Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Evan Kirkendall]

Jeff Permanian wrote on Wed, 11 February 2009 17:22

They have simular response as the growler, 103db 1 watt, 18mm 13ply baltic birch, 120 lbs, 36" x 24" x 26" and load with a 15" driver 600watts continous/1200watts program, 17mm xmax. I'm holding for building them because I want a more powerful driver.

Why is every so hung up on "wanting more power?" That seems to be the new trend "my box handles X watts, so it's better then yours!" I'd rather have a 500/1000w driver in a box that'll do 136dB peak vs. a 1000/2000w driver in a box that'll do the same. The less power, the better IMO.




Evan

[Phillip_Graham]

Evan Kirkendall wrote on Wed, 11 February 2009 23:02

Jeff Permanian wrote on Wed, 11 February 2009 17:22 They have simular response as the growler, 103db 1 watt, 18mm 13ply baltic birch, 120 lbs, 36" x 24" x 26" and load with a 15" driver 600watts continous/1200watts program, 17mm xmax. I'm holding for building them because I want a more powerful driver. Why is every so hung up on "wanting more power?" That seems to be the new trend "my box handles X watts, so it's better then yours!" I'd rather have a 500/1000w driver in a box that'll do 136dB peak vs. a 1000/2000w driver in a box that'll do the same. The less power, the better IMO. Evan

Evan,

Jeff is almost assuredly not speaking about the drivers' input power capacity.

He is likely speaking of 1 of two things:
1.  A driver with a higher BL product for the motor
2.  A driver with more usable XMAX.

Given the extremely short horns used in the growler boxes, I am suspecting number 1.

From a speaker designer's perspective, I can tell you that for modern loudspeaker drivers power handling is almost NOT on the list of things to concern yourself with.

Certain more meaningful parameters, such as increasing a driver's BL product, happen to include the side benefit of building a motor structure that can deal with greater input voltages.

[Mark Hobbs]

Evan Kirkendall wrote on Wed, 11 February 2009 22:02

Why is every so hung up on "wanting more power?" That seems to be the new trend "my box handles X watts, so it's better then yours!" I'd rather have a 500/1000w driver in a box that'll do 136dB peak vs. a 1000/2000w driver in a box that'll do the same. The less power, the better IMO.

I doubt if he wanted the more powerfull driver for the sake of bragging rights. Yes, I see the value of getting the same amount of output with less amplifier power, but there are many other variables, trade offs etc. involved there.

[Art Welter]

Wed, 11 February 2009 21:02

Quote:

Why is every so hung up on "wanting more power?" That seems to be the new trend "my box handles X watts, so it's better then yours!" I'd rather have a 500/1000w driver in a box that'll do 136dB peak vs. a 1000/2000w driver in a box that'll do the same. The less power, the better IMO.

Evan,

Not a new trend at all.
Around 1983, the EVM Series II speakers came out, handled twice the power of the original series, and were 3 dB less sensitive.
The speakers were "winning" over the amps.
Amps got bigger again, speakers had to catch up again, lest they get a reputation as frybabies.
The trend merely escalates with each generation. Back then it was a 100 to 200 watt deal.
Now it is 500 to 1000, or 1000 to 2000 or more.

Art Welter

[Jeff Permanian]

Mark Hobbs wrote on Wed, 11 February 2009 22:21

but there are many other variables, trade offs etc. involved there.

Isn't that the truth. Size, lowend, efficiency. Pick two.

[Rick Powell]

Jeff Permanian wrote on Wed, 11 February 2009 16:22

They have simular response as the growler, 103db 1 watt, 18mm 13ply baltic birch, 120 lbs, 36" x 22.5" x 25" and loaded with a 15" driver 600watts continous/1200watts program, 17mm xmax. I'm holding for building them because I want a more powerful driver.

So what is the advantage or the difference if the efficiency and response curve is similar, but the cabinet is bigger and heavier?  

[Winston Gamble]

Rick Powell wrote on Fri, 13 February 2009 03:33

Jeff Permanian wrote on Wed, 11 February 2009 16:22 They have simular response as the growler, 103db 1 watt, 18mm 13ply baltic birch, 120 lbs, 36" x 22.5" x 25" and loaded with a 15" driver 600watts continous/1200watts program, 17mm xmax. I'm holding for building them because I want a more powerful driver. So what is the advantage or the difference if the efficiency and response curve is similar, but the cabinet is bigger and heavier?

My thought exactly. There must be something missing in Jeff's summation.... I can't imagine him going after the B-52 type market of bigger is better and badder.

Winston

[Mark Hobbs]

Rick Powell wrote on Thu, 12 February 2009 21:33

Jeff Permanian wrote on Wed, 11 February 2009 16:22 They have simular response as the growler, 103db 1 watt, 18mm 13ply baltic birch, 120 lbs, 36" x 22.5" x 25" and loaded with a 15" driver 600watts continous/1200watts program, 17mm xmax. I'm holding for building them because I want a more powerful driver. So what is the advantage or the difference if the efficiency and response curve is similar, but the cabinet is bigger and heavier?

Maybe the lack of a big difference between this and the standard Growler would explain the desire for a more "powerful" driver.

The obvious difference and advantage is the 3db higher sensitivity and the slight increase in power handling.

[kevinjames]

Rick Powell wrote on Thu, 12 February 2009 18:33

Jeff Permanian wrote on Wed, 11 February 2009 16:22 They have simular response as the growler, 103db 1 watt, 18mm 13ply baltic birch, 120 lbs, 36" x 22.5" x 25" and loaded with a 15" driver 600watts continous/1200watts program, 17mm xmax. I'm holding for building them because I want a more powerful driver. So what is the advantage or the difference if the efficiency and response curve is similar, but the cabinet is bigger and heavier?

I'm wondering this too. I would have thought with the bigger box that that horn path would be a little longer and the mouth area bigger giving it the ability to extend a little lower, sounds like thats not the case though.

[Jeff Permanian]

Rick Powell wrote on Thu, 12 February 2009 21:33

So what is the advantage or the difference if the efficiency and response curve is similar, but the cabinet is bigger and heavier?

The goal was for one 15" version to equal two Growlers, 3db more efficient and double the power handling. The 15" in these prototypes was just for proof of concept and actually handles less power than the Growler driver. Getting a 15" that meets the design goal is proving to be difficult. The dual 10" was the first plan however the high excursion 10" had very little SD, weighed 27.5lbs each, cost within a couple bucks of the 12" so the dual 10" had less output than a 15", weighed much more and cost much more.