ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5]   Go Down

Author Topic: Ideas for Subwoofer Upgrade  (Read 12302 times)

Aaron Carian

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11
Re: Ideas for Subwoofer Upgrade
« Reply #40 on: March 03, 2017, 01:16:51 pm »


I think (I am not sure) that the DBH218 is less expensive than 2 of the TH118s.


For any others considering this... without getting into pricing too much, from what I have been quoted there is around a 10-15% difference with the DBH218 being slightly cheaper than 2 TH118s all in including caster boards and covers.
Logged

Jake R. Trutt

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15
Re: Ideas for Subwoofer Upgrade
« Reply #41 on: March 03, 2017, 04:04:15 pm »

So unless you KNOW where the numbers come from (like a measured response) you have no idea if the number is valid or not.

So simply trying to compare peak SPL to peak SPL will often result in a complete misunderstanding of the actual performance.  Especially in the freq range of interest.

You have to compare apples to apples.

I only use measured responses. I will never touch the manufacturer specs and I will generally look for or inquire about a products measured response. It just so happens that Yorkville is almost spot on accurate. They do have measured response, you simply have to ask them for them. Sometimes they won't give it out but if you push, they will. My information about the JTR's comes directly from data-bass, which does measured response. I want to know the real world performance and not just some peaks. Which is why I want the continuous maximum sustained output and not the maximum burst. This is where the JTR's fall short, although they do have a much wider hz range. I don't even know this information about Danley's either, the maximum sustained output is not given in graph form and the information on the spec sheets only show quick tests which could be subject to the maximum burst instead of the sustained output.

I did not know that about cardioid. You have a ton of experience on the matter so I do believe you, it's just it contradicts a plethora of information on the subject and many other venerable sound guru's. It has put me into cognitive dissonance for now and I will research it again, but as far as I knew, cardioid was the best way to direct bass energy away from other stages, food stands, and so forth, by creating that heart shaped pattern. This would direct the bass energy in the way OP desires and center it. Although it can be more difficult to setup, it is worth it, at least in the eyes of many sound guru's that I know. Maybe I am misinterpreting it though. I've read plenty of articles and each of them talk about it and there is even this image from Doctor Pro Audio, which was a replication of the effect, and shows my point: http://imgur.com/a/eGswo

Information sources on cardioid:
http://www.fohonline.com/ci/31-tech-feature/15387-cardioid-subwoofer-setups.html
http://www.prosoundtraining.com/site/synaudcon-library/do-it-yourself-cardioid-sub/
http://www.doctorproaudio.com/doctor/cajondesastre/pdfs/Downloaded_from_Doctor_ProAudio_com-SettingUp_cardioid-Joan_La_Roda-DAS_Audio.pdf
Logged

Tim McCulloch

  • SR Forums
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 21984
  • Wichita, Kansas USA
Re: Ideas for Subwoofer Upgrade
« Reply #42 on: March 03, 2017, 05:00:36 pm »

I only use measured responses. I will never touch the manufacturer specs and I will generally look for or inquire about a products measured response. It just so happens that Yorkville is almost spot on accurate. They do have measured response, you simply have to ask them for them. Sometimes they won't give it out but if you push, they will. My information about the JTR's comes directly from data-bass, which does measured response. I want to know the real world performance and not just some peaks. Which is why I want the continuous maximum sustained output and not the maximum burst. This is where the JTR's fall short, although they do have a much wider hz range. I don't even know this information about Danley's either, the maximum sustained output is not given in graph form and the information on the spec sheets only show quick tests which could be subject to the maximum burst instead of the sustained output.

I did not know that about cardioid. You have a ton of experience on the matter so I do believe you, it's just it contradicts a plethora of information on the subject and many other venerable sound guru's. It has put me into cognitive dissonance for now and I will research it again, but as far as I knew, cardioid was the best way to direct bass energy away from other stages, food stands, and so forth, by creating that heart shaped pattern. This would direct the bass energy in the way OP desires and center it. Although it can be more difficult to setup, it is worth it, at least in the eyes of many sound guru's that I know. Maybe I am misinterpreting it though. I've read plenty of articles and each of them talk about it and there is even this image from Doctor Pro Audio, which was a replication of the effect, and shows my point: http://imgur.com/a/eGswo

Information sources on cardioid:
http://www.fohonline.com/ci/31-tech-feature/15387-cardioid-subwoofer-setups.html
http://www.prosoundtraining.com/site/synaudcon-library/do-it-yourself-cardioid-sub/
http://www.doctorproaudio.com/doctor/cajondesastre/pdfs/Downloaded_from_Doctor_ProAudio_com-SettingUp_cardioid-Joan_La_Roda-DAS_Audio.pdf

The idea that cardioid subs must somehow put more energy "forward" is based on a misunderstanding of the Law of Conservation of Energy - that energy is neither created nor destroyed; only changed in form.  From a basic understanding it would seem obvious that whatever *isn't* behind the array must now be in front... but that's wrong.  The energy that creates the cancellation is represented as HEAT at the voice coil of the reversed sub.

The time smear that Ivan talks about can be seen in various measurement platforms.
Logged
"Practicing an art, no matter how well or badly, is a way to make your soul grow, for heaven's sake. Sing in the shower. Dance to the radio. Tell stories. Write a poem to a friend, even a lousy poem. Do it as well as you possible can. You will get an enormous reward. You will have created something."  - Kurt Vonnegut

Jeff Permanian

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 40
    • JTR Speakers Inc.
Re: Ideas for Subwoofer Upgrade
« Reply #43 on: March 27, 2017, 05:14:17 pm »

Why not the PG118's? They extend lower than the TH118. It's roughly the same cab with an extended path I believe. I'd still suggest the DBH218 over the TH118, if moving them is not a problem. They are thin enough that you can slide them through normal doorways. The touring version is great too, depending on how many helpers you have, you can each grab a handle. I'm not sure what your interest is in when upgrading though. The JBL SRX728 cabs are roughly 130db continuous +/-3db from 33hz-100 and -10 or more from 27hz or below, so there are many wonderful options to replace those dual cabs in many different areas. I presume you will be keeping it passive and purchasing instead of building so here goes:

If it were simply less cabs, more SPL, for a decent price, the LS1208 will be decently louder (136db continuous from 60-80hz). If you want marginally less loud and more clean, for slightly more you could go JTR Orbit Shifter Pro (130db continuous at 60hz and up, with 135db at 100hz and 125db continuous down to 35hz). A variant of that, with more low extension but less loud, would be the JTR Orbit Shifter LFU (121db +/-3db continuous from 20-100hz). Then you have Danley's which are more expensive but can get louder. The DBH218 will beat out 3 LS1208's in SPL, which is great but it costs more like 4 or 5 LS1208's, and it will be as low as 2 (probably 3) JTR Orbit Shifter Pro's and costing roughly the same. Although, the Danley's cannot reach the JTR Orbit Shifter LFU SPL output from 25hz and below, even with 2 DBH218's. So, in all honesty, it depends on what you are looking for exactly. I cannot speak on the PG118's but that would by my pick if it's at least -10db at 24hz and the rolloff from 24hz isn't too significant after that. It'd match the JTR Orbit Shifter LFU and beat it in SPL at the higher hz ranges. The PG118 is the most expensive of the bunch though and the Danley DBH218 isn't far off after that.

Edit: All of my specs include power compression by the way. They are measured results and not based off math applied to the specifications. These are the real world results you will see and are the true calculated SPL that will be experienced (provided proper placement and direction of bass energy). The JTR's do have better short term bursts (around 142db), however these are maximum sustainable output measurements (real world performance). Each of them, except maybe the Orbit Shifter LFU, will beat your current setup in output and the Orbit Shifter LFU will beat most of them (barring the PG118 if it stacks up) at low hz.

Sometimes people over look that data-bass measures are 2 meters, rms. So, you need to add 6db to their measurements to equal a 1 meter, rms measurement or 9db to equal a 1 meter peak measurement. The Orbit Shifter PRO averaged 128.7db, 2 meter, 30-125hz, longterm which is 134.7db at 1 meter.

http://www.data-bass.com/data?page=systems&col=9&type=2&sort=desc&mfr=-1

Another thing some people miss on data-bass is that they use simple averaging so they're not converting to pascals and then back.

http://www.data-bass.com/know-how
Logged

ProSoundWeb Community

Re: Ideas for Subwoofer Upgrade
« Reply #43 on: March 27, 2017, 05:14:17 pm »


Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5]   Go Up
 



Page created in 0.025 seconds with 18 queries.