Hey everyone! just wanting to gauge the crowd here on what yall think of Paraflex subwoofer designs. I am pretty new to the technical side of speaker building, but have been enjoying big subwoofer sound systems for a few years now.
Just wanting to see what peoples thoughts/experiences are on performance of Paraflex designs vs say Front Loaded Horns or Bass Reflex subs.
I am looking into building some Paraflex Golden Formula C-2E 1x18" boxes as they have interesting looking frequency range and performance with a relatively simple design that seems doable with my skills and tools. However I have not yet had the chance to actually hear these to see if they are really my cup of tea so to say, and the only way I have been hearing about them is through the paraflex facebook page which gives them heavy praise (with an understandable bias).
Goals of this system would be to play low bass dubstep/DNB and will be paired with JBL SRX835p tops.
I have heard from some that believe the Paraflex designs to sound 'noisy' and 'honky' but others who just love em. So really just trying to gauge the crowd and see if others who have experience with these would like to share.
Hope I am doing this right, and will change the post as needed if this does not fit the forum, or needs to be posted somewhere else.
Thanks yall!
-JahManSurf
Just wanting to see what peoples thoughts/experiences are on performance of Paraflex designs vs say Front Loaded Horns or Bass Reflex subs.
I am looking into building some Paraflex Golden Formula C-2E 1x18" boxes as they have interesting looking frequency range and performance with a relatively simple design that seems doable with my skills and tools. However I have not yet had the chance to actually hear these to see if they are really my cup of tea so to say, and the only way I have been hearing about them is through the paraflex facebook page which gives them heavy praise (with an understandable bias).
Goals of this system would be to play low bass dubstep/DNB and will be paired with JBL SRX835p tops.
I have heard from some that believe the Paraflex designs to sound 'noisy' and 'honky' but others who just love em. So really just trying to gauge the crowd and see if others who have experience with these would like to share.
Hope I am doing this right, and will change the post as needed if this does not fit the forum, or needs to be posted somewhere else.
Thanks yall!
-JahManSurf
I haven't heard Paraflex cabs but the Hornresp sims should tell you almost the whole story, the FB group is a bit over the top in their enthusiasm but they are a box that will work in some situations:
1) They are physically quite large for their minimum frequency
2) They are narrow band, IE you may have trouble meeting your tops if you select a low tune
3) The drive pole vent is exposed and so any drivers that have mechanical noises have no filtering of this as would happen in bass reflex. On the plus side driver cooling is excellent.
4) Group delay could be an issue for some genres, worth checking the box your building against audibility thresholds. The psy trance that tends to be the preferred genre on the FB group is quite insensitive to group delay issues.
To me they occupy a very similar space to conventional folded horns sitting in size between bass reflex and front loaded horns. If your going for minimum size and have a lot of amp power and money for drivers bass reflex will probably win, if you can deal with huge boxes FLH will win and if your somewhere in the middle then TH/Paraflex is the way.
1) They are physically quite large for their minimum frequency
2) They are narrow band, IE you may have trouble meeting your tops if you select a low tune
3) The drive pole vent is exposed and so any drivers that have mechanical noises have no filtering of this as would happen in bass reflex. On the plus side driver cooling is excellent.
4) Group delay could be an issue for some genres, worth checking the box your building against audibility thresholds. The psy trance that tends to be the preferred genre on the FB group is quite insensitive to group delay issues.
To me they occupy a very similar space to conventional folded horns sitting in size between bass reflex and front loaded horns. If your going for minimum size and have a lot of amp power and money for drivers bass reflex will probably win, if you can deal with huge boxes FLH will win and if your somewhere in the middle then TH/Paraflex is the way.
I have no first hand experience regarding how they perform or what they sound like so I will refrain from commenting or speculate on that , I can however share my thoughts on the design approach such and the data so far supplied by the group behind the designs and what has been stated by builders/users.
First of, they have had and continue to have an astounding adoption rate world wide in a very short time, I personally has never seen anything like it before from the diy community , and the people, even if its unknown to me what their previous experiences are, that has commented on their performance are indeed very impressed.
Higher order qw designs like this often get critiqued for falling short on the usually brought up qualifiers, phase response, groupdelay, etc. and yet their success in this case is beyond question, interesting that isn't it.
Finally, outside of a lab the primary goal of any speaker, especially in this type application, is the provide a positive experience for the audience, well judging by the feedback they have received this is certainly a job well done.
In short, by what quality metrics do we judge good and bad in a case like this, I won't argue with the theory or the physics, that's beyond question, the data is what it is, but how important are what parts of it with regards to the experience we get?
My hat is off to them and I which them all the best.
First of, they have had and continue to have an astounding adoption rate world wide in a very short time, I personally has never seen anything like it before from the diy community , and the people, even if its unknown to me what their previous experiences are, that has commented on their performance are indeed very impressed.
Higher order qw designs like this often get critiqued for falling short on the usually brought up qualifiers, phase response, groupdelay, etc. and yet their success in this case is beyond question, interesting that isn't it.
Finally, outside of a lab the primary goal of any speaker, especially in this type application, is the provide a positive experience for the audience, well judging by the feedback they have received this is certainly a job well done.
In short, by what quality metrics do we judge good and bad in a case like this, I won't argue with the theory or the physics, that's beyond question, the data is what it is, but how important are what parts of it with regards to the experience we get?
My hat is off to them and I which them all the best.
Make no connection with what I say next, but most turnaround is in the lowest class product. Amount alone is not an indicator of anything.
BUT I think the advanced paraflex designs have its merits, and I would give it to best efficiency/passband/size compromise/ratio. Therefore it has its place and user base. No need to overhype or put it down. A product which found its audience and customer base. A success.
We could as well badmouth every system without feedback from the speaker. All of these are deeply flawed...
BUT I think the advanced paraflex designs have its merits, and I would give it to best efficiency/passband/size compromise/ratio. Therefore it has its place and user base. No need to overhype or put it down. A product which found its audience and customer base. A success.
We could as well badmouth every system without feedback from the speaker. All of these are deeply flawed...
Take a Bose cannon, fold it into a rectangular box such that both open ends are coincident, and then, if you can, offset the driver along one or both of the paths to improve phase alignment at the upper end of the passband and extend the overall usable passband. The result is a paraflex alignment.
High out of band resonances can be an issue, similar to a lot of TH designs. If anyone finds that it sounds "honky", that probably means that the LP filter is set too high or the LP filter is too shallow.
Only reasons that I haven't built one yet too try it out is that (1) I'm a lazy and terrible builder of boxes and (2) Paraflex alignments usually result in boxes that are too big to fit in Matilda's trunk
.
High out of band resonances can be an issue, similar to a lot of TH designs. If anyone finds that it sounds "honky", that probably means that the LP filter is set too high or the LP filter is too shallow.
Only reasons that I haven't built one yet too try it out is that (1) I'm a lazy and terrible builder of boxes and (2) Paraflex alignments usually result in boxes that are too big to fit in Matilda's trunk
.
YEah, i know. Its a question though. Because the rest i feel is only different if we hear it. And not everyone does. But i was skeptical too. But back to back with qw pipes of a variety of use of nodes or positions of them on either side of the cone(and driver) theres what i think made an impression i found unique? Not perfect, or easy to just find. But its thst detail thats remaining maybe?
Im Suggesting things are in a timing that is stuck like our ears. Qw pipe is harmonics already, and catering to that in someway or however is also something thats either missed or overlooked or nothing at all. Not sure im
Guessing from my interpretations of harry olsons pipes? And obviously more recently mmj. But the wholevidea is clearly present in the new sim in HR. No questions left to not see for anyone to try. Theta is all i got. Parts of 45 degres into 90 into 180 into 360(shown as 720 unwrapped phase and well beyond)? Its nothing. But theres a pressure node in all that to?
Im Suggesting things are in a timing that is stuck like our ears. Qw pipe is harmonics already, and catering to that in someway or however is also something thats either missed or overlooked or nothing at all. Not sure im
Guessing from my interpretations of harry olsons pipes? And obviously more recently mmj. But the wholevidea is clearly present in the new sim in HR. No questions left to not see for anyone to try. Theta is all i got. Parts of 45 degres into 90 into 180 into 360(shown as 720 unwrapped phase and well beyond)? Its nothing. But theres a pressure node in all that to?
Last edited:
With this kind of response and the long sound pathways I can hear them now...
‘Long’ is not wrong if its proportionally not off in its spread to wherever it arrives at in the brain. That isnt saying anything, its just the same dimensions of thinking and mot seeing a sphere or a line or a point or? I dunno, how many sphers can burst into that and be understood as heard or?. But its easy to assume otherwise and who wouldnt? I dont think people can choose what they hear until they listen to hear when its fair to them. I say that because i went in skeptical and remain so if i explained the reason why, its only because i still think something's suppose to be weird? Im not sure,
Hi all together. I am one of the Co-Designers of the C2E-GF and i did the optimizations and testings for the latest update V42.11 on the Facebook homepage.
I want to share some graphs with you, just for some "ah, okay" effects.
But before that, some notes:
Hearing is the essential thing when it comes to Paraflex Designs.
When i started building subwoofers i started with Tapped-Horns. MTH30, MTH46VS (updated to big Tham18) and that was my way to go.
Then one day i saw that C2E classic cab with centered driver and i was done - i needed those!
I contacted and joined the group, told MMJ about my target to do a very strong 50-70Hz region (what i found out sounds best for me, with my 2x12 THs that i designed ) with a C2E-look. It took some time and MMJ contacted me that he found a solution!! That is how the C2E-Golden Formular was born. First builts in the US, Netherlands were promising okay-ish. (the Dip-Issue - cancelations)
Then we started to optimize (Hornresp: TH-Mode) and did that fold in the HT-chamber. (today we know we just did the fold too short )
Since the latest HR-updates (Thanks to David McBean at that point) we can simulate the Paraflex quite accurate since we know how it behaves in HR.
Also: The Folds in the R-Type (that were also too short in the prototypes) sounded not that good as they do now, why i sticked to my big Thams.
Okay, enough of that. I will share some graphs now, not every graph is 100% SPL-calibrated, but it gives you a hint, how the cabinets behave and what is optimizes (50-80% Damping material in the stubs for example to avoid a ringing-tone at 97Hz) or even the fold (also have angled braces without the caps included, just to see what these optimizations do on their own).
You can also listen to my YouTube Recording i made with all latest updates:
Demo 2x Paraflex C2E Golden Formular 35Hz with B&C18DS115-4 - YouTube
Have a nice day and build one if you want to know how it sounds.
Join the group and help us to improve further.
Greetz
Patrick Sander
I am one of the Co-Designers of the C2E-GF and i did the optimizations and testings for the latest update V42.11 on the Facebook homepage.I want to share some graphs with you, just for some "ah, okay" effects.
But before that, some notes:
Hearing is the essential thing when it comes to Paraflex Designs.
When i started building subwoofers i started with Tapped-Horns. MTH30, MTH46VS (updated to big Tham18) and that was my way to go.
Then one day i saw that C2E classic cab with centered driver and i was done - i needed those!
I contacted and joined the group, told MMJ about my target to do a very strong 50-70Hz region (what i found out sounds best for me, with my 2x12 THs that i designed ) with a C2E-look. It took some time and MMJ contacted me that he found a solution!! That is how the C2E-Golden Formular was born. First builts in the US, Netherlands were promising okay-ish. (the Dip-Issue - cancelations)
Then we started to optimize (Hornresp: TH-Mode) and did that fold in the HT-chamber. (today we know we just did the fold too short
)Since the latest HR-updates (Thanks to David McBean at that point) we can simulate the Paraflex quite accurate since we know how it behaves in HR.
Also: The Folds in the R-Type (that were also too short in the prototypes) sounded not that good as they do now, why i sticked to my big Thams.
Okay, enough of that. I will share some graphs now, not every graph is 100% SPL-calibrated, but it gives you a hint, how the cabinets behave and what is optimizes (50-80% Damping material in the stubs for example to avoid a ringing-tone at 97Hz) or even the fold (also have angled braces without the caps included, just to see what these optimizations do on their own).
You can also listen to my YouTube Recording i made with all latest updates:
Demo 2x Paraflex C2E Golden Formular 35Hz with B&C18DS115-4 - YouTube
Have a nice day and build one if you want to know how it sounds.
Join the group and help us to improve further.
Greetz
Patrick Sander
Attachments
-
00_C2E_GF_118_NoCaps_4Caps_Damped_GD.png -
00_C2E_GF_118_NoCaps_4Caps_Damped.png -
00_C2E_GF_118_Measurement_40cm_HTres_4caps_Waterfall_DAMPED.png -
00_C2E_GF_118_Measurement_40cm_HTres_4caps_Waterfall_RINGING.png -
00_C2E_GF_118_18DS115_4_VS_TH18_Tham.png -
00_C2E_GF_118_18DS115_4_VS_TH18_Tham_PLAN.png -
00_C2E_GF_118_18DS115_4_Measurement_Distortion.png -
00_C2E_GF_118_Measurement_40cm_HTres_4Caps_PH1TH_STEPPED.png -
00_C2E_GF_118_Measurement_40cm_HTres_4Caps_Damped60_and_Phase.png -
00_C2E_GF_118_Measurement_40cm_HTres_4Caps_RAW_and_Phase.png
Balfred1. The new data look very promising.
You can see the improvements and progression over the first MK1 prototype of the TC2E-GF-118 I have build, which has a smaller mouth, doesn't have filled stubs in the Hight Tuned Resonator (HTR) and a slightly larger chamber in the throat.
You can see the improvements and progression over the first MK1 prototype of the TC2E-GF-118 I have build, which has a smaller mouth, doesn't have filled stubs in the Hight Tuned Resonator (HTR) and a slightly larger chamber in the throat.
Attachments
I wonder what would become of this if using a layout that flipped the csa/fold as dictated by generic pipe nodes instead of putting a flare rate on it for gain in series of folding intervals as they fit. Clearly youve got it setup very well and leaves nothing to want. Only difference being a inherrjny drift from a flare rate which is not necessarily even a measure able area of concern or potential difference thats useful if put in a stepped profile dictated as phase’ would(pressure phase nodes/antinodes).. ‘After the fact’ in the PH1 sims, vs TH. Not that it matters, but interesting enough if its even possible to look in a sim with the stages of flair vs the two that are limited in proportion if referencing something or a pattern to use as one. That two stage HF rez chamber is the beez kneez!!! Perfect way to sneak into a window of opprtunity spliting it up. I was stuck on that and didnt like anything i could cone up with as a fold or funny way to do the same