or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › DIY Speakers and Subs › Was looking at getting Seaton Submersive F2 but alot of people are recommending DIY......
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Was looking at getting Seaton Submersive F2 but alot of people are recommending DIY...... - Page 2

post #31 of 86
Thread Starter 
Cool, thanks for the info. Either the Si or the Ultimax with the EP4000 amp is looking quite tempting. Would I need any type of processing or anything if I am using a receiver like an Anthem? Or just let ARC take care of it?
post #32 of 86
Subscribed! Gorilla, there are like four choices for SI subs. Either one is fine?
post #33 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by 04rex View Post

Cool, thanks for the info. Either the Si or the Ultimax with the EP4000 amp is looking quite tempting. Would I need any type of processing or anything if I am using a receiver like an Anthem? Or just let ARC take care of it?

I'm not as familiar with Anthem receivers, but does it have any type of sub EQ feature? Depending on the room, some type of EQ would be nice like a miniDSP or Beringer DCX. cool.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by CleatusCat View Post

Subscribed! Gorilla, there are like four choices for SI subs. Either one is fine?

You could use either D4 for a 2 ohm final load or D2 for a 4 ohm final load per sub. Your amp choice would be the deciding factor in which works best. With something like the EP4000 you can extract more power @ 2 ohm levels.
post #34 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gorilla83 View Post

I'm not as familiar with Anthem receivers, but does it have any type of sub EQ feature? Depending on the room, some type of EQ would be nice like a miniDSP or Beringer DCX. cool.gif
You could use either D4 for a 2 ohm final load or D2 for a 4 ohm final load per sub. Your amp choice would be the deciding factor in which works best. With something like the EP4000 you can extract more power @ 2 ohm levels.

I think I'll go with what you recommended. By the way, I tried to buy 3000Tls you were selling but they were already gone. I worry about how the DT speakers with their "subwoofers" are going to blend.
post #35 of 86
I'd just let the anthem do things for now, and if one day you wanna upgrade I'd buy a mic and a minidsp. Start without and get that going first though. Especially being your first build. You'll get bogged down with the details, and the performance gain is relatively small. A worthwhile upgrade once you've got your head around things down the road.
post #36 of 86
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gorilla83 View Post

I'm not as familiar with Anthem receivers, but does it have any type of sub EQ feature? Depending on the room, some type of EQ would be nice like a miniDSP or Beringer DCX. cool.gif
.

Anthem's ARC does have sub EQ. An actually well regarded one at that. Anthem's ARC allows you to see a graph so you can see exactly what frequency your sub is doing.
post #37 of 86
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuxedocivic View Post

I'd just let the anthem do things for now, and if one day you wanna upgrade I'd buy a mic and a minidsp. Start without and get that going first though. Especially being your first build. You'll get bogged down with the details, and the performance gain is relatively small. A worthwhile upgrade once you've got your head around things down the road.

I agree. I think that would be the best bet. I think ARC is pretty good.
post #38 of 86
I'm not surprised that so many here are recommending the FOTM (flavor of the month) drivers, and I think they could perhaps be designed in a way that performs well.

But, I think it behooves anyone seeking this type of build to go to one of the most experienced and respected authorities on the subject. As such, here's what bossobass has to say on the subject when consulting for people looking to do exactly what you're inquiring about in this thread:
Quote:
Originally Posted by bossobass View Post

I actually have guys like Husker in mind. I've been there myself, waiting for an eternity for the latest DIY driver-of-choice. Being the guinea pig and waiting, waiting, waiting. They finally arrive, you build, you like, they disappear forever. It's always been that way in DIY and it's always been a royal PITA.


Blueprint, Adire, Exodus, Stryke, AE, TC Sounds, CSS (SDX), Avalanche, Destijl (Fi), et al. Bummer.

Yes, I had the same reaction when I first plugged the SSDs into the system, using just 4 of them, then scaling the system up to 16, then settling on 8. It's a very compact system with serious firepower for relatively little cash.


I agree (and so has everyone who's heard my systems over the years) that the SSD driver adds a certain percussive nuance that is unique in my experience and certainly seems to fly in the face of all the "Inductance! Oh noes!!" talk.


I've kicked, pushed, prodded, dangled and dumped, throwing everything modern digital formats have at them. And, I haven't nailed down exactly why, they just sound good. I'm glad you agree, but I was pretty darned sure you would (or I wouldn't ever have suggested the idea to anyone).

And,
Quote:
Originally Posted by bossobass View Post

Driving the system with 12KW bursts and 3600W continuous amplification, it tested well and got very high subjective comments from every listener, most of whom have heard many of the systems I've had in my room. The SSD has higher THD than the Tumult MKII, my latest BHT-15 and a few others I've used, but it truly seems that people actually prefer it, calling it tighter, etc.

I don't do GP outdoor testing, but using the Tumult MKII as a reference and all else being exactly the same in my room, it serves the same purpose as a comparative tool. Of course, the Tummy has longer throw and cost more than double, so it would make sense that it has the lower THD+N number in the tests posted above.

My conclusion was that since the SSD has the same basket, former, coil wire, cone and surround as the Tumult (I believe Scott used to build Adire's stuff), the primary difference subjectively has got to be the higher THD. Everyone's mileage may vary, FWIW, etc. But, the bottom line is that everyone liked the presentation from this 4X15" system, and I think you will as well.

By contrast, he doesn't seem to like the 18" versions of the Si or Dayton drivers for ultra low frequency content reproduced by sealed systems, as mentioned in other threads. Did I mention that there's likely also a pretty good place to get SSD-15 drivers, used very lightly and only for testing purposes, for cheaper than the Si and Dayton recommendations mentioned in this thread? Heh. cool.gif

Thus, I see no need to reinvent the wheel. Giants have already created the template; all you have to do is stand on their shoulders.
post #39 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Louquid View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by antisuck View Post

I see a couple of problems with this approach:

- "performance" boils down to just a few metrics for a PC, but (as with everything in audio) subwoofer "performance" is a tangled web of tradeoffs.

- the designers of the commercial subwoofers that are respected as benchmarks in the DIY community tend to be good guys who participate in helpful ways around here, and systematically undercutting their products by "advertising" a DIY design as being the same thing for cheap would be disrespectful and wrong IMHO.

Imitation is the ultimate form of flattery. The whole purpse of DIY is to aim for the performance of a well regarded commercial sub, and best is with your own bare hands. Most designers and manufacturers are well aware that they are providing people with a no-hassle way of way of reaching bass nirvana.

Quote:
Originally Posted by antisuck View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by nube View Post

I don't think it's disrespectful or wrong. The point of DIY is to, shockingly, do it yourself. We all stand on the shoulders of giants.

You hadn't posted when I started typing (got interrupted part way through), so please don't think I have a problem with your helpful post above. I guess I was thinking about something along the lines of threads titled "The secrets uncovered: build your own Seaton Submersive for half the price!!!" or "Four Pi Killer free plans inside!!!" Silly, sure, but IMHO one should be a little careful walking the line between standing on giant shoulders and flat-out copying. That's all. smile.gif

Hi guys,

I do appreciate those offering some defense of what product designers and producers like myself offer. I have long encouraged DIY efforts and given pointers to investigate further, even if most skip past those details.

I've posted a few times in the past that while I have no control of what DIYers describe things as, my own preference and perspective would be to use descriptions more like "inspired by the SubMersive" or "SubMersive inspired design." It's rare that a DIYer would use the same parts, amplifier, dimensions, etc as what a production product does, as they are only limited by their own application and don't have to fit many.

As you will see, most options for a similar dual opposed package, sealed subwoofer with natural roll off come in larger boxes or require specific measurements of the finished driver/box combination to have the same starting point in-room. One of the biggest advantages in going DIY can be to use larger boxes and more drivers. You then reduce the likelihood of hitting the stops, and gain more efficiency. Keeping the size and number of units down while maintaining the deep extension and not getting foul amp clipping noises or behavior requires more measurements and dialing in. DIYers can use parts with variable availability and even those with higher defect rates which simply become impractical to manage in a growing business. Many of my customers would never tolerate fans as loud as even the modified pro amps so common in use unless there was an equipment room or closet. We as manufacturers also have to insure the product gets to you in once piece as carp recently came to appreciate more.

If you look closely you will see that those who have been more ambitious with their builds and decide to assemble a single or set of subwoofers larger and more capable that what might be available at their budget are very happy assuming they have the time, patience and appropriate expectations for the many details of the final result.

Enjoy the process and adventure,
post #40 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by nube View Post

I'm not surprised that so many here are recommending the FOTM (flavor of the month) drivers, and I think they could perhaps be designed in a way that performs well.

But, I think it behooves anyone seeking this type of build to go to one of the most experienced and respected authorities on the subject. As such, here's what bossobass has to say on the subject when consulting for people looking to do exactly what you're inquiring about in this thread:
And,
By contrast, he doesn't seem to like the 18" versions of the Si or Dayton drivers for ultra low frequency content reproduced by sealed systems, as mentioned in other threads. Did I mention that there's likely also a pretty good place to get SSD-15 drivers, used very lightly and only for testing purposes, for cheaper than the Si and Dayton recommendations mentioned in this thread? Heh. cool.gif

Thus, I see no need to reinvent the wheel. Giants have already created the template; all you have to do is stand on their shoulders.

I appreciate the kind words, but I was just about to post something similar to the OP's Q:
Quote:
I'm very surprised actually that on here, we don't see much DIY templates that assure performance of other systems. In the PC world this is almost a given. Every month Tomshardware publishes the best bang for your buck.

It's precisely because the driver vendors come and go with such regularity that it's rather pointless to post very detailed templating for systems based on the reigning FOTM driver.

Here's why I don't get excited about the 18" (and larger) craze:

I still haven't seen any advantage to using an 18", except in very large rooms with very large owner output appetites (like notnyt) vs dual 15s, in fact, I see the opposite.

Taking the SI drivers, since they're the current darling and have been mentioned in this thread, a single 18 in 4 cubes vs dual 15s in the same box, the comparo goes something like this:

Using dual 15s you get:

Higher sensitivity
36% more displacement
Double the power handling
Lower Qtc
Less distortion per dBSPL
Dual opposed stability advantages
Digs deeper (better <10 Hz performance)
Better in-room FR at crossover
The 15" is available now, the 18" is a prepay for future delivery

The added cost is around $400 for a 4x15" vs 2x18", a steal for the added benefits, IMO. I'm sure Seaton has come to the same conclusions with the SM I have in my own experiences for the same reasons.

2-Dual opposed subs (4x15"), amp and outboard EQ is a bit less than a SM and will best the SM by a noticeable margin in every category. If the amp and EQ are chosen wisely and properly set up, you'll get reference level to 5 Hz in most every room.
post #41 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Seaton View Post


Hi guys,

I do appreciate those offering some defense of what product designers and producers like myself offer. I have long encouraged DIY efforts and given pointers to investigate further, even if most skip past those details.

I've posted a few times in the past that while I have no control of what DIYers describe things as, my own preference and perspective would be to use descriptions more like "inspired by the SubMersive" or "SubMersive inspired design."

I would have loved to do that ^^^ if my 2x15"long throw drivers, sealed, L/T'd, high power subs didn't predate the SM by 5 or 6 years.

Actually, I was sorta hoping the SM would have been touted as a DIY-inspired commercial sub...
post #42 of 86
I think "craze" may be a good way to describe the 18" following. There are benefits of an 18" driver over a 15" driver, but there are also benefits of multiple 15" drivers over less 18" drivers. But, I know I personally would prefer a single 18" over a single 15", if for nothing more than aesthetics. I find 18"s to be the ultimate gateway to the riduculous. Having people over, the first thing they say is, "wow, is that your new sub there?!". And I'm like, "yup, wanna fea..I mean hear it?"

If we are talking about the advantages of 4 drivers over 2 drivers, for about the same or slightly more money, wouldn't this also apply to the 4xDayton 18's to 2xUXL-18's conversation? lol. Jk, lets not jump back on that wagon again.
post #43 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by bossobass View Post

I appreciate the kind words, but I was just about to post something similar to the OP's Q:
It's precisely because the driver vendors come and go with such regularity that it's rather pointless to post very detailed templating for systems based on the reigning FOTM driver.

Here's why I don't get excited about the 18" (and larger) craze:

I still haven't seen any advantage to using an 18", except in very large rooms with very large owner output appetites (like notnyt) vs dual 15s, in fact, I see the opposite.

Taking the SI drivers, since they're the current darling and have been mentioned in this thread, a single 18 in 4 cubes vs dual 15s in the same box, the comparo goes something like this:

Using dual 15s you get:

Higher sensitivity
36% more displacement
Double the power handling
Lower Qtc
Less distortion per dBSPL
Dual opposed stability advantages
Digs deeper (better <10 Hz performance)
Better in-room FR at crossover
The 15" is available now, the 18" is a prepay for future delivery

The added cost is around $400 for a 4x15" vs 2x18", a steal for the added benefits, IMO. I'm sure Seaton has come to the same conclusions with the SM I have in my own experiences for the same reasons.

2-Dual opposed subs (4x15"), amp and outboard EQ is a bit less than a SM and will best the SM by a noticeable margin in every category. If the amp and EQ are chosen wisely and properly set up, you'll get reference level to 5 Hz in most every room.

Why not apply this to a dual opposed 18" implementation like I did? It shifts the other way when you do.

I loved my SubM, but I'm liking the dual 18s even more, and I haven't even implemented my minidsp yet.

The other factor, is that the box for my build is so monstrous (to me), that i needed help in building it. I alone could not build it without an extraordinary amount of effort and time, as I and many others do not have the woodworking skills to do so. The SubM was perfect for me before that. DIY just isn't an option for many.

I'm sure other Seaton or JTR products are in my future as well, because I really like what these guys offer, in both product and community support. DIY is also fun too, so it was fun and rewarding to make a Seaton like sub from my own design. Its mostly just about loving the hobby, and that one way and one config doesn't satisfy everyone.
post #44 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by bossobass View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Seaton View Post


Hi guys,

I do appreciate those offering some defense of what product designers and producers like myself offer. I have long encouraged DIY efforts and given pointers to investigate further, even if most skip past those details.

I've posted a few times in the past that while I have no control of what DIYers describe things as, my own preference and perspective would be to use descriptions more like "inspired by the SubMersive" or "SubMersive inspired design."

I would have loved to do that ^^^ if my 2x15"long throw drivers, sealed, L/T'd, high power subs didn't predate the SM by 5 or 6 years.

Actually, I was sorta hoping the SM would have been touted as a DIY-inspired commercial sub...

Good ideas tend to pop up separately at similar times. I did a pack of dual opposed subs with original Shivas back in college and 5-10 years before the SubMersive was significantly impacted by the bass modules in the ML Statement E2 towers (actually Eminence OEM drivers), the Krell MRS sub and of course the PR'd but also opposed ContraBass. We actually had prototypes of dual 15 and 18" sealed subs at ServoDrive which never made it to production where I moved on to more available and easier to produce conventional drivers once I went off on my own. Besides, didn't I do it all wrong by not setting the drivers top/bottom! wink.gif
post #45 of 86
To the OP,

I would take the comments from two of the industry's (and this forum's) giants to heart.

18" subs are huge. You need big boxes. By contrast, you can usually stuff two 15" drivers into a box the same size, or in my case smaller, than the recommended 18" box. This is a huge, HUGE factor in the looks department if you don't have a dedicated theater, or don't want to mess with room aesthetics.

Apologies (respectfully) to all these folks who can and do build multiple 18" cabs, or incredibly-unwieldy dual opposed 18" cabs, but it doesn't make aesthetic sense for most, and there aren't many sonic benefits to doing so unless you have tons of space and can fit huge boxes into your decor.

Plus, all the other factors bosso described as distinct benefits from going with 15" drivers instead of 18". For me, it was a no-brainer. It may not be for everyone, though.
post #46 of 86
"The added cost is around $400 for a 4x15" vs 2x18", a steal for the added benefits, IMO."

hhmmm...2 dayton 18ho's are around $500 delivered. but if you buy 4, they are $230 a pop, so a much closer comparison would be 4 dayton 18ho's vs. 4x15" ssd's. by the time they get to your door, the quad 18's are probably **less money**. 4 x dayton 18ho's have an obvious performance advantage over 4x15" ssd's, so i'm not really sure the bang-for-the-buck title is in the 4x15's corner.
post #47 of 86
Thread Starter 
Well I said from the start I would prefer 15". To me it is the perfect size. Huge, but not overly huge. I wouldn't go bigger than 15. I would probably end up with 4 15s. And to Mark, I hope you take it as more of a compliment that people are trying to match the performance of your subs with DIY.
post #48 of 86
An 18" sealed enclosure shouldn't be that much bigger than a 15"s enclosure. To say that 18" subs don't make sense aesthetically for most people is a bit of a blanket statement. It's as if you're saying 18"s are too big and therefore can't be aesthetically pleasing or fit well in a typical living room.

Nube, what two 15"s do you have in a 4 cu ft enclosure? (or smaller enclosure)
post #49 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Seaton View Post

Besides, didn't I do it all wrong by not setting the drivers top/bottom! wink.gif

Glad someone said it. wink.gif
post #50 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Louquid View Post

An 18" sealed enclosure shouldn't be that much bigger than a 15"s enclosure. To say that 18" subs don't make sense aesthetically for most people is a bit of a blanket statement. It's as if you're saying 18"s are too big and therefore can't be aesthetically pleasing or fit well in a typical living room.

Nube, what two 15"s do you have in a 4 cu ft enclosure? (or smaller enclosure)

4 cubes vs 8 cubes is a huge difference. pretty much any 15" candidate will pair in 4-5 cubes.
post #51 of 86
"4 cubes vs 8 cubes is a huge difference. pretty much any 15" candidate will pair in 4-5 cubes."

yeah, but you kind of have to know what you are doing and the o.p. doesn't have a clue (no offense).

a pair of the dayton um15 15" that some folks have suggested give a q=0.94 in 5 cubic feet.

a pair of the dayton 18ho 18" that some folks have suggested give a q=0.78 in 5 cubic feet.

...............

among one of the advantages that you point to is:

"Lower Qtc"

i thought that you were in the camp that thought qtc didn't matter and that after eq'ing frequency response, all subs sound the same. have you modified/expanded your position on that one?
post #52 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 View Post

"The added cost is around $400 for a 4x15" vs 2x18", a steal for the added benefits, IMO."

hhmmm...2 dayton 18ho's are around $500 delivered. but if you buy 4, they are $230 a pop, so a much closer comparison would be 4 dayton 18ho's vs. 4x15" ssd's. by the time they get to your door, the quad 18's are probably **less money**. 4 x dayton 18ho's have an obvious performance advantage over 4x15" ssd's, so i'm not really sure the bang-for-the-buck title is in the 4x15's corner.

Size. The Dayton wants 5-6 cubes, the SSD is perfectly happy in 2, and until you A/B in a room with actual source, bang for buck is for gropers.

If you want to consider a difference of 20 cubes vs 8 insignificant, you're telling me you've never had 20 cubes of sub in your room.
post #53 of 86
dual 15s just under 4 cubes/box
dual 18s just over 8 cubes/box.

Big difference in size for sure. Same sensitivity for both, 18 liters more displacement for 8) SI 18s vs 8)SSD 15s. In my scenario the 18s were hundreds less than the 15s. Size is the only con.
post #54 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 View Post

"4 cubes vs 8 cubes is a huge difference. pretty much any 15" candidate will pair in 4-5 cubes."

yeah, but you kind of have to know what you are doing and the o.p. doesn't have a clue (no offense).

a pair of the dayton um15 15" that some folks have suggested give a q=0.94 in 5 cubic feet.

a pair of the dayton 18ho 18" that some folks have suggested give a q=0.78 in 5 cubic feet.

...............

among one of the advantages that you point to is:

"Lower Qtc"

i thought that you were in the camp that thought qtc didn't matter and that after eq'ing frequency response, all subs sound the same. have you modified/expanded your position on that one?

1st you say the OP is a noob regarding some off the wall Dayton 15 (not a candidate, IMO), then you say Q doesn't matter to a noob.

None of it matters to me regarding the final FR and performance, but we're not talking about me.
post #55 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by gpmbc View Post

dual 15s just under 4 cubes/box
dual 18s just over 8 cubes/box.

Big difference in size for sure. Same sensitivity for both, 18 liters more displacement for 8) SI 18s vs 8)SSD 15s. In my scenario the 18s were hundreds less than the 15s. Size is the only con.

Yes, 18L more on a 1:1 comparo, but my point has always been that you can put 2-15s in the same box you need for a single 18. And, remember, when I bought a slew of SSDs and Qs from Fi, there was slim pickin's out there for drivers. At a buck ninety nine, the SSD kicks tail in a tiny box.
post #56 of 86
"None of it matters to me regarding the final FR and performance..."

i was just asking because you listed lower qts as an advantage...

"...then you say Q doesn't matter to a noob."

nah, what i was showing is that a pair of um15's that have been recommended in this thread might not work as well as a pair of dayton 18ho's in a 5 cubic foot enclosure based on qts.
post #57 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by 04rex View Post

I live in Canada.

Are those the SI 15" subs? That box looks really good. I am very patient if you can compare the 2!!

If you live in Canada and are patient why don't you just wait until the UXL-18 is back in stock? It should easily best 2 SI 15's.
post #58 of 86
Because the OP has said repeatedly that he's interested in 15" drivers because 18" drivers are too big.
post #59 of 86
"I can't really build the box myself, but i did hear of DIY Sound that suuplies everything and you put it together i believe. That would work fine for me."

diysoundgroup.com is where erich sells flat packs. some of them aren't even listed yet, but i'm pretty sure that the flat packs for f2 clones are...non existant.

nice looking enclosures though.

post #60 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by nube View Post

Because the OP has said repeatedly that he's interested in 15" drivers because 18" drivers are too big.

Alright, it is his sub and ultimately he should listen to everyone's advice but build what he wants. I am just thinking he lives in Canada and could get the UXL cheaper than those of us here in The USA. It was a big debate as to how many Dayton or SI 18's it would take to match the UXL-18 so the UXL should easily beat the 15's in a similar side box. You are talking no more floor space just a bigger woofer and better performance.

Now keep in kind that I am not a expert like bossobass or mark seaton or many others on here this is just my take on it. I just think same size, same price, and more performance.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: DIY Speakers and Subs
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › DIY Speakers and Subs › Was looking at getting Seaton Submersive F2 but alot of people are recommending DIY......