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This topic has been archived.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

#61 of 73 OFFLINE   ThomasW

ThomasW

    Screenwriter



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

Posted December 30 2004 - 07:38 AM

Quote:
Here is a direct comment from Bill Fitzmaurice when I posted the new RE sub pics on his forum:
Fitzmaurice has an agenda, and that is to sell plans to his designs.... nuff said.

#62 of 73 OFFLINE   Brian-K-Owens

Brian-K-Owens

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 194 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 06 2003

Posted December 30 2004 - 07:49 AM

Hey Thomas - Don't think Bill was really downing the driver, I just used it as an example, since I hear this about high excursion drivers all the time. I have seen it brought up more than once in discussions of the extremis 6".

I have actually bought a couple of sets of Bill's plans for some PA setups. They are actually pretty awesome considering the price to build and their application. I don't think he is trying to get rich on $10 a pop for plans. I posted the driver pic there as OT, as there seems to be a few real bassheads over on his forum. He did say "But it is interesting.", which I would consider a compliment from him. . .

Brian
Brian Owens

#63 of 73 OFFLINE   Chad Kuypers

Chad Kuypers

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 79 posts
  • Join Date: May 08 2000

Posted January 02 2005 - 10:18 AM

Once again it has been a busy week and I haven't had a chance yet to reply. Posted Image Her are some answers to your questions:


Randy,

There are some enclosure recommendations up on the website for the Avalanche 18 along with the other drivers. For your preferences I would recommend the 20 cubic foot enclosure tuned to 13 Hz. Going with a 700 Liter/25 ft^3 enclosure tuned to 10 Hz will only get you more output once you drop below 11 Hz. From 11 Hz on up the 20 cubic foot alignment will have a definite advantage in output. Trust me when I say that in that enclosure it wil go LOOOOWWWWW. Posted Image


Quote:
Great job on these drivers. I have owned quite a few subs, and I was really impressed.



Thanks for the very kind words about our subwoofers Brian. They were designed to play loud without a lot of power and I am glad that this is indeed what happened. As far as power ratings go, we are about as conservative as you can get. I don't post peak ratings and as you found out, it can certainly handle more power. I would rather that people fault on the side of caution when it comes to power rather than over power them. That usually translates to happy customers. Posted Image


Quote:
Not sure what the mechanical throw is; I never asked Chad.



There is 39.5 mm of clearance behind the voice coil until it hits the back plate on the Avalanche subwoofers. The Atlas subwoofers are pretty much impossible to bottom out.


Quote:
Chad actually bought one of my 1803's so he should know first hand how it compares to the Avalanche 18.



Yes, I have gotten a LOT of questions asking how these subwoofers compare. As Brian mentioned, I do have quite a bit of experience between the two drivers. There are two Blueprint 1803's sitting in the shop here as we speak. Posted Image For a long time they were the only available very high-excurison 18 inch subwoofer that would work for home audio.

It is a touchy subject to compare your drivers with another manufacturer. However, Blueprint 1803/1804 subwoofers are apparently completely gone and can no longer be purchased new. For this reason I will be posting a couple of comparison graphs on the website showing the output differences with the same power. Prepared to be shocked. Posted Image They are two very different animals.


Quote:
Chad, you mentioned not building an ultra high excursion design with a very low Fs and exotic cone materials because of the cost.



No, I said that "I stopped the design on an ultra-high excursion subwoofer for the time being." Posted Image


Quote:
I have to agree with Rob on this one also. I think there are alot of people out there in the DIY market that would gladly fork over the extra cash for the higher xmax and higher power handling. I would suggest taking another look at that.



I appreciate both your and Rob's input on this. I agree that there definitely would be people who would love this type of driver even it it cost a lot more. However, there aren't as many people as you think who want such a driver. There are also several realities that go with it.

I had some initial prototypes of a very high excursion subwoofer design of ours to compare to the Avalanche 18 and Avalanche 15. I am telling you that a pair of Avalanche 15's or a single Avalanche 18 in a sealed enclosure will be louder than you expect.

There are also certain reailites that go along with this type of higher excursion subwoofer. There is an inertia issue as well as an enclosure issue. You should see what happens to a 2 to 3 cubic foot enclosure when a driver starts trying to move 90 mm peak-to-peak. Posted Image Honestly, it gets ridiculous. The enclosure needs to be at least 2+ inches thick to deal with that kind of onslaught of internal pressure. You end up with a 300 to 400 pound enclosure in your living room.

Then you need to buy an amplifier that can actually get it to move that far. Even an inexpensive 2000 to 4000 watt amplifier isn't that cheap. Beyond this, your outlet usually becomes the limiting factor. Unless you have a large dedicated breaker just for your subwoofer, you may not be getting that much power. I have a friend who ran his Crown K2 from his 220 Volt air conditioning outlet becuase when running it off the standard outlet it used to dim the lights on several floors of his old apartment building. Posted Image

I will further state that from the get-go, the biggest priority with this company was actually to design and offer this super high excursion subwoofer. I have been thinking about such a subwoofer design for years. At one point, the Avalanche 18 was finished with the current revised suspension. I threw it into a 5 cubic foot sealed enclosure with 750 watts and suddenly I didn't care about that other driver anymore. As mentioned above, I also took a pair of Avalanche 15's and threw them into a 4 cubic foot enclosure with 1500 watts and it was even louder. It was so loud that I began wondering what the higher excursion subwoofer was going to offer over the Avalanche subwoofers. I just decided to put off the development for awhile.

If people are knocking down our door to have it made, than I can certainly re-consider the idea of producing it. For now, I think that the Avalanche subwoofers have the ability satisfy the output cravings of most bass lovers out there. Hopefuly this gives you a little more perspective into why the ultra high excursion driver is on the back burner.


Chad Kuypers
Ascendant Audio

#64 of 73 OFFLINE   Chad Kuypers

Chad Kuypers

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 79 posts
  • Join Date: May 08 2000

Posted January 02 2005 - 10:34 AM

Quote:
I hope this is not too elementary of a question, but why do the voice coils on the atlas series have a different impedance? Does the lower impedance better accommodate the variable Q?


Your question is excellent and you hit the nail on the head. Having two different voice coils allows a larger range of Qts. There will be a wiring tutorial up by tomorrow morning explaining how to wire the Atlas subwoofers for an infiite baffle or dipole arrangement. You can power the smaller voice cols in this setup in series and get higher Qts figures than when powering the larger voice coil.

Having the smaller voice coil also allows you to run a pair of drivers in series and still arrive at a 4 ohm load instead of a 2 or 8 ohm load. This often makes your amplifier options much simpler.

You can also power both voice coils in series and get a 6 ohm load. This gives you a Qts .02 higher than the lowest Qts rating when using just the 4 ohm voice coil. It also gives you the strongest motor configuration and the BL is higher.


Chad Kuypers
Ascendant Audio

#65 of 73 OFFLINE   Jack Gilvey

Jack Gilvey

    Producer



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

Posted January 04 2005 - 09:53 AM

Quote:
Then you need to buy an amplifier that can actually get it to move that far. Even an inexpensive 2000 to 4000 watt amplifier isn't that cheap.

Even given adequate wattage, wouldn't power compression be significant at that level, or would that be taken care of by a presumably huge voice coil(s)?

Quote:
There are some enclosure recommendations up on the website for the Avalanche 18 along with the other drivers.

Saw that, cool. What type of porting are you recommending for the reflex designs? I've been toying with multiples of the ubiquitous 4" Precision Port, but do you have something rather more clever in mind? Posted Image I've been thinking of something around 14ft^3/16Hz using three of the aforementioned ports.
SVS Customer Service
http://www.svsound.com
sales@svsound.com
techsupport@svsound.com

#66 of 73 OFFLINE   RandyMathis

RandyMathis

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 94 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 19 2003

Posted January 04 2005 - 02:47 PM

Thanks Chad!

After reading up on Sonotubes and seeing different designs and different theories (Harmon white paper) I am thinking that I am best suited to Build a pair of Atlas 15's in your ported alignment as was posted on your site.

I'm still not sharp enough to figure out what to enter into WinIsd for BL and SPL. :b

I need to figure out how long of a 4inch port to use for the 16hz tuning. Posted Image

I'll probably try a 22" diameter Sonotube cut to a 50" length for a total of 311.462 liters which is almost exactly 11 cubic feet. Posted Image

I'll order when budget permits. Christmas was not kind to the checking account.

I may start with 1 and then do another later.

#67 of 73 OFFLINE   Greg Monfort

Greg Monfort

    Supporting Actor



  • 884 posts
  • Join Date: May 30 2000

Posted January 04 2005 - 03:53 PM

Quote:
I'm still not sharp enough to figure out what to enter into WinIsd for BL and SPL.

Hmm, I don't use WINISD, but what I posted here http://www.hometheat....92#post2505992 will work for a sim, so pick whichever the program prefers.

WRT BL, it can be calc'd for a 'close enough' sim:

Cms = Vas/(Sd^2*rho*c^2)

where:

Vas needs to be in m^3, so multiply liters by 0.001
Sd needs to be in m^2, so multiply cm^2 by 0.0001

rho = density of air in kg/m^3, or ~1.20997 at a typical room temperature

c = speed of sound in meters, or ~344.424 at typical room temperature

then:

Mms = 1/[(2*pi*Fs)^2*Cms]

BL = [(2*Pi*Fs*Re*Mms)/Qes]^0.5

But Mms is given as 269g, so we can skip the other formulas in this case, though it needs to be converted into kg, or 0.269:

BL = [(2*Pi*15.7*3.2*0.269)/0.334]^0.5 = ~15.945, or a bit lower than the calc'd ~16.13.

GM
Loud Is Beautiful, If It's Clean

#68 of 73 OFFLINE   Jack Gilvey

Jack Gilvey

    Producer



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

Posted January 13 2005 - 12:53 AM

Too much to resist. I've got a pair of Atlas 15's on the way to use in IB with a large closet (which has served this purpose before) adjoining my room receiving the backwave. I'll be cutting it close at 5 x Vas for the pair. I'll run their 2-ohm coils in series and go for a Qts of ~.7 (I'll play with is a bit). I've got an old PE #300-800 150w plate amp with no boost/rumble filter that should do nicely. The Avalanche 18 is mas macho, but the Atlas drivers are just too appealing in their ability to provide almost any Qts at useable impedance. Here's what Unibox predicts:

Posted Image

With such (presumably XBL-clean) output available with so little power applied, I think I'm in for a treat. Chad, as you might expect, was a pleasure to deal with and has been over-the-top helpful.

Also,with Chad's permission, here are some pics of the upcoming Avalanche 12:

http://ascendantaudi....20pictures.htm

Posted Image

No specs yet. Beautiful, no?
SVS Customer Service
http://www.svsound.com
sales@svsound.com
techsupport@svsound.com

#69 of 73 OFFLINE   Scott Simonian

Scott Simonian

    Screenwriter



  • 1,282 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 20 2001

Posted January 13 2005 - 09:31 AM

Quote:
No specs yet. Beautiful, no?


Posted Image Indeed, very beautiful. I love the motors on the Avalanche series. ETA on the specs?
Another supporter of 1080p and uncompressed multi-channel sound!

My Twin 18's. 50cuft of box, tuned to 11hz and with 2k watts on tap.

#70 of 73 OFFLINE   Mark Seaton

Mark Seaton

    Supporting Actor



  • 600 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 10 1999

Posted January 13 2005 - 03:24 PM

Hi Jack,

I finally made it out to Ascendant's to see Chad Tuesday night. I caught a glimpse of the nicely proportioned beauty you posted the image of. I also got to very casually give a listen and observation of the Avalanche 15 & 18 in action (Sealed boxes).

Basically I confirmed what I suspected and hoped. The important factor wasn't so much what I heard, but rather what I didn't. The Avalanche driver behaved very nicely and sailed right through Planet Drum (1st track I think) where some of the low sweeps and pulses will often modulate other bass being reproduced. While hardly a measurement, it was at least a subjective reality check which has left me disappointed with lesser subs. While I'm certainly a bit more greedy with headroom and EQ than most, I would advise those who like very high levels to try and design in a bit more output than you think you might want or need. Without the upper bass character change you don't get the sense of reaching the limits. In other words, it may sound great at louder levels than you currently listening at.

I am still very suprised at how soft (in compliance) the surround and suspension are. I have a single Atlas 15 I'm putting in a modest attic-IB for a sun-room system at my parents place. After that I think I may use the bigger brother in a few custom projects I'm working on where I can't fit our ContraBass. Four sealed Avalanche 15s should do the job. Posted Image

Cheers,
Mark Seaton
Seaton Sound, Inc.

#71 of 73 OFFLINE   Jack Gilvey

Jack Gilvey

    Producer



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

Posted January 13 2005 - 05:22 PM

Quote:
I finally made it out to Ascendant's to see Chad Tuesday night.

Yeah, you called while I was on the phone with Chad. Damn, I'd love to sit there, toss back a few, and just listen to you guys. Posted Image

Quote:
I am still very suprised at how soft (in compliance) the surround and suspension are.

Seems like he's onto something, the drivers apparently don't require very stiff suspensions like so many high-excursion models do (I swear I could stand on the cone of my Blueprint 1803 and cause negligible deflection). Without a stiff suspension to raise Fs, they also don't need a high Mms to get Fs back dow...and sensitivity is high as a result. Maybe the XBL2's supposed higher tolerance for rocking allows them to perform well with such a compliant suspension...?

Thanks for your sonic impressions, I'm eager to install mine.

Quote:
Indeed, very beautiful. I love the motors on the Avalanche series. ETA on the specs?

No ETA as of yet...I'll keep pestering him, though. Posted Image
SVS Customer Service
http://www.svsound.com
sales@svsound.com
techsupport@svsound.com

#72 of 73 OFFLINE   Brian-K-Owens

Brian-K-Owens

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 194 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 06 2003

Posted January 14 2005 - 12:53 AM

Quote:
Four sealed Avalanche 15s should do the job.


My 4 will be here on Saturday (and the 18" for the car)!!!

Brian
Brian Owens

#73 of 73 OFFLINE   Brian Tatnall

Brian Tatnall

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 149 posts
  • Join Date: May 21 2003

Posted January 17 2005 - 09:05 AM

Here is a review I did of the bigger 15's for those who are interested.

http://www.visionary...com/Reviews.htm


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



Forum Nav Content I Follow