I still haven't found the perfect DIY sub for my needs, but the commercial product that seems to come the closest is the Danley TH212. It's only downside, besides the price, is the 145 lb weight, and I figure I can shave off at least 20 lbs, maybe more, by using composites, or Spruce plywood, or other weight saving ideas.
I have of course seen the Labhorn, which comes very close, but it's only a "plain" 2X12", not push-pull like the Danley. I'm about 90% sure at this point that I will never be satisfied with a non-PP BR sub, and that a PP horn justmakes a good thing better.
I guess Danley thought the same thing, and the positive response from users of that sub is incredible.
SO: Has anyone built a PP version of the Labhorn, perhaps with slightly modified dimensions? (I can go to 42" high, max, but not deeper)
If not, does this at least seem feasible?
(I'm just learning design software now, but so far only BR designs as horns are a lot harder.)
The other option might be to work with Art on a 2X12" PP version of his Keystone sub, if I can talk him into it, 😱 as it is also tall and shallow, which I need.
I have of course seen the Labhorn, which comes very close, but it's only a "plain" 2X12", not push-pull like the Danley. I'm about 90% sure at this point that I will never be satisfied with a non-PP BR sub, and that a PP horn justmakes a good thing better.
I guess Danley thought the same thing, and the positive response from users of that sub is incredible.
SO: Has anyone built a PP version of the Labhorn, perhaps with slightly modified dimensions? (I can go to 42" high, max, but not deeper)
If not, does this at least seem feasible?
(I'm just learning design software now, but so far only BR designs as horns are a lot harder.)
The other option might be to work with Art on a 2X12" PP version of his Keystone sub, if I can talk him into it, 😱 as it is also tall and shallow, which I need.
Last edited:
I thought that's what the 12 Pi is, a push pull version of the labhorn in a 28" wide form factor.
You need it to be that heavy so the box does not flex under all the pressure of the drivers
So if you do used lite woods be sure to install
A lot of braces to help keep the flexing under control
So if you do used lite woods be sure to install
A lot of braces to help keep the flexing under control
Absolutely. (thx) I have a pretty good idea of what to try in this regard. Composites for part of the enclosure, (not the high pressure area) and aluminum channel / titanium rods for bracing.
It will be expensive, but I make my living with this stuff so that's OK.
If it turns out too flexy / muddy, then I'll just have to build something smaller, using the same drivers.
No offense, but I think you are making incredibly unsupported judgments most likely based on forum hearsay....
FWIW....from a guy who took the time to build, listen, and measure push-pull, push-push, bass-reflex, and sealed...all using the same driver.
Oh, I have labhorns too..... everything is a little different, NONE is better than the other, certainly not on everything you want to play...
Last edited:
Is it? I'm not aware of all the variants.
It's really hard to find all the info, with all specifics, in one place.
Do you know where I can see this?
Not at all. I've done a ton of reading of articles by well-respected guys.
I've also come to realize that I dislike the sound of literally every standard BR design I've heard.
I also did (admittedly limited)personal tests with the four sub versions I had here, retrofitting them as PP, or PP pairs, and in all cases the difference was significant.
I'd even say "extremely" significant.
Your experiences are just as valid, I'd very much like to here your thought in more detail.
It should also be noted that some people PREFER the sound of a lot of second order distortion. That's fine, but I'm not one of them.
Ah great, thx for nice response.
My thoughts are really simple and can be found in past posts here in the Subwoofer section.
About the only thing i can add to them, is that i never really liked the sound of a bass-reflex either, until i got a truly high quality pro-audio driver.
But after getting one, taking the time though modeling, then fine tuning via trial and error, I found it really doesn't matter what design i put it in, as long as the box reasonably fits the driver.
All the box types sounded very good, and really not all that different......
I'm left thinking the quality of the driver is what keeps a lot of otherwise decently designed bass-reflex, etc, from sounding good.
My thoughts are really simple and can be found in past posts here in the Subwoofer section.
About the only thing i can add to them, is that i never really liked the sound of a bass-reflex either, until i got a truly high quality pro-audio driver.
But after getting one, taking the time though modeling, then fine tuning via trial and error, I found it really doesn't matter what design i put it in, as long as the box reasonably fits the driver.
All the box types sounded very good, and really not all that different......
I'm left thinking the quality of the driver is what keeps a lot of otherwise decently designed bass-reflex, etc, from sounding good.
Interesting.
Of course, a really high quality driver will already have significantly lower distortion.
I doubt any of my commercial "Guitar Center" level subs had such drivers. Whatever I build this summer will have the best available, price-no-object, so sure, it might not be such a big deal after all. This is one reason I haven't decided which way to go yet.
AND YET: If one can build a horn as PP, why the heck NOT? Danley certainly did, and a huge number of people think it's his best sounding sub.
Then there's the discussion of horn vs BR, solely on the merits of SOUND. Everyone always gets hung up on efficiency, but that's not actually a big factor for me.
I have rad extensive interviews with a number of high profile touring sound engineers, and they ALL say they miss the old horn subs. (for a couple of good resaons) None of them like the 2X18" BR design. That's common now simply due to transportation efficiency.
Heck, I have no idea, really .....
Of course, a really high quality driver will already have significantly lower distortion.
I doubt any of my commercial "Guitar Center" level subs had such drivers. Whatever I build this summer will have the best available, price-no-object, so sure, it might not be such a big deal after all. This is one reason I haven't decided which way to go yet.
AND YET: If one can build a horn as PP, why the heck NOT? Danley certainly did, and a huge number of people think it's his best sounding sub.
Then there's the discussion of horn vs BR, solely on the merits of SOUND. Everyone always gets hung up on efficiency, but that's not actually a big factor for me.
I have rad extensive interviews with a number of high profile touring sound engineers, and they ALL say they miss the old horn subs. (for a couple of good resaons) None of them like the 2X18" BR design. That's common now simply due to transportation efficiency.
Heck, I have no idea, really .....
Remember, front-loaded horns like these are usually designed to work in multiples to get a flat low-frequency response. One on its own will make some bass, but you won't be getting the best out of it.
+1 on Mark's comments. Good drivers with plenty of power is the way to get good sound for a PA system.
Since you're planning on using some top-end drivers, why not try a few different cabinets? The cost of the wood will be pretty trivial, and you'll finally get to find out how good a well-done reflex cabinet can be.
Chris
+1 on Mark's comments. Good drivers with plenty of power is the way to get good sound for a PA system.
Since you're planning on using some top-end drivers, why not try a few different cabinets? The cost of the wood will be pretty trivial, and you'll finally get to find out how good a well-done reflex cabinet can be.
Chris
Absolutely. This is my plan. I'm especially looking at trying PPSL vs a TH.
(PPSL may or may not help much with a high end driver, but why not do it, anyway?
The trick is to find drivers that work optimally in both designs, but that is doable.
I also may end up try different structural materials, as I need to get as light as possible, and my early attempts may end up too flexible.
My dream result would be a Danley TH212 clone, or a 2X12" Keystone, but under 120 lbs. I truly think it's possible.
The other way is four smallish 15's, like yours, but ideally done as "push-pull pairs." (so slightly larger) That will be harder, since the internal volume needs to match pretty closely, but still do-able.
Last edited:
THANKS !!!!
No actual plans, but I'd rather pay them to cut it anyway.
My only problem with this is the weight. I can't use alternate materials.
Well, Maybe I can reverse-engineer it from the raw parts, then I could compare the BB version to my light version. That's an expensive proposition, but I'm willing to do this.
N/G.
tmuikku, I just looked at that Pi sub (Wayne Parham)
Unfortunately isn't even remotely the same. It's HUGE, (wide & deep) and it's not even a TH design. You have to use four of them to get a near-flat response.
tmuikku, I just looked at that Pi sub (Wayne Parham)
Unfortunately isn't even remotely the same. It's HUGE, (wide & deep) and it's not even a TH design. You have to use four of them to get a near-flat response.
In your OP you wrote:
"Has anyone built a PP version of the Labhorn, perhaps with slightly modified dimensions? (I can go to 42" high, max, but not deeper)"
You have previously indicated that the Keystone design, less than half the size and weight of the 12Pi is too big.
You have also mentioned that a shallow depth is important, the 12Pi is 45" deep, 45" tall and 28" wide. Because of the push-pull design, even the width would be difficult to reduce. It was specifically designed to be larger than Tom Danley's free LABHorn FLH design so performance of a single unit would have better output near Fc.
It also is designed around the heavy LAB12 drivers, modified for better heat transfer, adding a bit more weight ;^).
Cheers,
Art
Last edited:
Thanks, Art.
Again, I'm looking for a Danley TH212 clone, or as close to it as possible. The Danley is a dual 12" push-pull TH, and only 15" deep.
Or, again, maybe your 2X12" Keystone, if I can get the height down to 42", and the weight down to about 120 lbs.
Still looking for options .....
Again, I'm looking for a Danley TH212 clone, or as close to it as possible. The Danley is a dual 12" push-pull TH, and only 15" deep.
Or, again, maybe your 2X12" Keystone, if I can get the height down to 42", and the weight down to about 120 lbs.
Still looking for options .....
Last edited:
This thread asking about a push-pull LABhorn is confusing, considering you are looking for a TH212 clone- a 26.37 cubic foot FLH, vs a 11.25 cubic foot TH ..
The 15.5 cubic foot Keystone design would not lend it self to push-pull, better to go with a design that is.
A fold pattern similar to the TH-212 could be expanded in one dimension to 42", reduced in the other to 31", depth increased to 17", and then use those Radian Neo 15" you have your heart set on 🙂.
Attachments
Last edited:
''
VERY interesting, indeed. Did you just work that up yourself? To be clear, that's a dual 15" TH in P-P format, 42 x 17 x 31" ?
Wowsa! I may be calling you soon, after all.
Given the incredibly light weight of the Radian, maybe I can get these to my target weight, as well. (maybe)
Sure gonna' be expensive, but let's face it, SOMEBODY just has to build some subs with that Radian 15". 😀
Is there a way to "easily" guess at the LF extension of this design? Safe to say t would be close to the TH212?
------------------
BTW - I didn't realize the Labhorn was that small, for some reason. (thx) My "quick" notes say it 30"x38"x15", and the Danley is 36x36x15.
I must have got the former wrong. Maybe I was reading of a Labhorn variant. those old threads can be very confusing.
Last edited:
Not the one I found recently.
Again, it's awfully confusing, reading 6-7 year old threads, with info all over the place and often important diagrams & jpegs no longer viewable. There's yet another "Labhorn" with is a single 12". I guess it evolved over time? I'm way past confused......
But it doesn't matter, I just want a shallow TH design that 42" tall or less, and hopefully dual-driver, P-P.
(And reading back now, Art where did you get the idea that the Danley TH212 was a 26.37 cubic foot folded horn?)
Again, it's awfully confusing, reading 6-7 year old threads, with info all over the place and often important diagrams & jpegs no longer viewable. There's yet another "Labhorn" with is a single 12". I guess it evolved over time? I'm way past confused......
But it doesn't matter, I just want a shallow TH design that 42" tall or less, and hopefully dual-driver, P-P.
(And reading back now, Art where did you get the idea that the Danley TH212 was a 26.37 cubic foot folded horn?)
- Status
- Not open for further replies.