Jump to content
Droogne

B2 Audio XM18 vs Dayton Ultimax UM-1822

Recommended Posts

Hey

 

Instead of constantly derailing my own subwoofer rising project, I though it better to start a seperate topic to compare to very good drivers with each other. As far as I can see the B2 Audio brand is very reputably, but not so known. They are also European based ("Sweet Like Danish") which is why I doubt any of you know of them. 

Goal is for a sealed (or ported if it all possible) enclosure (max 290L / 10cuft internal withouth bracing and driver) to cross the sub 30hz region flat and as low as possible. Hopefully down to 10-15hz. I will probably end up building 2 so you can take that into consideration. My room is about 100 cubic meter / 3600cuft. Listening volumes are low (I only listen at 85-90dbs generally, but the bass can be higher ofcourse), but I do want some headroom (and option to use them at reference level if at all possible). 

 

B2 Audio driver:

image.png.1f062a0bac3630a1244e629c6b7f58e2.pngimage.png.188ca6c6f3211c143824506f0ad1e7ac.png

 

Dayton Audio UM1822

 

image.png.1838f1f0f39c6766993727919ac9f1c7.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When modeled in a sealed enclosure I noticed some relevant differences: (the red line is a bit difficult to see, but it is there ;) )

1) The B2 Audio would already be at a Qtc of ,707 with a 150L internal volume, while the Ultimax would need twice that. Being only 150L is not a requirement, but definitely a huge plus!

2) The Ultimax most definitely outperforms the B2 Audio in the lower end. This difference is nullified if I put in their respective RMS ratings. I know it's more complicated than that, but still. The B2 Audio can take 3 times the input of the Dayton. The B2 Audio is a double 0,5 ohm version. 

image.thumb.png.8ca4ccb091666e64ba981d85a2ce3da8.png

This is with their respective RMS ratings. 

 

 

So does this mean the B2 Audio can outperform the Ultimax, when coupled to an appropriate amp? This modeling doesn't consider the (8mm) Xmax advantage of the B2 Audio.  

image.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think anyone can give you the answer you are looking for here.  As far as performance, the B2 drivers are unknowns.  It's not necessarily a question of how reputable the manufacturer is.  Several methods exist for measuring or computing Xmax and power handling, which are of primary importance for your application.  The only way to know for certain is for the driver to be measured under consistent test conditions like @Ricci does here.  Likewise, specs tell you little about what to expect in the upper frequencies where inductance effects are substantial.  Though, you said you only care about performance under 30 Hz.

Of secondary importance are specs like Mms, BL, Re, and Cms, which affect low end efficiency.  Going by what's on paper, both have similar Mms; the B2 has higher BL^2/Re but lower Cms.  On balance, I think the UM-18 will be a bit more efficient in the low end in a sealed box unless the box is on the small side.  Of course if the power rating and Xmax ratings were comparable to the UM-18 and you opted to put a big enough amp on it, the B2 could out perform it.  Likewise, the B2 looks more attractive if you care about upper frequency capability.  Though, I'd be reluctant to assume anything there without real world measurements.

In a ported box the B2 may also be better.  I don't know without doing some modeling, and you need to take into account port velocity and other things like that when modeling a ported system.  If you decide to go that route, I highly recommend you try to copy or at least derive from an existing design in the DIY forum on AVS, using a known driver with known performance.  That way, you are much more likely to get satisfactory results.

If going sealed, I would still recommend the UM18 over the B2, simply because its performance is known.  Certainly on paper the B2 looks like a good choice if you're going to give it a lot of power, but is it worth taking the chance in order to save some money?  That's up to you I guess.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, SME said:

I don't think anyone can give you the answer you are looking for here.  As far as performance, the B2 drivers are unknowns.  It's not necessarily a question of how reputable the manufacturer is.  Several methods exist for measuring or computing Xmax and power handling, which are of primary importance for your application.  The only way to know for certain is for the driver to be measured under consistent test conditions like @Ricci does here.  

The site listed 40mm, and the guy from the store listed 30mm. I'm going by 30 for now. Ill try to find some testings. 

20 minutes ago, SME said:

Likewise, specs tell you little about what to expect in the upper frequencies where inductance effects are substantial.  Though, you said you only care about performance under 30 Hz.

 

20 minutes ago, SME said:

Of secondary importance are specs like Mms, BL, Re, and Cms, which affect low end efficiency.  Going by what's on paper, both have similar Mms; the B2 has higher BL^2/Re but lower Cms.  On balance, I think the UM-18 will be a bit more efficient in the low end in a sealed box unless the box is on the small side.  

Smaller box would make my life so much easier, so the B2 Audio has the advantage in that field. 

20 minutes ago, SME said:

Ofcourse if the power rating and Xmax ratings were comparable to the UM-18 and you opted to put a big enough amp on it, the B2 could out perform it.

I wont be able to put a big amp on it for now, but might in the future. Monoblock 6000W 1ohm amps don't look too expensive. 

20 minutes ago, SME said:

Likewise, the B2 looks more attractive if you care about upper frequency capability.  Though, I'd be reluctant to assume anything there without real world measurements.

I might want rise it to 80hz once, but I'm happy with solid performance under 30-40hz.

20 minutes ago, SME said:

In a ported box the B2 may also be better.  I don't know without doing some modeling, and you need to take into account port velocity and other things like that when modeling a ported system.  If you decide to go that route, I highly recommend you try to copy or at least derive from an existing design in the DIY forum on AVS, using a known driver with known performance.  That way, you are much more likely to get satisfactory results.

That's the thing keeping me from the ported designs with the B2 audio driver. I have read threads with some huge Ultimax ported designs (the Full Sized Marty Sub), so I was probably gonna do that if I wanted to go large sized ported.

20 minutes ago, SME said:

If going sealed, I would still recommend the UM18 over the B2, simply because its performance is known.  Certainly on paper the B2 looks like a good choice if you're going to give it a lot of power, but is it worth taking the chance in order to save some money?  That's up to you I guess.

Thank you again for all your time. Ill start looking into some real life testing and designs using the b2-audio driver. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, SME said:

In a ported box the B2 may also be better.  I don't know without doing some modeling, and you need to take into account port velocity and other things like that when modeling a ported system.  

PS when I modeled them in winISD pro the B2 Audio came heads up out first, but I don't really have a clue how to model it (precisely the tuning frequency and it's relation with the ports etc). Is there any good guide that you could link me too to learn how to do this? The more precise calculations needed to actually design and build it are not necessary. Ill probably stick with sealed for now, but if I would know that the b2 audio outperforms the Ultimax by a mile that would be a good thing to know for the future when I'd maybe want to try out different designs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hard to find reviews about them, but so far so good. Only thing people have against them is their price point, which is not relevant in my case. I doubt there are some decent measurements, except those given by the company though. I'll contact them to know how they define their Xmax and power rating, maybe that can shed some light on the specs? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Droogne said:

The site listed 40mm, and the guy from the store listed 30mm. I'm going by 30 for now. Ill try to find some testings. 

 

Smaller box would make my life so much easier, so the B2 Audio has the advantage in that field. 

I wont be able to put a big amp on it for now, but might in the future. Monoblock 6000W 1ohm amps don't look too expensive. 

I might want rise it to 80hz once, but I'm happy with solid performance under 30-40hz.

That's the thing keeping me from the ported designs with the B2 audio driver. I have read threads with some huge Ultimax ported designs (the Full Sized Marty Sub), so I was probably gonna do that if I wanted to go large sized ported.

Thank you again for all your time. Ill start looking into some real life testing and designs using the b2-audio driver. 

I had a closer look at their web site, and after doing way more digging than I should have to, I figured out that their Xmax figures are actually peak-to-peak instead of one-way.  As such, it would it would appear that the B2 drivers you are looking at have only 20 mm Xmax, per the manufacturer, vs. 22mm reported for the UM18 by its manufacturer.

If you are concerned about box size and would like to go smaller, then a ported design is definitely out of the question.  But I thought this was for a riser and that you had plenty of volume to work with?  While the larger motor on the B2 will give you better efficiency as the box gets small, low-end efficiency goes down very fast as you shrink the box no matter which driver you choose.  It's much better to use a medium to large box if you can, and the UM21 appears to win in that case.

If you decide to use the driver for mid bass frequencies, then the stronger motor and tighter suspension of the B2 *might* have an advantage.  But it also depends on inductance effects which are a total unknown for the B2s.  I don't see any mention of inductance control mechanisms in their motor designs, which concerns me greatly.  The consequences of inductance problems are a humped response with weak upper end output and more distortion with upper-end and mixed-frequency content.  The UM18 measurements show excellent performance in the upper end, even though the sensitivity is not that high.

Considering all this, I have to wonder what your end goal of all of this is.  You're running horn speakers and a front-loaded horn mid-bass sub, but only listen at 85-90 dB?  You want subs that extend below the mid-bass horns but are only considering 1 or 2 x 18s in a sealed riser?  You realize that the rest of the speakers will probably leave them in the dust as far as output capability is concerned?

I understand your desire to pursue the tactile dimension by mounting the drivers in the riser, but maybe you should address your SPL needs first.  A cinema track at reference can demand 120 dB or more between 20-40 Hz and 115 dB or more below 20 Hz.  You'll probably get more output from *any* sub if it's located in a corner or at least against a wall, and a large ported box will give you far more output for the money than a small sealed box.  Why not start by building a pair of low-tune ported boxes to put in corners or up front using something like the B&C 21SW152-4?  Once those are up and running, you can worry about the riser, at which point the drivers you use probably won't matter that much.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, SME said:

I had a closer look at their web site, and after doing way more digging than I should have to, I figured out that their Xmax figures are actually peak-to-peak instead of one-way.  As such, it would it would appear that the B2 drivers you are looking at have only 20 mm Xmax, per the manufacturer, vs. 22mm reported for the UM18 by its manufacturer.

Well that's a bummer :/ good that I asked your advice! 

Quote

If you are concerned about box size and would like to go smaller, then a ported design is definitely out of the question.  But I thought this was for a riser and that you had plenty of volume to work with? 

See below.

Quote

While the larger motor on the B2 will give you better efficiency as the box gets small, low-end efficiency goes down very fast as you shrink the box no matter which driver you choose.  It's much better to use a medium to large box if you can, and the UM18 appears to win in that case.

If you decide to use the driver for mid bass frequencies, then the stronger motor and tighter suspension of the B2 *might* have an advantage.  But it also depends on inductance effects which are a total unknown for the B2s.  I don't see any mention of inductance control mechanisms in their motor designs, which concerns me greatly.  The consequences of inductance problems are a humped response with weak upper end output and more distortion with upper-end and mixed-frequency content.  The UM18 measurements show excellent performance in the upper end, even though the sensitivity is not that high.

Considering all this, I have to wonder what your end goal of all of this is.  You're running horn speakers and a front-loaded horn mid-bass sub, but only listen at 85-90 dB?  You want subs that extend below the mid-bass horns but are only considering 1 or 2 x 18s in a sealed riser?  You realize that the rest of the speakers will probably leave them in the dust as far as output capability is concerned?

I'm a very hard to person to help I fear, I've been jumping from one idea to the next one, without actually abandoning the old ones.It does get confusing, even for me. I'm still on for the riser, but when I moved in about a month ago I realised that, as the arrangement of our living is still changing, I cant really start a riser project as long as there is no certainty. The height of riser is still a problem, so although I could very easily pull of a very low riser with a low-profile sub (or like a series of 10"-12"ers) without really needing to consider the lay out of the room, I don't want to settle for anything less than a 15" at least. So that is on hold for at least a month or 2 till I have time to rearrange everything, it is our living room so this does matter a lot.

Also, few months back my end goal for my home theatre was a fully Klipsch LaScala home theatre, which meant putting the tv at a height of 1 meter and thus needing a riser for the couch. I'm know in talks to get me a fully blown MEH inspired by the K-402 (similar to the K-402 MEH from Chris A), which changes quite a few things. For one, the MEH center speaker is only 2 foot in height, which is actually way to low already. This means it's in complete contradiction with the riser.. I could of course put the MEH higher to match it, but I have a lot of couches, so the riser was always a solution for the main couch. Rising the tv to match the riser would mean the opposite, compromising on all couches just for the main position. Secondly, although they would be the total end of the line, and the end of my DIY LCR chase for perfection, they would cost a lot, and could potentially take all the budget I have for the next year, which means compromising in other aspects. Primarily the subs. I actually want to put them at equal height as what I put in my LCR etc, which would mean I actually have like 2-3K to spend on subs the next year, but the MEH project will probably take most of it, which only leaves a few hundred to play with. From next year on I would be able to put everything in my subs and transducers (*Crowsons hell yeah*).

That aside, the riser still has it's value though, as we want to be able to transform the living room into a cinema, which means a riser would give the opportunity for a second row. Thing with that is, that I actually live in an apartment. I try to stay away from this fact, as people tend to tone down on SPL goals and what not. The apartment situation still means that when moving things in and out of it size is really important. A full fledged riser would be way to big to move out without using some kind of crane in the street. We have to use such a crane for moving out so it's not an absolute problem, but it still means I need to be sure the riser is the way to go as I wont be able to remove it till I get out of my apartment, which could be a few years.

 This got me thinking. If I do decide on a riser it would be waaaaay easier if it existed out of a part to rise the couch, leaving everything but the support points empty. That way I could just slide in a "flat" subwoofer cabinet. This would mean I could build it like this and easily move it out if I dont like it, or use small/cheap woofers, and replace those when I want with bigger cabinets. This in particular is of interest to me. It could mean I could chase a regular 18" frontiring sub so I can reach my low end SPL coverage, but also experiment with the 18"er as a riser. I was planning on building an almost flat sealed sub (only 1-2" behind the driver), but make up for it in weidth x height. Or maybe not. But I could build the regular sub (which could be ported or sealed) in normal measurements, and also build a riser appropriate cabinet to test the driver in. In other words... I'm looking for a sub that can do both. The ultimax is definitely that. Looking at a lot of designs etc, it seems it could just do that. Function in a relatively small enclosure, fit for small riser, and be used in huge sealed or ported subs for room coverage. And it's actually not that pricey too.. Not for what I'm getting in return. But it IS still too expensive to have 2 of at the moment. I could of course just build one, and save up for the next one. Which is probably the best idea. But I was really really hoping for something more budget appropriate like the Stereo Integrity, which is why I didnt stop looking, and keep proposing other subs. 

Quote

I understand your desire to pursue the tactile dimension by mounting the drivers in the riser, but maybe you should address your SPL needs first.  A cinema track at reference can demand 120 dB or more between 20-40 Hz and 115 dB or more below 20 Hz.  You'll probably get more output from *any* sub if it's located in a corner or at least against a wall, and a large ported box will give you far more output for the money than a small sealed box.  Why not start by building a pair of low-tune ported boxes to put in corners or up front using something like the B&C 21SW152-4?  Once those are up and running, you can worry about the riser, at which point the drivers you use probably won't matter that much.

To make it conclusive, I think I've settled for the SPL goal for now, but would really love a driver that can also work in very small sealed enclosures so I can still chase after the riser when I want to. But maybe I should take your advice and just prioritize the SPL goal, and leave the riser for what it is. Maybe it is better to leave it completely alone, and just chase an SPL goal combined with a crowson. Also, I might also start a small project for a bedroom sub, which means I maybe can build a riser appropriate driver for that one. 

 

The B2 Audio is a gorgeous driver, but it seems like I probably wont be using it. The odds are getting stacked against it.. which is a shame because only 350 for a driver that is sold for 800-1000 seemed like it should have immense potential.  I might still buy them, but only because I could get them for so low and maybe resell them. Looking into that right now. It's also a shame there are no DIY projects using them in huge ported subs. Would have made a fine choice. I still think if there were results showing them to be reliable in such a design (that I could copy). 

 

Lets say we transform my topic from:  Ultimax vs B2 Audio in a riser to a good low budget sub that could take me down to 15hz. I've never been clear on how flat you'd want it to be. Is a 15hz F3 decent? Or would I want it completely flat for the most satisfying result? For spl goal I always stated such a low number, but once I have my MEHS setup, with my K510/HF200 LaScala rears and 4x Heresy heights, I will have immense SPL potential in the higher range, so maybe something to match that would be nice. For now let's settle on a 20-40hz 110db and sub 20hz of 105db, with 2 subs. This would mean enough headroom when I need it (I'm in an apartment now, but who knows what the future will bring). Chasing those extremely high SPL goals with 8 21" subs etc will not be realistic in my current situation. Everything above 40hz can be covered by the PA Sub I have (although I might just sell that one as I'm not really happy with how it turned out.. maybe more on that later), and by the MEHs in the future (those have great output down to 30hz.). 

 

The B&C you suggested seems nice, but very expensive and I'm guessing very bigggg. Once build (which would already be pretty difficult on my terras :P ) I wouldn't be able to move them out till I move out with them. I've read up on that Budget Killer sub (using a Dayton woofer), might be worth looking into. Is there any sealed design (because of its simplicity and size) that you could recommend? The Ultimax is a fine choice of course, but for this kind of sub something cheaper could maybe work too? I already have the RCF LX400 in my horn, so if by any change that sub could be used (I doubt) for ported/sealed that might be worthwhile (problem with the horn is that I made some mistakes, and I'm gonna try to fix them, but chances are I'm just gonna have to scrap the whole box). 

Also I never accounted for stuffing while modelling, should I do this? 

PS the budget DIY project I mentioned was the VBSS: 

http://www.avsforum.com/forum/155-diy-speakers-subs/2226642-v-b-s-s-diy-subwoofer-design-thread.html

this one would be so cheap I could make 2 for the price of 1. So maybe even 4, and boost them even more. Would something like this be a good start? Could always make 2 of them, and when I have the money buy 2 other ported or sealed (different design with better drivers).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, SME said:

I had a closer look at their web site, and after doing way more digging than I should have to, I figured out that their Xmax figures are actually peak-to-peak instead of one-way.  As such, it would it would appear that the B2 drivers you are looking at have only 20 mm Xmax, per the manufacturer, vs. 22mm reported for the UM18 by its manufacturer.

If you are concerned about box size and would like to go smaller, then a ported design is definitely out of the question.  But I thought this was for a riser and that you had plenty of volume to work with?  While the larger motor on the B2 will give you better efficiency as the box gets small, low-end efficiency goes down very fast as you shrink the box no matter which driver you choose.  It's much better to use a medium to large box if you can, and the UM21 appears to win in that case.

If you decide to use the driver for mid bass frequencies, then the stronger motor and tighter suspension of the B2 *might* have an advantage.  But it also depends on inductance effects which are a total unknown for the B2s.  I don't see any mention of inductance control mechanisms in their motor designs, which concerns me greatly.  The consequences of inductance problems are a humped response with weak upper end output and more distortion with upper-end and mixed-frequency content.  The UM18 measurements show excellent performance in the upper end, even though the sensitivity is not that high.

+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.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Ricci said:

+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.

Car audio brands are the only sellers I find in Europe with subwoofers parts that are not build for PRO use. But very good to know, and it makes sense! Definitely because this driver looks pretty solid, and still isn't all that when looking deeper into it, so if you take that logic and use on the cheaper subs I was looking into I can imagine why those looked such great deals. Those 25mm xmax ratings on a Russion made 130eu sub is probably not all it says. 'll scrap those ;) I'll try to steer away from car subs that have not been "verified" for HiFi home use. 

 

I did ask the tech support from B2 Audio after the reasoning between their Xmax and power rating, so we'll see what they say. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of curiosity, have you ever heard a sub system with extension under 30 Hz?  Every room is different, but once you get below 30 Hz, you often get a lot of wall and/or floor/ceiling shaking.  If you are in an apartment, that could prove to be a big problem for the neighbors who may not appreciate feeling the vibrations or seeing their walls shake.  It's hard to say for sure what will happen though.  If you do get complaints, then rearranging the subs can help.  Or you might be able to use sine waves to identify problem frequencies and notch out the ones that cause the most shaking.

Selling the PA horn may be a great idea, especially if it frees up money to spend on nicer subs.  As far as 15 Hz extension, you probably have enough room gain that you don't need either flat response or F3 response to 15 Hz.  If sealed, you probably will need some EQ boost and enough excursion and power to accommodate it.  If ported, you need a tune of around 18 Hz or lower, but it's OK if the response diminishes gradually a above that point.  In fact, rather than thinking of it in terms of "less output at 15 Hz" think of it as "more output in the mid-bass", because that's typically what's going on with such designs.

You seem to be very concerned about both size, cost and extension.  Unfortunately, you have to compromise somewhere.  With ported systems, the lower the tune the bigger the box must be to achieve the same output capability.  And if you are pushing the size as small as possible, you'll want a driver with a bigger, more expensive motor.  Of course, you can use multiples to keep the individual box sizes down, but this requires buying more drivers, which is typically more expensive than a smaller number of large drivers.  By going sealed, you can achieve a lot more low end extension in a much smaller space than with ported, but you will pay for it big time, both in the cost of multiple drivers with big motors and the amps needed to power them in order to achieve the same output.

There are several sweet spots that balance each of these factors in different ways.  The VBSS is one such option that offers relative small size and low cost in conjunction with good extension but not a lot of low-end output.  What it does do very well is mid-bass, and if you were to go with multiples to get more low end output, I believe you'd get more than enough mid-bass capabilities to justify selling your PA horn.

Have you looked at the Marty subs?  They are a bit larger than the VBSS and have quite a bit more low-end but not quite as much mid-bass, at least with the drivers they usually recommend.  A couple Marty subs might be a better choice if you decide to keep the PA.

The B&C driver I suggested offers kind of a best of both.  Yes it takes a fairly big box to use to its full potential in a low tune, but it delivers substantial output in both the low end and mid-bass.  It is more expensive, but it might save you money in the long run compared to starting with smaller subs and adding more of them later.  A pair of those 21"s should easily meet your SPL requirements including for mid-bass, so you could sell your PA horn.  As another driver option, consider its little brother, the 18" B&C 18SW115, which ought to be less expensive for you and can work in a ported box closer to Marty size.

As for sealed subs, I would suggest you don't consider going this route unless you are either (A) very limited with respect to cabinet size; or (B) want as much extension as possible (into the low teens or even single digits); AND (C) are willing to spend a lot more money for the same low-end output capability.  This is the path I took, and I am running 4 x 21" high excursion sealed subs in 20 cuft *total*.  The drivers were very expensive because of their huge motors, and I am powering them with an expensive 12kW amp on them.  (On a separate note, keep in mind that cheaper amps don't usually deliver their full rated power at low frequencies.)  It turns out that the extra extension was mostly disappointing.  Most of the stuff in the low teens is pretty subtle, apart from a resonance that seriously rattles the house.  The stuff below 10 Hz is rarely noticed, even on the films with the hottest content there.  Some day I'll address that with Crowsons.

All the same, I could have gotten considerably more output down to 15 Hz using half the number of drivers if I could have made the cabinets bigger.  However, I have no regrets because I simply don't have the space.  If I had a large enough dedicated room, I'd probably use my drivers (if I still had them) or something similar like the B&C 21SW152 in huge ported boxes (possibly built into the structure) tuned to 12-13 Hz.

With your riser, you can always design and build it as a sealed enclosure without installing any drivers into it until you are ready to spend the money.

Edit: The B&C 18DS115 may also be worth looking at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15hz is a pretty good goal for extension, if it's in limited quantity.

Extension below is honestly not as exciting as it sounds. 15-30hz is where the real meat of that sensation of "weight" is. Below 15hz, there isn't so much sensation to be appreciated. The effects on the room on the other hand, are quite palpable sometimes. Will this affect your enjoyment? Maybe. After a while the effects become less interesting and more like a cheap parlor trick.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not poo-pooing full bandwidth extension. Just saying that producing it might not really add to the enjoyment of either movies or music....as 15hz and up surely will.

As @SME mentioned, you can still build a riser with no drivers. That is a thing people do. :P

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SME said:

Out of curiosity, have you ever heard a sub system with extension under 30 Hz?  Every room is different, but once you get below 30 Hz, you often get a lot of wall and/or floor/ceiling shaking.  If you are in an apartment, that could prove to be a big problem for the neighbors who may not appreciate feeling the vibrations or seeing their walls shake.  It's hard to say for sure what will happen though.  If you do get complaints, then rearranging the subs can help.  Or you might be able to use sine waves to identify problem frequencies and notch out the ones that cause the most shaking.

Well I decided to keep the appartment piece of information bit hidden, because I know people tend to tone down their suggestions, and thats not what I'm looking for. I know how much it's gonna be a problem, but Ive started on the road for a "perfect" system" and I'm not gonna turn back now ;) My neighbours are actually very nice and have not complained once (although I got a PA sub with a 5.1 consisting of horn loaded speakers). I'll probably have to find a way to keep it as pleasant as possible for everyone. Things like isolation (subwoofer isolators etc) are thing I've thought about. Never heard of the sine wave trick though. Good to know I got options ;) the crownsons I'll eventually buy are a part of the solution. 

Quote

Selling the PA horn may be a great idea, especially if it frees up money to spend on nicer subs. 

Well it's actually a shame.. I payed about the same as I would pay for an Ultimax, so I'm pretty bumbed right now. Especially because the new speakers I'll be buying later this year (the MEH, Multiple Entry Horns if I'm confusing you), use 2x 15"ers and are fully horn loaded which means I'd be getting pretty solid distortion free output that is even lower than this PA sub can.. So it wont even be a situation of having the sub "keeping up" with the mains. They would be outperformed.. Oh well. If I can fix the issues I'm having now (somemthing to do with it not being completely air sealed.. which is ofcourse a big issue, but fixable normally). I think I could sell it for a nice sum I guess. Every penny I get out of it is extra, I got enough to build a pair of 18s normally so all the extra money would go in better ones (or more ofcourse ;) ). 

Quote

As far as 15 Hz extension, you probably have enough room gain that you don't need either flat response or F3 response to 15 Hz.  If sealed, you probably will need some EQ boost and enough excursion and power to accommodate it.  If ported, you need a tune of around 18 Hz or lower, but it's OK if the response diminishes gradually a above that point.  In fact, rather than thinking of it in terms of "less output at 15 Hz" think of it as "more output in the mid-bass", because that's typically what's going on with such designs.

I'm all very new to designing, especially because I've never gone from calculation and modeling to the actual building and listening fase.. Also, as you've seen countless time I'm not very used to interpreting specs and graphs. I'm doing my best, but I think I better start somewhere simple and build up instead of trying to jump into the complicated parts head first (especially because I'm not english speaking, and the terms can get confusing after a while). 

Quote

You seem to be very concerned about both size, cost and extension.  Unfortunately, you have to compromise somewhere. 

I'll tell you what my problem is ;) I dont have the time to build them yet, and the situation (budget wise etc) is also not super clear, which is why I haven't picked a design, which makes me consider every aspect even more.. I'm an overthinker (and seeing I just put a lot of time in a sub I will have no use for in a few month is also a factor of course.)

Quote

With ported systems, the lower the tune the bigger the box must be to achieve the same output capability.  And if you are pushing the size as small as possible, you'll want a driver with a bigger, more expensive motor.  Of course, you can use multiples to keep the individual box sizes down, but this requires buying more drivers, which is typically more expensive than a smaller number of large drivers.  By going sealed, you can achieve a lot more low end extension in a much smaller space than with ported, but you will pay for it big time, both in the cost of multiple drivers with big motors and the amps needed to power them in order to achieve the same output.

There are several sweet spots that balance each of these factors in different ways.  The VBSS is one such option that offers relative small size and low cost in conjunction with good extension but not a lot of low-end output.  What it does do very well is mid-bass, and if you were to go with multiples to get more low end output, I believe you'd get more than enough mid-bass capabilities to justify selling your PA horn.

It's just that, my mains will be able to justify giving up in the midbass area. I'm starting with 3 MEHS normally, but depending on a lot of factors (money wize) that number might go up to 5. In that case I would have 10x 15" fully horn loaded blasting in my living room down to 30hz. Should be ample I'm guessing. 

Quote

Have you looked at the Marty subs?  They are a bit larger than the VBSS and have quite a bit more low-end but not quite as much mid-bass, at least with the drivers they usually recommend.  A couple Marty subs might be a better choice if you decide to keep the PA.

Marty subs look awesome, I was already planning on using that build as inspiration if I ever decide to build my own. More on that later. 

Quote

The B&C driver I suggested offers kind of a best of both.  Yes it takes a fairly big box to use to its full potential in a low tune, but it delivers substantial output in both the low end and mid-bass.  It is more expensive, but it might save you money in the long run compared to starting with smaller subs and adding more of them later.  A pair of those 21"s should easily meet your SPL requirements including for mid-bass, so you could sell your PA horn.  As another driver option, consider its little brother, the 18" B&C 18SW115, which ought to be less expensive for you and can work in a ported box closer to Marty size.

As for sealed subs, I would suggest you don't consider going this route unless you are either (A) very limited with respect to cabinet size; or (B) want as much extension as possible (into the low teens or even single digits); AND (C) are willing to spend a lot more money for the same low-end output capability.  This is the path I took, and I am running 4 x 21" high excursion sealed subs in 20 cuft *total*.  The drivers were very expensive because of their huge motors, and I am powering them with an expensive 12kW amp on them.  (On a separate note, keep in mind that cheaper amps don't usually deliver their full rated power at low frequencies.)  It turns out that the extra extension was mostly disappointing.  Most of the stuff in the low teens is pretty subtle, apart from a resonance that seriously rattles the house.  The stuff below 10 Hz is rarely noticed, even on the films with the hottest content there.  Some day I'll address that with Crowsons.

All the same, I could have gotten considerably more output down to 15 Hz using half the number of drivers if I could have made the cabinets bigger.  However, I have no regrets because I simply don't have the space.  If I had a large enough dedicated room, I'd probably use my drivers (if I still had them) or something similar like the B&C 21SW152 in huge ported boxes (possibly built into the structure) tuned to 12-13 Hz.

I noticed all the crazy projects on here, and the problem with all the lower extension not being as present as you would hope for. It's when I saw the 8x 21" Incriminator build, I realised I'd better stick with 15hz, and that lower would be something for the day I move into a more appropriate place. 

Quote

With your riser, you can always design and build it as a sealed enclosure without installing any drivers into it until you are ready to spend the money.

Yeah I thought about that, but decided that using several parts for one riser (some for rising, some for the sub) would be more versatile and primarily: moveable. A riser like this weighs a ton. It could still happen (and I hope it does). If the dust settles and it seems like there is no place for the riser I might go for a project where I look for a specific kind of 1 person couch (like a high end cinema seat) with lots of space beneath it, and high support which I could trade in for an enclosure. I might already have a couch suitable for something like this. That way I wouldn't really have a "riser" but more a kind of modified couch for 1 person (I'm the only one paying for the system, my roommate is enjoying all of it for exactly 0 euro. So I think I can pull of a project solely for me.) 

Quote

Edit: The B&C 18DS115 may also be worth looking at.

Those drivers look really nice, and bit cheaper which could mean the difference. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About the ported design, I realised it would really be best if I just build a couple of big ported subs and make sure I get them right. Although the marty sub and VBSS are the simplest choice, I have an opportunity here, and I would like to take it. 

As I told you about the lower height of those MEH speakers, I need to rise them. I could do this by putting them on a table or what not, but I need them at a height of 3 foot, which is not easily achieved with a piece furniture, considering the footprint of the MEHs. Plan would be to not only use the space below the MEH, but to actually use the sub as the stand.

Considering I'd need a 3 foot height, about the same in width, and about 1,5-2 foot in depth I'm looking at a very considerable enclosure size. About 350-460L (without bracing etc). "Problem" is that I dont want to build this matching subwoofer, and feel the need to change it out a few years later. So it might be not too bad to just go for quality and a bigger driver (like the ones you mentioned), and start off with only 1 and buy the second driver when I have the means. See pictures for the biggest audio shop in my area, they have lots of deals so I can probably get them cheap. Ofcourse if I do this I should maybe should go completely overboard and go for a 24" (only one I see localy is the Precision Devices PD.2450). You see, I never settle for an idea. It's a problem I have lol. The enclosure is probably not big enough for a 24" anyway. Big enough for the 21" though right? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

21inch.PNG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My subs are under my left and right mains because that is the only location that is available to them that is up against a wall.  You'll probably get better results if you can run your subs in corners.  My subs are dual-opposed, so they do not vibrate on their own.  Vibration may be an issue for you.

As for whether your proposed box is "big enough" for a 24" driver, there are two issues.  First is whether there is room enough on the panel you intend to install the driver into.  That should be obvious.  Second is whether the box volume is large enough to achieve the tune you want without holding back the performance of the driver.  That's complicated and depends on the particular design.  The diameter of the driver is only part of the deal.

The drivers you posted all appear to be solid performers in pro applications and would probably make some decent ported boxes.  The drawback with most pro drivers is that they don't offer as much excursion because most pro applications don't need extension below 30-40 Hz or so.  However, the BMS drivers I mentioned are somewhat unique in that they offer moderately high excursion despite being pro-style.  If the day comes when you want more than 110 dB of bass, you'll be happy to have that extra excursion.  You won't have to buy and build as many new subs to get to where you want to go.

With that said, I now see your mention of your plans to use MEH mains with each speaker having a horn-loaded bass bins with dual 15"s playing down to 30 Hz.  Your requirements are a moving target!  I don't quite understand why you are so obsessed about keeping price low on a single sub driver or two when you are planning on such monstrous mains.  What are you trying to accomplish here?  Do you intend to play music (most of which extends little below 30 Hz) at higher than live concert levels but play home theater at -15 from reference to keep sub peaks at 110 dB max?  To comparably match 5 x 2 x 15" horn-loaded bass bins, I wouldn't go with fewer than 4x21" or 8x18" ported subs.  If that sounds absurd, then maybe you should reevaluate your choice of mains.

Seriously, there's nothing fundamentally wrong with overkill, but when money is tight, it makes no sense to go extremely overkill on one aspect of the system while completely skimping on other aspects, most especially the sub system!

I don't know of the circumstances behind your selection of mains speakers, but perhaps you should hold off on your commitment for the time being.  There are a lot of attractive options out there for mains speakers, especially when you include DIY possibilities.  If you're unhappy with your current speakers, there are speakers you can buy that are cheap but sound quite good, especially if your  music listening levels are limited to 85-90 dBC.  Such speakers could get you by until you have time to learn more and to research the different options more thoroughly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SME said:

My subs are under my left and right mains because that is the only location that is available to them that is up against a wall.  You'll probably get better results if you can run your subs in corners.  My subs are dual-opposed, so they do not vibrate on their own.  Vibration may be an issue for you.

Isn't this fixable with something like an isolation pad or feet? Hard to say I guess. 

1 hour ago, SME said:

As for whether your proposed box is "big enough" for a 24" driver, there are two issues.  First is whether there is room enough on the panel you intend to install the driver into.  That should be obvious.  Second is whether the box volume is large enough to achieve the tune you want without holding back the performance of the driver.  That's complicated and depends on the particular design.  The diameter of the driver is only part of the deal.

The front panel would be big enough for a 24" inch, with about a foot both above and next to it. Depth wise it would be fine too. About 10" inches behind it. But the 24" was a crazy idea, I doubt there are any quality 24" drivers with known solid performance, which cost less than 1k. The only one I see is the Precion Device 24", which only has 10,5mm Xmax. I'll be more than happy with a solid B&C 21"er, if I decide to go this route.

1 hour ago, SME said:

The drivers you posted all appear to be solid performers in pro applications and would probably make some decent ported boxes.  The drawback with most pro drivers is that they don't offer as much excursion because most pro applications don't need extension below 30-40 Hz or so.  However, the BMS drivers I mentioned are somewhat unique in that they offer moderately high excursion despite being pro-style.  If the day comes when you want more than 110 dB of bass, you'll be happy to have that extra excursion.  You won't have to buy and build as many new subs to get to where you want to go.

 

1 hour ago, SME said:

With that said, I now see your mention of your plans to use MEH mains with each speaker having a horn-loaded bass bins with dual 15"s playing down to 30 Hz.  Your requirements are a moving target!  I don't quite understand why you are so obsessed about keeping price low on a single sub driver or two when you are planning on such monstrous mains.  What are you trying to accomplish here?  Do you intend to play music (most of which extends little below 30 Hz) at higher than live concert levels but play home theater at -15 from reference to keep sub peaks at 110 dB max?  To comparably match 5 x 2 x 15" horn-loaded bass bins, I wouldn't go with fewer than 4x21" or 8x18" ported subs.  If that sounds absurd, then maybe you should reevaluate your choice of mains.

Well I know, it's confusing and kind of irritating. I don't seem to stick my plans. But I am now. I'm planning on building the MEH LCR first, and maybe 5 at once because it would be cheaper to directly order 5 than 3 and 2 later. But I know.. I shouldnt skip the subs. But that aside, I'm definitely not against 4x 21" subs even if they cost me more. The cheaper subs I was looking at earlier are in every way a temporary solution. Or I would sell them, give them to a friend, keep as reserve or just put them in the bedroom. My goal is to eventualy have "fully grown" subs that can match my system. I included some extra pictures of my Living room. As you can see, I would be able to put the MEH/Sub combo in the corner (although the one on the left doesnt really count). IF I would upgrade to the 5 instead of the 3 MEHs, that would also include making 2 extra ported subs to rise the rear MEHs in the same way I would do in the front. 

1 hour ago, SME said:

Seriously, there's nothing fundamentally wrong with overkill, but when money is tight, it makes no sense to go extremely overkill on one aspect of the system while completely skimping on other aspects, most especially the sub system!

I don't know of the circumstances behind your selection of mains speakers, but perhaps you should hold off on your commitment for the time being.  There are a lot of attractive options out there for mains speakers, especially when you include DIY possibilities.  If you're unhappy with your current speakers, there are speakers you can buy that are cheap but sound quite good, especially if your  music listening levels are limited to 85-90 dBC.  Such speakers could get you by until you have time to learn more and to research the different options more thoroughly.

Reason for overkill on 1 aspect, and leave a bit behind is complex, but it comes down to this: I would rather spend most of money on perfect mains, which I wont have to upgrade, because they are an upgrade, regardless of the volume I would play them at. In a way they are an investment I know I'll be able to enjoy. I don't want to ignore or neglect the subs, but as they have a big change of becoming a problem with the neighbours, it could mean pumping a lot of money in something I wouldn't be able to enjoy as often as I'd like. So I'm not really neglecting them, but I do prioritise the mains. Also: it's because I'm so happy with what I have now that I'm upgrading to the MEHs. I started looking into bigger horns, and so I stumbled into the perfect polar controlling Jubilee and from that into the even better MEH (which is cheaper too). But to be clear, they are not like the Danely SHs with an abundance of drivers, meant to blast enormous amounts of sound, the MEH will do that too but it's only meant to present the best sound possible. SPL is not the reason why I'm buying them. 

 

That aside, I'll stop looking for drivers, and "settle" for one of the B&C drivers. Will try to model them later this evening. Any good guide on tuning frequency? I'll probably go for 17 or 15 hz, depending on how it relates to the enclosure I have in mind (450 internal volume). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's an example of a build using the B&C 21DS115 that's similar in volume to what you are thinking of.  The title says "18 cuft", but looking at the dimensions, I'd guess it comes in closer to 16-17 cuft after bracing and driver volume.  His tune came out right at around 14 Hz, which is very respectable.  I bet those sound awesome and have tremendous mid-bass as well.  He only has four of them.  :D

If you look around, you can probably find some example builds using the B&C21SW152 as well.

For your purposes, I wouldn't rule out the UM18s just yet, especially if your MEH bass bins are able to cover your mid-bass needs.  The UM18s do have a little more excursion capability that'd make up for their smaller diameter.  However, the cones are heavier and the motors aren't nearly as strong.  The B&C 21s will wipe the floor with them in the mid-bass department.  I think a lot will come down to the cost vs. performance.  You could try simulating them with WinISD, but most of us prefer Hornresp for modeling ported builds.  Realize that simulations usually don't get the port tune quite right, which is why real world examples are important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SME said:

Here's an example of a build using the B&C 21DS115 that's similar in volume to what you are thinking of.  The title says "18 cuft", but looking at the dimensions, I'd guess it comes in closer to 16-17 cuft after bracing and driver volume.  His tune came out right at around 14 Hz, which is very respectable.  I bet those sound awesome and have tremendous mid-bass as well.  He only has four of them.  :D

If you look around, you can probably find some example builds using the B&C21SW152 as well.

For your purposes, I wouldn't rule out the UM18s just yet, especially if your MEH bass bins are able to cover your mid-bass needs.  The UM18s do have a little more excursion capability that'd make up for their smaller diameter.  However, the cones are heavier and the motors aren't nearly as strong.  The B&C 21s will wipe the floor with them in the mid-bass department.  I think a lot will come down to the cost vs. performance.  You could try simulating them with WinISD, but most of us prefer Hornresp for modeling ported builds.  Realize that simulations usually don't get the port tune quite right, which is why real world examples are important.

Yeah I saw that build, looks good! I can copy the volume too I think. Would have to know the exact volume though. I'll try hornresp later this evening, got an exam later this day so got time to take a longer break . 

 

About the UM, I realise it's still a valuable choice. For the moment I'm between UM or a BC. 21" would look badass though ;) Also, all the talk and thinking about not compromising made me realise I'd maybe have to find a way to let my current plans go unhindered, but make free some budget for the subs. I'm looking into something, which could rise my budget by almost 2k, and if my second hand sales go through later this month I'm already sitting on +1k. So who knows what kind of budget I'm able to make free.

It'd be enough for 2x 24" Stereo Integrity subs lol, would be awesome. Just out of interest (no point into really getting into it as long as I'm not sure), what are in your opinion the best sound quality subs for what I need (so 450L ported or sealed sub for 15hz output)? If I'd like have 1500USD budget. ;)  Some suggestions? The SI 24" er looks pretty neat (just thinking about a 24" monster staring in my face makes me shiver)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For sound quality?  That's a real hazy topic.  I think the best answer is that sound quality primarily depends on displacement headroom but depends secondarily on inductance behavior and possibly some other effects like flux modulation.

The SI 24"s have enormous headroom compared to other products.  The original version yielded superb results for deep bass on Data-Bass, albeit in a rather large sealed box.  I believe that its inductance behavior has been improved in recent iterations, but I can't say for certain how it compares to other drivers.  They make at least 3 different versions of their 24" now.  Each has its strengths for different applications.  Just going by the web page, the IB driver might work OK sealed in that volume.  For ported, you'd want to go for the HS or SHS drivers, but your box might not be big enough to max their potential at a low tune.  The SHS driver is much more expensive but may not cost you much more because it's Nd instead of Fe and is probably a lot lighter.  I don't see a published weight for it though.

For specifics, you'll have to model them, seek out other projects that use them in similar spaces, or contact the owner @Electrodynamic  for help.  He posts on these forums from time to time.

Do keep in mind that you can always get more headroom by adding more drivers, and ported almost always gives you more headroom than sealed, as long as you are at or above the tuning frequency.  The hard work is figuring out which combination of drivers + cabinets is most economical for the headroom you want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, SME said:

For sound quality?  That's a real hazy topic.  I think the best answer is that sound quality primarily depends on displacement headroom but depends secondarily on inductance behavior and possibly some other effects like flux modulation.

Haha I know, I have seen a list here on the forum that ranks them based on BL, Re etc, but I was just wondering if you have some preference yourself ;) Headroom aside. 

5 hours ago, SME said:

The SI 24"s have enormous headroom compared to other products.  The original version yielded superb results for deep bass on Data-Bass, albeit in a rather large sealed box.  I believe that its inductance behavior has been improved in recent iterations, but I can't say for certain how it compares to other drivers.  They make at least 3 different versions of their 24" now.  Each has its strengths for different applications.  Just going by the web page, the IB driver might work OK sealed in that volume. 

Yeah I was wondering about that IBS version, the other ones are a bit expensive, even if I spend all my money on the sub instead of the MEHs ;) The IBS could maybe work (asked about a shipping quote). Would be so cool! Will try some modelling and see how it works in my enclosure. 

5 hours ago, SME said:

For ported, you'd want to go for the HS or SHS drivers, but your box might not be big enough to max their potential at a low tune.  The SHS driver is much more expensive but may not cost you much more because it's Nd instead of Fe and is probably a lot lighter.  I don't see a published weight for it though.

When shipping by sea the weight isn't really the cost, primarily the VAT and customs clearance are, but good catch! If I go 24 it will have to be the IBS though, and when picking an 18" I"ll probably stick with the Ultimax.

5 hours ago, SME said:

For specifics, you'll have to model them, seek out other projects that use them in similar spaces, or contact the owner @Electrodynamic  for help.  He posts on these forums from time to time.

Do keep in mind that you can always get more headroom by adding more drivers, and ported almost always gives you more headroom than sealed, as long as you are at or above the tuning frequency.  The hard work is figuring out which combination of drivers + cabinets is most economical for the headroom you want.

Yeah, copying a design is hard if I'd go this specific custom enclosure route, so a very large sealed version might be the safest bet right? Is there any real reason to go with a passive radiator instead of a regular vent? Might be easier to make (although complexer to design right?), and less port noise. A lot more expensive ofcourse. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m a biased fan of the SI HS-24 driver but I also have more experience with it than just about anyone as I’ve measured it in many different rooms of different shapes, sizes, and construction.  My 24s have measured flat to 7 Hz in every room except one, which was flat to 6 Hz.  And I haven’t had a customer with my 24s get near their full output capability, which is easily in the 120s depending on the frequency.  

So it really depends on what you’re looking for.  If you want effortless output above 15Hz then I’d recommend ported like LukeAmdMan did.  If you’re willing to give up some output capability (efficiency) to gain full extension, then I’d highly recommend the 24 in a sealed enclosure between 300 and 400 L.  And it really is easy to DSP the sub to be flat as the mk II driver has a mild inductance hump.  Take a look at my website (Deep Sea Sound) to see how flat I was able to get the HS-24 using 3 minor DSP settings.

Regarding sound quality, the HS-24 mk II is up there with any on the market.  I used to own the TC LMS-5400, which was lauded as one of the cleanest, lowest distortion drivers, so much so that some people didn’t like it as it was “too clean”.  Most people aren’t familiar with low distortion bass and the LMS-5400 was definitely clean.  I put my LMS subs up against the HS-24 mk I on multiple occasions and the 24 had more output than a pair of LMS-5400s and didn’t give up anything in regards to sound quality.  The HS-24 mk II driver is even better than the original in all regards except power handling, which is the same.

I don’t think you can go wrong with the HS-24 sealed but it really depends on what you want.  I don’t know about ported as I’m not interested in working with refrigerator size cabinets and as I said previously, my customers haven’t needed any more output than a pair of 24s provide. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dgage said:

I’m a biased fan of the SI HS-24 driver but I also have more experience with it than just about anyone as I’ve measured it in many different rooms of different shapes, sizes, and construction.  My 24s have measured flat to 7 Hz in every room except one, which was flat to 6 Hz.  And I haven’t had a customer with my 24s get near their full output capability, which is easily in the 120s depending on the frequency.  

So it really depends on what you’re looking for.  If you want effortless output above 15Hz then I’d recommend ported like LukeAmdMan did.  If you’re willing to give up some output capability (efficiency) to gain full extension, then I’d highly recommend the 24 in a sealed enclosure between 300 and 400 L.  And it really is easy to DSP the sub to be flat as the mk II driver has a mild inductance hump.  Take a look at my website (Deep Sea Sound) to see how flat I was able to get the HS-24 using 3 minor DSP settings.

Regarding sound quality, the HS-24 mk II is up there with any on the market.  I used to own the TC LMS-5400, which was lauded as one of the cleanest, lowest distortion drivers, so much so that some people didn’t like it as it was “too clean”.  Most people aren’t familiar with low distortion bass and the LMS-5400 was definitely clean.  I put my LMS subs up against the HS-24 mk I on multiple occasions and the 24 had more output than a pair of LMS-5400s and didn’t give up anything in regards to sound quality.  The HS-24 mk II driver is even better than the original in all regards except power handling, which is the same.

I don’t think you can go wrong with the HS-24 sealed but it really depends on what you want.  I don’t know about ported as I’m not interested in working with refrigerator size cabinets and as I said previously, my customers haven’t needed any more output than a pair of 24s provide. 

Have you had the chance to compare it to the IBS version in a sealed enclosure? I have no doubt the HS24 are amazing subs, but they are way out of my price range. The IBS version is worth considering (as it is 4 times as cheap). I know it will be nothing compared to the HS, but there is nothing I can do about that. Only thing I'm comparing is 18 vs 21 vs 24" drivers that are affordable and can work in my 450L enclosure. Love the input though. Nice looking subs you have man! 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Droogne said:

Have you had the chance to compare it to the IBS version in a sealed enclosure? I have no doubt the HS24 are amazing subs, but they are way out of my price range. The IBS version is worth considering (as it is 4 times as cheap). I know it will be nothing compared to the HS, but there is nothing I can do about that. Only thing I'm comparing is 18 vs 21 vs 24" drivers that are affordable and can work in my 450L enclosure. Love the input though. Nice looking subs you have man! 

Thanks.  Not familiar with the IB-24 but I’ve heard both HS-24 models, BHS-24 (130lb beast!), both HST-18s, HST-15, HT-18, and BM MK IV(12” car).  All of them were high quality and high performing.  Even more important to both of us, me for business and you for distance, the subs have been very reliable though I would recommend having Nick go through an extended burn-in period in your case. I have no reason to doubt the IB-24 as it shares the same pedigree with which I am so enamored. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, dgage said:

Thanks.  Not familiar with the IB-24 but I’ve heard both HS-24 models, BHS-24 (130lb beast!), both HST-18s, HST-15, HT-18, and BM MK IV(12” car).  All of them were high quality and high performing.  Even more important to both of us, me for business and you for distance, the subs have been very reliable though I would recommend having Nick go through an extended burn-in period in your case. I have no reason to doubt the IB-24 as it shares the same pedigree with which I am so enamored. 

Having no doubts the IBS is an amazing speaker, heard so much good things about the brand. I need to have an idea on it's performance in the sealed enclosure though. It's an "IBS" version, and it does seem to need a really a biiiig enclosure when modelled. Bigger than the 15-16 cu ft they stated. I could, in the worst case, enlarge my enclosure by like 20%, and I havent taken stuffing into consideration. Budget wise this one is already hard to pull of, but the 24" diameter is sooo aluring haha. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/14/2018 at 5:14 AM, Droogne said:

Having no doubts the IBS is an amazing speaker, heard so much good things about the brand. I need to have an idea on it's performance in the sealed enclosure though. It's an "IBS" version, and it does seem to need a really a biiiig enclosure when modelled. Bigger than the 15-16 cu ft they stated. I could, in the worst case, enlarge my enclosure by like 20%, and I havent taken stuffing into consideration. Budget wise this one is already hard to pull of, but the 24" diameter is sooo aluring haha. 

That's why the IB-24 is called the IB-24...because it should be used in an Infinte Baffle alignment. If enclosure size is an issue the HS-24 or SHS-24 are the winners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×