Othorn vs XOC Th118 comparison for fun.

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
(21sw-152-4 vs 18sw-115)

Hey ya'll. Had some fun jamming these two a/b today. Two very different monsters. Came out kinda how we expected. The xoc seems better than the othorn for psytrance, (most) house, dnb, kick drums, and anything a bit faster really. The bass is sharper from the 18" xoc, and sounds faster/more aggressive. Its considerably lighter, smaller, but several inches taller than the othorn. It does have a true deep 35hz slam to it, it is certainly not wimpy.

Where it falls short next to an othorn is with glitch hop, dub, and anything with a fat deep bassline. The othorn is gets a bit louder overall, and that extra 5hz lower extension is considerable. Those genres with deeper slower bass lines really come alive with the ground shaking and all that with the othorn. With the othorn you get this refreshing depth that you rarely hear. The xoc doesn't quite get there but its not too too far off.

Both have that impressive low 30-40hz deep "BOOM". Both have their own personalities across the response, with the othorn having an overall deeper tone throughout. We found we don't like running either over 80hz. We find both to be excellent. Hope all is well :D
 

Attachments

  • OthornXOC1.jpg
    OthornXOC1.jpg
    111.4 KB · Views: 1,421
  • othornxoc2.jpg
    othornxoc2.jpg
    81.5 KB · Views: 1,441
  • othornxoc3.jpg
    othornxoc3.jpg
    102.9 KB · Views: 1,415
Last edited:
I don't know.... "fast bass?" and "boom?"....
Though I know what you mean, with regards to deep notes verses "snappy" notes.

Any design that gets its efficiency through resonances is likely to be less defined on the kick drums and bass hits compared to the long notes. Also designs that go deeper, can often be slightly inferior on the upper bass. I often find this to be a function of the room, with outdoors being the "tightest" sounding, and the corners of concrete rooms being the most reverberant.

If you were to put two "holed" braces in a V pattern connecting the underside to either side of the driver, would that help the underside stop flexing?
 
I want it to be fair when we go outside so I think we will rebuild with some bracing on the xoc. upon searching we found a few diff ways people have braced it. Also gonna figure out a clever way to add a beefy grill because boy oh boy is this 18sw115 hanging out there in the wind just begging for a dixie cup or beer can. I want to build a keystone, weltersys seems to def know his stuff. If the xoc sounds considerably better with the bracing it will be a real big winner in my eyes (because it sounds awesome already). Its such an easy and inexpensive build and it slams. Im sure this has been known be all for a long time lol. Hey sine im rebuilding my tops 3 way!!!!
 
just build a keystone and throw one of the 18sw115 drivers in it. a tapped horn doesnt get much easier to build than the keystone

you can see what I mean by "strips of 3/4" in the mouth. also shows how the grille was mounted. i put foam on the grilles shortly after this pic.
 

Attachments

  • 1064848_301634766707134_8694834080611731643_o.jpg
    1064848_301634766707134_8694834080611731643_o.jpg
    262.5 KB · Views: 1,231
+1 as to Keystone. I get that the XOC gets the love being a DSL clone, but the Keystone goes lower and louder than XOC. I would think performance wise it would be close to what you were after which is exactly why I suggested it. I don't hang here as often as I'd like but I think this would be first "shootout" I've seen and adding the 'stone to it would be really neat.
 
An unbiased comparison would be very welcome.
The TH18 was never intended to be a DSL clone, and at the time I drew it up the internal structure of the Danley TH118 was completely unknown to me. Living in Devon, UK I still have never even seen a Danley PA System!
The TH18 has exceeded all my original design intentions which were for a 1KW bass cab.
I wish that the TH18 was not such a close clone of the Danley design as I feel this has stifled development of the design in the public domain. IE I feel wary about posting an updated version with a cone correcting Vee shape above the baffle.
Making the TH18 the same size as the TH118 was a mistake. Mostly because the TH118 is really a TH115 with an 18" driver shoehorned into it!
I would like to know what the effect is of double panel bracing around the mouth and adding a grille are, as I suspect that they would be beneficial to the lower end response of the speaker.
I wonder if the success of the TH18 is down to my concise documentation rather than any performance advantage!;)
Regards Martin (Xoc1)
 
Hey martin. Killer design, thank you! Ya man, I feel you on never having the pleasure of hearing a danley system we built the othorn and your design and we still have never heard a single danley product or any other tapped / synergy horns for that matter. I desperately want to.

I finally am getting over my hornresp phobia thanks in part to this CAD class Im taking, kinda conneced alot of concepts together for me. So hopefully I will have something to offer soon as well! Ill tell you what this whole world can be extremely mystifying from an outsider looking to learn. Math, Physics, Woodworking, Electronics, Acoustics, Hornresp, Technical 3d Drafting.... Some times I am just like "what the heck am I supposed to study today?"

After playing with them both I feel like the perfect sub in my mind would be like right in the middle of the extension of the xoc1TH18 and the Othorn. For a lot of applications the othorn just doesn't really make sense, where the xoc1th18 does and vice versa. I am tempted to try a regular folded bass horn ("front loaded" would be the term?) but I get scared of the need for numbers to get low extension and size.

I've been trying to discern where the advantage level on the "useable output vs number of units coupled" flips between tapped and folded horn. For instance at what quantity does it become more advantageous to use a fold horn design over a tapped. I guess driver for driver may not be fair because some may be better in a TH vs a folded, but I guess in dollar for dollar. Then I try and add in quality and accuracy into the equation, and then I realize I should probably just keep reading and learning because I cant answer that for myself lol.
 
this is literally based on hearsay (I have no scientific evidence of it)

but "i've been told" :
'A 1/4 wavlength horn with fc of 30hz will achieve maximum sensitivity (for the given flare) below the 1/2 wavelength frequency when mouth area approaches and exceeds 40 sq feet'

with a slower flare FLH (smaller mouth for given horn length) you can force a bit of a lower corner out of any giving horn length, at the expense of efficiency.
 
After playing with them both I feel like the perfect sub in my mind would be like right in the middle of the extension of the xoc1TH18 and the Othorn. For a lot of applications the othorn just doesn't really make sense, where the xoc1th18 does and vice versa. I am tempted to try a regular folded bass horn ("front loaded" would be the term?) but I get scared of the need for numbers to get low extension and size.

You might want to look at the keystone thread. Art mentions that you can trade off a little sensitivity for more extension by making one dimension longer. Easier than designing from the ground up and the design is comparatively simple.
 
Last edited:
B&C 18SW115 XOC shaded vs. Keystone in black @ 1W.

Truthfully the OTHORN trounces both on paper but as you allude to, size, weight, power needs, and cost are all factors. Then there's the LABhorn with more of the same problems, plus you need multiples to get the extension. I recall you need 8.

I was fortunate that Art took an interest in my threads and here is a post of his thoughts which highlight some relevant info: (snip)

The reason I designed the Keystone was to get more output from the same truck space. Using the same power (Crest CA-9), and one BC18SW115-4 (bridged mono) compared to 4 Lab 12 (two per side of the amp) in dual ported enclosures, the Keystone outperforms them in every regard.
As a reference, the four dual Lab 12 had more output at 40 Hz than eight dual 18" Meyer HP650.

The price increase of the neo driver now would make me choose the BCTBW100, only slightly less (ultimate) output than the BC18SW115 for a lot less money.

The Lab 12 loaded Pal12 is a nice "bite size" cabinet, but the big gun B&C 18s" are simply way better drivers, and a single 18" Keystone is lighter, easier to build, and 21.5% less truck space (15.52 cubic feet compared to 19.79) than a pair of PAL12.

Art(end)

I think the Keystone really fits the bill of what you want and it's worth the investment in sawdust and time to see for yourself. You already have the driver...
 

Attachments

  • XOC v KS.png
    XOC v KS.png
    62.5 KB · Views: 1,165
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.