Official Rythmik Audio Subwoofer thread - Page 760 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Baselworld is only a few weeks away. Getting the latest news is easy, Click Here for info on how to join the Watchuseek.com newsletter list. Follow our team for updates featuring event coverage, new product unveilings, watch industry news & more!


Forum Jump: 
 1265Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #22771 of 22792 Old 02-10-2016, 07:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RTROSE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: South Central Indiana
Posts: 6,454
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Liked: 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rythmik View Post
I will do a verbal update here. I am testing the enclosure of F25. The tuning frequency turns out to be about 17% higher than that of FV15HP 1 port mode. So I need to increase the enclosure height and port length by about 12%. My goal is to get the tuning frequency to within 5% of FV15HP 1 port. It is a bit tougher because FV25 uses 3 ports. Next I will test the enclosure of FV18 which uses 2 port.
Exciting news! Thanks for the update. Looking forward to seeing these come to fruition.

Regards,

RTROSE
turbojohngt likes this.

My (slower than molasses) HT build here.
Now a Certified Carpet Counselor and Plumbing Counselor (Self given titles - pay no attention).
Enjoying my "almost done" theater.
RTROSE is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #22772 of 22792 Old 02-11-2016, 12:36 PM
Member
 
Cardiff Kook's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Chicago and San Diego
Posts: 72
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 12
I have a very general sub/main integration question for the forum...

Is it best when integrating the sub and mains to
1) align the timing perfectly OR
2) is it best to tailor the timing to smooth the frequency response?

For example, let's say that there is overlap from forty to eighty hz, and that perfect time alignment creates a peak at 60 but is smooth everywhere else. However by delaying the sub I can smooth out the peak. Is it advisable to intentionally misalign the timing to improve the freq response?

The reason I ask is because it seems apparent that the benefit of multiple subs is to specifically to create the situation where peaks and valleys hit at different times thus smoothing out. But is this also true at higher bass frequencies? When does it get objectionable? Is smoother freq response always the goal or is time alignment important too? When they conflict which is most important?

Seems like something important for us to all know. All input is welcome!
Cardiff Kook is offline  
post #22773 of 22792 Old 02-11-2016, 12:37 PM
Member
 
Cardiff Kook's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Chicago and San Diego
Posts: 72
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 12
I have a very general sub/main integration question for the forum...

Is it best when integrating the sub and mains to
1) align the timing perfectly OR
2) is it best to tailor the timing to smooth the frequency response?

For example, let's say that there is overlap from forty to eighty hz, and that perfect time alignment creates a peak at 60 but is smooth everywhere else. However by delaying the sub I can smooth out the peak. Is it advisable to intentionally misalign the timing to improve the freq response?

The reason I ask is because it seems apparent that the benefit of multiple subs is to specifically to create the situation where peaks and valleys hit at different times thus smoothing out. But is this also true at higher bass frequencies? When does it get objectionable? Is smoother freq response always the goal or is time alignment important too? When they conflict which is most important?

Seems like something important for us to all know. All input is welcome!
Cardiff Kook is offline  
post #22774 of 22792 Old 02-11-2016, 01:05 PM
AVS Special Member
 
DonH50's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Monument CO
Posts: 8,459
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1266 Post(s)
Liked: 821
If timing is aligned properly then frequency response should follow and vice-versa. Fourier tells us they are the same signal whether expressed in the time or frequency domain. I am not sure how you are determining "perfect time alignment". Time delay and phase shift in the system make it (highly) likely that different phase shifts will be required at different frequencies to account for things like crossovers, physical distance, interaction with the room, etc.

The quick answer is that I would adjust for best frequency response since we hear changes in frequency response more readily than transient time events. Our ears, and brain, integrate the signals. That said, I always check impulse responses, and even with just frequency response you want to make sure you aren't wasting a bunch of power trying to feed a null.

Note time alignment also changes the relative phase, all of which impacts those peaks and valleys you hear and measure.
enricoclaudio likes this.

"After silence, that which best expresses the inexpressible, is music" - Aldous Huxley
DonH50 is offline  
post #22775 of 22792 Old 02-11-2016, 02:30 PM
AVS Special Member
 
qguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,066
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 75 Post(s)
Liked: 79
pics or it did not happen

... with the F12 beside the two behemoths for size comparison Pleaaaasssseeeeeeee...


Quote:
Originally Posted by Rythmik View Post
I will do a verbal update here. I am testing the enclosure of F25. The tuning frequency turns out to be about 17% higher than that of FV15HP 1 port mode. So I need to increase the enclosure height and port length by about 12%. My goal is to get the tuning frequency to within 5% of FV15HP 1 port. It is a bit tougher because FV25 uses 3 ports. Next I will test the enclosure of FV18 which uses 2 port.
turbojohngt likes this.
qguy is offline  
post #22776 of 22792 Old 02-11-2016, 06:37 PM
Member
 
eorr23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Austin TX
Posts: 50
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Hey guys, I am still toying with settings and just got around to using the subtuner from Rythmik. After using the subtuner, it recommended me setting the crossover to 31hz. I was a bit confused since my preamp's bass management is set to 80hz. I guess I don't fully understand what the crossover nob does on the back of the sub. Any guidance would be greatly appreciated.


For reference my gear is listed in my signature.

Equipment list:
B&W 803d, Rythmik F12SE, Emotiva XSP-1, Emotiva XPA-2, Oppo 105, Project 2Xperience Classic, Panamax M5300-PM, Panasonic 60ST60
eorr23 is offline  
post #22777 of 22792 Old 02-11-2016, 09:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
qguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,066
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 75 Post(s)
Liked: 79
The lowest crossover will be used, since you used 31 hz at the subwoofer, the sub will produce 31 hz down to its lowest limit. Now if you want to use the pre-amp crossover, adjust the crossoover to the max level and control the crossover from the pre-amp. Is this is for HT, 80 hz would be a good stating point. For 2 channel audio, start at 31 hz and tweak from there


Quote:
Originally Posted by eorr23 View Post
Hey guys, I am still toying with settings and just got around to using the subtuner from Rythmik. After using the subtuner, it recommended me setting the crossover to 31hz. I was a bit confused since my preamp's bass management is set to 80hz. I guess I don't fully understand what the crossover nob does on the back of the sub. Any guidance would be greatly appreciated.


For reference my gear is listed in my signature.
qguy is offline  
post #22778 of 22792 Old Yesterday, 08:22 AM
Member
 
eorr23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Austin TX
Posts: 50
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by qguy View Post
The lowest crossover will be used, since you used 31 hz at the subwoofer, the sub will produce 31 hz down to its lowest limit. Now if you want to use the pre-amp crossover, adjust the crossoover to the max level and control the crossover from the pre-amp. Is this is for HT, 80 hz would be a good stating point. For 2 channel audio, start at 31 hz and tweak from there
Thanks qguy, I am using it for both music and movies but I care more about performance for music. Luckily its a long weekend so I will have plenty of time to play around with settings. Probably going to give REW a try for the first time as well, I am definitely excited to SEE what I am hearing.

Equipment list:
B&W 803d, Rythmik F12SE, Emotiva XSP-1, Emotiva XPA-2, Oppo 105, Project 2Xperience Classic, Panamax M5300-PM, Panasonic 60ST60
eorr23 is offline  
post #22779 of 22792 Old Yesterday, 09:47 AM
Senior Member
 
klh007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Annapolis, MD
Posts: 269
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacob B View Post
If I bought the Lyngdorf TDAi2170 as mentioned, it would power the front L/R speaker. AVR would be set to Left and right = LARGE, and NO SUB.
The Lyngdorf would bass manage as well as EQ Front L/R and the two pairs of subs (stereo, i.e. 2.2), and the AVR (Denon X5200W) would bass manage and EQ (XT32) the center and all the surround speakers.

I will test it in the near future, and see if it will fix my problem of a collapsed stereo soundstage with crossover set to 80 Hz and higher (200 Hz is desired due to the two E15HP+FM8 stacks...) :-)

Cheers,
Jacob
Jacob, I hope you get the TDAI-2170, I'd love to hear how the Room Perfect worked for you, and how effective the bass EQ is.

Kemper Holt
klh007 is online now  
post #22780 of 22792 Old Yesterday, 12:14 PM
Senior Member
 
brianmlamb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 209
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Liked: 39
I received my L12 about a week ago and have been enjoying it ever since. One of the things I have yet to fully understand though is the bass extension control.

From the website:

"The bass extension control enables the user to customize the frequency response of the low end for the best trade-off between output and extension. If set to low music, bass below 18 Hz will be filtered. The damping factor of this mode is 0.5 for the best time domain response. However, the disadvantage is slower attenuation of subsonic signals. For HT application, we recommend low-HT mode which incorporates a 3rd order highpass filter to filter out subsonic signals below 20hz. High extension setting is recommended for application where longer playback time and lower power consumption is required."

So for my understanding:
High is like party mode, use it when blaring music for hours to not overheat the amp.

What confuses me is Low HT vs Low music.



Looking at the graph, Low music has the deepest extension which would give lower bass notes for movies that actually use that spectrum right? And 99% of music (excluding pipe organs) doesn't hit down below 20hz and a slower attenuation would be less desirable for music I'd think so wouldn't the logic on these 2 be reversed? I must be missing something here and admit I'm a noob when it comes to sub tuning so please educate me.
brianmlamb is offline  
post #22781 of 22792 Old Yesterday, 01:19 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
PlasmaPZ80U's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 10,001
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1272 Post(s)
Liked: 339
Basically, you're adjusting 2 parameters at once, extension as you see in the graphs and damping/q value, which is what makes the sound cleaner and faster (lower q) or slower/boomier/more full body (higher Q).

For normal use you should pick low music or low ht, whichever sounds best to you... for high spl playback, high may be preferable.
brianmlamb likes this.
PlasmaPZ80U is online now  
post #22782 of 22792 Old Yesterday, 01:37 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
PlasmaPZ80U's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 10,001
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1272 Post(s)
Liked: 339
I should add the low ht has the rumble filter on to limit sub 20Hz signals, which if loud enough could cause the driver to bottom out. An example would be playing Edge of Tomorrow intro at high spl. Low music might cause it to bottom out whereas low ht might not or not as easily. High mode would apply even more aggressive rumble filter to protect the driver but you lose significant low end output/extension as a result.

I'd use low music for music and possibly movies if you don't listen at high spl or you don't watch movies with lots of sub 20Hz bass.

I'd use low ht for ht use that does involve loud peaks and sub 20Hz bass.

Use high for loud music played for long periods of time, especially music that doesn't have lots of sub 20Hz content.
PlasmaPZ80U is online now  
post #22783 of 22792 Old Yesterday, 08:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
toddman36's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 1,138
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 422 Post(s)
Liked: 116
Anyone have the FVX15? Likes, dislikes?

(R&L: Infinity Beta 50) (Center: Infinity Beta C360) (Surround side & Back: Infinity IW ERS 210 x 4) (TM: Infinity ERS 110 x 2) (Sub: Def Tech SC1)
(7.1.2 Config.) (AVR: Denon 4100) (Audiosource Amp 110 for TM's) (BRP: Pioneer 80FD) (Display: Panasonic TC-P65S1)
toddman36 is offline  
post #22784 of 22792 Old Today, 06:32 AM
Member
 
benhacker22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 23
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by toddman36 View Post
Anyone have the FVX15? Likes, dislikes?
Quote:
Originally Posted by benhacker22 View Post
Been lurking on this thread for a few months as I was looking to find a replacement sub. I had an MFW-15 and was very happy with that sub until.....the HUM hit. Thought I had been pretty fortunate for awhile, but alas the amp went out. There were options to "fix/upgrade" the sub, but why go through all that when can get something for a similar price. I wanted to find something that would be similar in output and sound as the MFW-15. I was all set to buy a HSU VTF15H-MK2 when I ran across this Rythmik thread and found out they were relatively local. After reading MANY pages of this thread (great regular contributors) and having conversations with Enrico and Brian regarding my room (2700 cu/ft) and budget, I settled on the FVX15. I was able to pick it up local so I did not have to worry about settling/keeping the sub to avoid paying for return shipping and would have option to upgrade to FV15HP.

I have had it for 2 months as of today and all I can say is WOW! I have a modest 5.1 setup and use my system for 80% movies and 20% music. I have a Yamaha receiver, ran YPAO, tweaked to my liking, and am very happy with results (most movie watching is between -28 to -20 volume). I go back and forth between 1 port closed/HT and both ports open (1 port closed is winning). Could I get better sound/output with REW and other EQ options? Probably so, but watching MMFR (amazing), TIH, Cloverfield, Iron Man, Dark Night, Pacific Rim, WOtW, and Jurassic World with the FVX15 has been VERY satisfying and enjoyable!!! Versus the MFW, the bass just sounds and feels cleaner and tighter. I can only imagine what a second one would do in my room (not in the budget now, but who knows about later). This is a great sub and am very satisfied with my purchase!

There isn't a whole lot of feedback regarding the FVX15, so wanted to give my impressions.

Here is my previous feedback regarding the FVX15. Have stuck with 1 port mode and now listen to most movies at -20. Still VERY happy with this sub!!
toddman36 likes this.

Receiver - Yamaha
Sub - Rythmik FVX-15

Last edited by benhacker22; Today at 06:51 AM.
benhacker22 is online now  
post #22785 of 22792 Old Today, 11:17 AM
Exclusively Servo
 
Rythmik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Austin
Posts: 2,055
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 178 Post(s)
Liked: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by dominguez1 View Post
Will the ports be firing in the same direction as the drivers for either the fv25 or fv18?

The first rev of both models will be top firing port. I know some customers like to see front firing ports. But my consideration is as follows:
  1. Tuning using port is much easier. Enclsoure size and port length can be easily adjusted. This will shorten turn around time.
  2. For FV25, the enclosure will be tall enough (40") that one doesn't even see the port opening with seating position.
  3. Our FV15HP 12.5hz CEA number measured by Josh is capped by port noise in band 6. Otherwise, the CEA number would have been higher. With top firing, wind noise is less audible and we can expect the number to improve. In addition, there are 3 ports for FV25. If we keep the air velocity same, FV25 will have at least 9db higher CEA output at 12.5hz just by the port opening area. Any additional output due to wind noise being less audible from its side is icing on the cake. For both FV25/FV18, the main increase in output will be in the 12.5hz/16hz range.
After the top firing version is done, we may proceed to front firing version of FV18. FV25 will not use front firing becasue the total length of the slot will be just too long.
Rythmik is offline  
post #22786 of 22792 Old Today, 11:37 AM
AVS Special Member
 
enricoclaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Houston
Posts: 1,736
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 434 Post(s)
Liked: 423
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rythmik View Post
The first rev of both models will be top firing port. I know some customers like to see front firing ports. But my consideration is as follows:
  1. Tuning using port is much easier. Enclsoure size and port length can be easily adjusted. This will shorten turn around time.
  2. For FV25, the enclosure will be tall enough (40") that one doesn't even see the port opening with seating position.
  3. Our FV15HP 12.5hz CEA number measured by Josh is capped by port noise in band 6. Otherwise, the CEA number would have been higher. With top firing, wind noise is less audible and we can expect the number to improve. In addition, there are 3 ports for FV25. If we keep the air velocity same, FV25 will have at least 9db higher CEA output at 12.5hz just by the port opening area. Any additional output due to wind noise being less audible from its side is icing on the cake. For both FV25/FV18, the main increase in output will be in the 12.5hz/16hz range.
After the top firing version is done, we may proceed to front firing version of FV18. FV25 will not use front firing becasue the total length of the slot will be just too long.
For those who like numbers, +9dB more than the FV15HP @ 12.5Hz means 107.5dB @ 12.5Hz... So the FV25 would be at the same level of Danley DTS-10 LMS-R

Best Regards,

Enrico Castagnetti
Rythmik Audio

 

My Multimedia Room Gallery

enricoclaudio is offline  
post #22787 of 22792 Old Today, 12:17 PM
AVS Special Member
 
JimWilson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Somewhere in New Joisey
Posts: 5,778
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 817 Post(s)
Liked: 968
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rythmik View Post
After the top firing version is done, we may proceed to front firing version of FV18.
Just a quick comment on this point Brian... I don't think this would be advisable. If I understand you correctly there would be two different versions of the same model - with the only difference being the port orientation - and personally I think that would do nothing but add confusion for your customers and further clutter the product line, to say nothing of the difficulty it creates for Rythmik having to support, purchase and stock them both. You might want to just decide which model would best suit everyone's needs - the customer and Rythmik - and offer that version. That's just my 2 cents though. YMMV.

If you take yourself too seriously expect me to do the exact opposite
JimWilson is online now  
post #22788 of 22792 Old Today, 12:37 PM
Member
 
Cardiff Kook's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Chicago and San Diego
Posts: 72
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post
If timing is aligned properly then frequency response should follow and vice-versa. Fourier tells us they are the same signal whether expressed in the time or frequency domain. I am not sure how you are determining "perfect time alignment". Time delay and phase shift in the system make it (highly) likely that different phase shifts will be required at different frequencies to account for things like crossovers, physical distance, interaction with the room, etc.

The quick answer is that I would adjust for best frequency response since we hear changes in frequency response more readily than transient time events. Our ears, and brain, integrate the signals. That said, I always check impulse responses, and even with just frequency response you want to make sure you aren't wasting a bunch of power trying to feed a null.

Note time alignment also changes the relative phase, all of which impacts those peaks and valleys you hear and measure.
Thanks Don,

Let me Set up my question better...

Some experts recommend that a way to integrate the sub and mains is to start by reversing the phase on the mains and then adjusting the phase on the sub so that the volume in the crossover range is minimized. You then reverse the phase back and you now have them in phase. However, this is possibly not the arrangement which will lead to smoothest frequency response.

The answer I hear you stating is that frequency smoothness should trump timing or impulse response where the two conflict. That the next step is to fiddle with both crossover and volume to seek even FR. Is this correct?

Would it also be correct then that if I have a bass bump in my mains at let us say 6o hz, that I should consider increasing the crossover of the sub (from a much lower frequency) specifically to counteract that hump? Don't get me wrong I am not suggesting a sub is a great way to counteract frequency anomalies in the upper or mid bass, but in the lower mid bass it may be a possibility (note that Magnepan specifically recommends DWMs be used in such a way to smooth even upper bass).

Great discussion. I wish more people would chime in....
Cardiff Kook is offline  
post #22789 of 22792 Old Today, 12:38 PM
Member
 
Cardiff Kook's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Chicago and San Diego
Posts: 72
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post
If timing is aligned properly then frequency response should follow and vice-versa. Fourier tells us they are the same signal whether expressed in the time or frequency domain. I am not sure how you are determining "perfect time alignment". Time delay and phase shift in the system make it (highly) likely that different phase shifts will be required at different frequencies to account for things like crossovers, physical distance, interaction with the room, etc.

The quick answer is that I would adjust for best frequency response since we hear changes in frequency response more readily than transient time events. Our ears, and brain, integrate the signals. That said, I always check impulse responses, and even with just frequency response you want to make sure you aren't wasting a bunch of power trying to feed a null.

Note time alignment also changes the relative phase, all of which impacts those peaks and valleys you hear and measure.
Thanks Don,

Let me Set up my question better...

Some experts recommend that a way to integrate the sub and mains is to start by reversing the phase on the mains and then adjusting the phase on the sub so that the volume in the crossover range is minimized. You then reverse the phase back and you now have them in phase. However, this is possibly not the arrangement which will lead to smoothest frequency response.

The answer I hear you stating is that frequency smoothness should trump timing or impulse response where the two conflict. That the next step is to fiddle with both crossover and volume to seek even FR. Is this correct?

Would it also be correct then that if I have a bass bump in my mains at let us say 6o hz, that I should consider increasing the crossover of the sub (from a much lower frequency) specifically to counteract that hump? Don't get me wrong I am not suggesting a sub is a great way to counteract frequency anomalies in the upper or mid bass, but in the lower mid bass it may be a possibility (note that Magnepan specifically recommends DWMs be used in such a way to smooth even upper bass).

Great discussion. I wish more people would chime in....
Cardiff Kook is offline  
post #22790 of 22792 Old Today, 03:34 PM
Exclusively Servo
 
Rythmik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Austin
Posts: 2,055
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 178 Post(s)
Liked: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimWilson View Post
Just a quick comment on this point Brian... I don't think this would be advisable. If I understand you correctly there would be two different versions of the same model - with the only difference being the port orientation - and personally I think that would do nothing but add confusion for your customers and further clutter the product line, to say nothing of the difficulty it creates for Rythmik having to support, purchase and stock them both. You might want to just decide which model would best suit everyone's needs - the customer and Rythmik - and offer that version. That's just my 2 cents though. YMMV.

No those will be two different model numbers. But their tuning frequency will be same so that the same amplifier can be used for both models.
Rythmik is offline  
post #22791 of 22792 Old Today, 05:55 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RTROSE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: South Central Indiana
Posts: 6,454
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Liked: 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rythmik View Post
.......[*]For FV25, the enclosure will be tall enough (40") that one doesn't even see the port opening with seating position.
Would there be an option or any negative impact laying the sub on it's side? Just thinking about those of us who may not have the vertical clearance in front of our screens for 40".


Quote:
Originally Posted by enricoclaudio View Post
For those who like numbers, +9dB more than the FV15HP @ 12.5Hz means 107.5dB @ 12.5Hz... So the FV25 would be at the same level of Danley DTS-10 LMS-R

Holy crap! That's flippin' AWESOME!


Regards,

RTROSE

My (slower than molasses) HT build here.
Now a Certified Carpet Counselor and Plumbing Counselor (Self given titles - pay no attention).
Enjoying my "almost done" theater.
RTROSE is online now  
post #22792 of 22792 Old Today, 06:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
dominguez1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,266
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 388 Post(s)
Liked: 313
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rythmik View Post
The first rev of both models will be top firing port. I know some customers like to see front firing ports. But my consideration is as follows:
  1. Tuning using port is much easier. Enclsoure size and port length can be easily adjusted. This will shorten turn around time.
  2. For FV25, the enclosure will be tall enough (40") that one doesn't even see the port opening with seating position.
  3. Our FV15HP 12.5hz CEA number measured by Josh is capped by port noise in band 6. Otherwise, the CEA number would have been higher. With top firing, wind noise is less audible and we can expect the number to improve. In addition, there are 3 ports for FV25. If we keep the air velocity same, FV25 will have at least 9db higher CEA output at 12.5hz just by the port opening area. Any additional output due to wind noise being less audible from its side is icing on the cake. For both FV25/FV18, the main increase in output will be in the 12.5hz/16hz range.
After the top firing version is done, we may proceed to front firing version of FV18. FV25 will not use front firing becasue the total length of the slot will be just too long.
Thanks Brian. The performance of those models seem right in line to impress just as the FV15HP did in the 15in driver ported market...IOW, market leader.

I do get concerned about the top firing ports...not from a usability standpoint, but from a tactile response standpoint. With the sound wave firing upwards near tune, it won't have the same Sound Intensity (in the near field) as it would if it were firing in the same direction as the driver. That is something that I cherished with the FV15HP...
dominguez1 is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers

Tags
f12g subwoofer , lv12r , Rythmik , Rythmik Audio , Rythmik Audio F12 Direct Servo Subwoofer , Rythmik Audio F15 Subwoofer , servo sub



Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off