Hey everyone,
I’m starting the process of designing and building a sound system for a venue which I’m opening - we’re a 400 capacity warehouse, mostly doing dance music of various genres (as we hire out to different promoters we’ll be having pretty much every sub genre, house, techno, bass, garage etc)
I’m starting with the subwoofers (we’ve got a pair of RCF tt25a II on mid/high duty for now) and having spent a while reading on the forums and facebook groups i’m a bit overwhelmed by the options in terms of designs, and was hoping to get some advice from the collective brains to point me in the right direction.
In terms of our priorities, transient response and extension down to say 35 hz are at the top. Size is not so much an issue since we won’t be moving them around. Maximum SPL / efficiency is also not a huge priority given our venue has a limited capacity anyway and we don’t plan on scaling up. Let’s pretend also that budget isn’t a big problem for now as I’m willing to save up in order to get the right sound. We haven’t purchased amps yet so will scale our amp power to the design we go for.
Given these parameters, my question is what sub design principle should I be looking at?
I’ve narrowed it down probably to either a TH, bass reflex or paraflex design. FLHs are probably a bit beyond my capacity as a woodworker, though if they’re absolutely the right option i would figure it out.
for BR, I’m looking at Scott Hinsons double 18 design - https://www.facebook.com/share/p/6ngWaXTJrFypcyMu/?
I’m thinking there’s a reason the double 18 has been a classic for ages and maybe it’s best to stick to something tried and true instead of going for something advanced? If it’s a matter of building more BR cabs and loading them with generous amounts of amp to get the right sound, is that a good strategy? For TH, I’m considering the Keystones, and for paraflex probably the C2E golden formular. I understand the more complex designs beat out the BR in terms of efficiency but is there any other benefit to them?
Any and all advice appreciated, and I’m happy to clarify with further info if needed. Thanks!
I’m starting the process of designing and building a sound system for a venue which I’m opening - we’re a 400 capacity warehouse, mostly doing dance music of various genres (as we hire out to different promoters we’ll be having pretty much every sub genre, house, techno, bass, garage etc)
I’m starting with the subwoofers (we’ve got a pair of RCF tt25a II on mid/high duty for now) and having spent a while reading on the forums and facebook groups i’m a bit overwhelmed by the options in terms of designs, and was hoping to get some advice from the collective brains to point me in the right direction.
In terms of our priorities, transient response and extension down to say 35 hz are at the top. Size is not so much an issue since we won’t be moving them around. Maximum SPL / efficiency is also not a huge priority given our venue has a limited capacity anyway and we don’t plan on scaling up. Let’s pretend also that budget isn’t a big problem for now as I’m willing to save up in order to get the right sound. We haven’t purchased amps yet so will scale our amp power to the design we go for.
Given these parameters, my question is what sub design principle should I be looking at?
I’ve narrowed it down probably to either a TH, bass reflex or paraflex design. FLHs are probably a bit beyond my capacity as a woodworker, though if they’re absolutely the right option i would figure it out.
for BR, I’m looking at Scott Hinsons double 18 design - https://www.facebook.com/share/p/6ngWaXTJrFypcyMu/?
I’m thinking there’s a reason the double 18 has been a classic for ages and maybe it’s best to stick to something tried and true instead of going for something advanced? If it’s a matter of building more BR cabs and loading them with generous amounts of amp to get the right sound, is that a good strategy? For TH, I’m considering the Keystones, and for paraflex probably the C2E golden formular. I understand the more complex designs beat out the BR in terms of efficiency but is there any other benefit to them?
Any and all advice appreciated, and I’m happy to clarify with further info if needed. Thanks!
Hello! And welcome to the Forum.
Id actually be inclined to say that it's always a huge priority in sound reinforcement situations. You've already mentioned being open to many genre, including bass-heavy, played-loud types like House and Techno. (and others... cool!)
How loud do you play?
Id actually be inclined to say that it's always a huge priority in sound reinforcement situations. You've already mentioned being open to many genre, including bass-heavy, played-loud types like House and Techno. (and others... cool!)
How loud do you play?
Thank you!
Yeah totally agree with you in the general sense, I guess for more context, i say that for two reasons:
1 - for some of the other local sound systems I know, they care a lot about efficiency because they hire out their systems and take them to festivals / raves in the middle of nowhere, so for them, maximum SPL per box is a BIG priority given the additional effort / logistics with packing and moving. As this isn’t a consideration for us I’m wondering if we need to factor that in as heavily?
2 - as an ‘underground’ venue, we try keep our volume levels reasonable to avoid attracting attention from the authorities, so we’re limited in that sense anyway. though maybe there’s some logic in having the headroom anyway and not having to run super hot.
And do you mean how loud in a subjective or objective sense? 😂 Subjectively it’s gotta be satisfying, feel in the chest loud, but not face-ripping loud if that makes sense…objectively probably looking at no more than the 95-97db mark from the middle of the crowd ( is that the metric you’re after?) thanks again!
Yeah totally agree with you in the general sense, I guess for more context, i say that for two reasons:
1 - for some of the other local sound systems I know, they care a lot about efficiency because they hire out their systems and take them to festivals / raves in the middle of nowhere, so for them, maximum SPL per box is a BIG priority given the additional effort / logistics with packing and moving. As this isn’t a consideration for us I’m wondering if we need to factor that in as heavily?
2 - as an ‘underground’ venue, we try keep our volume levels reasonable to avoid attracting attention from the authorities, so we’re limited in that sense anyway. though maybe there’s some logic in having the headroom anyway and not having to run super hot.
And do you mean how loud in a subjective or objective sense? 😂 Subjectively it’s gotta be satisfying, feel in the chest loud, but not face-ripping loud if that makes sense…objectively probably looking at no more than the 95-97db mark from the middle of the crowd ( is that the metric you’re after?) thanks again!
For you usage criteria, I'd go with a good BR or ODTL design. The latter is slightly larger, but you should get less compression around the vent tuning frequency and a better idea of how the vent harmonic resonances will impact its usable passband. They're not that difficult to design and build - basically a BR with an extra panel.
Scott's Double 18 BR design looks like a pretty good one to go with.
Scott's Double 18 BR design looks like a pretty good one to go with.
If your system needs to meet the promoter's contract riders, dual 18" make for less explanation.
That said, DIY BR will still require some selling, even when using better drivers than commercial designs.
It certainly is a business strategy that works, and BR have slightly better output density (SPL for given occupied volume of space).
The benefit of roughly 6dB more output for a given amount of drivers, amplifiers and amperage is pretty much the whole deal- over twice the perceived (subjective) loudness in the bottom end.
The larger paraflex designs have even more upper output.
The drawback of the paraflex/TH is more stored upper energy "ringing".
Art
Thank you all for your considered responses.
I haven't come across ODTL before, what does that refer to? something transmission line?
Yes I see - in our case, given the diversity of genres and uses and our limited capacity / volume levels anyway I think we are willing to lose the extra loudness for a more even response. Art I wonder if you could explain for the beginners what upper energy ringing is? I've often subjectively felt that the paraflex subs I've heard so far struggle to keep up with some of the genres with faster moving basslines, does that observation check out with what you're saying?
bitSmasher i see you're in Aus too, wonder if you have any good recommendations for 18" drivers locally available? Have you had any experience with the SB Audience range?
ODTL = Offset-Driver Transmission Line. I've got several examples of ODTLs on my Projects page - the "Boom Unit", POC6 and POC7
https://www.diysubwoofers.org/projects/
https://www.diysubwoofers.org/projects/
I have no personal experience with paraflex subs, but would expect they probably "ring" in the upper peaks.
That said, seems a lot of their proponents like droning/ringing types of kick and bass lines, so that could be a "feature", not a defect 😉.
"Ringing" or "energy storage" can be seen in waterfall and group delay response plots, Josh Ricci's Data-Bass makes it possible to compare different designs (thanks Josh!):
https://data-bass.com/#/systems?_k=vhj336
Subjectively, most can't hear group delay with time lengths of less than 1 to 1.5 cycles, though some claim to.
An example of upper ringing is obvious in the DSL DTS10 tapped horn (useful response to ~13Hz), at 55Hz one cycle is 18ms, but the group delay is 110ms, six times longer :
The waterfall chart shows the "ringing" persisting at about -20dB at 300ms.
Tapped horns are not all that bad, Josh Ricci's Othorn TH has virtually no ringing other than at 107Hz, which drops by -30dB at 100ms.
The Othhorn and his BR 25Hz FB cabinet both using the B&C 21SW152-4 compared:
The CEA-2010 testing involves probing the short term dynamic output limitations of a speaker within defined distortion limits.
This test makes it possible to compare the usable "clean" output of systems:
Really good drivers like the B&C 21SW152-4 can do well in either BR or TH at extreme levels.
Art
For a bit over a year now surgesound.com.au has been a domestic distributor of B&C, Eighteensound and Ciare transducers and the prices are very good, they only seem to keep a small amount in stock locally but have said they can order anything so we have access to all the top teir drivers these days.
Welcome lucygoose!
Good note by Leviathan. I recently found out about surgesound too (wish I'd found out before I imported my drivers!). As for the SB audience drivers, every model I've "collected" thus far has been very well built and I do believe them to be great value for money.
If considering Bass reflex I'd strongly recommend the SB units, they are better value than other imported brands. If looking for higher loading cabs (tapped horns/paraflex) then the B&C/18 Sound units start to make more sense (more motor force due to neo magnets).
Best of luck with your journey in sound!
Good note by Leviathan. I recently found out about surgesound too (wish I'd found out before I imported my drivers!). As for the SB audience drivers, every model I've "collected" thus far has been very well built and I do believe them to be great value for money.
If considering Bass reflex I'd strongly recommend the SB units, they are better value than other imported brands. If looking for higher loading cabs (tapped horns/paraflex) then the B&C/18 Sound units start to make more sense (more motor force due to neo magnets).
Best of luck with your journey in sound!
Thank you all for your detailed replies!
I'm used to hi-fi where you have the T/S parameters and then build an enclosure based on that, but in pro audio world it seems to be the opposite.
Thanks again everyone!
Gtimes, or anyone else, is anyone able to describe what makes a certain driver more suitable for a BR vs a more loaded cab? How should I go about picking the best driver for my purpose basically? Should I get the B&C/18sound units anyway if i can afford it?
I'm used to hi-fi where you have the T/S parameters and then build an enclosure based on that, but in pro audio world it seems to be the opposite.
Thanks again everyone!
More durability, power handling @ high VC temps. T/S per se only defines its gain BW from Fs to its upper mass corner (Fhm = 2*Fs/Qts') @ 'x' box efficiency.
T/S max flat alignment:
Vented net volume (Vb) (L) = 20*Vas*Qts'^3.3
(Ft^3 = (Vb)/~28.31685)
Vented box tuning (Fb) (Hz) = 0.42*Fs*Qts'^-0.96
F3 (Hz) = Fs*0.28*Qts'^-1.4
(Qts'): (Qts) + any added series resistance (Rs)
T/S max flat alignment:
Vented net volume (Vb) (L) = 20*Vas*Qts'^3.3
(Ft^3 = (Vb)/~28.31685)
Vented box tuning (Fb) (Hz) = 0.42*Fs*Qts'^-0.96
F3 (Hz) = Fs*0.28*Qts'^-1.4
(Qts'): (Qts) + any added series resistance (Rs)
Art and folks - how does CUBO18 do ?
https://freespeakerplans.com/plans/14-plans/basscab/11-cubo-18
for those in the US - Madisound has a good looking LaVoce 18 for $149 - Re is kinda low for running two in parallel
https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/special-sale/lavoce-saf184.01-18-paper-cone-subwoofer-8-ohm/
stored energy - yeah a bit but would be fun for me
https://freespeakerplans.com/plans/14-plans/basscab/11-cubo-18
for those in the US - Madisound has a good looking LaVoce 18 for $149 - Re is kinda low for running two in parallel
https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/special-sale/lavoce-saf184.01-18-paper-cone-subwoofer-8-ohm/
stored energy - yeah a bit but would be fun for me
Attachments
FWIW -
Here's a video with dims for the CUBO 18 and CUBO 18 extend versions:
There might be another 18 version (?) - I did a sim some years back on the standard and IF the input was good showed it tuned
to ~57Hz -??
maybe my sim is bad ? - What did Brian Steele get ?
here's a Z-plot for an extended version
Here's a video with dims for the CUBO 18 and CUBO 18 extend versions:
There might be another 18 version (?) - I did a sim some years back on the standard and IF the input was good showed it tuned
to ~57Hz -??
maybe my sim is bad ? - What did Brian Steele get ?
here's a Z-plot for an extended version
Last edited:
ok got it. I've narrowed it down to two options based on availability in Australia - either the B&C18NBX100-8 (specs - https://surgesound.com.au/product/bc-speakers-18-0-inches-18nbx100-8/) or the SB Audience Nero 18" chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.wagneronline.com.au/attachments/Audio-Speakers-PA/sbacoustics/NERO-18SW1900D.pdf
headlines are that the SB has a nominal power handling of 1800 watts vs 1200 for the B&C, though the B&C has neodymium magnets. Also longer excursion of 17mm for the SB vs 11 mm for the B&C. Is there other important info that I haven't picked up on in terms of what would work best in the enclosures I've picked? Or does it become a bit subjective after this point. Appreciate any input!
I 'm assuming that whichever one plays loudest over the widest BW at rated peak power with HR's inductance losses engaged wins.
Hello,
Take a look at the comparison below:
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...nifold-mtb-be-better-than-tapped-horn.391782/
And also at the website below for more models inspiration.
https://freeloudspeakerplan.rf.gd/?i=1
As i mentioned in other post, surgesound can order anything in from the B&C & 18sound product lines so you are not restricted to whats listed on the site currently. For not much more money something like the 21/18SD115 will blow away an older model like they 18NBX in terms of overall output.
Design wise i've always thought the cubo's were a bit lacking compared to other options. A pretty good all rounder is Ricci's skram design, a fairly modern 6th order bandpass type made for high efficiency drivers with usable output down to 30hz and a fairly reasonable box size, IMO basically outperforms most of the paraflex options too at half the size. Comes with full 3d cad files if CNC if something you were considering. https://data-bass.ipbhost.com/topic/742-riccis-skram-subwoofer-files/
Skram loaded with 21DS115-4
Last edited: