ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: SB1000z vs DBH218  (Read 17344 times)

Reggie Kendrick

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 82
  • Channel Live Productions - raising the bar...
    • Channel Live Productions
Re: SB1000z vs DBH218
« Reply #10 on: April 15, 2011, 09:04:07 am »

Hey Owen, have you heard about the new EAW SB2001? Might be a good option if the box size works for you...
I was going to pose this question in a new thread but luckily I found this one via a forum search.  [no thread hijack]

Okay, so what's the deal with the EAW SB2001 vs. DBH218 comparison? 

The EAW seems to generally be:
- 11dB+ less efficient sensitivity-wise
- 4dB lower in Peak SPL (in the usable sub frequency range)
- 10dB lower in Peak SPL (at a given frequency - 100Hz?)
- able to go down to 20Hz but EAW doesn't state (+ - 3dB) or (+ - 10dB)

I'm not sure how the above changes considering the EAW requires special processing to sound great.

I'm inquiring for a new dance club soundsystem we're spec'ing.  The capacity is 850+ and we want subs for the 65'x50' dance floor.  It'll most likely be two subs clustered for the dance floor.  I'm leaning towards the Danley DBH218 but we've gotten quotes already on the SB2001. 

I'm thinking the DBH218's would be a better solution.  The music genres will be mostly Pop, Rap, Reggae and R&B (canned music... CDs/MP3s/vinyl). 


« Last Edit: April 15, 2011, 10:10:18 am by Reggie Kendrick »
Logged
Raising the bar...

Atlanta Wedding DJs
Atlanta DJs / Wedding DJs / Prom DJs ...and more

Reggie Kendrick

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 82
  • Channel Live Productions - raising the bar...
    • Channel Live Productions
Re: SB1000z vs DBH218
« Reply #11 on: April 15, 2011, 10:07:10 am »

Thanks guys, I will def go forward with the dbh's, should have the budget to do it come this March.

What is the retail price of those Danely cabinets ?
I believe $5622.
Logged
Raising the bar...

Atlanta Wedding DJs
Atlanta DJs / Wedding DJs / Prom DJs ...and more

Art Welter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 1700
Re: SB1000z vs DBH218
« Reply #12 on: April 15, 2011, 11:44:15 am »

Hey Owen, have you heard about the new EAW SB2001? Might be a good option if the box size works for you...
I was going to pose this question in a new thread but luckily I found this one via a forum search.  [no thread hijack]

Okay, so what's the deal with the EAW SB2001 vs. DBH218 comparison? 

The EAW seems to generally be:
- 11dB+ less efficient sensitivity-wise
- 4dB lower in Peak SPL (in the usable sub frequency range)
- 10dB lower in Peak SPL (at a given frequency - 100Hz?)
- able to go down to 20Hz but EAW doesn't state (+ - 3dB) or (+ - 10dB)

I'm not sure how the above changes considering the EAW requires special processing to sound great.

I'm inquiring for a new dance club soundsystem we're spec'ing.  The capacity is 850+ and we want subs for the 65'x50' dance floor.  It'll most likely be two subs clustered for the dance floor.  I'm leaning towards the Danley DBH218 but we've gotten quotes already on the SB2001. 

I'm thinking the DBH218's would be a better solution.  The music genres will be mostly Pop, Rap, Reggae and R&B (canned music... CDs/MP3s/vinyl).
Specs can be interesting to compare.

The DSL sensitivity is half space, referenced 2.83 v into a 2 ohm cabinet. Subtract 6 dB for a one watt equivalent, so the DBH 218 is 106 dB compared to 101 dB for the SB2001. The SB2001 is one dB less sensitive than the SB1000, but handles a lot more power.

The EAW charts are in whole space, one needs to add 6 dB for the half space figure, though a separate chart for half space would be more convincing.

I think DSL’s figures are consistently at least 3 dB high, but ignoring that issue, the difference in sensitivity is between the cabinets is 5,  not 11 dB.


The DBH 218’s chart frequency range only covers 20-100 Hz, so it appears flatter than the SB-2001, while in the 30-100 Hz range the SB-2001 is actually a bit smoother.
The DBH 218 is about 12.5 dB down at 30 Hz from 100 Hz, the SB1000 is about 9 dB down at 30 Hz from 100 Hz.
Both speakers require a lot of EQ to be reasonably flat.

Given more power, the DBH 218 should outperform the SB1000 by a good margin.

The large port of the SB2001 does much of the work down low, while the DBH 218 uses  a horn with two  compression chambers,  which subjects the speakers to dynamic compression at high power levels.

Given equal high power (7-8K), the difference between the DBH 218 and the SB2001 may not be much.

Art Welter
Logged

Reggie Kendrick

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 82
  • Channel Live Productions - raising the bar...
    • Channel Live Productions
Re: SB1000z vs DBH218
« Reply #13 on: April 15, 2011, 12:20:59 pm »

Quote
Specs can be interesting to compare.

The DSL sensitivity is half space, referenced 2.83 v into a 2 ohm cabinet. Subtract 6 dB for a one watt equivalent, so the DBH 218 is 106 dB compared to 101 dB for the SB2001. The SB2001 is one dB less sensitive than the SB1000, but handles a lot more power.

The EAW charts are in whole space, one needs to add 6 dB for the half space figure, though a separate chart for half space would be more convincing.

I think DSL’s figures are consistently at least 3 dB high, but ignoring that issue, the difference in sensitivity is between the cabinets is 5,  not 11 dB.


The DBH 218’s chart frequency range only covers 20-100 Hz, so it appears flatter than the SB-2001, while in the 30-100 Hz range the SB-2001 is actually a bit smoother.
The DBH 218 is about 12.5 dB down at 30 Hz from 100 Hz, the SB1000 is about 9 dB down at 30 Hz from 100 Hz.
Both speakers require a lot of EQ to be reasonably flat.

Given more power, the DBH 218 should outperform the SB1000 by a good margin.

The large port of the SB2001 does much of the work down low, while the DBH 218 uses  a horn with two  compression chambers,  which subjects the speakers to dynamic compression at high power levels.

Given equal high power (7-8K), the difference between the DBH 218 and the SB2001 may not be much.

Art Welter

Thanx Art,

... but I'm seeing some mentions of half-space on the EAW specs along a craftily stated "1/2 Whole Space" in the frequency response charts.  Where does the EAW spec show their cabinet's sensitivity reference voltage considering Danley's is 2.83V?
Logged
Raising the bar...

Atlanta Wedding DJs
Atlanta DJs / Wedding DJs / Prom DJs ...and more

Rich Frembes

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 45
    • Fulcrum Acoustic
Re: SB1000z vs DBH218
« Reply #14 on: April 15, 2011, 01:16:37 pm »

Where does the EAW spec show their cabinet's sensitivity reference voltage considering Danley's is 2.83V?

Last page of spec sheet, note #14: "Power averaged SPL over the Operating Range with an input voltage that would produce 1 W at the nominal impedance..."  The SB1000z is 4 ohms with both drivers paralleled and is thus specified at 2.00 V, while the 2 ohm (again, drivers paralleled) SB2001 is specified at 1.41 V.
Logged

Tom Danley

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 144
Re: SB1000z vs DBH218
« Reply #15 on: April 15, 2011, 10:01:34 pm »

Hi Art
I have seen you say the TEF is off and here “I think DSL’s figures are consistently at least 3 dB high” and am not sure what that is based on.   We have an independent lab measure some of our stuff too and they don’t use the TEF for that.
I think I might know the source of the issue here though;   depending on the source a one meter measurement may not be a valid one meter specification.   

The purpose of the standard one meter specification is to allow someone to scale the sound level one would get at a different distance or power.       Getting this right is important for contractors etc.

Remember the assumption for a 1 meter specification is that the source is effectively a small hole in the ground a meter away, a real speaker above the ground if it fills up much of that hemisphere,  distorts that space and inverse square law assumption up close.

A classic example of localized distortion of the near field amplitude from the olden days of big bass horns I know you had haha where the inverse square law appears to fail in the near field.   

As you walk away from a bass horn array, the SPL falls more slowly up close than if it were a “point”,  which gives the strong subjective impression that the bass horn has more “throw”.    A line array does this too, the SPL is less up close than the same total acoustic power radiated from a point at the same location and is exactly why i am focused on making acoustic real point sources.

While large horn arrays provided a very noticeable example of this effect any large source has this issue.     
We measure subwoofers at 10 meters (-20dB re 1 meter) because at that distance the source size error causes is minimized. 
For most of our speakers it is not a problem driving at 28V (re +20dB re 2.8V) to get the 1W equivalent without fiddling. 

In other words, a subwoofer measured at one meter, may or may not give the same measurement as one measured at 10 meters at +20dB, but the measurement taken at 10 meters will be a more reliable predictor of SPL at other distances etc.     The size and shape of the source govern the error.

Pat Brown has a nice write up on this source shape effect, while mostly looking at the cabinet itself and aimed at upper frequencies the principal distortion the near  vs far field is the same.

http://www.etcinc.us/tech/nl043_far_field_criteria.pdf

Given the huge distances needed to be in acoustic full space at low frequencies and the universality and availability of the ground, something based on that makes more sense to me as a universal spec.

So far as the DBH or anything vs anything, how they sound subjectively is what you hear side by side with music etc and you can do that anywhere. If you want to compare something by measuring, level, harmonic distortion etc, doing that outdoors is the way to go.     
I like people to do that kind of thing Art. 

One can also draw an approximate 1w1m sensitivity here for the DBH instead of the 2.8V sensitivity by taking Rmin as the impedance and then subtracting the 6.4dB difference to get 1W at Rmin .
From that the approximate 1W 1M sensitivity in half space at a few subwoofer relevant frequencies would be (Squinting through glasses that should be bi-focal’s now);
100Hz about 110dB
50-60Hz about 104dB
40Hz about 106dB
30Hz about 99dB
20Hz  about 86dB

Like all subwoofers, what the sensitivity is, either to Power or Voltage,  is frequency dependent so one needs to look at the frequency AND level not a single number.    As always, boosting EQ costs you headroom (in that you run out of amp there first) but cutting EQ costs nothing.

Lastly you said “while the DBH 218 uses  a horn with two  compression chambers,  which subjects the speakers to dynamic compression at high power levels.”

In reality, the velocity issues with ports are known and the sound pressure in a bass horn, even in the Servodrives was below what is needed to cause significant harmonic distortion, you might remember the bt-7 lit that showed it measured less than a couple % thd at rated power.   
While that wasn’t using normal drivers, it did reveal the air linearity wasn’t a problem under these conditions even though it seems like it should be.

Best,
Tom Danley
Logged

Art Welter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 1700
Re: SB1000z vs DBH218
« Reply #16 on: April 16, 2011, 02:01:33 pm »

Hi Art
I have seen you say the TEF is off and here “I think DSL’s figures are consistently at least 3 dB high” and am not sure what that is based on.   We have an independent lab measure some of our stuff too and they don’t use the TEF for that.

So far as the DBH or anything vs anything, how they sound subjectively is what you hear side by side with music etc and you can do that anywhere. If you want to compare something by measuring, level, harmonic distortion etc, doing that outdoors is the way to go.     
I like people to do that kind of thing Art. 

Lastly you said “while the DBH 218 uses  a horn with two  compression chambers,  which subjects the speakers to dynamic compression at high power levels.”

In reality, the velocity issues with ports are known and the sound pressure in a bass horn, even in the Servodrives was below what is needed to cause significant harmonic distortion, you might remember the bt-7 lit that showed it measured less than a couple % thd at rated power.   
While that wasn’t using normal drivers, it did reveal the air linearity wasn’t a problem under these conditions even though it seems like it should be.

Best,
Tom Danley
Tom,

I have based the observation of TEF possibly being off by a number of observations of TEF measurements coming in higher than others in various shootouts and spec sheets.

Have you compared the independent lab measurements of  some of your stuff to your own measurements?

Rather than repeat all my observations, here is a link to the thread with some of those observations.

http://www.soundforums.net/live/threads/957-Why-Do-TEF-Systems-read-3-5-dB-high

I have not had a chance to audition any of your bass speakers other than the BT-7 years ago, in a side by side test with one of my L-2 cabinets, which was also four ohm nominal and occupied the same cubic feet.

The BT-7 certainly had more sub 50 Hz LF extension, yet the sensitivity in the upper range of my plenum loaded BR L-2 cabinet was about the same. Listening to music, unless the track had a lot of really deep LF (and back then you had to kind of cherry pick tracks to find much happening below 45-50 Hz) the cabinets output seemed quite similar.

You rated the BT-7 at 107 dB, one watt one meter.
My L-2, using a pair of EVX-150A speakers should at best have been about 100 dB sensitivity.
But that was 1991, I spent more time listening and trying to keep 22 employees busy than looking at spec sheets.

Now, living the life of a country gentleman, I have more time to reflect, and certain disparities come up.

I had a chance to listen and test the SH-100, it sounded very good. I thought it may be a better choice for an excellent guitar playing singer songwriter, but as it turned out, the cabinets he presently used had a lot more bass extension and overall level, even when we provided the SH-100 with double the recommended peak power.

Thinking about that, I just looked up the SH-100 specs and compared them to the B&C8CXN, which I think is the driver you use.

In a bass reflex box, presumably half space  this driver should do about 94 dB one watt one meter just above Fb.
The SH-100 graph shows about 95 dB just above Fb.
Pretty close, we don’t worry about a dB between friends.

But the SH-100  spec sheet states the sensitivity is measured as 28.3 V input “free space at 10M distance”, while the graph says “two meters four watts at 10’ away in shop demo area”.

Whether the SH-100 was measured at 10 meters or two meters, if it was measured in free space the LF should be down 3-6 dB from a half space measurement.

In other words, it looks to me that it is at least three dB high.

As a manufacturer of speakers, I don’t think it is your responsibility to check the veracity of other cabinets specifications.

But as a long time fan of your work, I think a comparative check between your cabinets and other manufactures may be in order.

Art
Logged

Tom Danley

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 144
Re: SB1000z vs DBH218
« Reply #17 on: April 16, 2011, 04:22:08 pm »

Hi Art
Look, the TEF was not just invented or an untried process.   
Also, I really try to use every acoustic trick I can apply to get  everything possible out of our stuff. 
What you don’t see is that.       
This one time, I will indulge you publicly.

First, you are comparing it to a direct radiator driver measurement to one of an sh-100;     
Pull up the clf data for the sh-100.     
Look down and click “axial Q” and roll frequency down to the low region.   Notice the axial Q , it has some forward directivity even at 80Hz, the driver alone does not.

Now, notice the max input voltage rating.   
That is the level where at the first frequency; the response deviated by 3 dB from the 1 Watt response with a slowly increasing level.   
 
You probably are wondering how did that little speaker reach that level (under independent test) too?.       
That modest looking horn on the front actually has gain, a good bit in the low mid and some even at 80Hz.     
I pad most of that gain out to get back to flat response but that leaves the speaker at a lower power to much lower power for a given SPL and is partly why it sounds very clean.             

If you are facing a rolling off response say from failing horn gain, on can tie a slightly under damped corner into that and get a net gain .   
So there you are, some things you can’t see, what’s a couple free dB between friends if an independent lab doing it a different way measures essentially the same thing  eh?
Best,
Tom Danley
Logged

Mike Hedden

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 63
Re: SB1000z vs DBH218
« Reply #18 on: April 16, 2011, 10:42:28 pm »

The SH-100 graph shows about 95 dB just above Fb.
Pretty close, we don’t worry about a dB between friends.

But the SH-100  spec sheet states the sensitivity is measured as 28.3 V input “free space at 10M distance”, while the graph says “two meters four watts at 10’ away in shop demo area”.

Art
Art,
I am not sure which model you meant to reference but I double checked our website and the SH100 as well as the SH100B spec sheet both state 2.83 v measured  whole space at one meter. 
As Tom Danley has already stated, all our full range products are independently measured so your can check our .clf data to verify our numbers.  The clf data sheets offer a tremendous amount of information and with the free view file you don't have to buy a computer program to see it.

Thanks

Mike Hedden
Danley Sound Labs, Inc.
Logged

Mike Hedden

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 63
Re: SB1000z vs DBH218
« Reply #19 on: April 17, 2011, 07:52:46 am »

Tom,

As a manufacturer of speakers, I don’t think it is your responsibility to check the veracity of other cabinets specifications.

But as a long time fan of your work, I think a comparative check between your cabinets and other manufactures may be in order.

Art

Regarding this point we have quite a selection of our competitor's products and regularly compare not only specs but side by side listening as well.  We encourage the practice!

Mike Hedden
Danley Sound Labs
Logged

ProSoundWeb Community

Re: SB1000z vs DBH218
« Reply #19 on: April 17, 2011, 07:52:46 am »


Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up
 



Page created in 0.038 seconds with 23 queries.