AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › DIY Speakers and Subs › Dual JL 13W7 Subwoofer ideas?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Dual JL 13W7 Subwoofer ideas?

post #1 of 34
8/23/12 at 1:41pm
Thread Starter 
Greetings again. So, I'm in need of box design for a pair of JL 13W7 drivers. The reason behind this is because

1) I can get both drivers for $800 total.
2) I'd like to make a spiritual successor/copy to the eD A7s-650.

As many have said before, the eD 13" sub was orignally modelled after the JL 13W, but the JL should be the superior sub, so hopefully that will also mean better output capabilites. My goal is, if possible, to have this box be flat to at least 15Hz, preferably 10, and do it at 115dB. Am I setting these goals to high with these drivers or does it seem like it would be worthwhile?
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #2 of 34
8/23/12 at 2:17pm
Sounds awesome. This will blow the eD junk out of the water.

What amp are you powering these with?

t319_e27ff8bbee2cf3c2feae6bb914a1f322.jpg?1322528317
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 34
8/23/12 at 2:49pm
Thread Starter 
I haven't really decided on an amp yet. I do have an extra Behringer EP4000 lying around, but I'm sure that there will be other recc's as to what amp to get, especially since this will be for home theater applications. Plate amps usually have bells and whistles while pro amps usually don't. I also forgot budget. As previously stated, I can already get the 2 drives for $800. I'm hoping the wood costs won't be more than $150 (I think this is erring on the high side a bit). For amps, if no one really has a problem with me using an EP4000, then I'm all set on that side.
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 34
8/23/12 at 3:09pm
just make sure that the drivers are the real thing. apparently that one has problems with knockoffs.

anyway, yeah, you should be able to hit your performance goals.

here are 4 configurations, 1 driver in each of 10 cubic feet ported tuned to 15, 12, and 10hz respectively and 4 cubic ft sealed (yellow). all at 1000 watts.

by going with a lower tune, a little of the spl above the tuning point is lost.

Reply
Reply
post #5 of 34
8/23/12 at 3:10pm
Factors in with box size, only reason I brought it up. The EP4000 is a great amp. I see an Re of 2.41 Ω on the W7, is that correct?
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 34
8/23/12 at 3:12pm
with the ep4000 you leave a little in the tank in regards to what those subs can take but I would say since you already have it to give it a shot first and if you feel you need more, go from there!!! LOVE the jl subs
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 34
8/23/12 at 4:02pm
Thread Starter 
Thanks for doing those graphs LTD. So going off of those, then doing something similar to the sealed eD 650 box wouldn't be the best option? Do you have more info on the green line, whic is the 12Hz tune, I believe. It's curious that the 12Hz tune has a better curve than the 10Hz and 15Hz. Well, at least that confirms that it can be done. Is there someone on the forum that's good with drawing up sketches/cut lists?
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 34
8/23/12 at 7:33pm
hey jin, it really depends on what you are shooting for. it also depends on how large of a room that you have because once you put a sub in a room, they form a single system. if you have a room that is relatively small and provides a ton of gain, the sealed option could work well. if you have a largish room and are happy with the tradeoffs involved, a large ported can be a winner.
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 34
8/23/12 at 8:54pm
Thread Starter 
Hmm, ok. I do have a fairly large room, 26x25 and the bottom is open to the kitchen, which is 14.5 x 10 with 10 foot ceilings, so it's very large and very open. Not the ideal rectangular shape, but it's what I've got to work with at the moment. So you're saying that a large ported sub would be the best option, with these drivers? If so, that should hopefully move things a little bit more forward.


Probably several years down the road, I'm hoping to build an addition (a 3rd floor) dedicated to a theater room, but that is definitely a long ways down the road.
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 34
8/23/12 at 9:18pm
"So you're saying that a large ported sub would be the best option, with these drivers?"

in your large room, with only 2 drivers, i suspect that you will get the most enjoyment out of either the 12hz or 15hz ported tuned enclosures.
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 34
8/23/12 at 9:32pm
Thread Starter 
I'd probably like to try the 12Hz tuned. As an added note, box size doesn't matter. So long as it isn't the size of a sedan and it can fit through the front door. Is there a reason why the 12Hz tune has a 5dB dip lower than the 15Hz tune at 10Hz?

Another edit: I'll also probably think about making a second sub set down the road (maybe a year later). That should also help boost the response. If the EP4000 doesn't give enough juice to the 13W7's, I can always just bridge the EP and then get a second one. For me, the EP's are usually pretty cheap. (Around $200).
Edited by Jindrak - 8/23/12 at 9:40pm
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 34
8/23/12 at 9:42pm
great. i don't use sketchup and i haven't used cutsheet software, so others would be better to consult if that is what you want.

if nobody weighs in, i'll help you with the cab dimensions and porting for your subs.
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 34
8/23/12 at 10:24pm
for $800 I'd get a pair of LMS-R 15s or similar, more displacement more boom boom.

just my $0.02.
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 34
8/24/12 at 1:23am
Quote:
Originally Posted by notnyt View Post

for $800 I'd get a pair of LMS-R 15s or similar, more displacement more boom boom.
just my $0.02.

+1 And the 15hz tune looks best.
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 34
8/24/12 at 7:41am
Thread Starter 
The 15Hz tune drops off way to sharply at around 12Hz for me. I want it to stay a steady flat line all the way to 10Hz. The LMS would actually be more expensive, and it seems that it and the JL are pretty close in everything. The JL has a higher xmax, slightly lower Fs than the LMS, only .6 lower spl, and everything else is pretty close. This was just a quick look online. But, notnyt, having read all about your adventures with the massive LMS ultras, you might be a little partial to the LMS line? (Not a jab at ya, just fun smile.gif )
Reply
Reply
post #16 of 34
8/24/12 at 7:54am
Displacement:

Pair of LMS-R 15": 8.7L
Pair of 13W7's: 8.9L

Based on xmax/Sd from each manufacturer, assuming they are accurate.

Edit: I'm actually unsure of the Sd for the LMS-R, anyone seen that number?
Edited by Aknot5 - 8/24/12 at 8:06am
Reply
Reply
post #17 of 34
8/24/12 at 9:54am
I'm not quite sure how you're calculating that, but here are the actual parameters.

SD of LMS-R: 855.3 cm^2, xmax 29.4mm
SD of JL 13W7: 693.0 cm^2, xmax 31.8mm

VD of LMS-R: 2.5 l
VD of JL: 2.2 l

That was just a quick example. There are also plenty of 18" drivers under $400, such as the FI Q, which will give you even more displacement by a large margin.

SD of FI Q: 1210 cm^2, xmax 28mm
VD of FI Q: 3.3 l
Edited by notnyt - 8/24/12 at 9:59am
Reply
Reply
post #18 of 34
8/24/12 at 10:05am
Thread Starter 
Yes, but shouldn't the quality of the JL sub be higher? The price for just 1 brand new 13W7 is over $800, while the price of 1 Fi Q18 is $334. Or is all that price just name brand? From all the reviews I've seen, everyone loves the JL sub a lot, even though it is expensive.
Reply
Reply
post #19 of 34
8/24/12 at 10:34am
Quote:
Originally Posted by notnyt View Post

I'm not quite sure how you're calculating that, but here are the actual parameters.
SD of LMS-R: 855.3 cm^2, xmax 29.4mm
SD of JL 13W7: 693.0 cm^2, xmax 31.8mm
VD of LMS-R: 2.5 l
VD of JL: 2.2 l
That was just a quick example. There are also plenty of 18" drivers under $400, such as the FI Q, which will give you even more displacement by a large margin.
SD of FI Q: 1210 cm^2, xmax 28mm
VD of FI Q: 3.3 l

That's what I used for Sd, but Xmax is 25.4mm on the LMS-R.

I calculated full swept volume (two-way stroke) and two drivers per system. That's the only difference.
Reply
Reply
post #20 of 34
8/24/12 at 11:22am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aknot5 View Post

That's what I used for Sd, but Xmax is 25.4mm on the LMS-R.
I calculated full swept volume (two-way stroke) and two drivers per system. That's the only difference.

Something has changed then or it's a typo, it used to be 29.4MM Xmax for the LMS-R.

Hmmmmm, I just looked at the specs for the LMS Ultra and they now list it at 33.66mm Xmax were it used to be listed at 38mm.

A little more investigating and they have 38mm Xmax listed but at 70% BL as well as the LMS-R being listed at 29.4 at 70% BL. So I guess TC went through and adjusted there numbers, I know Notnyt and Ricci had both realized this before.
Reply
Reply
post #21 of 34
8/24/12 at 11:24am
As an added note http://tcsounds.com/ has added a lot of new content, worth checking out what there doing now.
Reply
Reply
post #22 of 34
8/24/12 at 1:16pm
You're right, I remember the LMS-R being ~30mm. They must have adjusted all official specs to: (voice coil – gap) / 2 from 70% BL. I checked Parts Express too and saw 25.4mm.

But JL seems to use that same method for their xmax rating, so I believe the comparison is correct that way (25.4mm vs 32mm).
Reply
Reply
post #23 of 34
8/24/12 at 1:34pm
Thread Starter 
I think I'll stay with the JL 13w7. I know I'll be impressed either way, and it doesn't seem like the LMS-R is "worlds away" better. Besides, I see alot of people using LMS drivers, be nice to try something different. (Of course, I know that people use the LMS drivers because they are good quality and dependable, but so are the JL's). All I need is for someone to help draw up box plans.
Reply
Reply
post #24 of 34
8/24/12 at 2:19pm
I'd go 18s if you have the space, dollar per displacement you can't lose there.
Reply
Reply
post #25 of 34
8/25/12 at 10:06pm
Thread Starter 
No designers free?
Reply
Reply
post #26 of 34
8/26/12 at 2:14pm
Thread Starter 
Ok, so turning the tables a bit and going with notnyt's recc's, I need a sealed box design for 2 FI Q18's.
Reply
Reply
post #27 of 34
8/26/12 at 5:02pm
Reply
Reply
post #28 of 34
8/26/12 at 7:09pm
Thread Starter 
Wow, that's completely weird to me. The suggested sealed design gives the worst response, while, yet again, a 12Hz tune gives the best. I wonder if I'll ever understand that. Well, I suppose the upside if there is one is that the FI Q18's are cheaper than the JL subs, but it seems like they're an even match for the JL's.
Edited by Jindrak - 8/26/12 at 7:20pm
Reply
Reply
post #29 of 34
8/26/12 at 8:03pm
Sealed designs will usually look worse in sims, that's why we always use them in multiples biggrin.gif

The 15hz tune looks better than the 12hz tune, it is twice as loud at 15hz and about the same volume at 12hz were it drops like a rock. The 12hz tune does not offer enough extension to make up for the loss at the upper frequencies.
Reply
Reply
post #30 of 34
8/26/12 at 8:24pm
The Q18 will have more output than the JL 13W7 in a sealed alignment. I actually shrunk down the size of the box for the JL so it would take more power so it would be closer.



I can't talk about how good the Fi's sub sounds compared to the JL though, owned a F113 before but never a Fi sub.

I also tried to make sure the WinISD file I downloaded from the HTS shack was right and was not able to get to the speaker section to check the TSP's, there is just a blank page on my screen.

An 18" with 28mm Xmax is going to beat a 13.5" with close to 32mm as far as output is concerned. Those are the specs I got from the HTS WinISD file so hopefully it is right.
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 › Dual JL 13W7 Subwoofer ideas?