I've been second guess this PPSL thing...cant believe it but I might as well go through the motions to see if there is some knowledge to gain.
Is this PPSL even worth it for me? The 18H+ has all the useable upper range that gets high passed due to slot resonance/cancellation...
I was thinking I configure like the pic up top.... with the 15m on top and the 2 18h+ on the bottom..... MTMW...yes I know its not traditional but I think it would work fine...I end up with a little lower group delay around 100hz..... The efficiency through most of the bass increased greatly as the bottom woofer can help out much higher being out of the slot.....
The bottom woofer, low passed at 35 with a lr12, at xmax, in half space, is at 112db with 2db of help from the other woofers (no filters helping on the top woofers).....vs the 117db at Xmax in PPSL....
On the otherwise of the fence....I can create some nice wide polars on the vertical with the 3 way config....excursion is much less in the lower bass....
The more I look at the two sims the less differences I see. The two major differences are the major efficiency in the subbass vs the major efficiency in the rest of the bass....wether helped by another woofer in mtm of highpassed in a 3 way the 15m never sees much excursion in either setups....
I don't know what to think about that.....I think I just want a sanity check...and probably still with the 3 way...but I am not afraid of change
Someone say the wise words please.
Attachments
Last edited:
After modelling for a long I came to the realization the 3 way is actually more efficient than the mtmw.....
TLDR; with the 3 way, THe 15m gets to couple with 2 18H+....with MTMW the 15m only gets to couple with 1 18h+ and that made all the difference....The FR is janky where the resonance and cancellation are but. apparently the FR is still useable where it matters....like due to the high sensitivity in the midrange of the 18H+
I've tried to second guess this design more than a few times...the current configuration still is champion =)
TLDR; with the 3 way, THe 15m gets to couple with 2 18H+....with MTMW the 15m only gets to couple with 1 18h+ and that made all the difference....The FR is janky where the resonance and cancellation are but. apparently the FR is still useable where it matters....like due to the high sensitivity in the midrange of the 18H+
I've tried to second guess this design more than a few times...the current configuration still is champion =)
Hi, knowing that big enclosures are pain in the butt to construct and a 3-way with 15", without subs, can be uncomfortably loud in livingroom environment I would make the horn + midbass boxes first and then see what subs are needed. 15m seems to be able to play pretty low, not sure how big enclosure you are going to make but anyway.
Since you have at least one PPSL enclosure on the works compare it to a plain closed box for example, if there is benefit in the lot more complex build. Cannot say which solution is best for you or would be for me but I'd try the multisub thing with all four subs on separate enclosures, the PPSL and what ever comes to mind to see first hand what solution works best.
There is great opportunity to test this kind of stuff at this point of your journey
Since you have at least one PPSL enclosure on the works compare it to a plain closed box for example, if there is benefit in the lot more complex build. Cannot say which solution is best for you or would be for me but I'd try the multisub thing with all four subs on separate enclosures, the PPSL and what ever comes to mind to see first hand what solution works best.
There is great opportunity to test this kind of stuff at this point of your journey
Last edited:
I dont much, but ots kinda fun trying to!
Recently horn response was updated with a ‘PH’ sim. Its all or nothing one side of the cone and completely adjustable on the other. Since this includes three chamber on each side and of the driver(position) it makes for a great learning opportunity to play with the lengths of those chambers, then the area ‘stuffed, and overall resulting change(s)??
Without getting too wordy, infrasonic in cone control and stuffed sacrificial anode(no pun intended, lol) chambers on one side of the cone wjile a strategic qw pipe(s) are placed on the other seem to be the beez kneez of dayton ultimax18 into single digits, with caution. if it folds up like a taco then ill be sure to retract any statements here
Recently horn response was updated with a ‘PH’ sim. Its all or nothing one side of the cone and completely adjustable on the other. Since this includes three chamber on each side and of the driver(position) it makes for a great learning opportunity to play with the lengths of those chambers, then the area ‘stuffed, and overall resulting change(s)??
Without getting too wordy, infrasonic in cone control and stuffed sacrificial anode(no pun intended, lol) chambers on one side of the cone wjile a strategic qw pipe(s) are placed on the other seem to be the beez kneez of dayton ultimax18 into single digits, with caution. if it folds up like a taco then ill be sure to retract any statements here
Last edited:
I dont much, but ots kinda fun trying to!
Recently horn response was updated with a ‘PH’ sim. Its all or nothing one side of the cone and completely adjustable on the other. Since this includes three chamber on each side and of the driver(position) it makes for a great learning opportunity to play with the lengths of those chambers, then the area ‘stuffed, and overall resulting change(s)??
Recently horn response was updated with a ‘PH’ sim. Its all or nothing one side of the cone and completely adjustable on the other. Since this includes three chamber on each side and of the driver(position) it makes for a great learning opportunity to play with the lengths of those chambers, then the area ‘stuffed, and overall resulting change(s)??