@tubelectron
Thanks. I might leave it like this. But the dsp eq is a mess. Change on change. Started wrong with two 2x4 mini's. I'm thinking to get a mini flex 8. Use the digital connection with my sacd. Bluetooth for streaming. And perhaps an analogue digital converter for the occasional wired analogue connection.
As far as I see the flex 8 can still eq down to 10hz.
Thanks. I might leave it like this. But the dsp eq is a mess. Change on change. Started wrong with two 2x4 mini's. I'm thinking to get a mini flex 8. Use the digital connection with my sacd. Bluetooth for streaming. And perhaps an analogue digital converter for the occasional wired analogue connection.
As far as I see the flex 8 can still eq down to 10hz.
Just a short question about modelling ripole subs in Hornresp. Im playing with the thought of using my 15 inch Bianco's in a ripole. When I use Hornresp it halves the impedance of the driver. Can anyone explain why this is the case and do I need to keep this in mind when I use two drivers in parallel?
When you use two drivers, the options are half (P) or double (S).
You make the choice to accommodate the amplifier(s) you plan to use to drive the load(s).
Hello,
What do you think of that specs, please : Faital 12PR320 ? good enough for a ripole 35 Hz to 150 Hz (or less if resonances) with two units like @CharlieM sub?
Qts 0.38/0.4 / 92/93dB/2.83V at 100 hz / Xmax 7.5 mm / Fs: 45 Hz / Qms : 7.8 / EBP :108. : this is the more real numbers VS the datasheet
Thanks
]
What do you think of that specs, please : Faital 12PR320 ? good enough for a ripole 35 Hz to 150 Hz (or less if resonances) with two units like @CharlieM sub?
Qts 0.38/0.4 / 92/93dB/2.83V at 100 hz / Xmax 7.5 mm / Fs: 45 Hz / Qms : 7.8 / EBP :108. : this is the more real numbers VS the datasheet
Thanks
| Haut parleur à cône |
| Faital Pro |
| 12PR320 |
| 03004279 |
| 8 ohm |
| 31.7 cm |
| Sub, Grave, Bas médium |
| 97 dB |
| 94.4 dB |
| 300 W |
| 45÷5000 Hz |
| 489 cm² |
| 51.4 gr |
| 0.67 mH |
| 5.3 ohm |
| 13.5 T.m |
| 42 Hz |
| 0.39 |
| 7.8 |
| 0.37 |
| 94.8 L |
| 1.2 T |
| ±7.37 mm |
| ±7.37 mm |
| 108 Hz |
| 6.4 ohm |
| 114 Hz |
| 12.98 L |
| 1.73 % |
| 1.73 % |
| ~2.8 kg |
| 2.56 pouce |
| 17.4 mm |
| 8 mm |
| 316 mm |
| 282 mm |
| 10.6 mm |
| 109.4 mm |
| 95 mm |
Last edited:
Peerless 830845 seems like a solid choice too, right? Parameters seem to vary but Peerless mentions Fs 29 Hz, Qts 0.65, Xmax 15.2mm.
Thanks @tubelectron , @jaakkopetteri
Yup, but I have already two 12PR320, that's why I ask. I have a doubt because the Qts is <= 0.40. I don't need too much low end < 35 Hz (no electronic music or organ, no HT).
The Mms is ligth so okay, Qms is within the highisch numbers, so okay. I just fear about too much drop, no flat spl because of the low Qts. I know the number wished is something Qts 0.5 to 0.6. But I wondered if some lived with a ripole with drivers at 0.4 Qts.
But I should no go over 100 Hz stiff low pass (+ resonance notched), rigth. I'd want to stay passive for the proof of concept in my room. But don't want to cut wood if the idea is bad because the Qts or spl curve of those units (it is a PA midwoofer, not a bass unit really).
H frame has as much resonance if I understood well enough for a 12" if the chambers are more than 15 cm, and less low end extension, rigth ?
Yup, but I have already two 12PR320, that's why I ask. I have a doubt because the Qts is <= 0.40. I don't need too much low end < 35 Hz (no electronic music or organ, no HT).
The Mms is ligth so okay, Qms is within the highisch numbers, so okay. I just fear about too much drop, no flat spl because of the low Qts. I know the number wished is something Qts 0.5 to 0.6. But I wondered if some lived with a ripole with drivers at 0.4 Qts.
But I should no go over 100 Hz stiff low pass (+ resonance notched), rigth. I'd want to stay passive for the proof of concept in my room. But don't want to cut wood if the idea is bad because the Qts or spl curve of those units (it is a PA midwoofer, not a bass unit really).
H frame has as much resonance if I understood well enough for a 12" if the chambers are more than 15 cm, and less low end extension, rigth ?
I have not tried them in dipole. I bougth them for an OSMC like but don't want to go in a BR with highish tunning. So I keep them for either a dipole mid 100 hz to 400/600 Hz like @Juhazi in a futur where I have more time. Or make a H frame or Ripole with tunelled rear open 2 NE149W-08 like in the Finalist loudspeaker, so something opened...
I like a lot the tower above in this thread with the two mono ripole stacked ! 🙂
Edit : if I am using the 12pr320 in uper midbass dipole w/o frame, I certainly try both a sealed <100 hz with a poper T&S driver for the task, and cheaper 50 euros driver rith 0.5/0.6 Qts and >= 40 Hz Fs to try the bass ripole or H frame way. It is a little mysterious for me than open bass for the moment... But seems something clever if you live in a flat.
I like a lot the tower above in this thread with the two mono ripole stacked ! 🙂
Edit : if I am using the 12pr320 in uper midbass dipole w/o frame, I certainly try both a sealed <100 hz with a poper T&S driver for the task, and cheaper 50 euros driver rith 0.5/0.6 Qts and >= 40 Hz Fs to try the bass ripole or H frame way. It is a little mysterious for me than open bass for the moment... But seems something clever if you live in a flat.
Last edited:
Why don't you simulate in hornresp and check? May be compare against the venerable 12" Peerless SLS optimal sims in relative terms?
Last edited:
I see @diyiggy. Well, if I was you, I would make a test with a quick-made, unfinished Ripole enclosure of the suitable size, just to check if :
- the speakers that you already have do the job as you expect (bass extension, Xmax vs. your listening level).
- a passive LPF is convenient for you plan to do (FC, slope, acceptable level attenuation).
I really have no complaint to make about the Beyma 12BR70 : affordable, consistent, ruggered and reliable.
They perfectly do the job in my Omega Ripole :
That said, I do not listen to HT effects at high level of loudness. If it was the case, I would have shifted to 15" or 18" speakers, or a Bass-Reflex enclosure... What I wanted is that deep, floating infra-bass extension suitable to notably reproduce Space Ambient EM, like this, for example :
And my compact (400x400x440mm) Omega Ripole is simply perfect... It combines extremely well with my Magnepan SMGb, naturally extending their bass.
I also choose the Beyma 12BR70 for my 475L ISOBARIC sealed enclosures, where they prove to be fine Woofers too :
T
Yes. That's exactly what for a Ripole is designed : that deep, floating infra bass tones... One of my good Audio Friends was seduced by the Ripole principle, after listening to my small 2x12" Omega Ripole. He buid a pair of 2x18" D-Ripoles :
And yes, he also cuts them at 24dB/Oct / 60Hz.
T
I am so excited as I listen more. I was building this for the planned music room. So for now, I just lugged these into my HT Room and started playing some music and movies. And these are incredible with how the lower register notes are presented even in my congested/small 5.4.4 channel HT room.
The seat to seat consistency(from hearing) is incredible. I hope no more the need of averaging over multiple seats. I will give Audyssey MultEq-X a spin to see how response in every seat looks like in coming days, as I rearrange all the gear back in place.
With first few minutes of Mad Max Fury Road, the sub-bass presentation was spine tingling. In some moments I could feel like cushion underneath move to-and-fro, in some sort of sinusoidal pattern.
At this point, I am even cancelling idea of music room. As its now sounding great for music across the entire spectrum in my moderately treated room. Better than ever, inching closer to the "perfect" sound I am seeking. This is not moving out of HT room 😎. In fact, I will build 1 or 2 more of these units just for the additional headroom(totaling 8x18inch if I do. :-O Crazy me), just in case if somebody tries to push volume knob higher than required 🙂. I guess I am going horizontal instead of vertical, as I desired to build one day.
I wanted to study ripol and its concept with some cheap drivers first and see how it would behave in my rooms. So choose the MCM 55-2984 even after I researched what I was getting into. Although finishing quality on these driver leaves lot to desired, the 4 no.s of drivers itself turned out be fairly consistent and usable. As with all MCM drivers the qts is way higher than factory. But Fs ~31hz was not too far away from spec'd 27Hz. I won't mind using these drivers again. Although I will build next ones using the SB 18SW450 or other.
Here are some Hornresp simulation after measuring the MCM 55-2984 drivers using Dats v3.
Close enough to reality. But I notice little wiggles near resonance impedance compared to sims. Probably due to split and bolted construction. May be thin gasket in between the interface would help smooth things out. Resulting Fs is 1.33Hz higher in real.
Finally, thanks to all threads like these and inspiring work by everybody, I finally I have the sub-freq experience very closer to what I was looking for in a small space.
Cheers!
The seat to seat consistency(from hearing) is incredible. I hope no more the need of averaging over multiple seats. I will give Audyssey MultEq-X a spin to see how response in every seat looks like in coming days, as I rearrange all the gear back in place.
With first few minutes of Mad Max Fury Road, the sub-bass presentation was spine tingling. In some moments I could feel like cushion underneath move to-and-fro, in some sort of sinusoidal pattern.
At this point, I am even cancelling idea of music room. As its now sounding great for music across the entire spectrum in my moderately treated room. Better than ever, inching closer to the "perfect" sound I am seeking. This is not moving out of HT room 😎. In fact, I will build 1 or 2 more of these units just for the additional headroom(totaling 8x18inch if I do. :-O Crazy me), just in case if somebody tries to push volume knob higher than required 🙂. I guess I am going horizontal instead of vertical, as I desired to build one day.
I wanted to study ripol and its concept with some cheap drivers first and see how it would behave in my rooms. So choose the MCM 55-2984 even after I researched what I was getting into. Although finishing quality on these driver leaves lot to desired, the 4 no.s of drivers itself turned out be fairly consistent and usable. As with all MCM drivers the qts is way higher than factory. But Fs ~31hz was not too far away from spec'd 27Hz. I won't mind using these drivers again. Although I will build next ones using the SB 18SW450 or other.
Here are some Hornresp simulation after measuring the MCM 55-2984 drivers using Dats v3.
Close enough to reality. But I notice little wiggles near resonance impedance compared to sims. Probably due to split and bolted construction. May be thin gasket in between the interface would help smooth things out. Resulting Fs is 1.33Hz higher in real.
Finally, thanks to all threads like these and inspiring work by everybody, I finally I have the sub-freq experience very closer to what I was looking for in a small space.
Cheers!
I have finally settled with 3 ripol subs for now. I am engaging the middle one only in movies. Went with the 18sw450 for this new build.
Thinking of few other subs I have and converting them to ripol too. Interesting to see how some long excursion small 5inch driver like Tangband W5 1138 will do under desk!
Thinking of few other subs I have and converting them to ripol too. Interesting to see how some long excursion small 5inch driver like Tangband W5 1138 will do under desk!
Attachments
I am interested in trying a Ripol sub/woofer (stereo pair) with my bending wave speakers (https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/improving-bending-wave-drivers.420495/)
I need for this speaker a crossover frequency of about 150Hz but I am aiming for a good reproduction of 30Hz but I am not too interested below that.. One issue with the Ripol design are the cavity resonances and one way to ameliorate that is using a notch filter which I would like to avoid.
So I have some questions about how to achieve that:
Would a design using smaller woofers with narrower front openings increase the cavity resonance frequency enough (above 300Hz)?
Most designs use 2 opposing drivers but there are also designs using a single driver with just a flat wall in front of it. Do they have less front cavity resonances (more design freedom with varying the distance)? One could stack these to get more output.
I have seen some announcements of new commercial speakers using a Ripol design which use non opposing drivers from Sound Kaos (Vox 5, 2 drivers) and from Voxativ (Alberich II, one 12” driver) but i assume they are designed for lower cross-over frequencies that what I need.
I need for this speaker a crossover frequency of about 150Hz but I am aiming for a good reproduction of 30Hz but I am not too interested below that.. One issue with the Ripol design are the cavity resonances and one way to ameliorate that is using a notch filter which I would like to avoid.
So I have some questions about how to achieve that:
Would a design using smaller woofers with narrower front openings increase the cavity resonance frequency enough (above 300Hz)?
Most designs use 2 opposing drivers but there are also designs using a single driver with just a flat wall in front of it. Do they have less front cavity resonances (more design freedom with varying the distance)? One could stack these to get more output.
I have seen some announcements of new commercial speakers using a Ripol design which use non opposing drivers from Sound Kaos (Vox 5, 2 drivers) and from Voxativ (Alberich II, one 12” driver) but i assume they are designed for lower cross-over frequencies that what I need.
Last edited: