AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › DIY Speakers and Subs › Best 8" and 10" Subwoofer Drivers?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Best 8" and 10" Subwoofer Drivers?

post #1 of 45
7/20/09 at 2:33pm
Thread Starter 
I am thinking about building something like Thiel's SS2 (dual 10") or the Genesis S 4/8 (quad 8") and am looking for suggestions for the best quality 8" and 10" subwoofer drivers out there.

This will be for 2/3 music and 1/3 theater.

Also, please let me know what you think is the "best quality bang for the buck" in these sizes.

I will be building two sets of these and will be amplifying and EQing them externally. Any suggestions or tips on wiring/amps/EQ are welcome.

Thanks!
LL
LL
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #2 of 45
7/20/09 at 2:37pm
The CSS Trio 8 is a rediculously good little 8" driver
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 45
7/20/09 at 3:13pm
I guess I don't understand the concept of 4 8's as a sub. I sure could see a pair as really low extended woofers in a 3 way, but subs? I don't quite understand why. What would the advantage be?
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 45
7/20/09 at 3:17pm
In before the "fast bass" myth.
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 45
7/20/09 at 3:28pm
Thread Starter 
Essentially I am after making tall 10.5" wide subwoofers as speaker stands for my monitors, and I wanted them to be sealed and front firing. Since that limits the size of the driver, I can make up for it with multiples. I could do two front firing 10" or 8", two front and two rear 8", four front 8"... you get the idea.
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 45
7/21/09 at 12:57am
Quote:
Originally Posted by sarsicism View Post

Essentially I am after making tall 10.5" wide subwoofers as speaker stands for my monitors, and I wanted them to be sealed and front firing. Since that limits the size of the driver, I can make up for it with multiples. I could do two front firing 10" or 8", two front and two rear 8", four front 8"... you get the idea.

Where do you plan on crossing them? For under 120Hz or so side mounting is fine.
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 45
7/21/09 at 8:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by sarsicism View Post

Essentially I am after making tall 10.5" wide subwoofers as speaker stands for my monitors, and I wanted them to be sealed and front firing.

Subs as speaker stands is a bad idea, unless you do something like the NHT 3.3 with the speaker 'making its own corner.'

That said, the aforementioned Trio8 is excellent. The Peerless SLS8 is also very good, albeit not quite as good (less xmax, higher Le, less impressive basket) and cheaper.

But put them in places they can do some real good, not under the speakers.
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 45
7/22/09 at 4:38am
Thread Starter 
After a ton of research I have come to have a few different thoughts.

1) No speaker stand design, but likely a versatile design that can work anywhere.

2) As for where I am going to cross them, TBD. My monitors hit 38 Hz, so I would like a little support for their bottom end and then as much extension as possible (being limited by maintaining defined quality bass).

3) I think I am going to use 8" drivers. I really want to make a very small, but very capable sub (or two). I am looking at several drivers (JL 8w7, Sound Splinter RL-i8, CSS Trio 8, Crystal CMP 8, Audio Pulse Epic 8).

4) I have several passive designs in mind and would love some thoughts on them.
A) A single JL 8w7 in two cabinets (pseudo mini fathom).
B) Two JL 8w7 in one cabinet (pseudo mini gotham). Likely both in front, but possibly one front and rear.
C) Two RL-i8 in two cabinets. Likely both in front, but possibly one front and rear.
D) Four RL-i8 in one cabinet. Possibly all in a vertical array, but likely 2 on opposing sides.
E) Other driver designs are still possible.

5) I have not figured out if I want to do sealed, ported, or passive radiator. Quite a lot of variables still up in the air, but I am leaning towards a dual passive radiator with one on each side.

Thoughts on which way to go would be great. Thanks.
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 45
7/22/09 at 5:24am
Out of curiosity, why 8"s? You would probably be better served with a couple shivas (12") than any of the 8" you mentioned. If you arent putting them in the stand it really shouldnt be an issue.
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 45
7/23/09 at 4:32am
Thread Starter 
12"s are still possible, but I'd like to keep the cabinets as small as possible and have two of them. With 12's requiring at least 1.5 cubic feet each, it adds up to more room than I want to take up. In the future I would like to add a third large subwoofer to cover the very low end, but for now I want to make two small, high quality, mid bass subwoofers.
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 45
7/23/09 at 7:05am
One advantage of 2 subs/cabinet:
If you rigidly couple the two magnet assemblies together you can significantly reduce the cabinet excitation and its attendant distortion.

C
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 45
7/23/09 at 7:12am
Quote:
Originally Posted by sarsicism View Post

12"s are still possible, but I'd like to keep the cabinets as small as possible and have two of them. With 12's requiring at least 1.5 cubic feet each, it adds up to more room than I want to take up. In the future I would like to add a third large subwoofer to cover the very low end, but for now I want to make two small, high quality, mid bass subwoofers.

Lots of 12"s require less than that.
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 45
7/23/09 at 7:23am
Quote:
Originally Posted by cc00541 View Post

One advantage of 2 subs/cabinet:
If you rigidly couple the two magnet assemblies together you can significantly reduce the cabinet excitation and its attendant distortion.

C

I'm guessing this is for things like the TD18 series where pole vents arent used.
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 45
7/23/09 at 7:31am
Quote:
Originally Posted by LHD21 View Post

I'm guessing this is for things like the TD18 series where pole vents arent used.

For drivers with pole piece vents, there would need to be appropriately sized spacers between the magnet assemblies to allow proper venting.

C
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 45
7/23/09 at 11:12am
Quote:
Originally Posted by cc00541 View Post

One advantage of 2 subs/cabinet:
If you rigidly couple the two magnet assemblies together you can significantly reduce the cabinet excitation and its attendant distortion.

C

You don't need to rigidly mount the two to get the advantage since the air in the box couples them. Further, if you put them too close together you will get problems from the magnetic fields from the drivers interfering with each other. You definitely wouldn't want metal on metal contact.
Reply
Reply
post #16 of 45
7/23/09 at 11:48am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post

You don't need to rigidly mount the two to get the advantage since the air in the box couples them. Further, if you put them too close together you will get problems from the magnetic fields from the drivers interfering with each other. You definitely wouldn't want metal on metal contact.

I was referring to the mechanical coupling to the enclosure. Not the acoustic coupling to the air in the box.

Yes, the T/S parms may change slightly, but the other advantages will be worth any potential detriments here. -Like when we glued shielding magnets on the drivers in the old CRT days, the stray magnetic field is of no concern.

And what harm would contact cause?

C
Reply
Reply
post #17 of 45
7/24/09 at 9:54am
Quote:
Originally Posted by sarsicism View Post

12"s are still possible, but I'd like to keep the cabinets as small as possible and have two of them. With 12's requiring at least 1.5 cubic feet each, it adds up to more room than I want to take up. In the future I would like to add a third large subwoofer to cover the very low end, but for now I want to make two small, high quality, mid bass subwoofers.

If you are looking at "mid bass" , then I think you should consider your original plans of making these into stands for your speakers. Use an active crossover and seperate amplification. You can add a true subwoofer later for the "low" stuff.

I used two of the Aurasound NS10 513 for my "bass bins". Sealed they work very well for my 90% music usage.

Look for a woofer or subwoofer that you can crossover fairly high, like 200 - 300 hz.
Reply
Reply
post #18 of 45
7/24/09 at 6:16pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by sarsicism View Post

12"s are still possible, but I'd like to keep the cabinets as small as possible and have two of them. With 12's requiring at least 1.5 cubic feet each, it adds up to more room than I want to take up. In the future I would like to add a third large subwoofer to cover the very low end, but for now I want to make two small, high quality, mid bass subwoofers.

I think I understand your objective. I have been looking at the same thing for a small room (20x11x7). A small driver in a small enclosure gives maximum placement flexibility (if you believe you need that).

I was looking at the SDX7, but it should be similar to the Trio 8.
Reply
Reply
post #19 of 45
7/25/09 at 2:08am
Thread Starter 
Yes, very similar to that idea, but a little deeper as my LCR can all hit 38 Hz. I'm thinking I can hit 20Hz with my small subs, and then later on get something with some serious muscle for the deepest hits.

If my figures are correct, doing an isobaric passive radiator design with two JL Audio 8w7s in a 1.1 cubic foot enclosure tuned to 22.7 Hz results in a +/- .5 db response to 21 Hz, F3 at 19.5 Hz, with 106.5 SPL using 1000 watts.

Another idea I was toying with is doing a design like the Velodyne 1812, but with an 8" & 12".
Finding the right drivers for that is a tricky task, even with independent EQ.

I am going to be powering the final design with a NAD 2700 2 channel amp, and then some form of 2 channel EQ (TBD).
Reply
Reply
post #20 of 45
7/25/09 at 2:33am
people need to make mistakes so they can learn.

mistakes - what DIY is all about.
Reply
Reply
post #21 of 45
7/25/09 at 12:44pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stereodude View Post

In before the "fast bass" myth.

fast bass is a myth, but let's go further.

it is a way of describing, subjectively, sound. in my estimation, it correlates best with low group delay, minimal resonances (in speaker as well as in room), and good magnetic damping (and possibly to minimal thermal compression and/or spl).

the latter three or four categories are not in the vernacular of most folks, so "fast bass" actually makes sense as a way of describing these three dimensions.

others may use the term, "tight bass".

other may use the term, "clean bass".

they are all kind of hinting at the same thing. have some sympathy for that.
Reply
Reply
post #22 of 45
7/26/09 at 11:13pm
you know, there are a couple drivers that you may want to take a look at. they are 12", but work well in small enclosures (0.6-1.0 cubic feet).

gr-research sw-12-04 servo sub (needs to be used with a servo plate amp)

http://www.gr-research.com/index.asp...ROD&ProdID=139

peerless 830500 (crazy tight, can be used with any amp)

http://www.madisound.com/catalog/pro...roducts_id=688

the 830500 can be used sealed, but what would really make for a sound quality/ht sub with good extension would be to put a pair of drivers on a small ported box, one on the front of the box, one on the rear, and tune the 2 cubic foot enclosure to about 27hz with two 16" long 2.5" diameter flared ports.

if you want a little bigger and a little deeper, a 3 cubic footer tuned to 22hz with the same two 16" long 2.5" diamerter flared ports.

normally, folks around here shoot for monster sized enclosures and monster sized ports, but for your application i would shoot for the smaller size, smaller ports, and tight drivers.

the other peerless 12" subs are worth investigating as well. depending on your final design, one may work better than another.
Reply
Reply
post #23 of 45
7/26/09 at 11:15pm
there are lots of options. just thought i point out a couple 12" drivers that will be as tight as most any 8" or 10" that you can dig up.
Reply
Reply
post #24 of 45
7/27/09 at 2:02am
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the suggestions. I had looked at both those drivers. The Peerless 835017 XXLS also looks interesting.

As of right now I have purchased a NAD 2700 THX two channel amp and a single JL Audio 8w7. The question is where to go from here? My plan is to use the 8w7 in a sealed enclosure, EQ'd and focused around low mid bass (40-60 Hz, tapering on from 100 Hz, off at 20 Hz). Now, do I go with another 8w7 for dual subs, with the idea of getting a third larger driver later, or do I just get a larger driver and do something like Velo's 1812? I think using a Behringer DCX2496 could get the balancing/EQ job done without too much difficulty.

The low driver would focus on the 20-30 Hz range, tapering on from 60 Hz, tapering off around 10 Hz. Again the trick here is to preserve definition, hitting the low to subsonic frequencies as best as possible, while keeping the size small. I have no interest in muddy loud bass just so I can feel it.

One thing I have been wondering about is SPL vs. EQ. Using WINISP, a lot of drivers model quite high in SPL, but with sloped responses. Even with these slopes, they still are hitting 95 dB at 14Hz (for example) and then rise from there up to 114 dB. If I was fine with listening at say 80 dB, then couldn't the EQ be used to sacrifice maximum SPL for flat response? I am sure I just made several bass heads here disgusted at that idea, but wouldn't that work?
Reply
Reply
post #25 of 45
7/27/09 at 9:19am
Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 View Post

fast bass is a myth, but let's go further.

it is a way of describing, subjectively, sound. in my estimation, it correlates best with low group delay, minimal resonances (in speaker as well as in room), and good magnetic damping (and possibly to minimal thermal compression and/or spl).

the latter three or four categories are not in the vernacular of most folks, so "fast bass" actually makes sense as a way of describing these three dimensions.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I was under the impression it was best described as transient response. Primarily a factor with car audio folks who use obnoxiously heavy cones in drivers with poor magnetic damping. The resultant bass sounded muddier than an array of smaller drivers where the magnetic damping was higher in ratio to MMS.

I think we've said pretty much the same thing but I'm not sure I understand how the other factors you've mentioned play into it.
Reply
Reply
post #26 of 45
7/27/09 at 1:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by LHD21 View Post

Correct me if I'm wrong but I was under the impression it was best described as transient response. Primarily a factor with car audio folks who use obnoxiously heavy cones in drivers with poor magnetic damping. The resultant bass sounded muddier than an array of smaller drivers where the magnetic damping was higher in ratio to MMS.

I think we've said pretty much the same thing but I'm not sure I understand how the other factors you've mentioned play into it.

yes. we are on the same page.

transient response can be taken in two parts: amplitude and ring.

efficient drivers hit hard on amplitude.

well damped drivers (low qes, in properly tuned systems ported, sealed, or otherwise) hit hard on minimizing ring.

weight the former more if you mean the colloquial use of transient response.

weight the latter more if you mean the more formal use of transient response.

it would be really nice if somebody with monster clout in the business/academic community could start putting some technical definitions to all these terms. otherwise, we may agree when we disagree, or vice versa. communication is based on common understanding.

i must admit that i have had my share of misunderstandings and miscommunications with folks because it turned out that we just had different definitions of terms.
Reply
Reply
post #27 of 45
7/27/09 at 2:10pm
Dumb note of the day....

LTD02 and LHD21 are two different members, I think I have read their posts as being always from LTD02.....I just realized this when they posted together
Reply
Reply
post #28 of 45
7/27/09 at 2:13pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by sarsicism View Post

Thanks for the suggestions. I had looked at both those drivers. The Peerless 835017 XXLS also looks interesting.

As of right now I have purchased a NAD 2700 THX two channel amp and a single JL Audio 8w7. The question is where to go from here? My plan is to use the 8w7 in a sealed enclosure, EQ'd and focused around low mid bass (40-60 Hz, tapering on from 100 Hz, off at 20 Hz). Now, do I go with another 8w7 for dual subs, with the idea of getting a third larger driver later, or do I just get a larger driver and do something like Velo's 1812? I think using a Behringer DCX2496 could get the balancing/EQ job done without too much difficulty.

The low driver would focus on the 20-30 Hz range, tapering on from 60 Hz, tapering off around 10 Hz. Again the trick here is to preserve definition, hitting the low to subsonic frequencies as best as possible, while keeping the size small. I have no interest in muddy loud bass just so I can feel it.

One thing I have been wondering about is SPL vs. EQ. Using WINISP, a lot of drivers model quite high in SPL, but with sloped responses. Even with these slopes, they still are hitting 95 dB at 14Hz (for example) and then rise from there up to 114 dB. If I was fine with listening at say 80 dB, then couldn't the EQ be used to sacrifice maximum SPL for flat response? I am sure I just made several bass heads here disgusted at that idea, but wouldn't that work?

winisd is misleading because it is showing 2 pi space results and most home environments are not 2 pi space, not even close.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...2&postcount=18

use the formula posted:
Translation (measurements in feet):
Frg ~= 565 / Sqrt(L^2 + W^2 + H ^2)

usually around 25hz or so for most home rooms, though can be much lower for large rooms. below that level, you will have almost a second order gain, which offsets the second order decline from sealed enclosures in 2 pi space.

so, however loud you are at 25hz is roughly how loud you will be all the way down to single digits (or where ever your other equipment begins to highpass, 5hz?).

this is why such small speakers can dig so deep in cars. the frequency at which pressure vessel gain kicks in is very high relative to a home size room.
Reply
Reply
post #29 of 45
7/27/09 at 2:16pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray View Post

Dumb note of the day....

LTD02 and LHD21 are two different members, I think I have read their posts as being always from LTD02.....I just realized this when they posted together

lol.
Reply
Reply
post #30 of 45
7/27/09 at 2:30pm
first, you start out with and 8" driver in a small enclosure.

second, you ask if you should just go straight to an 18".

maybe it would be better to define some performance targets first (size room, spl requirements, preferences for punch vs. clean, etc.) and whatever constraints you have (size, looks, budget, etc.)

so far, you have suggested you want to error on the side of clean. that's fine. lots more info is required though.

decent sound in a medium sized room at modest listening levels can be achieved with a pair of sealed shivas.

if you want to pound the mortar loose across the bass, and/or kill yourself, a pair of resonant engineering xxx 18", as much power as you can afford, and a top end with quad pro audio 15" drivers (such as the ae speakers td15m or the jbl 2226h) might be an option. you will probably need to upgrade your home wiring for full effect. ;-)

however, these are two totally different systems in performance, size, and price.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: DIY Speakers and Subs

AVS Top Picks

AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › DIY Speakers and Subs › Best 8" and 10" Subwoofer Drivers?