AVS Forum banner
1 - 20 of 51 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,083 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
The price would work out the same.


I never worked the kinks out of the modeling thing. What would have more output? Looking for best above 20 hz, and headroom. Already have the ep2500, and bassis eq.


So if you were doing it, and your significant other said 2 foot cube or less, what would you do?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
214 Posts
The Maelestrom has more low end output the two MJ-18s but the 2 MJ-18s will have more output for the same power.




Purple is two MJ-18s and Yellow is the Maelstrom.


If it was me... I would get two MJ-18s and built two boxes, they could be smaller than 8 cubic feet, and you have a more even in room response at all your listening positions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,083 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Thanks for the graphs!


I am definitely stuck with one box. With the two mj's, in one box, would it help get rid of any bass holes I have? No matter where I put my sub, I can always find a spot where there is a null zone.


Looking at the graphs, it really looks like the maelstrom has a slight edge, certainly in simplicity. Since I can drive each configuration to it's max with an ep2500, efficiency between the two would not matter so much - or am I reading that wrong?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,083 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
No, on another thread, someone posted that 2 of the mj's would work well in a single 24" cube.


Too good to be true?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,558 Posts
That was me. I originally was comparing 2 MJ18M's to one ported SDX since there was a limited box size and budget. I actually think that this is a good question here though. On paper the Mal-X will have a more extended natural response and a bit more low end output. Possibly also a better top end due to less inductance and XBL2. However I have to wonder after some comments from Kevin whether the Mal-x can truly use all of that xmax and whether it is realistic to expect it to perform to that level. On paper the 2 MJ18's have more sensitivity and upper bass output and are also cheaper.


I sort of lean towards the 2 MJ's coming closer to the modeled output and response since they are asked for relatively easily attainable performance compared to the 1 Mal=X which is asked for better than twice as much. I'd like to see someone do this comparo.
I wonder whether the MJ's would sound as good as the Mal-X? That's the big question. The MJ's will need some EQ on the low end and I wonder how bad the inductance is.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,083 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Price is within $100.


Would there be less room nodes with two in one box, or are they close enough together that it would not make any difference?


The sub would be in a corner. All I do know is it would kick butt over the 12" tc 2K that is there now.

The eq should not be a problem, already have that.


Dan, would sensitivity going to be an issue with the available power?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,575 Posts
I see no reason to assume they're high inductance with 12mm of X-max. The specs read like a pro sound driver, IMO. They won't do well below 30Hz and they'll have good output numbers above 30Hz. There is a huge sensitivity advantage with 2 of them at 93.4dB each, but the requirement for boost down low still requires PH and X-max capabilities that these drivers don't possess.


I'm with DS-21 and Will; go for the quality driver and the driver that's better suited to the application (HT). A single M-X equals 4-MJs at 20Hz.


I also agree with N8 that the IXL would be the driver to make a comparison with the M-X. 2-IXLs would best the single M-X in the single box, as defined. The problem here is that the amplifier is also defined and it's one that can't feed a 2 ohm load, so iy won't be able to feed the 2-IXL sub enough juice at 8 ohms to beat a single M-X into 4 ohms.


M-X FTW.


Bosso
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,083 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
Ok, I will stick with maelstrom. (when it becomes available)


This sub will be tucked in a corner, a wall on two sides, and the wwmt tower on the other. Keeping the same mandatory cube size in mind, would it be possible to spice things up with a pair of the matching passive radiators? If I did do radiators, would I have to make the baffles on those two layers also? If that were the case, I *may* be able to let it grow taller a couple inches also. (more mdf anyways, and that forgiveness over permission thing)


I think it will be potent enough for me as it is, hopefully indestructible. My 12" tc2K is showing signs around the edge that it is not capable.


I guess the bottom line here is, given the constraints of footprint, ep 2500, what is the best, most bang for the size, that is possible?


It is ironic to me that I consider the power of the ep 2500 a constraint! (But the Hoffman iron law or whatever is still in the drivers seat)


Would 2 of the IXL's win over the single maelstrom? Each coil would have it's own channel of the ep 2500?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,220 Posts
What those graphs aren't showing are the benefits of acoustic coupling, assuming you are going to have the 2 drivers placed next to or near each other.


If a subwoofer is positioned to within 1/4 wavelength of another subwoofer the sound waves will acoustically couple and one can achieve a maximum 6 dB increase in output over just running the two separately.


This is a no contest. 2 MJ18's all day long.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,558 Posts
I would go with a single Mal X too, but I don't think it is so cut and dry. I'd have to give the advantage in sensitivity and upper bass output to the MJ18-M's. I'd also give them the edge on thermal compression/ power handling over the single Mal-X especially in the music range where the extra sensitivity requires less power and then this is plit between 2 motors. The inductance for both drivers is pretty much speculation as there has been no thorough testing done on either driver. Not everyone agrees that this is that big of a deal anyway. The Mal X should do better in the low bass with an xmax of 33mm and a linear design versus 15mm xmax and a regular overhung design for the MJ18M's. But realistically which do you think will be cleaner and less distressed? The one driver asked to produce a complex signal requiring a displacement of 25mm one way from the driver , or the same signal through the 2 cheaper drivers that only need to use 12.5mm of throw?


I don't think that the pair of IXL18's are a valid comparison. They are more expensive than the 1 Mal-X and need just as large of a box. If the budget is wide open and you are just trying to make the most out of a 24" cube all kinds of options open up. Why not shoehorn 2 Mal-X's in there instead of the 2 IXL's?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,083 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ricci /forum/post/15424280



I don't think that the pair of IXL18's are a valid comparison. They are more expensive than the 1 Mal-X and need just as large of a box. If the budget is wide open and you are just trying to make the most out of a 24" cube all kinds of options open up. Why not shoehorn 2 Mal-X's in there instead of the 2 IXL's?

Largely because I am fairly ignorant in making a choice here. The two IXL's are not out of bounds, I can save up my cookie money. I just do not want to put time/money/effort into a project on too much of an experimental basis.

So putting two 18's in a box that would normally have one will not punch the diminishing returns graph too hard? The two IXL's would come in maybe three hundred bucks cheaper than one maelstrom.


Here is what bothers me the most about my current setup, other than the fact that it seems headed into self-destruction: Watching a movie that is mostly low bass impact, then a scene comes on that makes the sub go through some torture, bad noise. Scramble for the remote to turn it down.

I guess that means I need more headroom. I really have no idea if a single maelstrom would put an end to that, my HT really is not that big. For some silly reason, I thought the tc 12 2k would put an end to it. I burned up two nht 1259's in the same cabinet before that! (several amps ago. I also smoked me up a buttkicker - hence the ep2500)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,575 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by mynym /forum/post/15424226


What those graphs aren't showing are the benefits of acoustic coupling, assuming you are going to have the 2 drivers placed next to or near each other.


If a subwoofer is positioned to within 1/4 wavelength of another subwoofer the sound waves will acoustically couple and one can achieve a maximum 6 dB increase in output over just running the two separately.


This is a no contest. 2 MJ18's all day long.

If the input power is that same, add 3dB, not 6dB. Unfortunately, the dual 4 ohm or single 8 ohm load, if wired in series, negates some of that gain because the M-X will have 1.5dB more power available from the same amp.


As Ricci points out, the sensitivity advantage above 30Hz goes to the MJ-18s, so it depends on the app.


The point is moot below 30Hz, as the MJ-18s will need 6-10dB of boost to equal the M-X-18s output, which power isn't available in the EP 2500 at 8 ohms, nor which could they handle if the power was available.


Bosso
 
1 - 20 of 51 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top