looking for driver

[JohnnieB]

I will look for drivers with those parameters and see what comes up. Any specific choices? Perhaps a TLS custom design could be in my future? Thanks again Doc.

Steve, I really would like an IB sub/s, but I live in a rental. I am perfectly capable of repairing any damage due to modifications to walls, but all the work just to have to go back and fix it seems like more than I want to do. Although, the home owner is a good friend and he loves his metal music....hmmm

 

[TLS Guy]

Outside of LLT aficionados, I don't know that anybody is really aiming for a native F3 into the single digits. The most common way that I've seen to achieve single digit bass reproduction is via multiple relatively capable sealed box subs / IB subs ala JapanDave's system that was posted earlier. In that case, the idea is to let cabin gain largely offset the usual 12dB/octave roll of the sealed sub (or IB) vs trying to actually build a sealed box sub with a native F3 <20Hz.

The rooms don't exhibit the 12 db roll off, the drivers/speakers do. The fundamental problem remains, and always will, is that in the lower frequencies a vibrating cone without assist form an acoustic transformer, is a lousy inefficient coupler to an acoustic space.

I remember when I first put the power to one of my bass lines in my friends cabinet shop, his reaction.

This is a lager shop in two halves with a front office space, making a third space. I ran a 20 Hz tone to one line with a 100 watt amp. All of the boards piled up against the walls in both sides of the shop started to vibrate and rattle. Brad felt it, and came back and said, "that is the lowest tone, I have ever heard in my life!"

The take home is that those two 10" drivers loaded by that line, had no trouble evenly pressurizing that total space evenly. That was both sides of the shop and the office space. And yes, you could feel it.

It achieved that because the physics was correct.

 

[Steve81]

The rooms don't exhibit the 12 db roll off, the drivers/speakers do.

Yes, I know. What the rooms does is partially offset that roll off with cabin gain below ~30Hz or so. The nominal rate of cabin gain is 12dB/octave below the frequency = speed of sound / (longest room dimension * 2). Real rooms will exhibit less than 12dB/octave of gain, but in many cases the boost seen is quite significant.

The fundamental problem remains, and always will, is that in the lower frequencies a vibrating cone without assist form an acoustic transformer, is a lousy inefficient coupler to an acoustic space.

Hence why these systems are using multiple 15" or 18" long throw drivers with considerable amplification behind them.

 

[Steve81]

Steve, I really would like an IB sub/s, but I live in a rental. I am perfectly capable of repairing any damage due to modifications to walls, but all the work just to have to go back and fix it seems like more than I want to do. Although, the home owner is a good friend and he loves his metal music....hmmm

Hi Johnnie,

An IB isn't necessary (though it's more efficient). It takes quite a lot of displacement to deliver credible output at 10Hz though.

 

[JohnnieB]

The trouble is you are fixated on low F3. That will lead you astray. The most important parameter for any speaker is its sound quality. The crux of the error of your thinking is that "if a sub is good at 10 Hz, it will be awesome at 17 Hz." Almost certainly with a cone driver it will be lousy at 17 and above.

The most important parameter is the quality of the bass, especially that it be non resonant or close to it.

The other issue is that you don't have to get the F3 into the teens or single digits to feel bass. I don't use a sub, or sub drivers, but I can certainly feel bass with these speakers. In room F3 is almost exactly at 20 Hz. I have watched the opening night of the Proms several times now. I can feel the huge RAH organ on many occasions and the effect created is just the same as in the Albert Hall.

The problem comes in the home of getting bass out of a fairly small box. As I have so often pointed out, a speaker cone is a terrible and inefficient coupler to an acoustic space, and the larger the space the worse it is.

All closed boxes have a much higher F3 then driver Fs. So brute force becomes mandatory with Eq and high power. Even then if you pursue low F3 you still need a heavy cone and less efficiency and the spring (suspension) still has to be sloppy.

If you use a Qb4 vented enclosure, then you end up with horrid high Q "extended bass" alignments, rather then the optimal alignment. My advice is to never sacrifice bass extension for bass quality.

Now there are good reasons in physics why the pipes of an organ like the one on the RAH as so massive. It all has to do with filling the space evenly and cleanly at high spl.

Speakers are no different. However we live in small houses. Never the less, building speakers of the dimensions dictated by physics, and not building ones forced to perform by brute force, will always win the day. It all comes down to acoustic transformation. To perform optimally in the lowest octave, cone speakers need an acoustic transformer. The best options are pipes or horns.

To cut to the chase, for domestic purposes, a speaker system built round a driver with an Fs around 20 Hz and a Qts in the range of 0.3 to 0.4 is optimal. I personally think around 0.35 is the real sweet spot.

As you know some members have built subs, I have designed. They seem to really like them. I don't have to play the numbers game and get the lowest F3. However in practice, I bet mine sound as if they have a better bass than a commercial offering designing for lowest F3.

The problem is, I have been given so much info, some may have been bad. More likely, it came from me asking the wrong question. I'm not fixated on anything, I'm trying to figure out what I can and can't get away with, to give me an idea of what I really need to achieve my desired end result. I suppose what I really need is any idea of what the hell I'm doing. Since I don't have that, I have to rely on a ton of questions, some obscure and unrelated, and then sort through the info and look at the pros/cons to come to a sensible end goal. That goal being, superb bass that can reach as low as possible and still have desirable musical qualities. I think outside the box, no pun intended, mainly because I'm not constrained by the knowledge of what the box is to begin with. At the sacrifice of looking ignorant, I humbly submit to anyone who has the patience and know how to walk me through the process of figuring this out. There is so much info on the web pertaining to sub parameters and how this plays into choosing a build, that honestly, it's overwhelming. It would be an absolute pleasure, for me anyway, to work with you and learn something along the way. But were starting at ground zero. You up for that Doc?

 

[TLS Guy]

The problem is, I have been given so much info, some may have been bad. More likely, it came from me asking the wrong question. I'm not fixated on anything, I'm trying to figure out what I can and can't get away with, to give me an idea of what I really need to achieve my desired end result. I suppose what I really need is any idea of what the hell I'm doing. Since I don't have that, I have to rely on a ton of questions, some obscure and unrelated, and then sort through the info and look at the pros/cons to come to a sensible end goal. That goal being, superb bass that can reach as low as possible and still have desirable musical qualities. I think outside the box, no pun intended, mainly because I'm not constrained by the knowledge of what the box is to begin with. At the sacrifice of looking ignorant, I humbly submit to anyone who has the patience and know how to walk me through the process of figuring this out. There is so much info on the web pertaining to sub parameters and how this plays into choosing a build, that honestly, it's overwhelming. It would be an absolute pleasure, for me anyway, to work with you and learn something along the way. But were starting at ground zero. You up for that Doc?

Search Ares posts. I designed and talked him through the building of a very cost effective sub he really likes. It is an easy first built and a very good clean performer. I have been though this already with him. You won't go wrong with that build and you will feel it.

As for a TL sub, I have considered it. However that is something that would have to be built and tested here. TLs are not cookie cutter. There are enough bad ones out there, that I would not want to add to them. I would have to know that anything I offered was something exceptional that really shows off the purpose of going to the trouble of the build.

 

[JohnnieB]

Search Ares posts. I designed and talked him through the building of a very cost effective sub he really likes. It is an easy first built and a very good clean performer. I have been though this already with him. You won't go wrong with that build and you will feel it.

As for a TL sub, I have considered it. However that is something that would have to be built and tested here. TLs are not cookie cutter. There are enough bad ones out there, that I would not want to add to them. I would have to know that anything I offered was something exceptional that really shows off the purpose of going to the trouble of the build.

Thanks, may have to get up that way just to build a sub.

 

[rojo]

Don't forget the CSS SDX12. Hopefully the driver and amp for the one I'm building will arrive early next week. I'll let you know how it goes. The models look promising.

 

[JohnnieB]

Haven't forgotten. It will be some time before I make a final decision. Either way would still like to hear how it turns out.

 

[JohnnieB]

Looking at this Dayton audio.

Dayton Audio RSS460HO-4 18" Reference HO Subwoofer 4 Ohm - Subwoofers - Loudspeaker Drivers By Type - Loudspeaker Components

I saw the RS18HO on DB and the measurements looked quite good. They had the sub in a 4.2ft/3 enclosure. According to Dayton, this is the predecessor to the RSS460HO.

The Paradigm Signature 2 really had the specs I was looking for, but I just can't see the price. At least my bank account couldn't.

With a high pass filter at 16-18Hz, the power handling should go up overall, perhaps a DSP with 2 different settings profiles, one for HT and one for music.

 

[lsiberian]

What's your budget? Do you already have the tools and knowledge to build the box? Any size constraints?

 

[TLS Guy]

Looking at this Dayton audio.

Dayton Audio RSS460HO-4 18" Reference HO Subwoofer 4 Ohm - Subwoofers - Loudspeaker Drivers By Type - Loudspeaker Components

I saw the RS18HO on DB and the measurements looked quite good. They had the sub in a 4.2ft/3 enclosure. According to Dayton, this is the predecessor to the RSS460HO.

The Paradigm Signature 2 really had the specs I was looking for, but I just can't see the price. At least my bank account couldn't.

With a high pass filter at 16-18Hz, the power handling should go up overall, perhaps a DSP with 2 different settings profiles, one for HT and one for music.

That is an excellent driver. It is best ported.

Just build this box.

Name: Dayton Audio RSS460HO-4 18"
Type: Standard one-way driver
Company: Dayton Audio
No. of Drivers = 1
Fs = 19.6 Hz
Qms = 3.9
Vas = 297.9 liters
Cms = 0.26 mm/N
Mms = 425.9 g
Rms = 8.008 kg/s
Xmax = 12.75 mm
Xmech = 19.13 mm
P-Dia = 338.2 mm
Sd = 1164 sq.cm
P-Vd = 1.145 liters
Qes = 0.43
Re = 3.41 ohms
Le = 2.1 mH
Z = 4 ohms
BL = 20.4 Tm
Pe = 900 watts
Qts = 0.39
no = 0.503 %
1-W SPL = 89.2 dB
2.83-V SPL = 92.87 dB
-----------------------------------------
Box Properties
Name:
Type: Vented Box
Shape: Prism, square (optimum)
Vb = 7.672 cu.ft
Fb = 19.05 Hz
QL = 5.549
F3 = 22.48 Hz
Fill = minimal
No. of Vents = 1
Vent shape = rectangle
Vent ends = one flush
Hv = 3 in
Wv = 14 in
Lv = 37.29 in

You will need no DSP and it won't care if it plays music or movies. It will just sound good. Other members have built this and they love them. This design is a killer sub.

 

[JohnnieB]

Thanks Doc. Ill keep an update going on the build.
Isiberian: I hadn't really set a budget. I was hoping to keep it under 1000 only because I didn't want to wrap too much up in a first build. Yes I have some carpentry skills and tools. The motor on my table saw burned out last week, just my luck. I didn't really have any constraints on size other than living in a small bungalow. If the sub would have been the size of a refrigerator for under 1000 and played clean deep and awe inspiring bass, I would have found a way to fit it in.
TLS Guy brought me back to reality. I'm still open to suggestions for a second build tho.

 

[rojo]

I'm very happy with my CSS SDX12 build. GO-NAD! also did a similar build with passive radiators if you're interested.

You might ought to factor in bass correction if you don't already have some -- miniDSP and a mic if you aren't opposed to a ton of reading and experimenting with Room EQ Wizard; or a DSPeaker Anti-Mode if you prefer easy-peasy fully automated, but perhaps not as flexible or quite as accurate as miniDSP + REW. Creative Sound Solutions also sells the Anti-Mode, fwiw. If interested, use the contact form on their website to ask what sort of deal they could offer on this driver + amp combo with an Anti-Mode box.

If you go the miniDSP route, I recommend not getting the ubiquitous UMIK-1 USB mic, simply because a USB mic can't measure in the time domain. It's mono only, and there's no way to create a loopback for a timing reference. Therefore, a USB mic can't measure the difference in impulse response time between one sub and another. If you run multiple subs, they will sound better if you can time-align them at your primary listening position.

A more legacy XLR mic with a phantom power preamp, a USB sound card, and a couple XLR cables will let you use the mic on channel L to measure with a simple loopback on channel R as a timing reference. That's how I do it, anyway. You might be able to simplify the setup, combining the phantom power / pre-amp with the USB sound card by getting a USB mixing board instead, but I don't have any experience with that method, and can't vouch for its success.

If your receiver has Sub EQ HT (Denon X4000, Marantz SR7008, etc), then forget I said anything. You already have great bass management.

Anyway, whether you go miniDSP or Anti-Mode, I think driver + amp + enclosure + DSP device + measurement equipment will still be < $1000 all included.

 

[lsiberian]

Thanks Doc. Ill keep an update going on the build.
Isiberian: I hadn't really set a budget. I was hoping to keep it under 1000 only because I didn't want to wrap too much up in a first build. Yes I have some carpentry skills and tools. The motor on my table saw burned out last week, just my luck. I didn't really have any constraints on size other than living in a small bungalow. If the sub would have been the size of a refrigerator for under 1000 and played clean deep and awe inspiring bass, I would have found a way to fit it in.
TLS Guy brought me back to reality. I'm still open to suggestions for a second build tho.

You will need an amp like the EP4000 to drive this and dsp like the minidsp to handle eq and high pass filtering. You can do an iNuke as well, but it's not as flexible as the minidsp amp combo.

That leaves you 600 for supplies and drivers. There are a few great options to choose from at this price point.

1. The experimental build.(Only if you really want to get deep into loudspeaker design and do a lot of different enclosures to see what you like.)
[h=1]SB Acoustics SB42FHC75-6 15" Woofer(this is a woofer with a 22.5 Fs and an excellent candidate for a TL type build if you really want to tinker) [/h]The reason I like this option is the high sensitivity of the driver coupled with it's TL possibilities.

2. The best Driver you can get on your budget.

The TC Sounds Axis 15 is your best bet. You can seal or port it and get an excellent response either way. It does require a lot of power to drive and often times the designs are brute force. I don't really like brute force designs.
TC Sounds Axis 15Q1 15" Quad VC Subwoofer

3. You can build 2 of the Dayton's and Get a smoother in room response.

4. You can buy a commercial sub. The SVS PB-1000 is a great sub and definitely will fill the room.

I will have my own debate soon enough, but I'm leaning toward the experimental myself. I will probably put 6 of them in my fronts though(budget permitting).

 

[JohnnieB]

Rojo, I did not realize the USB mic had limitations, thanks. I have REW downloaded, but haven't played with it yet. My pre/pro doesn't have auto room correction, so a DSP is in my future, if only to experiment. Thanks for the links, I will check em out.

Isiberian: Two of these Daytons was the first thought I had. It is definitely in the budget. I e-mailed Dayton, and they recommended an SA1000. I felt this would be a little small for the sub. I have always felt if you run double the RMS for an amp and keep the gain down below 60%, you get a better sound. It works your amps less and gives you extra power reserves for impedence dips. Can't say as I like the looks of the Beringer amps though. I don't intend to use a rack, so more of a standalone that fits in with my other gear is a better choice for me aesthetically. I am considering an Emo mono block. It would match my front channel amp and my 3 channel when I get that. I'm not sure if this is the best route tho and I need to give this more thought. I intend to do other sub builds and perhaps a 2 way bookshelf at some point, but this may be a ways down the road.

I feel the Dayton would be a solid performer for a very reasonable price. Before it gets built however, there may be something else that catches my eye. As I stated, the Paradigm looks to be more along the lines of what I am really looking for as far as lower octave extension.
Paradigm® | Subwoofer | SUB 2 | Overview

I'm 1000% positive I can't go wrong with anything TLS has recommended, and this looks to be a great first build. Is it the perfect sub? I don't know, I will find out after it's built and integrated.

Yeah, I can go commercial subs, but I just have a hard time with feeling I can do just as good or better with a DIY for the same, or less, money.

I truly appreciate all the replies. Each one always adds to my knowledge base or gives me a different perspective.

 

[its phillip]

If you want something comparable to (or better than) the SUB2, just build a pair of subs with UXL-18s. There are other options as well.
Data-Bass

 

[ParadigmDawg]

Just buy the Dawgcrusher and build a nicer cab for it. Or I can send you the CADD drawings for a ported box modeled for that driver and it will know your socks off.

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/classifieds-sell-your-gear/91387-dawgcrusher-needs-new-home-subwoofer.html

 

[rojo]

One final thought, then I'll stop nagging you about the CSS driver. Sorry if I'm irritating.

With a reasonably-sized enclosure, you'll get a lower system Q with a 12" driver than you would with a 15 or 18. I admit I haven't heard any 18" home theater / hi-fi subs, so my assumptions about Q could be unfounded. Indeed, Tom V. of Power Sound Audio tells me that worrying about Q is no longer in vogue and hasn't been for several years. But I recall years and years ago when I was shopping for car subwoofers, I preferred the tight response of my JL Audio 10's to the 12's of the same series. The 10's just sounded more musical, and I think it's because they had a lower Q than the 12's in my trunk.

That experience was a consideration when I was shopping for my own DIY project. I read somewhere that a Q of 0.5 was the magic number. Lower would be too damped, and higher would result in less control. Thus was born my list of potentials.

The CSS in a 3 cu. ft. box has a Q around 0.5. Any larger subs I've modeled in a similar sized enclosure have had a Q of 0.8 or higher, as well as a steeper subsonic rolloff. Now, I don't doubt a Q of 0.8 would be perfectly acceptable for movie effects and for music not as demanding of obsessive control. But for a tight, musical response without needing a 6ft³ or larger box, the CSS was my huckleberry. Please know that I can't say whether a different choice wouldn't have been as musical. All I can tell you with certainty is that the CSS has delivered, and that my assumptions, as far as I can tell, have at the very least not been counterproductive.

On the other hand, the Dayton 18, the SB Acoustics 15, and all the others that have been mentioned in this thread must be doing something right to warrant their recommendations. I'm probably putting unreasonable emphasis on a feature that doesn't have much benefit in the real world. If that's the case, I truly apologize, and I hope someone more experienced teaches me something.

I'm also thinking about subsonic rolloff. In your first post, you mentioned you wanted solid single-digit Hz response. Is that still your goal? Did you ever download WinISD and model the drivers you're considering?

 

[lsiberian]

One final thought, then I'll stop nagging you about the CSS driver. Sorry if I'm irritating.

With a reasonably-sized enclosure, you'll get a lower system Q with a 12" driver than you would with a 15 or 18. I admit I haven't heard any 18" home theater / hi-fi subs, so my assumptions about Q could be unfounded. Indeed, Tom V. of Power Sound Audio tells me that worrying about Q is no longer in vogue and hasn't been for several years. But I recall years and years ago when I was shopping for car subwoofers, I preferred the tight response of my JL Audio 10's to the 12's of the same series. The 10's just sounded more musical, and I think it's because they had a lower Q than the 12's in my trunk.

That experience was a consideration when I was shopping for my own DIY project. I read somewhere that a Q of 0.5 was the magic number. Lower would be too damped, and higher would result in less control. Thus was born my list of potentials.

The CSS in a 3 cu. ft. box has a Q around 0.5. Any larger subs I've modeled in a similar sized enclosure have had a Q of 0.8 or higher, as well as a steeper subsonic rolloff. Now, I don't doubt a Q of 0.8 would be perfectly acceptable for movie effects and for music not as demanding of obsessive control. But for a tight, musical response without needing a 6ft³ or larger box, the CSS was my huckleberry. Please know that I can't say whether a different choice wouldn't have been as musical. All I can tell you with certainty is that the CSS has delivered, and that my assumptions, as far as I can tell, have at the very least not been counterproductive.

On the other hand, the Dayton 18, the SB Acoustics 15, and all the others that have been mentioned in this thread must be doing something right to warrant their recommendations. I'm probably putting unreasonable emphasis on a feature that doesn't have much benefit in the real world. If that's the case, I truly apologize, and I hope someone more experienced teaches me something.

I'm also thinking about subsonic rolloff. In your first post, you mentioned you wanted solid single-digit Hz response. Is that still your goal? Did you ever download WinISD and model the drivers you're considering?

The OP is looking to build a larger enclosure so using a larger driver is fine. 0.5 Qtc is on the lower end especially if you stuff the box. This applies only to sealed subs. Ported subs are different.