I am looking for a bass solution, that would blend well with the horn system I am building. The system extends down to 160hz with a 1 metre mouth upperbass horn but below that I am looking for a solution. I can have it work down to 100hz and I have a tapped horn but I do not want it to work up to 100hz and I don't want the upperbass horn to work down to its cf. This is quite a no compromise system for me, so I don't want phasing, group delay problems. I don't like how the tapped sounds after 80hz either. If having a viable solution from 30hz is too hard, I can have something between 60hz - 160hz and still use my tapped. Whatever the solution, it needs to be at least 104db efficient.
Do you mean each of them sealed within their chambers within a box, or multi units in one single sealed box.
What kind of qualities in a woofer one should look for, for this application.
Also, what do you think about mixing radiators and horns. What would be the potential advantages and disadvantages.
What kind of qualities in a woofer one should look for, for this application.
Also, what do you think about mixing radiators and horns. What would be the potential advantages and disadvantages.
http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g196/dkleitsch/CoePA-2009.jpg
These are 104dB/2.83V/1M, -3dB 29hz~32hz depending on the drivers used (one box). Easy to build. Useable to 250hz, but I usually cross at 150hz.
http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g196/dkleitsch/Eminence151269.gif
The 30hz version is 24H x 30D x 36W
The 35hz version is 24H x 24D X 32W (cut list available)
A 2 cu ft 2nd order sealed box with an F3 of 30hz can only be 0.18% efficient (84.55dB).
A 2 cu ft 4th order vented box with an F3 of 30hz can only be 0.36% efficient (87.56dB).
A 2 cu ft 6th order vented box with an F3 of 30hz can only be 0.90% efficient (91.54dB).
These are 6th order vented.
The slot loading reduces 2nd and 4th harmonics and sound like a servo sub.
These are 104dB/2.83V/1M, -3dB 29hz~32hz depending on the drivers used (one box). Easy to build. Useable to 250hz, but I usually cross at 150hz.
http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g196/dkleitsch/Eminence151269.gif
The 30hz version is 24H x 30D x 36W
The 35hz version is 24H x 24D X 32W (cut list available)
A 2 cu ft 2nd order sealed box with an F3 of 30hz can only be 0.18% efficient (84.55dB).
A 2 cu ft 4th order vented box with an F3 of 30hz can only be 0.36% efficient (87.56dB).
A 2 cu ft 6th order vented box with an F3 of 30hz can only be 0.90% efficient (91.54dB).
These are 6th order vented.
The slot loading reduces 2nd and 4th harmonics and sound like a servo sub.
I have a problem with vents and ports. Since I became audibly aware of ports years and years ago at a music studio on a monitor, I can not stop hearing them. Even at my music studio, my adam audio monitors have become problematic for me.
I tried blind tests and thought it was because of bad implementations but out of all of the designs I heard, I can hear the vents and ports and that distracts me. I tried stuff with vents at the back, downfiring vents etc. I have not heard this design but I am afraid to try. I can go for sealed but then it seems I will need many cabs to reach the efficiency I look for.
I tried blind tests and thought it was because of bad implementations but out of all of the designs I heard, I can hear the vents and ports and that distracts me. I tried stuff with vents at the back, downfiring vents etc. I have not heard this design but I am afraid to try. I can go for sealed but then it seems I will need many cabs to reach the efficiency I look for.
Some folks prefer to put them in individual chambers, but most don't, so your call.
I use to run dual Altec 515B in 40 Hz tuned MLTL rear chamber 70 Hz corner loaded FLHs, which were almost 112 dB eff, but was forced into a 'fire sale' back in 2k, leaving me with just my 16 Hz tuned MLTL dual 515B 'subs' to cover all the way up to 500 Hz and even after shelving down the HF horns to 'just' ~104 dB eff. I found I preferred its more 'open' upper bass/lower mids, so have lost all interest in replacing them unless it's a from scratch system with a ~'full-range' Synergy concept + true sub system, which will probably be a multiple driver IB now that enough movies have significant output to <10 Hz to justify the cost.
Driver wise, the 515B is way 'overkill' for your app since all you really need is a driver that is nominally flat from ~30-320 Hz with a <0.5 Qts [or whatever your mids horn Qt is] tuned to a transient 'perfect' 0.5 Qtc.
GM
I use to run dual Altec 515B in 40 Hz tuned MLTL rear chamber 70 Hz corner loaded FLHs, which were almost 112 dB eff, but was forced into a 'fire sale' back in 2k, leaving me with just my 16 Hz tuned MLTL dual 515B 'subs' to cover all the way up to 500 Hz and even after shelving down the HF horns to 'just' ~104 dB eff. I found I preferred its more 'open' upper bass/lower mids, so have lost all interest in replacing them unless it's a from scratch system with a ~'full-range' Synergy concept + true sub system, which will probably be a multiple driver IB now that enough movies have significant output to <10 Hz to justify the cost.
Driver wise, the 515B is way 'overkill' for your app since all you really need is a driver that is nominally flat from ~30-320 Hz with a <0.5 Qts [or whatever your mids horn Qt is] tuned to a transient 'perfect' 0.5 Qtc.
GM
No such thing as a no-compromise system, esp. with a lot of preconceived constraints. Aside from ESLs, cone speakers are highly "compromised" to start with, so just a matter of choosing the compromises you like best.
Having lived with a Klipschorn bass for nearly 50 years, I can say there are problems of time alignment that can't be easily addressed. But a sophisticated buddy at Bell Labs with a pair added a pair of large sealed boxes as his best notion of what matches them best at the bottom end.
I'd say the main principle to observe is to keep crossover points out of range of where the musical action is happening. So the lower the better.
Another issue is localization. Theorists will tell you to crossover to a mixed bass sub at 70 Hz or bellow. People (like me) who have used mixed bass with a single sub say 140 Hz works fine for music, if the filter slope is sharp.
Ben
Having lived with a Klipschorn bass for nearly 50 years, I can say there are problems of time alignment that can't be easily addressed. But a sophisticated buddy at Bell Labs with a pair added a pair of large sealed boxes as his best notion of what matches them best at the bottom end.
I'd say the main principle to observe is to keep crossover points out of range of where the musical action is happening. So the lower the better.
Another issue is localization. Theorists will tell you to crossover to a mixed bass sub at 70 Hz or bellow. People (like me) who have used mixed bass with a single sub say 140 Hz works fine for music, if the filter slope is sharp.
Ben
When I say this is quite a no compromise system for me, it is what I mean by that. Of course there are no ideal solutions, I am aware of that 🙂
I have a klipschorn as well and I like its bass too. Through the years, I changed its woofer, its crossovers, its midrange horns, its midrange drivers and its tweeters. So it is not a Klipschorn except the bass bins. I think its the best and most important part of that design. The time delay issue is problematic, but can be remedied with digital delay. I cross my khorns bass around 350hz, which also sounds better and less problematic than crossing it between 400-500hz. To do that, I got bigger midrange horns, than built even bigger ones. Got cd's that can go that low. Changed the crossovers etc.
However in my new horn system. I am trying not to have the problems of the klipschorn system. I will have other problems with this new design for sure but less hopefully or stuff that will not be relevant to my listening space or preferences.
This new system will not have time alignment issues, horns work in less than 3 octaves per channel, no group delay issues trying to reach cf of the horns etc. These are the problems I wont have, this is what I mean by quite a no compromise system. There is the height and lobing problem but I can listen from far enough so it is not an audible problem anymore. Better suited for me 🙂
I don't know about theorists but I can locate any bass source over 110-120hz with ease. I don't know if it is because I used to be a musician or worked in music production, sound design or whatever but I do. Just like I can hear ports or phasing or comb filtering.
Here you can see the 4 channels I have designed from 160hz to 45khz. I have the tapped horn for 20-60hz as well. So I am missing 60 to 160hz. As you can see I can operate the tapped to 90-100 and the upperbass 1metre tractrix down to 90-100hz. It would be a compromise I dont want to do.
I have a klipschorn as well and I like its bass too. Through the years, I changed its woofer, its crossovers, its midrange horns, its midrange drivers and its tweeters. So it is not a Klipschorn except the bass bins. I think its the best and most important part of that design. The time delay issue is problematic, but can be remedied with digital delay. I cross my khorns bass around 350hz, which also sounds better and less problematic than crossing it between 400-500hz. To do that, I got bigger midrange horns, than built even bigger ones. Got cd's that can go that low. Changed the crossovers etc.
However in my new horn system. I am trying not to have the problems of the klipschorn system. I will have other problems with this new design for sure but less hopefully or stuff that will not be relevant to my listening space or preferences.
This new system will not have time alignment issues, horns work in less than 3 octaves per channel, no group delay issues trying to reach cf of the horns etc. These are the problems I wont have, this is what I mean by quite a no compromise system. There is the height and lobing problem but I can listen from far enough so it is not an audible problem anymore. Better suited for me 🙂
I don't know about theorists but I can locate any bass source over 110-120hz with ease. I don't know if it is because I used to be a musician or worked in music production, sound design or whatever but I do. Just like I can hear ports or phasing or comb filtering.
Here you can see the 4 channels I have designed from 160hz to 45khz. I have the tapped horn for 20-60hz as well. So I am missing 60 to 160hz. As you can see I can operate the tapped to 90-100 and the upperbass 1metre tractrix down to 90-100hz. It would be a compromise I dont want to do.
Attachments
If it affects any design decisions you'll be making, wise to document your perceptual limits with objective blind testing.
Nice that you've modified the Klipschorns. The only aspect I'm enthusiastic about it the way the bass horn fills a room with glorious clean bass in the lower range.
Ben
Yes, for sure bentoronto 🙂 However, having an accurate blind test is as hard as designing speakers. There are so many physical parameters that may effect the judgement... Still, I do the best I can do. So I can hear the stuff I wrote above with blind tests. I can hear different quality digital file formats up to flac. Still I prefer dsd's. Although with blind tests it is a hit and miss judging. In our blind tests we even played the same setup over and over and noticed people prefer some to others although it is exactly the same.
Hi komodo,
Have you looked @ bass horns like the University Classic/Dean or the Klipsch Jubilee? They were either designed for dual 12" drivers (Klipsch), or there were models w/ dual 12" out there. You might want to google, or take a look @ these:
https://community.klipsch.com/index...-ideas-again-a-possible-build-need-criticism/
https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/61335-university-classic-corner-plans/
https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/146927-the-rebirth-of-the-university-classics/
Regards,
Have you looked @ bass horns like the University Classic/Dean or the Klipsch Jubilee? They were either designed for dual 12" drivers (Klipsch), or there were models w/ dual 12" out there. You might want to google, or take a look @ these:
https://community.klipsch.com/index...-ideas-again-a-possible-build-need-criticism/
https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/61335-university-classic-corner-plans/
https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/146927-the-rebirth-of-the-university-classics/
Regards,
Thank you tb46. I am aware of these designs as I am also on the klipsch forum. I also have the klipschorn. Jubilee is not much different sounding that I would build it. It wont be needing a corner but matching the rest of the system and placement would not work.
NEO Dan, it would be a huge horn that I can not place in my house. 110hz tractrix is the biggest I can get 🙂
I am looking into how Cessaro, Avantgarde, Hornfabrik and other similar companies are solving it. They all employ upperbass horns as big or a little smaller than mine.
NEO Dan, it would be a huge horn that I can not place in my house. 110hz tractrix is the biggest I can get 🙂
I am looking into how Cessaro, Avantgarde, Hornfabrik and other similar companies are solving it. They all employ upperbass horns as big or a little smaller than mine.
This fits perfectly to my needs as well
105db efficient, 25hz to 200hz
Funktion-One | Products | F218 Mk2
105db efficient, 25hz to 200hz
Funktion-One | Products | F218 Mk2
That is good enough for me as this is for music. The problem here is finding a suitable amp. Their amps only get line level inputs. I will only have high level outputs.
Best I could find is hypex ds 4.0, which has high level inputs, crossover but is only 400watts. Although I think, 400 watts would be more than enough at home, as it is rated 105db.
Best I could find is hypex ds 4.0, which has high level inputs, crossover but is only 400watts. Although I think, 400 watts would be more than enough at home, as it is rated 105db.
A related question.
Have you ever heard an SBB4 alignment?
They have the best transient response of any of the vented alignments.
The 6th order B6 is an SBB4 with a two-pole high-pass filter at Fb (Qts=0.312).
The SBB4 response looks about the same as the D2 (sealed box with Qtc=0.577 for best transient response), as does the phase.
A proper B6 sounds very different than a run-of-the-mill vented box.
Have you ever heard an SBB4 alignment?
They have the best transient response of any of the vented alignments.
The 6th order B6 is an SBB4 with a two-pole high-pass filter at Fb (Qts=0.312).
The SBB4 response looks about the same as the D2 (sealed box with Qtc=0.577 for best transient response), as does the phase.
A proper B6 sounds very different than a run-of-the-mill vented box.
The topics have merged for me. I have a topic at multi way forum, where I discuss the whole system. I think I should not create too much clutter. If you want we can continue at that topic. http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/266064-full-range-5-way-horn-project-15.html
I am now looking into building mtb 246 bassbins with 2 18" RCF drivers each. It is a hybrid cab. It looks like a very good solution for me.
I am now looking into building mtb 246 bassbins with 2 18" RCF drivers each. It is a hybrid cab. It looks like a very good solution for me.
Attachments
Hi kodomo,
Post #5: "I have a problem with vents and ports..."
Post #18: "... looking into building mtb 246 bassbins..."
To me the MTB-246 is on paper clearly inferior to djk's PPSL:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/subwoofers/177905-thread-those-interested-ppsl-enclosures.html
The MTB-246 is vented w/ a shared center port that is too small to do any good at the low end, and too large not to have audible consequences in the passband, and you have two not very well executed ports.
If you are trying to get away from ported/vented designs maybe take another look @ the University Classic/Dean projects.
Anyway, best of luck w/ your project.
Regards,
Post #5: "I have a problem with vents and ports..."
Post #18: "... looking into building mtb 246 bassbins..."
To me the MTB-246 is on paper clearly inferior to djk's PPSL:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/subwoofers/177905-thread-those-interested-ppsl-enclosures.html
The MTB-246 is vented w/ a shared center port that is too small to do any good at the low end, and too large not to have audible consequences in the passband, and you have two not very well executed ports.
If you are trying to get away from ported/vented designs maybe take another look @ the University Classic/Dean projects.
Anyway, best of luck w/ your project.
Regards,
- Status
- Not open for further replies.