AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/)
-   DIY Speakers and Subs (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/155-diy-speakers-subs/)
-   -   Does this Winisd Model look right? (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/155-diy-speakers-subs/3097098-does-winisd-model-look-right.html)

ratm 10-19-2019 06:56 AM

Does this Winisd Model look right?
 
1 Attachment(s)
So I was trying to get a feel for Winisd before I pull the trigger on drivers. I was all set on getting the FiCar Ht3 and came across the SI HST-18 (which looks like a beast). And for the fun of it, I also added the UM 18-22. I entered the values exactly as they are listed on each brands website. For consistency, I choose a 6 cubic foot box (which I have modeled in another post). All are being driven with 1000 watts


Blue is SI 18
Red is Ficar
Green is Dayton.


Each is posted with a 15hz Highpass filter. I pulled that out of thin air. So if its wrong, let me know and I will model it again.

trojantrow 10-19-2019 07:45 AM

The model looks ok for the graph you are on.

But you need to compare cone excursions.

It looks to me that these drivers all need different box sizes to each other to achieve the same overall Q value.

What would be a better test for you is to do the following.

1. Figure out what the biggest enclosure size you are happy with ( assuming 6cu ft)

2. Decide what overall Q you are happy with. ( depends on room and usage) maybe you can explain more.

3 . Se what box size is needed for each of the woofers to achieve the desired Q witching WinISD and feed them with 1000W.

Then compare how close all drivers are to Xmas.

The one that’s furthest away from Xmax is the best driver.

I say best driver for output. Doesn’t really say what’s the best driver period. All depends on the distortion created at certain Xmas compared to another.

For use with music and HT and going sealed, I tend to go for a lower Q. Like 0.57 or something like that.

I do this because room gain takes care out the output loss from 40 to 100hz. And it’s actually better as it rolls off sooner but not as steep. So the in room peaks are easier to tame with eq.

But the lower Q driver will extend lower.

If you wanted the best output 30hz and above, feed with more power and put in a smaller box.

If you want ridiculous volumes across all frequencies you want the big box, big xmax big power.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ratm 10-19-2019 07:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by trojantrow (Post 58704370)
The model looks ok for the graph you are on.

But you need to compare cone excursions.

It looks to me that these drivers all need different box sizes to each other to achieve the same overall Q value.

What would be a better test for you is to do the following.
1. Figure out what the biggest enclosure size you are happy with ( assuming 6cu ft)

6 foot is what Fi Car is recommending for their driver. I modeled a box I am happy with

2. Decide what overall Q you are happy with. ( depends on room and usage) maybe you can explain more.

I am not sure what Overall Q means. My room is 14 x 25 with a cathedral ceiling in the front (14 ft wall) and sloping towards my LP. It will be for 95% TV and movies and the occasional music session.


3 . Se what box size is needed for each of the woofers to achieve the desired Q witching WinISD and feed them with 1000W.

Then compare how close all drivers are to Xmas.

The one that’s furthest away from Xmax is the best driver.

I say best driver for output. Doesn’t really say what’s the best driver period. All depends on the distortion created at certain Xmas compared to another.

For use with music and HT and going sealed, I tend to go for a lower Q. Like 0.57 or something like that.

I do this because room gain takes care out the output loss from 40 to 100hz. And it’s actually better as it rolls off sooner but not as steep. So the in room peaks are easier to tame with eq.

But the lower Q driver will extend lower.

If you wanted the best output 30hz and above, feed with more power and put in a smaller box.

If you want ridiculous volumes across all frequencies you want the big box, big xmax big power.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


See above.

smcmillan2 10-19-2019 09:53 AM

1 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by ratm (Post 58704188)
For consistency, I choose a 6 cubic foot box (which I have modeled in another post). All are being driven with 1000 watts.

Each is posted with a 15hz Highpass filter. I pulled that out of thin air. So if its wrong, let me know and I will model it again.

Drop the HPF. With 1kw none of the drivers exceeds Xmax in 6cuft boxes.

Other than that, your model matches what I came up with. The UM18 is best bang-for-buck, but 1kw on it leaves less headroom than the others (usable excursion on the UM18 is ~28mm according to information posted in other threads). If you have the money to spend on the other drivers and amps to drive them, the HT-3 is the better performer, although the HST-18 digs slightly deeper.

Here's what I get with each driver at xmax:
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/attac...mentid=2629298

ratm 10-19-2019 10:41 AM

Thanks Man. I was looking at the Crown XLS2502 to drive a pair of them. Thoughts?

smcmillan2 10-19-2019 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratm (Post 58705140)
Thanks Man. I was looking at the Crown XLS2502 to drive a pair of them. Thoughts?

Depends on which drivers, desired SPL and what you plan on using for EQ (miniDSP?). There's a lot left on the table if you go with the HT-3 or HST-18, less if using the UM18s.

I think I recall the measured output of the NX6000 to be ~1500wpc at 4 ohms. Grab an NX6000D and you've got the power you need to drive a pair of any of them to at or near Xmax, and DSP to boot. Note that the NX6k isn't 2 ohm stable so you'll need to provide 4 ohm loads if you go that route.

ratm 10-19-2019 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smcmillan2 (Post 58705308)
Depends on which drivers, desired SPL and what you plan on using for EQ (miniDSP?). There's a lot left on the table if you go with the HT-3 or HST-18, less if using the UM18s.

I think I recall the measured output of the NX6000 to be ~1500wpc at 4 ohms. Grab an NX6000D and you've got the power you need to drive a pair of any of them to at or near Xmax, and DSP to boot. Note that the NX6k isn't 2 ohm stable so you'll need to provide 4 ohm loads if you go that route.


Thanks man. I think I have settled on the FiCar HT3. I hear what you are saying about the NX6000D. Would it be better to get the drivers in 4 ohm and run them with the NX6k? Or get them in 2 ohm and run them with this Crown Amp



https://www.americanmusical.com/Item--i-CRO-XLS250o


Both have DSP and I have read that the Crown amps are noticeably quieter. I would have no problem doing the fan mod on the NX6k.

trojantrow 10-19-2019 12:48 PM

If it were me I would get the nx6000d and mid the fans to make them quiet.. from what I’ve read, no other amp can touch the nx6000d for DSP function at the same price point.

4ohms is better than 2. You get more power with 2 but subjectively more distortion and definitely more heat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

smcmillan2 10-19-2019 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratm (Post 58705456)
Thanks man. I think I have settled on the FiCar HT3. I hear what you are saying about the NX6000D. Would it be better to get the drivers in 4 ohm and run them with the NX6k? Or get them in 2 ohm and run them with this Crown Amp



https://www.americanmusical.com/Item--i-CRO-XLS250o


Both have DSP and I have read that the Crown amps are noticeably quieter. I would have no problem doing the fan mod on the NX6k.

I have no experience with the Crown amps, but from what I have read the DSP on the Behringers (which I own 2 of for full disclaimer) is superior.

And as trojantrow mentioned, driving them at 4 ohms is easier on the amp vs. 2 ohm.

ratm 10-19-2019 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smcmillan2 (Post 58706486)
I have no experience with the Crown amps, but from what I have read the DSP on the Behringers (which I own 2 of for full disclaimer) is superior.

And as trojantrow mentioned, driving them at 4 ohms is easier on the amp vs. 2 ohm.


Fantastic!

Gorilla Killa 10-19-2019 07:04 PM

Out of all of them the UM will give the flatter response and has the lowest inductance. I don't even think it needs a lossy model and the difference is small. Fi doesn't list Le so its a guess but they are known to exhibit the hump.

FIHT3 6 cuft
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/attac...1&d=1571532087

HST18 4cuft
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/attac...1&d=1571532112

UM18 4 cuft
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/attac...1&d=1571532447

ratm 10-20-2019 07:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gorilla Killa (Post 58706958)
Out of all of them the UM will give the flatter response and has the lowest inductance. I don't even think it needs a lossy model and the difference is small. Fi doesn't list Le so its a guess but they are known to exhibit the hump.

FIHT3 6 cuft
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/attac...1&d=1571532087

HST18 4cuft
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/attac...1&d=1571532112

UM18 4 cuft
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/attac...1&d=1571532447


I can't see any of those pics really. Another question. Does the UM18 or HST graph change if I go with a 6 cuft box? Or should I stick with 4 cuft?

Gorilla Killa 10-20-2019 10:26 AM

Those sizes give you a qtc .7 which is what you want for sealed.

Pics showed in your quote for me.

ratm 10-20-2019 10:40 AM

I see them too. I just can’t make them any bigger to see them
Better

trojantrow 10-20-2019 10:44 AM

Personally I think the Desired QSC value is dependant on personal preference and intended usage.

For movies where bass goes very deep I recommend a lower QTC of around 0.55 to 0.6. (Larger box)

The bass will start to roll off sooner but will go lower. Room gain will make up for the earlier roll off.

And you will get more output at lower frequencies.

Subjectively, I’ve also heard that the lower Q sub will be more musical as the amp has more control over the cone. Rather than the air in the box having too much control over it.

Watch your Xmas though. Requires less power to reach xmax


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ratm 10-20-2019 11:03 AM

Thanks Trojan. I’m
Not looking to get too technical. I’ll stick with whatever the manufacture recommends.

MKtheater 10-21-2019 02:59 PM

Like I said before the go to bang for buck is the UM18. It measured very well on Databass. When you simulate these remember the Um18 has a rated x-max like other pro drivers where the HT drivers rate them differently which is higher x-max. To compare fairly as output goes to x-max you would use 28mm of x-max for the UM18. The databass numbers show this as it is close to higher x-max drivers.

Gorilla Killa 10-21-2019 03:32 PM


ratm 10-21-2019 03:39 PM


Thanks GK!


What do the different lines signify (red vs grey)?

Gorilla Killa 10-21-2019 05:36 PM

Red lines are adjusted for inductance on the motors, loss of Bl in short. Complex topic so Google if you are inclined The UM is well designed and probably doesn't need to be run with that feature but i did it anyway.

ratm 10-22-2019 04:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gorilla Killa (Post 58713990)
Red lines are adjusted for inductance on the motors, loss of Bl in short. Complex topic so Google if you are inclined The UM is well designed and probably doesn't need to be run with that feature but i did it anyway.


Thank you!


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:03 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.