X15 MOD
Printed From: Speakerplans.com
Category: Plans
Forum Name: X10, X12, X15 and XM15
Forum Description: Discussion / Questions about the X10, X12, X15 and XM15
URL: https://forum.speakerplans.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=25221
Printed Date: 27 March 2026 at 7:16am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.08 - https://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: X15 MOD
Posted By: audioalliance
Subject: X15 MOD
Date Posted: 23 March 2009 at 8:07pm
 15” + 1” Top / Full range - 15” = P-Audio SN-15MB or P-Audio WN-15S 1” = P-Audio BM-D450 on P-Audio PH-3220 Usable between 60Hz and 18KHz Run Active or Passive[1.8KHz/12dB lo, 2.2KHz/18dB high.] I saw these boxes in a list of builds here on speakerplans, they look impressive to me, especially since they're smaller than the X15's. I am wondered though if anyone had any experiences using them or something similar? I'm loading them with some BL15-300X (15inch) + CDX1-1430 driver all Celestion plus I'm gonna run some passive Dayton XO2W-4.5K 2-Way Crossover 4,500 Hz crossovers in there. On another note.., How much wadding is enough for this box? I read that wadding can be more than 3-4 inches thick once the vents are not blocked. ------------- http://www.myspace.com/audioalliance music is our mission |
Replies:
Posted By: nickyburnell
Date Posted: 23 March 2009 at 8:55pm
|
EV Deltamax (ish). Also like CVA cabs. Works well. Mine sound better to me with no wadding, stuff always has, that could be my ears though as others disagree. ------------- It's everything, not everythink! |
Posted By: ceharden
Date Posted: 23 March 2009 at 9:00pm
|
When it comes to reflex boxes like this, the size and shape is very much down to personal preference. The size basically determines how much output you'll get from the port and the response immediately above it. As long as the port ends up being tuned to somewhere sensible (close to the free air resonant frequency of the driver is normal) you'll be fine. Especially as in most cases you'll be running an active crossover with some subs and not using the output of the mid-top in the frequency range where the port is active. 4.5kHz is far too high. You need to be looking at 2-2.5khz region for a passive crossover. If you use a 24dB/oct passive crossover you could probably get away with taking it as low as 1.6kHz, depending on the 1" compression driver. Wadding needs to be done by ear really. Start with none then add some and see what difference it makes. 2-3 inches is normal but depends on what material you're using. Start by just wadding the back of the box to stop reflections back through the cone. |
Posted By: audioalliance
Date Posted: 26 March 2009 at 10:51pm
|
I got the horns and crossovers 2.5khz and will start building the boxes this weekend. I'll run the ports back 3 inches along the box with a slant on the front/ back edges so as to reduce port noise (chuffing). One question though...... What does the wadding really do for boxes? I mean some people say use wadding some say don't not to mention I've seen store bought boxes with and without wadding. Does wadding ensure a deeper bass, does it ensure all the air moves towards the front of the box etc. What the hell does this "wadding" do for sound enhancement/ reinforcement. ------------- http://www.myspace.com/audioalliance music is our mission |
Posted By: jonminns
Date Posted: 26 March 2009 at 11:08pm
|
Wadding is essentially loft insulation or other sound absorbing material It stops reflections and deadens the box to prevent reverberations etc Jon |
Posted By: Mark James
Date Posted: 29 March 2009 at 2:39am
|
Wadding needs to be done by ear really. that sounds a bit dodgy might be that its a saturday night but that does sound a little dodgy...... ------------- insert silly sentence here |
Posted By: Glenn
Date Posted: 29 March 2009 at 5:56am
| I would consider moving the horn fully to one side and have a single large port. |
Posted By: audioalliance
Date Posted: 29 March 2009 at 5:36pm
I thought so myself. That's gonna be A WHOLE LOTTA testing after a build.... JEEEEZ. Nevertheless I built them Friday and placed 2 inches of wadding on back and sides. I tested them long and hard at a outdoor event yesterday (11am - 2am) with about 300 people . The Results - They played really loud, even into the far off car park but the horns kept giving off a strange "clicking" noise once certain bassy tracks were played. Also there was a considerable amount of bass coming from behind the cab and not as much when compared to the front. I pulled down the horns and noticed that my tech buddy had installed an additional bass filter along with the crossovers on the horn's driver. Today I'll put in the 4 inch slanted channels for the vents this should make some improvements to the sound and air flow of the cabs. And maybe I dunno..., some more wadding... QUESTION: I hope you guys don't think it to far fetched but would the 15 driver give more if it was not connected to the crossover...? 
The design I've attempted is similar to the midtop of the void viper rig but I've seen some designs with the horn to one side as you suggested. Can you explain what would be some of the benitits. It shouldn't be to difficult to do a rebuild.  ------------- http://www.myspace.com/audioalliance music is our mission |
Markk James wrote:Posted By: audioalliance
Date Posted: 30 March 2009 at 8:09am
Picked this up at http://www.diysubwoofers.org/faq.htm regarding wadding cabs What happens if the box is too small? If the box is too small will typically result in a boomy system that appears to have strong midbass and less low bass. Typically power-handling is improved though, unless the box is REALLY too small! You can compensate somewhat for a small box volume by adding stuffing to the box. The stuffing can make the box appear up to 40% larger to the driver. Note that sealed systems are generally a lot more tolerant of variation in box volume than are the other tuned-port systems such as the ported and bandpass systems. file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CLenovo%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml - ------------- http://www.myspace.com/audioalliance music is our mission |
Posted By: audioalliance
Date Posted: 03 April 2009 at 2:32pm
|
Done.... And they're kicking major buttocks.... Ran them and they sound great also I did add some polyester stuff and it did make a big difference in the depth of bass I get now. I don't have to push 'em as much to get a good sound out of them. Now building some scaled down (10cm smaller) punishers to place with them. ------------- http://www.myspace.com/audioalliance music is our mission |
Posted By: Jake_Fielder
Date Posted: 30 June 2009 at 3:30pm
| why scaled down punishers? |
Posted By: audioalliance
Date Posted: 30 June 2009 at 5:13pm
Portability, weight, space constraints etc. I'm move my stuff alone most times and I do get inside outside gigs, hence I need a nice bottom end that can do both types of events. Punishers seems cheap to build plus they're very loud and can go very low. The only thing I've heard is they're on the heavy and takes two people to move one box. So scaling them down may reduce weight somewhat and I can carry more of 'em in the hatchback car  ------------- http://www.myspace.com/audioalliance music is our mission |
Posted By: Jake_Fielder
Date Posted: 01 July 2009 at 12:26am
| dunno if thats a good idea..., you might lose bottom end by tightening the throat and rear chamber, it depends how you scale it down i suppose... probably best to just put wheels and handles in sensible positions as i dont think you could save much weight, perhaps some neo 15/18" reflex would be an idea? |
Posted By: Hugo Biermann
Date Posted: 10 July 2009 at 3:22pm
It was to be used as a mid top. thebport tuning wasn't an issue when i drew that up. Use with nice loud bass bins and bi-amp.... Heavy cabs though... |