-I think the "utterance" is exactly on point.
You've asked for something that is unobtanium, and from your other posts - you understand that. That: "efficiently" never should have been added (and again, YOU KNOW THAT), and at the very least should have been amended in another post by now.
We tend to call behavior like this TROLLING.
As for what you asked for in your first post without regard to efficiency: I've given you that. But now apparently you like the idea of the SW26DAC76-3-DV which does NOT meet the requirement of an inverted surround no higher than the frame.
So what gives? Certainly the topic you've presented does - because the SB doesn't meet your constraints and there is no driver that is reasonably efficient under the other constraints you've posed.
What do you really want that actually is obtainable?
-anything less than this is WASTING PEOPLE'S TIME.
You've asked for something that is unobtanium, and from your other posts - you understand that. That: "efficiently" never should have been added (and again, YOU KNOW THAT), and at the very least should have been amended in another post by now.
We tend to call behavior like this TROLLING.
As for what you asked for in your first post without regard to efficiency: I've given you that. But now apparently you like the idea of the SW26DAC76-3-DV which does NOT meet the requirement of an inverted surround no higher than the frame.
So what gives? Certainly the topic you've presented does - because the SB doesn't meet your constraints and there is no driver that is reasonably efficient under the other constraints you've posed.
What do you really want that actually is obtainable?
-anything less than this is WASTING PEOPLE'S TIME.
Last edited:
I don't have much idea how to respond to your accusations, Scott. Maybe I forgot to say thank you for SBS-250F38AL01-04 before I earned the troll title. From technical side, SB subwoofer is considerably more efficient in same size sealed enclosure after applying necessary drive voltages and filters, than your Tymphany driver and it actually requires 2x more space to become as energy-efficient per given dB SPL than dual voice coil SB Acoustics proposition. I cannot give 2x more enclosure space to work in but I can give up other design choices (inverted surround for example) when pretending component is worth it. That's it, thanks to everyone to give their input here and I'm sorry to waste your time here and being on such attitude, I will not do it anymore.
When multiple people point out the same issue with your request being unobtainable: something is wrong, and you know it.
Effectively responding to those posts as: "yeah, whatever - give me what I'm looking for" - is WHY I responded the way I did.
As far as calling you a troll: nope. Instead your behavior in this limited instance was pretty much within the common-use of "trolling".
Now then, simply saying "A" is more efficient in the same size sealed enclosure then "B" isn't really helpful. What is the volume you are looking for? Sealed only? What sort of lower freq. response? Etc.. Also, have you given-up on the inverted surround and will allow the more traditional surround? Why did you want that in the first place? Do you still need aluminum, if so why?
-basically you've not provided enough information for others to give anything close to useful suggestions in their search FOR YOU. (..though unfortunately that's all to common, and by itself does not arise to "trolling").
Effectively responding to those posts as: "yeah, whatever - give me what I'm looking for" - is WHY I responded the way I did.
As far as calling you a troll: nope. Instead your behavior in this limited instance was pretty much within the common-use of "trolling".
Now then, simply saying "A" is more efficient in the same size sealed enclosure then "B" isn't really helpful. What is the volume you are looking for? Sealed only? What sort of lower freq. response? Etc.. Also, have you given-up on the inverted surround and will allow the more traditional surround? Why did you want that in the first place? Do you still need aluminum, if so why?
-basically you've not provided enough information for others to give anything close to useful suggestions in their search FOR YOU. (..though unfortunately that's all to common, and by itself does not arise to "trolling").
Last edited:
Here you are right becouse I armoured myself with this attitude becouse of premonition that instead of information, others would like to inquire why and why not instead of give an answer wasting not only their time but mine also. I'm in urgent need.
In the light of above it's OK, what I'm left with..
Dual-opposed woofers arrangement in total thickness of max 9", 10 dm3 space per driver (common sealed enclosure), digitally equalized to f0~30-35Hz, Q0=0.7, powered both with one-channel class-D amplifier providing max. 45 Vrms output voltage, drivers being able to move more than 7% cabinet space equivalent per stroke within rated voltage drive level and within rated power specs, aluminium diaphragm for providing pistonic motion in the range up to 400Hz or so, for internal cavity heat dissipation and for good look as large part of side walls. Choice of dual voice coil version of SW26DAC76-3-DV was overlooked by me for a long time from unkwnown reason.....
Last edited:
If I've got the time I'll look for other potential solutions later today. 🙂 Though the SW26DAC76-3-DV at 12mm of linear excursion looks pretty good!
In addition to the previously mentioned Rekhorn driver (in multiples):
Try modeling the Anarchy:
http://www.zaphaudio.com/temp/EX-Anarchy-TS.gif
At about 4 inches in depth it should give you another inch between the drivers for the motor's vents.
It's Vas is really low and it's Qe is higher, so extension near the average should be better except for the fact that Fs is quite a bit higher (so that 30-50 Hz will need a fair bit of boost). Because of the much lower Vas, also consider 4 drivers per cabinet when compared to the SB.
http://www.zaphaudio.com/temp/EX-Anarchy-HD.gif
Note: they have both 4 ohm versions and 8 ohm (unlike the Rekhorn) though the 8 ohm isn't currently in stock:
Anarchy 7 inch woofer by Denovo Audio
-double the price though (when compared to the Rekhorn).. and shipping would probably be cruel.
Try modeling the Anarchy:
http://www.zaphaudio.com/temp/EX-Anarchy-TS.gif
At about 4 inches in depth it should give you another inch between the drivers for the motor's vents.
It's Vas is really low and it's Qe is higher, so extension near the average should be better except for the fact that Fs is quite a bit higher (so that 30-50 Hz will need a fair bit of boost). Because of the much lower Vas, also consider 4 drivers per cabinet when compared to the SB.
http://www.zaphaudio.com/temp/EX-Anarchy-HD.gif
Note: they have both 4 ohm versions and 8 ohm (unlike the Rekhorn) though the 8 ohm isn't currently in stock:
Anarchy 7 inch woofer by Denovo Audio
-double the price though (when compared to the Rekhorn).. and shipping would probably be cruel.
Last edited:
Thanks! I will investigate your suggestions tomorrow becouse now it's quite late here and it always take some time.
Long-term availability and linear displacement per dollar is also seriously considered by me.
In the attachment there are my sims of mentioned SB driver I did earlier in the day in function of box size, cut-off frequency and voice coil temperature.
Long-term availability and linear displacement per dollar is also seriously considered by me.
In the attachment there are my sims of mentioned SB driver I did earlier in the day in function of box size, cut-off frequency and voice coil temperature.
Attachments
I looked further and didn't find anything better than the SB, despite numerous offerings from the car-audio sector.
Thanks! The closest competitor was TLBL's option of Reckhorn D-165 which also was pleasingly cheap, has good midrange extension and is available in Europe, I will seriously consider it in smaller designs.
It seems that SW26DAC76-3-DV wins by a far margin, first attachment shows sims for three 7" woofers - red is Reckhorn, green is Anarchy, Blue is Tymphany SBS160F35AL. Reckhorn can provide the same bass efficiency in considerably smaller enclosure (6 dm3 vs 10 dm3) than Tymphany and Anarchy woofers. It is visible on first graph where dB per Watt dotted lines are placed closest to each other in the bass range. Unfortunately it will run out of steam becouse 80W per driver RMS power rating is exceeded. In turn, Anarchy will not be able to fully stretch its wings in this cabinet size and when pushed, it will also jump over the rated RMS power (higher drive levels are not shown, they are brought to the same SPL level). Series vs parallel connection of woofers pairs is irrelevant from power consideration, only from driving voltage.
#2 simulation shows blue and green channels swapped for single SW26DAC76-3-DV woofer. This insane driver will start the game already at 6 dm3 (!) providing even better power efficiency than a pair of Reckhorns in the same cabinet space and also the same SPL at lower cone travel (but its red graph is covered by green on the first diagram). Changing cabinet size to 10 dm3 ends with +6dB SPL gain at the power usage of pair of Reckhorns and utiliziation of full cone excursion under moderate drive voltage.
SB woofer wins heavily also in category displacement per driver's weight and is a bit worse in displacement per dollar as Reckhorn.
It seems that SW26DAC76-3-DV wins by a far margin, first attachment shows sims for three 7" woofers - red is Reckhorn, green is Anarchy, Blue is Tymphany SBS160F35AL. Reckhorn can provide the same bass efficiency in considerably smaller enclosure (6 dm3 vs 10 dm3) than Tymphany and Anarchy woofers. It is visible on first graph where dB per Watt dotted lines are placed closest to each other in the bass range. Unfortunately it will run out of steam becouse 80W per driver RMS power rating is exceeded. In turn, Anarchy will not be able to fully stretch its wings in this cabinet size and when pushed, it will also jump over the rated RMS power (higher drive levels are not shown, they are brought to the same SPL level). Series vs parallel connection of woofers pairs is irrelevant from power consideration, only from driving voltage.
#2 simulation shows blue and green channels swapped for single SW26DAC76-3-DV woofer. This insane driver will start the game already at 6 dm3 (!) providing even better power efficiency than a pair of Reckhorns in the same cabinet space and also the same SPL at lower cone travel (but its red graph is covered by green on the first diagram). Changing cabinet size to 10 dm3 ends with +6dB SPL gain at the power usage of pair of Reckhorns and utiliziation of full cone excursion under moderate drive voltage.
SB woofer wins heavily also in category displacement per driver's weight and is a bit worse in displacement per dollar as Reckhorn.
Attachments
Last edited:
-watts are "cheap" though (in an active DSP solution). To me this suggests as much surface area and linear excursion as possible.
Like 4 (or *more) drivers instead of 3 (to one SB) and just boosting the lower-end as needed despite the "sub"optimal volume along with a well done aperiodic vent.
*and those Rekhorns are dirt-cheap, what.. 6 of them to 1 SB?
Like 4 (or *more) drivers instead of 3 (to one SB) and just boosting the lower-end as needed despite the "sub"optimal volume along with a well done aperiodic vent.
*and those Rekhorns are dirt-cheap, what.. 6 of them to 1 SB?
Those reckhorns had caught my eye too. Compared to other stuff on the market they look to give you an absurd amount of performance for the price.
My guess is you want the inverted surround mostly for cosmetics. I was going to point out that when at maximum excursion, beyond xmax, the cone edge actually pushes out pretty much towards the height of a normal half roll anyway so in terms of how much clearance you need there's not really much in it.
One potential candidate would be the drivers b&w employs in their PV1 sub but these would be difficult to get/eBay.
My guess is you want the inverted surround mostly for cosmetics. I was going to point out that when at maximum excursion, beyond xmax, the cone edge actually pushes out pretty much towards the height of a normal half roll anyway so in terms of how much clearance you need there's not really much in it.
One potential candidate would be the drivers b&w employs in their PV1 sub but these would be difficult to get/eBay.
Yes inverted surround was mainly for cosmetics. I will check other 7" woofers but indeed it seems they are unbeatable for price - performance ratio for a small aluminium diaphragm subs in a small box.
In my country the price per displacement ratio is less radical in favour of Reckhorns becouse of rather steep shipping cost from Germany for heavy items. On the other hand, I have good distributors of SB Acoustics stuff in Poland, which means discounts and generally good prices expressed directly in PLN with free pick up locally.
Yeah Watts are cheap but it seems that weight and space saving with SB option will be better. How much could Reckhorn woofer weight?
In my country the price per displacement ratio is less radical in favour of Reckhorns becouse of rather steep shipping cost from Germany for heavy items. On the other hand, I have good distributors of SB Acoustics stuff in Poland, which means discounts and generally good prices expressed directly in PLN with free pick up locally.
Yeah Watts are cheap but it seems that weight and space saving with SB option will be better. How much could Reckhorn woofer weight?
In the US we call that a "road trip" opportunity. 😉
Google Maps
-of course haggle for your bulk-driver order first (w/out shipping). 😀
(..and when you get there, whip-out a DATS v2 for the rubb-buzz testing!)
Google Maps
-of course haggle for your bulk-driver order first (w/out shipping). 😀
(..and when you get there, whip-out a DATS v2 for the rubb-buzz testing!)
I have ordered 4 pcs of Reckhorns, we will see what they are worth....
Last edited:
-perhaps the best thing is: even if they are mediocre performers they are still a good value. 😀
Hopefully though they are an astounding value! 🙂
Hopefully though they are an astounding value! 🙂
Looking from the motor exterior appearance there is stack of huge ferrites along with 8mm top plate and 24-mm tall, 4-layer voice coil wound with high temperature wire on non conducting former. I expect that motor force along with BL lineaarity over 8mm geometric Xmax is preserved.
High inductance value clearly says that this is basic motor without shorting rings anywhere but such a basic drivers can be current driven what takes care of the midrange distortion.
Diaphragm is aluminium alloy but lack of distinct break up peak visible on their graphs indicates lousy stiffness of cone neck and vc former intersection and this is actually what bothers me much. I will investigate it.
Suspension linearity can be limiting factor here but it's not so stiff and the fact that it will work far into air spring compliance operation regime tells me that I should not worry about it.
High inductance value clearly says that this is basic motor without shorting rings anywhere but such a basic drivers can be current driven what takes care of the midrange distortion.
Diaphragm is aluminium alloy but lack of distinct break up peak visible on their graphs indicates lousy stiffness of cone neck and vc former intersection and this is actually what bothers me much. I will investigate it.
Suspension linearity can be limiting factor here but it's not so stiff and the fact that it will work far into air spring compliance operation regime tells me that I should not worry about it.
I am sorry for double post, I can't integrate it becouse it is too late . 🙁
German companies are rather honest and I expect those numers to be close to the truth. Especially power rating should be good in reality, they claim they use 250 degree C wire.
This particular driver is tested in Hobby HiFi 6/2015 on 61 page, could someone share it?
German companies are rather honest and I expect those numers to be close to the truth. Especially power rating should be good in reality, they claim they use 250 degree C wire.
This particular driver is tested in Hobby HiFi 6/2015 on 61 page, could someone share it?
It would be great if someone has it. Nobody tested it except HobbyHiFi at least to my knowledge.
Last edited: