For a project I'm working on, I'm having a hard time deciding wich way to go. I have several options and I'm sure they can all lead to good results.
Base parameters are a 12" (mid)bass handing over to a waveguide/compression driver around 1000Hz. Fully active + DSP.
If there will be subs, they need to be integrated in to the main speakers. There's not enough space for separate (placed elsewhere) subs. Playing only music, no HT.
Drivers are not set in stone, my question is more about 'design philosophy'
I could do a FaitalPRO 12PR320 in a sealed, 50L box and below that a 12" sealed sub taking over somewhere around 80-120Hz
or
a single FaitalPRO 12RS430 in a 90L vented box running from 35 to 1000Hz.
Both provide enough SPL, both give me ~100L boxes. The 2 way is simpler and cheaper but uses a 90gr Mms cone all the way down. The 3 way uses a lighter 50gr Mms cone and hands the lowest frequencies over to a dedicated driver.
Would the more agile driver relieved from the lowest notes results in a nicer midrange and will the sub provide a better bottom end?
Or will it be a PITA getting good integration of the subs and will the 2-way not only be cheaper and easier to build but also a more coherent sound?
What would you do and why?
Base parameters are a 12" (mid)bass handing over to a waveguide/compression driver around 1000Hz. Fully active + DSP.
If there will be subs, they need to be integrated in to the main speakers. There's not enough space for separate (placed elsewhere) subs. Playing only music, no HT.
Drivers are not set in stone, my question is more about 'design philosophy'
I could do a FaitalPRO 12PR320 in a sealed, 50L box and below that a 12" sealed sub taking over somewhere around 80-120Hz
or
a single FaitalPRO 12RS430 in a 90L vented box running from 35 to 1000Hz.
Both provide enough SPL, both give me ~100L boxes. The 2 way is simpler and cheaper but uses a 90gr Mms cone all the way down. The 3 way uses a lighter 50gr Mms cone and hands the lowest frequencies over to a dedicated driver.
Would the more agile driver relieved from the lowest notes results in a nicer midrange and will the sub provide a better bottom end?
Or will it be a PITA getting good integration of the subs and will the 2-way not only be cheaper and easier to build but also a more coherent sound?
What would you do and why?
I would not expect my bass driver to play over 400Hz...
How bout two 12FH530’s in a 2.5 way tower system with a 1” horn? With room gain and a 40hz tune, that will get you an in room f3 around 35hz and and f6 below 30hz. Stupid efficient too so around 50w will chase most folks out of the room.
That said…,not exactly cheap at $2k for a pair of complete speakers.
That said…,not exactly cheap at $2k for a pair of complete speakers.
Hmm, based on this chart: (35*1000)^0.5 = 187 Hz mean XO for balanced acoustic power = perceived more powerful male fundamentals along with better perceived vocals of both male, female.
Yeah at the diy price you gotta compare it to similar speakers like Klipsch , jbl. My 2 way towers go down to 38hz I wish I had skills to diy a pair . It would probably cost more then they were to buy.
A sealed 12" sub below a 12" will have a very hard working life. It needs to do way more excursion than the mid bass. If you're seriously planning such a sub, go for a 8" mid bass. Or the other way around, go for a 15 or better, 18" sub.
Good that Klipsch was mentioned and many others as well.
Many iconic companies started with 2 ways.
In recent videos and collaborators. They all mention as well.
If they weren't busy keeping up with the hustle and could build what they want.
Most prefer 2 ways.
Again dont overthink, modern drivers have a lot to offer.
Get the drivers and go go go.
Always time to add to a system.
Many iconic companies started with 2 ways.
In recent videos and collaborators. They all mention as well.
If they weren't busy keeping up with the hustle and could build what they want.
Most prefer 2 ways.
Again dont overthink, modern drivers have a lot to offer.
Get the drivers and go go go.
Always time to add to a system.
That driver produces a low-frequency response that is quite good. As suggested elsewhere, this could easily be combined with an 8-inch midrange driver, which could be crossed over at around 400Hz or thereabouts.
If we opt to use a peaking 2nd-order high-pass filtered vented-box alignment, we can get the f3 down to 27.9Hz with a modest 4dB of boost. That's a good system, which can achieve 113dB SPL with 100W (re 8 ohms) before Xmax is exceeded at 20Hz.
Hi, yes and no 😀
No: as the boost by itself should not affect midrange except through masking which might be quite bad room modes added.
Yes: is due to more excursion which makes driver parameters vary for the whole bandwidth of the woofer, basically whole bandwidth distorts with excursion, which is dominated by excursion made by the lows. The better your driver and oversized system the less this matters though.
There is more of course, more lows means more power is needed so perhaps heat becomes another issue, big amp fan could be noisy at home, circuit breaker might get too small. You could reduce required power by increasing enclosure size but that has trade-off on the mids. Basically all enclosure problems are on midrange, edge diffraction, port noises and midrange leaks, panel resonances modes inside the box because the box and port are about midrange wavelength in size. So if you try get more bass by making bigger enclosure these issues would get lower in frequency and come more and more into passband of the driver.
Also early room reflections tend to pile on mids as well, if mid and bass are separate there is possibility to have midrange positioned suitably from various boundaries. Bass sources likely have very different optimal positioning than the midrange sources so another reason that suggests having bass in different box in home hifi situation. Also building the system is bit easier, divide and conquer.
In general, what ever you do, it's always possible to add more bass sources to augment bass due to very long wavelength, so there is no good reason from sound quality perspective to trade-off any midrange performance to get more bass. Cost savings and ease of build might be good reason not to have separate bass and mid system though. With this philosophy you'd always optimize any speaker driver performance for the high end of the passband, and then crossover to another driver when ever the performance gets out of spec. This is because there is no fixing lost performance on short wavelengths other than doing it again better, so why not do it properly from the get go. If bass is lost due to optimizing for the mids, it's fixable just by adding another bass source, which you might need to do anyway to get enough volume displacement and perhaps address room mode issues.
No: as the boost by itself should not affect midrange except through masking which might be quite bad room modes added.
Yes: is due to more excursion which makes driver parameters vary for the whole bandwidth of the woofer, basically whole bandwidth distorts with excursion, which is dominated by excursion made by the lows. The better your driver and oversized system the less this matters though.
There is more of course, more lows means more power is needed so perhaps heat becomes another issue, big amp fan could be noisy at home, circuit breaker might get too small. You could reduce required power by increasing enclosure size but that has trade-off on the mids. Basically all enclosure problems are on midrange, edge diffraction, port noises and midrange leaks, panel resonances modes inside the box because the box and port are about midrange wavelength in size. So if you try get more bass by making bigger enclosure these issues would get lower in frequency and come more and more into passband of the driver.
Also early room reflections tend to pile on mids as well, if mid and bass are separate there is possibility to have midrange positioned suitably from various boundaries. Bass sources likely have very different optimal positioning than the midrange sources so another reason that suggests having bass in different box in home hifi situation. Also building the system is bit easier, divide and conquer.
In general, what ever you do, it's always possible to add more bass sources to augment bass due to very long wavelength, so there is no good reason from sound quality perspective to trade-off any midrange performance to get more bass. Cost savings and ease of build might be good reason not to have separate bass and mid system though. With this philosophy you'd always optimize any speaker driver performance for the high end of the passband, and then crossover to another driver when ever the performance gets out of spec. This is because there is no fixing lost performance on short wavelengths other than doing it again better, so why not do it properly from the get go. If bass is lost due to optimizing for the mids, it's fixable just by adding another bass source, which you might need to do anyway to get enough volume displacement and perhaps address room mode issues.
Last edited:
I'm in a simillar quest and tought about the 10FR330 as solution. It's a 10" but goes low enough and loud enough to fit that purpose. I will crosso it smilar to a compression driver in horn. The 12FE330 could do similar, but the cabinet will be to big (arround 150L) for you.
The only other one i found need a similar big cabinet, it's the Beyma 12BR70. I've used it in an outdoor setup (tuned very low) but it's to big for indoor use i think. That's why i came to the Faital 10FE330. I will match it with a XT1086 horn and a Faital HF-108 with crossover in the 900 to 1300hz region (needs experimenting to know where exact).
The only other one i found need a similar big cabinet, it's the Beyma 12BR70. I've used it in an outdoor setup (tuned very low) but it's to big for indoor use i think. That's why i came to the Faital 10FE330. I will match it with a XT1086 horn and a Faital HF-108 with crossover in the 900 to 1300hz region (needs experimenting to know where exact).
I have two 12PR320 to sell in Europe,not used, purchased 2 or 3 years ago in their original box (stocked at 22°C) , make an offer in PM if interrersted.
Too huge cabinet for the living room condo (peace of the household)
The Faital 12PR320 if used sealed will be a big two way with subjective pratt/slam because its size and the emphasis iin the 80/200 Hz. It is cool driver because it has the SPL/2.83V for easy EQ between 92 to 90 dB in that range up to its Fs (if vented, less below 70 Hz if sealed : according the room size, can be good or not enough)
Vented, a netto good targett is something between 75 L to 110 liters, I would use a SC4 if I had to go vented.
For a two ways, thinks about a FR driver above and a XO at 500 hz max.
Too huge cabinet for the living room condo (peace of the household)
The Faital 12PR320 if used sealed will be a big two way with subjective pratt/slam because its size and the emphasis iin the 80/200 Hz. It is cool driver because it has the SPL/2.83V for easy EQ between 92 to 90 dB in that range up to its Fs (if vented, less below 70 Hz if sealed : according the room size, can be good or not enough)
Vented, a netto good targett is something between 75 L to 110 liters, I would use a SC4 if I had to go vented.
For a two ways, thinks about a FR driver above and a XO at 500 hz max.
Last edited:
The 12PR320 gives a f6 of 40hz and I really want to get a bit more bottom end so for a 2-way I feel it's fs is to high. I like closed boxes but I haven't found a 12" that will go low enough with sufficient SPL in a sealed box. The original idea was a 15" 2-way but those are simply to big for my space.
Just tune the Fb lower and give to it some EQ if needed or place closer to walls etc.
You didn't find it because it doesn't exist it is either low Fs or efficienty, you can not have it all.
40 Hz F6 can be ok according the room (20 square meter max ? and the distance & room mode), cause the higher Sd that givs the subjective pratt where you need to : the snap of the drums is more in the 80/150 hz vinicity. I think this is what T Gravsen refers too with the big Sd of pro drivers and high Fs used for hifi at home spl level.
If you want flatter down to 40 Hz, the 12RS340 is a better bet, but it hasn't the free fraim bottom of the littleneodynium magnet the 12PR320. The price to pay is 90 dB at 100 hz in spite of 94 dBbetween the two drivers. Consequence is the 90 dB is 10 Hz lower Fs.
The guys that have constructed Mbrenwa member 's Monkey coffin project. (OSMC thread) seems not to complain by a lake of bass (it is 77 liters cabinet iirc; vented).
Notice, the real Vas of the 12PR340 is 115 liters since 2022; it changes nothing though, but it is if you sim cabinets.
40 Hz F6 can be ok according the room (20 square meter max ? and the distance & room mode), cause the higher Sd that givs the subjective pratt where you need to : the snap of the drums is more in the 80/150 hz vinicity. I think this is what T Gravsen refers too with the big Sd of pro drivers and high Fs used for hifi at home spl level.
If you want flatter down to 40 Hz, the 12RS340 is a better bet, but it hasn't the free fraim bottom of the littleneodynium magnet the 12PR320. The price to pay is 90 dB at 100 hz in spite of 94 dBbetween the two drivers. Consequence is the 90 dB is 10 Hz lower Fs.
The guys that have constructed Mbrenwa member 's Monkey coffin project. (OSMC thread) seems not to complain by a lake of bass (it is 77 liters cabinet iirc; vented).
Notice, the real Vas of the 12PR340 is 115 liters since 2022; it changes nothing though, but it is if you sim cabinets.
in the corner, it could make a 90° horned mid-wood and loudspeaker à la Pi Loudspeakers ! Can be confortable for the baflestep management as well
Room is around 40m2 and at least 1 speaker is not in a corner. Efficiency is important but not that important. I'm powering it with a to be determined class D amp so plenty of watts available. A good chunk of what I listen to is dub/reggae so bass is important. I heard the 12PR320 in the Mezzo Calpamos speakers and I thought it sounded a bit lean in the bottom end. Could have been the room or the XO though.