Bossobass Subwoofers

[Steve81]

I know at least a few of you guys know who bossobass is (he mostly hangs out at the data-bass forums these days AFAIK), and that he's had a page to show off a couple of his products for quite a while. However, mum has ever seemed to be the word on pricing and all that jazz. Looks like that's changed now:

https://secure.bossobass.com/index.php?route=product/category&path=59

Pricing seems pretty reasonable considering the amount of subwoofage and amplification involved.

 

[its phillip]

Awesome. The system III seems like a great deal. Not cheap but it's a very capable system.

 

[Steve81]

If I were buying again today, the System II looks like it'd fill all of my needs in a fairly space efficient form factor. I've even got the 220V line to really eek everything out of the amp

 

[fuzz092888]

I've visited that page before, mostly looking at the amps. I've always debated between the A14K or the direct from Sanway version.

The subs are definitely interesting, but price seems steep compared to DIY'ing.

 

[Steve81]

The subs are definitely interesting, but price seems steep compared to DIY'ing.

That's always the case though. Compare the System II with the DSS 24, and you're looking at 4x15" drivers versus a single 24", and a crapton of power from the A14K for a pretty comparable price.

 

[fuzz092888]

That's always the case though. Compare the System II with the DSS 24, and you're looking at 4x15" drivers versus a single 24", and a crapton of power from the A14K for a pretty comparable price.

I'm not sure why I would do the 24" SI, even with the discount. Dual 21"s from Mach 5 will get 50% more radiating area for the same or less money.

So $1000 in drivers + $1000 for the Sanway + $1000 for materials (this is pretty variable depending on finish and dual opposed vs single's), and you're at minimum $1600 short of the system II. But, factor in time to build and finishing and that weighs in heavily as well.

Speaking of. First of 2 FTW's arrives today. We'll see how badly the GF reacts to this.

 

[Steve81]

But, factor in time to build and finishing and that weighs in heavily as well.

That and practicality. The Raptors are 22.5" in diameter, so they don't take up a boatload of floor space, and a stacked pair would be ~5 feet tall. Each module is ~105 pounds, so you won't kill yourself there either. Compare that with a DO 21" cabinet where you'd need a fork lift to move the thing

Edit: One other little detail is power handling, given that you're splitting that kind of juice among 4-3" VCs vs 2-3" VCs. You can build bigger enclosures to improve low end efficiency of course, but then the build isn't all that comparable anymore.

 

[its phillip]

The subs are definitely interesting, but price seems steep compared to DIY'ing.

You could say that about any other vendor. DIY is always cheaper

 

[billy p]

You could say that about any other vendor. DIY is always cheaper

While I largely agree, I oppose using external amplification like I-Nuke or similar to keep cost down. I much prefer a plate amp designed sub...You'd really need to step up with something along the lines of Speaker Power modules to even make the SI 18 hst or Mach 5 UXL a worthwhile investment even if DIY.

Welcomed news indeed he finally includes prices on his designs.

 

[Steve81]

I much prefer a plate amp designed sub...

Ditto, though with a multi-sub system, a single rack amp makes a lot of sense logistically (fewer power cords to deal with if nothing else).

 

[fuzz092888]

That and practicality. The Raptors are 22.5" in diameter, so they don't take up a boatload of floor space, and a stacked pair would be ~5 feet tall. Each module is ~105 pounds, so you won't kill yourself there either. Compare that with a DO 21" cabinet where you'd need a fork lift to move the thing

Edit: One other little detail is power handling, given that you're splitting that kind of juice among 4-3" VCs vs 2-3" VCs. You can build bigger enclosures to improve low end efficiency of course, but then the build isn't all that comparable anymore.

Not necessarily. Replicating the design, dual opposed in a sonotube would be relatively simple and keep weight down as well.

True, but now you're adding additional variables such as how much EQ is applied, how low are you extending response, room size, SPL requirements, driver sensitivity, actual driver performance, that are big question marks. So theoretically it could make a difference, but until you have more specificity, it's a moot point.

 

[fuzz092888]

You could say that about any other vendor. DIY is always cheaper

Hence why time and effort were mentioned as part of cost.

 

[fuzz092888]

While I largely agree, I oppose using external amplification like I-Nuke or similar to keep cost down. I much prefer a plate amp designed sub...You'd really need to step up with something along the lines of Speaker Power modules to even make the SI 18 hst or Mach 5 UXL a worthwhile investment even if DIY.

Welcomed news indeed he finally includes prices on his designs.

Why speaker power? You could pay $500-800 less and get Bosso's own A14. You could pay $5-600 less than the A14 and get a Sanway. Also, IMO even when driven by a lowly Crest Pro Lite 5.0 I would hardly say they're not worth it.

FWIW, Steve and I were talking about the FTW above.

 

[shadyJ]

External amps are just better, as long as rack space is available. There is no good reason not to go that route. They make cabinet construction simpler, they are less expensive, they are much better vented on a rack than sandwiched between a subwoofer cabinet and usually a wall, and that means less heat buildup in the cabinet which also helps the driver. You also only have to run one speaker cable to the cabinet instead of a line level cable and a power cord, so placement becomes easier. Furthermore, if the amp dies at any time in the future, you could just use any other amp instead of trying to source a similar sized plate amp.

 

[Steve81]

True, but now you're adding additional variables such as how much EQ is applied, how low are you extending response, room size, SPL requirements, driver sensitivity, actual driver performance, that are big question marks. So theoretically it could make a difference, but until you have more specificity, it's a moot point.

IMHO, the big one w/ respect to actual subwoofer performance vs power is going to be box size, as that will play a huge hand in determining the low end efficiency (say <40Hz), which in turn determines how much power you need to play at any given SPL, regardless of EQ and room size. That is to say, if you stuff a FTW into a Raptor sized enclosure, it's not liable to be much, if any more efficient in the low end. In that case, unless your system is overdone to begin with relative to your needs (and I'd never accuse you of such a thing ), doubling the VCs is likely to help.

 

[lovinthehd]

I wonder if this has something to do with Dave's son being more involved with the business these days, I noticed him posting quite a bit over on AVS (aka Shreds).

 

[fuzz092888]

(and I'd never accuse you of such a thing ),

I need to make my couch bounce. There. There's a need

 

[bossobass]

Hello Audioholics! Long time, no been around these parts.

I've Been semi-retired from posting on forums at all. I do some @ Databass, but I think 10 forums and 16 years is enough. Ten and a half years as a member here, but a low post count. That usually means the members are too far over my head.

I appreciate the link and am honored to be mentioned in any AH thread, so thanks for that. But, to try to keep the e-mails to a minimum, please visit the main site. I've put a lot of work into having as much info there as possible.

bossobass.com

Some info after reading the posts:

1. We do not use Sonotube. We have a local branch of a HUGE paper company custom make our tubes to specified inside diameter, wall thickness and density and they are cut to length to maintain precisely square ends.

2. The newly redesigned A14K flagship has been tested by The Wizard of Shreds, using his new amp test rig. It bursts well in excess of 14,000 watts @ a nominal 4 ohms. Shreds will come in and hopefully be more specific once I twist his arm off (he doesn't like forums much). He has tested with 120V-15A, 120V-30A and 220V-30A mains and can explain what to expect from each app.

Shreds also tests to a brutal 5 Hz, something no one has ever done to my knowledge. As I've always said, when entering the infinite number of octaves of single digits hertz, you enter an audio quantum universe where things happen that are difficult to explain in normal terms.

3. The fit & finish of the Raptor enclosures can't be done justice by pics, IMHO, but son #2 is pretty good with a camera. This is a pic he took of a Stereo Integrity HST-15-loaded Raptor module that we dressed with a glass top and aluminum grill ring:

Of course, I've designed and built hundreds of subs over the past 20 years, since before the ProLogic days, so DIY will always have a special place in my heart. So, I agree with the comments made by all you DIYers out there.

4. The Wizard of Shred has designed and built an active analog signal shaper specifically for budget minded DIYers. It's more versatile than the Linkwitz Transform and a whole new concept in the use of filters to reshape the native response of a sealed sub. I've just gotten one to play with so that I can write the operator's manual once I fully understand it's parameters.

I had prelim info and graphics that I created from his description on the site, but I recently pulled that info. I'll be redoing that on the amplifiers page soon, but here's a first-ever photo exclusive for you guys only of the SEQSS-V, or what we've been calling simply the Dash V:

Again, thanks for the thread and great posts. I'll check in and try to keep up.

Dave

 

[bossobass]

BTW, my sig is a broken link from the old .mac days. Sorry, I can't edit it until I have 30 posts.

 

[Steve81]

BTW, my sig is a broken link from the old .mac days. Sorry, I can't edit it until I have 30 posts.

Feel free to shoot me a PM if you want a new sig before then. I nixed the old one for good measure.