yes, lets get back to the subwoofers
dont take me wrong that I dont like subwoofers
I do, I have a couple of them
my first diy sub was 2 x 15" woofers (350watts continuous each, 97 dB sensitivity, dont remember brand) in isobarick configuration in closed box, rather large closed box, as you know folks, isobarick requires 1/2 volume for the same low frequency cut off
that sub was going flat to 20 Hz after equalization ( I use boehringer ultracurve 31 band digital)
even 12.5 Hz was capable, except my SPL meter was off a lot, you could see membranes going back and forth an inch! hard to say if you could hear anything, but certainly feel a belly dancing!
later I upgraded to 18" cervin vega and built my sub into the wall of attic, so it became integral part of the house, now it realy has infinite volume and performs even better, handles
now I normaly listen at moderate levels (80-100 dB) but at certain time after significant consumtion with good company we want to crank it up a little, and then the lps are out, only cds
thats why i mentioned mechanical feedback, ok? not a problem at normal levels, but always there after certain level, unless you move turntable to other sound proof room
dont take me wrong that I dont like subwoofers
I do, I have a couple of them
my first diy sub was 2 x 15" woofers (350watts continuous each, 97 dB sensitivity, dont remember brand) in isobarick configuration in closed box, rather large closed box, as you know folks, isobarick requires 1/2 volume for the same low frequency cut off
that sub was going flat to 20 Hz after equalization ( I use boehringer ultracurve 31 band digital)
even 12.5 Hz was capable, except my SPL meter was off a lot, you could see membranes going back and forth an inch! hard to say if you could hear anything, but certainly feel a belly dancing!
later I upgraded to 18" cervin vega and built my sub into the wall of attic, so it became integral part of the house, now it realy has infinite volume and performs even better, handles
now I normaly listen at moderate levels (80-100 dB) but at certain time after significant consumtion with good company we want to crank it up a little, and then the lps are out, only cds
thats why i mentioned mechanical feedback, ok? not a problem at normal levels, but always there after certain level, unless you move turntable to other sound proof room
well, what I ment "convenience for sound quality" is when people replace something like reel to reel for cassette deck, the convenienece of the media got better, but the sound quality got worse
even the most expensive cassette deck will not even come close to the reel to reel
the same happened with lps and cds, cds are much more convenient to handle, but sound inferior
you think that lps sound worse than cds because you are not comparing adequate lp setup
in my case i have california audio labs cd player, which is quite a good one, selected it for analog like sound, but is is only $500 cd player, does not even close to lps, for I spent on cartridge itself more than that
when i performed blind test on my friends and played both at the same time with matching volume, they always went for lp as a winner
but this is probably for another topic
first of all, i don't mean to offend anyone...
i wouldn't name a discussion like this one a war either! however, i'd like to continue the discussion on this topic about audible differences between several music storing formats and equipment. but ofcourse this is not the right place. if any of you is also interested, we could start another thread somewhere else on this site. I will now make a few statements. this is just how i see "the truth". Better will mean, more faithfull to the original recording. more hi-fi.
so, IMHO(!):
* cd-sound is better than lp-sound
* all properly designed cd-players sound the same
* all properly designed amplifiers sound the samen (if not driven into clipping)
* if your equipment and cables are properly designed, the soundquality you get in your room depends on 3 things:
-quality of the recording
-quality of the loudspeaker-system
-acoustics in the room
i am sure most of you will disagree with one or maybe all points. please tell me, and we could start another thread.
i wouldn't name a discussion like this one a war either! however, i'd like to continue the discussion on this topic about audible differences between several music storing formats and equipment. but ofcourse this is not the right place. if any of you is also interested, we could start another thread somewhere else on this site. I will now make a few statements. this is just how i see "the truth". Better will mean, more faithfull to the original recording. more hi-fi.
so, IMHO(!):
* cd-sound is better than lp-sound
* all properly designed cd-players sound the same
* all properly designed amplifiers sound the samen (if not driven into clipping)
* if your equipment and cables are properly designed, the soundquality you get in your room depends on 3 things:
-quality of the recording
-quality of the loudspeaker-system
-acoustics in the room
i am sure most of you will disagree with one or maybe all points. please tell me, and we could start another thread.
keyser,
(makes me think of that movie with the legend "keyser soze")
While I agree that the most important in music reproduction is;
-quality of the recording
-quality of the loudspeaker-system
-acoustics in the room
I must say that;
* all properly designed cd-players sound the same
* all properly designed amplifiers sound the samen (if not driven into clipping)
is as far from the truth as possibly could be.
/Peter
ok, ok let´s not get more of topic! sorry!
(makes me think of that movie with the legend "keyser soze")
While I agree that the most important in music reproduction is;
-quality of the recording
-quality of the loudspeaker-system
-acoustics in the room
I must say that;
* all properly designed cd-players sound the same
* all properly designed amplifiers sound the samen (if not driven into clipping)
is as far from the truth as possibly could be.
/Peter
ok, ok let´s not get more of topic! sorry!
you're right pan, about where i got my nickname from. you're wrong about the other thing. This will be the last time i polute this thread with info that is not relevant as far as the threads subject is concerned. just like you to check ou these sites.
http://sound.westhost.com/
and the next is from the former director of acoustic research at McIntosh Laboratory
http://www.roger-russell.com/truth/truth.htm
you could also google up double-blind test and hifi or sound reproduction (something...)
everybody can relax, i'm goin back to subwoofers
http://sound.westhost.com/
and the next is from the former director of acoustic research at McIntosh Laboratory
http://www.roger-russell.com/truth/truth.htm
you could also google up double-blind test and hifi or sound reproduction (something...)
everybody can relax, i'm goin back to subwoofers
definitely not, no need to start another futile discussion like tubes vs solid state (we know the unswer anyway)
just one more thing about subwoofers for keyser who started it all before i go
if you are about to built a sub, make it a good one
your speakers have already two 8" woofers per side, and relatively good bass extension
I am affraid one 12" woofer will not be adequate subwoofer for them, I suggest if you are already investing money and time into woodwork, go with 15" or possibly bigger woofers, does not cost that much more, important parameter besides low frequency extension is efficiency, the higher the better, aim for 97 dB/w/m and higher
I hope you will find woofer so you will not be dissapointed when you finish it
good luck!
tanx adason
what do you think about two 12" woofers. i'm thinking about using a pair of Visaton W 300 S:
check for 12"woofer from visaton at:
http://thielesmall.com/database.asp
i'm thinking about using them with a conrad subwoofer-module. this module works like a REL-module: it is supposed to be used to support sub-bass (below about 50 hertz) instead of reproducing mid-bass (from 50 hertz upwards). With this module the subwoofer should be placed in parallel with the main speakers. There's no high-pass. The low-pass has to be adjusted with only frequensie and gain to be integrated with the main speakers.
as i said before, my mains go pretty low already. the cross-over will probably be at around 30-35 hertz.
what do you think?
what do you think about two 12" woofers. i'm thinking about using a pair of Visaton W 300 S:
check for 12"woofer from visaton at:
http://thielesmall.com/database.asp
i'm thinking about using them with a conrad subwoofer-module. this module works like a REL-module: it is supposed to be used to support sub-bass (below about 50 hertz) instead of reproducing mid-bass (from 50 hertz upwards). With this module the subwoofer should be placed in parallel with the main speakers. There's no high-pass. The low-pass has to be adjusted with only frequensie and gain to be integrated with the main speakers.
as i said before, my mains go pretty low already. the cross-over will probably be at around 30-35 hertz.
what do you think?
adason said:
If your mains go down to 35Hz, then a couple of 12s are probably not going to help that much in terms of extension. It'll help a little, but do some modeling. Those Visatons have a Fs of ~30Hz, so you'll need to go ported or play with the response (hi pass/transform/BFD/etc) to get any extension at all over your current setup. Most 12's F3s are in the high 30s sealed, and this is the theoretical--in reality, they have rolled off even more this low! Room gain helps, but use your current mains as a guide to how much you'll get.
Or HP your mains and use the subs to give you higher max SPL instead of extension, which could certainly improve the bass impact.
Believe me, I'm in your boat with my current mains, Proac 2.5. They don't go down quite as far, maybe 42Hz in room, but I still don't get a lot of mileage out of a single sealed shiva (12").
the visatons 300S looks ok to me, two woofers is better than one, the biger and stiffer the box the better too, if you insist on 12" woofers i personaly have heard good reviews about nht 1259 (fs 16.5 Hz!), handles plenty of power, goes deep, cost a lot though
http://www.madisound.com/nht1259.html
cross it higher, you can experiment from 80, 100, up to 150 Hz, the higher you cross the sub, the more critical the slope of crossover and placement of the sub
one thing you should consider is to limit the low frequencies from your main speakers (run them from 150 Hz up), once you will have the subwoofer
any midrange/woofer will sound better in midrange area if its free from duties as woofer, you will hear midrange much cleaner, with lower distortion, and that i believe will be the best benefit of subwoofer for its a midrange where will live, if you dont get midrange right, who cares about the subwoofer
i know nothing about your hifi besides it is 2 channel music system, it should not be that hard to split the signal at 150 Hz and use your main amplifier for two main tower speakers and dedicated subwoofer amplifier for sub (the same aplies for amplifiers, your main amplifier will be happy when freed from low fr. duties)
i still believe you should step up to 15" and bigger woofers, the most important being fs and efficiency
adason out
http://www.madisound.com/nht1259.html
i guess to cross the sub at such a low crossover point is a mistake, you will not hear much out of it, so sub will have no purpose than
cross it higher, you can experiment from 80, 100, up to 150 Hz, the higher you cross the sub, the more critical the slope of crossover and placement of the sub
one thing you should consider is to limit the low frequencies from your main speakers (run them from 150 Hz up), once you will have the subwoofer
any midrange/woofer will sound better in midrange area if its free from duties as woofer, you will hear midrange much cleaner, with lower distortion, and that i believe will be the best benefit of subwoofer for its a midrange where will live, if you dont get midrange right, who cares about the subwoofer
i know nothing about your hifi besides it is 2 channel music system, it should not be that hard to split the signal at 150 Hz and use your main amplifier for two main tower speakers and dedicated subwoofer amplifier for sub (the same aplies for amplifiers, your main amplifier will be happy when freed from low fr. duties)
i still believe you should step up to 15" and bigger woofers, the most important being fs and efficiency
adason out
For music, with stereo subs the highest I would consider crossing is 80Hz. With a single sub I'd stick to 40HZ.
Keyser, is the 35Hz for your mains 'on paper' or measured in room ?
Cheers,
Rob
Edit, just searched for your mains, but couldn't find an english review. However, with twin 8" per side I'd guess you can safely cross low without ' damaging' your midrange.
Keyser, is the 35Hz for your mains 'on paper' or measured in room ?
Cheers,
Rob
Edit, just searched for your mains, but couldn't find an english review. However, with twin 8" per side I'd guess you can safely cross low without ' damaging' your midrange.
i have the two visatons already. what do you think simon? how should i build a subwoofer around them?
i am also thinking about a REL kind of setup: the subwoofer starting below the natural roll-off of the main speakers.
my speakers are Canton RC-L
this is what canton sais:
Leistungseigenschaften:
- Stand-Lautsprecher
- aktive Ba-Entzerrung
- 3-Wege-Lautsprechersystem
- Bareflex-System
- Wirkungsgrad/Schalldruck 1W/1m: 89 dB
- min. Impedanz: 4 Ohm
- max. Impedanz: 8 Ohm
- 200 W Nenn-Belastbarkeit
- 350 W Musik-Belastbarkeit
- Frequenzgang-Untergrenze: 18 Hz
- Frequenzgang-Obergrenze: 30000 Hz
- bergangsfrequenz Tief-Mittelton: 300 Hz
- bergangsfrequenz Mittel-Hochton: 3500 Hz
- 2 Tieftner
- 1 Mitteltner
- 1 Hochtner
- Durchmesser Tieftner: 22 cm
- Durchmesser Mitteltner: 18 cm
- Durchmesser Hochtner: 2,5 cm
Gehuse-Eigenschaften:
- Breite: 26 cm
- Hhe: 110 cm
- Tiefe: 34,7 cm
however, frequenzgang-untergrenze is not 18 herz lineaer! think the F3 will be around 30-40 hertz. i may be wrong ofcourse! my room is not very large (5 x 4 meters). the subwoofer doesn't have to give me more SPL's, just the deep notes. would the visatons do, or should i try to get rid of them through ebay or such?
i am also thinking about a REL kind of setup: the subwoofer starting below the natural roll-off of the main speakers.
my speakers are Canton RC-L
this is what canton sais:
Leistungseigenschaften:
- Stand-Lautsprecher
- aktive Ba-Entzerrung
- 3-Wege-Lautsprechersystem
- Bareflex-System
- Wirkungsgrad/Schalldruck 1W/1m: 89 dB
- min. Impedanz: 4 Ohm
- max. Impedanz: 8 Ohm
- 200 W Nenn-Belastbarkeit
- 350 W Musik-Belastbarkeit
- Frequenzgang-Untergrenze: 18 Hz
- Frequenzgang-Obergrenze: 30000 Hz
- bergangsfrequenz Tief-Mittelton: 300 Hz
- bergangsfrequenz Mittel-Hochton: 3500 Hz
- 2 Tieftner
- 1 Mitteltner
- 1 Hochtner
- Durchmesser Tieftner: 22 cm
- Durchmesser Mitteltner: 18 cm
- Durchmesser Hochtner: 2,5 cm
Gehuse-Eigenschaften:
- Breite: 26 cm
- Hhe: 110 cm
- Tiefe: 34,7 cm
however, frequenzgang-untergrenze is not 18 herz lineaer! think the F3 will be around 30-40 hertz. i may be wrong ofcourse! my room is not very large (5 x 4 meters). the subwoofer doesn't have to give me more SPL's, just the deep notes. would the visatons do, or should i try to get rid of them through ebay or such?
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.