Jump to content
Ricci

Ricci's Skram Subwoofer & Files

Recommended Posts

Hey guys, im fizzing to start a pair of these within the next few months. Im a pretty novice builder, only a couple of bfm t30's under my belt.

Im planning to use the pocket hole technique Jesal used. With the last panel is only adhesive used? Also any recommendations for adhesive? Here in New Zealand ive used Loctite MP5000 which is basically the same as PL Premium you guys can get in the states.

Birch ply is $200 for a sheet 2440x1220mm, anyone used standard ply?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use PL Premium 3X for my commercial subs and don’t use fasteners for our standard offerings.  Not sure what the equivalent that would be on your side of the pond but we’ve tried quite a few types and PL Premium 3X is the one we like the best by far.  We used to use Loctite Heavy Duty but we had a couple bad tubes I think so kicked that stuff to the curb.

I believe most use true Baltic Birch plywood, which is significantly better than standard plywood (13 void-free plys in 18mm vs inconsistent layering).  The true Baltic Birch I get for my business is from Russia/Ukraine and less than $50 USD in bulk for 1520mmx1520mmx18mm sheets.  This is definitely the best plywood for building speaker and sub enclosures.  You could use MDF but I don’t like it, it’s heavy and won’t hold up if dropped and doesn’t hold screws well.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎7‎/‎18‎/‎2019 at 11:26 PM, Ricci said:

Yes. These unload below tuning. The only cabs that do not are those with a sealed chamber on one side of the driver, or IB. 

I use 18dB BW most of the time. 12dB when I can get away with it. I never go any steeper than 24dB. It typically causes greatly increased group delay at the corner and removes any possibility of useful output below tune. Typically there is some useful output till about 1/3rd octave below tuning. Also extremely sharp cutoffs just seem to sound unnatural to me. 

If your use of 12-24dB BW HPF (or mostly 18dB) is implemented in the context of the subs having to endure your test-bench trials, then I take it the slopes being mentioned are sufficiently protective. I may try out 12dB BW and see whether it's advantageous in terms of sound quality, but I'm not sure it's a good idea with tapped horns if they unload more severely below tune compared to ported subs or a 6th order BP iteration like the Skrams?

As is 18dB BW HPF is preferred here over 48dB BW. The overall presentation just appears to be more cohesive. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pocket screws are great for bracing and any other piece where you need to secure the panel from moving while the glue drys. I wouldn’t use them for outer panels, it creates more finishing work where just gluing, brad nailing and clamps will work just as well. I use pl premium 3x, works great 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

That's a good description.  And on bandwidth limited systems, it may not necessarily be a bad thing to sharpen the cut-off a bit, as long as the ringing doesn't get too excessive.  I think it'd be worthwhile to try to do a systematic study of listener preference on this point.  It's something I intend to do as I migrate toward testing my low frequency optimization methods in other rooms and on other systems.  Not everyone can have 5 Hz extension like I do.

Good idea with the systematic study. A friend of mine has implemented a 48dB BW HPF at 20Hz on his six 15"-loaded FLH's (tuned at 25Hz), and that sounded pretty decent to me, but other than not having heard a lower HPF slope on his setup I don't know the variables that would affect the outcome differently compared to my own setup.  

22 hours ago, SME said:

Unfortunately this is greatly complicated by the fact that HPFs get applied to audio content also.  These are often high Q and can contribute a lot of ringing.  This seems to be especially popular with movies these days.  It's understandable.  Everyone wants "more deep bass" from cinema subs that only play to 30 Hz.  Unfortunately though, 30 Hz sub vary quite a bit wrt HPFs used, so the results will be unpredictable and not translate well.  Ideally, soundtracks should avoid using HPFs above like 10 Hz.  This way, playback systems can be optimized, using a high Q HPF if desired, to get the best compromise of "deep bass sound" vs. "ringing".  Alas, this is very wishful thinking on my part.

I've never really understood the meddling with audio content that would impose HPF; leave that to the end user. Lately I've found a tendency among studios/mixing facilities to limit ULF content in Blu-rays/UHD's (certainly from Disney, added to a low reference level), and while the impact of this is less audible in my own setup (with the latest 18dB BW HPF 17-18Hz extension is all I'll ever get), though still easily audible, I presume it's an entirely different matter with your sub setup and extension down to ~5Hz(!). It's a shame also that IMAX theaters are the only commercial cinemas to hit in the vicinity of 23Hz, but I wonder the type of HPF they're using. A bunch of Skrams/Skhorns/Othorns in a commercial cinema would be fun, and high-passed at some 25Hz would offer a significant gain in extension over the typically used dual 18" ported cabs. 

Share this post


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

Hey guys, im fizzing to start a pair of these within the next few months. Im a pretty novice builder, only a couple of bfm t30's under my belt.

Im planning to use the pocket hole technique Jesal used. With the last panel is only adhesive used? Also any recommendations for adhesive? Here in New Zealand ive used Loctite MP5000 which is basically the same as PL Premium you guys can get in the states.

Birch ply is $200 for a sheet 2440x1220mm, anyone used standard ply?

Use Arauco ply 18mm. I found it for 55 a sheet at Mitre 10 here in Adelaide. I was using marine ply sheets before but that was about 165 a sheet. I have tubes of PL premium I order from someone in Australia years ago. Just got a box of 12 tubes. PL works best but use what you can get. I think I used Sikaflex about 9 years ago when I built my BFM subs. Pocket holes work great but they do add a lot of extra time at the finishing stage. But the Kreg inserts do help.

 

Take your time with the build and let us know how you go.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, m_ms said:

Good idea with the systematic study. A friend of mine has implemented a 48dB BW HPF at 20Hz on his six 15"-loaded FLH's (tuned at 25Hz), and that sounded pretty decent to me, but other than not having heard a lower HPF slope on his setup I don't know the variables that would affect the outcome differently compared to my own setup.

I guess I should have mentioned that the "optimal" filter choice must also depend on the capabilities of the sub(s).  Some need steeper roll-offs than others to avoid over excursion.  This makes a systematic study rather difficult.  For example, if the particular sub system sounds best with a roll-off that's lower order or lower Q, but this is not possible for the system without excessive distortion, then perhaps the listener would prefer a roll-off that starts higher.  Another variable is that some DSP architectures allow limiting to be applied between EQ processing steps, and it may be possible to roll-off subs less aggressively at the bottom in exchange for more compression (and maybe milder limiter distortion) at higher levels.

Another tricky issue with systematic evaluation is the test content.  As I already noted, content itself is rarely neutral with respect to bottom-end.  It almost always has one or more ringing filters.  That 48 dB BW HPF at 20 Hz you speak of is quite steep, but this my not be audible unless you are listening to content that isn't filtered up a lot higher, which most movies and almost all music is.  OTOH, if you play content that is also steeply filtered at 20 Hz (which I encounter often for movies and occasionally for music), then this is likely to *exaggerate* the ringing of your filters.

10 hours ago, m_ms said:

I've never really understood the meddling with audio content that would impose HPF; leave that to the end user. Lately I've found a tendency among studios/mixing facilities to limit ULF content in Blu-rays/UHD's (certainly from Disney, added to a low reference level), and while the impact of this is less audible in my own setup (with the latest 18dB BW HPF 17-18Hz extension is all I'll ever get), though still easily audible, I presume it's an entirely different matter with your sub setup and extension down to ~5Hz(!). It's a shame also that IMAX theaters are the only commercial cinemas to hit in the vicinity of 23Hz, but I wonder the type of HPF they're using. A bunch of Skrams/Skhorns/Othorns in a commercial cinema would be fun, and high-passed at some 25Hz would offer a significant gain in extension over the typically used dual 18" ported cabs. 

To be precise, a lot of movies use aggressive shelving rather than a HPF at the bottom.  This way the ULF content is still in the track but at a lower level and can be perceived if it crosses perceptual thresholds.  However, aggressive shelves still ring a lot, and the ringing characteristic tends to contribute substantially to the perception of the bass sounds, whatever they are at the expense of other potentially more interesting details.

In any case, there are good and bad reasons for applying filters of various kinds to a soundtrack.  In many cases, filters do more good than harm.  It's like that with compression and limiting too.  Tools are neutral.  How they are wielded matters a lot.  A wrong reason to filter is to try to remove content that the mixer "cannot monitor".  I don't know any mixers who cut their mixes off at 12 kHz or 15 kHz because of the capabilities of their hearing or their speakers.  Unfortunately, few mixers can monitor bass with enough quality and extension to hear what these filters are doing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/20/2019 at 2:20 PM, dgage said:

I use PL Premium 3X for my commercial subs and don’t use fasteners for our standard offerings.  Not sure what the equivalent that would be on your side of the pond but we’ve tried quite a few types and PL Premium 3X is the one we like the best by far.  We used to use Loctite Heavy Duty but we had a couple bad tubes I think so kicked that stuff to the curb.

I believe most use true Baltic Birch plywood, which is significantly better than standard plywood (13 void-free plys in 18mm vs inconsistent layering).  The true Baltic Birch I get for my business is from Russia/Ukraine and less than $50 USD in bulk for 1520mmx1520mmx18mm sheets.  This is definitely the best plywood for building speaker and sub enclosures.  You could use MDF but I don’t like it, it’s heavy and won’t hold up if dropped and doesn’t hold screws well.

If I understand right,

1.-  do you use PL Premium 3X from loctite  and don't  use screws   even for subs?

2.- Is the Loctite PL Premium 8x Fast Grab,  Best than the 3X  you recommended? 

 

Thanks,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, geritass said:

If I understand right,

1.-  do you use PL Premium 3X from loctite  and don't  use screws   even for subs?

2.- Is the Loctite PL Premium 8x Fast Grab,  Best than the 3X  you recommended? 

 

Thanks,

Correct, we just glue with PL Premium 3X and then clamp for 24 hours.  Wood glues, when used correctly, are stronger than the actual wood.  I’ve tested this by gluing two parts together at a right-angle and then swinging the wood against a tree, the wood broke but the joint did not.  We tested the 8X and did not like it as much though I think cost had a lot to do with it since we have to worry about cost in a production instance that DIYers don’t have to worry about.  But I’m willing to pay more for better performance, but we liked the PL 3X better.

Here is a video showing the construction of our Mariana 18S subwoofer.  We put it together and use 2 ratchet straps to go around the sides and then 8 parallel clamps for front to back.  Like I said, we let the glue dry for 24 hours and the enclosure is solid.  The corners are 2” mdf corners, everything else is 18mm Baltic Birch plywood.

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, dgage said:

Correct, we just glue with PL Premium 3X and then clamp for 24 hours.  Wood glues, when used correctly, are stronger than the actual wood.  I’ve tested this by gluing two parts together at a right-angle and then swinging the wood against a tree, the wood broke but the joint did not.  We tested the 8X and did not like it as much though I think cost had a lot to do with it since we have to worry about cost in a production instance that DIYers don’t have to worry about.  But I’m willing to pay more for better performance, but we liked the PL 3X better.

Here is a video showing the construction of our Mariana 18S subwoofer.  We put it together and use 2 ratchet straps to go around the sides and then 8 parallel clamps for front to back.  Like I said, we let the glue dry for 24 hours and the enclosure is solid.  The corners are 2” mdf corners, everything else is 18mm Baltic Birch plywood.

 

Thanks a lot  Dgage for your fast reply,  I will go for the 3X ,   I will follow your professional experience!  Thanks Again 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/20/2019 at 5:39 PM, m_ms said:

If your use of 12-24dB BW HPF (or mostly 18dB) is implemented in the context of the subs having to endure your test-bench trials, then I take it the slopes being mentioned are sufficiently protective. I may try out 12dB BW and see whether it's advantageous in terms of sound quality, but I'm not sure it's a good idea with tapped horns if they unload more severely below tune compared to ported subs or a 6th order BP iteration like the Skrams?

As is 18dB BW HPF is preferred here over 48dB BW. The overall presentation just appears to be more cohesive. 

That is correct. The relatively shallow 12 and 18dB filters have been adequate with the sine sweeps at max level which start at 2Hz. Also the pro drivers used in these and the Skhorn are VERY resistant to mechanical bottoming. A filter is recommended but there's no need for something like a 36 or 48dB octave slope for protection. I wouldn't go any steeper than 24dB. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey guys,

my friends and I are totally fascinated of the Skram and for now we want to build two of them. 
At first we'll build it with the suggestion of 18mm birch ply and after we want to do some changes for the second pair.
We want to make it out of 15mm (birch ply and in the core of it one layer of poplar to make it lighter) in addition we would like to add some braces out of carbon and epoxy resin. It should be as stiff as 18mm birch ply.

Do you have any concerns with this plan so far? 
 

We are not sure which kickbass we want to use. Maybe some of you have another recommendation?

We are planing to build one Cubo Kick 12 per Skram with the 18sound 12ND830 and a little bigger cabinet, so it gets down to about 90hz and up to 200hz.

The other consideration is to build some sealed boxes as kicks but I worry if this will be very harmonic with the Skram. But it should be the purest and punshiest kick, isn't it?
There would be I guess 2 drivers per Skram (depends on the driver). 

What do you think? What would you do?

As Mid Tops (from 200hz with a bit different AMT) there will be one Mundorf AMT (with a horn in front of it and an active cooling system) and two Wavecore WF259PA01 per side.. Mostly we are playing Techno, etc. but the system should be able to let you enjoy all kinds of music...

It would be great if you guys could help us with your knowledge!

Thanks a lot,
Timon

Share this post


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

Hey guys,

my friends and I are totally fascinated of the Skram and for now we want to build two of them. 
At first we'll build it with the suggestion of 18mm birch ply and after we want to do some changes for the second pair.
We want to make it out of 15mm (birch ply and in the core of it one layer of poplar to make it lighter) in addition we would like to add some braces out of carbon and epoxy resin. It should be as stiff as 18mm birch ply.

Do you have any concerns with this plan so far? 
 

We are not sure which kickbass we want to use. Maybe some of you have another recommendation?

We are planing to build one Cubo Kick 12 per Skram with the 18sound 12ND830 and a little bigger cabinet, so it gets down to about 90hz and up to 200hz.

The other consideration is to build some sealed boxes as kicks but I worry if this will be very harmonic with the Skram. But it should be the purest and punshiest kick, isn't it?
There would be I guess 2 drivers per Skram (depends on the driver). 

What do you think? What would you do?

As Mid Tops (from 200hz with a bit different AMT) there will be one Mundorf AMT (with a horn in front of it and an active cooling system) and two Wavecore WF259PA01 per side.. Mostly we are playing Techno, etc. but the system should be able to let you enjoy all kinds of music...

It would be great if you guys could help us with your knowledge!

Thanks a lot,
Timon

I would advise against the combination of hardwood and plywood, as both have a different CLTE. If you're really limited on weight, you may try to use Banova Ply. You could do the outside panels with regular BB ply and use the Banova for all inside panels (and be my guinea pig at the same time 😉)

Other than that, I'd personally prefer to keep the speaker count at 2 (i.e. one or multiples of the same sub playing from 20/30Hz to 60/100Hz depending on taste and a (line) array of the same capable tops). I had a quick look at the tops you're using and I don't see the need for a kick bin here. The dual 10" tops should capable enought to cross them over between 80 and 100Hz, and the Skrams are capable enough to be used in that configuration as well.

Share this post


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

Hey guys,

my friends and I are totally fascinated of the Skram and for now we want to build two of them. 
At first we'll build it with the suggestion of 18mm birch ply and after we want to do some changes for the second pair.
We want to make it out of 15mm (birch ply and in the core of it one layer of poplar to make it lighter) in addition we would like to add some braces out of carbon and epoxy resin. It should be as stiff as 18mm birch ply.

Do you have any concerns with this plan so far? 

We are planing to build one Cubo Kick 12 per Skram with the 18sound 12ND830 and a little bigger cabinet, so it gets down to about 90hz and up to 200hz.

The other consideration is to build some sealed boxes as kicks but I worry if this will be very harmonic with the Skram. But it should be the purest and punshiest kick, isn't it?
There would be I guess 2 drivers per Skram (depends on the driver). 

What do you think? What would you do?

As Mid Tops (from 200hz with a bit different AMT) there will be one Mundorf AMT (with a horn in front of it and an active cooling system) and two Wavecore WF259PA01 per side.. Mostly we are playing Techno, etc. but the system should be able to let you enjoy all kinds of music...

 

I don't see any issue with modifying the plans a bit for 15mm wood. It should still be strong enough. Banova ply for the interior bracing would be nice as we were just discussing it at AVS but it seems quite expensive. Carbon and epoxy bracing sounds interesting. What's the goal though? Weight savings?

I don't generally use kick bins. I like subs that can get up fairly high in frequency and big mains that can get low with power so I don't usually add a third set of cabs. I like to put the extra weight and size of the kick bins into the subs and or mains, and have one less amplifier channel and set of DSP settings to worry about. YMMV. A lot of other guys swear by the kick bin approach. If your preference is for kick bins the Martin 215mk3 design gets a lot of praise but it's bigger and heavier than a Skram so it better be good!

It'd be hard for me to pack a pair of those when I could add another <120Hz sub cab instead unless I was already running like 8+ subs. 

If I were designing a dedicated kick bin I would do a FLH, or plain old bass reflex for sure and not a TH or bandpass variant. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, peniku8 said:

I would advise against the combination of hardwood and plywood, as both have a different CLTE. If you're really limited on weight, you may try to use Banova Ply. You could do the outside panels with regular BB ply and use the Banova for all inside panels (and be my guinea pig at the same time 😉)

 

7 minutes ago, Ricci said:

I don't see any issue with modifying the plans a bit for 15mm wood. It should still be strong enough. Banova ply for the interior bracing would be nice as we were just discussing it at AVS but it seems quite expensive. Carbon and epoxy bracing sounds interesting. What's the goal though? Weight savings?

 

before we start building the second skram we want to make oszillating tests with test pieces. These will be like 18mm birch, 12/15mm Banova with Epoxy(and carbon), the same with  poplar and birch. we are not sure zet, how the tests will look like, but we are sure to find a way ;) after that we will make the second skram out of the winner design and then compare it with the orig. skram.

 

36 minutes ago, peniku8 said:

Other than that, I'd personally prefer to keep the speaker count at 2 (i.e. one or multiples of the same sub playing from 20/30Hz to 60/100Hz depending on taste and a (line) array of the same capable tops). I had a quick look at the tops you're using and I don't see the need for a kick bin here. The dual 10" tops should capable enought to cross them over between 80 and 100Hz, and the Skrams are capable enough to be used in that configuration as well.

 

15 minutes ago, Ricci said:

I don't generally use kick bins. I like subs that can get up fairly high in frequency and big mains that can get low with power so I don't usually add a third set of cabs. I like to put the extra weight and size of the kick bins into the subs and or mains, and have one less amplifier channel and set of DSP settings to worry about. YMMV. A lot of other guys swear by the kick bin approach. If your preference is for kick bins the Martin 215mk3 design gets a lot of praise but it's bigger and heavier than a Skram so it better be good!

It'd be hard for me to pack a pair of those when I could add another <120Hz sub cab instead unless I was already running like 8+ subs. 

Ok, those are interesting advices, so we will try it without them first.  Is it a good idea to make i.e. per side one Top with both, the AMT with the Mids, and a second cab with only the Mids (eighter with the same tuning or again as a 4 way system?)

Another change in the plan is to use not the very expensive wavecore driver, but instead something like the http://www.precision-devices.com/Product-Details/PD103NR1.
Would you recommend a closed box or BR Design for a tuning around 100Hz? (And could you recommend a calculation tool for designing these?)


We want to use a FP10000Q for two skrams, another class A/B or D amp for the L/R mids and one for the L/R AMTs.
Do you prefer a single extern dsp for all amps or the build in dsp (with much more effort)?
 


Thanks a lot for your help, I think we are on a good way! :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Timon said:

 

before we start building the second skram we want to make oszillating tests with test pieces. These will be like 18mm birch, 12/15mm Banova with Epoxy(and carbon), the same with  poplar and birch. we are not sure zet, how the tests will look like, but we are sure to find a way ;) after that we will make the second skram out of the winner design and then compare it with the orig. skram.

 

 

Ok, those are interesting advices, so we will try it without them first.  Is it a good idea to make i.e. per side one Top with both, the AMT with the Mids, and a second cab with only the Mids (eighter with the same tuning or again as a 4 way system?)

Another change in the plan is to use not the very expensive wavecore driver, but instead something like the http://www.precision-devices.com/Product-Details/PD103NR1.
Would you recommend a closed box or BR Design for a tuning around 100Hz? (And could you recommend a calculation tool for designing these?)


We want to use a FP10000Q for two skrams, another class A/B or D amp for the L/R mids and one for the L/R AMTs.
Do you prefer a single extern dsp for all amps or the build in dsp (with much more effort)?
 


Thanks a lot for your help, I think we are on a good way! :)

 

If you have the built in DSP you may as well use it right? Less cables, less pieces to fail. If it does not work for some reason perhaps look into another external DSP box. 

It cannot hurt to try the Skram's with the tops first. If you think you need the kick bins you can always build some later. 

Let us know how the material testing with Birch, Poplar, Carbon, Banova goes. I think this will be interesting for many of us. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interested in this design, going to build one just to have a listen. and if i like what i hear i'll build 8+ of them for our rig!

 

one thing, our tops are bit wider than these, so would want to build them 2inch or so wider, and possibly taller, by few inches.

will this effect the sound in anyway? and how so?

 

also whats the best way to do so? scale everything up?

 

look forwards to hearing back!

Cheers, 

Murdoch

Share this post


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

 

before we start building the second skram we want to make oszillating tests with test pieces. These will be like 18mm birch, 12/15mm Banova with Epoxy(and carbon), the same with  poplar and birch. we are not sure zet, how the tests will look like, but we are sure to find a way ;) after that we will make the second skram out of the winner design and then compare it with the orig. skram.

 

 

Ok, those are interesting advices, so we will try it without them first.  Is it a good idea to make i.e. per side one Top with both, the AMT with the Mids, and a second cab with only the Mids (eighter with the same tuning or again as a 4 way system?)

Another change in the plan is to use not the very expensive wavecore driver, but instead something like the http://www.precision-devices.com/Product-Details/PD103NR1.
Would you recommend a closed box or BR Design for a tuning around 100Hz? (And could you recommend a calculation tool for designing these?)


We want to use a FP10000Q for two skrams, another class A/B or D amp for the L/R mids and one for the L/R AMTs.
Do you prefer a single extern dsp for all amps or the build in dsp (with much more effort)?
 


Thanks a lot for your help, I think we are on a good way! :)

 

You'd want the tuning frequency of the mains to be way below your Xover freq, due to the phase swap at the tuning frequency (that will cause cancellations with the sub).

I'd advise on going with a ~70Hz tuning frequency (or lower if possible) when going with a 100Hz crossover at 24db/octave or greater, that would leave you with half an octave of constructive interference. I would also not cross over that PD driver at much higher than 2k to the tweeter.
I prefer using networked dsp amps. That way you have quick access to all your amp channels and settings from your PC, which allows for efficient system tuning.

When using the FP10kQ for two subs, either use it in bridged config (with 8Ohm drivers) or one cab on channel A and one on channel B to prevent bus pumping.

Depending on how big the dance floor (?) is, it might be advisable to put two cabs low and hang two up high, so you can individually adjust the SPL of the tops to get an even coverage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, medico said:

Very interested in this design, going to build one just to have a listen. and if i like what i hear i'll build 8+ of them for our rig!

 

one thing, our tops are bit wider than these, so would want to build them 2inch or so wider, and possibly taller, by few inches.

will this effect the sound in anyway? and how so?

 

also whats the best way to do so? scale everything up?

 

look forwards to hearing back!

Cheers, 

Murdoch

Scaling it up would drop the tuning quite a bit. Making the cab only wider wouldn't make much of a difference, but if you also increased the height you'll end up with a pretty big spike around 30Hz so you'd want to EQ that out. Here is a response with the wider cab (guesswork):

wJOb9Qw.png

Share this post


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

Hey @jay michael , any updates?  Have you listened to the Danley + Skram combo yet?

Yeah..... Spent a good 6 hours or so yesterday in my back yard messing around..... Much love to my neighbors!

Played around with a bunch of crossover variables, at the moment I am liking what 75hz-ish with a 24 db butterworth slope is sounding like.  My impressions are super positive so far. The Danley and the skram seem to be a good match.  The Skram has a really nice tight, clean and impactful sound.  I hate using the word but it feels and sounds fast,  never sounds muddy or distorted, nice separation between different sounds. I notice that I can feel punch in my body from sounds where I don't expect them to give me a felt impact....  if that makes any sense.  The sound is so much cleaner than I am used to coming from front radiating subs, it makes me want to turn the ratio of sub to top up more than I am used to, yet it doesn't sound like the bass is overloading the tops. 

As for the Danleys, wow!  If you haven't every heard them you need to track some down. I would describe the sound as mid forward, every little sound no matter how subtle is right there plain and pure and with unreal clarity and seperation. My buddy that was hanging out with me described it as being able to hear and feel the textures of each sound.  Really breathtaking large stereo field, the sound doesn't feel directional from the horns at all, seems to just envelope you from everywhere.  We played a bit of everything, metal, rock, folk and a bunch of our favorite electronic tracks, everything sounded amazing and exciting.   The mix between the Danley and the Skram seems very fitting, the clean punchy attack of the skrams compliments the Danleys sound nicely.

Of note.  The skram's have a powerful 30hz grunt to them, very clean and hifi sounding..... but I think the Othorn sounds slightly more exciting with those really low frequencies.   The Othorn has some sort of a unique harmonic growl to its 30hz output that is just really sexy.  The Skram's are seriously almost there... they are just ever so slightly perhaps a little cleaner so it doesn't sound quite as rowdy as the Othorn does down low.  On the other hand the skram up higher is noticeably more impactful and punchy which for most types of music I think is going to serve you better.    If you are strictly a bass music lover the Othorn is a pretty amazing beast,  If your musical tastes are wider I think the Skram is the way to go. 

Someone previously mentioned adding kick bins to their system.... you were me a year ago, that's what I figured I needed for the sound I was chasing.  I would try the skram first with a nice beefy top cabinet, you may likely agree that kick bins are not needed, the skram's kick plenty.   If your stuck on the kickbin idea then maybe the Othorn might be your ticket. 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

As for the Danleys, wow!  If you haven't every heard them you need to track some down. I would describe the sound as mid forward, every little sound no matter how subtle is right there plain and pure and with unreal clarity and seperation. My buddy that was hanging out with me described it as being able to hear and feel the textures of each sound.  Really breathtaking large stereo field, the sound doesn't feel directional from the horns at all, seems to just envelope you from everywhere.  We played a bit of everything, metal, rock, folk and a bunch of our favorite electronic tracks, everything sounded amazing and exciting.   The mix between the Danley and the Skram seems very fitting, the clean punchy attack of the skrams compliments the Danleys sound nicely.

I haven't heard any Danley speakers, but I hope to some day.  I expect they sound quite good.

1 hour ago, jay michael said:

Of note.  The skram's have a powerful 30hz grunt to them, very clean and hifi sounding..... but I think the Othorn sounds slightly more exciting with those really low frequencies.   The Othorn has some sort of a unique harmonic growl to its 30hz output that is just really sexy.  The Skram's are seriously almost there... they are just ever so slightly perhaps a little cleaner so it doesn't sound quite as rowdy as the Othorn does down low.  On the other hand the skram up higher is noticeably more impactful and punchy which for most types of music I think is going to serve you better.    If you are strictly a bass music lover the Othorn is a pretty amazing beast,  If your musical tastes are wider I think the Skram is the way to go.

Using EQ you can change the sound of the Skram, for better or worse.  The Skram response simulated in Hornresp and exhibited in your measurements has a bit of a hump around 95 Hz, which is likely to dominate the character of the sound.  EQ down that hump, and the bottom may come alive.  Ideally this can be achieved while retaining (and hopefully enhancing) the punch, but finding the ideal EQ ideal may be tricky.  If you apply such EQ to the subs only (instead of the whole signal), you may find that a different crossover frequency works better.  For example, crossing at 75 Hz reduces the emphasis from the 95 Hz hump (it's still there, but less) compared to a higher crossover frequency, but if the hump is EQed out, the system might sound good crossed a bit higher, like 90-100 Hz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't make my mind between Othorn or Skram.
At first I was going for 2xOthorn + 2xES18BPH to cover 27.5hz - 110hz, so Othorn playing on one octave (27.5hz - 55hz) and the ES18 on another one (55hz - 110hz).

But then the Skram comes out and offer me the possibility to cover those 2 octaves with only one bin + the possibility to tune it lower for movies.
That means :

- Less amplifiers
- Less cabs so less speakers, cables, storage difficulty etc
- Less phase problems 
- Easier building and less wood required

I would save a lot of money, almost enough to build two others Skrams quickly.

The only thing I'm afraid of is the Skram "kick" power, is it something I should care about ?
I like the ES18 kick but it does it with light Mms drivers, the skram would kick with a 412gr Mms (B&C 21DS115-4).

@jay michael review makes me hesitate even more ahah.

Is the Skram far away of an Othorn + ES18BPH combo ? :)

Share this post


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

Yeah..... Spent a good 6 hours or so yesterday in my back yard messing around..... Much love to my neighbors!

Played around with a bunch of crossover variables, at the moment I am liking what 75hz-ish with a 24 db butterworth slope is sounding like.  My impressions are super positive so far. The Danley and the skram seem to be a good match.  The Skram has a really nice tight, clean and impactful sound.  I hate using the word but it feels and sounds fast,  never sounds muddy or distorted, nice separation between different sounds. I notice that I can feel punch in my body from sounds where I don't expect them to give me a felt impact....  if that makes any sense.  The sound is so much cleaner than I am used to coming from front radiating subs, it makes me want to turn the ratio of sub to top up more than I am used to, yet it doesn't sound like the bass is overloading the tops. 

As for the Danleys, wow!  If you haven't every heard them you need to track some down. I would describe the sound as mid forward, every little sound no matter how subtle is right there plain and pure and with unreal clarity and seperation. My buddy that was hanging out with me described it as being able to hear and feel the textures of each sound.  Really breathtaking large stereo field, the sound doesn't feel directional from the horns at all, seems to just envelope you from everywhere.  We played a bit of everything, metal, rock, folk and a bunch of our favorite electronic tracks, everything sounded amazing and exciting.   The mix between the Danley and the Skram seems very fitting, the clean punchy attack of the skrams compliments the Danleys sound nicely.

Of note.  The skram's have a powerful 30hz grunt to them, very clean and hifi sounding..... but I think the Othorn sounds slightly more exciting with those really low frequencies.   The Othorn has some sort of a unique harmonic growl to its 30hz output that is just really sexy.  The Skram's are seriously almost there... they are just ever so slightly perhaps a little cleaner so it doesn't sound quite as rowdy as the Othorn does down low.  On the other hand the skram up higher is noticeably more impactful and punchy which for most types of music I think is going to serve you better.    If you are strictly a bass music lover the Othorn is a pretty amazing beast,  If your musical tastes are wider I think the Skram is the way to go. 

Someone previously mentioned adding kick bins to their system.... you were me a year ago, that's what I figured I needed for the sound I was chasing.  I would try the skram first with a nice beefy top cabinet, you may likely agree that kick bins are not needed, the skram's kick plenty.   If your stuck on the kickbin idea then maybe the Othorn might be your ticket. 

 

Interesting impressions - much appreciated. The Skram appears to be one heck of a sub (and the Othorn as well), and I'd also like to have a closer listen to the Danley's. 

Regarding named perceived differences between the Skram and Othorn (grunt vs. growl, if you will), I'm wondering whether the more pronounced rowdy character or "growl" of the Othorn is at least partly explained due the driver being more exposed at the mouth? The way you describe it though doesn't make it sound as if the Othorn is sonically akin to a typical direct radiator (i.e.: if we accept there is any such typicality to the sound of a direct radiator), and moreover I've heard other people speak of the tapped horn sound in ways quite similar to yours (something about a combination of presence, smoothness, a certain visceral feel, and even a touch of "warmth") - impressions I can relate to via my own tapped horns, though it may at first glance sound like any capable, well integrated sub regardless of topology.. 

Interesting also that the Skrams appear to be more impactful (alive?) in the upper end of their range compared to the Othorn and how this is explained (simply caused by a rise in the frequency curve in the upper range?). I've always imagined the Othorns were good to some 125Hz. 

Share this post


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

 

Using EQ you can change the sound of the Skram, for better or worse.  The Skram response simulated in Hornresp and exhibited in your measurements has a bit of a hump around 95 Hz, which is likely to dominate the character of the sound.  EQ down that hump, and the bottom may come alive.  Ideally this can be achieved while retaining (and hopefully enhancing) the punch, but finding the ideal EQ ideal may be tricky.  If you apply such EQ to the subs only (instead of the whole signal), you may find that a different crossover frequency works better.  For example, crossing at 75 Hz reduces the emphasis from the 95 Hz hump (it's still there, but less) compared to a higher crossover frequency, but if the hump is EQed out, the system might sound good crossed a bit higher, like 90-100 Hz.

Yeah I suspect that its entirely possible that some eq tuning could change the character of the sound from the skram. The only eq applied so far is the recommended dsp settings that Danley provide for the sh46's.  I didn't experiment with higher crossover points above 80 hz, its something that I want to do the next time I have them out.  I will have the full system outdoors for 4-5 days aug 15 weekend so I will get lots of time to experiment some more.  Here is the response of just the skram as I had it processed meeting the sh46

https://imgur.com/mTse4If

If one was to try applying some individual eq just to the sub to improve it, what should I strive for?  More of a flat response? what about the notch's at 85 and 150 ish? Should I try to even those out?

Here is the response of both speakers together

https://imgur.com/gallery/EMtk6eN

Certainly open to suggestions if anybody has some!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...