ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Tapco 6918S opinions  (Read 5065 times)

Chris Carpenter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 316
  • Baton Rouge
Tapco 6918S opinions
« on: July 01, 2011, 02:20:07 am »

Has anyone had some experience with the Tapco 6918S subwoofer? I am mainly curious about reliability, seeing as parts will be hard to come across. Also, is the performance as well as to be expected from the specs?

I intend to upgrade from a pair of PV118s to a pair of the Tapco subs. The tapcos feature 3db better sensitivity (98 vs 95) and twice the power handling (450/900/1800 vs 200/400/800).
Logged

Tim McCulloch

  • SR Forums
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20085
  • Wichita, Kansas USA
Re: Tapco 6918S opinions
« Reply #1 on: July 03, 2011, 12:10:15 pm »

Has anyone had some experience with the Tapco 6918S subwoofer? I am mainly curious about reliability, seeing as parts will be hard to come across. Also, is the performance as well as to be expected from the specs?

I intend to upgrade from a pair of PV118s to a pair of the Tapco subs. The tapcos feature 3db better sensitivity (98 vs 95) and twice the power handling (450/900/1800 vs 200/400/800).

We don't own any and never will (it's not a product our clients would accept), BUT... I know a couple of local bar bands that bought them and currently regret that decision.  Performance, subjectively, was not improved (according to one act) and one band has managed to release the magic smoke from at least one unit.  Not sure how their repairs are going as I haven't talked to them in a couple of weeks.

The PV118 is a "value" entry level product.  You can stay with Peavey and do much better with the Q-Wave or Versarray 218 although you'll need to bring your own power amps (and big ones at that).

There are lots of powered 1x18" subs in the market.  I suggest you rent different models to find the combination of size, weight, output and price that best fits your needs.

Have fun, good luck.

Tim Mc
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

Chris Carpenter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 316
  • Baton Rouge
Re: Tapco 6918S opinions
« Reply #2 on: July 05, 2011, 06:35:50 pm »

Well, Tom from Toms Sound in Birmingham gave me a great deal for trading in the peaveys, so I went ahead and swapped them out. I also bought a pair of Peavey GPS 2600 amps from the board. I've only had time for a quick demo, but the new setup seems pretty awesome. I will report back after I dial in the driverack.

I'm trying to decide between 8ohm per side or 4 ohm bridge. Like I mentioned, the subs are rated 450/900/1800. The amp does 620 at 8 ohm stereo and 2600 at 4ohm bridge. Would you guys prefer the output or the headroom?
Logged

Chris Carpenter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 316
  • Baton Rouge
Re: Tapco 6918S opinions
« Reply #3 on: July 07, 2011, 07:39:46 am »

Well, turns out my JRXs can't keep up with the subs at 8ohm, so that answers that question.

The subs are definitely much hotter than the peaveys, particularly with the upgraded amplifier. They can handle far more power as well. Unlike the peaveys, the amplifier clips before the speakers do. LF extensions is also improved. The peaveys barely hit 43 before dropping off steeply. The tapcos can nearly do 35 at reasonable levels.

Something I found surprising was the change in amount of delay required. My old subs needed between 6.5-7ms of delay, these need 0.4-1ms.
Logged

Tim McCulloch

  • SR Forums
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20085
  • Wichita, Kansas USA
Re: Tapco 6918S opinions
« Reply #4 on: July 07, 2011, 12:25:25 pm »

Well, turns out my JRXs can't keep up with the subs at 8ohm, so that answers that question.

The subs are definitely much hotter than the peaveys, particularly with the upgraded amplifier. They can handle far more power as well. Unlike the peaveys, the amplifier clips before the speakers do. LF extensions is also improved. The peaveys barely hit 43 before dropping off steeply. The tapcos can nearly do 35 at reasonable levels.

Something I found surprising was the change in amount of delay required. My old subs needed between 6.5-7ms of delay, these need 0.4-1ms.

The tuning of the box and the inertia of the speaker cone, combined with any external HPF creates "group delay".  I suspect you have, somehow, eliminated the external (DSP) high pass filter.  That would also explain the additional LF extension.
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

Chris Carpenter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 316
  • Baton Rouge
Re: Tapco 6918S opinions
« Reply #5 on: July 07, 2011, 03:01:29 pm »

The tuning of the box and the inertia of the speaker cone, combined with any external HPF creates "group delay".  I suspect you have, somehow, eliminated the external (DSP) high pass filter.  That would also explain the additional LF extension.

That makes sense. I did adjust the HPF when I was working on the P-EQ for the subs. I just lowered it until the subs wouldn't go any lower.
Logged

Tim McCulloch

  • SR Forums
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20085
  • Wichita, Kansas USA
Re: Tapco 6918S opinions
« Reply #6 on: July 07, 2011, 03:18:23 pm »

That makes sense. I did adjust the HPF when I was working on the P-EQ for the subs. I just lowered it until the subs wouldn't go any lower.

Here's the deal... the lower the HPF frequency, the more group delay.  If you lowered the sub HPF relative to it's previous setting, you should have had a slightly longer delay for your top boxes, not less.  Are you certain this filter is actually engaged?

Edit for another thought - did you change the type or slope of the sub HPF?
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

Chris Carpenter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 316
  • Baton Rouge
Re: Tapco 6918S opinions
« Reply #7 on: July 08, 2011, 02:46:05 am »

Here's the deal... the lower the HPF frequency, the more group delay.  If you lowered the sub HPF relative to it's previous setting, you should have had a slightly longer delay for your top boxes, not less.  Are you certain this filter is actually engaged?

Edit for another thought - did you change the type or slope of the sub HPF?

Actually, I didn't realize changing the HPF would alter the alignment settings. I played around with that after setting alignment. Also, I've been delaying the subs to match the tops rather than the other way around. With the new subs, the phase traces are already almost on top of each other; adding half a millisecond of delay puts them together right at the crossover point (118).

I left the HPF as 12db butterworth, though I'm considering using something sharper. Ill keep in mind I'll need to redo the alignment after adjusting those parameters.
Logged

Ivan Beaver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8778
  • Atlanta GA
Re: Tapco 6918S opinions
« Reply #8 on: July 10, 2011, 03:25:11 pm »

Actually, I didn't realize changing the HPF would alter the alignment settings. I played around with that after setting alignment. Also, I've been delaying the subs to match the tops rather than the other way around. With the new subs, the phase traces are already almost on top of each other; adding half a millisecond of delay puts them together right at the crossover point (118).

I left the HPF as 12db butterworth, though I'm considering using something sharper. Ill keep in mind I'll need to redo the alignment after adjusting those parameters.
Every adjustment you make will affect the overall amount of delay needed.  Be it a differnet filter type-or slope or freq.  Eq will also affect the delay time needed.

So you have to get all of that "done first", before you start to adjust the delay time.

Also remember that at a different listening position, the delay could be different as well-depending on your setup.
Logged
A complex question is easily answered by a simple-easy to understand WRONG answer!

Ivan Beaver
Danley Sound Labs

PHYSICS- NOT FADS!
Pages: [1]   Go Up
 


Page created in 0.038 seconds with 21 queries.