or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers › The Ultimate shootout begins ...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Ultimate shootout begins ... - Page 3  

post #61 of 919
Quote:
Stevenn saying he is too busy to send me his plans, then saying I am avoiding doing an extremely large box. Steve - I am not angry, but I am also not sure how asking for different ideas means I am ruling anything out.
I went back to double check and I don't see or recall saying such a thing although I understand misinterpreting fairly well... I said nothing close. The simple truth is, I'm not willing to help in any way (what I feel) your attempt to discredit the DIY realm and Steve C with a so called LLT. As you well know I never take as strong a position as some regarding sealed, vented or LLT, but I think being above board with our biases and moving forward with that knowledge in mind helps keep everything in perspective. With that being said, my perspective has hampered me a great deal. .
Quote:
"Extreme" is in the eye of the beholder, Steve. Will the market embrace a 20" diameter 56" tall sono LLT? There's only one way to find out. :)
Hey Ed.... Get back to me after you figure it out. ;)
post #62 of 919
That is odd, that looks like 500 and 15 should be in their some where. I don't know why? ;)

Or maybe 250 and 21! :confused:
post #63 of 919
Quote:
This exercise - in its current form - sounds to me like you are setting up the large reflex DIY for a fall. "It stunned our terrier unconscious at 10 yards during the GP session and it knocked small objects off the shelves during the HT evals, but it sounded bloated on music with smeared details and plenty of overhang and it couldn't hold a candle to the Maestro in SQ".

Looking at DIY as just a route to louder/deeper is myopic. DIY is whatever you want it to be - that is the real beauty of the concept. My suggestion is to play your own hand instead of someone else's. State your known preferences up front and try to do them one better. And definitely take your eval room into consideration and make it an integral part of your design.

Take a page from bosso's playbook and build a dual 15" 2nd order 0.6 Q sealed subwoofer of reasonable size which is designed to start rolling off at the approximate frequency which corresponds to the onset of room gain in your eval room. Then commission Phil Marchand to build a "BOSSIS" electronic interface. I'll let Bosso extole the virtues of such a unit, but in essence it will allow you to custom tailor the frequency response and the roll-of profile of your sealed subwoofer to provide a near-perfect complement to the acoustic transfer function of your room.

That DIY project would get my attention in a hurry.
Agreed. This is a superb post with spot on suggestions.

I refrained from entering the thread due to the price constraints listed at the onset.

Actually, build two 2X15s, each at around 5 cubes and use the Acoupower drivers in an opposing push/push config and have 4KW into 4 ohms available to each 2X15. Add the selectable Q and tunes Ed mentions and you'll have a system that will beat the big ported SS sub in every conceivable real life situation, in any room, with any source.

The SS drivers can't handle the power needed and are lacking in other areas for a design of this magnitude and parameters.

I'm with Craig's brother on the Behringer issue. I'd use 2 of these:
http://www.zzounds.com/item--QSCPLX3602

Problem is, you're gonna spend alot more dough to build this system. $6K for the entire system. It will easily best 4 Maestros or 4 Kleiss S15s or 4 DD-18s or 2 Seaton Subs.... Of course, you could build a 2X15 and use a Behringer amp and the SS drivers and use a mono Bassis to select tune and Q manually but...that just ain't gonna give you any idea what it COULD sound like and, other than being cheaper, I don't think it'll perform much better (if at all) than 2 Maestros, etc.

Bosso
post #64 of 919
craigsub- You might want to throw some constraints out there before this gets out of hand. Maybe a price cap or SPL limit something. Max power levels. Formula 1 and dirt track racers don't usually get along for very long. :rolleyes:
post #65 of 919
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by soho54
craigsub- You might want to throw some constraints out there before this gets out of hand. Maybe a price cap or SPL limit something. Max power levels. Formula 1 and dirt track racers don't usually get along for very long. :rolleyes:
There already are some contraints ... We know the drivers will be dual Soundsplinter RP-p15 D4's ... And we will have a couple amps available ... hopefully including this newer ICE/DSP amp.
post #66 of 919
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve nn
I went back to double check and I don't see or recall saying such a thing although I understand misinterpreting fairly well... I said nothing close. The simple truth is, I'm not willing to help in any way (what I feel) your attempt to discredit the DIY realm and Steve C with a so called LLT. As you well know I never take as strong a position as some regarding sealed, vented or LLT, but I think being above board with our biases and moving forward with that knowledge in mind helps keep everything in perspective. With that being said, my perspective has hampered me a great deal. .

Hey Ed.... Get back to me after you figure it out. ;)
Stevenn ... You should be ashamed of yourself for this post. "Discredit the DIY realm and Steve C".

THAT is nonsense. And it is an outright lie. :mad:
post #67 of 919
One of the issues here is that in a different thread, Craig passed this idea of his off as a way to judge the performance of Steve's sub vs commercial subs - that's how the ultimate shootout began.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Craigsub
Steve, I thought it would be of interest for everyone to see what is "size is not object" sub (yours) would do next to a well known and respected "turn key" sub (the Ultra) ...
What is the motivation for this? If he wised up and finally decided he wants to build a great DIY subwoofer, more power to him. If he has no intention of keeping it - which seems logical due to his constant mentioning of LLTs being too large for his liking and how his wife hates them - then it seems a bit odd, esepcially taking testing history into consideration. At the moment, the designs he is considering are very different from Steve's subwoofer, and I think that just needs to be clarified.
post #68 of 919
If you want a DIY sub that competes with some of the subs you have listed as personal favorites and with your stated feelings/preferences from the past testing I really think you should be looking at a pair of Rythmik Servo kits, or if possible get your hands on a pair of his new 15's that will be out soon.

If you just want to be the one to build and thgourouly test out one of the LLT or OSS designs with a SS 15 then you can easily head over to the DIY area and read any of the number of threads of people who have already done this and read imput and instructions from both Steve's.

If you just want to bait people and rig a contest or 'set them up to fall' as some people seem to expect feel free to have at it.

As you have pointed out to others already we don't really know what is on your mind, and I am not about to make any assumptions on what anyone else's motivations are. I truly believe that any of those three options are distinct possibilities but all of your comments in this thread still leave it pretty ambigous as to what exactly you want. If you really want the DIY sub that will sound the best to you, with your documented past I would expect the Rythmik to be right up your alley that will give you evidence that DIY either does or does not compete with commercially available subs. If you just wanted to do the community a favor by being the first to do thourough testing of the LLT designs then trying to pit them in a competition that will include critical listening to music against a more expensive sealed sub IS just setting them up to fail. And repeatedly calling out the two Steve's specifically and asking for designs when you could easily go to the DIY section and find their exact plans just makes it look like you are trying to continue some personal fued and really does all of us here a major disservice as there are many people who would LOVE to see either option #1 or #2.

Just my thoughts on the matter, and I'm not trying to start another fued or even jump on one side or another in an existing one, all I want is to find out exactly what this "contest" is trying to prove.
post #69 of 919
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigsub
Interesting post, Ed. While you may think you have some knowledge about what is going on in my head that I don't, you are mistaken,

For the record ... a few clarifications ...

1. I don't have a preference for sealed subwoofers.
Full stop, Craig. You made all of these statements about a month ago in the below-hotlinked thread.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...1&page=1&pp=30

Quote:
Originally Posted by previously made by Craig
“For the best overall sonic presentation, sealed speakers, whether subwoofer or full range, are the way to go.â€

“And when one gets to subwoofers, unless one has listened to what a properly designed, sealed subwoofer can do, one really is missing out on the best bass money can buy.â€

“Mark Seaton could easily have decided to come out with a "higher SPL per $$$$" by going ported. He is going sealed because it will perform and sound better in a room.â€

“Personally, I bought into the ‘louder is better’ concept until a single 15 inch, sealed subwoofer completely outclassed a quad 12 inch, ported design in every aspect. The sealed unit was tighter, it was deeper, and subjectively more powerful than the ported counterpart.â€

“…..The Maestro, even fresh out of the box, is capable of hitting any level of bass which a reasonable person can tolerate from 18 Hz and up - yet it is extremely articulate ... much more so than is the Ported Subwoofer sets we have.â€

“Eventually, you may get a chance to experience a properly designed, sealed system in your system, and suddenly it will make sense.â€
This is a clear and distinct bias toward sealed subwoofers. I don't have any problems with this, nor should anyone else; we all have preferences.

I just don't understand why you would want to go through the trouble of building a bass reflex subwoofer when your personal preference is clearly sealed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by craigsub
2. I am not setting up the large reflex sub for a fall.
Building a reflex subwoofer - an alignment which you have previously stated is inferior sounding to sealed - is setting up reflex for a fall.

The proposed alignment is not an EBS and will likely exhibit a critically damped anechoic response down to Fb. The result will likely be a rising in-room response and a bloated low-end which will then require some type of high pass filtering to achieve a flat in-room response. Then there are the attendant transient response issues that plague every reflex alignment; something you seem particularly sensitive to.

Unless the reflex you build is an EBS or LLT alignment with an overdamped anechoic alignment and an extremely deep Fb, I have no doubt that you will be able to easily identify its sonic signature in blind testing. And blind testing does not work when the participant in question has a pre-existing bias toward one of the alignments being ABX'd.

Quote:
Originally Posted by craigsub
I asked, in open forum, for ideas in regards to the final design people would like to see.
OK - you have my $0.02 - be true to yourself and your previously stated preferences and build a 2nd order low Q sealed subwoofer which will outperform its OEM counterparts.

We all know reflex has more output per woofer and that's why I'm a big fan of this alignment in OEM applications - because OEM subwoofers are almost by definition undersized, underpowered, underported to some extent - and need all the help they can get.

But in the DIY realm, there is nothing a reflex subwoofer can do that a sealed subwoofer cannot ultimately do better. Yes, it will be less efficient, and yes it will require 2X the drivers, and yes it will cost more and take up more space - but that is the price you pay if you want to keep up with reflex on the output side of things AND also reap the benefits of the inherently superior phase response and transient characteristics of this alignment.

Nobody ever said perfection comes cheap. ;)
post #70 of 919
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Mullen

Take a page from bosso's playbook and build a dual 15" 2nd order 0.6 Q sealed subwoofer of reasonable size which is designed to start rolling off at the approximate frequency which corresponds to the onset of room gain in your eval room. Then commission Phil Marchand to build a "BOSSIS" electronic interface. I'll let Bosso extole the virtues of such a unit, but in essence it will allow you to custom tailor the frequency response and the roll-of profile of your sealed subwoofer to provide a near-perfect complement to the acoustic transfer function of your room.

That DIY project would get my attention in a hurry.
now this is what i'm talking about...dual sealed, low Q ;)...or a critical-Q 2X15 like what i'm building now... :p
post #71 of 919
Craig,

This enclosure will need more than just standard DIY construction methods to minimize vibrations and other pressure variant anomolies. Software sims and driver specs look great on paper, but they're pointless if the enclosure is not rigid (sims and T/S parameters don't apply to non-rigid enclosures), also turbulance plays a significant role in the LF performance of something like this.

Do you have a rough sketch of your idea? I'd be willing to offer my $.02 on the engineering of the enclosure, if you don't mind. Otherwise, I'll just sit back, jeer, and post snide comments.

-Matt
post #72 of 919
Quote:
And repeatedly calling out the two Steve's specifically and asking for designs when you could easily go to the DIY section and find their exact plans just makes it look like you are trying to continue some personal fued and really does all of us here a major disservice as there are many people who would LOVE to see either option #1 or #2.
This sums up my thoughts to the T regarding the matter. Granted it's only my opinion and not a stated truth to be called a liar on, but history has a way of shaping ones conclusions.
post #73 of 919
Thread Starter 
Ed ... Full stop back at you .. Those comments were made based on blind listening impressions.

As with many, you also posted parts of what I said, leaving other information out. I also CLEARLY stated that I did not know whether the Maestro sounded so good because it was sealed, or because ACI does such excellent design work. It was the same with the speakers. I did not say they performed better because they are sealed ... I said that sealed speakers are the way to go because it was a sealed speaker that "won" in blind testing. If next week, I hear a ported speaker that bests the ACI's ... that will be reported accordingly.

There is a difference between looking at a subwoofer, knowing what it is, and declaring that you like it the best, and performing carefully controlled, blind tests and coming up with a preference in that manner. Right now, under those blind conditions, sealed units have won out. This does not preclude a ported deign from besting the sealed design in a future test.

When this subwoofer is done, it will also be evaluated under blind listening conditions.

I will not care if it sounds as good, the same or worse than the sealed subwoofers we have here.

If this design bests what I currently have as my benchmark, I will say so.

This approach is not setting the large, ported design up for a fall. In fact, I sent Mike G. a link to this thread so he could follow it. He seems pretty happy.
post #74 of 919
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by purifiedaudio
Craig,

This enclosure will need more than just standard DIY construction methods to minimize vibrations and other pressure variant anomolies. Software sims and driver specs look great on paper, but they're pointless if the enclosure is not rigid (sims and T/S parameters don't apply to non-rigid enclosures), also turbulance plays a significant role in the LF performance of something like this.

Do you have a rough sketch of your idea? I'd be willing to offer my $.02 on the engineering of the enclosure, if you don't mind. Otherwise, I'll just sit back, jeer, and post snide comments.

-Matt
Matt ... I think the guys at the factory can handle this .. but, if we run into any problems, lok for a phone call ... and thanks ! :)
post #75 of 919
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve nn
This sums up my thoughts to the T regarding the matter. Granted it's only my opinion and not a stated truth to be called a liar on, but history has a way of shaping ones conclusions.
Steve, All I asked was if you wanted your design reproduced. Things have gotten to the point that it is a "calling out" ?

You guys just took a compliment and turned it into something nasty.

I should be surprised, but I am not.

I have been reading about how a ported subwoofer with tuning below 15 Hz gives the best of both worlds between sealed and ported ... and have been reading about it for months.

It is an intriguing concept ... and one I am willing to explore. I asked for suggestions from the forum.

What is so hard to understand about this ? Instead of support, we get conspiracy theories about how I am setting this design up for a fall ... and looking to embarass the two Steves. It is just plain a lie, that I am looking to embarass, call out, set up for a fall .. etc ...

I offered for Ed Mullen to come to the GP session ... and have offered for anyone who wishes to come to our home to witness first hand the final product, and to compare against the commercially available stuff.

Exactly how much more open can I get ?

As for my wife not liking the large box idea: She does not like the vast majority of subwoofers ... this will be no different, except they may handle our room from a spot which she DOES like ... The front left and right sides of our main theater room would be the least offensive in terms of appearance, as there is ample room to the sides of the cabinetry. For reference .. the screen is 8 feet wide, and a 30 inch wide subwoofer will easily fit into each corner.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...irssitting.jpg
post #76 of 919
Having followed this thread since its inception I'm at a loss to understand some of the histrionics posted. Building an oversized traditional reflex design seems like a worthy exercise. I didn't read anywhere that it was Craig's decision to go that route to undermine DIY subs or the Plus/2. Rather the opportunity has presented itself so why not explore it further to see what a properly designed reflex behemoth can do. I've always regarded large enclosures as essential for excellent bass reproduction which is one reason for my choosing dual 6.7cf EP600s. The beta version of this sub was a 9cf monster which was shrunk to accommodate shipping economics and pricing considerations.

Mike Grynicks suggestion of a solid 8.5cf enclosure tuned to 18hz looks very appealing. Part of the resistance to it I suspect stems from the views often expressed that deep extension to single digits somehow equates to superior sound quality, which always makes me chuckle. I get the feeling this sub will raise the bar for how good a reflex design can sound. Rather than dissing the exercise, questioning motivations, and dismissing the project as a forgone conclusion I would like to see how it develops and hopefully Craig/Mike will keep us posted with developments. :cool:
post #77 of 919
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Mullen

We all know reflex has more output per woofer and that's why I'm a big fan of this alignment in OEM applications - because OEM subwoofers are almost by definition undersized, underpowered, underported to some extent - and need all the help they can get.

But in the DIY realm, there is nothing a reflex subwoofer can do that a sealed subwoofer cannot ultimately do better. Yes, it will be less efficient, and yes it will require 2X the drivers, and yes it will cost more and take up more space - but that is the price you pay if you want to keep up with reflex on the output side of things AND also reap the benefits of the inherently superior phase response and transient characteristics of this alignment.

Nobody ever said perfection comes cheap. ;)
the AMEN prize to ya Ed! ;) one need not pay the obscene amounts that are charged for high end sealed designs...and furthermore, i'd very much like to see a servo sub (velo DD18, for example) tested against dual-driver critical-Q alignments (15's or 18's with state of the art drivers).

The DD18,servo15, maestro, revel performa are outstanding achievements in sealed designs but all of them are compromised basically because a single sealed driver, with eq, is a very hard working driver...high pass filtering throws away the 2nd order roll off and introduces added GD and system ringing... :(

I concur with Ed that dual driver sealed designs are definitely something to look at...you can have it all, especially with drivers on the order of the LMS 5400 from TC sounds...two of those in a low Q sealed alignment... :eek:
post #78 of 919
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigsub
Ed ... Full stop back at you .. Those comments were made based on blind listening impressions.

As with many, you also posted parts of what I said, leaving other information out. I also CLEARLY stated that I did not know whether the Maestro sounded so good because it was sealed, or because ACI does such excellent design work. It was the same with the speakers. I did not say they performed better because they are sealed ... I said that sealed speakers are the way to go because it was a sealed speaker that "won" in blind testing. If next week, I hear a ported speaker that bests the ACI's ... that will be reported accordingly.

There is a difference between looking at a subwoofer, knowing what it is, and declaring that you like it the best, and performing carefully controlled, blind tests and coming up with a preference in that manner. Right now, under those blind conditions, sealed units have won out. This does not preclude a ported deign from besting the sealed design in a future test.

When this subwoofer is done, it will also be evaluated under blind listening conditions.

I will not care if it sounds as good, the same or worse than the sealed subwoofers we have here.

If this design bests what I currently have as my benchmark, I will say so.

This approach is not setting the large, ported design up for a fall. In fact, I sent Mike G. a link to this thread so he could follow it. He seems pretty happy.
Lest anyone think I misrepresented your position (despite the fact that I hotlinked the thread), here is your post in its entirety:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig
The one area that really is most frustrating in audio today is the demise of listening.

Listening has, to many people, become an idea to be dismissed as "magic dust" or "sonic Voo Doo". We even have some speaker companies directly insulting listening tests as "self proclaimed golden ears" using "puffery".

Speaking personally, and having had well in excess of 100 loudspeaker pairs and 100 subwoofers in our home, with literally 100's of blind tests being done, I have experienced the following:

1. Ported subwoofers will play louder for the same $$$$ as their sealed counterparts, at the subwoofer's tuning point.

2. Ported loudspeakers will play louder than sealed loudspeakers at the speaker's tuning point.

3. Ported subwoofers/loudspeakers can sound very good.

4. For the best overall sonic presentation, sealed speakers, whether subwoofer or full range, are the way to go.

A great example is the ACI Essence V. Look at the specs, and they look like nothing special. However, for $1800 per pair, I have heard nothing which comes close to their performance, both on music and for home theater.

ACI also builds ported speakers - but even for their ported designs, they make available port plugs when using a subwoofer. The ported designs are their smaller, bookshelf speakers, which need the port for extension, but a subwoofer eliminates that need.

And when one gets to subwoofers, unless one has listened to what a properly designed, sealed subwoofer can do, one really is missing out on the best bass money can buy.

Mark Seaton could easily have decided to come out with a "higher SPL per $$$$" by going ported. He is going sealed because it will perform and sound better in a room.

Bossobass learned the same thing years ago. He is running quad 15 inch sealed drivers with plenty of power.

Personally, I bought into the "louder is better" concept until a single 15 inch, sealed subwoofer completely outclassed a quad 12 inch, ported design in every aspect. The sealed unit was tighter, it was deeper, and subjectively more powerful than the ported counterpart.

I will never forget my reaction when the ACI Maestro was revealed to be the winner over the SVS B4+ ... The moderator of this event was a gent who builds pro audio loudspeakers for a living, including systems which sell for well over $100,000. For pro-audio, they use ported or horn loaded designs, because they need loud. I had expected the B4+ to totally clean the Maestro's "clock", as the saying goes. I was really surprised. He was not.

For his home system ? He uses twin Paradigm Servo 15 V.2's. Here is a guy who could easily build a monster ported sub, but who wants the best sound quality, and decided sealed was the way to go.

For those who love the idea that ported gives more SPL per dollar, that is cool. We all start by making decisions based on our pocketbooks and our opinions as to what is best for the $$$$.

Eventually, you may get a chance to experience a properly designed, sealed system in your system, and suddenly it will make sense.
So - through blind testing - you have come to the conclusion that sealed subwoofers sound better than reflex, and therefore they are your personal preference.

There is nothing wrong with keeping an open mind, but there is also nothing special or unique about the proposed reflex design that suggests the outcome of your next blind listening session will be any different.
post #79 of 919
New floorstanders, Craig?
post #80 of 919
Thread Starter 
jakeman .. those are a pair of AV123's RS 1K's ... that pic is 19 months old .. in fact, the ACI's replaced those speakers after a Blind Test last year.
post #81 of 919
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kramskoi
the AMEN prize to ya Ed! ;) one need not pay the obscene amounts that are charged for high end sealed designs...and furthermore, i'd very much like to see a servo sub (velo DD18, for example) tested against dual-driver critical-Q alignments (15's or 18's with state of the art drivers).

The DD18,servo15, maestro, revel performa are outstanding achievements in sealed designs but all of them are compromised basically because a single sealed driver, with eq, is a very hard working driver...high pass filtering throws away the 2nd order roll off and introduces added GD and system ringing... :(

I concur with Ed that dual driver sealed designs are definitely something to look at...you can have it all, especially with drivers on the order of the LMS 5400 from TC sounds...two of those in a low Q sealed alignment... :eek:
Depending on the results of the dual 15 inch subs in this exercise, we are looking at some pretty potent 18 inchers for a sealed design.
post #82 of 919
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve nn
I went back to double check and I don't see or recall saying such a thing although I understand misinterpreting fairly well... I said nothing close.
It was said in another thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by steve nn
It would be terribly interesting Craig, although I already have a general idea. In all sincerity, it would be quite the honor though. Maybe it's more of a matter of timing when some other things are out of the way first and I figure out just what I want to do "regarding bass" in the future . I'm sure your sensitive to this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigsub
Hey, I asked for input, remember ? YOU were too busy ... :p ;) :D

I am open to any and all design ideas. :)

Quote:
Originally Posted by steve nn
And take away all your fun figuring this out away. :) I see you have a Thread discussing the topic now, so you should come up with a few different options I'm sure.
post #83 of 919
Quote:
Mike Grynicks suggestion of a solid 8.5cf enclosure tuned to 18hz looks very appealing. Part of the resistance to it I suspect stems from the views often expressed that deep extension to single digits somehow equates to superior sound quality, which always makes me chuckle.
I think you have at least a somewhat good idea how a ported sub works, so it should be obvious to you why an LLT ported sub will have better sound quality than the traditional design Mike is suggesting.

Quote:
I get the feeling this sub will raise the bar for how good a reflex design can sound
:rolleyes: :D I can say with confidence that won't be the case.

Ed has presented a solid case. Anything besides a sealed or LLT IS setting up for failure.

Craig, with those speakers in the way, a sub like Steve's would not fit in your corner.
post #84 of 919
Got bored.
LL
post #85 of 919
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveCallas

Ed has presented a solid case. Anything besides a sealed or LLT IS setting up for failure.
Then why not build one of each? 2 drivers were ordered correct? ;)

DIY sealed vs DIY LLT vs everything else.... sounds like the way to go.



JR
post #86 of 919
Hey UNICRON-WMD,

If those are the posts in question, I don't see where I stated anything in regards to time. Timing was mentioned once, but in no way shape or form does that relate to time in the context that it was mentioned. Bottom line, it really doesn't matter or apply to what the issue at hand imo.
Quote:
Craig, with those speakers in the way, a sub like Steve's would not fit in your corner.
No doubt about it. I was aiming for the big 5 with your help on this project Steve, but admittedly size was the least of my concerns. My preference in tune has been drifting lower every since I did the PB12-Ultra/2..Maestro Thread.
post #87 of 919
Remember a few things people. This all kind of started with me being skeptical of some DIY subs and the claims behind them. I stated that more DIYers should test their subs and Craig agreed.

I don't think Craig is trying to "call out" anyone. Ok, maybe SteveC:) The whole point is to compare a LLT sub to some of the commercial. Craig just wanted to use either Steve's designs.

The other thing people need to remember, wood/MDF is cheap. Craig should be able to build a LLT, a sealed sub and a design by his brother and just swap out the drivers.

This is going to be a blind test and "anyone is welcome to come". What is the problem?

At the end of the day, these are all just subs. Let's not make everything said personal.
post #88 of 919
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveCallas
I think you have at least a somewhat good idea how a ported sub works, so it should be obvious to you why an LLT ported sub will have better sound quality than the traditional design Mike is suggesting.


:rolleyes: :D I can say with confidence that won't be the case.
Without you knowing design parameters and specs on the more basic things like amp, port design, driver implmentation, enclosure materials, crossover electronics, final size, shape of enclosure to mention just a few, why do I get the feeling that you have developed omnipotent powers? :rolleyes: Maybe its because you have have a tendency to rush to conclusions without the necessary information required to make an assessment.

Suffice it to say not everyone shares your infatuation with large cylinders and that excellent bass reproduction isn't restricted to any one design type. I'm keeping an open mind on this project.
post #89 of 919
Thread Starter 
WMD ... Well said.

Stevenn .. how wide is your sub ?
post #90 of 919
Quote:
The whole point is to compare a LLT sub to some of the commercial.
Thats assuming he actually builds a true LLT sub.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
This thread is locked  
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers › The Ultimate shootout begins ...