AVS Forum banner

Vas Strikes Again

5K views 71 replies 17 participants last post by  vasyachkin 
#1 ·
i recently reconsidered my approach to ultimate bass.


i have previously suggested:

http://www.diy-av.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=29


but now i realize we can in fact do much, MUCH better.


here is what you do. you take 3 types of 18" woofers each in its own sealed enclosure.


"top" - 96-98 db efficiency 8-12 mm xmax. 800 - 1600W. ex: JBL 2242, BEYMA 18SW1600ND


"middle" - 92-95 db efficiency 15-25 mm xmax. 1000W - 2000W. JBL 2269, TC Sounds Worx


"bottom" - 88-90 db efficiency 30 mm + xmax. 2000W + TC Sounds LMS Ultra


also VERY IMPORTANT from "top" to "bottom" BL^2/Re should increse VERY SIGNIFICANTLY as it does in the driver examples i have given.


now there would not be any crossover ! all 3 would operate in parallel but each one would be EQUALIZED differently. the combined resulting bass subsystem would be used up to about 200 - 300 hz.


the "top" driver would be essentially run unequalized. the chamber volume would be tuned to limit excursion to prevent damage and distortion.


the "middle" driver would be given a bigger enclosure, more power, and its midbass would be attenuated above 100 hz or so. so it would be about -3db @ 100hz and -6db @ 200hz


the "bottom" driver would be given the most power, about same size enclosure as "middle" driver and it would be rolled off starting from 30hz or so. so it would be -3db @ 30hz for example, -6db @60hz, - 10db @ 100hz and -20db @ 200 hz


basically each driver would be allowed to do what it does best but without crossing any one over to any other so that they can all combine and reinforce each other.


both the entire volume of all 3 boxes and the entire surface of all 3 diaphragms will be used for all frequencies ( maximum utilization ) but at the lowest frequencies ( where box volume is the constraint ) there will be bias towards high BL drivers that can compress the box volume better and at higher frequencies ( where moving mass is the constraint ) there will be bias towards lighter coned drivers.


now go build it. you can thank me later.
 
See less See more
#28 ·
i think 18sound is italian ricci. the 21" version of the nlw9600 line is crazy nuts, while the 18" version is just pretty nuts. i've been curious what they cost as well. i believe the official importer is some shop in florida, but i haven't tried to contact them. you can find the shop on the 18sounds website regional distributor information.
 
#30 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivan Beaver /forum/post/18428549


By equalizing out the upper freq, that is a form of lowpass filter (ie crossover).


How exactly do you plan on dealing with the phase interaction that you will likely have? So that you don't have all sorts of notches in the resonse.

oops missed that post. since 90% of your post was a quote of my post i just thought it was my post and LTD was the first to answer.


well i don't plan to deal with it. if it worked for Everest
 
#31 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivan Beaver /forum/post/18431493


But he wants you to spend YOUR money (and time) to prove him wrong.


And let's say you did prove him wrong, he would just claim that you didn't do it right, so it MUST be your fault.


His ideas are ALWAYS right (at least in his mind anyway)



Just give it a little time-and this idea will fade away- like all the others.

now now, stop crying. big boys don't cry.


i didn't say my ideas are always right. they usually are, but not not always.


also there is no need for lying. you don't know what i will say if somebody builds it and proves me wrong.


and if you don't want this idea to "fade away like the others" - build it. only 2 things can happen if you do - either it works as i say it will or it doesn't - then we will all have learned something. either way your effort will not be wasted.
 
#32 ·
Kyle don't make me spank you. That was a blatant hijack - you kids should know better.


that said, that 18Sound would be a good choice for the "top" driver in my setup. i mentioned Beyma and JBL because i had used their products. but 18Sound enjoys a good reputation for woofers so.
 
#33 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by vasyachkin /forum/post/18429199


that's right. people like myself or Einstein are beyond such silly games. we think in abstract conceptual terms.


also i am not a "smart person" - i am a genius. thank you. smart people are a dime a dozen

Oh sorry for hurting your ego, genius.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vasyachkin /forum/post/18429199


this phase thing is something that used to bother me and the reason why i haven't come out with this idea sooner. because i had this idea since forever but i always felt that phase would be a problem.


then i learned that the most high end speaker JBL makes ( the Everest ) in fact gradually tapers off one of the woofers above 150hz while the other is run full range. at this point i thought if it's good enough for the Everest then it's good enough for me. i mean obviously JBL measured their speaker - it's the one thing they're good at - measuring stuff.

That makes you no better than JBL, right? But since you don't believe in measurements anyway... the point is moot.


Quote:
Originally Posted by vasyachkin /forum/post/18429199


i guess this is where LTD comes out screaming Vas you didn't invent this - 2.5 way speakers were around since forever ! to which i would give the very scientific response of "shut up !" hehe. yes. i have merely refined and upgraded a tried and true technology.


now in addition to that finite impulse response filters can manipulate phase and even though it is quite difficult for bass it CAN be done. i have specifically consulted on that matter on DiyAudio. i don't remember the explanation i was given i just remember that its possible.

I - caaaaaan'ttttt - rememmmberrrr - whaaaatttt - I ---- diddddd ---- lasssstttt --- nightttt -- I was just tooooooo drunk.


Quote:
Originally Posted by vasyachkin /forum/post/18429199


also there is an alternate way of thinking that goes just do it and let the ear sort it out. ears are notorious for seemingly defying the laws of physics (laws of physics as they understood by simple people that is). in this case however it probably won't even get to the point where ears would have to work their magic.


bottom line: Trust in Vas !

Ears are also notoriously subjective as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vasyachkin /forum/post/18429795


so you're 2 years behind my thinking. what you are describing is precisely my PREVIOUS guideline.

http://www.diy-av.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=29


does it work ? yes. is it optimal ? no.


why is it not optimal ? because at any given frequency either the speaker works or the sub, but not both. you're flushing potential output down the drain.


once you move from crossovers to parallel operation you can now have any number of different drivers with individual EQs. you can have 7 if you want - and you would still be at maximum possible efficiency. while with a system that uses crossovers 7 drivers would mean only 1/7th of the system is used.


so you're not looking at the issue from the right angle. it's not 2 vs 3. its crossover vs EQ.

Um, it's burp vs fart?? That's what it seems to me at least. You can have a number of farts with their own EQ. A collective number of farts is still going to sound like a fart.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vasyachkin /forum/post/18429795


basically if all good drivers can cover about 4 octaves then there is simply no need for more than 2 crossover points.


but within that 10hz - 300hz range which most woofers can cover each woofer will be OPTIMAL at around its in-box resonance frequency. a woofer can ( AND MUST ! ) be used both above and below resonance. most people use them only above resonance. BAG END uses it only below resonance. both approaches are idiotic. you have to use the woofer AROUND it's resonance ( mostly below though ) - this is the brilliant revelation for the day.

I've been doing that since i learned what WinISD is. Is it brilliant? No. Is it a good way to get more bass from cheap woofers? Yes. Does it do good for more than two woofers? NO.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vasyachkin /forum/post/18429795


what happens here is you're building a system where for every crucial frequency ( 35hz - 200hz is approximately the range that must be uncompromised for a perfect bass ) there is an optimally matched sub but the other ones are also providing reinforcement. this allows you to precisely dial in the required performance over the entire frequency range into a system. you no longer have a system which has this but doesn't have that - it just has everything now. and it accomplishes this without any redundancy like having one cabinet above crossover and one below - instead it is synergistic.


by contrast a traditional system is doomed to one of 2 possible outcomes:


1 - it will be strongest at one thing, and weaker at everything else.


2 - it will be a hugely redundant multi-way design.


i just need to point out that optimal is not the same as most efficient ! optimal means most efficient PER UNIT OF BOX VOLUME. now you will probably want to bring up Hoffman's iron law however i am one of the very few people who actually understand what Hoffman's iron law MEANS so spare it. also optimum means MAXIMUM OUTPUT ( regardless of efficiency ) per unit of volume.

Hoffman's Iron Law holds true for every subwoofer system including one with multiple drivers. The more drivers you have, the less benefit each driver individually contributes to the system as a whole. And there is of course the dude who will mess up the settings on all the woofers. What would happen then eh?


I might be drunk but i sure ain't stupid.

Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray /forum/post/18430336


Sigh....someone want to tell VAS for the 4th time that EQing slopes (high pass/low pass) is what someone smart would call a crossover

"True dat". I wish i could be right there in NY (btw Vas said he left New York like 5 months ago, because he couldn't stand the noise, yet in his location he says NY). I wish i could slap you Vas in the face then offer you a coffee to wake up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vasyachkin /forum/post/18432403


now now, stop crying. big boys don't cry.


i didn't say my ideas are always right. they usually are, but not not always.


also there is no need for lying. you don't know what i will say if somebody builds it and proves me wrong.


and if you don't want this idea to "fade away like the others" - build it. only 2 things can happen if you do - either it works as i say it will or it doesn't - then we will all have learned something. either way your effort will not be wasted.

Or not build it and let it fade away since it's stupid. Maybe YOU would learn something if someone builds it. Everyone else already knows the outcome.
 
#34 ·
the idea of splitting the bass between high excursion and high efficiency drivers/designs is a good idea, but is also old news man. i've been saying this for quite some time now, though i don't claim credit for the idea. if you read the literature, you can see the idea goes way back.


if you really want to score your "genius", then say something worthy of the title. we'll gladly implement your ideas and give you credit. but so far, you have provided little other than weird comedy.


 
#35 ·
Eh, at least let's give Vas some credit for providing comedy. If he wasn't here... drunk people like me wouldn't bother posting.
 
#37 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by vasyachkin /forum/post/18432624


* joins penngray on my ignore list *


ah ! the sound of silence - isn't it beautiful ?

I never saw the point of an ignore list. Is this yahfoo messy, er, messenger? Educate me.
Anyway, i'm so f'n glad that the great Vas doesn't have to read my posts. Saves him another minute of his great life.
 
#38 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 /forum/post/18432571


the idea of splitting the bass between high excursion and high efficiency drivers/designs is a good idea, but is also old news man.

The idea is not new. But everybody does it wrong because nobody understands the physics of TS theory.


Even i, the genius, only vaguely understand what i am saying here.


The ones who were saying that crossover and EQ is the same thing are partially right. The difference is in the way we think of them, not in what they are.


There should be some OPTIMAL attenuations slope ( whether you call it EQ or Crossover ) for maximum efficiency ( between low MMS and high BL driver ) which could be calculated mathematically but this is not something i am willing to undertake. Instead i am merely saying that this optimum slope is likely to be very shallow and a function of the woofers themselves. the more similar the woofers the shallower the attenuation slope. if the two woofers are the same the optimum attenuation slope is zero db/oct.


But what people do is they always use the same 24db/oct slope for any combination of prosound type woofer and car audio type subwoofer. this is wrong - that's what i am saying here.


and there really is no need to use drivers that are so dissimilar in the first place. the reason we tend to use such dissimilar woofers is because of that 24db/oct crossover which we don't need in the first place.


instead our woofer and subwoofer should be more similar to each other - like 2269 JBL and LMS Ultra for example - which are only about 5 decibel apart in efficiency and only 50% apart in xmax. and the transition between them should be much more gradual - perhaps about 3 to 6 db/oct in the case of these particular two woofers. this is more like an EQ than like a crossover however you can call it what you please.


the losses due to phase cancellation can either be addressed by rounding the slope to the nearest crossover slope that doesn't result in cancellation ( 6db/oct ) or by using FIR phase processing. or it may be determined that for a particular design the level of this cancellation is not significant and doesn't need to be addressed.


the point is to treat the transition intelligently rather than blindly as you all do.
 
#39 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 /forum/post/18432307


i think 18sound is italian ricci. the 21" version of the nlw9600 line is crazy nuts, while the 18" version is just pretty nuts. i've been curious what they cost as well. i believe the official importer is some shop in florida, but i haven't tried to contact them. you can find the shop on the 18sounds website regional distributor information.

They are not cheap. The 18" costs more than twice what the 15" B&C that we use in the TH115 does.
 
#41 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Th3_uN1Qu3 /forum/post/18432656


I never saw the point of an ignore list. Is this yahfoo messy, er, messenger? Educate me.
Anyway, i'm so f'n glad that the great Vas doesn't have to read my posts. Saves him another minute of his great life.

Quoted...I wonder if a ignore list person can quote another ignore list person
 
#42 ·
"They are not cheap. The 18" costs more than twice what the 15" B&C that we use in the TH115 does."


thanks i-man. that's the ballpark that i was anticipating. depending on the constraints of the app, i can see how it would be worth the money.
 
#43 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray /forum/post/18432885


Quote:
Originally Posted by Th3_uN1Qu3 /forum/post/18432656


I never saw the point of an ignore list. Is this yahfoo messy, er, messenger? Educate me.
Anyway, i'm so f'n glad that the great Vas doesn't have to read my posts. Saves him another minute of his great life.

Quoted...I wonder if a ignore list person can quote another ignore list person

it appears to work. maybe it will create a blackhole and annihilate the troll. ;-)
 
#45 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by vasyachkin /forum/post/18429795


so you're 2 years behind my thinking. what you are describing is precisely my PREVIOUS guideline.

http://www.diy-av.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=29


does it work ? yes. is it optimal ? no.


why is it not optimal ? because at any given frequency either the speaker works or the sub, but not both. you're flushing potential output down the drain.


once you move from crossovers to parallel operation you can now have any number of different drivers with individual EQs. you can have 7 if you want - and you would still be at maximum possible efficiency. while with a system that uses crossovers 7 drivers would mean only 1/7th of the system is used.


so you're not looking at the issue from the right angle. it's not 2 vs 3. its crossover vs EQ.


basically if all good drivers can cover about 4 octaves then there is simply no need for more than 2 crossover points.


but within that 10hz - 300hz range which most woofers can cover each woofer will be OPTIMAL at around its in-box resonance frequency. a woofer can ( AND MUST ! ) be used both above and below resonance. most people use them only above resonance. BAG END uses it only below resonance. both approaches are idiotic. you have to use the woofer AROUND it's resonance ( mostly below though ) - this is the brilliant revelation for the day.


what happens here is you're building a system where for every crucial frequency ( 35hz - 200hz is approximately the range that must be uncompromised for a perfect bass ) there is an optimally matched sub but the other ones are also providing reinforcement. this allows you to precisely dial in the required performance over the entire frequency range into a system. you no longer have a system which has this but doesn't have that - it just has everything now. and it accomplishes this without any redundancy like having one cabinet above crossover and one below - instead it is synergistic.


by contrast a traditional system is doomed to one of 2 possible outcomes:


1 - it will be strongest at one thing, and weaker at everything else.


2 - it will be a hugely redundant multi-way design.


i just need to point out that optimal is not the same as most efficient ! optimal means most efficient PER UNIT OF BOX VOLUME. now you will probably want to bring up Hoffman's iron law however i am one of the very few people who actually understand what Hoffman's iron law MEANS so spare it. also optimum means MAXIMUM OUTPUT ( regardless of efficiency ) per unit of volume.

I'm not exactly sure what you are thinking
You want to make a bass

subsystem of 3 woofers to cover a large range but don't want to cross

them over individually, you want to use an equalizer ?


Thinking out loud, you want to do this?


Electronic crossover drives three EQ's'


EQ #1 for bass system #1 -> amplifier -> woofer #1

EQ #2 for bass system #2 -> amplifier -> woofer #2

EQ #3 for bass system #3 -> amplifier -> woofer #3



The crossover would feed a low pass 200hz or so signal to three seperate

EQ's, where each EQ output connects to the amplifier.


You can EQ each woofer independently, perhaps a parametric EQ to allow

control of gain, Q and frequency.


But, I would still prefer to crossover each woofer though; ie


Electronic crossover w/EQ #1 for bass system #1 -> amplifier -> woofer #1

Electronic crossover w/EQ #2 for bass system #2 -> amplifier -> woofer #2

Electronic crossover w/EQ #3 for bass system #3 -> amplifier -> woofer #3


I don't think there is any reason to be worried about using crossovers with

parametric eq, you can do some cool stuff.
 
#46 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by thylantyr /forum/post/18433538



Electronic crossover drives three EQ's'


EQ #1 for bass system #1 -> amplifier -> woofer #1

EQ #2 for bass system #2 -> amplifier -> woofer #2

EQ #3 for bass system #3 -> amplifier -> woofer #3



The crossover would feed a low pass 200hz or so signal to three seperate

EQ's, where each EQ output connects to the amplifier.


You can EQ each woofer independently, perhaps a parametric EQ to allow

control of gain, Q and frequency.

CORRECT.


the point is that whenever it comes to SERIOUS BASS there is ultimately just one constraint - CABINET SIZE.


therefore the BEST system must utilize ALL available space. whenever you have two drivers int two sub-enclosures and you use a crossover you cut off half of the effective volume - this can never be optimal !


greatest efficiency will be realized when the air is simultaneously being compressed in ALL sub-enclosures, not one of them. recall that putting two identical speakers in parallel results in extra 6db output from only extra 3db of input THIS IS WHAT ITS ALL ABOUT.


in addition to that you get unprecedented control over "voicing" of the system. because no matter what anybody says each driver does sound different and this setup would allow you to tailor the overall sound precisely to your taste.
 
#50 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 /forum/post/18432307


i think 18sound is italian ricci. the 21" version of the nlw9600 line is crazy nuts, while the 18" version is just pretty nuts. i've been curious what they cost as well. i believe the official importer is some shop in florida, but i haven't tried to contact them. you can find the shop on the 18sounds website regional distributor information.

I did not know they were an Italian brand. That would explain the big $$$$. I tried contacting that shop on Friday afternoon, but it was too late. Oh well.
 
#51 ·
"I did not know they were an Italian brand. That would explain the big $$$$. I tried contacting that shop on Friday afternoon, but it was too late. Oh well."


good friday, lots of folks cut out early. keep at it man. if you find a friendly supplier, please post. maybe usspeaker can special order?? the 12nmb420 and 15nmb420 midwoofers look like real winners for different reasons from the copper sleaved pole in the 12 to the exponential cone in the 15 among other benefits (the 8nbm420 even looks good for folks interested in smaller ones) and the nlw9600 series woofers also look insane. 5.3" coil with bl of 43 or so?? mwhahaha... we need a source for these drivers.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top