Wow!
I had a look at what you posted last night but I couldn't get the point then. After getting some sleep it's OK now. 🙂
I think the only reason why I couldn't find a positive 'k' is that I didn't try to calculate with such a small box. I think the smallest value I used was 40 l. This calculation you gave is very interesting, if I start to play with different box volumes around 20 l then I get somewhat worse parameters either way. Even the 'k' gets negative or the gain gets too high. So 20 l seems to be some kind of a balance. How did you find it (if it can be explained easily🙂 )?
So what do you think, now that richie00boy has found a good solution for a closed box with eq with my xls10, should I build this 20 l closed box or should I buy the passive radiator and build a pr? (The only thing makes me be afraid of the closed box is the crazy low Qts of the xls 10. All the application notes say that the xls will perform good only in a small vented box or with pr.)
I had a look at what you posted last night but I couldn't get the point then. After getting some sleep it's OK now. 🙂
I think the only reason why I couldn't find a positive 'k' is that I didn't try to calculate with such a small box. I think the smallest value I used was 40 l. This calculation you gave is very interesting, if I start to play with different box volumes around 20 l then I get somewhat worse parameters either way. Even the 'k' gets negative or the gain gets too high. So 20 l seems to be some kind of a balance. How did you find it (if it can be explained easily🙂 )?
So what do you think, now that richie00boy has found a good solution for a closed box with eq with my xls10, should I build this 20 l closed box or should I buy the passive radiator and build a pr? (The only thing makes me be afraid of the closed box is the crazy low Qts of the xls 10. All the application notes say that the xls will perform good only in a small vented box or with pr.)
I arrived at that volume instinctively given my years of experience with LTs 🙂
I would build a 20 litre net internal volume (i.e. accounting for driver and bracing) box as a test out of MDF and see how you get on with the LT. If it works out, you have saved yourself the cost of a PR. If it doesn't work out you have lost maybe EUR30 but had some fun and learnt something 🙂
I would build a 20 litre net internal volume (i.e. accounting for driver and bracing) box as a test out of MDF and see how you get on with the LT. If it works out, you have saved yourself the cost of a PR. If it doesn't work out you have lost maybe EUR30 but had some fun and learnt something 🙂
M127, if it were me I would either stick with a sealed box or make a bigger vented box if you want the extra extention for HT. I'd save my money 😉 Keep in mind that Peerless sell passive radiators, and they aren't cheap - they have financial incentive to recommend passives for that driver. It's true, the driver is designed for passive radiator use, but this does not mean this is all it's suitable for. If a sealed box is good enough for Siegfriend Linkwitz ...
I had a quick look at modelling your room, assuming fairly conventional construction (drywall). If you have concrete or brick walls or something more solid than conventional then the following comments won't be valid.
It looks like you are getting gentle room gain at about 30 Hz - approx +4dB @ 20 Hz relative to 30 Hz.
Corner placement will be a problem if you sub is flat to 20 Hz as it has very sudden gain ~13db from 40 to 30 Hz which then plateaus off and continues upwards below 20 Hz. A hole in response from 35 - 60 Hz which will take away midbass punch, but then have an exaggerated bottom end. You will want to turn it up to get midbass more prominent, then the low end will boom when it comes in.
Most positions in the room seem to have this problem - midbass suck out then low end exaggeration. I found one exception though which seems to exist in most rooms - direct field placement. Put the sub next to your listening position and your problems are much less severe.
You then have a 7db peak centred at about 60 Hz you would need to attenuate and a few other peaks that aren't that bad. With BFD you could very easily get the response very smooth. Room gain doesn't look like much of a problem, but you have some modes that will give you some hassles. At least in your room, you can find options that don't have dips which are harder to deal with.
I had a quick look at modelling your room, assuming fairly conventional construction (drywall). If you have concrete or brick walls or something more solid than conventional then the following comments won't be valid.
It looks like you are getting gentle room gain at about 30 Hz - approx +4dB @ 20 Hz relative to 30 Hz.
Corner placement will be a problem if you sub is flat to 20 Hz as it has very sudden gain ~13db from 40 to 30 Hz which then plateaus off and continues upwards below 20 Hz. A hole in response from 35 - 60 Hz which will take away midbass punch, but then have an exaggerated bottom end. You will want to turn it up to get midbass more prominent, then the low end will boom when it comes in.
Most positions in the room seem to have this problem - midbass suck out then low end exaggeration. I found one exception though which seems to exist in most rooms - direct field placement. Put the sub next to your listening position and your problems are much less severe.
You then have a 7db peak centred at about 60 Hz you would need to attenuate and a few other peaks that aren't that bad. With BFD you could very easily get the response very smooth. Room gain doesn't look like much of a problem, but you have some modes that will give you some hassles. At least in your room, you can find options that don't have dips which are harder to deal with.
Thank you guys!
I rent the flat I live in, so I'm not sure about the walls, but it's in a block of flats, I guess it's concrete.
I will build the 20 l MDF box as you recommended and not buy the passive (at least not yet).
By the way if I happen to buy a BFD should that go before or after the Linkwitz Transform in the chain?
I rent the flat I live in, so I'm not sure about the walls, but it's in a block of flats, I guess it's concrete.
I will build the 20 l MDF box as you recommended and not buy the passive (at least not yet).
By the way if I happen to buy a BFD should that go before or after the Linkwitz Transform in the chain?
I could be wrong but I don't think it matters in this case.
Probably the floor and ceiling will be concrete, the party wall as well. Internal walls might in fact be drywall, or it might all be concrete. If everything is concrete then you have big problems! You will have to model it not with the default 0.7 values for reflectivity but more like 1!!!
The response will become much worse. Knock on the walls and you will very quickly find out if they are solid masonry/concrete, drywall which is hollow sounding or a much older equivalent which is very solid and probably have an inbetween value.
You will need a mic or SPL meter with calibration figures to use BFD but if you have a very solid envelope it will be hard to get a good response without BFD.
Yes, this is my plan; I will try to get an SPL-meter (wich is a must as far as I see if one tries to set up a BFD). I don't know where to buy it, the only shop dealing with devices like this is conrad here. They have a cheap spl meter, if that doesn't work then I will buy something on ebay. Though I don't know what brands to search for (most of the spl-meters on ebay come from the States).
I think my walls are concrete. Three of them are external walls of the building (the flat is at the end of the building) and the fourth wall is an internal wall but not drywall I'm sure. There's a chance that it's also concrete. I will take a look what the room response caclulator gives for values like 1 for reflectivity. Anyway, even if the wall is concrete I can have some lowest values if the wall is not exposed (I mean if there are any pieces of furniture that do some damping).
My XLS will arrive in the next some days from Germany, so the first thing I will do is to builld the box and the preamp parts like the Linkwitz transform, and their supply. (Meanwhile I'll search the ebay for a BFD.)
I think my walls are concrete. Three of them are external walls of the building (the flat is at the end of the building) and the fourth wall is an internal wall but not drywall I'm sure. There's a chance that it's also concrete. I will take a look what the room response caclulator gives for values like 1 for reflectivity. Anyway, even if the wall is concrete I can have some lowest values if the wall is not exposed (I mean if there are any pieces of furniture that do some damping).
My XLS will arrive in the next some days from Germany, so the first thing I will do is to builld the box and the preamp parts like the Linkwitz transform, and their supply. (Meanwhile I'll search the ebay for a BFD.)
SPL meters - I recommend the Radioshack analogue one - it's cheap and most importantly, you can get calibration figures as it's response is far from flat - this is true of any meter, as they are not designed for acoustic measurements. Even if you get the most expensive SPL meters you can find, it's useless in this application without calibration figures.
Any wall that is as solid as masonry or concrete should have 1 or at least 0.9. Large windows absorb bass and will make an improvement proportional to their size. Nothing in your room is likely to have sufficient absorption in the bass range to make any real difference. I think you will find the in-room response with all enclosing planes shown as 0.9 will be horrendous!
When you model it you will probably find that there are sharp peaks. What this tells you is that you need to measure with considerable resolution to find exactly the right eq to be used. Measurement with a mic is going to give you a better idea, unless you take a LOT of individual measurements! Ultracurve would be worth considering, you can get it cheap secondhand often. You get a mic and then get it to auto-eq the room flat to your target curve. As I understand, you can set the inverse of the response of the SPL meter as the target curve. It will then give you a result that is flat within the specified bandwidth. It's possible that you could leave out the LT in this case and just eq the thing flat to 25 Hz in room. Not everyone will agree with me there ...
I will be getting Ultracurve shortly myself.
Any wall that is as solid as masonry or concrete should have 1 or at least 0.9. Large windows absorb bass and will make an improvement proportional to their size. Nothing in your room is likely to have sufficient absorption in the bass range to make any real difference. I think you will find the in-room response with all enclosing planes shown as 0.9 will be horrendous!
When you model it you will probably find that there are sharp peaks. What this tells you is that you need to measure with considerable resolution to find exactly the right eq to be used. Measurement with a mic is going to give you a better idea, unless you take a LOT of individual measurements! Ultracurve would be worth considering, you can get it cheap secondhand often. You get a mic and then get it to auto-eq the room flat to your target curve. As I understand, you can set the inverse of the response of the SPL meter as the target curve. It will then give you a result that is flat within the specified bandwidth. It's possible that you could leave out the LT in this case and just eq the thing flat to 25 Hz in room. Not everyone will agree with me there ...
I will be getting Ultracurve shortly myself.
Hi,
Subwoofers are always nice! Big and they DO make an impact on the sound, don't they!?? 😀
Regarding the XLS vs SLS there are a few things that come to my mind. After building and trying out the XLS I begin to more and more think that its design is not all toghether perfect (what units is, by the way).
Look at the moving mass! 135g (more than a tenth of a kg) and look at the SLS! 58g.
In the XLS case they try to compensate by using large magnets and my worst enemy - large voice coil!
4.3 milli Henrys! Whiiiha!
I would recomend you to look at the new series:
XXLS
There you'll get the long excursion for even the "sealed box driver" and a little bit smaller voice coil (but still big).
My 2 cents...
Subwoofers are always nice! Big and they DO make an impact on the sound, don't they!?? 😀
Regarding the XLS vs SLS there are a few things that come to my mind. After building and trying out the XLS I begin to more and more think that its design is not all toghether perfect (what units is, by the way).
Look at the moving mass! 135g (more than a tenth of a kg) and look at the SLS! 58g.
In the XLS case they try to compensate by using large magnets and my worst enemy - large voice coil!
4.3 milli Henrys! Whiiiha!I would recomend you to look at the new series:
XXLS
There you'll get the long excursion for even the "sealed box driver" and a little bit smaller voice coil (but still big).
My 2 cents...
Per,
I think it's usually not a good criticism to talk about just one or two parameters of a driver. Such criticism can make an inferior driver look better than one that is far better overall. Hence I prefer to look at the actual performance - output, power handling, what it's suitable for, distortion, power compression, BL and suspension linearity. Unfortunately no subwoofer manufacturer really gives enough information to properly judge all these aspects. Even where distortion figures are available, research has shown that comparison on %THD figures alone are meaningless and don't correspond to perception in ways that one would expect.
This makes it very difficult to really judge and compare subwoofer drivers.
I have heard this driver and it is a good driver. In fact I have heard three different subs with it. It's hard to compare it to other drivers as with subs, the room dominates! In most setups, you are listening to the room as much as the sub
I think it's usually not a good criticism to talk about just one or two parameters of a driver. Such criticism can make an inferior driver look better than one that is far better overall. Hence I prefer to look at the actual performance - output, power handling, what it's suitable for, distortion, power compression, BL and suspension linearity. Unfortunately no subwoofer manufacturer really gives enough information to properly judge all these aspects. Even where distortion figures are available, research has shown that comparison on %THD figures alone are meaningless and don't correspond to perception in ways that one would expect.
This makes it very difficult to really judge and compare subwoofer drivers.
I have heard this driver and it is a good driver. In fact I have heard three different subs with it. It's hard to compare it to other drivers as with subs, the room dominates! In most setups, you are listening to the room as much as the sub
I agree. It's a bit like the marketing department trying to explain the universe with only 2 or mayby 3 parameters. It's easy! Earth, Sun and the rest.paulspencer said:
The one's I've built myself doesn't sound bad and the room does the most harm. XLS have thier benefits with xtra long stroke (xls!) and the design allows you to feature small boxes with low freq output. That is not a bad accomplishment at all. 😀
I just wanted to point out some mayor diffrences between XLS vs the rest of the world! 🙄
Conceptual, I do not like heavy cones, large voice coils etc. But that me, I guess.
Hi,
My sub project that made me start this thread came to a higher level: I have recieved the xls I bought at ebay, and I have built a simple amp to drive it. I haven't made the 20 l closed box yet, so the xls is still in box. Anyway I wanted to try some versions of the amp first so now it's driving a 10" reflex sub I've been having for a time. The amp now is only a volume pot, an input buffer and a lowpass filter (TL072), and the LM3886 power amp I planned to build (it's a gainclone again but with two 10.000uF caps.
The process was very interesting. The gainclone was easy, but the preamp didn't want to work for a time. It hummed, though I payed a lot of attention to star grounding and not mixing power and signal grounds. I had a look with my oscilloscope, it was not a normal sinus wave, but just the plus and minus "tips" of the wave, between them the signal was normal. Then, at another location for the ref plug of the scope I saw a 50Hz sinus and the signal, modulated, at the output. I rearranged earthing, now most of the hum is gone. It cannot be heard when music is played, even at the lowest volumes. Another interesting thing was that the amp sounded somewhat worse after the sub added. It's not just imaging or that kind of thing I'm talking about, the sound was not as "free" as before. It sounded a bit more tired. And then, after a time, it was all gone and now I'm really amazed again how good this amp sounds! The stereo image and the "freeness" (sorry) of the sound is perfect! I am really interested how the new driver will perform in the new box with the setup. There is still a long way to go, e.g. I haven't built the Linkwitz Transform yet (I use a reflex sub now).
Anyway, the problems I had with the preamp made me think about earthing. I read a lot of articles again, but I still don't really know what the best solution is for the earthing in this case.
The preamp has a regulated supply (lm317-337), +-15VDC, and the stab is powered from the same transformer as the power amp (actually its power leads are connected to the gainclone since they're very close to each other). The output of the stab is supplying the preamp (the TL072). There is a virtual 0 at the output of the stab, which I connected to the preamp. Then, from the preamp, there is a piece of wire to the star ground of the gainclone. Is it correct? Or how should the virtual 0 of the stab output be connected? Is there a possibility for a problem at the point where the signal passes from the preamp to the power amp? How should this be connected?
My sub project that made me start this thread came to a higher level: I have recieved the xls I bought at ebay, and I have built a simple amp to drive it. I haven't made the 20 l closed box yet, so the xls is still in box. Anyway I wanted to try some versions of the amp first so now it's driving a 10" reflex sub I've been having for a time. The amp now is only a volume pot, an input buffer and a lowpass filter (TL072), and the LM3886 power amp I planned to build (it's a gainclone again but with two 10.000uF caps.
The process was very interesting. The gainclone was easy, but the preamp didn't want to work for a time. It hummed, though I payed a lot of attention to star grounding and not mixing power and signal grounds. I had a look with my oscilloscope, it was not a normal sinus wave, but just the plus and minus "tips" of the wave, between them the signal was normal. Then, at another location for the ref plug of the scope I saw a 50Hz sinus and the signal, modulated, at the output. I rearranged earthing, now most of the hum is gone. It cannot be heard when music is played, even at the lowest volumes. Another interesting thing was that the amp sounded somewhat worse after the sub added. It's not just imaging or that kind of thing I'm talking about, the sound was not as "free" as before. It sounded a bit more tired. And then, after a time, it was all gone and now I'm really amazed again how good this amp sounds! The stereo image and the "freeness" (sorry) of the sound is perfect! I am really interested how the new driver will perform in the new box with the setup. There is still a long way to go, e.g. I haven't built the Linkwitz Transform yet (I use a reflex sub now).
Anyway, the problems I had with the preamp made me think about earthing. I read a lot of articles again, but I still don't really know what the best solution is for the earthing in this case.
The preamp has a regulated supply (lm317-337), +-15VDC, and the stab is powered from the same transformer as the power amp (actually its power leads are connected to the gainclone since they're very close to each other). The output of the stab is supplying the preamp (the TL072). There is a virtual 0 at the output of the stab, which I connected to the preamp. Then, from the preamp, there is a piece of wire to the star ground of the gainclone. Is it correct? Or how should the virtual 0 of the stab output be connected? Is there a possibility for a problem at the point where the signal passes from the preamp to the power amp? How should this be connected?
Do you intend to run your XLS from a chip amp? 😱
I think you will find the result well short of what the XLS is capable of. These amps do not like to be pushed hard, and with a sub you will do it frequently without knowing - bass is just so dynamic and subs like the XLS are not efficient. You will run out of power long before you run out of excursion, which can be quite frustrating.
If you want to build an amp for the sub, you might consider:
http://sound.westhost.com/
In particular
ESP mosfet power amp - 180w - 8 ohms
ESP sub amp - 272w - 8 ohms
The latter is probably better as it's a mono amp.
But keep in mind it's hard to build a good amp cheaper than you can often get hold of them for subs. When I looked into it, I concluded it was one area where it's not worth diy IMO. Too easy to get a cheap PA power amp or plate amp.
I think you will find the result well short of what the XLS is capable of. These amps do not like to be pushed hard, and with a sub you will do it frequently without knowing - bass is just so dynamic and subs like the XLS are not efficient. You will run out of power long before you run out of excursion, which can be quite frustrating.
If you want to build an amp for the sub, you might consider:
http://sound.westhost.com/
In particular
ESP mosfet power amp - 180w - 8 ohms
ESP sub amp - 272w - 8 ohms
The latter is probably better as it's a mono amp.
But keep in mind it's hard to build a good amp cheaper than you can often get hold of them for subs. When I looked into it, I concluded it was one area where it's not worth diy IMO. Too easy to get a cheap PA power amp or plate amp.
Of course I know about the esp subamp, I may even build it in the future, but I'm sure I don't need 300-500 W of power to drive my sub! I listen to music in a 17 sqm room, my stereo speakers have 20 W amps each, and I never use them at more than half volume! Other than that, I have seen many subamp projects all over the internet based on Natsemi's chips, especially the LM3886. They can be bridged if needed, for a power of about 150 W. The supply will b oversized anyway, now I'm using an impregnated, shielded 300 VA toroid transformer for one single channel.
Here on this forum several applications like this are described as well. I think it must be correct. And - I use a 3886 sub right now, it works!
Here on this forum several applications like this are described as well. I think it must be correct. And - I use a 3886 sub right now, it works!
You dont need 500 watts to drive your sub....
Erm it depends on the application but you do.
My 10" XLS in a 20 litre sealed box with a shelving net work to give me and f3 of 20hz, are driven by a 200 watt amp. Now these are used up to 150hz so are not really a proper sub application, but! the amp runs out of steam at 50hz before the driver runs out of excursion.
Now talking about group delay and EQ circuits etc, I get better GD without an EQ circuit on. But when I apply it, I get the same GD at about 30hz. Above 30hz its better then the box without the EQ, then below 30hz the group delay is worse.
Erm it depends on the application but you do.
My 10" XLS in a 20 litre sealed box with a shelving net work to give me and f3 of 20hz, are driven by a 200 watt amp. Now these are used up to 150hz so are not really a proper sub application, but! the amp runs out of steam at 50hz before the driver runs out of excursion.
Now talking about group delay and EQ circuits etc, I get better GD without an EQ circuit on. But when I apply it, I get the same GD at about 30hz. Above 30hz its better then the box without the EQ, then below 30hz the group delay is worse.
You can't expect me to know what you know.
How much output you need and how much power you need to get to a level you are happy with is something no one can advise you on. But if you want to use an amp that will be a good match to the driver, and not to be a limiting factor if you want at times a little more output, this is another thing. A driver comes with thermal power (electrical) and excursion limited output. I prefer not to introduce further limits by underpowering it. With subwoofers it is very easy to supply not enough power.
If you look at the dynamic power required to drive a sub, it becomes apparent that bass is far more dynamic than the rest of the audio spectrum. Hence with bass it is more about dynamic range.
This is probably not a good idea for the XLS. I believe chip amps handle 4 ohm loads at best. However, while the XLS is an 8 ohm nominal driver, it requires a 4 ohm stable amp. If you bridge a chip amp, the impedance will drop down below 4 ohms effectively and the chip amps will be required to be stable down to 2 ohms unbridged. Hence you may have problems.
In a small room like yours it is easy to get enough bass and its also easier to get smooth response. However, if I were you I would aim for amps to get the most out of the driver and keep whatever spair output you have as headroom.
Chip amps will work, but you would be very unusual if you dont' have the urge to find out what 1" p-p excursion feels and sounds like!
HUH? 😕
I have had this experience with a 450w x2 PA amp driving my two AV12 subs. The amp starts clipping while the drivers are using less than half of their excursion when it comes to music. If you don't use up that excursion to get LFE extension, then they can take more power than would be appropriate for HT as excursion limits are less of an issue with midbass. This is assuming you don't go overboard and cook the driver. I suspect it would be very unusual to melt the drivers VC ...
OK, now I see what you're talking about. Anyway I like the idea of building the amp, not buying one, and not having to bother with the post, guarantee things, being able to make changes, etc. What do you recommend then? I like the design of the esp project 68, and I can get hold of the parts quite easily. Will that be OK instead of the chipamp? I mean if I don't want to limit the driver's capabilities as you said. By the way is there a way to tell how much power is needed for an eq'd sub to be able to get the calculated frequencies at the low end?
I believe you will find ESP's P68 mosfet sub amp to be just right for your XLS. I would go with the higher powered version.
To get a good idea of how much power, use Win ISD pro. It will show you the max power handling and the excursion, including the result of the eq used. Note pro version.
You might have a play with a few other programs that will show excursion for a given power input. If you try at least 3 then you can get a feel for the difference between them and hence how accurate you can expect the result to be. You could also look at Adrian Mack's Excelsub, and Isaac's Subwoofer simulator on the FRDC.
I have simulated using all three. I didn't really compare rigorously and now having tried the sub out I haven't watched too carefully to gauge how accurate the predictions were. But I will comment that my simulations prepared me pretty well for the result I got. Subjectively they seemed a fairly good indication. Good enough to then make a decison based on cost and performance together.
In my current setup I have a NAD power amp which has about 150w x 2 into 4 ohms, but unlike any other amp I have seen specs for it has 6db of dynamic headroom. A lot of amps have less than 3 db headroom. This means it's more like a 300w amp. I get adequate output generally, but it runs out of steam well before the subs run out of excursion. One time it went into overload protection and shut itself off at what I considered a moderate level. I have tried out a PA amp with 450w and it was a good amount of power, but even that clipped when I turned it up ... the driver still had plenty more to give. I'm leaning towards getting the Behringer Europower with 650w, which can be configured to get 1.2kw if used for one driver. A very versatile amp. I think this will be a good balance of price and performance. More power is just too expensive. But I can't get anything decent for much less.
To get a good idea of how much power, use Win ISD pro. It will show you the max power handling and the excursion, including the result of the eq used. Note pro version.
You might have a play with a few other programs that will show excursion for a given power input. If you try at least 3 then you can get a feel for the difference between them and hence how accurate you can expect the result to be. You could also look at Adrian Mack's Excelsub, and Isaac's Subwoofer simulator on the FRDC.
I have simulated using all three. I didn't really compare rigorously and now having tried the sub out I haven't watched too carefully to gauge how accurate the predictions were. But I will comment that my simulations prepared me pretty well for the result I got. Subjectively they seemed a fairly good indication. Good enough to then make a decison based on cost and performance together.
In my current setup I have a NAD power amp which has about 150w x 2 into 4 ohms, but unlike any other amp I have seen specs for it has 6db of dynamic headroom. A lot of amps have less than 3 db headroom. This means it's more like a 300w amp. I get adequate output generally, but it runs out of steam well before the subs run out of excursion. One time it went into overload protection and shut itself off at what I considered a moderate level. I have tried out a PA amp with 450w and it was a good amount of power, but even that clipped when I turned it up ... the driver still had plenty more to give. I'm leaning towards getting the Behringer Europower with 650w, which can be configured to get 1.2kw if used for one driver. A very versatile amp. I think this will be a good balance of price and performance. More power is just too expensive. But I can't get anything decent for much less.
I play the drums in two bands. We have a power amp which we rarely use, because most of the stages offer PAs. We use this amp for driving the "control" speakers (those ones inside the stage as a feedback for the vocals - I don't know the exact name for those). It's a normal power amp, I gess it uses the MOSFET technology, with nothing more than a volume control, 2 channels. I think it's something around 2x200 W. Can I try that amp (only one channel of course)? I know it's not a subwoofer amp, but the preamp I have already built, and this amp is ready to try, at no costs. I mean the benefit is that I could take a look at the performance of a mosfet amp for this task for free before I build one.
By all means try the amp out, but don't expect it to be representative of a MOSFET amp. The power supply and topology also play an important part in the sound of an amp.
5th element said:
That was my way of being sarcastic.
You dont need 500 watts to drive your sub? Oh yes you do.
But I threw in depends on the application because that also plays a major role in power requirements.
M127 had just said, im sure I dont need 300-500 watts. So I was saying that he does.
In a sealed box environment with EQ, the XLS will run out of excursion before the amp clips if your main speakers already go down to 40hz or so, because at those frequencies you require much less power to bottom out the cone. However if you are needing extension up to say 70hz to match a sealed box 5 or 6.5" mid/bass then you will need more power. Ofcourse this is assuming the main speakers can go that loud anyway.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.