B20 missing from PE catalog

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#43
Godzilla said:
the GRS does not have the same balls as the B20
Click to expand...

Hi Godzilla,

To make it a fair fight, we should keep the Qtc constant, rather than volume. But at Qtc .707, it looks like the B20 has an F3 of ~60Hz vs. ~69Hz for the GRS. The box for the GRS is bigger. Anyway, the result isn't much different from the graph.

But if you use series resistance to raise the GRS Qts to .5, it looks like the F3 drops to ~55Hz (box is bigger though).

GRS: Fs: 39 Hz, Qts: 0.40, Vas: 2.26 cu. ft. (~64 liters)
B20: Fs: 43 Hz, Qts: .51, Vas: 1.75 cu. ft. (~50 liters)
 
#44
>>> f3 going from 60 to 120 would be an octave. 60 to 70 is much less.

My bad, thank you.

I kept the boxes the same size to see how closely they'd match up as a replacement for the B20... yes, we should look at this new driver as something different entirely and take advantage of its strengths. I think the GRS can be used successfully in a project for sure. But it doesn't have the B20s tone or natural sound imo. It does have a nice midrange tho and that's why i believe it's not a total waste.

GM, lol, just because it sounds thin compared to the B20 doesn't mean it's unusable. But maybe you might consider a 4" Tangband instead. I think an 8" should have some grunt.
 
#46
Godzilla said:
GM, lol, just because it sounds thin compared to the B20 doesn't mean it's unusable.

But it doesn't have the B20s tone or natural sound imo.

It sounds a bit strained at higher volume too.
Click to expand...

Didn't say it was, but I need them to be tonally alike and while adjusting box alignment can average out any LF differences it won't solve its tonal differences and apparent mids/HF power handling deficiencies.

GM
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom