Hello all, I read around and didn’t really find my answer. I’m heavily considering using just a pair of rs100’s from ~125hz n up. This is for a simple car stereo system that I’m trying to make my bucket list of having upfront bass with only a ~4” driver in the sail panels. I’m prepared to do door midbass or passenger footwell woofer if I have to but I will tolerate it not being perfect up front effect.
I’ve already moulded fiberglass to the shape of the sail area and there’s a small opening on the top of the door card that should make it almost if not infinite baffle. Winsid shows the response of a large cabinet having f3 around 125 ish, if I recall correctly. I’m running two ported epique 7’s that are surprisingly powerful tuned just below 27hz. The port velocity and 1st resonance are all in check with the resonance at something like 260hz.
I have extra rs100’s and will be using them either way. I also have the dayton nd28 1-1/8” tweeters that are advertised to perform as low as 2.2khz if needed. This will be fully active and I have the channels for the tweeters but again, bucket list.
From my reading, people seem to enjoy the rs100’s full range and the Facebook dayton group was in high regard to this, except one gentleman. He was very adamant about their ringing and breaking up quite early and heavily suggested running a tweeter below 2.5khz. The dayton graphs look decent enough for my needs but I can’t get his opinion out of my mind.
I wasn’t able to find very much independent measurements of decay or breakup so I come to yall for expert opinion. Being in a car, I feel like a fullrange would be beneficial in its beaming to attenuate reflections. Either I fabricate for only the rs100 or I fabricate for a tweeter as well. I’ve outgrown the need for perfection in the chaotic car cabin environment and ok with some barley audible ringing but for the time and effort of fabrication I want to try my best to avoid disappointment. Both sides will be aimed very on axis to the listening position.
I’ve already moulded fiberglass to the shape of the sail area and there’s a small opening on the top of the door card that should make it almost if not infinite baffle. Winsid shows the response of a large cabinet having f3 around 125 ish, if I recall correctly. I’m running two ported epique 7’s that are surprisingly powerful tuned just below 27hz. The port velocity and 1st resonance are all in check with the resonance at something like 260hz.
I have extra rs100’s and will be using them either way. I also have the dayton nd28 1-1/8” tweeters that are advertised to perform as low as 2.2khz if needed. This will be fully active and I have the channels for the tweeters but again, bucket list.
From my reading, people seem to enjoy the rs100’s full range and the Facebook dayton group was in high regard to this, except one gentleman. He was very adamant about their ringing and breaking up quite early and heavily suggested running a tweeter below 2.5khz. The dayton graphs look decent enough for my needs but I can’t get his opinion out of my mind.
I wasn’t able to find very much independent measurements of decay or breakup so I come to yall for expert opinion. Being in a car, I feel like a fullrange would be beneficial in its beaming to attenuate reflections. Either I fabricate for only the rs100 or I fabricate for a tweeter as well. I’ve outgrown the need for perfection in the chaotic car cabin environment and ok with some barley audible ringing but for the time and effort of fabrication I want to try my best to avoid disappointment. Both sides will be aimed very on axis to the listening position.
Winsid shows the rs100’s at half excursion with the subwoofers at peak output and I feel like at that point masking would make intermodulation and other issues less noticeable.
The Dayton RS line of woofers have a rep of ringing and break up being a aluminum cone but the RS100-4 is pretty good looking at the factory FR, there's a few here who have used them in a WAW with reasonable results.
But as you're saying run some decent midbasses in your doors will help as those little cones don't do low mid bass very well IMHO especially in a noisy car environment.
But as you're saying run some decent midbasses in your doors will help as those little cones don't do low mid bass very well IMHO especially in a noisy car environment.
Thanks guys, I mentioned this will be a one seat tune with the rs100’s nearly perfect on axis if tweeterless. I’m blown away by the idea that a 3.5” driver can be advertised as fullrange yet be designed to require a lowpass of 1.5khz or below. Not saying anyone is wrong, just wrapping my head around this is dizzying.
You can probably use them full range, but I would not expect it to sound the same as a system with a dedicated tweeter. It just doesn't go that high that well.
It's able to be advertised as full range because it covers a considerable amount of the range and the upper end rolls off fairly slowly. That doesn't inherently mean it'll do a satisfactory job in every scenario or be equivalent to a two-way with a larger woofer and tweeter dedicated to their own ranges. It simply means you won't miss out on a huge chunk of the range of audible frequencies and you can definitely use them standalone.
FWIW they're probably fine much higher than 1.5 kHz. I haven't used the RS100 specifically, only the larger alu cones. The RS100 is a 4" driver, just too small for me. But they will all have the same physics-related limitations with their cones and the characteristics they produce because of it. What you do have going for you (a positive), is the fact it's so darn small. That pushes the breakup up quite substantially and reduces the magnitude. They're somewhat dampened as well.
In the end, we can't really tell whether you'll end up finding the breakup "up there" annoying or not. It won't be super severe. We can't tell whether you'll be craving a little more "hiss" in your hi-hats or will be happy with this driver's response.
Edit: and remember, this is a USD$ 35-40 driver. What you get for that money, is pretty stellar already. But it ain't USD$ 250 worth of material and speaker, so you can't expect that either.
It's able to be advertised as full range because it covers a considerable amount of the range and the upper end rolls off fairly slowly. That doesn't inherently mean it'll do a satisfactory job in every scenario or be equivalent to a two-way with a larger woofer and tweeter dedicated to their own ranges. It simply means you won't miss out on a huge chunk of the range of audible frequencies and you can definitely use them standalone.
FWIW they're probably fine much higher than 1.5 kHz. I haven't used the RS100 specifically, only the larger alu cones. The RS100 is a 4" driver, just too small for me. But they will all have the same physics-related limitations with their cones and the characteristics they produce because of it. What you do have going for you (a positive), is the fact it's so darn small. That pushes the breakup up quite substantially and reduces the magnitude. They're somewhat dampened as well.
In the end, we can't really tell whether you'll end up finding the breakup "up there" annoying or not. It won't be super severe. We can't tell whether you'll be craving a little more "hiss" in your hi-hats or will be happy with this driver's response.
Edit: and remember, this is a USD$ 35-40 driver. What you get for that money, is pretty stellar already. But it ain't USD$ 250 worth of material and speaker, so you can't expect that either.
I own the tang band w3 bamboo fr and I find it quite satisfying to listen to. In my home stereo I switch between two micro bookshelf speakers, one pair being the w3 and one pair being the rs100 and scan 1” illuminator rings. The reason why I wanted to do the rs100 fr in this car build is it’s generous excursion which may allow upfront bass with only that driver.
The w3 and its .5mm throw wouldn’t allow that and it’s likely too delicate for the automotive environment, they’re also like $75 a piece now. I’ve been leaning back towards the tectonic bmr 2” so favorably measured by Erin and the rs180 in doors, both which I own. I have a largish bookshelf set with the bmr 2”, Anarchy 704, and rss210 passive radiator which I find surprisingly nice to listen to. I allow myself to believe that the bmr 2” is one of the best budget values on the planet.
There are obviously some perfect fr drivers for my but I’m trying to stick with things I already own. I also have some peerless 1.5” neo drivers and Dayton 5/8” tweeters that I have been itching to try with the anarchy cabinet. The cabinets are prebuilt ones from Parts Express that have a 4” large format tweeter cutout that allows me to swap various speakers. I think the safe bet is the bmr and 7” midbass.
The w3 and its .5mm throw wouldn’t allow that and it’s likely too delicate for the automotive environment, they’re also like $75 a piece now. I’ve been leaning back towards the tectonic bmr 2” so favorably measured by Erin and the rs180 in doors, both which I own. I have a largish bookshelf set with the bmr 2”, Anarchy 704, and rss210 passive radiator which I find surprisingly nice to listen to. I allow myself to believe that the bmr 2” is one of the best budget values on the planet.
There are obviously some perfect fr drivers for my but I’m trying to stick with things I already own. I also have some peerless 1.5” neo drivers and Dayton 5/8” tweeters that I have been itching to try with the anarchy cabinet. The cabinets are prebuilt ones from Parts Express that have a 4” large format tweeter cutout that allows me to swap various speakers. I think the safe bet is the bmr and 7” midbass.
If you're looking for good bass, the RS100 might not be your best bet? If it does produce any good bass given the Fs, you'll likely end up distorting the rest of the spectrum. Although that's hardly specific to the RS100 driver in any case.
What I would like to point out, is that the RS100 has an open voice coil gap. That means it's vulnerable to dust and the likes. Make sure you have something that screens it.
I personally also have some RS180 drivers. I have them paired with the original RS28-A (not the new RST series) and I love the combination.
R.I.P. Bagby. This build was inspired by his simple build using these.
What I would like to point out, is that the RS100 has an open voice coil gap. That means it's vulnerable to dust and the likes. Make sure you have something that screens it.
I personally also have some RS180 drivers. I have them paired with the original RS28-A (not the new RST series) and I love the combination.
R.I.P. Bagby. This build was inspired by his simple build using these.
He is not expecting bass the planned high pass is 125 Hz
which is good enough to not have any blurring from bass like a full range application
Not sure what application Mr Facebook was using.
If he was running fullrange or as a woofer in a 2 way.
Then his issue was distortion expecting bass.
on a high pass non issue, the top end is fine compared to many " fullrange"
for time and cost of material not sure why a tweeter would be left out.
No matter how " expensive" a wideband. A tweeter will always beat it
or add clarity a wideband will never do.
Rs100 doesnt have fatigue like some do with typical normal treble boost
which is good enough to not have any blurring from bass like a full range application
Not sure what application Mr Facebook was using.
If he was running fullrange or as a woofer in a 2 way.
Then his issue was distortion expecting bass.
on a high pass non issue, the top end is fine compared to many " fullrange"
for time and cost of material not sure why a tweeter would be left out.
No matter how " expensive" a wideband. A tweeter will always beat it
or add clarity a wideband will never do.
Rs100 doesnt have fatigue like some do with typical normal treble boost