for the needs of a small setup I use 2 tham 15 and 2 rcf tt22a driven by 2 channels of a lab c48.4
the 750w satellites have 131 db declared, while the bass ones are the tham 15 with faital 15hp1060 driven with 1000w they should have 130db
To avoid bringing 4 subs, I would like to achieve better bass performance using the speakers I have, I don't know if it's a feeling due to the fact that more bass extension would be needed or I need more db in the same range.
However, I would like to do a new project also because I have the doubt that at high volumes the wood used, 20 mm conifer phenolic plywood, perhaps has losses, given that everyone finds the output of these subs monstrous.
what do you think of the various paraflex C, O that would be suitable for my woofers?
or the ss15?
the roar 15 is an old piano, it seems like a cross between paraflex and TH.
or should I change the type of upload, such as bandpass etc?
I have other unused woofers available: 15hp1030 which are the ferrite version of the 1060, 15nbx100 from b&c, and I also have 2 18 faital 18hp1010 - 4 ohm, they don't have an exaggerated bl, but I could see using them in a tham 18, the final would give 1200w/4ohm.. what do you think?
I could, in this case, make better use of the power by putting the power amplifier on 2 bridged channels and limiting the output 🙂 it would become 2400x2 /8ohm
thank you 😉
the 750w satellites have 131 db declared, while the bass ones are the tham 15 with faital 15hp1060 driven with 1000w they should have 130db
To avoid bringing 4 subs, I would like to achieve better bass performance using the speakers I have, I don't know if it's a feeling due to the fact that more bass extension would be needed or I need more db in the same range.
However, I would like to do a new project also because I have the doubt that at high volumes the wood used, 20 mm conifer phenolic plywood, perhaps has losses, given that everyone finds the output of these subs monstrous.
what do you think of the various paraflex C, O that would be suitable for my woofers?
or the ss15?
the roar 15 is an old piano, it seems like a cross between paraflex and TH.
or should I change the type of upload, such as bandpass etc?
I have other unused woofers available: 15hp1030 which are the ferrite version of the 1060, 15nbx100 from b&c, and I also have 2 18 faital 18hp1010 - 4 ohm, they don't have an exaggerated bl, but I could see using them in a tham 18, the final would give 1200w/4ohm.. what do you think?
I could, in this case, make better use of the power by putting the power amplifier on 2 bridged channels and limiting the output 🙂 it would become 2400x2 /8ohm
thank you 😉
The ROAR is a quarter wave based seriell 8th order bandpass and the paraflex is parallel 8th order bandpass. With parallel bandpass you loose a lot of synergistic effects of positive acoustic feedback (virtual increase of Bl in the midbass region etc). It is more of a simple brute force solution, and as such it does have its place and uses...
Most people seems to dislike or at least get surprised by the sonic character of massive amounts of acoustic positive feedback. It sounds quite different, with typically very "hard" and physical tactile character. Compare the difference in character and transfer curve of a natural aspirated engine with compressor loaded engine (roots blower type). It is not the same, but once you get to fool around with postive feedback systems you start to recognize the similarities in character.
‘ increase of BL in the midbass region’?
because the second resonace is coming off the resonator @ the motor side, or ?
what’s the front doing At this point? Unlike a paraflex (bose wave cannon) they don’t share a resonance 3:1 of the 1/4 wave harmonic, so where’s the ‘supercharger’?
because the second resonace is coming off the resonator @ the motor side, or ?
what’s the front doing At this point? Unlike a paraflex (bose wave cannon) they don’t share a resonance 3:1 of the 1/4 wave harmonic, so where’s the ‘supercharger’?
Last edited:
doesnt a bass reflex box with a pair of drivers produce a lot more ‘Fb’ than an overdamped high order qw design by comparison?
Over damped? I should think so for a given tuning, but why not critically damped as a default comparison of both?
It looks like paraflex designs are all ‘over damped’ responses that start rolling off at like 50 hz regardless of the 28-35hz Fb . I assumed the qw pipe and low Qes driver required to work in those creates that scenario ?
Ah! Yes, QW pipes are for higher Qt drivers if wanting flat to Fs(Fb). The ongoing confusion WRT which Qt to use stems from the pioneer's having to use high output impedance systems, so a correspondingly lower driver Qt was normally required to make it 'critically' damped (0.707 by their reckoning), so fast forward to (super) low output impedance systems and now we need higher Qt drivers.
You should have been around when me (a then totally unknown) n' Tom were 'taken to task' (it got pretty heated/nasty) re this subject on an early forum (BB?) led by the late/great JMLLC and his then various horn connoisseurs and (thankfully) self appointed keepers of the pioneer's sound system design theory, technology.
You should have been around when me (a then totally unknown) n' Tom were 'taken to task' (it got pretty heated/nasty) re this subject on an early forum (BB?) led by the late/great JMLLC and his then various horn connoisseurs and (thankfully) self appointed keepers of the pioneer's sound system design theory, technology.
I was also thinking about the sub cube and extended cube both 15 and 18, does anyone have measurements and curves?
Good bass is a relative term, some people think/like beach boom boxes and that's good bass to them.
Do you have a known system you have heard live and like it so to use as baseline?
And finally ...budget.
How much you will allocate to buy the driver/drivers, plywood, connectors , paint ...etc
You can do a lateral move instead of stepping up your setup.
If I understand correctly,you have 2 subs
Looks like you want more low extension
If you are a DJ , a lot of the new EDM stuff have 30hz information and sometimes lower than that.
So to hit lower you need bigger drivers , 18" or 21", and bigger boxes.
Iron law: low,loud,small
Pick 2.
How much you want to invest
That will help us to help you
In a realistic sense
If you want to sound like DJ Tiesto
Who use 40 Lacoustics KS28
(Double 18's) Cabinets
And have 1000 USD to spend
Maybe In a wet dream but not in real life
So how low and how hard you want to hit
And how much you want to spend.
That will give you the perspective of how much you need to save to make it happen.
Last edited:
Transient perfect, i.e. damped to be sonically the same as a 0.5 Qtc sealed system required to accurately reproduce the transient attack/decay of a signal.
The large front resonator couples through the driver back into tapped pipe section. Helping the driver to drive the tapped pipe harder and to some extent push pull loading the exit of the tapped pipe where it enters the front resonator.
Because the 1/4 wavelength of the front resonator is a half wave length of the tapped pipe section (I’m trying to imagine pressure and velocity at either side of the drivers cone) .
intersting!
intersting!
I would go Paraflex C or Manifold. Easier to build and better output.
Take a look in the thread below:
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...-better-than-tapped-horn.391782/#post-7161928
Take a look in the thread below:
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...-better-than-tapped-horn.391782/#post-7161928
I can not see what that picture has to do with a ROAR?
But below is attached a Hornresp sim with the pressure of the two sides of the driver compared. It does not directly show the phase relationship between the two sides, but the overlap in the midbass does indicate a substantial amount of positive feedback as also seen in the spl graph.
