late night thoughts about DIY vs Comercial - Page 10 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #271 of 682 Old 03-22-2008, 10:41 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Kevin Haskins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,008
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by armystud0911 View Post

You bet they are, but if you'll recall, $275 was only the closeout price of that avalanche, it went for $400 for most of the time, that short sale is hardly a true benchmark of the value for LLT alignments as the driver isn't even available anymore at all unless you want to chance the rare ebay auction and likely pay more. The tempest, I can't argue with you there, that guy is gold and I can't wait to get my hands on one, I really hope Kevin can stay in business to keep offering that driver, even if he raises the price 25%, I'd still consider it worth it.

I'm not going out of business!

I know it has been the norm in the high-end DIY driver business but I'm in good shape. I don't expect the Tempest-X price is going to change in the near-term. I'll have some more expensive models with better features and cosmetics to fill-in the line upscale from the Tempest-X for those who want to spend more money.

Kevin Haskins
Exodus Audio
Kevin Haskins is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #272 of 682 Old 03-22-2008, 10:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 4,509
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 607
Quote:
Originally Posted by armystud0911 View Post

Bosso = SMALL SEALED!
Steve = LARGE PORTED!

New folks, that pretty much sums up the past several pages.

The truth be told, I couldn't care less what method is employed to achieve the flattest in room response across the widest possible spectrum, as long as it's achieved.

Steve is absolutely correct in his basic premise, but he's not content with that so he crosses the line with a lot of ridiculous claims that simply aren't true. You cannot...cannot...build a ported sub that covers the Dolby spec. If you attempt to do it, theoretically, you'd end up with an IB that has a hump at 3Hz and a pipe that wouldn't fit in your house.

Steve's theory is that a huge subwoofer that rolls off sharply at 10Hz, in-room, is the best system one can hope for. He's wrong.

I've survived the evolution of this discussion over the last 7 or so years that began with TV's condescension (and there has never been a more condescending blowhard on the boards, IMHO) regarding "tweako-fast bass", decay time, anechoic flat response to tune is best, etc. (or, as TV says, "ect."). During this time, Wiggins and Hyre continually raised the bar of understanding of things like flux modulation, motor topology, transient response, anechoic vs in-room response, and much more. It progressed through the "house curve, F/M era that held fast to the idea of a gradual boosting of the response from 80-20Hz by a huge amount to accommodate the non linear human hearing curve. We have battled through the measurements discussions with Sir Edward, Ilkka, TV, Yates, Nousaine, Chase and CEA. We advanced our way through the IB craze (where ThomasW has presided, and done a great service to everyone, IMO), which served to validate a lot of the points made before then regarding a second order sealed system. Of late, Steve has been crowing about the EBS 4th order reflex alignment. Not an original idea, Steve has tweaked its fine points to everyone's benefit.

You also have to mention TV, Brian Ding, Tom Holman, Klippel, Danley, Seaton, Thilo, Dr. Phil and the king of practical audio engineers, Siegfried Linkwitz, who has been amazingly accessible and willing to help in all of the areas discussed in my own case.

Along the way, groups of people latched on to many of the points discussed and have settled there, which is cool. Happy listeners is what this is all about.

I've pushed the envelope for most of my years in this hobby. It's a lot of fun and results in amazing listening experiences. Advances in driver technology, clean amplifier power in $ per watt and low frequencies in general have made it possible to keep raising the bar. Signal shaping, measurement capability, motor cooling, self noise, digital audio resolution, stored energy, transients and transient response, group delay, are all things that I've studied and experimented with.

It's all just for the sake of discussion. No need to focus on styles of debate. We're all individuals with our own perspectives and quirks. Sure, there's a bit of pushing and shoving, but that makes it even more fun. No one searches harder for the truth than he who has been pushed to his limit, IMO.

I doubt that anyone would argue that the state of the art has been born of these discussions far more so than it would have been if left to the consumer electronics industry.

Bosso
bossobass is online now  
post #273 of 682 Old 03-22-2008, 10:50 AM
Advanced Member
 
Richard Mayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 863
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by bossobass View Post

Of course, it should go without saying that closing a car door does not result in SPL of 125dB @ 3Hz

Should it? I'm thinking most real world VLF effects are actually much louder than you think. 90 dB @ 3 Hz isn't perceivable so unless the car door produces something in the range of +115 dB, we wouldn't perceive it as we do. IIRC that Eminent Tech guy showed some real world measurements in the TRW-17 install thread (+20k forum). Seaton, anyone?

Quote:


How clean? THD is irrelevant at 3Hz. H2, H3, H4 and H5 are inaudible.

If any of the harmonics closes the amplitude of the fundamental (=100% distortion), it will most definitely be audible if assuming that the fundamental is audible. The higher the order of the harmonic, the less amplitude it needs to be audible.
Richard Mayer is offline  
post #274 of 682 Old 03-22-2008, 11:02 AM
AVS Special Member
 
SteveCallas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 6,734
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by army View Post

I'm afraid that isn't always the case anymore, with the advent of some of these new "IB Series" drivers with very low BL and higher Q, things don't model well for many of those new value orientated drivers, especially since many of them don't have the same overexcursion protection that EBS drivers require

Post the paremeters. A driver doesn't need overexcursion protection for EBS use - if you feel some specific driver doesn't have enough excursion capability, then it shouldn't be used as a single driver solution. What you seem to be failing to realize is how much easier and earlier a driver will bottom in an IB, so the solution is to use lots of those "value orientated" drivers. So why would we compare one "value orientated" driver in a LLT to lots in an IB? We wouldn't. If we use 4 drivers here, we use 4 drivers there.

Quote:


Sherv has mentioned some of these and you continue to revert back to the Rl-p18/Avalanche 18 drivers as reference, which cost twice as much.

I don't believe I have "reverted" to either of those drivers once in this thread. He asked about the RL-p18, and he brought up the Avalanche 18. And now you are bringing them up again, so...

Quote:


but what is remarkable about the IB is its ability to play deeper and smoother than even the greatest LLT's

Please define what you mean by smoother. A LLT will maintain better linearity to a much lower frequency than any sealed counterpart - it will even have more output below tuning for a while as Ilkka's measurements have shown. If you want to get into this "Sealed has extension to 3hz, but at -45db average output" thing, and you consider that deeper, then more power to you. I tend to look at things in a more real world, what-actually-matters type of light.

Quote:


What you do seem set on convincing him of though is that his endeavors to try the sealed versions are a waste before he even tries it.

Are we even in the same thread? I don't think discussion of him trying a sealed sub ever came up here.

Quote:


You bet they are, but if you'll recall, $275 was only the closeout price of that avalanche, it went for $400 for most of the time, that short sale is hardly a true benchmark of the value for LLT alignments as the driver isn't even available anymore at all unless you want to chance the rare ebay auction and likely pay more.

So what exactly is your point? I said the Avalanche 18 at $275 was one of the better deals I've come across. The AA Poly 6.5" at $35 was also a great deal, and it is gone now too. You snooze you lose. There are a variety of other suitable drivers available.

Quote:


Just because a driver isn't tested doesn't make it not worthy of note or recommendation.

Who said anything to that effect?

Quote:


If a single Rl-p18 offered the same or better performance than an equivalent cost IB array in an actual IB alignment then you can hold your statements with pride

You're really coming way out of left field with this stuff today. Which statement could I hold with pride?


Quote:
Originally Posted by ssabripo View Post

It's quite simple: what is the best performance per dollar one can get for $X....choose any driver, any alignment, etc, and make it happen.

Maybe I'm expecting too much from you. Please explain how we can prove "best performance" comparing different drivers if we don't know what the performance of each driver is? It's not a rhetorical question, it's quite simple. Your exercise is flawed unless you have a full set of measurements on each driver we would discuss. What we do have measurements on is one alignment vs another.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

SteveCallas is offline  
post #275 of 682 Old 03-22-2008, 11:13 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ssabripo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Plantation, Floriduh
Posts: 6,008
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveCallas View Post

Maybe I'm expecting too much from you. Please explain how we can prove "best performance" comparing different drivers if we don't know what the performance of each driver is? It's not a rhetorical question, it's quite simple. Your exercise is flawed unless you have a full set of measurements on each driver we would discuss. What we do have measurements on is one alignment vs another.

I guess I'm just as guilty I keep hoping that somehow, someday, you will understand basics, but so far nothing. Most have given up on you, but not me Steve...not yet! I know most tell me I expect too much from you, but I got faith!

so let me see if I can attempt to reign in your spin once again, since you are determined to dance around the issue YOU brought up. Here is your original post which I disagreed with:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...&postcount=204
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveCallas View Post

We can powder coat this topic anyway anyone wants, talking about average needs and what's "good enough", but at the end of the day, if performance per dollar is your goal, large and ported always wins. Performance just doesn't mean louder either, it means significantly less distortion, more linear FR, deeper extension, and greater headroom. Performance does not mean a small size your wife is willing to accept. Different priorities for different people and all that jazz, just keep the facts facts and the opinions opinions.

here is my reply:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...&postcount=207

an IB, with the same budget you may have for an LLT solution, will give you MORE performance for the dollar, with significantly less distortion, deeper extension, greater headroom, and arguably more natural FR.

for months and months, including this particular thread, you keep stating the same theme: if performance per dollar is your goal, LLT is the obvious choice.............and you are quite simply WRONG on all accounts, unless you now have the added requirement that you want to compare driver to driver.


so lets get it straight from you Steve....which is it? what exactly are you debating here?

are you debating that given a particular budget, the best performance per dollar for your goal is still an LLT?

are you debating that the conditions are that we keep the same driver? if so, what is the point of that? why would anyone compare alignments from the same driver when certain drivers perform better in certain alignments than others??


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
ssabripo is offline  
post #276 of 682 Old 03-22-2008, 11:17 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Thomas-W's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: 5280'
Posts: 1,379
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveCallas View Post

So why would we compare one "value orientated" driver in a LLT to lots in an IB? We wouldn't. If we use 4 drivers here, we use 4 drivers there.

There are no "value oriented" drivers for ported alignments, those are exclusive to IB designs.

So it comes down to comparing total dollars spent on drivers for either alignment. And that's of course what ssabripo is doing.

If the logic behind this is lost on you, consider staying awake in class...


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Thomas-W is offline  
post #277 of 682 Old 03-22-2008, 11:26 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ssabripo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Plantation, Floriduh
Posts: 6,008
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas-W View Post

There are no "value oriented" drivers for ported alignments, those are exclusive to IB designs.

So it comes down to comparing total dollars spent on drivers for either alignment. And that's of course what ssabripo is doing.

If the logic behind this is lost on you, consider staying awake in class...

whew!! thank you! for a second I thought I was not making that clear enough for steve, given his past couple of replies


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
ssabripo is offline  
post #278 of 682 Old 03-22-2008, 12:00 PM
 
goneten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Africa
Posts: 3,681
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by bossobass View Post

You cannot...cannot...build a ported sub that covers the Dolby spec

Interesting claim.

--Regards,
goneten is offline  
post #279 of 682 Old 03-22-2008, 12:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
SteveCallas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 6,734
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssabripo View Post

an IB, with the same budget you may have for an LLT solution, will give you MORE performance for the dollar, with significantly less distortion, deeper extension, greater headroom, and arguably more natural FR.

for months and months, including this particular thread, you keep stating the same theme: if performance per dollar is your goal, LLT is the obvious choice.............and you are quite simply WRONG on all accounts, unless you now have the added requirement that you want to compare driver to driver.

You already stated you feel an IB is a cheaper way to get more performance - I explained why it is not cheaper. Then you started saying use 8 of driver X in an IB vs 2 of driver Y in LLT, but why would we not use 8 of driver X in a LLT? That's your first mistake. By trying to use different drivers in your comparisons, you are leaving it up in the air as to which performans better, as we don't know. That's your second mistake. The inflated price differential you made up isn't accurate, as you left out many things needed for an IB, including EQ. You can use the same number of drivers in a LLT as an IB for roughly the same cost. If you start wanting to use 8+ drivers in the IB, just turn it into a SLLT. You pay $15 more for a port and you end up with tons more clean headroom. Anyway you slice it, porting wins the performance per dollar game.

Quote:


so lets get it straight from you Steve....which is it? what exactly are you debating here?

The same thing I have said from the start of this thread - when it comes to performance per dollar, large and ported always wins. No spin, just a fruitless "lab exercise" you created that you can't see the error in.

Quote:


are you debating that given a particular budget, the best performance per dollar for your goal is still an LLT?

Let's be a bit more generic by saying large and ported due to the fact that a $300 budget can't get you enough displacement to tune low, but you're basically there in concept.

Quote:


are you debating that the conditions are that we keep the same driver? if so, what is the point of that? why would anyone compare alignments from the same driver when certain drivers perform better in certain alignments than others??

How else would you be able to prove your silly "lab exercise"? If we don't know what driver X or Y are capable of, how do we know if driver X offers more performance per dollar than driver Y? You are the one who set up the faulty experiment and now you are the one getting frustrated at the repercussions of it's own irrationality. ssabripo, I welcome you to trying to debate ssabripo.

My stance has been constant throughout this thread and others. You went and convoluted everything, and now you think you actually made a point somewhere in this mess. More power to you.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas View Post

There are no "value oriented" drivers for ported alignments, those are exclusive to IB designs.

That is fundamentally flawed in so many ways. Examples would be great.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ssabripo View Post

whew!! thank you! for a second I thought I was not making that clear enough for steve, given his past couple of replies

Then we have this guy, so desperate for backup that he agrees with that flawed statement.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

SteveCallas is offline  
post #280 of 682 Old 03-22-2008, 12:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TheEAR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Montreal,CANADA
Posts: 3,464
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Let me get some popcorn...

I see startling advances in subwoofer design being made here.

Ask yourself mortal , do you have as much displacement as me ? The answer is no unless you have a Windmere fan sub.
TheEAR is offline  
post #281 of 682 Old 03-22-2008, 01:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ssabripo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Plantation, Floriduh
Posts: 6,008
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveCallas View Post

You already stated you feel an IB is a cheaper way to get more performance - I explained why it is not cheaper.

........basic arithmetic much?

have you tried or participated in building an IB yet to make this silly statement? of course not....you just make sh!t up as you go along, you know, the callas way.

dual ava18" LLT's:


IB:
8x IB15" drivers: $800 shipped
2 sheets of MDF wood: $90
glue, sandpaper, bondo, insert your favorite item: $200!! (take more if you need be)

so for roughly 1/2 the price of the cost of dual LLT's, you get an IB setup which will best it in every category by a wide margin, and yet you still argue about numbers? LOL



Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveCallas View Post

Then you started saying use 8 of driver X in an IB vs 2 of driver Y in LLT, but why would we not use 8 of driver X in a LLT? That's your first mistake.

really? how is that a mistake again? enlighten all of us Steve...apparently we are ALL wrong and you are right on this one.

so someone who wants to start a subwoofer system, and wants the best performance for his dollar should NOT use 8 of driver X, but rather use 2 of driver Y in LLT because YOU SAID so? gotcha!

Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveCallas View Post

By trying to use different drivers in your comparisons, you are leaving it up in the air as to which performans better, as we don't know. That's your second mistake.

no my friend, you are the only one who doesn't know in this particular scenario....even the most beginner of enthusiasts can certainly see how 8 drivers with 30mm Xmax, good Q, descent Le, in an IB alignment will perform FAR better than two drivers of 27mm Xmax in a large ported enclosure.

i'm sorry you can't see that. Most intelligent humans can.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveCallas View Post

The inflated price differential you made up isn't accurate, as you left out many things needed for an IB, including EQ.

See BOM above. I can also attest to Nicol27 and a few other LLT owners to what their cost was.

no need for EQ? LMAO.....Steve, you and Tacki are THE ONLY LLT owners that are not using an EQ of some sort, and yet you make that to be the norm....gimme a break. But hey, I'll play along...go ahead an tack on the price of the EQ as well...that's an extra $300....which brings the grand total to a STILL $800 short of dual LLT's

Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveCallas View Post

You can use the same number of drivers in a LLT as an IB for roughly the same cost. If you start wanting to use 8+ drivers in the IB, just turn it into a SLLT. You pay $15 more for a port and you end up with tons more clean headroom. Anyway you slice it, porting wins the performance per dollar game.

so you just agreed that an IB (whether a regular IB or the "SLLT") is still head and shoulders above single LLT designs that cost more? !!! took you a while, didn't it!

Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveCallas View Post

the same thing I have said from the start of this thread - when it comes to performance per dollar, large and ported always wins. No spin, just a fruitless "lab exercise" you created that you can't see the error in.

oh boy....back to square one.


Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveCallas View Post

My stance has been constant throughout this thread and others. You went and convoluted everything, and now you think you actually made a point somewhere in this mess. More power to you.

read again.


Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveCallas View Post

Then we have this guy, so desperate for backup that he agrees with that flawed statement.

the day I get desperate for backup is the day I quit the game.

and yet, in thread after thread, forum after forum, month after month, you seem to be in this fruitless battle against everyone, trying to convince yourself that your flawed and illogical stance on what is better, what performs better, etc, is the right one......

it's steve against the world


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
ssabripo is offline  
post #282 of 682 Old 03-22-2008, 02:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
SteveCallas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 6,734
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 18
It's your choice of course for parts and construction techniques, but you spent way, way more than is needed to to built two LLTs. Way more. Also, EQ isn't needed for a LLT, whereas it is mandatory for sealed due to the rolloff.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ssabripo View Post

so someone who wants to start a subwoofer system, and wants the best performance for his dollar should NOT use 8 of driver X, but rather use 2 of driver Y in LLT because YOU SAID so? gotcha!

I'm pretty sure I didn't type in Spanish, as I clearly stated if you want to use 8 drivers for IB, why wouldn't you also use 8 for LLT. Just read my posts.

Quote:


i'm sorry you can't see that. Most intelligent humans can.

You're going on and on about something you have misread. It's not going to be 8 driver vs 2, it would be 8 vs 8 or 2 vs 2.

Quote:


so you just agreed that an IB (whether a regular IB or the "SLLT") is still head and shoulders above single LLT designs that cost more? !!! took you a while, didn't it!

What? First, a SLLT isn't an IB, it's a ported subwoofer, and second, I brought it up because it may be difficult to fit 8 LLTs in some rooms. Whether you build a 1,2, or 10 driver SLLT or discrete LLTs, the performance is the same. At some varying point, if you use enough multiples of a driver, it would likely become cheaper to go SLLT rather than building multiple enclosures, as the baffle wall of a SLLT is essentially already built. If that's what you have desperately trying so hard to say, then realize that I don't disagree with that comment. It's still a large ported subwoofer.

Now you can continue to phrase things as me being against the world, blah blah blah - if that makes you feel better, that's nice. My view is still consistant and correct however - large and ported gives the best performance per dollar. Whether everyone or nobody agrees with it, that doesn't affect the fact that it is correct. Additionally, your lab exercise is still a flawed one, and now it would appear that all these posts spent discussing it seems like a waste because you have been going on due to misreading my comments.

For a quick cost breakdown, the driver(s), amp(s), wood, glue, binding posts, wire, tools, etc. would cancel themselves out when comparing designs. So we're left with enclosure tube ($85 for two), port tube ($15 is enough for plenty), legs ($10), and a fabric sock ($15) for the LLT, and EQ ($200) for the IB. Not only does it cost less, but the LLT will offer more performance.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

SteveCallas is offline  
post #283 of 682 Old 03-22-2008, 02:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Thomas-W's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: 5280'
Posts: 1,379
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveCallas View Post

EQ isn't needed for a LLT

Not when you 'cook' the books using a text file to create your plots.

BTW isn't it amazing you're still using the same plot, even though you moved to a new location? Surely you don't think people haven't noticed?
Quote:


I clearly stated if you want to use 8 drivers for IB, why wouldn't you also use 8 for LLT. Just read my posts.

You're going on and on about something you have misread. It's not going to be 8 driver vs 2, it would be 8 vs 8 or 2 vs

Since--you're--really--'slow'--on--the--uptake--we'll--repeat.

The comparison is between the total investment paid for drivers, not the number of drivers purchased

IS THAT CLEAR?


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Thomas-W is offline  
post #284 of 682 Old 03-22-2008, 02:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
SteveCallas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 6,734
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas View Post

Not when you 'cook' the books using a text file to create your plots.

You mean the one that was later proven to be more accurate than the file that existed at the time? That was used on the close mic measurement of my driver. Whether sealed or ported, one may have some peaks and nulls created by the room that may benefit from EQ, but a sealed sub needs EQ jut to counteract the rolled off low end whereas a ported does not. Therefore it is mandatory with sealed to achieve similar performance to ported.

Quote:


BTW isn't it amazing you're still using the same plot, even though you moved to a new location? Surely you don't think people haven't noticed?

For one who is so keen to my actions, surely you would have seen one of my posts where I explained that my subwoofer is in a new room and that I would be lucky to maintain such a great FR. I wouldn't know for sure though, as I haven't bothered to measure my sub's response in my new place, and yeah, I've been here for nearly a year. It sounded good from the get go, so I see no need.

Quote:


The comparison is between the total investment paid for drivers, not the number of drivers purchased

IS THAT CLEAR?

It's crystal clear. Point?


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

SteveCallas is offline  
post #285 of 682 Old 03-22-2008, 02:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Thomas-W's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: 5280'
Posts: 1,379
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveCallas View Post

It's crystal clear. Point?

You've now validated Sherv's comparison.

Thank you.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Thomas-W is offline  
post #286 of 682 Old 03-22-2008, 03:22 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
penngray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 26,779
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Quote:


EQ isn't needed for a LLT


EQ isn't needed for a IB solution either then!

It is not "open-minded" to reject knowledge - Bob Lee
penngray is offline  
post #287 of 682 Old 03-22-2008, 03:42 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 4,509
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 607
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveCallas View Post

Whether sealed or ported, one may have some peaks and nulls created by the room that may benefit from EQ, but a sealed sub needs EQ jut to counteract the rolled off low end whereas a ported does not. Therefore it is mandatory with sealed to achieve similar performance to ported.

Quote:


I wouldn't know for sure though, as I haven't bothered to measure my sub's response in my new place, and yeah, I've been here for nearly a year. It sounded good from the get go, so I see no need.

What if the EQ is used in reverse to create the flat response?

How convenient that you've never bothered to graph your in room response, but still choose to blather on about the perfect mate of your subwoofer to any room in existence.

I would especially enjoy seeing the flat response below 15Hz with tons of headroom and no distortion.

And I was sure that you made it clear that it was a bad thing to rate a subwoofers performance based on subjective listening. Sounds like you owe Craig about 2,000 apologies. "Sounds good, no need to measure". Got it.

Bosso
bossobass is online now  
post #288 of 682 Old 03-22-2008, 03:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 4,509
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 607
Quote:
Originally Posted by goneten View Post

Interesting claim.

--Regards,

Should be easy enough to refute if it's only a claim.

Bosso
bossobass is online now  
post #289 of 682 Old 03-22-2008, 03:55 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ssabripo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Plantation, Floriduh
Posts: 6,008
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 13
seeing as you dug your own hole for now, i'll just address this last tid bit of wisdom you kindly shared with us:
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveCallas View Post

It's your choice of course for parts and construction techniques, but you spent way, way more than is needed to to built two LLTs. Way more.

really?
so exactly where would you have "cut" corners here steve ........

avalanche drivers too much? what is the price of an equivalent RL-P18 today?

Sonotube too much? ok, take away the $40 extra we all paid for it, since we should go by your price.

glue too much? sure, buy a family size from costco and subtract the extra $5.79.

just in case it escaped you, you do realize that the total in red INCLUDES the electronics. the total in blue on the right, includes just the material building.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
ssabripo is offline  
post #290 of 682 Old 03-22-2008, 04:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TheEAR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Montreal,CANADA
Posts: 3,464
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Popcorn is out.

This became sealed is better than ported,ported became LLT and went to face IB in the course of events ! Political manupulation

Now Steve and Sherv are fighting over glue savings and $40
too much for a sonotube(s) !


Thread of the year

Ask yourself mortal , do you have as much displacement as me ? The answer is no unless you have a Windmere fan sub.
TheEAR is offline  
post #291 of 682 Old 03-22-2008, 05:10 PM
Member
 
Warmon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 142
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10

Warmon -
Warmon is offline  
post #292 of 682 Old 03-22-2008, 06:05 PM
AVS Special Member
 
SteveCallas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 6,734
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 18
It's nearly impossible to even have a meaningful debate here anymore because you have guys who try so hard to prove something out of nothing. We've gone on now for something like three pages and ssabripo hasn't done anything to refute that large and ported offers the most performanc per dollar except show that he spent way more on his LLTs than he needed to.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bosso View Post

And I was sure that you made it clear that it was a bad thing to rate a subwoofers performance based on subjective listening. Sounds like you owe Craig about 2,000 apologies. "Sounds good, no need to measure". Got it.

How am I rating a subwoofer's performance? The point of measuring response in a new room would be to make sure the phase is correct around the crossover and that I'm not sitting in a big null or peak. I already know what my sub can do after having it for over two and a half years.

Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray View Post

EQ isn't needed for a IB solution either then!

That would be great if not for the fact that it wasn't true.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

SteveCallas is offline  
post #293 of 682 Old 03-22-2008, 06:10 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
penngray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 26,779
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Quote:


That was be great if not for the fact that it wasn't true.


How is this not true? I dont remember ever reading that I had to EQ my IB at all. Only if it needed it.

I have an EP2500 amp running my 4 Q18s in my ceiling NO EQ needed at all. I ran the REW a long time ago and posted the graphs too, pretty damn good for no EQ. The point is that an EQ can be equally important in either design or we dont need one at all for either design. Its splitting hairs.


I will build two 310L boxes for my TC2000 15" speaker...ported, etc. I will post later on which is better. Although the boxes will be in an acoustically treated HT room.

All I know right now is that my IB kicks the crap out of any sub I have had in my family room. Ported or sealed, it didnt matter the IB is just effortless in what it does.

I suspect BOTH ARE GREAT and this is one of many debates in the audio world that is up there with arguing about religion. Its just preference and people are too stubborn to see the facts.

It is not "open-minded" to reject knowledge - Bob Lee
penngray is offline  
post #294 of 682 Old 03-22-2008, 06:17 PM
Advanced Member
 
geoffstgermaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Winnipeg, Canada
Posts: 504
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssabripo View Post

just in case it escaped you, you do realize that the total in red INCLUDES the electronics. the total in blue on the right, includes just the material building.

To be fair the number includes a $650 amplifier.
geoffstgermaine is offline  
post #295 of 682 Old 03-22-2008, 07:05 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Looneybomber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Lawrence, KS
Posts: 4,668
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEAR View Post

Popcorn is out.

<-- Pretzels and Micheal Jackson playing...Nappy Root's just came on.

YID DIY
Looneybomber is offline  
post #296 of 682 Old 03-22-2008, 07:22 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Looneybomber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Lawrence, KS
Posts: 4,668
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Attn: SPEEZY. Re: Cooling.

Hey man, why not try the liquid cooling systems offered for computers? You could retrofit it to cool the magnets of a woofer, and run the coolent lines outside the enclosure. Seal the gromets and you're good to go. Cost will be quite high after it's all said and done, though you could potentially cool the magnets by sticking the radiator in some kind of refrigeration unit.

YID DIY
Looneybomber is offline  
post #297 of 682 Old 03-22-2008, 07:40 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Ricci's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Louisville KY
Posts: 5,094
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 204
IB:
8x IB15" drivers: $800 shipped
2 sheets of MDF wood: $90
glue, sandpaper, bondo, insert your favorite item: $200!! (take more if you need be)

Ssabripo,
You forgot to add in an amp. Just sayin!


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Ricci is offline  
post #298 of 682 Old 03-22-2008, 08:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TheEAR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Montreal,CANADA
Posts: 3,464
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Each party is pushing its own favorite approach to sub bass. Each will twist the positives and amplify negatives of an opposing design to best appeal to the new recruits.

With LLT and IB ...EQ is needed to get rid of dips and peaks,as with any sub.Honestly I have to hear a perfect room where you just place speakers,sub(s) and get a flat response at listening position.

I use ZERO EQ boost on my sealed and get serious extension thanks to the room gain.

Ask yourself mortal , do you have as much displacement as me ? The answer is no unless you have a Windmere fan sub.
TheEAR is offline  
post #299 of 682 Old 03-22-2008, 08:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TheEAR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Montreal,CANADA
Posts: 3,464
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Looneybomber View Post

Attn: SPEEZY. Re: Cooling.

Hey man, why not try the liquid cooling systems offered for computers? You could retrofit it to cool the magnets of a woofer, and run the coolent lines outside the enclosure. Seal the gromets and you're good to go. Cost will be quite high after it's all said and done, though you could potentially cool the magnets by sticking the radiator in some kind of refrigeration unit.

Bosso's system being a very compact sealed and powered by a very capable amp can get hot inside. And this would have to take a few hours of non stop pounding to stress the VC to the point of failure.

Even JL Audio's very high power and very compact sealed Fathom and Gotham do not employ motor cooling,a cooling can only be good as part of the power is transformed into heat. And with the VC getting bursts of several KW will get hot.

The cooler the motor the more efficient it will be, magnets when heated loose efficiency. Same as with competition electric motors you cool(freeze) to get best results.

I would like to see comparo data comparing his cooled driver(motor) and one with no extra cooling.Even with no such data I see the gains,minute but real.

Ask yourself mortal , do you have as much displacement as me ? The answer is no unless you have a Windmere fan sub.
TheEAR is offline  
post #300 of 682 Old 03-22-2008, 08:34 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 4,509
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 607
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Mayer View Post

Should it? I'm thinking most real world VLF effects are actually much louder than you think. 90 dB @ 3 Hz isn't perceivable so unless the car door produces something in the range of +115 dB, we wouldn't perceive it as we do.

If any of the harmonics closes the amplitude of the fundamental (=100% distortion), it will most definitely be audible if assuming that the fundamental is audible. The higher the order of the harmonic, the less amplitude it needs to be audible.

It's not too difficult to measure the closing of a car door for the people whose job it is to isolate the combination of frequencies that result in the perception of quality as it relates to the event. I've seen more than a few graphs of these measurements, all to 1Hz.

I assure you that it isn't a triple digit SPL event, much less all of the energy at one frequency.

Every one of these companies meticulously design every part of the door mechanism, including precise shaping and material of the gaskets, to emphasize (or exaggerate) the single digits end of the spectrum and to de-emphasize the audible end of the spectrum, as the perception is equated with quality by the average human.

When discussing subsonic frequency, please note the name of those frequencies again for reference. SUB sonics, as in not audible. Again, I assure you that 100% THD at 3Hz is not audible.

Since Thigpen has no reference, his are extrapolations, just as the F/M curves are, as they also had no real reference because they simply had no way to generate -20Hz sound with zero non linear distortion. Their tests concerned audibility, not perception, of single sine wave tones, nor did they employ measurements of ELF in everyday musical and non musical events.

That's not to take anything away from the TRW, an amazing accomplishment. But, too much emphasis is placed on the audibility of frequencies that are not audible. There are virtually no soundtracks that contain single digit effects encoded at 0dBFS. Most are -20, (95dB in the LFE channel, if you listen at reference level) and don't exist as single events, but are part of a wide range of simultaneous frequencies across a wide spectrum.

But hey, you can easily go with the conventional wisdom and tune to 15Hz, or lose more output and tune to 10Hz, as TV and Dr. HSU have obviously chosen to do (for some unknown reason) and live happily ever after.

I have 10-80Hz covered. The spec is to 3Hz and is now available in lossless formats and the fact of the matter is that there is content to be played back to that threshold and below, so there it is. I fail to see the ready acceptance of the TRW, with all of its attending baggage, but so much resistance to attempting to reach the same goal with transducers, or by any other method.

It's actually relatively easy to accomplish, so why not? You can always install a HP filter and move on with your life. These 'Steve' debates are simply about the fact that he has no way (as in NO WAY) to reach these frequencies at any level, yet he insists that his subwoofer has the best frequency response with no EQ required and no distortion, etc., etc.

BTW, this post isn't directed at you in any way. I enjoy your posts and have for a long time. My comments are directed toward your questions, which are worth answering with the longer version.

Bosso
bossobass is online now  
Reply DIY Speakers and Subs

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


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