http://www.speakertrade.com/raveland/PDF/Manual_Raveland_AXX_Rev2_WEB.pdf
I think the Raveland has more output, because it's bigger and has higher xmax. Just never heard of anyone using the raveland for a dipole subwoofer.
I want to built 2 subwoofers to support my Mordaunt Short MS902 bookshelfs. I was thinking about the ripole described by Rudolf some time ago. This because their compact size and usable as a small speaker stand.
Just looking for a nice driver here in the netherlands. I found the following options:
Peerless SLS-315 (€70)
http://www.tymphany.com/datasheet/printview.php?id=38
Raveland AXX1515 (€90)
http://www.speakertrade.com/raveland/PDF/Manual_Raveland_AXX_Rev2_WEB.pdf
I think the Raveland has more output, because it's bigger and has higher xmax. Just never heard of anyone using the raveland for a dipole subwoofer.
JBL ??
I can get these for cheap:
http://www.jbl.com/car/products/product_detail.aspx?prod=GT4-15/230&CheckProduct=Y
I can get these for cheap:
http://www.jbl.com/car/products/product_detail.aspx?prod=GT4-15/230&CheckProduct=Y
vinnie said:
Caution!
I have two of these
They have a (small) problem with noise from the pole vent. Would not affect normal rock music, but when only producing low bass you can hear air pressed through the pole piece.
BTW. Qts of my drivers was MUCH higher than advertised.
I see, that the 1535 is a different driver, but the vendor doesn´t seem to care too much about pole vent noise.
recommendations
Hi,
its nearly impossible to give recommendations with just the parameters listed on Websites.
The GBS 1535 e.g. is hardly usable, because the mesh sitting in the pole vent leads to horrible noise. Closing the vent doesn´t help at all but generates even more noise (compression below the spider). It might help to break off the plastic cap covering the magnet to get the mesh out of the pole vent. Btw: A correct and fair price tag for this driver would read ~50-60€. A UVP of 90€ is ridicolously high
The GBS 515 can be used with good results, but I´m a bit surprised to see the ebay auction offering housings too. This dipole-style (ripol/DRS) is patented too and the seller doesn´t have a license!
Too, the claimed parameters are not the ones You measure
And again..the UVP is a fantasy number
The original chinese supplier ships them with ´fantasy´- parameters and GBS doesn´t measure either. E.g the claimed +-7mm linear throw are simply not veryfiable.
I wouldn´t recommend the Raveland AXX. For my taste too much mass to move and not at all a quiet driver.
The SLS12 is one of the very best choices for dipole subs. If You need higher SPLs than I´d opt rather for more SLSes instead of using different drivers!
jauu
Calvin
Hi,
its nearly impossible to give recommendations with just the parameters listed on Websites.
The GBS 1535 e.g. is hardly usable, because the mesh sitting in the pole vent leads to horrible noise. Closing the vent doesn´t help at all but generates even more noise (compression below the spider). It might help to break off the plastic cap covering the magnet to get the mesh out of the pole vent. Btw: A correct and fair price tag for this driver would read ~50-60€. A UVP of 90€ is ridicolously high
The GBS 515 can be used with good results, but I´m a bit surprised to see the ebay auction offering housings too. This dipole-style (ripol/DRS) is patented too and the seller doesn´t have a license!
Too, the claimed parameters are not the ones You measure
And again..the UVP is a fantasy number
The original chinese supplier ships them with ´fantasy´- parameters and GBS doesn´t measure either. E.g the claimed +-7mm linear throw are simply not veryfiable.
I wouldn´t recommend the Raveland AXX. For my taste too much mass to move and not at all a quiet driver.
The SLS12 is one of the very best choices for dipole subs. If You need higher SPLs than I´d opt rather for more SLSes instead of using different drivers!
jauu
Calvin
Great topic since I'm also looking at dipool woofers. The SLS 12 is also one of my choises.
Another one thet might be nice: Beyaa SM115N, two of them per side.
Or, if think one is engough: Beyma 15P1000. It is expensive though.
I'm still not sure if I should take one or two woofer per side. with 12", I guess you definanly need two, but if you have a nice 15" woofer...?
Another one thet might be nice: Beyaa SM115N, two of them per side.
Or, if think one is engough: Beyma 15P1000. It is expensive though.
I'm still not sure if I should take one or two woofer per side. with 12", I guess you definanly need two, but if you have a nice 15" woofer...?
Yes, I think so, but it depends mainly on how long the way from front to back of the cone is.
Bear in mind that a ripole is purely a subwoofer. If you want to play a bit higher, a short U frame would be better, but then you definantly need more drivers This is also a nice unit: http://www.speakertrade.com/mivoc/details-einzel.html?marke=mivoc&artikel=XAW 310 HC
Bear in mind that a ripole is purely a subwoofer. If you want to play a bit higher, a short U frame would be better, but then you definantly need more drivers
This is also a nice unit: http://www.speakertrade.com/mivoc/details-einzel.html?marke=mivoc&artikel=XAW 310 HC
I found a pdf file done by Ridtahler himself. Unfortunately I can't remember the URL where I found it but I will post a couple of figures from it to illustrate my question about ripoles.
Is the ripole about 10 db less sensitive than the sealed boxed version with the same driver ? Check out the figures. I would suggest you google for the original pdf called ridtahler.pdf
Cheers.
Is the ripole about 10 db less sensitive than the sealed boxed version with the same driver ? Check out the figures. I would suggest you google for the original pdf called ridtahler.pdf
Cheers.
Attachments
peas and apples
Hi,
comparison of different dipoles with other principles of boxes is a bit difficult. It depends very much on which parameter You choose to be prime.
There are people for example who just say.....well the dipole gives me a lower SPL for my watts than a CB or BR, others that say..well with one driver its much quieter.
What they don´t compare is, that especially the BMC-dipoles are much smaller than any other box and that there ground resonance is lower than with any other principle. If You´d try to get the same amount of deep base from an equally small CB or BR (which is imo impossible anyhow) they´d have an equally low efficiency....on the other hand building multiple driver dipoles with the same volume as CB or BR You get roughly the same efficiency and SPL max.
Now You might ask, whats the use of building a dipole with 4 drivers and the same volume as a single driver CB or BR? The only answer is....hear and You´ll know!
jau
Calvin
Hi,
comparison of different dipoles with other principles of boxes is a bit difficult. It depends very much on which parameter You choose to be prime.
There are people for example who just say.....well the dipole gives me a lower SPL for my watts than a CB or BR, others that say..well with one driver its much quieter.
What they don´t compare is, that especially the BMC-dipoles are much smaller than any other box and that there ground resonance is lower than with any other principle. If You´d try to get the same amount of deep base from an equally small CB or BR (which is imo impossible anyhow) they´d have an equally low efficiency....on the other hand building multiple driver dipoles with the same volume as CB or BR You get roughly the same efficiency and SPL max.
Now You might ask, whats the use of building a dipole with 4 drivers and the same volume as a single driver CB or BR? The only answer is....hear and You´ll know!
jau
Calvin
Hi Calvin,
No question about what you wrote.
However you misunderstand me. In engineering one cannot gain anything without loosing out somewhere else. In other words we do not get anything for free !
So the Ripole does a great job producing deep bass from a really incredibly small enclosure. So the design looses out somewhere else - perfectly understandable. This will be very high on the WAF list.
I did not put up those graphs to say the system was bad but to find out if it is 'really' as insensitive as the graphs show. Additionally the graphs seem a bit different with respect to levels and so they might not all be taken under the same conditions.
Maybe I'm interpreting them wrong.
It was a post to clarify the performance of the system and not deride it !!
I plan to build and use a Ripole. I want to decide how much power I will need for it . I'm not an efficiency driven person but I'd like to keep power levels down as much as practically possible.
The bottom line is just as you put it - "..hear and You´ll know!.."
Cheers,
Ashok.
No question about what you wrote.
However you misunderstand me. In engineering one cannot gain anything without loosing out somewhere else. In other words we do not get anything for free !
So the Ripole does a great job producing deep bass from a really incredibly small enclosure. So the design looses out somewhere else - perfectly understandable. This will be very high on the WAF list.
I did not put up those graphs to say the system was bad but to find out if it is 'really' as insensitive as the graphs show. Additionally the graphs seem a bit different with respect to levels and so they might not all be taken under the same conditions.
Maybe I'm interpreting them wrong.
It was a post to clarify the performance of the system and not deride it !!
I plan to build and use a Ripole. I want to decide how much power I will need for it . I'm not an efficiency driven person but I'd like to keep power levels down as much as practically possible.
The bottom line is just as you put it - "..hear and You´ll know!.."
Cheers,
Ashok.
I've used the ripole concept but with W manifolds and a U-baffle extension on the back. I used 4 12's in a cab that is 12" wide and 25" tall. When possible I prefer to use push/pull and the vibration cancellation the W alignment allows. These cabs are still too big for my taste to function as a bass.
I plan to use eight 6"x9" drivers per side in my next cab. Before you start laughing, a 6x9 is equal to an 8" in terms of surface area, so 8 will have the equivalent performance of a pair of 15's. The manifold dimensions will be 25"h x 9"d x between 9 and 10" wide. I find that deep manifolds are inferior from a sonic standpoint, so the shallower the better and the higher I can run the woofer section. The shallow depth also allows me to add some extra depth to the back, which is worth 2 for 1 depth in comparison to a dipole manifold. It becomes a W/U hybrid, but the effect on dispersion and room interaction is minimal. Dipole radiation is a fantasy anyway with in room placement. I find no sonic detriment of the hybrid alignment, and the added extension is welcome.
Sure there's a lack of T/S parameters, but listening comparisons will easily tell me those with an appropriate Q, which should be any designed for rear deck use. I may have to burn a little cash on a few pairs to find the best drivers for my purpose, since I may not be able to pick out the best Xmax with in store listening. I can probably find what I need in the $15-20/pair range, so some research cost is worth it. Along with Xmax a concern is Fs, but the ripole alignment brings that down considerably.
Le will remain very low using smaller drivers, 8 4ohm drivers are easily wired for 8ohms, and efficiency will be a non-issue. Overall, I should end up with a very compact and economical relatively high output OB woofer section, on top of which I should be able to mount almost any main driver(s).
I plan to use eight 6"x9" drivers per side in my next cab. Before you start laughing, a 6x9 is equal to an 8" in terms of surface area, so 8 will have the equivalent performance of a pair of 15's. The manifold dimensions will be 25"h x 9"d x between 9 and 10" wide. I find that deep manifolds are inferior from a sonic standpoint, so the shallower the better and the higher I can run the woofer section. The shallow depth also allows me to add some extra depth to the back, which is worth 2 for 1 depth in comparison to a dipole manifold. It becomes a W/U hybrid, but the effect on dispersion and room interaction is minimal. Dipole radiation is a fantasy anyway with in room placement. I find no sonic detriment of the hybrid alignment, and the added extension is welcome.
Sure there's a lack of T/S parameters, but listening comparisons will easily tell me those with an appropriate Q, which should be any designed for rear deck use. I may have to burn a little cash on a few pairs to find the best drivers for my purpose, since I may not be able to pick out the best Xmax with in store listening. I can probably find what I need in the $15-20/pair range, so some research cost is worth it. Along with Xmax a concern is Fs, but the ripole alignment brings that down considerably.
Le will remain very low using smaller drivers, 8 4ohm drivers are easily wired for 8ohms, and efficiency will be a non-issue. Overall, I should end up with a very compact and economical relatively high output OB woofer section, on top of which I should be able to mount almost any main driver(s).
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.