I own 2 of the smaller 124
I have emailed CV, polite but not helpful, no old data not sent to new owners
Cerwin Vega will no longer help with Y/S parameters for any of their drivers new or discontinued.
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=300277620465&_trksid=p2759.l1259
This beauty was just listed on E*** Australia, i'd like it to complement the existing pair, does any-one have the TS parameters for this unit??
I have the parameters for the 12's ans I have never taken them out of the little sealed box that came as part of the original purchase package, 12's are Fs 24 and Qts0.33, small Vas, I can only assume these are similar but lower Fs.
I have emailed CV, polite but not helpful, no old data not sent to new owners
Cerwin Vega will no longer help with Y/S parameters for any of their drivers new or discontinued.
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=300277620465&_trksid=p2759.l1259
This beauty was just listed on E*** Australia, i'd like it to complement the existing pair, does any-one have the TS parameters for this unit??
I have the parameters for the 12's ans I have never taken them out of the little sealed box that came as part of the original purchase package, 12's are Fs 24 and Qts0.33, small Vas, I can only assume these are similar but lower Fs.
Dunno, all I have is the VMX series, i.e. 15.4 which has a listed 23.4 Fs, 0.56 Qts, 82.32 L Vas.
GM
GM
GM i should of course said higher Vas, if the Q of the bigger woofer is 0.56 I think I'd be putting them in sealed box.
You modelled the little ones for me for a TL a little while ago, I still havent done anything but I have kept the data and plans in a safe place.
CerwinVega also did an 18inch version of this driver, can you imagine that in a small hatchback??
You modelled the little ones for me for a TL a little while ago, I still havent done anything but I have kept the data and plans in a safe place.
CerwinVega also did an 18inch version of this driver, can you imagine that in a small hatchback??
Dunno if the 'classic' V154 is even similar.
I did? I normally save all my sims, but can't find any CV other than an 18" Stroker TQWT, so got a link?
My interest in car audio peaked in ~1971 when I added a high SQ derived four channel plus sub system (AKA 5.1 system with phantom CC in today's parlance) in my late wife's '70 1/2 SS350 Camaro and until the DSP revolution came along heard nothing in any car that could match it overall in performance and if I had my way all the 'boom-box' cars would be so heavily regulated WRT to SPL emissions that any abusive SPLs would be treated as tantamount to a drunk driving crime, so except for SPL competition an 18" in any typical commuter road going vehicle would be a complete waste of $$$/effort IMO.
That said, I found the stereo pair of Altec 500 Hz VOTT components in what was effectively a divided one piece cab that replaced all of the rear passenger compartment plus trunk of a '75? Camaro was rather entertaining in a near-field 'you're part of the band' sort of way until he cranked it up to ear bleed levels, forcing me to make a hasty exit. With no rear vision except for door mirrors though, not something I could ever recommend, though maybe OK with a rear view camera, so always YMMV.
'Loud is Beautiful if it's Clean!', but loud cars just define an extremely irritating form of distortion.
GM
I did? I normally save all my sims, but can't find any CV other than an 18" Stroker TQWT, so got a link?
My interest in car audio peaked in ~1971 when I added a high SQ derived four channel plus sub system (AKA 5.1 system with phantom CC in today's parlance) in my late wife's '70 1/2 SS350 Camaro and until the DSP revolution came along heard nothing in any car that could match it overall in performance and if I had my way all the 'boom-box' cars would be so heavily regulated WRT to SPL emissions that any abusive SPLs would be treated as tantamount to a drunk driving crime, so except for SPL competition an 18" in any typical commuter road going vehicle would be a complete waste of $$$/effort IMO.
That said, I found the stereo pair of Altec 500 Hz VOTT components in what was effectively a divided one piece cab that replaced all of the rear passenger compartment plus trunk of a '75? Camaro was rather entertaining in a near-field 'you're part of the band' sort of way until he cranked it up to ear bleed levels, forcing me to make a hasty exit. With no rear vision except for door mirrors though, not something I could ever recommend, though maybe OK with a rear view camera, so always YMMV.
'Loud is Beautiful if it's Clean!', but loud cars just define an extremely irritating form of distortion.
GM
GM, if yu need data on CV folow this link
http://english.gttrading.it/utilita/default.asp?sect=&opt=Manuali Cerwin-Vega
Not much difference between the 12 and the 15, i'll run the numbers soon
http://english.gttrading.it/utilita/default.asp?sect=&opt=Manuali Cerwin-Vega
Not much difference between the 12 and the 15, i'll run the numbers soon
Tapered TL for the CV124 Small folded box, I'm looking at the sketch but i've misplaced the figures, that isn't a problem as I can find the thread.
Your comment was that small Vas made TL's more difficult to design, my comment was that it made for better WAF.
I'm bidding on one only CV 154, amd was thinking of using it in a TL and keeing the smaller ones in the 20 litre sealed boxes.
I would appreciate some help or a comment on the 15, I'm looking for a sub to use below 40/45Hz to go with the new OB 3-way I'm planning, I have a Behringer XO and 40 is the lowest XO point, and the drivers should handle a bit more power if I can remove some of the lowest note, and while I already have a Kicker EX15 in a sealed box of 190 litres I'm happy to biuld a new box if this driver performs better.
Regards
Ted
PS The seller gave me that link, since the sale of CV to Stanton the level of srevice sems to have dropped somewhat but data on a lot of drivers there
Your comment was that small Vas made TL's more difficult to design, my comment was that it made for better WAF.
I'm bidding on one only CV 154, amd was thinking of using it in a TL and keeing the smaller ones in the 20 litre sealed boxes.
I would appreciate some help or a comment on the 15, I'm looking for a sub to use below 40/45Hz to go with the new OB 3-way I'm planning, I have a Behringer XO and 40 is the lowest XO point, and the drivers should handle a bit more power if I can remove some of the lowest note, and while I already have a Kicker EX15 in a sealed box of 190 litres I'm happy to biuld a new box if this driver performs better.
Regards
Ted
PS The seller gave me that link, since the sale of CV to Stanton the level of srevice sems to have dropped somewhat but data on a lot of drivers there
Just found the figures you gave me for the 12's
TQWT
7.12Cubic feet
72.4 inches long 10:1 taper.
I've been playing with JB's box program, the "154" in a 200 litre box tuned to 20Hz seems to give reasonable performance and SPL and as the pre-amp has a second order subsonic filter at 15Hz extreme excursion shouldn't be too much of a problem.
Like it's smaller sibling this really isn't the best driver for a sealed box, will it perform better in a TL??
What do you think of running both subs one sealed and one ported both only handling that lower octave 40 -->> 20 Hz??
The other sealed box with the Kicker 15 isn't perfect but it is reasonable and as that awful peak at 120 isn't going to be there not too bad musically.
TQWT
7.12Cubic feet
72.4 inches long 10:1 taper.
I've been playing with JB's box program, the "154" in a 200 litre box tuned to 20Hz seems to give reasonable performance and SPL and as the pre-amp has a second order subsonic filter at 15Hz extreme excursion shouldn't be too much of a problem.
Like it's smaller sibling this really isn't the best driver for a sealed box, will it perform better in a TL??
What do you think of running both subs one sealed and one ported both only handling that lower octave 40 -->> 20 Hz??
The other sealed box with the Kicker 15 isn't perfect but it is reasonable and as that awful peak at 120 isn't going to be there not too bad musically.
GM I suppose I should give you the parameters for the Kicker sub that I have in the 190litre sealed box , just in case you want t do a quick comparison.
Fs 19 Hz
Vas 314 litres
Qms 5.77
Qes 0.56
SD 890cm^2
X-max 19mm ( thats published which is optomistic / 19 is X-max + 15%)
It is currently in a fully stuffed sealed box of 135 litres so I extrapolated a 15% increase in vitual box size, 1st order high pass inside box a capacitor bank 1755uF ( 100V rated rat tail bpolar) helps fill out the bottom end
Stated power handling of 400 watts is in a sealed box,Q = 1.1
I've probably never put more than 150 peak into it, it is loud
Fs 19 Hz
Vas 314 litres
Qms 5.77
Qes 0.56
SD 890cm^2
X-max 19mm ( thats published which is optomistic / 19 is X-max + 15%)
It is currently in a fully stuffed sealed box of 135 litres so I extrapolated a 15% increase in vitual box size, 1st order high pass inside box a capacitor bank 1755uF ( 100V rated rat tail bpolar) helps fill out the bottom end
Stated power handling of 400 watts is in a sealed box,Q = 1.1
I've probably never put more than 150 peak into it, it is loud
Moondog55 said:
I don't know what I did with it, I can't find anything on it.
Yes, TLs like high Vas and yes, low Vas makes for small cabs, ergo long vents, hence the TQWT comes to the rescue to turn the whole cab into a loaded vent.
The 154 wants a TQWT also and has enough Xmax to do 2 kW/16 Hz if it can handle it, so a Vb = ~Vas or a little larger should work if the specs are reasonably accurate.
GM
Ok so because the Fs is similar then a line length of 72/76 inches will still be in the ball park?/ Vb = to Vas?? still 10 : 1 taper??
Moondog55 said:
OK, what is the closed/open areas? I don't have program to reverse engineer a truncated cone or how to calc it, assuming there's a way.
Should work fine as a sealed tends to work best in a corner with vented a bit more flexible. IIRC Dr. Geddes did his HT sub system this way, including BPs.
GM
Moondog55 said:
In theory the 154 is on a par with it with 500 W Vs the Kicker's 400 W down to ~30 Hz if it really performs like a theoretical 190 L, then its greater acoustic efficiency pulls away to a 3-4 dB gain/16 Hz, so not a major difference considering it takes at least a 10 dB difference down low to perceive a doubling of sound power.
GM
I aked about running a sealed and a portd box together becaise I just experimented with some cheap subs I bought fot the home theater.
4 small vented boxs each with a 10inch driver, just for fun I sealed 2 of them and stuffed them with poly fill. lost some output but they gave the impression of going deeper, one pair just didn't do it fo me, whether sealed or vented.
When I used a sealed and vented together bass seemed better both deeper and louder, so I made another splitter and ran all 4 together, 2 sealed and 2 vented amd the sound stage seemed to get much bigger, not to mention much louder, so was wondering whether there was some sort of synergy betwen the two types of box that would have this effect.
Some of it is due to the increase in radiating area but for me, for now I'm happy with the bass in my home theatre, at the listening position of course.
Having done that the bass in my music system seems deficient. having reached an agrreement with significant other and being told to use my birthday present in a project i've started on a new 3-way OB.
This/these subs would be used mainly to increase the powerhandling of the OB woofers wich reach X-max at 12watts and 104dB.
Really I wanted an expert opinion on the functionality of subs crossed as low as 40/50 Hz.
Do you see anything wrong with the idea of the project??
Room is quite small L-shaped (which sucks) 5m X 3.7M plus the short arm of the L which is 4m X 5M and 3.4M ceiling
4 small vented boxs each with a 10inch driver, just for fun I sealed 2 of them and stuffed them with poly fill. lost some output but they gave the impression of going deeper, one pair just didn't do it fo me, whether sealed or vented.
When I used a sealed and vented together bass seemed better both deeper and louder, so I made another splitter and ran all 4 together, 2 sealed and 2 vented amd the sound stage seemed to get much bigger, not to mention much louder, so was wondering whether there was some sort of synergy betwen the two types of box that would have this effect.
Some of it is due to the increase in radiating area but for me, for now I'm happy with the bass in my home theatre, at the listening position of course.
Having done that the bass in my music system seems deficient. having reached an agrreement with significant other and being told to use my birthday present in a project i've started on a new 3-way OB.
This/these subs would be used mainly to increase the powerhandling of the OB woofers wich reach X-max at 12watts and 104dB.
Really I wanted an expert opinion on the functionality of subs crossed as low as 40/50 Hz.
Do you see anything wrong with the idea of the project??
Room is quite small L-shaped (which sucks) 5m X 3.7M plus the short arm of the L which is 4m X 5M and 3.4M ceiling
Moondog55 said:
Yes, 10:1 taper since it's worked well every time I've used it regardless of the driver, so I don't bother trying to fix what isn't broke, so to speak. Dunno about length, actual Vb, I haven't calc'd it yet, but typically a 15" can get by with a Vb = Vas or a bit more and length is a function of vent area.
GM
OK sounds like no matter which I use; either on its own won't keep up with 4 X 12inch OB woofers.
That is OK, I thought that I'd need 2 X 15 at a minimum. I'm beginning to reqret not buying 2 of the Kicker when I had the chance to get them so cheap ( I thought there had to be something wrong as they were selling at 1/4 list price)
iI'm thinking that integrating these into the OB project will be difficult, and really only needed when we move to the new bigger house.
That is OK, I thought that I'd need 2 X 15 at a minimum. I'm beginning to reqret not buying 2 of the Kicker when I had the chance to get them so cheap ( I thought there had to be something wrong as they were selling at 1/4 list price)
iI'm thinking that integrating these into the OB project will be difficult, and really only needed when we move to the new bigger house.
'Expert' opinion? I normally recommend Dr. Geddes's and/or Don and Carolyn Davis's books for expert advice. Best I can do is somewhat 'experienced', I've never been either formally trained and/or officially made a living at anything audio related beyond designing/installing annunciator systems in certain types of low, medium, high voltage electrical distribution systems, controllers, so bearing that in mind..........
Right, sealed typically has a better tonal balance in room without EQ and as previously noted they each load the room differently and of course when multiple subs are ganged together off a common feed each doubling increases SPL +6 dB plus any boundary/room gains if there's enough amp power, so for four you get +12 dB plus any room boost down low and why multiple small subs scattered around the room is superior to one big one if the latter isn't optimally located.
With today's relatively inexpensive, powerful LF EQ capability it's mostly moot now though except possibly from a total system cost POV since several inexpensive small subs can be DIYed for the cost of even one high SQ, long throw sub driver and might can be placed such that no EQ beyond level matching is required. Can't argue with the big driver(s) and/or IB array's, TH's, etc., WOW! factor 'payback' though when first-timers ogle them, so as much a personal as performance choice.
WRT sub integration, ideally you want the XO point low enough that it basically only covers the BW below ~30 Hz, hence the moniker 'sub'. Unfortunately you know who has subverted this in both the consumer and prosound domain to mean any speaker or 'sub' system of a multi-way meant for a < ~250 Hz XO point. Indeed, a typical prosound 'sub' has long since been high passed by 30 Hz, so is really a mid-bass/woofer speaker system.
Regardless, with OBs, horns, blending to them normally works best with a BP alignment limited to WLs long enough to put the listening position in its far-field, so for 80 Hz it needs to be > ~1130/80 = ~14.13 ft away for a typical speaker and much further for a horn loaded this low where its flare frequency and factor plus mouth area, boundary loading defining its focal length and why corner loading them to abitrarily making it 90 deg is normally chosen to make the calc fairly easy.
Of course room modes should be factored in WRT the listening position, so a semi-complex solution is required for best performance if some form of room correction isn't used. Still, in these cases, locating the subs along walls, beside or behind the listening position to acoustically align them often gets the job done without significant EQ. Indeed, where stereo corners are used I've had good luck just tuning the speakers to different frequencies/slopes to balance out room modes a bit. Making the area behind the listening position diffuse helps a bunch too.
With 'L' shaped rooms, placing a common sub in a corner with the mains along the side walls typically solves most of the room problems as long as the right corner is chosen, many don't have one unfortunately.
As always YMMV.
GM
Right, sealed typically has a better tonal balance in room without EQ and as previously noted they each load the room differently and of course when multiple subs are ganged together off a common feed each doubling increases SPL +6 dB plus any boundary/room gains if there's enough amp power, so for four you get +12 dB plus any room boost down low and why multiple small subs scattered around the room is superior to one big one if the latter isn't optimally located.
With today's relatively inexpensive, powerful LF EQ capability it's mostly moot now though except possibly from a total system cost POV since several inexpensive small subs can be DIYed for the cost of even one high SQ, long throw sub driver and might can be placed such that no EQ beyond level matching is required. Can't argue with the big driver(s) and/or IB array's, TH's, etc., WOW! factor 'payback' though when first-timers ogle them, so as much a personal as performance choice.
WRT sub integration, ideally you want the XO point low enough that it basically only covers the BW below ~30 Hz, hence the moniker 'sub'. Unfortunately you know who has subverted this in both the consumer and prosound domain to mean any speaker or 'sub' system of a multi-way meant for a < ~250 Hz XO point. Indeed, a typical prosound 'sub' has long since been high passed by 30 Hz, so is really a mid-bass/woofer speaker system.
Regardless, with OBs, horns, blending to them normally works best with a BP alignment limited to WLs long enough to put the listening position in its far-field, so for 80 Hz it needs to be > ~1130/80 = ~14.13 ft away for a typical speaker and much further for a horn loaded this low where its flare frequency and factor plus mouth area, boundary loading defining its focal length and why corner loading them to abitrarily making it 90 deg is normally chosen to make the calc fairly easy.
Of course room modes should be factored in WRT the listening position, so a semi-complex solution is required for best performance if some form of room correction isn't used. Still, in these cases, locating the subs along walls, beside or behind the listening position to acoustically align them often gets the job done without significant EQ. Indeed, where stereo corners are used I've had good luck just tuning the speakers to different frequencies/slopes to balance out room modes a bit. Making the area behind the listening position diffuse helps a bunch too.
With 'L' shaped rooms, placing a common sub in a corner with the mains along the side walls typically solves most of the room problems as long as the right corner is chosen, many don't have one unfortunately.
As always YMMV.
GM
Thanx GM, if 40 is as low as i can go in this instace it maynot be a problem then??
Dr Geddes hasn't dropped into this post but I have read most of his forum posts and some of the material in the links he has provided, and in the other home theatre I did use multiple random placement of 5 seperate subs, in the new set-up 4 in front does it better, we seem to me sitting right in the centre of a "positive node"
I'll go with the sealed Kicker then and if I win the auction for thr CV, I'll make a TL for it, I simply will not have the real-estate for a large bandpass, if you do have time to sim the driver for me I would appreciate it. so I don't get it too badly wrong.
Regards
Ted
Dr Geddes hasn't dropped into this post but I have read most of his forum posts and some of the material in the links he has provided, and in the other home theatre I did use multiple random placement of 5 seperate subs, in the new set-up 4 in front does it better, we seem to me sitting right in the centre of a "positive node"
I'll go with the sealed Kicker then and if I win the auction for thr CV, I'll make a TL for it, I simply will not have the real-estate for a large bandpass, if you do have time to sim the driver for me I would appreciate it. so I don't get it too badly wrong.
Regards
Ted
You're welcome!
Well, I was just talking about true subs, but another way to look at it is to use the sub only in the theoretical room gain curve that begins in earnest at the lowest room mode or ~SoS/2/longest room dim: ~1130/2/16.4 = ~34.45 Hz in your case, though being 'L' shaped it shouldn't have much room gain till well below audibility.
Regardless, 40 Hz is low enough that you'll be in the near-field plus our hearing acuity is gone, so as long as the response is nominally flat and there's no audible vent or driver mechanical noise to locate it (them) the sound should be homogenized.
Yeah, subs spaced across the sound wall to make a virtual infinite array can work extremely well if the listening position isn't in a null.
I'll take a look-see.
GM
Well, I was just talking about true subs, but another way to look at it is to use the sub only in the theoretical room gain curve that begins in earnest at the lowest room mode or ~SoS/2/longest room dim: ~1130/2/16.4 = ~34.45 Hz in your case, though being 'L' shaped it shouldn't have much room gain till well below audibility.
Regardless, 40 Hz is low enough that you'll be in the near-field plus our hearing acuity is gone, so as long as the response is nominally flat and there's no audible vent or driver mechanical noise to locate it (them) the sound should be homogenized.
Yeah, subs spaced across the sound wall to make a virtual infinite array can work extremely well if the listening position isn't in a null.
I'll take a look-see.
GM
I lost the auction
By 3 dollars, still I had my wifes limit to deal with, those Vega 125's do not come up very often, Ah well back to the drawing board.
I do think that 1 X 15 is just not enough SPL to be in keeping with what the sims tell me tha 4X 12's can do if I subtract that bottom octave and send it to subs.
I will keep looking, unfortunately freight from the USA means I need to source my drivers locally and still within my budget.
Thanx for your help GM
By 3 dollars, still I had my wifes limit to deal with, those Vega 125's do not come up very often, Ah well back to the drawing board.
I do think that 1 X 15 is just not enough SPL to be in keeping with what the sims tell me tha 4X 12's can do if I subtract that bottom octave and send it to subs.
I will keep looking, unfortunately freight from the USA means I need to source my drivers locally and still within my budget.
Thanx for your help GM
- Status
- Not open for further replies.