AV12/AV15 Driver Sensitivities

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Baldemar Garcia, Oct 22, 2002.

  1. Baldemar Garcia

    Baldemar Garcia Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 1999
    Messages:
    141
    Likes Received:
    0
    As has been mentioned a few times elsewhere, it seems that the new drivers with higher excursions are having to sacrifice sensitivity to deliver. Honestly, that is the only reason why I passed on the AV12. But, why is it the AV15 is able to maintain good sensitivity? (I also passed on the AV12 because I'm hoping to find room for the AV15.)
    It seems to be just like a Tempest, and with significantly more excursion. Is there a chance that the final design will end up losing a bit?

    I know there are many more benefits to these drivers, but as a 'common plate amp' user, I'm trying to get the best bang for my buck. As a few others have said, it's a tougher sell when getting the most out of these drivers requires more money and/or componentry. Not everyone likes the 'smaller box/bigger amp' combo.
     
  2. Mark Seaton

    Mark Seaton Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 1999
    Messages:
    599
    Likes Received:
    0
    Real Name:
    Mark Seaton
    The hard reality is that we can't cheat Hoffman's Iron law, and everyone says they want more managable box sizes. With small boxes, deep extension and efficiency are mutually exclusive. With more motor stregth and new technology we can get closer and closer to the theoretical limits, but as I posted in the Tumult thread, you need to look at the real efficiency at low frequencies, not just the passband.
     
  3. Baldemar Garcia

    Baldemar Garcia Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 1999
    Messages:
    141
    Likes Received:
    0
    Mark, I read your post in the Tumult thread, and it was very interesting. Maybe I should have posted a description of what I see when comparing the AV12/AV15 and other popular drivers.

    I thought it was interesting that when comparing the AV12 to the Shiva, PE DVC12, and PE Titanic II, ALL drivers in the same box (5cuft, tuned to 18Hz), they all have a very similar curve. The exception being that the AV12 was about 2-3dB below in level (all with 250W), except of course as tuning point is approached. I personally can't ignore the fact that this driver will not be as loud (significantly so IMHO) at frequencies where most of the content is. There are ways around it, and this driver will outperform the others in smaller boxes, no doubt about it.

    And after noting that the AV15 models pretty closely to a Tempest, still giving equal sensitivity AND more excursion, I wondered to myself why the AV12 wasn't similarly designed.
    I guess as someone pointed out when the AV12 was first revealed, 'it's a DVC12 on steroids'. But apparently the steroids used require that you're ready to give this beast a very tough workout. My plate amps aren't up to it! I would have liked to have bought one, dropped it in place of a Shiva/DVC12, get the same performance (even cleaner bass since we'd be well within Xmax), and someday maybe upgrade the amp for even better performance.

    I guess it seems like the AV12 was designed strictly for small box use, but the AV15 wasn't really. I like the AV15. I understand the compromises that need to be made when designing drivers. And I can definitely see all the potential that these new drivers offer, especially when trying to cheat Hoffman's Law. I just wish someone would make a 25mm Xmax, low Le 12" driver that isn't afraid of a bigish box. So needing smaller enclosures is the only reason to design a driver with high excursion? I say screw that! Give me more displacement, but don't force me to cripple the driver in a smaller box!
     

Share This Page