Hello, I ask for help here. I am currently happy with the sound of my pair sub diy subs. I used a 90 liter sealed box with a Hypex FA 501 500w 4 ohm module and a Scan-Speak Discovery 30W/4558T00 Subwoofer. However to get a long response below 50hz at high volume, scanspeak suffers and is close to its physical limit. I would like information on other 12” speakers that will fit into a 90 liters sealed box, preferably 4ohm capable of going down to 30hz comfortably. I listen to all the options although I prefer not to exceed 500 eur per unit. The crossover frequency used can vary between 80 and 40 hz to reinforce a 10” wofer from my loudspeakers. If there is already a topic like this, I apologize and accept the link.
BR
Toni
BR
Toni
Last edited by a moderator:
That box is way to big for a sealed config with that driver, half the volume should be enough and give a better rollof to lower, what is probally the problem now. That 90L does not give a good rolloff below 30hz and make the box go very low loud and so use a lot of xmax for that where you don't want it. And a HPF at a bit (25hz or so below can solve that issue probally without changing the box.
Otherwise, an SB34NRX75-6 is fit for that box and that tuning and goes louder...
Otherwise, an SB34NRX75-6 is fit for that box and that tuning and goes louder...
hello, thanks for answering. Instead of working with a high pass filter, I did it through the hypex ecu, dropping 15 db at 15hz with a Q of 7. With vinyl records I try to make it work like a "subsonic filter" but the needle pitch continues to push the sub membrane dangerously to its physical limits
br
toni
br
toni
that is because that eq is not enough, you need a relative steep filter higher up to avoid that low response eating up xmax. I would use a 24dB/octave (4th order) or steper filter at 25hz to do that. It also depends on what level you play. If it's above 105dB at 30Hz, you just expect to much from that driver i think. You'll need a bigger driver or more than one to get there. Even that SB34 or any 12" won't go much further without getting close to xmech.
Estoy de acuerdo con tu solución. Lo pondré en la práctica. Es una buena manera de arreglar el exceso de volumen para el modelo de subwoofer que tengo. La alternativa que propuse fue conocer otros subwoofers que por su diseño se integrarían mejor en una caja sellada de 90 litros, manejando altos spl entre 20 y 80 hz.
BR
Toni
BR
Toni
Totl Dayton are a really good value. I bought one, that will lead to multiple. If you can eat up some of the cabinet volume https://www.parts-express.com/Dayto...-Subwoofer-22-ohm-295-291?quantity=1#speclink As you can see its built heavier and beefier than the scanspeak. And handles more power.
Or the baffle could easily be modified to accommodate two. Personally I prefer option A, one per box. Its easier to tune singles in room (and sounds better), opposed to
one dual box.
Or the baffle could easily be modified to accommodate two. Personally I prefer option A, one per box. Its easier to tune singles in room (and sounds better), opposed to
one dual box.
English please, i and most here don't speak Spanish (i assume it is Spanish) so ...
Google translate:
I agree with your solution. I will put it into practice. It's a good way to fix excess volume for the subwoofer model I have. The alternative that I proposed was to know other subwoofers that, due to their design, would be better integrated into a 90-liter sealed box, handling high spl between 20 and 80 hz.
I agree with your solution. I will put it into practice. It's a good way to fix excess volume for the subwoofer model I have. The alternative that I proposed was to know other subwoofers that, due to their design, would be better integrated into a 90-liter sealed box, handling high spl between 20 and 80 hz.
More reason to replace the 1 with two. Desired spl can be achieved while stessing he system less while making less audible distortion, decreased room nodes, more balance and fuller audible base, larger sound stage..I could stop there or continue. A minimum of at least two subs is my rule. You net alot of sq with this upgrade.
Eminence Lab12 and Dayton UM12-22
If I remember are both around 50 liter for .707 Qtc and 90 liter for .5
But the motor design and linear travel all relatively the same.
Within reason all relatively close to 14mm.
as what you have now. Technically a 90 liter enclosure is .5 Qtc
for flat hifi intentions
But as mentioned boosted , most people go .707 or even .8 Qtc
for boosted. AKA 40 to 50 liters
I dont know what Euro prices are for
CSS SDX12-XBL2
the only way to double linear travel and somewhat hold
same sensitivity. is rather large magnet and price jump to
go from coils with 14mm of travel to 25mm.
Either way need more power than 100 watts.
Which is all a boosted speaker is gonna take
with 14 mm of travel.
Likely the mentioned 4th order would help.
If I remember are both around 50 liter for .707 Qtc and 90 liter for .5
But the motor design and linear travel all relatively the same.
Within reason all relatively close to 14mm.
as what you have now. Technically a 90 liter enclosure is .5 Qtc
for flat hifi intentions
But as mentioned boosted , most people go .707 or even .8 Qtc
for boosted. AKA 40 to 50 liters
I dont know what Euro prices are for
CSS SDX12-XBL2
the only way to double linear travel and somewhat hold
same sensitivity. is rather large magnet and price jump to
go from coils with 14mm of travel to 25mm.
Either way need more power than 100 watts.
Which is all a boosted speaker is gonna take
with 14 mm of travel.
Likely the mentioned 4th order would help.
Sorry, Chrome's automatic translator has played a trick on me. Thanks for the help.
BR
Toni
Actually I am already using two subs in the estuary (see photos). Thanks for the help.
BR
Toni
Attachments
this is a misalignment as in 90L that drier will easily exceed x-max.
The woofer cabinet and amplifier needs to be matched so that the speaker can use all of its available excursion but not more, using the least amount of power necessary.
You heard of people putting subs into incredibly small boxes and needing incredibly large amount of power? You got it the other way round-too big a box and easily exceeding x-max .
The 30W4558 does much better in 40-50L.
It may sound counter intuitive, but it’s much better to have 4 of those subwoofers, each in 45L.
The woofer cabinet and amplifier needs to be matched so that the speaker can use all of its available excursion but not more, using the least amount of power necessary.
You heard of people putting subs into incredibly small boxes and needing incredibly large amount of power? You got it the other way round-too big a box and easily exceeding x-max .
The 30W4558 does much better in 40-50L.
It may sound counter intuitive, but it’s much better to have 4 of those subwoofers, each in 45L.
One 30W/4558T00 in 90L box-
Whoops- thermal and excursion limits exceeded with just 150W (see cursors)
Now 2 of the woofers in series in on 90L box. Alternatively 1 woofer each in a 45L box each, wired in series with the plate amp (piggy back series connection)
Makes better use of Hypex amplifier power (250W in nominal 8 ohm load), and gives more SPL and doesn't exceed thermal or excursion limits.
You may say... "Oh that's not audiophile quality. But bass shows lump at 50Hz.
These are all 2pi simulatations.
Option 1) Model with baffle dimensions, to simulate baffle losses.
In a typical 35-40cm wide cabinet the brown line is closer to what is achieve in 4pi (free field/anechoic)
Whoops- thermal and excursion limits exceeded with just 150W (see cursors)
Now 2 of the woofers in series in on 90L box. Alternatively 1 woofer each in a 45L box each, wired in series with the plate amp (piggy back series connection)
Makes better use of Hypex amplifier power (250W in nominal 8 ohm load), and gives more SPL and doesn't exceed thermal or excursion limits.
You may say... "Oh that's not audiophile quality. But bass shows lump at 50Hz.
These are all 2pi simulatations.
Option 1) Model with baffle dimensions, to simulate baffle losses.
In a typical 35-40cm wide cabinet the brown line is closer to what is achieve in 4pi (free field/anechoic)
Last edited:
I'd rather go a couple shades smaller with a sealed cabinet with a given sub rather than a shade larger.
In this case I would have even more reason to go multiples. Those seas don't like a great deal of power. I use the word great loosely.
Quick solution would be steep 4th order Highpass
to reduce excursion.
Also can corner loading to reduce needed boost.
even corner loaded facing straight up.
Positive note
These drivers have impressive inductance and sensitivity.
and I understand the .5 Qtc design.
Overall the system and enclosures in the photos seem rather impressive.
Higher SPL looking at 25mm xmax or as mentioned double the drivers.
Basically doing the same thing more xmax. current Drivers used are close to maybe better
than others I can think of in the same price range. Sensitivity and inductance seems rather good
actually. Large sealed subs are my thing. but I always corner loaded and used little boost.
to reduce excursion.
Also can corner loading to reduce needed boost.
even corner loaded facing straight up.
Positive note
These drivers have impressive inductance and sensitivity.
and I understand the .5 Qtc design.
Overall the system and enclosures in the photos seem rather impressive.
Higher SPL looking at 25mm xmax or as mentioned double the drivers.
Basically doing the same thing more xmax. current Drivers used are close to maybe better
than others I can think of in the same price range. Sensitivity and inductance seems rather good
actually. Large sealed subs are my thing. but I always corner loaded and used little boost.
Hello, thank you very much to all the people who are making comments.
From what I read, there are several possibilities to improve and optimize my two subwofers:
1. The simplest: high pass filter to prevent damage to the scan speak. A 4th order at 25hz could be an alternative.
2. Reduce the volume of the box to around 50 litres. So I can get an optimal performance of the scanspeak. To do so, could it be a solution to introduce bags of sand into the enclosure to reduce its volume? At the same time, it would gain mass at the base.
3. Replace the two scanspeakers with one of the models that have been mentioned and with more suitable technical characteristics for the liters in the box.
4. Add one more sub to each box? That is to say, two scanspeak for each box (maintaining the volume of 90 liters? I have reviewed the measurements of the box, and although it is somewhat fair, but there is space on the front to add another sub below the one that already exists.
BR
Toni
From what I read, there are several possibilities to improve and optimize my two subwofers:
1. The simplest: high pass filter to prevent damage to the scan speak. A 4th order at 25hz could be an alternative.
2. Reduce the volume of the box to around 50 litres. So I can get an optimal performance of the scanspeak. To do so, could it be a solution to introduce bags of sand into the enclosure to reduce its volume? At the same time, it would gain mass at the base.
3. Replace the two scanspeakers with one of the models that have been mentioned and with more suitable technical characteristics for the liters in the box.
4. Add one more sub to each box? That is to say, two scanspeak for each box (maintaining the volume of 90 liters? I have reviewed the measurements of the box, and although it is somewhat fair, but there is space on the front to add another sub below the one that already exists.
BR
Toni