You mis understood what I had meant. I am using the XLS with EQ to get it too do f3 of 40 hz, I know you get an f3 of 80 without this. SO what I had said still stands, oh and excursion isnt really a problem as the mids bottom out before the bass in my set up.
The point of the XLS is lower distortion and much smaller cabinet over the 850146.
It has also been decided at one point that the 850146 sounds best in a sealed cab on the madisound board. I dont know if I agree as I hvnt done ported with it but sealed does sound very good to me.
The point of the XLS is lower distortion and much smaller cabinet over the 850146.
It has also been decided at one point that the 850146 sounds best in a sealed cab on the madisound board. I dont know if I agree as I hvnt done ported with it but sealed does sound very good to me.
Non optimal
105 EBP
=ported box Definately. If u dont follow the general rules you cant expect to succeed.
sealed= not a sub in this case.
look at the response!
Definately not optimal,i see no reason to make a sealed box for this woofer.
if u cant fit the ports,then dont try buildign a sealed box with this woofer.Or try if u want to waste money on quiet subwoofers
Sure it may sound good-but very quiet
With all that EQ,youl have no headroom left,and no excursion either-unless you enjoy 90db levels.
What exactly are u trying to achieve/ a LACK of bass? personaly i go for FULL FLAT or slightly overdamped responses!
not completely -lacking -in -bass- responses
and about Madisound forum deciding that 'sealed is best' , an intelligent person ,is one who knows who to copy (eg the right people)
what if they like a 'lack of bass' and a huge roll off?
you cant just say 'they said so,so its true'
Provide facts such as ='with 250watts RMS and 9db EQ i can still acheive 104db '
105 EBP
=ported box Definately. If u dont follow the general rules you cant expect to succeed.
sealed= not a sub in this case.
look at the response!
Definately not optimal,i see no reason to make a sealed box for this woofer.
if u cant fit the ports,then dont try buildign a sealed box with this woofer.Or try if u want to waste money on quiet subwoofers
Sure it may sound good-but very quiet
With all that EQ,youl have no headroom left,and no excursion either-unless you enjoy 90db levels.
What exactly are u trying to achieve/ a LACK of bass? personaly i go for FULL FLAT or slightly overdamped responses!
not completely -lacking -in -bass- responses
and about Madisound forum deciding that 'sealed is best' , an intelligent person ,is one who knows who to copy (eg the right people)
what if they like a 'lack of bass' and a huge roll off?
you cant just say 'they said so,so its true'
Provide facts such as ='with 250watts RMS and 9db EQ i can still acheive 104db '
Attachments
Bah you dont get it again!
I DONT WANT FLAT TO 20HZ
Im just going for the same response as the 850146 or slightly better with EQ for music purposes. I dont think that f3 of 40hz roll off 9db per octave is lack of bass!
I simulated with BOTH the 85-146 AND XLS
When the XLS HAD EQ added, it played to the same SPL as the 850146 until they both ran out of linear excursion.
The mids in my speakers run out of excursion before the bass does now anyway SO I DONT NEED ANY MORE! on the bass, flat to 20hz? I cant get 20hz in my room anyway its too small pr at least it seems that way.
What music do you know that has a huge amount of 20-30hz material, none of mine!
I said before this was for music and not HT I dont need 20hz or massive SPL, its for music to go to f3 of about 40 hz. So therefore I do have what I want! I will see how it turns out anyway. You may be right but for my application I dont need SUB bass. Im not designing a SUB just a bass box for music.
I DONT WANT FLAT TO 20HZ
Im just going for the same response as the 850146 or slightly better with EQ for music purposes. I dont think that f3 of 40hz roll off 9db per octave is lack of bass!
I simulated with BOTH the 85-146 AND XLS
When the XLS HAD EQ added, it played to the same SPL as the 850146 until they both ran out of linear excursion.
The mids in my speakers run out of excursion before the bass does now anyway SO I DONT NEED ANY MORE! on the bass, flat to 20hz? I cant get 20hz in my room anyway its too small pr at least it seems that way.
What music do you know that has a huge amount of 20-30hz material, none of mine!
I said before this was for music and not HT I dont need 20hz or massive SPL, its for music to go to f3 of about 40 hz. So therefore I do have what I want! I will see how it turns out anyway. You may be right but for my application I dont need SUB bass. Im not designing a SUB just a bass box for music.
Can anyone point me to some US websites that sell the passive radiator (10 inch version).
I can buy in the UK but it will cost approx. £80 (approx. US$150), so I am hoping to take advantage of the low doller at the moment and see if i can get it cheaper.
Partsexpress has the 830468 version, I think macky888 recomended the 830481 version. Would 2 of 830468 be ok?
Thanks for any suggestions
Mark.
I can buy in the UK but it will cost approx. £80 (approx. US$150), so I am hoping to take advantage of the low doller at the moment and see if i can get it cheaper.
Partsexpress has the 830468 version, I think macky888 recomended the 830481 version. Would 2 of 830468 be ok?
Thanks for any suggestions
Mark.
Kram:
By the time you get done with import duties and transportation costs, the differential is usually made up. Unless you have an American cousin, but I won't go into details on that.
How big is your box? Instead of two 10" PR's, why not one 12 inch Passive Radiator? One 12 has 60% more area than one 10 , and will probably suffice for a 10" driver. Plus one 12" PR probably costs just a bit more than one 10" PR.
By the time you get done with import duties and transportation costs, the differential is usually made up. Unless you have an American cousin, but I won't go into details on that.
How big is your box? Instead of two 10" PR's, why not one 12 inch Passive Radiator? One 12 has 60% more area than one 10 , and will probably suffice for a 10" driver. Plus one 12" PR probably costs just a bit more than one 10" PR.
Don't know why you would want a 10" in a 'sub' app., but when using PRs it is best to use at least two or you will have to either make a very heavy cab or bolt it to the floor, so for your ~$150 you can get a couple of Stryke's PRs: http://www.stryke.com/passiveradiators.html
HTH,
GM
HTH,
GM
Kram:
By the way, BK Electronics seems to sell it's own 10" Passive Radiator, the BXP 10, for 25 pds.
You might want to consider that. Even two of them would be a substantial saving.
However, by the picture, it looks like it might not have a spider. Generally, a Passive Radiator should have either a spider or a double surround, (one surround on the inside). Otherwise, it is said to wobble when playing low frequency notes.
You might want to check with BK on that unit, and check with other Brit DIYers about how good they are.
There was a link to an English board where the guy from BK posts on. I'll see if I can dig it up.
By the way, BK Electronics seems to sell it's own 10" Passive Radiator, the BXP 10, for 25 pds.
You might want to consider that. Even two of them would be a substantial saving.
However, by the picture, it looks like it might not have a spider. Generally, a Passive Radiator should have either a spider or a double surround, (one surround on the inside). Otherwise, it is said to wobble when playing low frequency notes.
You might want to check with BK on that unit, and check with other Brit DIYers about how good they are.
There was a link to an English board where the guy from BK posts on. I'll see if I can dig it up.
Here is a page on dual surrounds for PR's. If you have a slow internet connection like me, the two illustrations on the right are supposed to have the Passive Radiator moving in synch.
http://www.danmarx.org/audioinnovation/flatpassives.html
Almost makes you want to build the PR yourself. Almost.
http://www.danmarx.org/audioinnovation/flatpassives.html
Almost makes you want to build the PR yourself. Almost.
I think 2 of the peerless radiators from parts express would cost approx. £110, that is with a guess of a postage cost of $30 and 17.5% VAT and 8% import duty added on.
I just e-mailed Wimslow Audio to find out how much it would cost for 2 PRs from them.
However that PR from BK looks so tempting at £25 each, but as kelticwizard said that it might not have a spider (dont know what one is
).
I am assuming that the lack of a spider can cause that cantilever thing to happen?
oh yeah the box is 47.4 L (1.7 cubic feet), dimensions are
internal:
Length = 52cm
W = 31.5cm
H = 31.5cm
Thanks
Mark
I just e-mailed Wimslow Audio to find out how much it would cost for 2 PRs from them.
However that PR from BK looks so tempting at £25 each, but as kelticwizard said that it might not have a spider (dont know what one is
). I am assuming that the lack of a spider can cause that cantilever thing to happen?
oh yeah the box is 47.4 L (1.7 cubic feet), dimensions are
internal:
Length = 52cm
W = 31.5cm
H = 31.5cm
Thanks
Mark
Kram said:
However that PR from BK looks so tempting at £25 each, but as kelticwizard said that it might not have a spider (dont know what one is
I am assuming that the lack of a spider can cause that cantilever thing to happen?
Thanks
Mark
Kram:
Don't know if you have gone ahead and built this yet, or what. But I Emailed BK about their BXP 10 Passive Radiator. I Emailed them once before with no answer, but I used the reply from their last answer to me. This time I used the normal inquiry form on their website and received a reply overnight.
I asked about an inner surround, similar to the Earthquake, (as opposed to a spider). I asked about cantilevering. I asked if they would recommend using these with their Peerless XLS 10 driver. I asked if he recommended using two instead of one per enclosure.
Hear is the answer I received:
Hello:
The BX10P does not have a suspension like the [Peerless] XLS10P, I think it is a case of you get what you pay for and the XLS10P is of a very high quality as it has a cast basket and a spider. If your friend in the UK is interested we can sell him the XLS10P passive radiator for £38.58 plus £8.00 carriage totalling £46.58
Regards
Tom Pearce
I am guessing that they haven't tried the BX 10 with the Peerless, so they are neither recommending them nor warning against them. So there you are.
Contrary to some opinions expressed here, the XLS 10 (as well as the 12) is an outstanding driver in a sealed box if you're willing to use about 6dB of bass boost EQ. The pic shows it in a 28 liter box, EQ'd to Q=.5 at 25Hz and kept below Xmax at all frequencies.
If 97dB isn't enough for you, just add a second one. It will be cheaper to buy two drivers than a single driver and a pair of PRs. And you'll never get the tight bass out of a 4th (or 5th) order PR system that you'll get from a critically damped 2nd order, Q=.5 sealed system. With room gain, it should play flat to well under 20Hz with no risk of overexcursion.
If 97dB isn't enough for you, just add a second one. It will be cheaper to buy two drivers than a single driver and a pair of PRs. And you'll never get the tight bass out of a 4th (or 5th) order PR system that you'll get from a critically damped 2nd order, Q=.5 sealed system. With room gain, it should play flat to well under 20Hz with no risk of overexcursion.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
YOU GOT URE XLS10!!! IVE BEEN wating for 10weeks from that place to get my pair! Tell me you have had the same experience. Yes the price is very nice! They tried to deliver today and noone was in they are at the depot in warrington of all places im in manchester.
Either way Im putting them in a sealed enclosure around 20 litres probably smaller, with EQ to get and f3 of about 40hz rolling off 9db per octave.
Either way Im putting them in a sealed enclosure around 20 litres probably smaller, with EQ to get and f3 of about 40hz rolling off 9db per octave.
Hello kelticwizard
I have put this project on hold for the moment, too much uni work to do as usual.
I didnt get round to asking BK about their BX10P so im glad you did.
I could get 2 peerless PRs for £148 from wilmslow audio, unfortunatly the doller has gone back up so buying from UK is now definatly cheaper.
kelticwizard, you mentioned that I could use 1 12" PR instead of 2 10", do you think it would be almost as good (actually probably better when reduced cost taken into account).
The volume of the box I made allready could be reduced so I dont have to stick to the 47l size i made it.
Thanks for your time
Mark.
I have put this project on hold for the moment, too much uni work to do as usual.
I didnt get round to asking BK about their BX10P so im glad you did.
I could get 2 peerless PRs for £148 from wilmslow audio, unfortunatly the doller has gone back up so buying from UK is now definatly cheaper.
kelticwizard, you mentioned that I could use 1 12" PR instead of 2 10", do you think it would be almost as good (actually probably better when reduced cost taken into account).
The volume of the box I made allready could be reduced so I dont have to stick to the 47l size i made it.
Thanks for your time
Mark.
A single PR of sufficient excursion/mass loading capability is fine until it gets energized at any appreciable SPL. Like I said early on in this thread, two PRs ~cancel out their rocking motion, but with only one, the sub has to be massive to stay still, ergo it's not a good idea to use only one unless you're sure it will never be energized to anywhere near its excursion limits. This means tuning it down where the room is pressurized, usually around 20Hz or less, which means big/heavy/expensive PRs.
Anyway, with 47L available, and considering the cost of good PRs, I'm with catapult; two drivers EQ'd ~flat in-room is a superior performing system for a similar amount of $$. Even if you don't want to afford the EQ, putting it up against a wall (or best, a corner) will probably be sufficient, but if it's still bass-shy, then reduce the Vb as required to increase its Q.
GM
Anyway, with 47L available, and considering the cost of good PRs, I'm with catapult; two drivers EQ'd ~flat in-room is a superior performing system for a similar amount of $$. Even if you don't want to afford the EQ, putting it up against a wall (or best, a corner) will probably be sufficient, but if it's still bass-shy, then reduce the Vb as required to increase its Q.
GM
What about a bigger box
First of all, let me just say that I am somewhat of a newbie, still learning about speaker design. However, I am in the process of designing either a 3 or a 2.5 way design, using a seas excel mid and tweet in one enclosure, and 2 peerless xls 10's in the other. I am therefore in the same position as the person who began this post. For me, I am not worried about my box being as small as possible, in fact I probably require a larger box in the neighborhood of 80L to stand the mid and tweet enclosure on.
The thing is that PR's cost a lot of money. I can't afford to buy 4 of them. In addition, although I know physics has the last say, I find it hard to believe that you won't get good bass out of an 80 or 100L cabinet with 2 xls 10's. When I say good bass I mean excellent transient response with acceptable low frequency extension. Also, PR's have a steeper dropoff curve than a ported design. If I was to build a sealed cabinet of this size, what do you think they would sound like in the lower end. Also, ported designs haven't really been discussed yet, so what are peoples' opinions on their application in this scenario (maybe not the same cabinet size; for 2 10's peerless says 52L, 7cm x 93cm port) in regards to sound and practabilty of construction. Thanks for your help,
Philip
First of all, let me just say that I am somewhat of a newbie, still learning about speaker design. However, I am in the process of designing either a 3 or a 2.5 way design, using a seas excel mid and tweet in one enclosure, and 2 peerless xls 10's in the other. I am therefore in the same position as the person who began this post. For me, I am not worried about my box being as small as possible, in fact I probably require a larger box in the neighborhood of 80L to stand the mid and tweet enclosure on.
The thing is that PR's cost a lot of money. I can't afford to buy 4 of them. In addition, although I know physics has the last say, I find it hard to believe that you won't get good bass out of an 80 or 100L cabinet with 2 xls 10's. When I say good bass I mean excellent transient response with acceptable low frequency extension. Also, PR's have a steeper dropoff curve than a ported design. If I was to build a sealed cabinet of this size, what do you think they would sound like in the lower end. Also, ported designs haven't really been discussed yet, so what are peoples' opinions on their application in this scenario (maybe not the same cabinet size; for 2 10's peerless says 52L, 7cm x 93cm port) in regards to sound and practabilty of construction. Thanks for your help,
Philip
The box size is related to the driver parameters and provides an air spring behind the driver. Making the box really small makes this spring harder to contract and expand which overdamps the driver. Making the box big underdamps and makes the spring easier to push around. These two need to be balanced correctly, is get the box size just right, so that the spring is loading the driver correctly. Getting the box the right size will yeild the best transient response. Make it too big or too small and your transient perfect response starts to drift. T perf I think is Q=0.5.
Why do you need the box to have an internal vol of 80 litres to put a mid/tweet cab on anyway? That was one of the reasons I moved away from the 850146, with an internal of 66 litres, the box was too big. I got my XLS to use a smaller cabinet.
Once you factor in cabinet thickness the cab size increases a bit. With the XLS id deffo use double thickness MDF. And then if you need to increase you cabinet even more for visual purposes just add a compartment in the bottom of the speaker and fill it with stones or sand.
Why do you need the box to have an internal vol of 80 litres to put a mid/tweet cab on anyway? That was one of the reasons I moved away from the 850146, with an internal of 66 litres, the box was too big. I got my XLS to use a smaller cabinet.
Once you factor in cabinet thickness the cab size increases a bit. With the XLS id deffo use double thickness MDF. And then if you need to increase you cabinet even more for visual purposes just add a compartment in the bottom of the speaker and fill it with stones or sand.
Hey 5th Element, thanks for the help. Ok... I see what you are saying about the box size. One thing I am wondering is where you come up with the Q = .5? Is that a ratio of VAS and cabinet size?
I just said 80L beause I didn't want my top enclosure to sit on the floor, however in thinking about it you are right - 80L is kind of big.
Peerless talks about achieving their desired response by using a passive radiator. However, if you were able to replace the passive radiator with another driver wouldn't that be better? The first cone would be the same in either case, but the second cone would be working harder in the case of a second driver vs. the cone of a PR. In this scenario you would have higher power handling, and the advantages of a sealed box. In fact, having 2 drivers in one cabinet seems to me like having 2 subs. The question then becomes: is one driver with a passive radiator better than 2 sealed subwoofers? I would think the 2 sealed would be better, right?
I just said 80L beause I didn't want my top enclosure to sit on the floor, however in thinking about it you are right - 80L is kind of big.
Peerless talks about achieving their desired response by using a passive radiator. However, if you were able to replace the passive radiator with another driver wouldn't that be better? The first cone would be the same in either case, but the second cone would be working harder in the case of a second driver vs. the cone of a PR. In this scenario you would have higher power handling, and the advantages of a sealed box. In fact, having 2 drivers in one cabinet seems to me like having 2 subs. The question then becomes: is one driver with a passive radiator better than 2 sealed subwoofers? I would think the 2 sealed would be better, right?
It's not as straight forward as that Phillip. The passive is actually a replacement for a port in a vented system. You actually tune the box and passive combo to extend the frequency response i.e. go deeper. Two active subs will be louder at a given frequency and require more enclosure space.
Hey Vikash. I understand about how a PR is like a port, and I am thinking that a second driver could have the same effect. If you have an xls at, say, 80dB @ 30Hz, you could imagine that with a PR it would go up to 83dB. However, if you simply added another subwoofer, wouldn't their outputs sum to give you this figure of 83dB (or something greater than 80?) even if you were running them in series or paralell?
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.