Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Ricci

  1. Here's the design I'm going to be using to replace my Othorn. It's been "almost" done for a long time now but I finally made an effort to wrap it up to the point that it is ready to build. Originally I was going to go with another TH design I was calling the Palehorn to replace the Othorn but I wasn't quite happy with it. I stumbled on this type of cab a few years ago while doing a billion simulations of different cabinet designs. You can read some of that in the M.A.U.L. thread. I originally planned to try this design first since it was smaller and cheaper to produce but circumstances led to the bigger more complicated M.A.U.L. getting done first. Since this style of 6th order bandpass / horn cab worked quite well and on target with the bigger design, I used what was learned there to make a few tweaks to this and finally wrap it up. I'll add a lot more info later, but here are some pics to start with. If anyone feels froggy and wants to have a go at building one of these let me know and I'll send the plans. Simplified design layout. Add bracing, drivers, hatches, hardware to taste. PDF and DXF Plans Skhorn 221 print.pdf Skhorn 221 print.DXF
  2. Aura NS8-385-4a, 8 available

    This and the 5inch drivers are both killer deals. I thought about buying these but I have to be honest with myself they would likely just sit here. I have too many projects. Good luck with the sale.
  3. Upcoming Testing Possibilities?

    There are about a hundred things I'd like to test but I only have so much time. Someone would have to provide the driver AND a cabinet. I only have a small sealed cab for 12" drivers at the moment and I just can't build a cab for every driver that comes through.
  4. Ricci's Skhorn Subwoofer & Files

    Well that doesn't look too bad. Of course the 18's aren't going to have the same amount of headroom as the big dog 21's...
  5. Ricci's Skhorn Subwoofer & Files

    I'm not sure if they will work or not. I will run those drivers the next time I have a chance.
  6. (8) Ported Incriminator Audio Judge 21" build

    Looks good. Time to sit back for a few months and watch movies with some brews?
  7. B2 Audio XM18 vs Dayton Ultimax UM-1822

    +1 This about sums up my thoughts as well. I have heard of B2 before from the car audio guys. They mention sound quality a lot on the website but I saw no technical information that explained what was done in their speakers to engineer them for better sound quality or lower distortion or whatever. They might be awesome drivers, or they might be typical cookie cutter car audio SPL comp subs. Like most of these car audio companies, they are very short on any type of engineering specs, technical data, or explanation of design goals. There is a lot of descriptive text (claims) about them but little substance. I see a number of red flags from browsing the website. A lot of the specs are different in the manual vs the website. The power handling specs have no information of how they were derived (AES, CEA, some other proprietary testing?). Same for the Xmax specs (gap geometry, what calculation, BL simulation, Klippel, pulled out of thin air?). This is typical for this market. Some of the xmax specs are peak to peak and others seem to be 1 way? Other things that would give me pause are the lack of any mention of shorting rings in the motors. 6 and 8 layer 4" diameter and larger will have huge inductance. What that means is inductive distortion will be high and your winisd sims will not even resemble the real response behavior using these drivers. Le at 1kHz isn't even listed so it is impossible to sim them in HR with the Le effects added. Also the Cms is extremely low meaning that the suspensions are rock hard. Stiffer than any other drivers I can recall. Another thing I see is that the Qts of these drivers is on the high side meaning they are very inefficient. This is despite the huge motors, massive voice coils, etc. What do I mean by a typical SPL comp car sub? Basically it comes down to this... The drivers are designed to take a beating and withstand as much abuse as possible. That is priority #1, #2 and #3. After that they may start to consider how cool the sub looks. The marketing involves having bigger everything than the competitor...Heaviest motor possible, most neodymium, biggest coil diameter, highest power handling rating, etc. Quality=Heavy & Tough in this market. None of this has anything to do with making the sub more accurate, linear, higher efficiency, or lower distortion. I'm not trying to pick on B2. It's a car audio market issue as a whole. They may have some excellent products but without sufficient information on them from the MFG it is impossible to know without trying one out.
  8. How much can you find the Alpine SWS-15 for? They go for just over $120 here. It's not a glamorous 30mm xmax sub with a jillion watts power handling, or 100dB sensitivity, but it is very well engineered, backed by a huge company and the specs are legitimate. It's a killer driver for the money. You can often get 2 or 3 of them for the price of a single good 18". The SWR-1522D or 1542D are also good and a bit beefier with a useful 20-25mm 1 way excursion, but a bit more expensive. These should be available where you are but I'm not sure what the cost is where you are. They are a very reasonable here in NA. https://www.ebay.de/itm/Pair-New-Alpine-SWR-1522D-15-4000-Watt-DVC-2-Ohm-Car-Subwoofers-Subs-SWR1522D/302565646107?epid=69759827&hash=item4672515f1b:g:-WEAAOSw401aMvsW https://www.ebay.de/itm/Alpine-Type-S-SWS-15D4-15-1500-Watt-Dual-4-Ohm-Car-Audio-Subwoofer-Sub-SWS15D4/351607121407?epid=1700178220&hash=item51dd6ae5ff:g:u5QAAOSwgQ9Vib0U Just a couple of other options to consider. These drivers are vetted and known to be good quality. Sadly to say unless you are familiar with a company and it's products you may be rolling the dice buying an unknown driver based on specs alone. Some of them are notoriously inflated to sell more product. Xmax, sensitivity and power handling are the worst.
  9. Ricci's Gjallarhorn & Othorn Files

    It was never billed out in man hours to me for any of the cabs I've had built. We just negotiated a labor price on top of the raw materials costs up front. I never searched for someone to build any of my cabs either. It just kind of happened that I know some fellow DIYers who were willing to work on them for reasonable prices. I had the Othorns, Gjallarhorns built by one guy. The MAUL's by someone else and the Skhorn's most lately by member DSL1. I covered materials+ shipping+enough extra to cover some labor each time, but I probably got quite the hookup on some of the labor charges. In fact I know that I did. Just the wood, duratex, glue, wire, screws, handles and shipping on a pair of any of these is substantial. The labor hours are also substantial. You can save a LOT of money by doing it yourself but be prepared to put the hours in. If you would rather have a pro or someone with a full on cabinet shop and all the tools build them, it will cost. If you need to discuss in more detail we should take it to PM.
  10. Upcoming Testing Possibilities?

    I've got a couple of pro woofers on hand for 2018 so far. I need to do some more testing with the 21DS115-4, but I also have a JBL 2269H 18 and 2 18Sound 21's the 21NLW9601 and 21ID. I also have a couple of vented pro subs I didn't get to in 2017. Even more JTR Speakers testing is on the schedule for when spring gets here.
  11. X-curve compensation re-EQ

    Cinemas often sound very midrange forward and rolled off up top to me which is what would be expected. Some of them also sound very loud and harsh to me mostly in the upper midrange I'd guess as 1-4kHz. Just an observation. Do we know that the mixes are usually created on large cinema type systems employing an X-curve? Thus baking in boosted HF and LF content. The X-curve shape vs air absorption of HF might be worth pondering. I admittedly have not done much research on the X-curve in quite some time. Is the P/N calibration usually made at a few spots centered in the theater seating or many averaged positions, or in worst case at only a single position? The back wall seats of a large cinema could be >100ft from the speakers and a "good" center seat in the theater would probably be around 40-50ft for a typical commercial cinema. Those are significant distances which reduce the HF energy. Below 1000Hz there would be little effect, assuming typical indoor atmospheric conditions and a distance of 40-100ft , but at 5kHz and above it becomes a major factor. There could be a loss of 5dB near 15kHz quite easily. I'm assuming the mixing desk in a full size cinema screening room would also be a good 30-50ft back from the speakers. This may take care of the lions share of the top end response of the x-curve, depending on the room and where it is measured. I wouldn't say I avoid using EQ on my subs at home, it's just that my response is what I would consider to be pretty good below 100Hz natively, both the main LP measurement and averaged across many seats. Relative to the raw measurements I've seen from most. A combo of luck and a bit of thoughtful planning + research through measurements. It's been a while since I looked at it but I think it was something like +/-6dB from 8-105Hz with no Eq and no smoothing. There aren't any big nulls over that range and only one high Q peak at about 45Hz (center room seating) and a bit of a shelf up near 70-100Hz. I was able to get it to +/2dB with 4 simple filters. The major issue I tried to address was the 45Hz peak. I had it EQ'd flatfor a while, but something always seemed off with kick drums and other sharp bass events centered near 40-50Hz. It took a lot of cut to get it back to flat and that range just seemed to lose any sense of power or clarity at the main seats and was MIA anywhere else in the room. That peak primarily comes from the right 2 subs from what I recall. I spent sometime messing with different amounts of cut to that area but it just never sounded right. I think that cutting it so much had other noticeable effects besides reducing the direct sound energy at a relatively small area in the room as measured by the mic capsule. Are you saying that minor bass shelf adjustments of only 0.5dB wildly affect your perception of the bass sound quality on your system? Your ears must be better than mine my friend. I don't think I would notice unless someone told me it was done and then only very subtly if at all.
  12. 18" SW115 4ohm - $425 + shipping

    Never even hooked up eh? I was hoping you'd be able to compare it to the 5100 and give me your thoughts. Dang it.
  13. X-curve compensation re-EQ

    Good discussion so far. I'd say that the issue stems from the fact that there is some kind of standard developed for large cinemas, so most of the mixing effort is skewed in that direction. There really is no standard for "home" listening rooms, or even studio mastering rooms. Sure we can come up with some rigid standard of what it should be, but the reality is that it will be all over the place. Once it goes to the consumer for playback all bets are off. You might have someone with a badly setup HTIB 5.1 system, another with playback through a soundbar and a third with a 1% system such as many members here or at AVS. A commercial cinema on the other hand, while it may be quite different from the one across town, will be close to other cinemas in the areas of: Acoustics, room design, shape, gear and playback capabilities comparatively. How much of the optimization for cinema playback is directly put in the mix, versus compensated for at the playback gear / speaker EQ level, is what I really wonder about. It would be best to use the playback gear to handle that for each room, but if the mixes are truly done in a big cinema room to begin with undoubtedly some of that will get baked in. EQ is a powerful tool but in my experience once things have been EQ'd multiple times at each step in the process it can begin to muddy the waters and cause a loss of cohesiveness of the mix. It has to be used with care, especially with narrowband filters. That's just my experience. After doing some A/Bing with and without EQ at home I don't use any EQ on my subs other than the low pass filter. With EQ was flatter at the main 2 listening seats but didn't sound better to me. I think it may have something to do with the total bass energy output into the room vs measured at a few pinpoint specific points in the space.
  14. New CEA 2010 in room Measurements.

    I have been doing most of the commercial subs in my room as well for quite a while. Mostly as a data point on the room acoustics effects I have and how distortion is lowered in the deep bass. Mic is at head position at the main seat and subs are placed in the same corner each time. Only valid for my room and that exact placement.
  15. (8) Ported Incriminator Audio Judge 21" build

    Finally! I bet you will be glad to have this project off of your plate and be able to fire up all 8.
  16. Othorn Plans

    It should be fine. Response shape may be a hair different but not a deal killer by any means
  17. That is good to hear Nick. I decided not to see that in the theater so I could fist watch it at home. Looks like it has some good 12 to 25Hz energy. My buddy also said the visuals are stunning.
  18. New SVS Ultra 16"

    Looks like it is time to try that K20 out on the next big woofer across the bench. Judging by the slope of those curves it looks like the 70% BL point is going to be around 20mm.
  19. The Bass EQ for Movies Thread

    John how much time does it take you to go through the process above?
  20. New SVS Ultra 16"

    I went back and looked at the Tymphany STW-350F specs and they are totally different from the specs that ITR posted from a PB16 driver. Originally I thought that these drivers would be quite similar or were at least using a similar build platform. After looking again there is very little similar between them at all. The frames are different, the STW-350 is 15" OD but the SVS appears to be 16" OD. The STW-350 is using an overhung topology with a 7.4" diameter coil. SVS says they are using an underhung 8" nominal diameter. That being the case both the surrounds and spiders would be different. The overall motor / gap / coil geometry would be much different as well. In fact it seems like perhaps the only parts shared would maybe be the motor case and backplate. Although the motor outwardly makes the drivers seem like close brothers it appears that they are more like estranged 3rd cousins. Modeling the 2 drivers using the parameters provided shows that they behave as differently as you would expect. The SB16 driver should be a completely different 3rd driver design. I must say this has gotten me interested in testing the SVS 16's again.
  21. New SVS Ultra 16"

    Thanks. They are not what I expected. I just checked and this would've tied the 21Ipal as having the stiffest suspension I've ever encountered.
  22. New SVS Ultra 16"

    Welcome to the forum... Just to clarify...These specs are pulled from what driver? What jumps out at me is Qts = 0.87 BL^2/Re = 118 n0 0.186% Cms=0.039 Extremely tight suspension + 500g mms and a relatively low strength coil / motor system results in a very inefficient driver. Very odd set of design tradeoffs IMHO.
  23. JTR Noesis 215RT Measurements Discussion

    Kinda off topic from the 215RT... In general if I was selling subs or speakers I'd probably aim for a flattish response to 30-35Hz and a gentle 6 to 12dB/oct roll off below there. Rooms vary a LOT but if you look at the broad trends vs individual samples most rooms seem to have some moderate boost by 20-25Hz and a large amount by 10Hz. Mine has about 3.5dB at 20Hz and about 14dB by 10Hz. There are always those examples that don't and you have your usual room issues such as the dip in the 12-17Hz range that occurs in a lot of rooms, or the peak near 40-60Hz for seating placed near the center of the room. A lot of companies go for the flat full or half space bass response. It's really a matter of preference and design choices.
  24. Discussion of JTR's mammoth main speaker should go here.