Another which subwoofer question... - Page 2 - 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 7th October 2006, 01:16 AM   #11
claudio is offline claudio  Italy
diyAudio Member
 
claudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Italy
To check if a driver is suited for a sealed enclosure, Small suggests the EBP (efficiency bandwidth product). EPB=Fs/Qes; values <50 (around) suggest a closed enclosure.
A driver suited for a closed enclosure has a low Fs, pretty high cone mass (Mms), and a long voice coil (high Xmax), a Qts>0.3, and a good motor (high BxL).

Regards,
Claudio
__________________
______________________________
My Home Page: www.claudionegro.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th October 2006, 03:11 AM   #12
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Bay Area, CA
This Dayton 10" RSS265HF driver seem to be the one that would fit my needs. For the amp, there is a 250W amp that Rhythmic Audio is selling that is on sale right now.

http://www.rythmikaudio.com/nonservo_product.htm

They also suggest to get the LT board to go with the amp for only $15 more. This sound like a deal. All this into about a sealed 15" cube would hopefully work for me. Sounds like a plan...

Anyone care comment my choices to see if this would work?
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th October 2006, 07:01 AM   #13
diyAudio Member
 
Lothar34's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Send a message via AIM to Lothar34
That really does LOOK like a good sub that would fit what you need. I talked to another guy who was going to get one, but he was really turned off by the frequency response graph:
http://www.partsexpress.com/pdf/295-460g.pdf

That amp with the LT look like a really good deal.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th October 2006, 11:59 PM   #14
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: toronto
http://www.madisound.com/cgi-bin/ind...27687&pid=1809

this would be my recommendation.most musical sub i've ever heard
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th October 2006, 12:16 AM   #15
diyAudio Member
 
Lothar34's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Send a message via AIM to Lothar34
ooooooh. That one does look nice.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th October 2006, 07:04 PM   #16
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Bay Area, CA
Quote:
Originally posted by Lothar34
ooooooh. That one does look nice.
I'll second that!!!
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th October 2006, 09:38 AM   #17
stroop is offline stroop  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Hi folks,

Just found this thread same questions etc.!!!

Would this one be nice?

http://www.hifisound.de/oxid/oxid.ph...%20C%20CARBON/
__________________
awe nuts...
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th October 2006, 02:46 PM   #18
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: toronto
nice woofer,don't think it would make a suitable sub with such a high fs and i doubt it as much of a xmax?
  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
subwoofer box question mike49504 Car Audio 6 1st February 2009 05:32 AM
Subwoofer out question. G Tubes / Valves 2 6th February 2008 06:28 PM
First DIY Subwoofer, Amp question Lokalazeros Subwoofers 36 24th January 2008 04:10 PM
Subwoofer Amp Question samsagaz Solid State 0 10th September 2004 06:38 PM
pro-subwoofer question trespasser_guy Subwoofers 5 1st March 2003 02:30 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 01:09 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