Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

Hey, New CO & Woofs /XBL^2/ Very Interesting Drivers!


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
72 replies to this topic

#21 of 73 OFFLINE   Chad Kuypers

Chad Kuypers

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 79 posts
  • Join Date: May 08 2000

Posted December 20 2004 - 04:59 PM

Quote:
Is there a set date for the launch of the website? Or is it still up in the air?


While it is not completely up, there is product info posted on the site now. The ordering/contact info etc. will be up tomorrow/Tuesday and we will be completely ready to roll by Wednesday. Atlas subs are in stock while the Avalanche are still a week or so away from being available. Recommended enclosures and other info will slowly trickle into place on the website by the end of the week. The Atlas subwoofers can do so many things that organizing and explaining their abilities in detail has been a challenge. Of course, listening to them has been a pleasure. Posted Image There should be some reviews popping up soon too...


Chad Kuypers
Ascendant Audio

#22 of 73 OFFLINE   Geoff L

Geoff L

    Screenwriter



  • 1,702 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 09 2000

Posted December 21 2004 - 04:52 AM

Anyboby been able to see or get to anything at Chads site?

I've checked a number of times, yesterday and today, and only the Home page has some print. All links seem dead blank pages...Except (Info) and it says web site is still under construction...

This is all I've found & it's at the Home page:
======>
Welcome to Ascendant Audio. At this time the website is still under development. We are working as quickly as possible to get everything up and running ASAP. Thank you for your patience!

We are currently fully stocked with both the Atlas 12 and Atlas 15 subwoofers. We will begin taking orders and shipping product by the 22nd. You will be able to place your order by phone or directly on our website. The larger Avalanche subwoofers are about a week away from being available for purchase. We will accept orders on these drivers as well if you want to reserve one ahead of time, or you can just wait until they are available to ship.

Contact information including phone numbers and email addresses will be up by the end of the day on December 21st. We are very excited to bring these fantastic new products to the market.

Again we thank you for you patience as we get everything ready to accept orders and ship product.
======>

Has anyone been able to see some product, or "anything aside" from the printed above??

Thanks
Geoff ¥
~{ Speak of what you know, listen to what you don't.! }~  

#23 of 73 OFFLINE   David_P

David_P

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 149 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 12 2003

Posted December 21 2004 - 05:11 AM

works for me...

http://www.ascendant...om/Products.htm

gives links to atlas and avalanche drivers, Atlas product info is pretty much complete, avalanche T/S is all there, physical info (cutouts, size, weight etc) is spotty, probably because they're still being built?

David

#24 of 73 OFFLINE   Geoff L

Geoff L

    Screenwriter



  • 1,702 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 09 2000

Posted December 21 2004 - 06:40 AM

Thats screwy, all I get is a blank page with the ~{Home, Info, Contact, etc, link panel at the top}~. Links all work, but I just get a blank page once it loads. It dose say Page-2 in your link, but the rest is blank...

More than likely it's a problem with my garbage MSN/Web.TV not being able to read/recognize it, but usualy it's not a problem unless it's a pdf file, and the address isn't, ugg. Posted Image

Oh well, that bites for me..! Posted Image

Bummer
Geoff ¥

Edit: Now it works, I kept hitting products and presto it's their. Starange but cool....Posted Image
~{ Speak of what you know, listen to what you don't.! }~  

#25 of 73 OFFLINE   KurtJ

KurtJ

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 80 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 14 2002

Posted December 21 2004 - 12:08 PM

Ascendant Audio seems to have hit a home run! I was considering the Tumult, but I think Santa may bring me something else.Posted Image

#26 of 73 OFFLINE   Brian Bunge

Brian Bunge

    Producer



  • 3,719 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 11 2000

Posted December 21 2004 - 01:38 PM

Chad,

That's awesome! I sure could use a pair of those Atlas 15's for an IB!Posted Image
Brian Bunge
RAD Home Theater

#27 of 73 OFFLINE   Bryan Michael

Bryan Michael

    Supporting Actor



  • 564 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 02 2002

Posted December 21 2004 - 03:16 PM

i have a few q about this sub. i have dual av15 in a huge box. i was thinking of upgradeing to eather 4 av15 or 2 Tumult ir would 2 of the Avalanche 18 be best?
there are olny 2 types of people in the world the irish and thoes who want to be irish

#28 of 73 OFFLINE   JimPeitersen

JimPeitersen

    Second Unit



  • 474 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 07 2001

Posted December 21 2004 - 04:52 PM

Two AV15 = 7.6 L swept volume
One Avalanche 18 = 6.5 L
Four AV15 = 15.2 L
Two Avalance 18 = 13 L
One Tumult = 5.1 L

Clearly, the 4 AV15's will displace the most air. When you figure in the "linear" displacement of the XBL2 motors, it would be a toss up.
JP

#29 of 73 OFFLINE   Chad Kuypers

Chad Kuypers

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 79 posts
  • Join Date: May 08 2000

Posted December 21 2004 - 09:09 PM

There is some more info up on the website. In the next few days I hope to get all of the wiring diagams and enclosure recommendations posted. Thanks for your patience!

Quote:
avalanche T/S is all there, physical info (cutouts, size, weight etc) is spotty, probably because they're still being built?


I am sorry about the dimensions on the Avalanche 18 not being up. I was at home and did not want to accidentally post the wrong dimensions. I will also post the weight information tomorrow/Wednesday night.


Quote:
That's awesome! I sure could use a pair of those Atlas 15's for an IB!


Sounds like a plan. Posted Image If you are using a pair of them in an IB, you can just wire up the smaller 2 ohm voice coils in series to get a nice 4 ohm load. (This info will be up on the website soon...) In this setup, you can choose a Qts between ~.5 and 1.05. If you set the Qts to .7 you get an F3 close to 20 Hz...


Chad Kuypers
Ascendant Audio

#30 of 73 OFFLINE   Rob Bird

Rob Bird

    Agent



  • 47 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 21 2004

Posted December 22 2004 - 06:00 AM

Holy Moley. The Avalanche 18 in a 250L sealed enclosure is a pure monster. I mean, it's only down 7db at 20hz and down 12db at 14.5!!!!!!!!!!!!! And that's with a _peak_ group delay of 9.37ms at 20hz. I'm thinking about one in a smaller 200L enclosure.

Wish I could find room for the 700L vented box tuned to 10hz, though. Can you say down 8.27db at 10hz?

"No honey, it's a...new...bulldozer for uncle bob"

#31 of 73 OFFLINE   Rob Bird

Rob Bird

    Agent



  • 47 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 21 2004

Posted December 23 2004 - 12:06 AM

Chad,

Speaking of efficiency, what's the efficiency of the Avalanche drivers?

Also, is there any chance of having larger pics that you see when you click on the smaller ones on the page? I'd like to see the drivers up close and internet like Posted Image

Great site, btw...nice use of font sizes and layout.
Rob

#32 of 73 OFFLINE   Brian-K-Owens

Brian-K-Owens

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 194 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 06 2003

Posted December 23 2004 - 06:20 AM

I have an Avalanche 15 on order and can not wait to compare it side by side with one of my Tumults. I will post the results soon after it is received. . . .

Brian Owens
Brian Owens

#33 of 73 OFFLINE   ThomasW

ThomasW

    Screenwriter



  • 2,282 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 06 1999

Posted December 23 2004 - 03:58 PM

Brian,

That should be an interesting comparison.....

#34 of 73 OFFLINE   MarkRoberts

MarkRoberts

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 167 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 20 2002

Posted December 24 2004 - 02:32 PM

Chad,
Any plans on a 10" atlas or avalanche? I see you have a 8" atlas in the works.Just curious, my 10" jl's I have in my suv are gettin' tiredPosted Image

#35 of 73 OFFLINE   Greg Peniston

Greg Peniston

    Agent



  • 33 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 25 2002

Posted December 25 2004 - 09:12 AM

How about a 10" that could also serve as a midbass running up to say 500hz?Posted Image

#36 of 73 OFFLINE   KurtJ

KurtJ

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 80 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 14 2002

Posted December 25 2004 - 12:07 PM

Any thoughts on enclosure sizes/Qtc values? I'm looking at the sealed tempest Q=.707. 122 liters. But now with Santa's help, I'm also looking at the Atlas 15.

#37 of 73 OFFLINE   Greg Monfort

Greg Monfort

    Supporting Actor



  • 884 posts
  • Join Date: May 30 2000

Posted December 26 2004 - 04:47 AM

Quote:
Speaking of efficiency, what's the efficiency of the Avalanche drivers?

FWIW, the 15" calcs 87.28dB/W/m - 90.29dB/2.83V/m and the 18" 89.06dB/92.07dB, so only good for aneochoic comparison purposes.
Quote:
Any thoughts on enclosure sizes/Qtc values? I'm looking at the sealed tempest Q=.707. 122 liters. But now with Santa's help, I'm also looking at the Atlas 15.
I get 103.5L, 57.5L/210.7L unstuffed for the Tempest and Avalanche 15"/18". If you can afford the space, the 18" is the clear winner SPL wise on paper if the room is rigid enough to contain its bottom end, with the 15" being the clear winner SQ wise due to its much lower Qt/higher Xmax, making it my choice of the three. Factor in that it allows two to be used in a bipole cab (~cancelling out rocking coupling motion) in ~the same cab size as the Tempest, making this the SQ/SPL 'no-brainer' choice IMO if you have the budget and it lives up to anywhere near its stated/calc'd performance.

WRT preferred Qtc, lower is technically better, i.e. IB or multiple relatively small bipole sealed cabs arranged in a horizontal corner loaded line array loaded with multiple low ~0.20 QT drivers being the ideal short of a basement size subhorn), but the room/wallet/SAF usually dominates so 0.6-0.8 depending on room gain is where most folks wind up, with 0.707 unstuffed usually being a good compromise, then either experimenting with room position, and/or add stuffing to lower it some or install scrap MDF, bricks (or other low resonance material(s)) to reduce cab Vb as required.

GM
Loud Is Beautiful, If It's Clean

#38 of 73 OFFLINE   Jack Gilvey

Jack Gilvey

    Producer



  • 4,952 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 13 1999

Posted December 27 2004 - 03:15 PM

It seems to me, when looking at the specs for the Avalanche 18, that the true benefit of XBL2 may not be in super-high excursion but in allowing high excursion without the high Fs, high Le, and low sensitivity seemingly endemic to large, oversized motor assemblies and stiff suspensions. The 18 models kinda like four Adire DPL12's...nice stuff.
SVS Customer Service
http://www.svsound.com
sales@svsound.com
techsupport@svsound.com

#39 of 73 OFFLINE   KurtJ

KurtJ

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 80 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 14 2002

Posted December 28 2004 - 01:32 AM

Modeling these XBL^2 drivers is kinda difficult. I emailed Chad yesterday about enclosure sizes and Q, and also about using the Rythmik 250 from Kyle. I thought sharing this on the forum might be beneficial since some of this info is not up on his website yet.

"Recommended enclsoure sizes will be up in a few days. (The holiday prevented me from working on the website all weekend!!) To get a Q of .707, the Atlas 15 only needs a 3.7 cubic foot sealed enclosure. To get a Q of .5 you need a 6.5 cubic foot enclosure. These enclosures would be filled with polyfill. (not jam-packed with stuffing, but simply filled up lightly throughout.)

There is also something else worth mentioning about these drivers. (which will also soon be on the website...) XBL^2 does something to the frequency response of these drivers. "Standard" non-XBL^2 drivers with a single gap and a long voice coil will lose strength the more the driver moves. If you look at their BL curve, it is typically parabolic. This translates to less output and less strength at the lower frequencies at higher volumes, where the driver is moving the most.

Take this "standard driver" and put it into a sealed enclosure with a Q of .707 for example. The louder you play it, the more the driver moves. The more the driver moves, the more it loses motor strength. This translates to a
frequency response that starts to "sag" in the lower frequencies. It may have a Q of .707 on paper, but at higher volumes the measured frequency response will
actually LOOK more like a higher Q of .8 etc.

The XBL^2 motor has a very flat BL curve until near its excursion limits. Because of this, the frequency response tends to "hold" its shape and remain a true Q of .707 until you push it to its extremes. For this reason, it will tend
to sound "flatter" or more like a lower Q. People have become use the sound of standard drivers having a higher apparent enclosure Q at higher output.

Our drivers don't do this. Instead, they actually hold their frequency response. As a result, you can typically put them into smaller enclosures than you are used to using. Their frequency response will not change as they get
louder like other drivers, so they sound like they are a lower Q than they actually are.

This characteristic was immediately apparent when I first started testing my prototypes. They sounded "flatter" in relation to the frequency response,and the low end also seemed to stay stronger even at higher output levels.
Ground plane testing confirmed this. Once you think about the motor design, it actually makes sense.

Sorry about a really long answer to a really short question. A smaller enclosure will give you more "punch" and a larger enclosure will have a less punch and more neutrality. It all depends on what type of sound you are trying to achieve. I played classical bass in orchestras for over a decade, but I admit I still prefer a little "punch" to the sound. Posted Image

I would say that for a Q of .707 that 3.6 cubic feet sealed is a good place to start. As mentioned above, I also stuff my enclosures with enough polyfil to fill the enclosure. I don't stuff it tight or pack in as much as I can, but
rather just fill up the enclosure. If you are not using stuffing, I would recommend just over 4 cubic feet.

I hope that this answers your question. If you need more info, PLEASE let me know and I will be more than happy to provice all of the answers that I can.
Thanks again...


Chad Kuypers
Ascendant Audio

P.S. 250 watts is all you need to get these subwoofers to really pound, so that amplifier sound perfect. With direct comparisons to other similar subwoofers, we have found the sensitivity to be reliatvely high on our products".



I hope this helps. Which 'standard driver' do you think he refers to? Perhaps "Tempest."

#40 of 73 OFFLINE   Mark Seaton

Mark Seaton

    Supporting Actor



  • 600 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 10 1999

Posted December 28 2004 - 04:20 AM

This is a simple matter of motor linearity which many never consider. Unless you measure and seriously consider the non-linearities at work, you will overlook the real situation. At what we commonly rate as "Xmax" the driver will have a Qts which is double and a Vas which is 1/2(I have to double check if that's actually 1/2 or 1/4). The point is that the parameters are significantly different. These parameters are not constant for a given output or excursion, but rather they ride the curves we see plotted. This causes intermodulation distortion. The modulation of the signal affects all frequencies being produced while the driver moves past the most linear range. There is a common assumption that drivers moving within their rated Xmax are perfectly linear. Removing the rosy shades allows a more accurate assesment of the problem at hand, leading to overall improvements, even if the reality of the improvement looks less pristine than the previous perspective.
Mark Seaton
Seaton Sound, Inc.


Back to Members' Theaters, HT Projects, Remotes, Seating, Accessories & Lighting



Forum Nav Content I Follow