Hello there, i need a pair of subwoofers for bookshelf speakers, and though about building a ripole desing.This would come to a 15m2 student apartment and they will be only for music, so no bone crushing volumes used, the sound quality will be priority.
I thought about using Feedbackdestroyer as an EQ to controll some room modes.
After reading some posts, i think that Peerless SLS12 might work as ripole pair nicely, they said SLS series 8" 10" 12" might be one of the best drivers at least here in europe for this kind of setup. Besides i heard that a sub made out of SLS10 was better at music in a close box, when compared to xls-12 in a closed box, althought offcourse didn't play as deep but what played was integrated to mains very nicely.This is now important if this ripole won't work in the end properly, so i will just do common closed boxs.
SLS10, QTS 0.51 and for SLS12, QTS 0.47
http://www.tymphany.com/datasheet/printview.php?id=38
http://www.tymphany.com/datasheet/printview.php?id=37
4-Drivers, 2 at each box in a ripole confiquration, like they do at audioelevation http://www.audioelevation.de/attac_400.htm
do you think that for a output, 35hz at 85-90 db would be possibly?
Help, comments, critique or link to an existing project would be greatly appreciated!
I thought about using Feedbackdestroyer as an EQ to controll some room modes.
After reading some posts, i think that Peerless SLS12 might work as ripole pair nicely, they said SLS series 8" 10" 12" might be one of the best drivers at least here in europe for this kind of setup. Besides i heard that a sub made out of SLS10 was better at music in a close box, when compared to xls-12 in a closed box, althought offcourse didn't play as deep but what played was integrated to mains very nicely.This is now important if this ripole won't work in the end properly, so i will just do common closed boxs.
SLS10, QTS 0.51 and for SLS12, QTS 0.47
http://www.tymphany.com/datasheet/printview.php?id=38
http://www.tymphany.com/datasheet/printview.php?id=37
4-Drivers, 2 at each box in a ripole confiquration, like they do at audioelevation http://www.audioelevation.de/attac_400.htm
do you think that for a output, 35hz at 85-90 db would be possibly?
Help, comments, critique or link to an existing project would be greatly appreciated!
Oh yes, second thing that someone told me about SLS drivers on general:
"Personally I wouldn't use a driver that has 8mm of Xmax in this application. The suspension travel is all one has in a dipole, so the longer the travel the better.
My suggestion is use something that has no less than +/-14mm Xmax, and double that is better yet."
So is SLS actually good for dipole because it is cheap, and you can use many drivers for the money? I have space as a limiting factor here, so i think that four 12" as two pair of ripoles are the biggest i can go, or maybe just maybe four 15" as two pair of ripoles.
do i really need these kind of heavy load to achieve around 30hz dipole bass?
"Personally I wouldn't use a driver that has 8mm of Xmax in this application. The suspension travel is all one has in a dipole, so the longer the travel the better.
My suggestion is use something that has no less than +/-14mm Xmax, and double that is better yet."
So is SLS actually good for dipole because it is cheap, and you can use many drivers for the money? I have space as a limiting factor here, so i think that four 12" as two pair of ripoles are the biggest i can go, or maybe just maybe four 15" as two pair of ripoles.
do i really need these kind of heavy load to achieve around 30hz dipole bass?
SLS
Hi,
playing the sub in a small 15m² room a pair of SLS12 or a quad of SLS10 are very ok.
Forget what "someone" told You, because it will be hard to find a driver thats able to move more than the Peerless´s +-8mm linearly and without creating noise. Additionally such drivers usually need a huge magnetical circuit. So the dimensions of the dipole (width) will increase substantially. Additionally such drivers usually feature very heavy moving systems with high values of inductance and relative small magnetic field forces. A prime measurement to create a bad sounding device and one with a extended stray filed that disturbs every TV/monitor in close proximity.
The SLS festure an excellent set of parameters together with a very affordable price. I even would prefer them over the XXLS series, because -apart from the linear stroke and optics- they outperform their much costlier brethren and any other driver I came across yet.
Since space is small -and money too I guess- a dipole with a pair of SLS10 could already be sufficient. Anyhow, since the SLS12 doesn´t cost much more and doesn´t build much bigger I´d prefer to use this driver, as it should meet all Your requirements best.
Because of its greater diaphragm area and higher Qt the SLS12 can generate higher SPLs i.e has greater reserves or lower distortion numbers.
A dipole featuring a parallel connected pair of SLS12 could have the following dimensions using 22mm MDF-board.
W: 360mm H: 390mm D: 340mm
Chamber front: W: 80mm
Chambers rear: W: 96mm
The Fs of the driver drops to 20Hz in zthis configuration.
Using a passive filter/EQ -which I strongly recommend- the Fs drops to ~16Hz and the response is linear between 21Hz-195Hz (F-3dB, nearfield).
Impedance stays above 2.7Ohms
Max. linear stoke is reached at 9.5V@20Hz, 17V@30Hz and 28V@40Hz respectively 20W, 70W amd 200W@4Ohms
An active subsonic-filter is strongly recommended.
The SLS-drivers feature a progressive suspension that makes them nearly mechanically indesctructable, but with drivers working under free air conditions like dipoles, BR, BL-Horns, etc. a subsonic is a very sensible device.
jauu
Calvin
Hi,
playing the sub in a small 15m² room a pair of SLS12 or a quad of SLS10 are very ok.
Forget what "someone" told You, because it will be hard to find a driver thats able to move more than the Peerless´s +-8mm linearly and without creating noise. Additionally such drivers usually need a huge magnetical circuit. So the dimensions of the dipole (width) will increase substantially. Additionally such drivers usually feature very heavy moving systems with high values of inductance and relative small magnetic field forces. A prime measurement to create a bad sounding device and one with a extended stray filed that disturbs every TV/monitor in close proximity.
The SLS festure an excellent set of parameters together with a very affordable price. I even would prefer them over the XXLS series, because -apart from the linear stroke and optics- they outperform their much costlier brethren and any other driver I came across yet.
Since space is small -and money too I guess- a dipole with a pair of SLS10 could already be sufficient. Anyhow, since the SLS12 doesn´t cost much more and doesn´t build much bigger I´d prefer to use this driver, as it should meet all Your requirements best.
Because of its greater diaphragm area and higher Qt the SLS12 can generate higher SPLs i.e has greater reserves or lower distortion numbers.
A dipole featuring a parallel connected pair of SLS12 could have the following dimensions using 22mm MDF-board.
W: 360mm H: 390mm D: 340mm
Chamber front: W: 80mm
Chambers rear: W: 96mm
The Fs of the driver drops to 20Hz in zthis configuration.
Using a passive filter/EQ -which I strongly recommend- the Fs drops to ~16Hz and the response is linear between 21Hz-195Hz (F-3dB, nearfield).
Impedance stays above 2.7Ohms
Max. linear stoke is reached at 9.5V@20Hz, 17V@30Hz and 28V@40Hz respectively 20W, 70W amd 200W@4Ohms
An active subsonic-filter is strongly recommended.
The SLS-drivers feature a progressive suspension that makes them nearly mechanically indesctructable, but with drivers working under free air conditions like dipoles, BR, BL-Horns, etc. a subsonic is a very sensible device.
jauu
Calvin
That person knows what they are talking about.
For dipole subwoofers, it's very simple. Output is determined by swept volume (Sd x Xmax) and path length (between the acoustic short circuit). Path length is purely a function of the enclosure. So the only relevant driver related parameter is swept volume.
Using the Peerless drivers as an example, both the SLS12 and XLS12 will have roughly the same Sd. The difference is Xmax. 12.5mm vs 8mm (forget the superior lower distortion motor system for now). The XLS will sweep more volume. It (one vs one) is superior to the SLS for dipole bass. It will handily outperform the SLS in any given enclosure. Period.
If you can get 2 SLS's for the price of 1 XLS and don't mind a larger enclosure, then go with the SLS.
I've tried the SLS12 in a dipole, it bottoms and distorts so quickly, it's completely useless, unless used in large numbers. Which means more enclosure volume vs the same number of XLS drivers.
The only benefit would be cost. They are less than the XLS or XXLS.
If you can comprehend who Siegrfried Linkwitz is http://www.linkwitzlab.com and understand what level of knowledge and expertise he has, then you might understand why he chose the XLS drivers for his projects.
Ditto for John Kreskovsky http://www.musicanddesign.com (XXLS)
If you can't, then listen to the self anointed "Internet experts" who know far more than these two gentlemen and go with whatever they recommend. It's your money.
cheers,
AJ
Hi,
oh my gosh, just another one who lost 🙂
At the time SL constructed his dipoles the XLS was probabely the best possible driver for a dipole, but it isn´t any more and I´m very sure he´d use other drivers nowadays.
The XLS has two major drawbacks for use in ripoles:
- 1. too low Fs. Since a Ripole lowers the Fs even more You´ll end up with an Fb ~13Hz!!
- 2: too low Qt. Since there is no Q-raising mechanism as in CBs or BRs the optimum value for Qt should be in the range 0.5-0.7
Additionally such a low Qt (SLS~0,2) demands heavy equalization of the freq-response, because of low linearity. A pair of parallel connected XLS is 4,5dB lower in SPL @20Hz as a pair of SLS in the same cabinet. So its superior throw isn´t of real use down here.
The SLS on the other hand are nearly perfect with regard to those parameters. Also they feature lighter moving systems, which prooved to be sonically advantageous in dipoles. Having tried those drivers as well as many others, I can just repeat that they work better in ripoles than any other and clearly better than the XLS. Much more practical (in a lot of cases You could even cross over passively!) with higher linearity, Fb at the right point, and much less need for equing.
In short: When sounds matter.....try the SLS....when prize matters...try the SLS....when practicability matters..try the SLS.... When prize doesn´t matter use multiple SLS....Point!
Oh BTW. Not having a Website doesn´t mean You´re plain stupid.
And as AJ said: Don´t listen to those self appointed Internet Experts....and I might add:......who haven´t had any experience yet with ripoles but lost in building working stuff 😀
jauu
Calvin
oh my gosh, just another one who lost 🙂
At the time SL constructed his dipoles the XLS was probabely the best possible driver for a dipole, but it isn´t any more and I´m very sure he´d use other drivers nowadays.
The XLS has two major drawbacks for use in ripoles:
- 1. too low Fs. Since a Ripole lowers the Fs even more You´ll end up with an Fb ~13Hz!!
- 2: too low Qt. Since there is no Q-raising mechanism as in CBs or BRs the optimum value for Qt should be in the range 0.5-0.7
Additionally such a low Qt (SLS~0,2) demands heavy equalization of the freq-response, because of low linearity. A pair of parallel connected XLS is 4,5dB lower in SPL @20Hz as a pair of SLS in the same cabinet. So its superior throw isn´t of real use down here.
The SLS on the other hand are nearly perfect with regard to those parameters. Also they feature lighter moving systems, which prooved to be sonically advantageous in dipoles. Having tried those drivers as well as many others, I can just repeat that they work better in ripoles than any other and clearly better than the XLS. Much more practical (in a lot of cases You could even cross over passively!) with higher linearity, Fb at the right point, and much less need for equing.
In short: When sounds matter.....try the SLS....when prize matters...try the SLS....when practicability matters..try the SLS.... When prize doesn´t matter use multiple SLS....Point!
Oh BTW. Not having a Website doesn´t mean You´re plain stupid.
And as AJ said: Don´t listen to those self appointed Internet Experts....and I might add:......who haven´t had any experience yet with ripoles but lost in building working stuff 😀
jauu
Calvin
http://www.linkwitzlab.com/faq.htm#Q34
How has lighter Mms proven to be sonically advantageous in dipoles?
How has lighter Mms proven to be sonically advantageous in dipoles?
Its on Calvins vast website Calvinlabsanddesign.com
The technical dissertation and extensive blind listening tests are there for all to see.
There you will also find his AES papers, the Calvin-Riley crossover used in most pro speakers, the Calvin Transform used to extend bass response in large numbers of commercial subwoofers, his decades of dipole research and speaker systems, his studies on ripole vs monopole vs cardioid inroom response and on and on it goes. Check it out.
He's the real expert here. Buy whatever he says. Put on a nice pipe organ track, crank the volume and listen to the wonderfully musical cracking, of an 8mm xmax dipole drivers voice coil, crashing against the backplate. Enjoy!
cheers,
AJ
Matsuru,
to answer your question, here are a few: http://www.linkwitzlab.com/proto.htm#PW1
"Craw built as an H-frame dipole" http://www.musicanddesign.com/craw.html
http://www.euronet.nl/users/temagm/audio/dipolesub.htm
A so called "Ripole" is no more than a compact dipole. That's it.
It's in room behaviour will be exactly like the velocity source that it is. No more, no less.
cheers,
AJ
Hi,
@AJ
We agree in disagreeing...so far so fine. It´s just a pity that You didn´t have the class not to respond on a personally insulting level.
We have an interesting phenomenon in forums like this one. Everybody who runs a website is automatically regarded a competent person, somebody who doesn´t is not. I won´t disclose why I don´t run one, but to be cynical about that without knowing my experiences or expertise is rather insultive and stupid than funny.
At least was and am I able to give matsuru clear construction details with predictable results instead of just quoting others´s websites.
Where´s Your solution to matsuru´s prob Mr. AJ? Did I miss it?.....oh no, I just forgot....You don´t have any experience at all with the ripoles. So how the **** do You think You are the person to critisize others experiences, products or projects in such a rude way?
And yes, the ripole is a compact version of a classical dipole...so far You´re right. But You just missed out on how this difference in size effects the drivers and what it is used for.
@rest
I know that theoretically the mass of the moving system of a driver shouldn´t play any big role within the working freq-range.
Over the years experience showed (and it´s not my experience alone) that drivers with high moving masses -for their size class- never gave really good sounding ripoles. The ones with light to mid-weight sytems were always preferred. So this answer is a matter of experience and taste not theory and numbers.
jauuu
Calvin
@AJ
We agree in disagreeing...so far so fine. It´s just a pity that You didn´t have the class not to respond on a personally insulting level.
We have an interesting phenomenon in forums like this one. Everybody who runs a website is automatically regarded a competent person, somebody who doesn´t is not. I won´t disclose why I don´t run one, but to be cynical about that without knowing my experiences or expertise is rather insultive and stupid than funny.
At least was and am I able to give matsuru clear construction details with predictable results instead of just quoting others´s websites.
Where´s Your solution to matsuru´s prob Mr. AJ? Did I miss it?.....oh no, I just forgot....You don´t have any experience at all with the ripoles. So how the **** do You think You are the person to critisize others experiences, products or projects in such a rude way?
And yes, the ripole is a compact version of a classical dipole...so far You´re right. But You just missed out on how this difference in size effects the drivers and what it is used for.
@rest
I know that theoretically the mass of the moving system of a driver shouldn´t play any big role within the working freq-range.
Over the years experience showed (and it´s not my experience alone) that drivers with high moving masses -for their size class- never gave really good sounding ripoles. The ones with light to mid-weight sytems were always preferred. So this answer is a matter of experience and taste not theory and numbers.
jauuu
Calvin
We'll agree to disagree Calvin. Obviously our opinions differ.
That's fine. Hopefully Matsuru can make a decision that fits his needs best, whether it be the (X)XLS or the SLS.
What isn't opinion is the drivers rated xmax. Those are facts.
As is a dipole woofer systems output direct relation to said xmax.
Plug in the numbers into SL's spreadsheet to see the free-space relation. More xmax = more (undistorted, cracking) output.
So when ThomasW or I opine that the XLS is better vs SLS, we base it on this fact and not our subjective opinion of which may "sound better" - when not bottoming.
Something that add's nothing to my subjective impression of a subwoofer.
cheers,
AJ
That's fine. Hopefully Matsuru can make a decision that fits his needs best, whether it be the (X)XLS or the SLS.
What isn't opinion is the drivers rated xmax. Those are facts.
As is a dipole woofer systems output direct relation to said xmax.
Plug in the numbers into SL's spreadsheet to see the free-space relation. More xmax = more (undistorted, cracking) output.
So when ThomasW or I opine that the XLS is better vs SLS, we base it on this fact and not our subjective opinion of which may "sound better" - when not bottoming.
Something that add's nothing to my subjective impression of a subwoofer.
cheers,
AJ
Hi,
well finally we found something to agree on ;-)
You´re right, the possible throw determines the maximum output.
But thats just one side of the medal. Longer throw is only of use, when this is done without too much noise and distortion. That´s what I criticized about the generalized statement "the longer the better".
There are countless drivers on the market -mainly of far eastern origin- that claim longthrow capabilities, but in practise most of them can´t supply for such long strokes without serious noise. That might be ok for sealed enclosures but is not so for open systems.
For our differences on the Qt of the driver.
It works perfectly well to use low Q-drivers if You use massive equing of deep bass freqs (which basically excludes passive solutions). I on the other side prefer to have less or even no equing with drivers featuring Qts greater than 0,4. Equing can be done with a simple Subsonic with Q>1. This solution -while it is not that technically perfect provides for excellent results in practise too.
And it is much easier to imply for a DIYer who doesn´t have the opportunity to measure or who isn´t skilled in filter building and implementation since many subwoofer-amps feature such a filter/bassboost. Often the centre-freq and volume of the bass boost is variable so that the user can tune easily on his demands or taste.
jauu
Calvin
well finally we found something to agree on ;-)
You´re right, the possible throw determines the maximum output.
But thats just one side of the medal. Longer throw is only of use, when this is done without too much noise and distortion. That´s what I criticized about the generalized statement "the longer the better".
There are countless drivers on the market -mainly of far eastern origin- that claim longthrow capabilities, but in practise most of them can´t supply for such long strokes without serious noise. That might be ok for sealed enclosures but is not so for open systems.
For our differences on the Qt of the driver.
It works perfectly well to use low Q-drivers if You use massive equing of deep bass freqs (which basically excludes passive solutions). I on the other side prefer to have less or even no equing with drivers featuring Qts greater than 0,4. Equing can be done with a simple Subsonic with Q>1. This solution -while it is not that technically perfect provides for excellent results in practise too.
And it is much easier to imply for a DIYer who doesn´t have the opportunity to measure or who isn´t skilled in filter building and implementation since many subwoofer-amps feature such a filter/bassboost. Often the centre-freq and volume of the bass boost is variable so that the user can tune easily on his demands or taste.
jauu
Calvin
Coming just back from an open air concert of "The Who" (or what has remained of them), I got a fresh look at what is "loud enough".
So I will try to give some thought about how much dipole is needed under what circumstances:
When AJ states that "I've tried the SLS12 in a dipole, it bottoms and distorts so quickly, it's completely useless, ..." and ThomasW says that "... IMO it's pretty much a joke for a dipole subwoofer. Unless you use a highpass filter the voice coil former will slam into the backplate with the first loud bass passage" this is true for shure if you look at only one driver.
But if you take 2 SLS12 per channel (making it 4 in a room), I have a hard time to see why that shouldn´t be plenty enough for a 15 m² room - regarded only for music, no HT.
It will perfectly fit matsuru´s (jerusalem´s) demand:
"I think i can live with 35hz, 3 meters are just right for distance, 85-90db will be allright too. "Box" (or frame?) size could be 18" x 18" x 20", or 2 boxes with: 15" x 15" x 17" ".
Could it be that in general (subjective) demands in bass spl level are higher in America than in Europe?
I would attribute this to the different styles of dwelling: Living in some concrete wall appartment in a crowded area in western Europe limits bass demand if compared to the larger (mostly) living rooms of wooden american houses with larger distance to the neighbours.
If I would try to get the "livelike" SPL level at 3 m distance at home that I got in 50 m distance at that concert, my good relationship to my neighbors and the law forces would rapidly decay.
Rudolf
So I will try to give some thought about how much dipole is needed under what circumstances:
When AJ states that "I've tried the SLS12 in a dipole, it bottoms and distorts so quickly, it's completely useless, ..." and ThomasW says that "... IMO it's pretty much a joke for a dipole subwoofer. Unless you use a highpass filter the voice coil former will slam into the backplate with the first loud bass passage" this is true for shure if you look at only one driver.
But if you take 2 SLS12 per channel (making it 4 in a room), I have a hard time to see why that shouldn´t be plenty enough for a 15 m² room - regarded only for music, no HT.
It will perfectly fit matsuru´s (jerusalem´s) demand:
"I think i can live with 35hz, 3 meters are just right for distance, 85-90db will be allright too. "Box" (or frame?) size could be 18" x 18" x 20", or 2 boxes with: 15" x 15" x 17" ".
Could it be that in general (subjective) demands in bass spl level are higher in America than in Europe?
I would attribute this to the different styles of dwelling: Living in some concrete wall appartment in a crowded area in western Europe limits bass demand if compared to the larger (mostly) living rooms of wooden american houses with larger distance to the neighbours.
If I would try to get the "livelike" SPL level at 3 m distance at home that I got in 50 m distance at that concert, my good relationship to my neighbors and the law forces would rapidly decay.
Rudolf
I've also experience with Ripole, IMHO just a dipole in a more convenient form factor. With as bonus a lower system fs. I used PA drivers to overcome efficiency problems. In my relatively small room ~16 m2 4X 15" is more sufficient (music).
Be aware that the ripole still needs to stand in a velocity maximum in the room (away from the corners).
With regard to American SPL hunger I agree on Rudolf's comments.
Be aware that the ripole still needs to stand in a velocity maximum in the room (away from the corners).
With regard to American SPL hunger I agree on Rudolf's comments.
Agreed. SPL output should reflect your environment.
But let me ask you this LaMa. Why do they sell cars in your country capable of travelling twice the speed limit?
Rudolf, why does your country manufacture cars with over 500hp when less than 100hp is needed for daily travel?
Should one deliberately limit the capability of your system because the current enviroment is constrained?
Is it better to have just enough, or more than enough - used wisely?
cheers,
AJ
But let me ask you this LaMa. Why do they sell cars in your country capable of travelling twice the speed limit?
Rudolf, why does your country manufacture cars with over 500hp when less than 100hp is needed for daily travel?
Should one deliberately limit the capability of your system because the current enviroment is constrained?
Is it better to have just enough, or more than enough - used wisely?
cheers,
AJ
Hi,
You know AJ that this example sucks?
I think it was AUDI in a TV commercial who righteously said: "Power is nothing without control"
If You can have the long stroke without sacrificing on other parameters go for it. If not, then You should rather concentrate on other important parameters. And that is just the point between the XLS and SLS-Series. With the new XXLS-Series there are indeed some drivers featuring quite similar parameters as the SLS-Series and the extra long stroke. If it weren´t for the high price, I´d recommend those ..no doubt about it.
The XXLS10 (830843) as replacement for the SLS10 (830 668).
As replacement for the SLS12 (830669) one could use the XXLS12 (830845) or the double-coil-version (830847). The latter could be used in different setups.
1st. both coils in parallel (if the amp can handle the resultant 2Ohms with a pair of these) as a classical ripole (built with not too small chambers because of the already low Fs)
2nd: Just one coil driven and the other left open. The Qt will rise substantially such that a bass boost might not be needed any more. In this case the woofer might even be crossed over passively.
3rd: One coil driven and the second could be ´short circuited´ over switchable resistances or switched parallel to coil No.1
This way the woofer becomes more flexible and can be adjusted to the needs of the user
Again, if price doesn´t count these drivers are superior to the SLS
On the other hand, if size doesn´t matter a quad of SLS is still cheaper than a pair of XXLS and tops them.
Anyway a pair of any of those drivers is sufficient for matsurus needs in such a small room.
jauu
Calvin
You know AJ that this example sucks?
I think it was AUDI in a TV commercial who righteously said: "Power is nothing without control"
If You can have the long stroke without sacrificing on other parameters go for it. If not, then You should rather concentrate on other important parameters. And that is just the point between the XLS and SLS-Series. With the new XXLS-Series there are indeed some drivers featuring quite similar parameters as the SLS-Series and the extra long stroke. If it weren´t for the high price, I´d recommend those ..no doubt about it.
The XXLS10 (830843) as replacement for the SLS10 (830 668).
As replacement for the SLS12 (830669) one could use the XXLS12 (830845) or the double-coil-version (830847). The latter could be used in different setups.
1st. both coils in parallel (if the amp can handle the resultant 2Ohms with a pair of these) as a classical ripole (built with not too small chambers because of the already low Fs)
2nd: Just one coil driven and the other left open. The Qt will rise substantially such that a bass boost might not be needed any more. In this case the woofer might even be crossed over passively.
3rd: One coil driven and the second could be ´short circuited´ over switchable resistances or switched parallel to coil No.1
This way the woofer becomes more flexible and can be adjusted to the needs of the user
Again, if price doesn´t count these drivers are superior to the SLS
On the other hand, if size doesn´t matter a quad of SLS is still cheaper than a pair of XXLS and tops them.
Anyway a pair of any of those drivers is sufficient for matsurus needs in such a small room.
jauu
Calvin
Hello there, Thanks for everyone who has taken part in this topic, i think this has been quite instructive (if somewhat aggressive) reading on the whole.I forgot to say that this is "high end" project so it actually means that the budget is around 1000e.
If not for the amount of money, xxls12 830845 is superior in subjective terms of "good ripole driver"? well one could allways ask for a wholesale offer for quad of those, it would be a really good ripole subwoofer then? At least In terms of fast accurate easily integrating bass with SLS version, and capable putting out more output, and be used in a bigger appartment in future too?
what do you say, how long does actually subwoofer element last in use? 10 years? Would this be one of those "long terms investments"
How close to the wall you could put this kind of ripole?
If not for the amount of money, xxls12 830845 is superior in subjective terms of "good ripole driver"? well one could allways ask for a wholesale offer for quad of those, it would be a really good ripole subwoofer then? At least In terms of fast accurate easily integrating bass with SLS version, and capable putting out more output, and be used in a bigger appartment in future too?
what do you say, how long does actually subwoofer element last in use? 10 years? Would this be one of those "long terms investments"
How close to the wall you could put this kind of ripole?
Matsuru,
Lets say you built 2 W-dipole systems (or so called "Ripole" for arguments sake) of approximately the same size, each using the same amount of drivers, but the difference being one using the SLS driver and one using the XLS driver.
Drive them at an SPL level where only say 4mm of xmax is required (maybe music with content down to below 30hz). The only person who could decide which one sounds "better" to you is you . Not Calvin. Not I.
Thats what "subjective" is. It doesn't matter which one Calvin or I think sounds better, since we can't know which you would prefer.
Now increase the SPL level where 8,9,10 or even greater xmax is needed, even for short periods. Which one do you think you would prefer? I'm fairly certain I know the answer then.
I don't ever "listen" to my subwoofer. The only time I will know it was on is if I turned it off when listening to music. It should never draw attention to itself "sound" wise. It's presence is "felt" rather than "heard".
Do you know when a subwoofer easily draws attention to itself?
When it distorts. Or worse, bottoms. That will surely let you know its presence. That's why I (and JPK, SL, ThomasW, etc.) recommend a higher xmax driver.
If your SPL requirements are low to modest and you need no more headroom for the future, the SLS will save you some money. If not....
cheers,
AJ
Lets say you built 2 W-dipole systems (or so called "Ripole" for arguments sake) of approximately the same size, each using the same amount of drivers, but the difference being one using the SLS driver and one using the XLS driver.
Drive them at an SPL level where only say 4mm of xmax is required (maybe music with content down to below 30hz). The only person who could decide which one sounds "better" to you is you . Not Calvin. Not I.
Thats what "subjective" is. It doesn't matter which one Calvin or I think sounds better, since we can't know which you would prefer.
Now increase the SPL level where 8,9,10 or even greater xmax is needed, even for short periods. Which one do you think you would prefer? I'm fairly certain I know the answer then.
I don't ever "listen" to my subwoofer. The only time I will know it was on is if I turned it off when listening to music. It should never draw attention to itself "sound" wise. It's presence is "felt" rather than "heard".
Do you know when a subwoofer easily draws attention to itself?
When it distorts. Or worse, bottoms. That will surely let you know its presence. That's why I (and JPK, SL, ThomasW, etc.) recommend a higher xmax driver.
If your SPL requirements are low to modest and you need no more headroom for the future, the SLS will save you some money. If not....
cheers,
AJ
AJ,
first thing I read in this thread was a finnish student looking for a ripole/dipole sub driver for a 15 m² apartment. Next thing was Calvin recommending a pair of SLS12. What the ... could we know that students in Finland are prepared to invest 1000 Euro in a student ap. subwoofer!
Intro AJinFLA and ThomasW who dismiss this SLS12 proposal as nonsense. In no way would I argue, that a better dipole could be built with XLS drivers. But thinking back at my student time the SLS12 seemed to be a very appropriate proposition.
It´s like your car argument. Engineering oscillates between two targets IMHO: Doing the best possible - cost no object. Or constructing what does the job decently at the lowest cost. My personal transportation (to work) is a Volkswagen Lupo 3l, where 3l stands for 78 mi/gal consumption (diesel). In real live I never do less than 60 mi/gal. I believe this will let you anticipate my answer to your question "Should one deliberately limit the capability of your system because the current enviroment is constrained?" 😉
In the end many conflicting statements boil down to different views or personal preference. Probably we all should more often refer to our boundary conditions first before giving bold absolute statements. 🙄
Rudolf
first thing I read in this thread was a finnish student looking for a ripole/dipole sub driver for a 15 m² apartment. Next thing was Calvin recommending a pair of SLS12. What the ... could we know that students in Finland are prepared to invest 1000 Euro in a student ap. subwoofer!
Intro AJinFLA and ThomasW who dismiss this SLS12 proposal as nonsense. In no way would I argue, that a better dipole could be built with XLS drivers. But thinking back at my student time the SLS12 seemed to be a very appropriate proposition.
It´s like your car argument. Engineering oscillates between two targets IMHO: Doing the best possible - cost no object. Or constructing what does the job decently at the lowest cost. My personal transportation (to work) is a Volkswagen Lupo 3l, where 3l stands for 78 mi/gal consumption (diesel). In real live I never do less than 60 mi/gal. I believe this will let you anticipate my answer to your question "Should one deliberately limit the capability of your system because the current enviroment is constrained?" 😉
In the end many conflicting statements boil down to different views or personal preference. Probably we all should more often refer to our boundary conditions first before giving bold absolute statements. 🙄
Rudolf
- Status
- Not open for further replies.