x12 with fane drivers - do i need to change cab? |
Post Reply |
Author | |
herke
Registered User Joined: 04 November 2009 Location: Huddersfield Status: Offline Points: 171 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: 15 May 2012 at 9:14am |
hi,
decided to build some x12s using the budget fane sovereign 12-300 drivers. Do I need to alter the cab layout at all to get the most out of them? how about port size/lengths? How do I find this info out! thanks |
|
Absulum
Registered User Joined: 01 February 2012 Location: Sheffield Status: Offline Points: 267 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Erm i have no idea if you need to change the cab or not... BUT download and install winISD (its free), enter the driver parameters (dont think theres a preset for the fane soveriegn 12-300) and enter all the other stuff (2 drivers, 2 ports etc) and it will give you the volume for the box + the port length. Just adjust the dimentions so you get the internal volume you need :)
Edited by Absulum - 15 May 2012 at 9:42pm |
|
herke
Registered User Joined: 04 November 2009 Location: Huddersfield Status: Offline Points: 171 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
hey thanks. Been playing with winISD most of the day and if i have done it correctly then its suggesting a port length of 105mm for a 95l box (I think this is the correct size for the x12 box)
Does that sound about right? the suggested drivers on the plans only have a port depth the thickness of the wood (18mm) thanks Neil |
|
herke
Registered User Joined: 04 November 2009 Location: Huddersfield Status: Offline Points: 171 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
For a bit more info here are the results I'm getting:
tuning freq of 73.91 < +2.6db at 102 with 18mm port length tuning freq of 53.19 < flat but 100mm length port Not seeing a recommended tuning frequency on the Fane PDFs though. I take it the flat result is best?? |
|
Absulum
Registered User Joined: 01 February 2012 Location: Sheffield Status: Offline Points: 267 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Erm im no expert so not too sure.
However, yes flat result is best (although if necassary this can be dealt with with a little EQ. I would imagine that going with the 100mm recommended port size would be best. If you can get hold of some cheep mdf you could knock up a quick prototype and see how it sounds.
|
|
Steve_B
Old Croc Joined: 29 September 2007 Status: Offline Points: 1587 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The X12 was designed for specific drive units. If you are
using different drive units it is not really an X12. Unless you just want to stick some drive units in a box and
hope for the best you might as well start from scratch. If you are familiar
with winisd then you are part the way there. First up a screen shot. This plots the responses for a
number of boxes. Hopefully it is not too confusing. I’ve tried using different
background colours but non are that much better than the default. First I’ll get the purple plots out of the way. These are 90
litre sealed enclosures. One has 6dB of boost added at 80Hz to flatten the
response. Ok. Starting with the light plot that has the lowest
response. This is a 180 litre cabinet tuned to 55Hz. The next two plots which
have an almost identical response are a 134 litre cabinet tuned to 55Hz and a
90 litre cabinet tuned to 55Hz. The smaller cabinet has eq added to modify the
response. 3dB at 65Hz. The red plot is the same 90 litre cabinet with no eq. Another graph. This time we are looking at the theoretical
maximum spl. At first glance, this appears to have fewer graphs. The
reason is that adding eq to alter the response does not change the upper limit
to what you can get from a particular drive unit and cabinet. The peak between
50 and 60Hz is the output from the port. In this case, the biggest cabinet
produces the biggest peak. From 70 Hz upwards all the reflex cabinets have the
same maximum output. Essentially, all you gain from doubling the size of the
cabinet (90 to 180ltrs) is about 4dB between 50 and 55Hz. At 40 Hz all the
cabinets have the same maximum output. A final graph shows the group delay. I’ve added this to firstly show that the bigger cabinets
have a higher group delay and secondly to show that going the sealed box route
because it has lower group delay is only valid until you apply additional eq to
modify the response. So, which one is best? Well, all of them and none. My
optimum might be different from yours. It is up to you to decide is the big
cabinet worth it for the slight extra output? Using a higher tuning frequency
might knock a several Hz of the lower response but fill in the dip in maximum
output at 80Hz. If you are intending to use a sub with this cabinet gaining an
extra 4dB at 90Hz could be a better choice. |
|
herke
Registered User Joined: 04 November 2009 Location: Huddersfield Status: Offline Points: 171 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Hey Steve,
Many thanks for the very in-depth response! These will be used (at least in the meantime) as full range speakers, or as close to them as I can get. they are only going to be in a small room. Ideally I would want these to be as low as possible, I dont mind making them bigger if that would help. they wont be moved really. To be honest im only just getting my head round winisd but I feel a bit like this: I may end up building a 186 sub in the future but thats probably a way off. These are just for the odd party and also a building project. What do you think is best for these as stand alone? thanks again |
|
Post Reply | |
Tweet |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |