Hi guys
Sorry for being a 'Johnnie-come-late', but I second the suggestion for the Beyma 18LX60V2, but only for one reason- did you guys see the X-Mech? 58mm!!! That will allow it to go low without damage. Other than that I would seriously suggest a pair of the AE Dipole15s per side. Just my 2 cents.
Enjoy
Deon
Sorry for being a 'Johnnie-come-late', but I second the suggestion for the Beyma 18LX60V2, but only for one reason- did you guys see the X-Mech? 58mm!!! That will allow it to go low without damage. Other than that I would seriously suggest a pair of the AE Dipole15s per side. Just my 2 cents.
Enjoy
Deon
Eminence Kilomax 18
I just bought an Eminence Kilomax18 to experiment with.
After about 3 hours burn in at 20 Hz I found that the Qts and other parameters were off the specs by a fair margin.
manufacturers spec ............ measured ( by Clio 4.55)
Fs 33 hz .............. 38 hz
Qts 0.56 .............. 0.71 ( it does have a huge magnet unlike the Alpha 15 !)
Perfect for OB !
My panels should be ready by Sunday. I plan to use ( if required ) a sealed sub to do anything below 50 Hz. Heavy eq could possibly get the Kilomax to go down to just below 40 hz but that would take up too much power. Considering it can handle 1200 watts music signals it 'might be possible' to avoid a sub. But I need to test it out to see how it sounds as it is. My panel is small , just about 24 inches tall by 20 inches wide with rear wings.....quasi U frame I guess. Needs to be used in a small room ! All equalisation will be electronic. No passive parts at all.
Note that the my kilomax specs are closer to their 2006 catalog rather than their 2011/2012 catalogues where Qts is 0.47 ! Maybe its an older batch ?
I just bought an Eminence Kilomax18 to experiment with.
After about 3 hours burn in at 20 Hz I found that the Qts and other parameters were off the specs by a fair margin.
manufacturers spec ............ measured ( by Clio 4.55)
Fs 33 hz .............. 38 hz
Qts 0.56 .............. 0.71 ( it does have a huge magnet unlike the Alpha 15 !)
Perfect for OB !
My panels should be ready by Sunday. I plan to use ( if required ) a sealed sub to do anything below 50 Hz. Heavy eq could possibly get the Kilomax to go down to just below 40 hz but that would take up too much power. Considering it can handle 1200 watts music signals it 'might be possible' to avoid a sub. But I need to test it out to see how it sounds as it is. My panel is small , just about 24 inches tall by 20 inches wide with rear wings.....quasi U frame I guess. Needs to be used in a small room ! All equalisation will be electronic. No passive parts at all.
Note that the my kilomax specs are closer to their 2006 catalog rather than their 2011/2012 catalogues where Qts is 0.47 ! Maybe its an older batch ?
Last edited:
With time and usage the Fs and Qts will probably go down. I don't know how much to expect but an older kilomax 18 belonging to a friend was closer to the 2006 spec than my unit.
Interesting end to my friend's kilomax! They tried to shake their room with home theater sounds. The kilomax was in a 7 cu ft reflex box . They ripped out the spiders after seeing the cone doing up to or over 20mm max ! The surround seemed to be OK ... I think ! I didn't get to see it , they have replaced the cone/coil assembly already.
So one has to be careful with an open baffle.
I ripped out the spider from a Peerless 12 inch woofer fairly recently ! It did sound great till the end !
Interesting end to my friend's kilomax! They tried to shake their room with home theater sounds. The kilomax was in a 7 cu ft reflex box . They ripped out the spiders after seeing the cone doing up to or over 20mm max ! The surround seemed to be OK ... I think ! I didn't get to see it , they have replaced the cone/coil assembly already.
So one has to be careful with an open baffle.
I ripped out the spider from a Peerless 12 inch woofer fairly recently ! It did sound great till the end !
Last edited:
I think that PPK. So one way it's 29 mm max. Still quite a lot ! The official figures for the Peerless kilomax-18 is 19.1 mm.
I don't know about best but the Goldwood 1858 is a inexpensive driver that seems to sound better than one would expect, using mine in MJK's Goldwood H-Frames .. http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=290-386
Hawthorne Audio has the Augie 15 at a good price although probably shipping would be OOTQ.. http://www.hawthorneaudio.com/catalogs/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=3&products_id=19
Probably the best out there for SQ would be the AE drivers as mentioned earlier.. http://www.aespeakers.com/drivers.php?driver_id=32
Hawthorne Audio has the Augie 15 at a good price although probably shipping would be OOTQ.. http://www.hawthorneaudio.com/catalogs/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=3&products_id=19
Probably the best out there for SQ would be the AE drivers as mentioned earlier.. http://www.aespeakers.com/drivers.php?driver_id=32
Last edited:
Well, the specs say +-58mm, so I don't know if that is 58mm peak-to-peak or 58mm one-way. Either way, it is impressive.
Enjoy,
Deon
We do, we do.
OB is not the most economic way to get bass, let alone infrasonics. But from, say, 30..40Hz up nothing beats the tonal beauty and timing precision of a good OB which still can be quite economic in absolute terms, notably for DIYers
So you mix a sealed subwoofer below 70Hz and have an open baffle woofer above 70Hz?
Quite agree. There is a beauty in OB bass that few boxes can touch. My current is solid down to 30Hz and I love it.I Just don't understand why
WITH ALL DUE RESPECT:
Never, ever will I understand taking this approach: "open baffle" to reproduce bass notes, when in fact, the rear wave wraps around and cancels the front wave. Now if I understand the "theory" (?) the baffle board's physical dimensions determine the point at which response falls at 6 db/octave ?
I'm not sure I agree with that either, as in my view (jaded as it may be)
once it cancels, it cancels.
The rest of my 2 cents: (after which I'll proably leave this alone, as I have made it very clear on numerous of occasions, I don't like the OB concept)
--> Bass enclosures aka "boxes" are very difficult to build correctly, thus, it is far easier to cut a whole in a board and proclaim just how wonderful this non-box sound is. OR... maybe I just have never heard one done correctly. Of course, it's also entirely possible many have never heard a bass enclosure done correctly, either.
WITH ALL DUE RESPECT:
Never, ever will I understand taking this approach: "open baffle" to reproduce bass notes, when in fact, the rear wave wraps around and cancels the front wave. Now if I understand the "theory" (?) the baffle board's physical dimensions determine the point at which response falls at 6 db/octave ?
I'm not sure I agree with that either, as in my view (jaded as it may be)
once it cancels, it cancels.
The rest of my 2 cents: (after which I'll proably leave this alone, as I have made it very clear on numerous of occasions, I don't like the OB concept)
--> Bass enclosures aka "boxes" are very difficult to build correctly, thus, it is far easier to cut a whole in a board and proclaim just how wonderful this non-box sound is. OR... maybe I just have never heard one done correctly. Of course, it's also entirely possible many have never heard a bass enclosure done correctly, either.
In defence of Open Baffle bass
To be sure there will be diverging opinions on this topic, like nearly ALL topics. But I must take exception to the assumption that IF one likes and or prefers Open Baffle produced bass it's because they have yet to here a correctly executed mono-pole bass source. I, and many others here could list literally THOUSANDS of box designs. Every thing from the original AR-1 to a Klipchhorn and beyond. Not all box bass is good and of course not all OB bass is bad or Vise versa. However, it is not possible to completely remove the negative effects of either designs. The one often overlooked problem with a box is rear wave energy reflecting of the inner walls of the box back through (and out of phase to various degree) the woofer cone. And most cones are light, thin and easily excited. OB, by and large does not suffer from this issue.
Also, the reason an OB can produce bass, deep bass is the front and rear wave cancellation is NOT 100% efficient. In fact, if you level the rising response cause by the Open Baffle, you, in effect, double your woofer radiating area as compared to most box designs. Both front and back of the cone are contributing. You do throw away a LOT of upper bass output. But, with the right woofer choice (say two hi Q 15") on 2' X4' baffle with minimal wings (less than 6" total depth) you can realize a flat response to 30 Hz with a true efficiency around 88 dbw.
For comparison, that is more efficient than a AR-3a operating in 1/2 space. Like TWICE as efficient. Remember, we are talking at 30 Hz. And the OB will play WAY louder. I am also assuming both the AR and the OB are 3'-4' from the wall with the woofers around 24"-30" off the floor. And if you have spent any time with the AR3 or other excellent sealed box designs, that is the distance they usually sound best. And, most box designs that can deliver 100plus db of output at 30 Hz with 88 db off efficiency with out excessive doubling tend to be the size of refrigerators! And building a proper box of that size is hideously expensive! One last thought, could it be that individuals who dislike the OB concept may have not heard it properly executed? Hmmm!
To be sure there will be diverging opinions on this topic, like nearly ALL topics. But I must take exception to the assumption that IF one likes and or prefers Open Baffle produced bass it's because they have yet to here a correctly executed mono-pole bass source. I, and many others here could list literally THOUSANDS of box designs. Every thing from the original AR-1 to a Klipchhorn and beyond. Not all box bass is good and of course not all OB bass is bad or Vise versa. However, it is not possible to completely remove the negative effects of either designs. The one often overlooked problem with a box is rear wave energy reflecting of the inner walls of the box back through (and out of phase to various degree) the woofer cone. And most cones are light, thin and easily excited. OB, by and large does not suffer from this issue.
Also, the reason an OB can produce bass, deep bass is the front and rear wave cancellation is NOT 100% efficient. In fact, if you level the rising response cause by the Open Baffle, you, in effect, double your woofer radiating area as compared to most box designs. Both front and back of the cone are contributing. You do throw away a LOT of upper bass output. But, with the right woofer choice (say two hi Q 15") on 2' X4' baffle with minimal wings (less than 6" total depth) you can realize a flat response to 30 Hz with a true efficiency around 88 dbw.
For comparison, that is more efficient than a AR-3a operating in 1/2 space. Like TWICE as efficient. Remember, we are talking at 30 Hz. And the OB will play WAY louder. I am also assuming both the AR and the OB are 3'-4' from the wall with the woofers around 24"-30" off the floor. And if you have spent any time with the AR3 or other excellent sealed box designs, that is the distance they usually sound best. And, most box designs that can deliver 100plus db of output at 30 Hz with 88 db off efficiency with out excessive doubling tend to be the size of refrigerators! And building a proper box of that size is hideously expensive! One last thought, could it be that individuals who dislike the OB concept may have not heard it properly executed? Hmmm!
I've heard, and built, quite a few bad OB speakers. Box speakers might have an edge there on percentage of good vs bad that I've listened to. But OB bass is so much easier to get right, if you know a few crossover tricks.
The very best bass I ever heard was from the Onken W cabinet. That's a massive box with 2x15 woofers and sand filled walls of 25mm marine ply. Not something everyone can or will do. But I have 2x15" on cheap plywood baffles that play right down to 30Hz and sound wonderful. Fast and easy, results much better than 95% of boxes. You pick what you can do within your skills and budget.
I'm 3x farther than Cooksville, but if you're ever on this side of the mountains, you're welcome to stop by for a listen.
Box speakers might have an edge there on percentage of good vs bad that I've listened to. But OB bass is so much easier to get right, if you know a few crossover tricks.The very best bass I ever heard was from the Onken W cabinet. That's a massive box with 2x15 woofers and sand filled walls of 25mm marine ply. Not something everyone can or will do. But I have 2x15" on cheap plywood baffles that play right down to 30Hz and sound wonderful. Fast and easy, results much better than 95% of boxes. You pick what you can do within your skills and budget.
I'm 3x farther than Cooksville, but if you're ever on this side of the mountains, you're welcome to stop by for a listen.
I'm the Cookeville dude that Scott means. Scott has an open invitation to visit.
My implementation is more of a balanced approach--not the absolute deepest bass but a very good balance of bass/mid/treble. While in some ways relatively modest system the results are very musical.
It is an open baffle midrange with PHL Audio 1240s in an MTM and Aurum Cantus G2 tweeters. Eminence 3015LF Neo Kappitalite woofers in H-frame mounts handle the lows. The 3-way crossovers are via a DEQX PDC2.6 HD at 175 Hz and 2500Hz. I'm using 96 dB/octave slopes.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/atta...woofer-match-raal-tweeter-my-pictures-001.jpg
Open baffle or dipole bass works on sound velocity vs. sound pressure (monopole) effects. The tradeoff you have to appreciate is superior attack and decay of dipolar bass at the expense of chest thumping--often muddy sounding--bass heard from monopole speakers.
My implementation is more of a balanced approach--not the absolute deepest bass but a very good balance of bass/mid/treble. While in some ways relatively modest system the results are very musical.
It is an open baffle midrange with PHL Audio 1240s in an MTM and Aurum Cantus G2 tweeters. Eminence 3015LF Neo Kappitalite woofers in H-frame mounts handle the lows. The 3-way crossovers are via a DEQX PDC2.6 HD at 175 Hz and 2500Hz. I'm using 96 dB/octave slopes.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/atta...woofer-match-raal-tweeter-my-pictures-001.jpg
Open baffle or dipole bass works on sound velocity vs. sound pressure (monopole) effects. The tradeoff you have to appreciate is superior attack and decay of dipolar bass at the expense of chest thumping--often muddy sounding--bass heard from monopole speakers.
Last edited:
Visaton ws 25 e
Hi.
Questions for an old but still very relevant thread.
I too am playing around with OB speakers and have come across the Visaton ws 25 e WS 25 E - 8 Ohm .
This is a very cheap 10” driver with high Qts: 1,43 and fairly low fs: 34 Hz but low sensitivity: 88 dB. With a price tag of under 35 EUR it would be interesting to try 4 or maybe 8 per side to compensate for the low sensitivity.
What are your thoughts or even better experiences with this driver? The only thing I can find about these drivers are from Visatons own ORGUE speakers.
One more question. These speakers have very small magnets. Normally I consider this a problem, but many seem to apply that this is not the case when dealing with open baffle speaker design. Can anyone explain why this is so?
Hi.
Questions for an old but still very relevant thread.
I too am playing around with OB speakers and have come across the Visaton ws 25 e WS 25 E - 8 Ohm .
This is a very cheap 10” driver with high Qts: 1,43 and fairly low fs: 34 Hz but low sensitivity: 88 dB. With a price tag of under 35 EUR it would be interesting to try 4 or maybe 8 per side to compensate for the low sensitivity.
What are your thoughts or even better experiences with this driver? The only thing I can find about these drivers are from Visatons own ORGUE speakers.
One more question. These speakers have very small magnets. Normally I consider this a problem, but many seem to apply that this is not the case when dealing with open baffle speaker design. Can anyone explain why this is so?