Thx, not yet .... gonna read tomorrow and try to get through all constructive input
And I had no idea that Qtc changes at different SPL levels
Driver parameters will change at different input levels, but worrying about some simulations I would not recommend.
The measurements are of more value... The top plot is supposed to be a driver that is played up till about 15% above x-max. A comparison between two hypothetical cases to show differences. But that's all they are... hypothetical...
This is result I got from the "Embla" simulator putting 6 Scan Speak 32W/4878-T11 in a 140 liter cabinet, including room gain with corner loading and a 7 db boost at 17 Hz. The linkwitz trabsform with this program is limited to around 7dB max but some more gain would give flat in room response to below 18 Hz. (Please ignore all the vented box figures)
This simulator states 100 dB in room at 20 Hz with less than 2 mm cone travel, it's got to be very far off
I have no idea how accurate this is, and as of the room gain it is highly dependant on room. Thinking of checking these simulatins and see how they fit to what winisd gives.
It would be more exiting to see what max SPL levels could be reached!
Still I think it's both crazy and pointless to take a driver like the 32w for what you are planning.
Yeah, so basically we need to make a test cabinet before doing the real thing to gain enough knowledge
Well, it is disappointing to see them do a driver test and show 2.83 volt and 33 volt.
...in a simmulation...
I'd rather see measurements, not simulations.
Especially if one wants to make a point about driver linearity at different SPL levels, how is that possible without actual measurements.
How are we going to pick out a good driver if we can't see how it holds up under power.
That's like testing a car running stationary.
...in a simmulation...
I'd rather see measurements, not simulations.
Especially if one wants to make a point about driver linearity at different SPL levels, how is that possible without actual measurements.
How are we going to pick out a good driver if we can't see how it holds up under power.
That's like testing a car running stationary.
Last edited:
Power compression, that woofer is being driven well beyond what it is capable of at 33V, xmax +15%.Anyone.... what is is that can be the root cause of that 36Hz peak at 110dB
That isn't the root cause of what you are looking at.Thx, not yet .... gonna read tomorrow and try to get through all constructive input
And I had no idea that Qtc changes at different SPL levels
The simulation by itself tells very little but it can be useful in comparing drivers across their reviews.
What is much more useful is the klippel plots, that is what a good manufacturer uses to check the design of their speakers, and refine accordingly. The distortion plots in the article can also be quite telling as they are usually at a high level. This is the best way to look at how linear a woofer really is.
This is one of the best looking driver I have seen in terms of Klippel measurements, and you can see that there is hardly any difference between between the plots at 2.83v and 70V
B&C18SW115, compare that the klippel in the previous article.https://pearl-hifi.com/06_Lit_Archive/15_Mfrs_Publications/40_Voice_Coil/2010/2010_5_May.pdf
Screenshots attached below
A good program for simulating including linkwitz transforms is Jeff Bagby's Woofer Box and Circuit Designer, take the Calculated Qtc and Fc put them in the F0 and and Q0, put the values you want to achieve in the Fp and Qp and it will calculate the filter for you and apply it. You can also import curves from the room prediction spreadsheet to give an idea of room gain.
None of that will tell you what you will get in your room, but it is a good way of comparing drivers before you spend money on them to see if they have any chance of doing what you want.
Have a look at the drivers Paradigm used in their sub, they look nothing like a standard scanspeak woofer or sub, throwing six drivers in a copy enclosure and expecting it to give you what you want might be disappointing.
Are you set on making a six sided enclosure? Or are you more interested in making the best solution to fit your room?
Attachments
Wouldn't it be good if we could listen as well, is it so hard? There would have to be comparisons
I don't think there's any problem with the idea of copying the Paradigm with other drivers than what they used. Even Paradigm builds upon the DSP to make it work and that's exactly what's going to make it work, even more so than the driver used (within limits, pick a good one, not an expensive one).
One can try and simulate it, it will get you some data, but the most important part will be to plan the DSP side. Because the sims won't show all that will happen in real life.
In the end, it's going to be about an abundance of available volume displacement what's attractive about such a subwoofer setup, plus six drivers that don't share position and as such will create a better average than a single driver could when placed in the same spot.
One can try and simulate it, it will get you some data, but the most important part will be to plan the DSP side. Because the sims won't show all that will happen in real life.
In the end, it's going to be about an abundance of available volume displacement what's attractive about such a subwoofer setup, plus six drivers that don't share position and as such will create a better average than a single driver could when placed in the same spot.
All I was trying to point out is that a simulation of 2 outer situations tells me nothing about that driver, except the range in which it could operate.
Take 6 decent subs and put them in a Paradigm like enclosure, DSP it to your liking and then see what it can do. You'd be deaf before reaching the limits of these decent subs.
It's not that you can't use other driver's but look at the type of driver they used to understand the concept they were going for. The Driver has a small cone, a huge surround and a lot of motor and travel, it is a car sub style speaker. Lots of excursion to make up for the lack of cone area but able to be used in a small enclosure. The type of driver that you have picked is the exact opposite of that, higher vas lower mms, less motor and more box volume needed to be optimal. The size of the paradigm is roughly 215 litres if it was square, there is six big drivers, electronics and bracing in there so it won't have nearly that much effectively. You can brute force anything with DSP but starting with something that doesn't need so much seems like a good idea to me.
At less than 100Hz those six drivers in that layout will be within 1/4 wavelength of each other and act much like a single big driver. A vertical line of the those drivers would do that trick much better.
A single 18" like that B&C could be put in a 215 litre box and produce more clean output than most sane people would need especially if you feed it the same sort of watts as the paradigm is using.
To me three separate boxes with 2 x10" woofers placed in the room where they work best would be a practical reality and place less restraints on the drivers and box volume used or DSP needed afterwards.
Thanks educate us what that LEAP curve is about, imagine LEAP simulation is then based on the Klippel test data input and then think it should be taken serious for comparisons, think weapon to fight that distortion is as wesayso did suggest me in past via PM, think he write me something as "if you need some certain area and stroke for the woofer job right then why not take 4-10 times as much and get superior performance down there" ...
... and he is probably right if cone hardly will move we can bypass that LEAP curve reality.
I was just about to ask a question to haraldo,
To me, a sub like the Paradigm (except for bragging rights) only makes sense if you plan to use it somewhat free-standing.
I'd rather have the same amount of drivers in separate enclosures (or a line) to be able to play with placement separately.
I agree that the sub used probably isn't like the Scan Speaks, I just mentioned the 26W as the 32W got so much attention from haraldo. The 26W and 30W share a similar pedigree of the 32W. Not saying they are the same, but just look at cone size and their weight shows they are alike.
If the Paradigm uses roughly 216 litre...
Sticking the 26W in a 25 litre box per driver would get you a Q of 0,703.
I don't think that's such a bad starting point for DSP. 6 x 25L = 150L
Leaving enough space for driver volume, electronics and bracing.
A total cone area of 2112 cm² from these 6 drivers, in comparison the B&C SW115-4 has 1210 cm².
Don't underestimate multiples. That's why I figure it would be a feasible option.
The Scan Speak has 12.5 mm x-max, the B&C 14 mm, which one will move more air (or need less cone movement)?
(quick figures in WinISD for 6 drivers is 105 dB at 20 Hz max, before room gain for 6x 26W, I think in room would
see more than that. I did say you'd probably go deaf before hearing the limits)
The 32w would have 3156 cm² of cone area and either 14 mm (heavy cone) or 7 mm (light cone) of x-max.
All in all I think that even the 26W, used like that would be "impressive".
To me, a sub like the Paradigm (except for bragging rights) only makes sense if you plan to use it somewhat free-standing.
I'd rather have the same amount of drivers in separate enclosures (or a line) to be able to play with placement separately.
I agree that the sub used probably isn't like the Scan Speaks, I just mentioned the 26W as the 32W got so much attention from haraldo. The 26W and 30W share a similar pedigree of the 32W. Not saying they are the same, but just look at cone size and their weight shows they are alike.
If the Paradigm uses roughly 216 litre...
Sticking the 26W in a 25 litre box per driver would get you a Q of 0,703.
I don't think that's such a bad starting point for DSP. 6 x 25L = 150L
Leaving enough space for driver volume, electronics and bracing.
A total cone area of 2112 cm² from these 6 drivers, in comparison the B&C SW115-4 has 1210 cm².
Don't underestimate multiples
. That's why I figure it would be a feasible option.The Scan Speak has 12.5 mm x-max, the B&C 14 mm, which one will move more air (or need less cone movement)?
(quick figures in WinISD for 6 drivers is 105 dB at 20 Hz max, before room gain for 6x 26W, I think in room would
see more than that. I did say you'd probably go deaf before hearing the limits)
The 32w would have 3156 cm² of cone area and either 14 mm (heavy cone) or 7 mm (light cone) of x-max.
All in all I think that even the 26W, used like that would be "impressive".
Last edited:
Thanks educate us what that LEAP curve is about, imagine LEAP simulation is then based on the Klippel test data input and then think it should be taken serious for comparisons, think weapon to fight that distortion is as wesayso did suggest me in past via PM, think he write me something as "if you need some certain area and stroke for the woofer job right then why not take 4-10 times as much and get superior performance down there" ...
I'm still all for that, even though I do not get to practise that as well as I would like. There's no replacement for displacement.
The Paradigm is interesting, because it's rather small yet very powerful and a sealed alignment. I was shocked to see those dimensions. I bet it is fun to have two of those
.
Honestly your arrays did perform top notch and very realistic for music as i heard it the twice visit to Assen, maybe movies is lacking as youself sometimes say, i can't know about that in we listened to various normal music genre and that wasn't lacking anything below 500Hz at the recommended 84-86dB SPL. One would probably always want it louder than the 84-86dB level because your system really sounds so clean and well ballanced, but i'm not shure that is a good idea tonality wise if its right recordings are mastered with the equal loudness curve optimized to happen at the recommended 84-86dB SPL, then we want a reverse equal loudness EQ curve to set in whenever we go louder than the standard SPL recommentation.
Also if i plot your room with three boundary's and 50% pressurization gain i get below, red is ZAPH audio TC9 curve, blue is red ZAPH curve times room curve one transducer in the middle of the row for your left side array
black is 20Hz-20kHz target, and green is your new sub at left side (room curve times a 37Hz f3). Of course we boys often like to exaggerate when it comes to speakers but you should be more than good at 86dB spl.Attachments
Last edited:
Me too
The 216 was a square of the longest dimensions so certainly much less than that as available volume. The Hexagon is a nice shape and the force cancelling aspect is interesting. 150l plus drivers and bracing would end up being a fair bit bigger. Quite doable and would be good with the 26W. The box could be shrunk but you end up using more power and excursion.
I don't and it is quite a feasible optionA total cone area of 2112 cm² from these 6 drivers, in comparison the B&C SW115-4 has 1210 cm
Don't underestimate multiples
That is where it is good to look at the klippel data. Most drivers are limited by their compliance more so than their excursion. That is also what is shown in those voltage simulations before. The B&C is very linear throughout it's entire travel, most hifi drivers are not, so you can't really compare xmax as a figure without considering the rest of the driver. For volume displacement purposes it works but it tells you nothing about how linear that volume will be displaced. Linear excursion on a spec sheet is very misleading as most of it will be anything but linear as the klippel will show.
That's where a simulation can be helpful to show what sort of excursion will be needed from the multiple drivers to match the single well designed big one. If that keeps the excursion low enough then the balance will swing back to the multiples.
If price is a consideration, the B&C can be had for 383 Euro's including tax, I think 6 x 26W's would be quite a bit more. But harlado was talking about 6 32W's so I don't think cost is an issue
I do believe you would not need to get anywhere near the limits with a sub like that 6x 26W. I'm also sure there are other solutions to get there.
Another question, when are you buying that B&C? Looks like you're in love.
Haraldo may buy the 6x 32W, wear ear plugs all the time and bring down his house if he wants to, I merely suggested the 26W as a competent alternative that can already do crazy things at budget price compared to the 32W.
Keep in mind Robbintip has 16x Peerless XXLS P835037 to satisfy his needs....
I do believe I'll be more than fine with just 2x 30W added to my arrays. As BYRTT demonstrated, room gain may add more than enough for a 84-86 dB average playback. I restrict my levels anyway as in the early days of running the array's I could not 'hear' how loud it was. If it's clean, it's very easy to overdo volume levels. I'm known to have long listening sessions, I want to keep my hearing in tact for the years to come.
Another question, when are you buying that B&C? Looks like you're in love
.Haraldo may buy the 6x 32W, wear ear plugs all the time and bring down his house if he wants to, I merely suggested the 26W as a competent alternative that can already do crazy things at budget price compared to the 32W.
Keep in mind Robbintip has 16x Peerless XXLS P835037 to satisfy his needs....
I do believe I'll be more than fine with just 2x 30W added to my arrays. As BYRTT demonstrated, room gain may add more than enough for a 84-86 dB average playback. I restrict my levels anyway as in the early days of running the array's I could not 'hear' how loud it was. If it's clean, it's very easy to overdo volume levels. I'm known to have long listening sessions, I want to keep my hearing in tact for the years to come.