Speakerplans.com Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > General > General Forum
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Outdo B&C 21DS115 and upgrade to modular subs
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Outdo B&C 21DS115 and upgrade to modular subs

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 34567 8>
Author
Message
corell View Drop Down
Young Croc
Young Croc
Avatar

Joined: 19 August 2013
Location: Berlin
Status: Offline
Points: 1161
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote corell Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 December 2018 at 8:25pm
Hi Crashpc again, first of all i have to say that you got a much better understanding of TSP and SPL/ excursion/impedance etc. than i thought at first. In fact, much better than the majority of users here.
I agree with what you are saying in terms of low q vs high q drivers, which is why i made the "TSP are irrelevant for max SPL" statement earlier. People look at the wrong spots and draw wrong conclusions from it. Big companies are using extremely underdampened drivers in tiny cabs for their BR enclusores, which should make you wonder. It is because they dont care about the non EQ`d response, which in fact is inferior to drivers with 0,32-0,42 qes.

So now that we agree here:
The bad reputation for BP you got is unfair. every speaker is in fact a BP of different order and BP can have nasty high Q resonators with huge GD or the other way around, same as BR speakers can have it.
Most "hybrids" and some tapped horns (which allways get rewarded for their nice sound by many) are in fact serial tuned 6.order BP.

"Real" BP  (and TH aswell) have the major advatage over other designs that you can have the magnet cooled beeing in the airflow without wasting cabinet space. Power Compression is a huge factor if you  want to push boundaries. So dont write BP cabs off just because their are so many trash ones out there (most of them have a way to high tuning which should make them sound like an infra while they are not at all).

My suggested drivers you should look at :
BMS 12S305 (low q, high excursion)
18Sound 18NLTW5000 (same Vd as 18DS115, but higher q so shorter port for same tuning)

if you need help getting 18sound drivers, i am relatively nearby at Berlin so we can sort things out i guess.

Back to Top
Crashpc View Drop Down
Registered User
Registered User


Joined: 26 February 2008
Location: Czech Republic
Status: Offline
Points: 465
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Crashpc Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 December 2018 at 9:42pm
corell: things now starting to make sense when we sort it out calmly. At the end of the day, to a point, you are right that TSPs don't matter THAT much...

For the BP, it is a complex thing. I had a chance to hear some bandpass enclosures. Some usable, acceptable, or maybe on the good side, most of these very bad. The problem I have with this box is that you only have two slow resonators hooked up to the third one(the driver). The GD and delays must be horrendous anyway. It takes two to three periods to fully kick in. That's not good for fidelity....
Then you are likely to have narrower passband....

In my situation, when mostly excursion limited, cooling is not that much of a problem, but I keep an eye on that issue still.

Thank you for your offer. If there is possibilty to order 18Sound from Germany, and I liked the driver, I wouldn't want to bother you. Thomann? Or a local shop/dealer? I'll dive into their drivers list first, lets not get mad.

Thank you.

I didn't get the last thing about the shorter port. Yes, the fall of can be little steeper with low q driver, but not that much, right? Any sims for that available? ;-)
Nikon and Canon people should not be married to each other. Why did you let this happen?
Back to Top
corell View Drop Down
Young Croc
Young Croc
Avatar

Joined: 19 August 2013
Location: Berlin
Status: Offline
Points: 1161
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote corell Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 December 2018 at 10:41pm
the port gets shorter because the net volume for a higher q driver needs to be larger. to a certain extend (the NTLW is not that high either) that results in quite a similar external volume.


oh and of course i was talking TSP in a sense that we only look at ranges found in pro audio drivers from the big players. The lower q driver has less sensitivity in the range above tuning but also less excursion and since we are most certainly excursion limited in that non resonant passband, the max spl would be dictated by Vd.




Edited by corell - 12 December 2018 at 10:46pm
Back to Top
MarjanM View Drop Down
Old Croc
Old Croc
Avatar

Joined: 10 February 2005
Location: Macedonia
Status: Offline
Points: 7816
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote MarjanM Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 December 2018 at 10:43pm
Originally posted by Crashpc Crashpc wrote:

MarjanM: Thanks. I will look into that. It has smaller Xmax, but it is cheaper, and has more powerful motor. I´ll do some sims etc...
 
toastyghost: many other box types are allowed, except for BP.
I did some sims and it seems that some 8"-12"s could do the job in small THs.

It does not have much smaller x-max. Unlike all of the rest, BMS do not add 25-30% to the formula calculating the x-max. If we use the B&C formula, it will have 11mm x-max.
Marjan Milosevic
MM-Acoustics
www.mm-acoustics.com
https://www.facebook.com/pages/MM-Acoustics/608901282527713
Back to Top
MarjanM View Drop Down
Old Croc
Old Croc
Avatar

Joined: 10 February 2005
Location: Macedonia
Status: Offline
Points: 7816
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote MarjanM Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 December 2018 at 10:53pm
No one mentioned isobaric box. It goes very low with least volume, but sure does lose sensitivity.
So you might need several boxes to keep up with the SD.
Marjan Milosevic
MM-Acoustics
www.mm-acoustics.com
https://www.facebook.com/pages/MM-Acoustics/608901282527713
Back to Top
Crashpc View Drop Down
Registered User
Registered User


Joined: 26 February 2008
Location: Czech Republic
Status: Offline
Points: 465
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Crashpc Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 December 2018 at 8:54am
corell: okay, now I get it with the port.  I´m only inclined to get "not much" larger box where we´re talking 15"s. I had 18SW115 in proper box, tuned at about 34Hz, and I would like to still go a tad smaller. I.E. Around those 180l. More for only very exceptional and high power density/output solution.
Less would be nice with 15"s. But 15"s don´t have that low Fs and great Xmax usually. I´m really pushing it here...
 
MarjanM: I see now. That is very solid competition to Eminence and Dayton. And seems affordable for four pieces. Thanks a lot. I´ll look what I can do with it.
Nikon and Canon people should not be married to each other. Why did you let this happen?
Back to Top
Crashpc View Drop Down
Registered User
Registered User


Joined: 26 February 2008
Location: Czech Republic
Status: Offline
Points: 465
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Crashpc Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 December 2018 at 7:52am
I was thinking about ergonomics and what is possible to make the speaker more likely to get moved (taken out). Wheels, OK... Handles, OK, I need to work on this one, big time.
Size, that was my initial idea. I continued on this idea. Now I´m freaking out over sims of 18DS115 vs 21DS115 in 120-130l enclosure:
 
 
It looks ridiculous. The 18DS115 would be excursion limited at around 40-50Hz, so it wouldn't really enjoy the bump at 30Hz (If any was there, as HornResp exaggerates here).
Bad idea to put 21DS115 into 120-130l box? Can any driver outdo this for $580 while retaining the usable passband?
 
Nikon and Canon people should not be married to each other. Why did you let this happen?
Back to Top
Crashpc View Drop Down
Registered User
Registered User


Joined: 26 February 2008
Location: Czech Republic
Status: Offline
Points: 465
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Crashpc Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 December 2018 at 8:01am
So, I did some sims and thinking, got help from some forum members here (thanks) and elsewhere, and so I decided to take some action and try.
 
The resulting concept is this:
 
Not what I firstly expected and demanded. But still, this design shaves over 50l off, of the original compact enclosure. So this one is indeed very compact for 21" and hopefully with new shape, handles, sledge and wheel, I will be more likely to move it more often.
I plan to build one piece from waste wood to see how it handles and how it measures.
 
 
Sensitivity sim:
 
 
 
 
If I like the box, and it plays and measures well, I would like to have two of these:
 
 


Edited by Crashpc - 20 December 2018 at 8:01am
Nikon and Canon people should not be married to each other. Why did you let this happen?
Back to Top
Crashpc View Drop Down
Registered User
Registered User


Joined: 26 February 2008
Location: Czech Republic
Status: Offline
Points: 465
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Crashpc Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 December 2018 at 2:49pm
The concept box is standing...




I cannot believe the accuracy of my port length wild guess for 29Hz:



With very little padding, it should flatten out some peaks in the FR, and push the apparent tuning of the box to 28Hz.

Plugged it to the amp and listened/measured.
The output at the low end is still there, not weaker than in larger box.
I´m amazed of the speaker. Its sheer power (motor force) still is able to drive the bassreflex port even in small volume of the box.
Bassy songs sound more "with ease", yet I don´t really feel like it goes significantly deeper. Things rattle a lot in the room, even at 25-26Hz, that is a good sign, yet my ears say NO from 29Hz down. Diminishing returns so to speak. I will leave it at that.

The box is smaller than the original one, and even with few centimetres shaved off of each side, handling of the box alone improved significantly.

On the other hand, I effed up on the ergonomics. Mean WHEELS.
The back side of the box doesn´t allow for usable wheels at this moment. Yes, the box could roll on the flat ground with small wheels, but that is not what I´m looking for. Big wheels either wont fit, or will stick too much out of the box. I really wonder, if extended "skids/sledge" on the bottom of the box, and additional two wheeled handler/transporter wouldn´t be better idea after all. Decisions, decisions!

Anyway, I´m looking forward to build two of these next year.


Edited by Crashpc - 28 December 2018 at 3:31pm
Nikon and Canon people should not be married to each other. Why did you let this happen?
Back to Top
mini-mad View Drop Down
Old Croc
Old Croc
Avatar

Joined: 13 July 2012
Location: london
Status: Offline
Points: 6903
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mini-mad Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 December 2018 at 2:56pm
Why not a 'clip-on' removable wheel board? 

Touring boxing use them. ie a wheel board that will attach to the front of the box to protect the grill and/or driver in transit and maybe even protect from the rain when moving from van/truck to venue and back again.

Worth a thought.....


If it sounds like a gorilla is trying to escape, turn it down.
Back to Top
Crashpc View Drop Down
Registered User
Registered User


Joined: 26 February 2008
Location: Czech Republic
Status: Offline
Points: 465
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Crashpc Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 December 2018 at 3:47pm
How would it clip on?

If that was possible, I wonder if the original design would profit from this too...
Nikon and Canon people should not be married to each other. Why did you let this happen?
Back to Top
Earplug View Drop Down
Old Croc
Old Croc


Joined: 03 January 2012
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 7216
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Earplug Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 December 2018 at 4:09pm
Originally posted by Crashpc Crashpc wrote:

How would it clip on?

If that was possible, I wonder if the original design would profit from this too...



Metal 'keyway' on the box, small butterfly catches on the board? You could router in the keyway so it doesn´t protrude.  Smile

Like these:

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Replacement-Small-Butterfly-Catch-for-ABS-or-Plastic-Rack-Case-/152114257369





Earplugs Are For Wimps!
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 34567 8>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.06
Copyright ©2001-2023 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.141 seconds.