I agree but then again the same can be said for matching mid and tweeter. However, I realise that you may reduce the tweeter volume within reason at the crossover.It will also limit subwoofer selection greatly.
I agree but then again the same can be said for matching mid and tweeter. However, I realise that you may reduce the tweeter volume within reason at the crossover.It will also limit subwoofer selection greatly.
There are some Kippel tests to be found. Looks like that at least Xmax is about half the spec (with generous 20%THD limit)The SB woofers you mention might be good , but we want some evidence that they really are as good as you think .
Among the ASR members separate subwoofer is mostly considered a must have. Not everyone agrees.Hello,
Can you explain why the placement of the subwoofer in the same box as the other speakers is a design compromise?
What would be the ideal design?
Amphion and some other company which I can't remember have used the SW26The SB woofers you mention might be good , but we want some evidence that they really are as good as you think .
I haven´t found any reviews that can back up your claims, and I havent seen those subwoofers used by other highly regarded brands that make subwoofers.
Peerless xls 10 and 12 inch woofers can be found in many other subwoofer brands ( Sigberg , Amphion, legend acoustics, GRIMM and many more …)
Is this standard for SB ? The same can apparently be said about SB 17CAC-35 , xmax is half the spec.There are some Kippel tests to be found. Looks like that at least Xmax is about half the spec (with generous 20%THD limit)
Hmm… I dont want to be rude but… Why are you starting this thread if you already have all the answers ? A bunch of people have already explained that building everything with 4 drivers in a small cabinett is not optimal . Why do you want to go 4 way and use passive crossovers, when you probably can get much better results with a 3-way in such small boxes with a dsp crossover ?I don't want to use separate subwoofer. Also I'm using passive crossover in T/M because tame to big breakup in middome and in low passive crossover, it cost a lot. Also I prefer sealed enclosure no port, no PR.
The SB woofers you mention might be good , but we want some evidence that they really are as good as you think .
Peerless xls 10 and 12 inch woofers can be found in many other subwoofer brands ( Sigberg , Amphion, legend acoustics, GRIMM and many more …)
Just enough is probably not enough (if you actually intent to play loud). Note that most power will be in the bass:https://audioxpress.com/article/test-bench-the-l26roy-10-subwoofer-from-seas - your planned Seas L26Roy is a good choice, IMO. It has just enough displacement to keep up with the Purifi 8 if you decide to stick with that design.
Exactly.I don't like the idea of mixing high excursion drivers with midrange frequencies
Super YESPurifi 10
Can I ask what graph is this? Might be average crestfactor?Just enough is probably not enough (if you actually intent to play loud). Note that most power will be in the bass:
View attachment 212314
So the sub will need about 5 to 10 dB more headroom than the rest. If you do room EQ, probably add another 6~10dB or so.
Thanks for new suggestion and simulations! I might not play over 86dbspl at most, 96dbspl for max target spl which use in measurements, +12db headroom is enough I think?(I don't know well)There is another option of course: just add another 8" Purifi and then make it a .5 way. It will yield about the same max SPL as a decent 10" on the side (like the Seas), but makes the enclosure much easier (just one chamber needed). It's also the most efficient solution > 35 Hz.
Here is 2x Purifi (red) vs 1x L26ROY (blue) MaxSPL:
View attachment 212316
Note that something like the 10" Dayton HE will only have an advantage below 40 Hz, and it's only 4dB at 20 Hz. Given that, you'll need to feed it loads of power because it's inefficient. If <40 Hz is a priority, that might make sense.
The fact that you dont know that a notch filter also can be done in a dsp much easier and much better than going passive, shows that you need to read and learn a lot before you start to build. I dont want to stop your entusiasm, but dont buy superexpensive drivers if you dont have the tools to make it good.As I saw in Hificompass review, he said breakup made by hysteresis in voicecoil which is 15khz in M74b only could be tamed by passive notch filter. Is he wrong?
Oh, 3,5rd harmonic distortion peak due to hysteresis peak in on axis could be tame by DSP? I didn't know that. As I study, making high impedance by passive series notch filter in that curve is only solution.The fact that you dont know that a notch filter also can be done in a dsp much easier and much better than going passive, shows that you need to read and learn a lot before you start to build. I dont want to stop your entusiasm, but dont buy superexpensive drivers if you dont have the tools to make it good.