I have been on the hunt for exactly what I am looking for in a sub (which is proving impossible to find). Anyway, I stumbled upon the JL Audio 13W7, which is huge, has huge Xmax, can work in very small sealed and PR boxes and put out quite high SPL doing it. In fact, it appears to best my Blueprint 1503 in all respects at first glance.
So, I was just wondering... Why doesn't anyone else use or talk about this beast? A search of the forums returned only about four threads. I know it is expensive, but if you look around, you can find them for $600 brand new on eBay. I know they probbaly have enormous inductance (so, I would be getting nowhere in my case going from Blueprint 1503 to this), but otherwise, the specs look pretty good. I, personally, would almost rather buy one of thes than a new Tumult.
So, I was just wondering what others' thoughts were about this driver. It seems as though it could be promising...
So, I was just wondering... Why doesn't anyone else use or talk about this beast? A search of the forums returned only about four threads. I know it is expensive, but if you look around, you can find them for $600 brand new on eBay. I know they probbaly have enormous inductance (so, I would be getting nowhere in my case going from Blueprint 1503 to this), but otherwise, the specs look pretty good. I, personally, would almost rather buy one of thes than a new Tumult.
So, I was just wondering what others' thoughts were about this driver. It seems as though it could be promising...
Mostly folks around here tend to use home audio speakers in the house, car audio speakers in the car, and mostly they talk about home audio; this is a car sub.
That said, with a properly designed box (usually way bigger than for the same driver in a car), a good car sub can do well at home.
That said, with a properly designed box (usually way bigger than for the same driver in a car), a good car sub can do well at home.
Just alot of better subs out there for $600, I think that is the only reason. I used a 13W7 in the home stereo for a long time, I loved it, it sounded great. JL did a phenomenol job designing the W7 series, but they are overpriced. When I was offered more than I payed for my W7, it was out the door and I upgraded.
95Honda-
Just wondering... What did you upgrade to?
I like the allure of an impressive-looking driver and am having conflicting ideas about my sub design between one impressive woofer or two or more "lesser" woofers...
Just wondering... What did you upgrade to?
I like the allure of an impressive-looking driver and am having conflicting ideas about my sub design between one impressive woofer or two or more "lesser" woofers...
I tried an Adire Maelstrom after that, sold it because it would reach it's mechanical limits very easily, had a Brahma 15" sub for a while, got rid of that, it was nice, but didn't have enough output by itself, a Pair of Type-R 15s (blah), a pair of Tumults (sounded awsome, but I blew 3 of these in 2 years, my fault), and now a pair of modified XXX 18s..... I like the XXXs...
could you elaborate on this please, Im curious what specifically you are looking for?
regarding the 13w7, what are you looking for ht subbass, music range bass ~40hz cutoff or loudness? Also with only 3ohms wired in series (DVC) you might have trouble finding an amp that can drive it safely. If I was in the position to spend that much money on one sub it would be a tumult 18D2, but im not.
Anyways just my two cents
They say that what I am looking for is impossible because of physics... Which, I must agree to, really...
I want a small-to-mid sized box (less than 4 cubic feet) that has extremely low distortion, high SPL (at least 115dB sustained from 30Hz up) all the way to 20Hz (-10dB max at 20Hz anechoic, preferably no more than -5dB at 30Hz), has all the slam one wishes for HT (which my current sub does, but it is just too large), but plays ultra musically for classical music/soundtracks (my current sub is 'ok' here). Also, for occasional rock music, I need clean, distinct control so the quick kick drum beats are clean and clear (not exactly a strong suit of my current sub).
I think I can achieve most of this by using a PR sub. If I use two PR's with very high mass (thinking 1800 grams, which is nearly 5 pounds, IIRC) in a relatively small box (2.5-3.5 cu.ft.) with a suitably low-distortion, extremely high excursion sub driver, it should all work pretty well. The way I figure it, for classical music, the excursion will not be very long (except for low bassoon/string bass/tuba/etc. notes), so the cleanliness and detail should be there because the PR's won't lend much delay to the system because they will weigh too much to move unless the sub driver is really pushing some air. Maybe I am imagining this, though. Anyway, in theory, it also seems as though it will retain all of its depth and slam since I'll be able to dig deep while retaining good SPL down low.
I am just searching for that suitable, low-distortion, high-X-max driver. My current driver (Blueprint 1503, which has 26mm X-max) seems like it will work, but I don't have a lot of faith in it because of its supposed high inductance, which undoubtedly will affect the sound in the much smaller box that is tuned higher. Currently, in its 7 cu.ft enclosure tuned to 15-18 Hz (I forget which, really) it sounds quite clean, although still muddy on top with rock music, and a little too boomy/over exaggerated for classical music soundtracks. But, it has immense slam and goes really deep, making movie experiences amazing.
I bought a Behringer Feedback Destroyer, but I haven't had time to analyze my room yet (if I ever do get to it at all...). So, that is what I am looking for. In short, servo-performance for music, huge-sub performance for HT, all from one relatively small PR box. And, to top it off, I don't want to spend a lot (I could, but for some reason, I just have this feeling that subs should be cheaper and I feel cheated when I have to pay $600 for a driver, even a cool looking one).
It sounds like you and I are in the same position except for spl, dont care about going that loud.
To help select a good woofer, what size room do you have? what are the mains and how low do they go cleanly?
Have you considered an LT ciricuit?
Personally I would stay with sealed, if you dont mind the clamshell look (you can cover it with grill cloth)I would go two subs isobaric. This configuration halves the box size requirement, and having two drivers mechanically out of phase "cancels" non-linearities in the suspension and motor.
To help select a good woofer, what size room do you have? what are the mains and how low do they go cleanly?
If they move at high volume or low frequencies, they will also move at low volume and high frequencies. Dont know much about PR but ive read others mention problems with too much mass.
Have you considered an LT ciricuit?
Personally I would stay with sealed, if you dont mind the clamshell look (you can cover it with grill cloth)I would go two subs isobaric. This configuration halves the box size requirement, and having two drivers mechanically out of phase "cancels" non-linearities in the suspension and motor.
A few points of my opinion I would like to add-
Passive Radiators only add cost over a properly sized vented design, nothing else (assuming space is less of a concern than efficency).
A vented box will give you more output and less distortion than a sealed box. (Again, assuming space is not a concern)
An LT is an inefficent design that should only be used because of space constraints.
Use a larger or multiple woofer if at all possible and cut your excursion down.
Isobaric adds 2X the driver cost and not much else, unless you are primarily concered about size, again.... There isn't a whole lot of audible distortion that occurs because of suspention non-linearities in the drivers currently avalible.
For a subwoofer, displacement is king for bottom octave performance. Don't expect much from little woofers with average throw.....
Passive Radiators only add cost over a properly sized vented design, nothing else (assuming space is less of a concern than efficency).
A vented box will give you more output and less distortion than a sealed box. (Again, assuming space is not a concern)
An LT is an inefficent design that should only be used because of space constraints.
Use a larger or multiple woofer if at all possible and cut your excursion down.
Isobaric adds 2X the driver cost and not much else, unless you are primarily concered about size, again.... There isn't a whole lot of audible distortion that occurs because of suspention non-linearities in the drivers currently avalible.
For a subwoofer, displacement is king for bottom octave performance. Don't expect much from little woofers with average throw.....
Yes, but not below resonance, if you tune ported boxes too low you get low frequencies but the rest of the bass isnt quite as good. If you tune it optimally, you get clean bass like you mentioned however you sacrifice the really deep "HT" bass. With classical music that he listens to, like me, I would prefer low group delay so that the sub integrates with the mains better and sounds more coherent. I know there is not alot of data (maybe now there is) on audibility of group delay at those low frequencies but I have always prefered sealed anyway.
this would be nice but he has that, he wants smaller. Larger woofers usually need larger boxes. Multiple woofers... double up on woofers double box size. You are right, that is the best way but hes not looking for that. Im going to be reworking an 18" with a bad foam surround, I have room for it and am ok with a fairly large box. This is why I asked him how big his listening area is, you can get away with smaller cones in smaller rooms.
unless
or
You said there is not alot of audible distortion, it would be nice to get rid of what there is, right?
ALL suspensions and motors have some degree of non-linearities, it doesnt hurt to minimize it especially when you can halve your box size in the process. with isobaric you can run two 18's or 15's and maintain compactness, low excrusion and high spl.
Sorry to be so combative but Im trying to focus on what he wants not what you and I consider to be acoustically best. Im sure he know bigger is better, and large boxes are better for low bass, he has one!
Btw needtubes I modeled the 1503 in winisd, no wonder you dont like the musicality of it. The woofer rolls off really early, and the 16-18hz tuning with that box size produced a roller coaster FR and lots of group delay. Unless the new 1503's have different specs from yours, that would explain the muddiness.
I like how a sealed box seems to blend better with music, but sealed never works out for me for HT. I had my Blueprint sealed for a while, and while it sounded MUCH better for music, it was terrible for HT because there was no slam. Now, it is in a huge ported box, which is OK for music, and amazing for HT. I still haven't gotten exactly where I want to be...
I would really kind of like to go isobaric with two good, low-distortion, high-excursion drivers. If they were sensitive enough, I'd still get a good amount of SPL for movies and for showing off. But, most drivers cost so much that buying two would be a killer. And, I've been wanting a good plate amp that had auto-on and no fan noise (my power amp is great, but I hate the fan noise and having to open the closet door to turn it on). So, my cost would be enormous if I went isobaric with two high-end drivers and a high-power amp... For the price and amount of trouble, I could probably buy a Velodyne HGS. 😉
I definitely agree on the 1503... The model of it looks rather bad. Group delay is crazy down low, and it does roll off early. I have found several different versions of specs for the 1503. The ones from the Acoustic Visions website (at the time I bought mine about a year or two ago) were supposedly totally wrong and made the graphs look terrible. I have some DUMAX specs that are supposedly more correct, but who knows. The graphs using the DUMAX specs look slightly better, but not magnificent because the inductance is unknown. Some say the Le is 4, some 16... Either way, it messes with the frequency response and group delay.
I would really kind of like to go isobaric with two good, low-distortion, high-excursion drivers. If they were sensitive enough, I'd still get a good amount of SPL for movies and for showing off. But, most drivers cost so much that buying two would be a killer. And, I've been wanting a good plate amp that had auto-on and no fan noise (my power amp is great, but I hate the fan noise and having to open the closet door to turn it on). So, my cost would be enormous if I went isobaric with two high-end drivers and a high-power amp... For the price and amount of trouble, I could probably buy a Velodyne HGS. 😉
I definitely agree on the 1503... The model of it looks rather bad. Group delay is crazy down low, and it does roll off early. I have found several different versions of specs for the 1503. The ones from the Acoustic Visions website (at the time I bought mine about a year or two ago) were supposedly totally wrong and made the graphs look terrible. I have some DUMAX specs that are supposedly more correct, but who knows. The graphs using the DUMAX specs look slightly better, but not magnificent because the inductance is unknown. Some say the Le is 4, some 16... Either way, it messes with the frequency response and group delay.
This is IIRC due to the low Qts of the driver, low Q drivers roll off sooner-you might want to do a search on that though to confirm it.
With isobaric you dont need as good of a driver, you dont need low distortion, and if I were you I would go for Sd not Xmax.
Isobaric almost doubles cone strength( there are losses) due to the two cones interacting with the same air volume. You dont need low distortion drivers because isobaric helps with that, the drivers I quoted you on is what you would need for any other configuration.
My advice would be to look for the FR you want from a single woofer in the "half you budget" range ignoring box size, the isobaric config. will cut that in half. This Woofer might interest you. It has a decent price too.
Attachments
I'd love to discuss this but this sounds more like a personal attack from a kid, then from someone who knows what they are talking about.
Why dont you elaborate on why its bad, other than the fact that you dont like isobaric
Not a kid, I've been building speakers and amplifiers for over 10 years, I'm 28 years old and have been an elctronic tech in the military for the last 10. I worked for Audioprism designing and building tube amplifiers for 5 years before I joined the service. I have done RF testing and consultation work including EMI emenation testing for 2 major audio manufacturers. I have designed pre-amplifiers, RF gainstages, FM antennas, Dynamic loudspeaker motor parts, have hand assembled many subwoofer drivers..... Blah Blah Blah....
OK, I said that was bad advice because you basically told him to buy 2 woofers that were only 1/2 as good as one decent quality one because the "Isobarik" configuration would null out all of the non-linearities. So what he will do, also following your advice, will buy a set of subwoofers with half the excursion capability and put them together in clamshell and put them in a sealed box, hit them with a bunch of power and wonder why they bottom out so easily and don't sound signifigantly better than one of the single subs in a larger box. And, when he realizes that he will have no more acoustical output thatn one of the single subwoofers in a larger box. All of this because you told him to buy 2 woofers of lesser quailty because the Isobarik will cure all of the non-linearity problems....
But then again, I'm just a kid.... 🙂
OK, I said that was bad advice because you basically told him to buy 2 woofers that were only 1/2 as good as one decent quality one because the "Isobarik" configuration would null out all of the non-linearities. So what he will do, also following your advice, will buy a set of subwoofers with half the excursion capability and put them together in clamshell and put them in a sealed box, hit them with a bunch of power and wonder why they bottom out so easily and don't sound signifigantly better than one of the single subs in a larger box. And, when he realizes that he will have no more acoustical output thatn one of the single subwoofers in a larger box. All of this because you told him to buy 2 woofers of lesser quailty because the Isobarik will cure all of the non-linearity problems....
But then again, I'm just a kid.... 🙂
Impressive, now go take a communications class. In the future try and respond to what people actually say and not change their words....
1/2 as good come on man, never said that. The point I was trying to convey is that you dont need as high of a quality (distortion-wise) woofer when you run isobaric, period. And I never said it would "null" out the distortion, read it again sobaric helps with that\.
No he wont, he's not dumb, nobody told him to buy "cheap" drivers and since he will probably get winisd like suggested he will put them in whatever box they need to be in, sealed or otherwise.
Half the excursion!! What? Why would anyone read anything I said that way? I never told him to get a low excursion driver, I said if I were you I would go for Sd not Xmax. Any on here who cares about spl and quality want to argue against cone area being better than cone displacement?
lesser quality... hmmm, you read that how you wanted to read that. He thought he need two high quality drivers, I simply stated this is not necesary, heres why. "high quality" subs today have one or both of these traits, and Im generalizing here; small box requirements or high excursion. Average woofers have average xmax, average box size requirements...etc.
Telling someone they dont need high end woofers doesnt imply that the need the cheapest out there although maybe I should have specifically stated that for absolute clarity. Cure all, again your words, mine were, well, o.k. maybe the "cancels" in quotes is not a universally accepted way of saying "dont read this 100% literally"
Now I know I sometimes word things so that it is not 100% clear to everyone who reads it but hey thats why you ask questions and not dismiss it with "really bad advice" and nothing else, hence me referring to your post as childish.
You should reread this post and realize how you are being argumentative and not backing up your opinions properly, I just did although I didnt mention each ambiguity from my earlier posts I will be mindful of them in the future.
Someone with your educational background cant afford to be so combative as your experience is so crucial to the success of this website, particularly in amp design which seems to be your specialty.
Thanks for listening,
Needtubes, anything you thought was unclear feel free to question were all here to help and learn.
Remaining neutral,
AFAIK, an isobarik design with opposite facing woofers are a lot like a push-pull amplifier stage. This concept does tend to allieviate assymetrical (even order) distortion. In the case of the amp, there is greater excursion (when one device can't go any further). that one device on its own.
AFAIK, an isobarik design with opposite facing woofers are a lot like a push-pull amplifier stage. This concept does tend to allieviate assymetrical (even order) distortion. In the case of the amp, there is greater excursion (when one device can't go any further). that one device on its own.
I have been considering isobaric so I could use a smaller box and hopefully get the same performance of a larger box. I would definitely use two good quality woofers, though. The SoundSplinter woofers come to mind immediately, although I might use the 12's instead of 15's. Two of the 12's model really well in a small box without being isobaric.
I am currently exploring other pre-built subs at the moment...
I am currently exploring other pre-built subs at the moment...
- Status
- Not open for further replies.