I'm in the planning stages of building an fully active 3 way system using the Seas L18/27TBFCG as the mid and tweeter. I've been using this in an active two-way tower system currently, and I love the mid to high range response. I feel the low end is a bit unstable however and could benefit from a larger driver.
In the interest of keeping it wife friendly, I'd like to continue with the metal driver motif and to re-use my current drivers to reduce the cost. I think a 10" driver would best suit my needs, but I'm having trouble deciding between the L26RFX/P and L26RO4Y.
In either case, I'd like to use a sealed design, as I like tight accurate bass. I think I would use two drivers per side for the RFXP and a single RO4Y. Obviously the RFXP would require a fairly monstrous box (100L or so) compared to a 20L sealed box for the RO4Y. But I'm willing to build a big box if it will give me good sound.
I don't listen to my music too loud, so I don't think the XMAX will be a huge issue. Does anyone have experience with either? I'm interested to know how responsive the RO4Y is particularly. I think it'd be crossed over between 200-250Hz.
I'd be powering the woofers with an Emotiva UPA-2, which would output 185W RMS at 4ohm per channel. I think that would be enough for my listening volumes.
In the interest of keeping it wife friendly, I'd like to continue with the metal driver motif and to re-use my current drivers to reduce the cost. I think a 10" driver would best suit my needs, but I'm having trouble deciding between the L26RFX/P and L26RO4Y.
In either case, I'd like to use a sealed design, as I like tight accurate bass. I think I would use two drivers per side for the RFXP and a single RO4Y. Obviously the RFXP would require a fairly monstrous box (100L or so) compared to a 20L sealed box for the RO4Y. But I'm willing to build a big box if it will give me good sound.
I don't listen to my music too loud, so I don't think the XMAX will be a huge issue. Does anyone have experience with either? I'm interested to know how responsive the RO4Y is particularly. I think it'd be crossed over between 200-250Hz.
I'd be powering the woofers with an Emotiva UPA-2, which would output 185W RMS at 4ohm per channel. I think that would be enough for my listening volumes.
There is a stack-able system thats been copied a fair bit but I no longer have the link and the name fails me, its been over a year. Im sure someone else knows the one Im talking about and can shine some light there.
Or consider deeper cabs with side mounted 10s to keep baffles trim.
I have been more fond of closed boxes the past couple of years and running closed 3 way mains along with 4 closed subs, the bass is phenomenal. Recently I acquired some 3 way frontal ported speakers, I was hesitant to actually get them at first but im VERY happy I did. The bass response is tight and accurate, sounds natural and effortless. Its doing all the things I seeked sealed boxes out for in the first place. It just takes the right open box set up. I had all but given up on open full size full ranges.
Or consider deeper cabs with side mounted 10s to keep baffles trim.
I have been more fond of closed boxes the past couple of years and running closed 3 way mains along with 4 closed subs, the bass is phenomenal. Recently I acquired some 3 way frontal ported speakers, I was hesitant to actually get them at first but im VERY happy I did. The bass response is tight and accurate, sounds natural and effortless. Its doing all the things I seeked sealed boxes out for in the first place. It just takes the right open box set up. I had all but given up on open full size full ranges.
Last edited:
I'd be interested to know the system you mention if you can remember th ename.
I've debated the side mounting, but I don't think I can get my system far enough away from the walls for it to work well. I've got a fairly large media cabinet in the middle, so they can't face inwards either.
Doing a front port and single 10" driver would be somewhat easier, but I'd want to make sure my modelling was spot on. What were the driver sizes in the 3 way system you were looking at?
I've debated the side mounting, but I don't think I can get my system far enough away from the walls for it to work well. I've got a fairly large media cabinet in the middle, so they can't face inwards either.
Doing a front port and single 10" driver would be somewhat easier, but I'd want to make sure my modelling was spot on. What were the driver sizes in the 3 way system you were looking at?
I had it saved on a retired pc, it was the Tarkus I was thinking of. Have a look here https://sites.google.com/site/undefinition/tarkus There are some nice twists off the original design too.
This is another large 3 way system I liked enough to save Zaph|Audio - SB12.3 3-Way Tower
This is another large 3 way system I liked enough to save Zaph|Audio - SB12.3 3-Way Tower
I had a single unit of both the L26RFX and the Scanspeak 26W/4534 and preferred the second. Its breakup is lower in frequency but was somewhat milder, probably due to the fiberglass dust cap and its damping glue, works into a smaller box and has a massive shorting ring close to the back plate, that would matter, of course, if you plan on using it into the higher bass. I did use it 2nd order active at 85hz without a notch. You can null the cone resonance of both but there`s a catch - this will reduce even further their offaxis response and while the electrical signal can be tweaked to address the cone breakup, it can still be excited by acoustic energy from the upper two units when playing the right frequency. I would choose the one with the lowest and most narrowly distributed resonance.
If you want sealed performance but from a smaller box, you can do a trick - use the driver in a box 2.5-3 times lower than its Vas and tune the port under the Fs. The port contribution will be characterized by almost two octaves, flat and low in magnitude compared to the main driver. The transient response is close to that of a sealed box with Qtc of 0.707, group delay would be slightly higher ( 25-30% that of a sealed box < 60Hz and slightly higher than a properly designed ported box in the 60-90Hz region ) and the port will control your cone down to below the lowest notes ( excl. pipe organs ) allowing for reduced distortion and greater power intake. Its also slightly more efficient. I did this recently on a project I`m working on and it seems to do the trick.
The Scan is also cheaper so a bonus bang 🙂
If you want sealed performance but from a smaller box, you can do a trick - use the driver in a box 2.5-3 times lower than its Vas and tune the port under the Fs. The port contribution will be characterized by almost two octaves, flat and low in magnitude compared to the main driver. The transient response is close to that of a sealed box with Qtc of 0.707, group delay would be slightly higher ( 25-30% that of a sealed box < 60Hz and slightly higher than a properly designed ported box in the 60-90Hz region ) and the port will control your cone down to below the lowest notes ( excl. pipe organs ) allowing for reduced distortion and greater power intake. Its also slightly more efficient. I did this recently on a project I`m working on and it seems to do the trick.
The Scan is also cheaper so a bonus bang 🙂
Last edited:
Interesting trick, but the Vas of the L26 div by 3, is still 57L for a single unit. That'd still put me at 114L for a dual woofer cab. I suppose I might not need dual woofers at that point.
I'd probably be crossing it over from 200-250Hz, maybe a bit less if I went with the L26RO4Y. I hadn't considered how the upper two units would affect the breakup. That might be able to be reduced by heavily damping the cabinet.
How would you describe the sound of the Seas unit?
Thanks for the info by the way!
I'd probably be crossing it over from 200-250Hz, maybe a bit less if I went with the L26RO4Y. I hadn't considered how the upper two units would affect the breakup. That might be able to be reduced by heavily damping the cabinet.
How would you describe the sound of the Seas unit?
Thanks for the info by the way!
tale of 2 seas
Greetings !
Difficult choice. One is a woofer driver; the other is a sub-woofer driver.
Here is a site that carries the units:
Enclosure suggestions: ( L26RFX/P )
Sealed box - not recommended
Vented box of 2.5 cubic feet with a 3" diameter vent by 10" long for an F3 of 32Hz.
https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.c...stige-l26rfx/p-h1209-10-aluminum-cone-woofer/
https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.c...eas-l26ro4y-10-subwoofer-4-layer-vc-d1004-04/
Greetings !
Difficult choice. One is a woofer driver; the other is a sub-woofer driver.
Here is a site that carries the units:
Enclosure suggestions: ( L26RFX/P )
Sealed box - not recommended
Vented box of 2.5 cubic feet with a 3" diameter vent by 10" long for an F3 of 32Hz.
https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.c...stige-l26rfx/p-h1209-10-aluminum-cone-woofer/
https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.c...eas-l26ro4y-10-subwoofer-4-layer-vc-d1004-04/
Yeah, they are a bit different, but I was recommended the L206RO4Y by a Seas representative as an alternative to the L26RFXP. I've heard the L26RFXP referred to as a musical woofer in terms of character, and I'm wondering if the RO4Y would be a like for like substitution.
The reason, as far as I can see, why the L26RFXP is not recommended for a sealed box is due to it's limited Xxmax. My thought was that in a dual woofer design, I would be able to get the volume I would need without running into the xmax.
I guess the question comes down to, what would perform better to 250Hz in a sealed box with respect to transient response? And if anyone had any direct experience comparing them?
The reason, as far as I can see, why the L26RFXP is not recommended for a sealed box is due to it's limited Xxmax. My thought was that in a dual woofer design, I would be able to get the volume I would need without running into the xmax.
I guess the question comes down to, what would perform better to 250Hz in a sealed box with respect to transient response? And if anyone had any direct experience comparing them?
Since this is an active speaker, you can simply use a sealed box of any size (ie., too small volume) and then equalise the bass in the filter to flat response down to any (reasonably) low cutoff frequency. Just Google for "Linkwitz transform". All that matters here is large Xmax, so take the woofer with more Xmax.
BTW I have two of these for sale in excellent condition
SEAS Prestige L26RFX/P (H1209) 10" Aluminum Cone Woofer
They do not do well in a sealed box. In a 2-2.5f3 vented box they sound very nice.
I my self ended up going with AE 10s 2 woofers per side in a 2f3 sealed box and they sound amazing
SEAS Prestige L26RFX/P (H1209) 10" Aluminum Cone Woofer
They do not do well in a sealed box. In a 2-2.5f3 vented box they sound very nice.
I my self ended up going with AE 10s 2 woofers per side in a 2f3 sealed box and they sound amazing
SEAS L26ROY in 30 liter (wrong volume in picture text) sealed box, nearfield measurement. Not just a subwoofer!
Attachments
Last edited:
Juhazi: Dayum, the L26ROY has a flat response, looks like it has mildly better sensitivity as well. It might be a bit better suited to what I'm looking at compared to the L26RO4Y.
How do you find the transient response in the sealed 30L box? i.e. is the bass still quite tight and punchy? As well, how much power are you giving it in your active setup?
rezn00: How much are you selling the L26RXFP's for? I'm starting to seriously consider a front ported 3 way design with just a single woofer per side. It'd definitely be easier to implement than dual woofers.
How do you find the transient response in the sealed 30L box? i.e. is the bass still quite tight and punchy? As well, how much power are you giving it in your active setup?
rezn00: How much are you selling the L26RXFP's for? I'm starting to seriously consider a front ported 3 way design with just a single woofer per side. It'd definitely be easier to implement than dual woofers.
^and ^^ My measurement does not have standard voltage/dB. Yes this is the older version, not RO4Y. The 4 should have even better low extension but perhaps also higher distortion there. Th unit is downfire and the wiggles at 600-800Hz come from this setup. The factory datasheet response is reliable.
I use "Linkwitz transform" -way equalization in my active system. These are very strong units and can take loads of power, very well suited for active 3/4-way systems and subwoofer usage!
I use "Linkwitz transform" -way equalization in my active system. These are very strong units and can take loads of power, very well suited for active 3/4-way systems and subwoofer usage!
Last edited:
That depends entirely on the way you use it. I haven`t measured the alu Seas and it was used as a subwoofer, but below you can see a short test of it.
Seas L26 RFX/P
RFX/P has phase plug, that is main reason why it is not usable in a sealed cab.
If we are talkin mainly frequencies below 300Hz, I wonder if there is any difrence in "musicality" between these two. ROY has stiffer cone, less resonances.
If we are talkin mainly frequencies below 300Hz, I wonder if there is any difrence in "musicality" between these two. ROY has stiffer cone, less resonances.
I thought the limited xmax would have been the reason for it not working well in a sealed box, hmm.
Would the phase plug really even be offering much for these lower frequencies? I thought it was to reduce resonance at higher frequencies. The best part about it in my case would be that it would keep the system looking consistent and thus increase my wife acceptance factor 🙂
Would the phase plug really even be offering much for these lower frequencies? I thought it was to reduce resonance at higher frequencies. The best part about it in my case would be that it would keep the system looking consistent and thus increase my wife acceptance factor 🙂
No. The suitability for closed box tuning is mostly related to the Qts (Qts > 0.3 is typically assumed for this). However, you don't need that if you can include a Linkwitz transform in your active filter.
If a Linkwitz transform is possible in your case (why wouldn't it?), look for high Xmax (so you can take the equalisation down to a low cut off frequency) and high Qms (low mechanical losses).
Maybe. The lack of a dustcap improves ventilation of the voice coil / magnet gap, which reduces mechanical losses and helps cooling the voice coil.
However, looking at the data sheets of the two Seas drivers you mentioned, the ROY has higher Qms (lower losses).
Last edited:
Here some good advice from SEAS about using RO(4)Y as a woofer in active speaker
http://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/pdf/KingRO4Y Kit.pdf
http://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/pdf/KingRO4Y Kit.pdf
Thanks for the information mbrennwa. I need to spend some more time understanding the Thiele-Smalls parameters and how that affects enclosure design, even if I can EQ out most effects with an active setup.
I think my initial idea of dual L26's in a closed cabinet is over. It's just not suited to the drivers and unnecessary.
Now I need to decide if I want to use a smaller sealed cabinet with a RO4Y or a larger cabinet with the cheaper L26 in a bass reflex design.
I think my initial idea of dual L26's in a closed cabinet is over. It's just not suited to the drivers and unnecessary.
Now I need to decide if I want to use a smaller sealed cabinet with a RO4Y or a larger cabinet with the cheaper L26 in a bass reflex design.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.