Post by: Scott Hibbard on January 29, 2007, 09:00:57 PM
Danley Sound Labs TH-115
Danley Sound Labs TH-215
Electrovoice PX2181
McCauley MS3
BassMaxx Z5000
BassMaxx Trip X3
L’Acouctics SB218
JTR Growler
EM Acouctics EMS-215
EM Acoustics Quake
LAB Sub
Outline Subtech 218
EONA ATA 118 HH
No opinions until all the testing is over and the smoke has cleared.
P.S. Hats off the Paul Bell for pulling this thing off!
ScottH
Post by: Michael 'Bink' Knowles on January 29, 2007, 10:02:49 PM
| Scott Hibbard wrote on Mon, 29 January 2007 18:00 |
Part 1 was getting kinda long so I started this thread focusing on the actual event. Today we took measurements with Mark Seaton and Ivan at the wheel. Tomorrow we pit them up against each other in listening tests. Here are the subs we tested. Note: Meyer MD3, JBL's and EONA 618's did not show up - perhaps tomorrow? Danley Sound Labs TH-115 Danley Sound Labs TH-215 Electrovoice PX2181 McCauley MS3 BassMaxx Z5000 BassMaxx Trip X3 L’Acouctics SB218 JTR Growler EM Acouctics EMS-215 EM Acoustics Quake LAB Sub Outline Subtech 218 EONA ATA 118 HH No opinions until all the testing is over and the smoke has cleared. P.S. Hats off the Paul Bell for pulling this thing off! ScottH |
Yeah, Paul deserves a round of applause or a round of something with some kick to it. Jolly good show!
Having never heard of them I was curious about the Growlers... they look like LA400 killers in their specs: lighter weight, less cost, half the cubic volume. The EAWs are rated for more SPL but how do we know what frequency band and what level of distortion products were involved to get the official rating? Too bad Ryan's LA400s didn't get themselves to Club Rebel so we could line the Growler up directly against its worthy competitor.
-Bink
Post by: Paul Bell on January 29, 2007, 10:50:40 PM
We took our vote and the six cabinets moving on are:
Danley Sound Labs TH-215
BassMaxx Z5000
JTR Growler
EM Acouctics EMS-215
EM Acoustics Quake
Outline Subtech 215
The BASSMAXX Trip missed by one vote and everybody quickly asked for a seventh candidate. Seven it is.
Given time, we'll also do some listening to the other subs.
My take so far:
The EMS215 was the biggest surprise to me. Compact box, very loud, very accurate. Better sounding than it's bigger brother, the Quake which to me, sounded like a typical horn box.
The Growler did very well given its size. It might be a good box for those small gigs.
The Outline was very good for a front loaded dual 18 however, it did have some pronounced air noises.
The Danleys faired very well, up there with the top runners. They are a bit smaller than I'd imagined. EZ to move around.
The EONA self powered single 18 sounded good during sweep tests but didn't do very well with music.
The L-Acoustic didn't do very well compared to the big subs, I think we were all a bit disappointed in them. Hokey jack setup, one NL4 per driver. No way of going in & out.
The EV was good and loud but doesn't do much below 45 Hz. Loud box here.
McCauley MS3. Good box, not a sub. A bass cabinet for flying. I'd say they wisely designed a bass cabinet for free air use where a flown sub bass cabinet would be lost anyway. Rated -3 at 52 Hz, -10 at 35Hz so they did spec it right.
The Z5000 went loud and low, almost as loud and low as it's big brother the Trip. The Trip I think so far was the biggest performer but due to it's size and weight, some folk'll shy away from it.
The Lab Sub on hand is a modified version, shorter horn and open driver cavities. We all feel the original Lab Subs are a better box.
Mr. Prescott announced that the EONA 6X18 sub has arrived in New Jersey and will be delivered tomorrow. We'll toss it into the fray.
Still MIA is the Meyer and JBL cabinets. Let's hope they wander in tomorrow also.
David Lee and I discussed the sound of all the cabinets. We know how the BASSMAXX cabinets are supposed to sound and David has noticed some things when using various amplifiers. Now, without making this an amplifier issue, we'd like to hear the Z5000 and Trip on a QSC 9.0. It's been mentioned earlier in the shootout thread that the 9.0 should be there. We'll hook one up tomorrow just to see if the sound is any different.
It's been suggested to me that we take a more accurate vote in the morning with the folks who'll be there for day two. Also, it should be a paper vote. We'll discuss it in the morning.
On to the listening tests!
Paul Bell
Post by: Tim McCulloch on January 30, 2007, 12:43:36 AM
All the boxes that made the final cut for tomorrow's listening evals were good in their own right, but for me, the Growlers were the "sleeper" of the bunch. I think Jeff's little sub surprised everyone, and we're looking forward to hearing more from it.
Mark Seaton will be posting some hard data, and we will be posting our listening impression as things progress.
A big Thank You to Paul Bell and his assistant Karl, and everyone else too numerous to mention (because there are too many for me to remember right now) for making this a great way to spend a couple of winter days!
More later.
Tim Mc
Post by: Mark Seaton on January 30, 2007, 09:13:54 AM
I will add to this as time permits.
The system hookup was as follows:
My TEF25 was connected to an input on the Dolby Lake processor. We had the controls for the Dolby Lake on a laptop next to my position. The Dolby Lake outputs then directly drove the PowerSoft amps and of course then to the speakers. The amps were all at the same gain so we could connect multiple channels where needed and Voltage output was the same for a given output from my TEF25. Ivan brought an EarthWorks M30 microphone and calibrator which was used for all measurements. We grabbed a mono output from the board to the Dolby-Lake which could be mixed in or muted at the click of a mouse. After each set of measurements we engaged an 80Hz LR24 low pass and a suitable 24dB Butterworth high pass (per box) for listening. All filtering in the Dolby-Lake was bypassed for testing you will see posted... as time permits me.
Please remember I have no direct financial stake in this and have about 8 products I'm working on getting to normal production in the Home Theater market. My ties to the participants of course includes my history of working with Tom Danley and the guys at Danley Sound Labs. Jeff Permanian, of JTR, and I are long time friends from before we both started slaving for ServoDrive/Sound Physics. My involvement with the Growler is limited to helping source the custom driver and helping with measurements and models.
So after getting all the routing and connections sorted we needed to establish a set of measurements that we would be practical to perform on the 13 subs. Trying to stay "equal" for each sub when they run from 1-6 drivers per box and impedances of 2-8 Ohms would have added another level of confusion, so we decided to set the drive level for our base measurements at ~2.8V as measured on a GreenLee meter with a sine wave at 60Hz generated by my TEF25. The TEF25 has a numeric output level, which makes relative changes easy. We adjusted gains in the Dolby Lake such that -30dB on my TEF25's output corresponded to ~2.8V. This was the base level measurement for each sub. Let's remember that we are really seeing Voltage sensitivity, NOT efficiency.
The subwoofers were placed in the middle of the floor of the narrow room about 8' in front of the stage. The M30 was set on the ground 4' from the front edge of the pair of subwoofers under test.
Measurements taken were as follows:
1) 2.8V (to each box or connection), 120-20Hz, 16.6 second TDS sweep, giving a frequency resolution of 2.5Hz for the tracking filter. This measurement gives us a low level sensitivity reference and basis for the other frequency response and THD measurements. Finer resolution gives little added information once at <~1/10th the lowest frequency of interest. In taking longer sweeps at 2Hz resolution, there was no added detail to the measurements, and it just took longer.
2) 2.8V (same as in #1), 300-50Hz, 7.08 second TDS sweep, giving a frequency resolution of 5.9Hz for the tracking filter. This measurement gives us a view of the out of band response and behavior of the subwoofers which may or may not impact the subjective sound. This region will have an impact on the crossover region and may skew the effective crossover or require attention to get the desired crossover.
Just got the wireless router Paul Bell has set up for us. To be clear, there were more measurements than the above starting point taken, and I'll detail those as time permits.
More to come...
Post by: Mark Seaton on January 30, 2007, 09:18:27 AM
Post by: Tom Young on January 30, 2007, 09:34:36 AM
In my self-imposed exile from frequent live sound events, it is SO refreshing to be in the presence of such a group. All the anecdotal exhanges and common interests/beefs/insights have recharged my batteries considerably.
Much appreciation for the work that it took on the part of Paul Bell & company and those who schlepped all those big-boys so far.
I will look forward to the data/graphs from Mark and (equally) to the subjective voting tallies.
A great day.
Post by: Michael Hedden Jr. on January 30, 2007, 09:37:53 AM
Hi Paul and all,
Your assessment of the Danley's makes the point perfectly for the Tapped Horn technology. Anybody can make a big sub, the real art is in getting big and low out of a small box.
Come to NSCA Orlando in March if you want to see enormous, low, and ridiculous output using a tapped horn.
Post by: Grant Conklin on January 30, 2007, 09:42:06 AM
Thanks,
Grant
Post by: David J Lee on January 30, 2007, 10:05:05 AM
First order of business: Many thanks to Paul Bell for going to a lot of time, trouble and expense to organize this event. Thanks to Mark Seaton for running the test equipment. So now on to the subwoofers...
The measurements will speak for themselves. We'll be listening today so I'll post my opinions when I've heard more than one song on each of them. Talk with you soon...
Post by: Scott Hibbard on January 30, 2007, 10:08:06 AM
Ho UCS1's at the event. However, I will be placing an order very shortly for 6 of them and will post the results for everyone after the first workout with them. In terms of the UCS1 keeping pace with the Danley TH-115, I think that's abitious...the TH-115 is a monster.
ScottH
Post by: Jeff Knorr - Cobra Sound on January 30, 2007, 01:14:12 PM
My first impressions of select cabinets:
The BassMaxx boxes definitely move some air. It will be interesting to see the full test results but the Z-5000 seemed impressive to me. The downsides are their expected cost and weight.
The Danley TH-215 definitely had more extension than the TH-115 but couldn't match the TH-115 for it's efficiency at higher frequencies. I called and ordered more TH-115's today.
The JTR box was definitely the sleeper of the pack and provided some serious low-end from a small and affordable package.
I wasn't as impressed with most of the bass reflex designs but we'll have to see what the rest of the pack says after the listening tests.
I should have some pictures of most of the contenders up later tonight.
Jeff
Post by: Ivan Beaver on January 30, 2007, 01:22:21 PM
Lots more boxes to play with. So far the Powersoft amplifiers are winning. They used to throw Christians to the lions, now we are throwing loudspeakers to the sound dudes
More more-lots of fun. Everybody gets up and watches the smoke come out. Chedering in a sad kind of way, like days of old.
Post by: Tim McCulloch on January 30, 2007, 03:39:28 PM
While playing with with Bassmaxx Triples, we were visited by an angry neighbor... from the 5th floor... across the street!
Vibrating his apartment thru the substrate of Manhattan streets, and more annoying than subways, trash trucks, and horn honking traffic. Oddly, the recording studio 4 floors above Club Rebel weren't complaining.
Stay tuned!
Tim Mc
Post by: Evan Kirkendall on January 30, 2007, 03:55:02 PM
Thats almost as good as Jim B's LAB story.
Dont kill too much gear!
Evan
Post by: Tim McCulloch on January 30, 2007, 04:09:34 PM
We were thinking of you when this came in
Tim Mc
Post by: The Guy on January 30, 2007, 04:17:46 PM
| Paul Bell wrote on Mon, 29 January 2007 22:50 |
The Lab Sub on hand is a modified version, shorter horn and open driver cavities. We all feel the original Lab Subs are a better box. |
It's a shame that you couldn't have any real Lab subs there...I would've been happy to supply some....maybe next time.
Also, where can we see some information on the bassmaxx Z5000 or the JTR? I think Bassmaxx is a contender for the "worst of the web" award!
-JB
Post by: Scott Hibbard on January 30, 2007, 05:58:38 PM
In the meantime we all own Paul Bell a HUGE round of applause for his effort. He is a class act and more importantly, a real nice guy. Thanks also to Mark Seaton for driving TEF and to Bennett and his friends for supplying the amps/Lakes. Thanks to Ivan Beaver for all his insights. It was nice to finally put a face to all the names on the forum.
My observations coming later tonight. I hope everyone makes it home safely.
ScottH
Post by: Scott Hibbard on January 30, 2007, 08:29:50 PM
<added> I failed to mention that each subwoofer was listened to (and tested) in pairs. Some side by side, some stacked.
Every single sub in the listening test was a worthy piece of professional equipment. There wasn't a bad speaker in the bunch. More interestingly, each speaker had its own sound. I'll let some of the other post pics (maybe Jeff knorr - he had a nice camera) - my camera was "average" at best.
Danley TH-115
- Capable of extreme SPL for a single driver box
- Went down to 30Hz but sounded best between 40Hz - 50Hz
- Very efficient & very responsive to transients
- HPF 25Hz, LPF 75Hz
- Saw peaks in excessive of 133db just above 40Hz
- Cabinets defy their size - arguably the best 15" horn-loaded sub available to date in a very manageable size
- Tom/Mike - Would like to see a foam backed grill to protect the driver from dust etc.
Danley TH-215
- Noticeably lower response that the TH-115, albeit not quite as efficient but hey we didn't care - we had tons of power on-hand.
- At approx. 16 feet, punch was simply amazing with the most notable output of any speaker between 30Hz and 50Hz. We saw peaks over 135 db at 35Hz!!
- Very little sound coming from the rear of the speaker relative to the front
- A true large scale concert speaker in every way. Nice size - not too small, not too large. It would be a pleasure to move 12 of these for larger events (which is about all you would need!)
- HPF 20Hz, LPF 75Hz
- Tom/Mike - Just like the TH-115, I would like to see a foam backed grill on the front
- Not the overall loudest subwoofer in the group, but in my opinion the most musical, most controlled and enjoyable speaker in the group. Its ability to produce 35Hz effortlessly added an element to listening most didn't have while remaining very tight and extremely responsive to transients.
- An incredible subwoofer - simply amazing sound quality and output through its range.
EMS-215
- Happiest between 45-55Hz but had usability down to 35Hz before drop-off
- Had a pleasant level of distortion when approaching peak levels - was never harsh on the ears
- HPF 35Hz, LPF 80Hz
- Greatly exceeded my expectation for a bandpass sub, substantial impact
- Didn't go as low as the TH-215's but did a good job keeping up with them between 50Hz - 70Hz
- Was the first speaker voice coil to go up in smoke - we pushed it a little to hard
EMS Quake
- Thunderous output from 35Hz - 70Hz, and like the Th-215, the Quake has its most significant output between 35Hz - 50Hz but I did notice a slight bump at 70Hz.
- Easily reached 135+ db at 55Hz
- HPF 25Hz, LPF 80Hz
- Not as controlled as others in the group and was a little slower to respond to transients but certainly not bad by any means
- Easily shook the room and everyone in it. Was second only to the BassMaxx Trip X3 as the sub you "felt" the most. Worthy of its name.
- Very large subwoofer, looked like an apartment sized refrigerator but despite it's size, was easy to move around
BassMaxx Z5000
- Had significant peaks between 40Hz through 70Hz
- 37Hz was about as low as she would go before drop off but had tons of punch around 40Hz - 50Hz.
- Very tight and responsive to transients
- Measured peaks in excessive of 137db at approx. 63Hz
- HPF 35Hz, LPF 80Hz
- Sub sounded best in the 40Hz - 60Hz region with very little audible distortion
- Absolutely no sound coming off the rear of the speaker. I was able to have a normal conversation with Paul Bell while standing less than 1 foot behind it. Very impressive for a non-cardoid subwoofer.
- Reasonably sized - you won't mistake this for a small cabinet but you also won't need a crew of 4 to lift it (unlike it's big brother the Trip X3)
- Great box
BassMaxx Trip X3
- If bass were a controlled substance, David Lee would have been arrested on the spot and thrown in the slammer w/o bail! Simply stated, the Trip X3 walked away the "King of SPL". Truly amazing output.
- HPF 35Hz, LPF 80Hz with a -3b cut at 75Hz
- Trip was the first (and I believe only) speaker to cause the K10's to run into clipping. I wonder how these would sound with an FP13000 on them?
- This speaker needs POWER. If you've got anything less than 5000 watts per speaker cabinet, you're probably best served to look elsewhere or upgrading your amps.
- To give you an idea of the output, we measured peaks of 143db at approx. 16 feet at 60Hz while watching (literally) some of the furniture go for a stroll.
- Had very significant output at 35Hz (approx. 135db) very much like the TH-215 but didn't quite have the same "easy sound" as the TH-215 at 35Hz.
- This subwoofer was the cause of Paul Bell's hilarious announcement "…guys turn it down for a while. We received a complaint from someone of the 5th floor…FROM ACROSS THE STREET!"
- Absolutely massive in size. Made the Quake look small.
JTR Growler
- Extremely punchy and an amazing speaker - esp. when you consider it's size
- VERY compact subwoofer. You could probably fit 4 of them in the back of a SMALL SUV with room to spare. If I recall correctly, two of these were smaller than one Quake by a decent margin.
- HPF 30Hz, LPF 80Hz
- Smooth response down to 40Hz and then fell off from there.
- Coupled very nicely
- Saw peaks around 128db at 65Hz with nice impact
- Speaker seemed happiest between 45Hz and 75Hz
Outline Subtech 218
- Measured 135db at approx. 55Hz
- Warm, full bass reproduction with some audible distortion associated with dual 18's but only upon reaching it's very limits
- Lots of bass at 35Hz and seemed happiest between 35Hz - 55 Hz.
- HPF 35Hz, LPF 82 Hz
- Slightly smaller than one would expect for a dual 18"
- Had nice covers that can remain in place during use
I wasn't able to stay for the full listening test of the EONA ATA 618HH. I'll let the other share their thoughts here. I was however, able to sit through the swept tests Mark Seaton ran and without seeing the actual numbers, it seemed pretty efficient and got loud around 45Hz.
I hope this was helpful to those who weren't able to attend.
ScottH
Post by: Ivan Beaver on January 30, 2007, 10:59:45 PM
He kept us feed and liquided (is that a word?) up and I think a good time was had by all. A few slow downs (none had anything to do with Paul) in the measurement side of things (that happens when you try to do it right!).
I also want to thank Mark Seaton for "driving" the TEF. We went through a lot of pains in order to try to get as accurate data as possible. I haven't really looked at all of it yet, but his care and diligence to "Doing it right" is appreciated.
He has lots of stuff to put together and present to the LAB.
I also want to thank all the others that helped out providing amp power and dealing with all the odd/different connections that were presented by different cabinets.
Thanks to Bennett and his "work box" for providing all sorts of odd and ends to make it work.
If you ever get to NY, be sure to check out the Les Paul show-some excellent musicians he is working with and I think the girl bass player is simply having to much fun with the upright. Maybe it is because Les is a dirty ol man. We had a blast and "Fuzzy" with the fungus on his face even got a belly rub from Les Paul (You know who you are
)I had fun, but now I have to get back to the real job at hand and " screw around" for the next couple of weeks-those that were there know what I mean
.Again, thanks to all for helping out and attending and making it a very positive event.
WHAT-HUGH?
Post by: Elliot Thompson on January 30, 2007, 11:31:11 PM
A quick review about this cabinet
This sub houses six 18-inch neodymium woofers. It's an isobaric design which offers four drivers firing forward and, two drivers firing backwards to create a cardioid effect. This is powered by an 8400 watt (1400 watts x 6) amplifier. The amplifier is a Dual-Mono design. So, if one channel sees a fault and shuts down, it doesn’t affect the other channel not registering a fault. It weighs in at 240 pounds which, is not heavy considering it holds six 18-inch woofers, in addition to an amplifier offering two toroidal transformers. However, seeing that the weight is even on all sides of the cabinet, it’s dead weight. So, it’s like you are moving 300 pounds. Definitely not the type of box you want to be left alone to move around yourself because the roadies are too drunk to stand up much less, lift speaker boxes.
Sine wave listening
The sine wave sweep was interesting. To appreciate the lower notes, you needed to be furthest away from the source. My observation came from being at FOH, located at the rear of the club whereas, the 618 was close to the stage area. The response was very good. It actually didn’t offer any signs of strain all the way down to 20 Hz. Mark swept it at an average level, then a high level. Again no sign of strain. Just to let you know, a pair of these arrived on day 2. So, they were tested before playing the tracks.
Music Listening
IMHO the box sounded very good. It went loud and low with ease. Bennet requested to push it harder for he wanted to hear how loud they would go before they began breaking up. So they were pushed harder. The limiter really clamps down on the amplifier. At this point, I decided to walk over to the box to hear if any port noise, burning voice coils, or cone breakup was apparent. Many Labsters were hanging out behind the box to find out if the rear firing eighteens were doing their job. When I arrived to the source, the SPL of the upper bass sounded as if I was sitting in front of an EAW KF 850. The gain got reduced for it was getting too excessive, and many were walking away from the box that were standing within its pathway. We then moved over to the final track.
There was one track that Greg Rosenkrans from EM Acoustics provided. We began calling it the subwoofer killer because subs were smoking due to the severe low frequency sine waves the track offered and, learned it would be best to use that track last. I was back at FOH and decided to take a venture towards the back of the box to hear if the cancellation was noticable for myself. As I maneuvered my way towards the back of the box, the top box wasn’t working. The breakers tripped on both amp modules. We need to keep in mind that this box was designed for 220 volts and was wired to 110.
As Bennet pointed out before the sine wave testing, that Eona warned him that the breakers were never switched, and excessive sine waves will trigger the breakers in which it did.
If you can feed them 220 volts that minor altercation would not be an issue.
Best Regards,
Post by: Rob Spence on January 31, 2007, 12:21:08 AM
I also want to thank Paul Bell for his super effort. He sure took care of all of us and even those who arrived on Sunday! Real nice ales and fun in the snow
Thanks also to Mark Seaton and Ivan Beaver for really making sure all the measurements got done right!
Thanks to Bennett for the work box. Now I got to get one, sigh...
And thanks to the guys from across the river for the super racks full of amps & Lakes and also for the power distro. It was great to see again the folks I have met before and to meet so many others from the forum.
I sure liked the Les Paul show. A must see.
Nite now...
Post by: Jeff Permanian on January 31, 2007, 12:54:46 AM
| Jim Bowersox wrote on Tue, 30 January 2007 15:17 |
Also, where can we see some information on the bassmaxx Z5000 or the JTR? -JB |
JTR's website is still in the works with hopes to have it up within feb. JTR's Growler subwoofer- single 12" driver, horn loaded, fr 45-100(40-100 in pairs), 100db@1watt, +133db PEAK, 1000watt music power, 2000watt PEAK, 18mm 13ply birch cabinet(24mm baffle), 30"w x 20"t x 22.5"d, 95 lbs, Line-X coating
Post by: Tim McCulloch on January 31, 2007, 12:58:16 AM
Basically I want to echo what Scott and the others have said: Paul hosted a useful and fun event that was productive AND a blast to be at, and well worth the trip from Kansas. I don't think I've been in a room with so many smart, resourceful, and genuinely nice people in ages. THANK YOU!
Scott, I read your post timestamped 19:29 and pretty much agree with your assessment of the speakers we listened to. I'll post my subjective observations after I get home Wednesday night.
For those of you who didn't attend, but might have been able to, please come to the next event of this kind hosted by LABsters. You will leave with vastly more than you arrived with and be in the company of some of pro audio's best folks. Really.
Thanks again, Paul, Karl, Mark, Ivan, and everyone else who made the NYC SubShoot such a delight.
Tim Mc
Post by: Paul Bell on January 31, 2007, 07:57:35 AM
I would say I was very impressed with the EM Acoustics cabinets. While I initially felt the 215 cab would sound better than the Quake, the listening test made me go the other way. The 215 didn’t like certain music yet the Quake ran pretty hard. Too bad both Quakes lost their drivers, I could’ve used some more pounding from them.
I’m really backed up with work and I still have gear to pull from the space so I’ll be watching the thread and post more thoughts later.
BTW, the complaint from the 5th floor neighbor across the street during the BASSMAXX Trip test was real, it may be construed here as if it was a prank I pulled (which I’d never do). I’ll attribute it to us adding time and tracks to the testing of these speakers. Anyway, we needed a break afterwards.
Post by: Michael 'Bink' Knowles on January 31, 2007, 08:28:13 AM
Bennett must've pulled some crazy logistical magic out of his hat to get the thing there by day two.... Nice one, Bennett!
-Bink
Post by: Ivan Beaver on January 31, 2007, 08:52:34 AM
The cabinets were fine untill we got to the high level sine wave type music, that is what killed several loudspeakers. Peaks are one thing (Kick drum) but sine is brutal.
There was no damage done to the EONA's and they could operate fine off of 110V, but the circuit breakers in them were setup for 220V, so they simply tripped at the extra current at 110V.
The change was a last minute one to get the cabinets to us (I think I am understanding this right) and the breakers didn't make it into the swap.
Post by: Ales Dravinec 'Alex' on January 31, 2007, 09:07:17 AM
| Ivan Beaver wrote on Wed, 31 January 2007 13:52 |
....There was no damage done to the EONA's and they could operate fine off of 110V, but the circuit breakers in them were setup for 220V, so they simply tripped at the extra current at 110V. The change was a last minute one to get the cabinets to us (I think I am understanding this right) and the breakers didn't make it into the swap. |
Thanks Ivan. Explanation is in place and is correct. Due to transport mix up, there was no time to swap the fuses....We even considered calling Bink to make "parallel" shootout in SF since boxes were already there...
Thanks to everybody in "transport chain" to expeditiously corrected routing error.
Alex
Confession : ATA618CHH indeed weighs 300lbs. There's error in specs. Sincere apologies. Will be corrected soon
Post by: The Guy on January 31, 2007, 09:09:27 AM
Kudos to getting the boxes there on time. I was hearing some of the details along the way and it's no small feat that you managed to clear up the freight mess....it's never easy!
-JB
Post by: Jason Dermer on January 31, 2007, 10:40:26 AM
Thanks to everyone involved, especially Paul for the room and hospitality. My experience in SR is primarily as a mix engineer in the middle to lower high end (I love that type of terminology!), world of rock and roll combat audio. I do have enough knowledge in Smaart/Spectrafoo/Ease to perform "basic" system setup and alignment, or as I like to call it, confirmation of what my ears are telling me. Working with the likes of some of the brains in the room was like being a lab assistant (pun intended) to Albert Einstein, though never once did I deal with a "clean my boots" attitude from anyone, knowledge was shared freely and explained in such a way as to make perfect sense.
As the designated driver once we reached the music portion on day two...
The installed McCauleys were not turned down as a whole, only the HF drivers were. I also applied a pretty good amount of EQ above 1.6K. I'll save the theories and explanations as to why for another post, and I'm sure Paul will want to chime in as well. The mains were fed from the LR of the installed Spectra T, with the tested subs fed from the Mono. The Mono was in turn fed from an Aux . Using this technique, we were able to balance the outputs of each of the subs to the tops quite easily. To be fair to the EM guys. lest anyone think that their subs were not up to the task at hand, they only gave up their smoke AFTER I was asked by Greg to bring up the sub level 4-6db beyond what I would consider a very sub heavy but still balanced point. Or, as someone put it, they died honorably in service to the Powersoft amplfier gods...
More later on the shootout itself, with followups over the next few weeks as I have demos of the EM and Bassmaxx boxes heading my way for awhile.
Post by: Elliot Thompson on January 31, 2007, 11:29:06 AM
| Ales Dravinec 'Alex' wrote on Wed, 31 January 2007 14:07 |
Alex Confession : ATA618CHH indeed weighs 300lbs. There's error in specs. Sincere apologies. Will be corrected soon |
So my assumption was right
They were worth the trouble.
If anyone is waiting to hear a longer review on all the cabinets,
I will post my thoughts later on this evening.
Edit
I just got the pictures from a friend who took photos and its a lot
So, this may take some time to put it all together.Best Regards,
Post by: Tim Morin on January 31, 2007, 01:48:16 PM
Post by: Donnie Ricciardi on January 31, 2007, 06:46:26 PM
Until next time...
Donnie Ricciardi
Post by: Elliot Thompson on January 31, 2007, 06:57:44 PM
This is my take on the Subwoofer Shoot out held at Club Rebel, NYC January 31, 2007.
First and foremost, I would like to thank Paul Bell for a terrific job as host. It was a great success. The turnout was much larger than the previous shoot out of 2003. I would also like to thank Mark Seaton for taking time out of his busy schedule to measure the cabinets, The APB Dyansonics Family for supplying a magnificent board and EM Acoustics for providing the racks. I would also like to thank all the Manufactures, and Representatives who brought their cabinets from all parts of the globe to NYC.
And, last but not least, all the Soundmen who took part in the event.
Please keep in mind, unlike my previous review in 2003, this one is based on listening only. If you would like to view the SPL measurements, please refer to Scott Hibbard’s post entitled “NYC Subwoofer Shootout Results”
APB Dynamics board
Amplification & Processing
We had five Powersoft K 10 Amplifiers, and two Dolby Lake DSPs, at our disposal for the event. Generally only one K 10 was needed. However, a second one came in handy when creativity in wire work was needed.
The Powersoft K 10 delivers 2000 watts per channel @ 8 ohms, 4000 watts per channel @ 4 ohms, and 6000 watts per channel in a 2-ohm load. One Dolby Lake was used to supply the processing for the Subs, where Mark Seaton would adjust the high and low pass filtering accordingly.
The amplifiers were fed 220 volts so they could achieve maximum current capacity if/when necessary.
On to the review;
Tom Danley TH 115
This sub uses the Tapped Horn technology housing a single fifteen-inch driver. It can be used as a stand alone, dual or quad box configuration.
Listening Test
They had a rough start due to having one of the speakon connections offering a short. Thus, what we thought was two cabinets playing was actually one box. This became apparent when we played a very low frequency dance music track, which offered numerous amounts of sine waves. The end result was the smell of burned voice coil coming from the TH 115. While the speakers were being tested to determine which cabinet was offering this wonderful smell, the shorted speakon cable was discovered. All the SPLs were coming from one box. Ivan Beever quickly brought it to our attention, and addressed the problem. Now, we had the pleasure of hearing both boxes (Actually 1 ½ due to due charred coil of one cabinet) in action.
Sounded it very good. Although, I would class it as handicapped seeing that one box was partially cooked already. Very efficient and pleasing to the ear nonetheless. And we did get our first complaint from a neighboring office.
Tom Danley TH 215
This sub uses two fifteen-inch drivers in conjunction to the tapped horn technology. Upon looking at the cabinet it looks similar to the EAW SB 1000 from the naked eye. However, where the EAW has their woofers exposed, the TH 215 does not. I want to note that this box is not too far off in terms of size to the TH 115.
Listening Test
With Speakons double checked, they fire up the system and they are off and running. If you are familiar with any of Tom’s previous designs (Servodrive 5, Basstech 7, & Lab Sub) air pressure is their motto, and the TH 215 of is no exception. They are not as efficient as the TH 115. But, they offer a high degree of dynamic impact/punchy bass. They are designed to have a narrow dispersion, which reduces a lot of spilling on the sides, and can be tightly packed to take advantage of the coupling effect so popular with horns. There were only two available and, I would’ve loved to hear 4 (1 wide 4 high) or 8 (2 wide 4 high) housed with a pair of SH 50s on top. Personally, I would grab the TH 215 faster than the TH 115. I just see more flexibility and potential using the TH 215. Of course, I did hear a handicapped pair of TH 115s. Which I could play a factor
due to my first experience listening to both designs.
EM Acoustics EMS 215
This sub is comprised of two 15-inch woofers in a band-pass module. Very compact, and easy to handle.
Listening Test
Now, forget about all those band-pass cabinets, you’ve heard that offers a limited bandwidth. This cabinet offers everything you wouldn’t expect from a band-pass in a good way. Very smooth with a good frequency range providing you don’t try to push them beyond it’s limits. It’s not a touring box, and shouldn’t expect it to work as one. Unfortunately, they were pushed too hard and smoke started to escape through the vents. Bare in mind, that they were being fed 4000 watts per channel @ 4 ohms (Powersoft K 10) which, clearly exceeded their 2000 watt program rating. This was another victim to wrath of ultra low sine wave frequency dance track.
EM Acoustics MSE 118 Quake
This is another design from the British Company using a single 18 (Not many eighteens used at this Shootout) in a 9 foot folded horn. Follows the bass horn principals that it would be best to use at least 4 cabinets to take advantage of the coupling effect and achieve the required size mouth. This box reminds me more as a Rave box based on the dimensions. That may be a good or bad thing based on your clientele and if you have other means on having your tops elevated.
Listening Test
I was actually in the hall way with Bennet and another Labster unassembling the EONA ATA 618C. So, I only caught the low-end resonance from that perspective. For what its worth, the extension sounded good enough for me to drop what I was doing and see what subs were playing. By the time I got in to fully examine what was going on, they just stop playing. I’m not sure if they have a built in protection circuitry or what. But, it is quite bizarre to have both boxes stop working with no indication (Smell) of a damage driver.
BASSMAXX Z 5000
This is a new design from David Lee and Johan Van Styl. It uses four 10 inch woofers in folded horn. What makes this box interesting is the resemblance of the larger B Zero, B Two, and B One (No longer in production) cabinets, just smaller. Another surprise is the open back technology is not adopted. So, it carries the standard sealed chamber trait found in all folded horns. The box is rated at 5000 watts program, and with David at the controls, you can be sure he’s going to take advantage of the K 10 at his disposal.
Listening Test.
With all small speakers, they tend to deliver low mid/mid bass frequencies better than larger drivers with no effort. This is a plus for those who are using one cabinet for mid bass and one cabinet for bass. The Z 5000 goes very loud and stays very clean right up to clip. (This was the first box to take full power of the K 10) There seems to be noise issues with the casters, that makes it sound as if distortion is coming out the horn’s mouth when each box is getting 6000 watts. This won’t be an issue once you use some kind of adhesive to remedy the problem. It also passed the ultra low frequency sine wave dance track without a hitch.
BASSMAXX TRIP
Another new design from the BASSMAXX camp is the TRIP. It houses three 12 inch woofers and claims to go lower than the B Zeros. Id might warn you that this box is well over 300 pounds and offers no handles or casters. It’s more suited for an install. However, David does have a dual version that is lighter, and, more mover friendly.
Listening Test.
I’ve actually heard four of the B Zero’s (Housed with the Neomaxx 18) and four B Two’s (Housed with the McCauley 6174).
My preference was four B Two’s with the 6174 because they went extremely low. My mind changed upon hearing the TRIP sine wave test on Day 1. They go extremely lower with less cone breakup. The subs were actually reduced by – 6dB on the APB Board to balance with the McCauley Line Array. Since everyone wanted to hear how bad they really were, and David wasn’t shy to please a room full of soundguys, they were cranked up. We encountered a limiting factor ……… The K 10.
The clip lights were bouncing every second and third beat, while the trip didn’t even flinch. I actually told David several times that the amp had ran out of gas and, he did reduce the gain. But, it slowly crept back up, and the clip lights were on again.
Notes:
1.These cabinets had just come from an Outside Rave in California. As we proceeded to drive the snot of the K 10, we were greeted with some California dust that hid in the boxes. At first, we thought the woofers were smoking. Then David mentioned the Rave in California that was held outdoors in the dirt.
2. We had a surprise DJ waltz in that thought it was a Party, and wanted to join in the festivity.
3. And last but not least. The Noise complaint from a tenant on the 5th floor Across The Street complaining about the bass shaking up his apartment.
Oh, and it did pass the ultra low frequency sine wave dance track.
More to come.....
Post by: Elliot Thompson on January 31, 2007, 06:58:40 PM
JTR Growler
This is a small company that you really need to keep your eye on. The Growler houses one 12-inch woofer in a folded horn. The box is so small (30”x 20”x 22.5”) you can throw two in a car. It’s also very light. Mark Seaton is helping Jeff and it’s evident in its performance
Listening Test
This box actually blew a lot of people away. Normally, when you see a small folded horn the first thing comes to mind is a 10-dB drop @ 60 Hertz. However, this box worked it’s way in the mid 40’s without the irritating, ear fatiguing, peaky response, that many horns of that size are known for. At some levels it did clip the Powersoft K 10. However, it was momentary, and not long-term. The Quality is very High Fidelity and, you do wonder if it’s indeed a horn playing. If I were looking for a little sub, this would be my first choice. It’s flexible enough to stack 2 wide 6 high with a pair of JTR Tops (Still under works) sitting above to achieve a substantial amount of output.
Outline Subtech 218
This Italian based design was the only Dual Eighteen in the listening test. They come with their own vinyl-padded covers, flyware and caster/dolly that double up as a protection for the face of the cabinet. I like the concept behind the archetecture.
Listening Test.
The only issue this box had was the foam/port interaction that created a shuffling noise at high SPL levels. Although, the woofers, had no problem handling the power. If that minor issue were addressed, you have a well-constructed dual 18 flyable cabinet. Its fairly punchy in a near field manner. But from FOH, the port noise is most dominant.
EONA ATA 618 C
This sub houses six 18-inch neodymium woofers. It's an isobaric design which offers four drivers firing forward and, two drivers firing backwards to create a cardioid effect. This is powered by an 8400 watt (1400 watts x 6) amplifier. The amplifier is a Dual-Mono design. So, if one channel sees a fault and shuts down, it doesn’t affect the other channel not registering a fault. It weighs in at 240 pounds which, is not heavy considering it holds six 18-inch woofers, in addition to an amplifier offering two toroidal transformers. However, seeing that the weight is even on all sides of the cabinet, it’s dead weight. So, it’s like you are moving 300 pounds. Definitely not the type of box you want to be left alone to move around yourself because the roadies are too drunk to stand up much less, lift speaker boxes.
Sine wave listening
The sine wave sweep was interesting. To appreciate the lower notes, you needed to be furthest away from the source. My observation came from being at FOH, located at the rear of the club whereas, the 618 was close to the stage area. The response was very good. It actually didn’t offer any signs of strain all the way down to 20 Hz. Mark swept it at an average level, then a high level. Again no sign of strain. Just to let you know, a pair of these arrived on day 2. So, they were tested before playing the tracks.
Music Listening
IMHO the box sounded very good. It went loud and low with ease. Bennet requested to push it harder for he wanted to hear how loud they would go before they began breaking up. So they were pushed harder. The limiter really clamps down on the amplifier. At this point, I decided to walk over to the box to hear if any port noise, burning voice coils, or cone breakup was apparent. Many Labsters were hanging out behind the box to find out if the rear firing eighteens were doing their job. When I arrived to the source, the SPL of the upper bass sounded as if I was sitting in front of an EAW KF 850. The gain got reduced for it was getting too excessive, and many were walking away from the box that were standing within its pathway. We then moved over to the final track.
There was one track that Greg Rosenkrans from EM Acoustics provided. We began calling it the subwoofer killer because subs were smoking due to the severe low frequency sine waves the track offered and, learned it would be best to use that track last. I was back at FOH and decided to take a venture towards the back of the box to hear if the cancellation was noticable for myself. As I maneuvered my way towards the back of the box, the top box wasn’t working. The breakers tripped on both amp modules. We need to keep in mind that this box was designed for 220 volts and was wired to 110.
As Bennet pointed out before the sine wave testing, that Eona warned him that the breakers were never switched, and excessive sine waves will trigger the breakers in which it did.
If you can feed them 220 volts that minor altercation would not be an issue.
Best Regards,
Post by: Jason Dermer on January 31, 2007, 07:08:56 PM
On a side note, did we ever find out if the neighbor's complaint was actually to the EPA and not the police, as had had been rumored?
Post by: Elliot Thompson on January 31, 2007, 07:12:21 PM
Only Paul would know. Hopefully he will shed some light on the situtation.
Best Regards,
Post by: Mac Kerr on January 31, 2007, 07:40:51 PM
Mac
Post by: Michael Ioia on January 31, 2007, 08:14:33 PM
| Jeff Permanian wrote on Tue, 30 January 2007 23:54 | ||
JTR's website is still in the works with hopes to have it up within feb. JTR's Growler subwoofer- single 12" driver, horn loaded, fr 45-100(40-100 in pairs), 100db@1watt, +133db PEAK, 1000watt music power, 2000watt PEAK, 18mm 13ply birch cabinet(24mm baffle), 30"w x 20"t x 22.5"d, 95 lbs, Line-X coating |
Whats the $$ per box? Whats the weight of each box?
Thanks,
Post by: Bob Kenton on January 31, 2007, 09:48:43 PM
Thanks, Bob
Post by: Jeff Knorr - Cobra Sound on January 31, 2007, 09:57:29 PM
Jeff
Post by: Michael 'Bink' Knowles on January 31, 2007, 10:13:01 PM
| Jeff Knorr - Cobra Sound wrote on Wed, 31 January 2007 18:57 |
My pictures are finally online after a battle with the gallery software, http://cobrasound.com/cobrasound_gallery/misc/SubwooferShoot out07 Jeff |
Great photos! Some of those boxes... I have no idea which ones they are. A few words underneath the photos would help sort it out.
-Bink
Post by: Bob Kenton on January 31, 2007, 10:19:19 PM
info for the Growler subs
Post by: Mike Butler (media) on January 31, 2007, 10:19:55 PM
First, a huge "hats off" to Paul for a great job! Putting together all that gear and talent, to say nothing of getting it all checked out in an organized fashion is tough to make look easy.
Great to see some of the guys from Wedgefest Troy again, and great to meet more of the guys from the LAB in person.
Some notable no-shows: JBL, Meyer, plus we would have liked to see EAW and Yorkie. And it would have been nice to have some actual proper LAB subs and maybe some Tubas or Titans. But we had plenty to play with.
The Danleys did not fail to please, and served as a great benchmark. The feisty little Growlers were more fun than 64 ounces of beer (which is the other kind of "growler" as those of us who have visited the microbreweries of Vermont all know), What a pleasant surprise. The Trips were, well, a trip! They brought out the mischievous side in some of us, along with reminiscences of the venerable Shearer Horn with its front panel mouth effect (not that any of us is actually old enough to remember it, right?).
Thanks to Mark, a real trouper, for piloting the measuring rig, to Scott the Scribe, and to the rest of the guys who did the work. Oh yes, and thanks to the mfrs. for their participation and input.
The event was quite a success, complete with "magic smoke" and complaining neighbors. Oh yes, and the "Less Balls Trio," right, Fuzzy?
Post by: Bennett Prescott on January 31, 2007, 10:25:52 PM
Glad you liked my subs. I'd just like to clarify that the subs are 120v only due to the power supply, these are definitely US versions. It was discovered shortly before they were packed up in Slovenia to be shipped to me that it was possible to trip the two 10A push-reset breakers with full power sine waves, but we didn't have time to source the part in Slovenia. I ordered 15A replacement breakers in the US and was going to install them before the shootout, but since the subs came in the second day of the event, I'll have to do it back at the shop in Troy.
Now we'll just have to pass Paul's "48 hour full power trance party" overheating test. Anyone want to host?
Post by: Bennett Prescott on January 31, 2007, 11:33:42 PM
Just got back, had a great time. It was wonderful to hang out and see all y'all and listen. I'm exhausted, but here's the photos I took:
http://www.campuspa.com/images/subshoot07/
Sorry I don't have my usual witty commentary and names of people in the photo appended to each, too much to do to go through 250 photos.
Post by: Mac Kerr on January 31, 2007, 11:49:31 PM
| Bennett Prescott wrote on Wed, 31 January 2007 23:33 |
Hey guys, Just got back, had a great time. It was wonderful to hang out and see all y'all and listen. I'm exhausted, but here's the photos I took: http://www.campuspa.com/images/subshoot07/ Sorry I don't have my usual witty commentary and names of people in the photo appended to each, too much to do to go through 250 photos. |
The link seems to go somewhere, but access is forbidden.
Mac
Post by: andrew gissing on January 31, 2007, 11:51:07 PM
andrew
Post by: Bennett Prescott on January 31, 2007, 11:58:48 PM
Post by: Tim McCulloch on February 01, 2007, 12:45:15 AM
Tim Mc
Post by: Andrew Russell on February 01, 2007, 07:36:41 AM
Fun fun time... thanks again to Paul and everyone that brought gear, I'm so glad I took time to come check it out!
-Andrew
Post by: Jeff Permanian on February 01, 2007, 08:47:08 AM
Whats the $$ per box? Whats the weight of each box?
Thanks,
[/quote]
JTR's website will be up before the end of february!! Please feel free to contact me via phone, email and myspace. The "little" 12" driver in the growler is the cause for the speaker weighing in at 95lbs. MRSP price includes shipping within USA 48 states.
Jeff
1-847-714-6878
JTRspeakers@hotmail.com
Post by: Jeff Permanian on February 01, 2007, 09:06:37 AM
| Bob Kenton wrote on Wed, 31 January 2007 20:48 |
Thanks for your review Elliot, esp about the JTR Growler, I just may try a pair of these. As far as small subs go, my favorite has been the JBL SRX 718s, how would you think they would do against each other? Sound quaility? Thanks, Bob |
Does anyone in the chicago area have a pair of SRX718s? I'd be happy to assemble a side by side listening.
Post by: Tom Danley on February 01, 2007, 11:25:35 AM
Sounds like you had fun and your neighbors had “enough” bass.
From what I understand at some point the board operator was asked to “crank it up” to see what the boxes could do “flat out”.
I was curious, which of the Boxes did you push to max output?
Best,
Tom Danley
Post by: Elliot Thompson on February 01, 2007, 12:15:54 PM
| Tom Danley wrote on Thu, 01 February 2007 16:25 |
Hey Paul, Guys Sounds like you had fun and your neighbors had “enough” bass. From what I understand at some point the board operator was asked to “crank it up” to see what the boxes could do “flat out”. I was curious, which of the Boxes did you push to max output? Best, Tom Danley |
The Danely TH 115 is very efficent. This was the first box used and we got a complaint. The amplifier output indicators were just touching the first LEDs I would say every 7 - 10 seconds.
The Danely TH 215 needed a little more, and the amplifier's output indicators were blinking on the second and third light.
The only boxes that were driven into clip were the BASSMAXX Z 5000 and the TRIP. Bennet's boxes were driven into clip as well but, it was powered by it's built in amplifier.
Best Regards,
Post by: Paul Bell on February 01, 2007, 12:41:20 PM
Yes, the first gentleman who wanted to know what was going on was a NYC EPA inspector. Some weeks ago, I posted notices throughout the building so the many recording studios would be aware of our event. I included "DB levels of 145..." on the notice. One neighbor, who hates club Rebel, made an appointment for the inspector to be here during the shootout.
He was impressed with what we were doing and found no problems or people complaining about the sound.
The across the street neighbor heard the bass and ran over to scream. We had been doing the extended listening of the Trip cabinets so we all took a little break. This was the only noise complaint we got.
The APB console used for the shootout is owned by the venue, John from APB was nice enough to join us and show the upcoming rack console.
Post by: Bennett Prescott on February 01, 2007, 01:07:55 PM
| Elliot Thompson wrote on Thu, 01 February 2007 12:15 |
Bennett's boxes were driven into clip as well but, it was powered by it's built in amplifier. |
I just want to quickly clarify that they were driven into limit, not clip. If they'd been driven into clip you would have smelled and heard it, there's a bunch of power in that box! Given our limiter slope and attack/release characteristics, clipping is practically impossible, and we hope our limiters sound a lot better than clipping while keeping the box from eating itself up.
My understanding is that our subs were driven full range, without an additional external LPF or HPF. Since our internal protection LPF and HPF are second order (12db/octave) any tonal changes due to hard limiting were probably higher frequency components getting more gain due to squishing down the LF content. I know Alex (our R&D manager) spends a lot of time making the limiters sound good.
Post by: Elliot Thompson on February 01, 2007, 01:10:48 PM
| Mac Kerr wrote on Thu, 01 February 2007 00:40 |
The speakers with the "one NL4 per driver" syndrome was not the Outline, it was the L-Acoustic SB218. I don't think that is a standard configuration. Mac |
Sorry about that. I'll fix that right now.
| Bob Kenton wrote on Thu, 01 February 2007 02:48 |
Thanks for your review Elliot, esp about the JTR Growler, I just may try a pair of these. As far as small subs go, my favorite has been the JBL SRX 718s, how would you think they would do against each other? Sound quaility? Thanks, Bob |
I'm leaning more towards the Growler. I like the sound they project. Great detailing. If you can play Jazz through it and
it sounds good, it pretty much says that the quality is top notch.
For Corporate work that requires a good sounding box that is heard but not seen, this is it.
Gotta keep in mind that the Growlers were played right after the TRIPS. Many (Myself included) felt that was unfair. But, it held it's own very well. Of course, it won't offer the same amount of SPL and, low frequency extension of the Trips. But, it did offer great sound over a broad frequency range. And when you compare other boxes that offer that kind of fidelity, you are looking more towards a larger cabinet.
| Bennett Prescott wrote on Thu, 01 February 2007 03:25 |
Hey Elliot, Glad you liked my subs. I'd just like to clarify that the subs are 120v only due to the power supply, these are definitely US versions. It was discovered shortly before they were packed up in Slovenia to be shipped to me that it was possible to trip the two 10A push-reset breakers with full power sine waves, but we didn't have time to source the part in Slovenia. I ordered 15A replacement breakers in the US and was going to install them before the shootout, but since the subs came in the second day of the event, I'll have to do it back at the shop in Troy. Now we'll just have to pass Paul's "48 hour full power trance party" overheating test. Anyone want to host? |
Bennet,
It's too bad you weren't at FOH when the very low frequencies started to kick in.
I wish you much success promoting EONA in the States. If their tops sound as good as their subs, you will be known as Mr.Prescott in the near future.
Best Regards,
Post by: Gareth James on February 01, 2007, 01:55:39 PM
Just out of interest how were the TH-115 boxes wired up? As I understand it the K10 was used for all speakers...just curious as it is 2000w into 8ohm. Surely the Danleys would have taken full power (as did the Trip), providing the amp wasn't hard clipping?
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on February 01, 2007, 02:29:30 PM
| Bennett Prescott wrote on Thu, 01 February 2007 12:07 |
I just want to quickly clarify that they were driven into limit, not clip. If they'd been driven into clip you would have smelled and heard it, there's a bunch of power in that box! Given our limiter slope and attack/release characteristics, clipping is practically impossible, and we hope our limiters sound a lot better than clipping while keeping the box from eating itself up. My understanding is that our subs were driven full range, without an additional external LPF or HPF. Since our internal protection LPF and HPF are second order (12db/octave) any tonal changes due to hard limiting were probably higher frequency components getting more gain due to squishing down the LF content. I know Alex (our R&D manager) spends a lot of time making the limiters sound good. |
I am a proponent of smart powered boxes for the latitude it allows designers to make the boxes quite robust while handling operator abuse gracefully.
When evaluating such boxes we should be careful to not make assumptions based on the bad behavior we are accustomed to from conventional approaches.
I'd make a similar caveat about Danley's routinely low distortion.. sometimes people can't handle the truth..
Glad to hear a good time was had by all, and maybe one DJ was brought over to the good side of the force...
JR
Post by: Mark Seaton on February 01, 2007, 02:44:48 PM
| Bennett Prescott wrote on Thu, 01 February 2007 12:07 |
My understanding is that our subs were driven full range, without an additional external LPF or HPF. Since our internal protection LPF and HPF are second order (12db/octave) any tonal changes due to hard limiting were probably higher frequency components getting more gain due to squishing down the LF content. I know Alex (our R&D manager) spends a lot of time making the limiters sound good. |
Hi Bennett,
There was a high pass and low pass on the subs just as was used and set for all of the subwoofers used. The low pass was a LR4 set to 75-85Hz. The high pass was a 4th order Butterworth that ranged in setting from 20-40Hz for the different boxes used. If there weren't any instructions from those who brought the box, I had just set things appropriately to what we I observed in measurements so far as response and overload, and usually started with the HP at about 30Hz to first see how the boxes handled the 32-35Hz content and would then slide up the high pass if the box was audibly objecting.
Post by: Bennett Prescott on February 01, 2007, 02:47:20 PM
Post by: John Chiara on February 01, 2007, 09:58:42 PM
| Tom Danley wrote on Thu, 01 February 2007 11:25 |
Hey Paul, Guys Sounds like you had fun and your neighbors had “enough” bass. From what I understand at some point the board operator was asked to “crank it up” to see what the boxes could do “flat out”. I was curious, which of the Boxes did you push to max output? Best, Tom Danley |
According to Ivan..not the Danley's...
Post by: Mac Kerr on February 01, 2007, 10:04:31 PM
| John Chiara wrote on Thu, 01 February 2007 21:58 | ||
According to Ivan..not the Danley's... |
Mac
Post by: Rob Spence on February 01, 2007, 10:47:05 PM
Geez was it loud
Post by: Jeff Permanian on February 01, 2007, 10:58:02 PM
Post by: Ryan Lantzy on February 01, 2007, 11:18:01 PM
| Jeff Knorr - Cobra Sound wrote on Wed, 31 January 2007 21:57 |
My pictures are finally online after a battle with the gallery software, http://cobrasound.com/cobrasound_gallery/misc/SubwooferShoot out07 Jeff |
Hey! What was up with those wacked out connectors on those LAB subs.
I've seen other LAB subs and they didn't look like that!
Post by: Paul Bell on February 02, 2007, 12:13:54 AM
Thanks again Raj for dragging them out, in due time Mr. Mark Seaton will post the results of all the tests.
-PB
Post by: Pascal Pincosy on February 02, 2007, 01:17:20 AM
| Elliot Thompson wrote on Wed, 31 January 2007 23:57 |
BASSMAXX TRIP Another new design from the BASSMAXX camp is the TRIP. It houses three 12 inch woofers and claims to go lower than the B Zeros. Id might warn you that this box is well over 300 pounds and offers no handles or casters. It’s more suited for an install. |
Hey Elliot, I own 4 of the TRIP's and wanted to point out that currently shipping cabinets do come with handles and a stackable caster dolly. It's not "easy" to do, but one person can move and position these speakers by oneself if need be. I can even manage safely loading one cabinet on and off a lift-gate by myself. If you encounter a slope though, you'll need to find help. Stacking TRIP's two high is also do-able with two guys and the aid of a road box about half the height of a TRIP. The size and weight of these cabinets is somewhat mitigated by the well-designed caster dolly and handles.
Post by: Mike Butler (media) on February 02, 2007, 03:49:27 AM
| Rob Spence wrote on Thu, 01 February 2007 22:47 |
We pushed the Bassmax Trip to the clip lights. Geez was it loud |
Ya THINK???
Post by: Gareth James on February 02, 2007, 04:09:14 AM
For them to release the smoke before coming even close to clipping seems strange, having said that I'm probably missing some vital facts...
Post by: Elliot Thompson on February 02, 2007, 08:05:44 AM
| Pascal Pincosy wrote on Fri, 02 February 2007 06:17 | ||
Hey Elliot, I own 4 of the TRIP's and wanted to point out that currently shipping cabinets do come with handles and a stackable caster dolly. It's not "easy" to do, but one person can move and position these speakers by oneself if need be. I can even manage safely loading one cabinet on and off a lift-gate by myself. If you encounter a slope though, you'll need to find help. Stacking TRIP's two high is also do-able with two guys and the aid of a road box about half the height of a TRIP. The size and weight of these cabinets is somewhat mitigated by the well-designed caster dolly and handles. |
Pascal,
Thank you for bringing that to my attention. I'm pretty many lab members who were eyeing these boxes had a sigh of relief when you mentioned handles.
Best Regards,
Post by: Elliot Thompson on February 02, 2007, 08:22:31 AM
| Gareth James wrote on Fri, 02 February 2007 09:09 |
Were the two cabinets on separate channels? Either way I'd have thought the power rating of the K10 was ideally suited to the Danleys. For them to release the smoke before coming even close to clipping seems strange, having said that I'm probably missing some vital facts... |
Hey Gareth,
The Powersoft K 10 has a similar output as the discontinued QSC PL 9.0 I’m not sure if you remember the old board. But, many users of the PL 9.0 had to step down to the PL 6.0 because their reconing bill was getting outrageous. This seems pretty much the case with the K 10.
It’s a very powerful amplifier. I was keeping my eye on it from time to time, and you really need to disregard the indicators and use your gut feeling when you’ve reached the maximum output capacity of the woofer. It would probably be wiser to use it in 4 or 2-ohm loads to maintain the woofer’s longevity.
I believe each TH 115 were fed one channel each box. And when we smelt the burnt coil, we didn’t hear any cries for help coming from the cabinet.
Best Regards,
Post by: Elliot Thompson on February 02, 2007, 08:30:18 AM
| Mike Butler (media) wrote on Fri, 02 February 2007 08:49 | ||
Ya THINK??? |
We actually needed to dim the lights throw a girl in each cage and begin partying
EDIT:
Here are a few things I noticed while running back and forth.
1. When the TRIPS were loaded on the K 10, the amp read 3.4 ohms despite using three 8 ohm woofers per cabinet.
2. While the amp was driven into clip, I walked over to the boxes to listen for distortion. None. The driver's excursion wasn't severe at all. It actually sounded as if they needed more power.
3. From FOH, the sound was very balanced with the Line Array, while shaking everything around us. At times, the McCauley delivered excessive 1.5 - 2.5 Khz that really did a number for those (Like myself) that didn't walk with ear plugs. With the TRIPS, it Dampened the effect.
Best Regards,
Post by: Tom Danley on February 02, 2007, 09:14:16 AM
Thanks for the clarification.
I am curious, relative to rated power, where abouts are the first second and third power indicator lights?
The TH-115’s are efficient BUT they also handle a lot of power.
Being an 8 Ohm load, it is worth pointing out that AT PEAK CLIPPING that amp (per ch) can only deliver about half the rated power of the driver with Pink Noise.
It takes a 4KW amp to put out 1000Watts of Pink noise due to the 6 dB peak to average ratio.
While they were able to heat one 115 up to the point of smelling while fooling around, it would have been nice for the people to have heard what two boxes driven that hard sounded like (a number of times more acoustic power and it would have made it less of a heating load too) compared to the other boxes.
The TH-215’s have a new drivers in them too, these should be easily safe to 2500 Watts RMS per box (and that is de-rating the driver and not including the increased power capacity the horn loading adds). To reach rated power with a pair, with pink noise, takes +6 dB over 5000Watts or 20,000 Watts of amplifier capacity.
I didn’t mention the power capacity figuring they would crank these boxes to “arc weld” anyway as FBJ says.
I wish someone had thought to go back and re-connect the TH-115’s and TH-215’s after they decided to crank it up and “go to the max” test, to see where there max was.
With music one should have been able to clip the amp on either box with music with no problem. They may sound nice but they can go scary loud too, I wonder how well that part came across?
Best,
Tom Danley
Post by: Elliot Thompson on February 02, 2007, 11:00:28 AM
| Tom Danley wrote on Fri, 02 February 2007 14:14 |
Hi Elliott Thanks for the clarification. I am curious, relative to rated power, where abouts are the first second and third power indicator lights? |
Hello Tom. Hopefully this will give you an idication where your boxes stood.
With the TH 115, it took some time for the lights to trigger (I actually wondered if they were working).
With the TH 215, the indicators were on the second light RMS and Peaked on the third light.
In my opinion the 115 was very loud. I don't think it was necessary to drive the amplifier full throttle. But, I was just one guy out of 30. So, others may feel different.
I really feel many were hesitate to push the 115 harder after we smelt the burned voice coil. Maybe if you were present, and gave the thumbs up, we could've found out how much SPLs a pair of 115s can do. I guess we were just being overly cautious of burning the perfect driver.
| Quote: |
The TH-115’s are efficient BUT they also handle a lot of power. Being an 8 Ohm load, it is worth pointing out that AT PEAK CLIPPING that amp (per ch) can only deliver about half the rated power of the driver with Pink Noise. It takes a 4KW amp to put out 1000Watts of Pink noise due to the 6 dB peak to average ratio. While they were able to heat one 115 up to the point of smelling while fooling around, it would have been nice for the people to have heard what two boxes driven that hard sounded like (a number of times more acoustic power and it would have made it less of a heating load too) compared to the other boxes. |
I agree. That's why I mentioned it was handicapped. It's just unfair to judge a pair of cabinets when one is only operating at 50% of its optimum capacity.
| Quote: |
The TH-215’s have a new drivers in them too, these should be easily safe to 2500 Watts RMS per box (and that is de-rating the driver and not including the increased power capacity the horn loading adds). To reach rated power with a pair, with pink noise, takes +6 dB over 5000Watts or 20,000 Watts of amplifier capacity. I didn’t mention the power capacity figuring they would crank these boxes to “arc weld” anyway as FBJ says. I wish someone had thought to go back and re-connect the TH-115’s and TH-215’s after they decided to crank it up and “go to the max” test, to see where there max was. With music one should have been able to clip the amp on either box with music with no problem. They may sound nice but they can go scary loud too, I wonder how well that part came across? Best, Tom Danley |
The TH 215 was my favorite out of the two. From FOH you felt the impact/attack. Standing in front of the cabinet you were subjected to A Lot of pressure build up.
Personally, I think it’s a matter of driving the boxes to the point of appreciating the characteristic it can show without ear fatigue. We were indoors, and it's only so loud you can go before it irritates your ears.
Hope the picture sheds some light on where your cabinets stood.
If anyone is curious where EM Acoustics 215, and the OUTLINE 218 stands, I can post a picture as well.
Off Class....
Best Regards,
Post by: Tim Morin on February 02, 2007, 11:10:26 AM
Post by: Michael Hedden Jr. on February 02, 2007, 11:23:29 AM
That's why I mentioned it was handicapped. It's just unfair to judge a pair of cabinets when one is only operating at 50% of its optimum capacity.
So if you matched impedance and cubic volume of some of the large cabinets just think how loud it would get!
I've heard 8 at one time and it is nothing but stunning.
Mike Hedden
Danley Sound Labs
Post by: Tim McCulloch on February 02, 2007, 12:15:13 PM
| Elliot Thompson wrote on Fri, 02 February 2007 07:22 |
I believe each TH 115 were fed one channel each box. And when we smelt the burnt coil, we didn’t hear any cries for help coming from the cabinet. Best Regards, |
I believe you are correct, Elliot.
For those with questions, including Tom D.... we only stopped because we smelled the heat. The TH-115 exhibited no audible stress whatsoever. If there were measurements being taken and saved during the listening test, we might be able to extrapolate the amount of performance compromise from the measurments made the first day.
Also, if the TH-115s are going back to the Danley Mothership, Tom can do his own testing to see what we did to his box.
We made the decision that this wasn't going to be a destructive testing, and almost as quickly changed our minds when Greg from EM and David from Rhino said "you can turn mine up!" And we did!
The TH-115 sounds very good, and got very loud, sufficiently so that we had no idea we were only listening to half of them. I think that impression should be considered
Elliot, you are one VERY observant guy, and have a great ear. It was a pleasure meeting and talking to you!
Tim Mc
Post by: Gareth James on February 02, 2007, 12:24:54 PM
It seems strange that only the bottom LED was lighting, if that was a dB scale it would be at least 10dB down from rated power and surely nowhere near electrical powerhandling limits of the driver.
Looking at the K10 manual it seems the meters are either set to read voltage output or current. If they had been set to current is it possible the amp WAS at maximum output seeing as the current output would be that much lower into an 8ohm load than a 3ohm load. I suppose there's not much way of telling?
Post by: Mike Butler (media) on February 02, 2007, 12:42:37 PM
| Jason Dermer wrote on Wed, 31 January 2007 19:08 |
The DJ was none other than DJ Logic. He has worked with many of the biggest names in the business, at sheds, arenas, and other huge houses with top level touring gear, including a stint with Ratdog on Meyer rigs. He could not believe what we were getting out of only two boxes and one amp, and quickly scooped business cards from Powersoft and Bassmaxx reps.... |
Yeah, that DJ Logic.
http://www.djlogic.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DJ_Logic
Post by: Rob Spence on February 02, 2007, 12:48:29 PM
There has been a thread in one of the forums (I can't place it right now) about what connector to use and the owner just could not be convinced to use NL4s.
Post by: Tim McCulloch on February 02, 2007, 01:19:01 PM
I think Raj got a little scared. We got his subs inside the club and he took a seat on one of the sofas. A couple hours later I noticed he was gone. I'm not sure he realized the depth (no pun intended) of what we were doing until he got there and got a good look at the commercial products.
Raj mentioned that he made some specific changes to suit his needs, and if he got what he wanted/needed from those changes then his build was a success.
My personal take was that he built a sub based on the LABhorn design, but it wasn't a LAB. His deliberate ommission of the speaker chamber covers is, to me, inexplicable. He had as much energy leaving the box via those openings as he did at the mouth of the horn.
Even with the changes he made, and the use of 7 ply fir rather than birch, the box was better than anything I've heard from the Cerwin Vega crowd.
For those at home, we did the TEF sweeps on these, and the data will be posted when Mark has time to get it all in order.
Bottom line... these ain't LABsubs the way Tom designed them. However, if they do what the builder wanted, I suppose it's a valid build. I only wish I could have heard a pair built the way TD meant them to be.
Raj, thanks for bringing these to the shootout.
Tim Mc
Post by: Rob Spence on February 02, 2007, 02:31:15 PM
My own take is that they sounded better than I expected but as you point out, I don't understand not sealing up the rears of the drivers either. I stood next to them during the brief listen test we did after the measurment sweeps and, as you said, there was a lot of energy coming out of the side ports.
Post by: Mark Seaton on February 02, 2007, 04:01:32 PM
| Gareth James wrote on Fri, 02 February 2007 11:24 |
Hi Elliot, Tom, It seems strange that only the bottom LED was lighting, if that was a dB scale it would be at least 10dB down from rated power and surely nowhere near electrical powerhandling limits of the driver. Looking at the K10 manual it seems the meters are either set to read voltage output or current. If they had been set to current is it possible the amp WAS at maximum output seeing as the current output would be that much lower into an 8ohm load than a 3ohm load. I suppose there's not much way of telling? |
Hi Guys,
I don't have a lot of time to post right now, but I do believe the amps were showing some relation to actual power or current, not the Voltage indicators we are more used to seeing. This means that clip points at 8 Ohms for the TH-115 and 4 Ohms for the TH-215s would have been at much lower current levels, which is at least parallel to Eliots observations. We probably should have had one unit bridged for the higher impedance subs, but as usual you find things to do differently every time you attempt such an exercise. This event was no different, although we've done this a few times and did have many more details organized and covered than in the past.
At least for me, there was also some obvious differences in audible distortion that made having the RTA running on fast and peak hold insightful. For their displayed higher SPLs, the Danleys were subjectively the cleanest I heard for the day, especially while the TH-215 delivering the 30-35Hz info in the music selection. Where to stop is very much a matter of personal preference. Some keep driving until the drivers are going "splat" every bass hit, and others stop when they start to hear tonal changes in the sub. Those points could be about 10dB in average level appart!
More food for thought.
Post by: David J Lee on February 02, 2007, 04:09:30 PM
Thanks for this well composed review. It will be very informative and helpful to all who weren't able to make it.
| Scott Hibbard wrote on Tue, 30 January 2007 19:29 |
BassMaxx Z5000 - Had significant peaks between 40Hz through 70Hz - 37Hz was about as low as she would go before drop off but had tons of punch around 40Hz - 50Hz. - Very tight and responsive to transients - Measured peaks in excessive of 137db at approx. 63Hz - HPF 35Hz, LPF 80Hz - Sub sounded best in the 40Hz - 60Hz region with very little audible distortion - Absolutely no sound coming off the rear of the speaker. I was able to have a normal conversation with Paul Bell while standing less than 1 foot behind it. Very impressive for a non-cardoid subwoofer. - Reasonably sized - you won't mistake this for a small cabinet but you also won't need a crew of 4 to lift it (unlike it's big brother the Trip X3) - Great box |
Just a question here for the logical and practical minded folks out there: What makes a cardioid cabinet a cardioid cabinet? Marketing hype? Isn't a cabinet cardioid if it delivers significantly more energy to the front than it does to the rear? Is cardioid an output pattern or is it a marketing buzzword that allows manufacturers to charge more for boxes that have more drivers, processing and amplifiers in them?
I was told that the sound level behind the Z-5000s was lower than it was behind the processed cardioid box that was there. FOH engineers tell me that they are amazed at how little bass can be heard on stage even with 8 or more of our subwoofers directly in front of the stage. Hmmm...
| Quote: |
BassMaxx Trip X3 - If bass were a controlled substance, David Lee would have been arrested on the spot and thrown in the slammer w/o bail! Simply stated, the Trip X3 walked away the "King of SPL". Truly amazing output. - HPF 35Hz, LPF 80Hz with a -3b cut at 75Hz - Trip was the first (and I believe only) speaker to cause the K10's to run into clipping. I wonder how these would sound with an FP13000 on them? - This speaker needs POWER. If you've got anything less than 5000 watts per speaker cabinet, you're probably best served to look elsewhere or upgrading your amps. - To give you an idea of the output, we measured peaks of 143db at approx. 16 feet at 60Hz while watching (literally) some of the furniture go for a stroll. - Had very significant output at 35Hz (approx. 135db) very much like the TH-215 but didn't quite have the same "easy sound" as the TH-215 at 35Hz. - This subwoofer was the cause of Paul Bell's hilarious announcement "…guys turn it down for a while. We received a complaint from someone of the 5th floor…FROM ACROSS THE STREET!" - Absolutely massive in size. Made the Quake look small. ScottH |
I would just like to point out the following details to bring a little perspective to he size of the BASSMAXX X3C:
LAB subwoofer dimensions: 45" by 45" by 22.5"
BASSMAXX X3C dimensions: 45" by 45" by 24"
And for anyone still intimidated, the X2C is 45" by 30" by 24".
It's essentially 2/3 of an X3C.
The X3C is a modular design incorporating 3 modules and the X2C incorporates 2 of the same modules. Three (3) X2C cabinets will exactly match the performance of the two (2) X3C cabinets.
Regarding power requirements, the X3C is really quite efficient and does not REQUIRE massive power. The fact that it was the only cabinet there that could handle the full output of the K-10 amplifier without going up in smoke means it is very robust and reliable. The fact that it produced 8dB more output than the nearest competitor means that it would have matched that competitors output with about 1/6 to 1/8 the power input. That's efficiency in my book. (There's no need to point out that they would not be close to their thermal limits at that level, is there?)
If you have a car that will do 200mph, you don't always have to drive it that fast, but it sure is nice to know you can.
(Tempting, though it is...
) You don't NEED to power an X3C with 5000 watts, but if you do, you will simply get more out of it. Significantly more, as it turns out.
Post by: Raj Sookraj on February 02, 2007, 04:26:49 PM
Being the only DIY guy there, I decided to take a back seat and see how it compares to the high end stuff. I'm curious to see the measured results. I'm planning to build a lot of these (18) so the connector is temporary until I figure out what I'm going to use on all of them. Most likely NL2's. I take heed to what you guys say about the modification and basically it comes down to weather I should make the access panels for it. Other than that, it's just 5 inches shorter in front. I have never heard the original Labhorn built by someone else.
A little about myself...I'm part of a nonprofit organization where I provide the music. I make about $1500/yr. from DJ'ing and the rest of my expense is out of pocket. I do not intend to sell speakers, audio engineering is a hobby I just won't give up.
Post by: Dan Brown on February 02, 2007, 05:00:19 PM
| David J Lee wrote on Fri, 02 February 2007 15:09 | ||
...snip...
...snip... Regarding power requirements, the X3C is really quite efficient and does not REQUIRE massive power. The fact that it was the only cabinet there that could handle the full output of the K-10 amplifier without going up in smoke means it is very robust and reliable. The fact that it produced 8dB more output than the nearest competitor means that it would have matched that competitors output with about 1/6 to 1/8 the power input. That's efficiency in my book. (There's no need to point out that they would not be close to their thermal limits at that level, is there?) If you have a car that will do 200mph, you don't always have to drive it that fast, but it sure is nice to know you can. (Tempting, though it is... ) You don't NEED to power an X3C with 5000 watts, but if you do, you will simply get more out of it. Significantly more, as it turns out. |
Hmm,
Lets see your cabinet has 3 drivers per cabinet and the others you are comparing to have 1-2. Doesn't quite seem fair. Also as far as the peak numbers I still haven't seen the data of the actual measurements. I sure hope someone compares this data with truth in mind taking the extra drivers or power into account.
While I do believe that your cabinets get loud as most have said they also do have to put out music and in my book do it faithfully not just loud.
hoping for the actual data soon
my .02
sincerely,
db
Post by: David J Lee on February 02, 2007, 05:12:42 PM
| Elliot Thompson wrote on Wed, 31 January 2007 17:57 |
Hello All! This is my take on the Subwoofer Shoot out held at Club Rebel, NYC January 31, 2007. BASSMAXX TRIP Another new design from the BASSMAXX camp is the TRIP. It houses three 12 inch woofers and claims to go lower than the B Zeros. Id might warn you that this box is well over 300 pounds and offers no handles or casters. It’s more suited for an install. However, David does have a dual version that is lighter, and, more mover friendly. |
For the record, these X3C 'TRIP' cabinets were made without handles for installation purposes. They happened to be in New York for a demo in an installation. (Unfortunately the guy getting the demo was made an offer he couldn't refuse and had to sell his building, but that's another story...
) Since they were already there, we figured why send more? They sound the same with or without handles.The touring version has 8 handles and a self-locking wheel tray. The touring version using the lighter weight (yet equally strong) internal bracing will be approximately 250 lbs. The option of neodymium drivers reduces their weight by another 24 lbs.
The X2C 'DEUCE' cabinet in touring trim will weigh in at around 175 lbs and will be available with integrated flyware.
| Quote: |
Listening Test. I’ve actually heard four of the B Zero’s (Housed with the Neomaxx 18) and four B Two’s (Housed with the McCauley 6174). My preference was four B Two’s with the 6174 because they went extremely low. My mind changed upon hearing the TRIP sine wave test on Day 1. They go extremely lower with less cone breakup. The subs were actually reduced by – 6dB on the APB Board to balance with the McCauley Line Array. Since everyone wanted to hear how bad they really were, and David wasn’t shy to please a room full of soundguys, they were cranked up. We encountered a limiting factor ……… The K 10. The clip lights were bouncing every second and third beat, while the trip didn’t even flinch. I actually told David several times that the amp had ran out of gas and, he did reduce the gain. But, it slowly crept back up, and the clip lights were on again. Notes: 1.These cabinets had just come from an Outside Rave in California. As we proceeded to drive the snot of the K 10, we were greeted with some California dust that hid in the boxes. At first, we thought the woofers were smoking. Then David mentioned the Rave in California that was held outdoors in the dirt. 2. We had a surprise DJ waltz in that thought it was a Party, and wanted to join in the festivity. 3. And last but not least. The Noise complaint from a tenant on the 5th floor Across The Street complaining about the bass shaking up his apartment. Oh, and it did pass the ultra low frequency sine wave dance track. More to come..... |
Current plans are for us to have 12 to 16 of these (and/or the X2Cs) in Miami for the Ultra Fest on March 23rd and 24th. Hope to see you there!
Post by: Ryan Lantzy on February 02, 2007, 05:27:00 PM
| Dan Brown wrote on Fri, 02 February 2007 17:00 |
Hmm, Lets see your cabinet has 3 drivers per cabinet and the others you are comparing to have 1-2. Doesn't quite seem fair. Also as far as the peak numbers I still haven't seen the data of the actual measurements. I sure hope someone compares this data with truth in mind taking the extra drivers or power into account. |
8dB more output than the nearest competitor... If that means one more driver then I'm all for it! Basically it just becomes a math game. Remember your GCF and LCD?
If I need 24 2 driver cabinets and 12 power amps, or 16 3 driver cabinets and 12 power amps to get the same output, is there much of a difference? It really depends on the cost of the 3 driver cabinet vs. the 2 driver one.
However... with and 8 dB difference, it's more like 24 2 driver cabinets vs 6 3 driver cabinets and you have headroom to spare!
| Quote: |
hoping for the actual data soon |
As am I.
Post by: Scott Hibbard on February 02, 2007, 06:17:24 PM
Regarding the cardoid characteristics of the Z5000, maybe that speaks favorably to the design of the cabinet. In the science of things, I'm sure there exists more than one way to keep sound off the back of the sub other than rear facing "cardoid" designs.
Anyway had a great time and was nice to meet you David.
ScottH
Post by: Dan Brown on February 02, 2007, 06:39:19 PM
| Ryan Lantzy wrote on Fri, 02 February 2007 16:27 | ||||
8dB more output than the nearest competitor... If that means one more driver then I'm all for it! Basically it just becomes a math game. Remember your GCF and LCD? If I need 24 2 driver cabinets and 12 power amps, or 16 3 driver cabinets and 12 power amps to get the same output, is there much of a difference? It really depends on the cost of the 3 driver cabinet vs. the 2 driver one. However... with and 8 dB difference, it's more like 24 2 driver cabinets vs 6 3 driver cabinets and you have headroom to spare!
As am I. |
Actually in this case it would be 2 to 4 more drivers not 1.
2 * single cone cabinets = 2 drivers
2 * dual cone cabinets = 4 drivers
2 * triple cone cabinets = 6 drivers
Also most people are talking numbers of the second day and the peaks you got. What were the numbers from the first day when the cabinets were tested and all given the same input voltage???
sincerely,
db
Post by: Ivan Beaver on February 02, 2007, 07:12:39 PM
When the TH115's get back to the warm south
, we will check them out and will post what (if any) differences there are between the damaged one and properly working one. I'll be busy for a while, so be patient. I have smelt many loudspeakers that appear to be "going bad", but have no long term damage. Maybe we just warmed them up a bit.But look on the bright side-there was a problem with the test setup (one speaker cable wasn't hooked up to the amp), and this apparent damage caused us to look further and find the problem. If we had not realized it untill later in the day, it would have skewed many of the listening tests. We would probably not checked it out if one cabinet wasn't smelling. So that was a good thing.
For most of the cabinets we had a seperate amp channel feed each box. The VDosc had 4 amp channels for it. That was the only one that was different-if I remember correctly.
Mark was correct in what he said regarding setting the highpass filters. With the Danleys, he set it where I told him, which was at 20Hz for TH215. The low freq rolloff of the TH215 started at 30Hz. The reason for the 20Hz filter is that the 24db/oct butterworth is 3 dB down (half power) at crossover freq. I was looking for max low freq extension-hence the 20Hz filter. So I didn't want any attenuation due to the filter to roll of some of the lower freq.
You know how your mind just stops working sometimes? I normally tell people to set the highpass at around 1/2 oct below the flat response of the cabinet for normal operation, but to raise it up a bit if you are going to hit it hard. I simply did not follow my own advice.
It hit me the next day that I really wished we had raised the HP to 30Hz on the TH215 and really poured the power to it to see what it is really capable of. These cabinets had a brand new driver we were trying out. I wished I would have thought to bring them back at the end of the day, but hindsight is always 20/20.
There is always the next shootout.
Post by: Ivan Beaver on February 02, 2007, 07:53:21 PM
It would help him organize it it there were some guide lines on how he should present it.
If he tries to overlay it (let's just say the 28.3V freq response), it gets crowded.
What he has for data is the following:
2.83V below 120Hz TDS (Freq response and Phase)
2.83V 50-300Hz TDS
28.3V below 120Hz TDS
28.3V +3db below 120Hz TDS
28.3V +5dB 40-120Hz TDS He and I choose the 40Hz cutoff for this exta power because we were concerned with overexcursion of some of the cabinets, so we wouldn't damage any of the drivers with the high level swept sine signal.
2.83V THD (distortion)
28.3V THD
And as Mark has noted earlier, these are all VOLTAGE sensitivities NOT power. It will be up each person to determine what the actual "power" is that is being applied in regards to the impedance of each loudspeaker and the applied voltage.
He could show each model with the 4 TDS measurements overlaid so you can see any effect of power compression.
He could then also overlay the 28V distortion and the 2.83V Distortion so you can see the added distortion at the higher level.
Each loudspeaker would be presented differently so any direct comparisons would have to be made by looking at each graph seperately.
He could also overlay a couple of different responses of different loudspeakers, but this could get very complicated due to all of the different combinations possible.
He and I both have the raw TEF data that we could send to someone if they have TEF to look at it by themselves. The data will not do you any good if you do not have the software-it is not free BTW. There is not a viewer that I am aware of.
What do you think he should do with all this information and how should it be presented?
Mark, if you want me to do some of it, just let me know.
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on February 02, 2007, 08:17:19 PM
| Ivan Beaver wrote on Fri, 02 February 2007 18:53 |
I was just looking over the data that Mark collected. There is a bunch of it. There are 7 different measurements on each of 13 different cabinets. Various ouput level freq responses and distortion measurements. It would help him organize it it there were some guide lines on how he should present it. If he tries to overlay it (let's just say the 28.3V freq response), it gets crowded. What he has for data is the following: 2.83V below 120Hz TDS (Freq response and Phase) 2.83V 50-300Hz TDS 28.3V below 120Hz TDS 28.3V +3db below 120Hz TDS 28.3V +5dB 40-120Hz TDS He and I choose the 40Hz cutoff for this exta power because we were concerned with overexcursion of some of the cabinets, so we wouldn't damage any of the drivers with the high level swept sine signal. 2.83V THD (distortion) 28.3V THD And as Mark has noted earlier, these are all VOLTAGE sensitivities NOT power. It will be up each person to determine what the actual "power" is that is being applied in regards to the impedance of each loudspeaker and the applied voltage. He could show each model with the 4 TDS measurements overlaid so you can see any effect of power compression. He could then also overlay the 28V distortion and the 2.83V Distortion so you can see the added distortion at the higher level. Each loudspeaker would be presented differently so any direct comparisons would have to be made by looking at each graph seperately. He could also overlay a couple of different responses of different loudspeakers, but this could get very complicated due to all of the different combinations possible. He and I both have the raw TEF data that we could send to someone if they have TEF to look at it by themselves. The data will not do you any good if you do not have the software-it is not free BTW. There is not a viewer that I am aware of. What do you think he should do with all this information and how should it be presented? Mark, if you want me to do some of it, just let me know. |
Not to sound too mystical.. sometimes the data will talk to you...
What I would like to see is where a given speaker starts getting off track, so if a bunch of lower power plots are all linear and the same, ignore them.. just show what's different.
I don't know if this makes sense in the context of your data collected.
JR
Post by: Mac Kerr on February 02, 2007, 08:28:33 PM
| Ivan Beaver wrote on Fri, 02 February 2007 19:53 |
He could show each model with the 4 TDS measurements overlaid so you can see any effect of power compression. He could then also overlay the 28V distortion and the 2.83V Distortion so you can see the added distortion at the higher level. Each loudspeaker would be presented differently so any direct comparisons would have to be made by looking at each graph seperately. He could also overlay a couple of different responses of different loudspeakers, but this could get very complicated due to all of the different combinations possible. |
Mac
Post by: David J Lee on February 02, 2007, 09:03:15 PM
| Dan Brown wrote on Fri, 02 February 2007 16:00 |
Hmm, Lets see your cabinet has 3 drivers per cabinet and the others you are comparing to have 1-2. Doesn't quite seem fair. Also as far as the peak numbers I still haven't seen the data of the actual measurements. I sure hope someone compares this data with truth in mind taking the extra drivers or power into account. While I do believe that your cabinets get loud as most have said they also do have to put out music and in my book do it faithfully not just loud. hoping for the actual data soon my .02 sincerely, db |
Hi Dan,
To whom is this not fair? Our customers get more output from fewer boxes with greater reliability and power handling. That might not be fair to the competition but it sure is fair to our customers' bottom line.
You see, we're focused on results. For us it's not about how many drivers are fair to use in a loudspeaker cabinet, it's about getting a job done. Professionals want as much output as possible from the smallest amount of physical space. They also want the most reliable cabinet possible. I'd suggest they might also want to make the least investment of capital possible to get the greatest return in output. If necessary they will factor in the cost of amplifiers.
For those who have to write checks for equipment, the math is pretty simple.
How many X3C (or X2C) cabinets would I have to put in my truck to provide all the bass I need to make my client happy?
How many of anything else would it take?
What will they cost?
How much space will they take up?
The X3C and X2C were designed as the result of conversations with a very well known major touring company. They specified they wanted something that was no deeper than an average double 18 because in tight spaces they didn't want to take up valuable floor space. If they lose a row of seats in a venue due to the depth of the subwoofers, that's thousands of dollars in ticket sales that their client doesn't want to lose. They specified that they wanted something very loud and very compact so they could take half the number of subs they usually use on a tour. When you get right down to it, this is the big money saver. For some, it doesn't even matter what they cost to buy if you can save up to $60K or more per tour in transportation costs for the next 5 to 10 years, or longer if you look after the cabinets.
With regard to sound quality and playing music, ask around. BASSMAXX are better known for sound quality and musical reproduction than we are for being loud. That's not going to change, no matter how loud we make them.
Actual data is very useful for objective evaluations, calculating how much money you can save, how many cabinets you'll need to cover the audience and how loud or low you can get with them. What it won't tell you is how good they sound. For that you have to hear them and make your own subjective evaluation. You're invited to come hear them whenever your schedule permits.
All the best,
Post by: Ivan Beaver on February 02, 2007, 09:03:52 PM
For example
Post by: Ivan Beaver on February 02, 2007, 09:04:55 PM
Post by: Pascal Pincosy on February 02, 2007, 09:19:37 PM
| Elliot Thompson wrote on Fri, 02 February 2007 16:00 |
It's just unfair to judge a pair of cabinets when one is only operating at 50% of its optimum capacity. |
I'm a little confused here. When a driver gets smoked or burned, I know it damages the glue. What I don't understand is how smoking a driver would change the efficiency such that it would operate at a lower capacity?
Was the damaged TH-115 run 3 dB down from the other? Or were ya'll a bit more cautious about hitting these cabinets full force with the K10 after letting some smoke out? When I compare the SPL readings that were taken at the shootout, the measurements equal or excede specs on the Danley web site so I'd be very surprised if the TH-115's weren't given a fair shake.
Also to point out the obvious: A 50% increase in input power would only produce an increase of under 2 dB. So unless any given set of speakers in the shootout was run at under 2/3 of peak capacity, the difference between what was measured and what is possible with the speaker is only a 1-2 dB increase. Something to think about when looking at the max dB measurements.
Post by: Mac Kerr on February 02, 2007, 09:23:29 PM
Mac
Post by: Ivan Beaver on February 02, 2007, 09:33:15 PM
Post by: Mac Kerr on February 02, 2007, 09:48:52 PM
Since this thread has already gone over 100 messages, I'd like to see the data in a new thread.
Mac
Post by: Ivan Beaver on February 02, 2007, 09:59:00 PM
TEF assigns the colors in the order the traces are overlaid. So you just have to be careful.
Post by: Mac Kerr on February 02, 2007, 10:06:18 PM
| Ivan Beaver wrote on Fri, 02 February 2007 21:59 |
After looking at it on line, it gets a bit confusing. So maybe 3 graphs, Distortion, phase and Freq. As long as the traces are put on in the same order for all loudspeakers, the colors will remain the same for the same measurements of different loudspeakers. TEF assigns the colors in the order the traces are overlaid. So you just have to be careful. |
Mac
Post by: Ivan Beaver on February 02, 2007, 10:30:25 PM
It is really amazing how all of the responses follow the same basic curve. look how each one goes up and down at the same freq, just the amount varies between cabinets. This has really started me to think about this.
Post by: Michael 'Bink' Knowles on February 02, 2007, 10:39:30 PM
I'm seeing blue swirly distortions surrounding the traces. Graphical, not audible disortions. Perhaps if you saved them as GIFs instead of JPGs it would clear that up.
-Bink
Post by: Grant Conklin on February 02, 2007, 11:09:58 PM
| David J Lee wrote on Fri, 02 February 2007 20:03 |
"To whom is this not fair? Our customers get more output from fewer boxes with greater reliability and power handling.... For those who have to write checks for equipment, the math is pretty simple. How many X3C (or X2C) cabinets would I have to put in my truck to provide all the bass I need to make my client happy? How many of anything else would it take? What will they cost? How much space will they take up? " |
Dave and Dan-
Good points. I would like to do the math.
How much is the street price for the cabinets tested? The best I can come up with is this from binkster: http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:zl-42CiVtsEJ:www.binkst er.net/SubwooferShootout2007.xls+EONA+ATA+118+hh&hl=en&a mp;a mp;a mp;gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1&client=firefox-aI'm sure he's done the best he can, but as you can see, there's some missing data.
Perhaps the unfairness that Dan refers to would be better thought of as not comparing heavyweight fighters to lightweight fighters. I'll pit 3 lightweights against a single heavyweight any day, especially if I can see the prices. The major touring companies may see the savings in shipping costs, but my guess is that most folks on this forum aren't even filling a single straight truck for most of their gigs.
As for the other math, please correct me if I'm wrong: When you put 2 single driver boxes next to each other, don't you gain 3db in level for the wattage, and another 3db for the phase agreement? If this math is correct, 3 boxes would see a gain of about 8db over 1 box, and there are some single driver boxes that could rock the bigger boys when combined.
Thanks for listening,
Grant
Edit: As I redo that math, 3 boxes would see a 10 db increase, assuming the phase part of the equation is correct. Is it?
Post by: Dan Brown on February 02, 2007, 11:45:06 PM
| David J Lee wrote on Fri, 02 February 2007 20:03 | ||
Hi Dan, To whom is this not fair? Our customers get more output from fewer boxes with greater reliability and power handling. That might not be fair to the competition but it sure is fair to our customers' bottom line. You see, we're focused on results. For us it's not about how many drivers are fair to use in a loudspeaker cabinet, it's about getting a job done. Professionals want as much output as possible from the smallest amount of physical space. They also want the most reliable cabinet possible. I'd suggest they might also want to make the least investment of capital possible to get the greatest return in output. If necessary they will factor in the cost of amplifiers. For those who have to write checks for equipment, the math is pretty simple. How many X3C (or X2C) cabinets would I have to put in my truck to provide all the bass I need to make my client happy? How many of anything else would it take? What will they cost? How much space will they take up? The X3C and X2C were designed as the result of conversations with a very well known major touring company. They specified they wanted something that was no deeper than an average double 18 because in tight spaces they didn't want to take up valuable floor space. If they lose a row of seats in a venue due to the depth of the subwoofers, that's thousands of dollars in ticket sales that their client doesn't want to lose. They specified that they wanted something very loud and very compact so they could take half the number of subs they usually use on a tour. When you get right down to it, this is the big money saver. For some, it doesn't even matter what they cost to buy if you can save up to $60K or more per tour in transportation costs for the next 5 to 10 years, or longer if you look after the cabinets. With regard to sound quality and playing music, ask around. BASSMAXX are better known for sound quality and musical reproduction than we are for being loud. That's not going to change, no matter how loud we make them. Actual data is very useful for objective evaluations, calculating how much money you can save, how many cabinets you'll need to cover the audience and how loud or low you can get with them. What it won't tell you is how good they sound. For that you have to hear them and make your own subjective evaluation. You're invited to come hear them whenever your schedule permits. All the best, |
I understand all that you are saying.
Bottom line as far as actual cost and saving from other factors are all things we all need to take account of.
Your cabinet having 3 drivers is great and I have no issues with that other than I wouldn't want to lug it around.
I also applaud you on not only making your cabinet truck pack for some trucks but in this case for 2 truck widths. 90" and 96".
I am trying to nail down some new low end cabinets to go with top cabinets I already own and this situation lends itself well in timing with my project.
I would just like to see a more direct corelation between boxes as to how they compare on a fair scale.
You stated that your box has 8db more output than the nearest competitor but I was stating that you have 2 more drivers and more power therefore being one step ahead of that nearest competitor. Yet if they had 2 more drivers how would the numbers compare then. Also that nearest competitor as far as I can tell is the TH-215 which was given a SPL rating of 135db @ 35hz and yours which was peaks of 143db @ 60hz. While your cabinet also had a rating of "approx. 135db" at 35hz.
It sounds like it puts out much volume, and is living up to the hype that Pascal started a couple of months back. It also sounds like it can take loads of power.
BTW, what are the drives as standard in it(or what were they at the shootout?)
sincerely,
db
Post by: Michael Hedden Jr. on February 02, 2007, 11:45:59 PM
Change the scale to 3 or 5 dB per division and the exact same data will help differenciate the various responses. As a rule we prefer 5 dB per division.
Mike Hedden
Danley Sound Labs
Post by: Bennett Prescott on February 02, 2007, 11:46:59 PM
| David J Lee wrote on Fri, 02 February 2007 16:09 |
Just a question here for the logical and practical minded folks out there: What makes a cardioid cabinet a cardioid cabinet? Marketing hype? Isn't a cabinet cardioid if it delivers significantly more energy to the front than it does to the rear? Is cardioid an output pattern or is it a marketing buzzword that allows manufacturers to charge more for boxes that have more drivers, processing and amplifiers in them? |
David,
I've read this several times and I can still only see it as an unjustified attack on our design and company philosophy. Have I somehow wronged you? Are you suggesting that our product doesn't meet spec?
I think what makes a cardioid pattern is fairly well understood, and its limitations are also fairly well understood. We happen to be getting additional front to rear rejection from a phase network and rear facing drivers. You're doing it with large horns. Both methods are valid, and I think we're both getting remarkable output from a relatively compact box.
The end result is what's important. We're not sneaking around in the dark trying to foist extra drivers and amplifier channels on our customers, and I am personally insulted by your insinuation that we would be in business to fool people into buying "extra" components.
Post by: Dan Brown on February 02, 2007, 11:56:47 PM
| Bennett Prescott wrote on Fri, 02 February 2007 22:46 | ||
David, I've read this several times and I can still only see it as an unjustified attack on our design and company philosophy. Have I somehow wronged you? Are you suggesting that our product doesn't meet spec? I think what makes a cardioid pattern is fairly well understood, and its limitations are also fairly well understood. We happen to be getting additional front to rear rejection from a phase network and rear facing drivers. You're doing it with large horns. Both methods are valid, and I think we're both getting remarkable output from a relatively compact box. The end result is what's important. We're not sneaking around in the dark trying to foist extra drivers and amplifier channels on our customers, and I am personally insulted by your insinuation that we would be in business to fool people into buying "extra" components. |
Agreed.
I was wondering what justified such an attack also.
A cardioid subwoofer is just that and when measured would show a cardioid type pattern.
If a horn loaded cabinet can do the same thing then more power to you and you should use this in your own marketing lit.
sincerely,
db
Post by: Langston Holland on February 03, 2007, 01:02:53 AM
| Elliot wrote on Fri, 02 February 2007: |
The Powersoft K 10 has a similar output as the discontinued QSC PL 9.0 I'm not sure if you remember the old board. But, many users of the PL 9.0 had to step down to the PL 6.0 because their reconing bill was getting outrageous. This seems pretty much the case with the K 10. It's a very powerful amplifier. I was keeping my eye on it from time to time, and you really need to disregard the indicators and use your gut feeling when you've reached the maximum output capacity of the woofer. It would probably be wiser to use it in 4 or 2-ohm loads to maintain the woofer's longevity. I believe each TH 115 were fed one channel each box. And when we smelt the burnt coil, we didn't hear any cries for help coming from the cabinet. |
Good points Elliot. Expensive, irritating points. You bring up two areas of distortion that old-school (push it until it sounds really bad) BE's are clueless about.
The first point is that many of us now have amps like the K10's and I-T8000's that can produce a great deal more clean power than most subs can handle even with limiters set to a reasonable RMS +3dB if the signal has an unusually low crest factor, like low synth tones or in a recent $900 out of pocket situation for me, a special effect from a drummer's laptop.
The second point is subs like the TH115 simply don't get to the point where they sound nasty before the white smoke comes out of their voice coils.
In my situation I had four TH115's packed two wide by two high powered by a single I-T8000 in stereo mode, two subs per channel. The concert was in a high school auditorium that only seated about 600. A very small room for that much sub horsepower, but the band was an excellent hard rock act with a 10 year history and a strong following. It also has a pretty new BE. I was about a hundred yards away in a bathroom during part of soundcheck when I felt the cinder block walls vibrating like a 40Hz sine wave. I ran to the auditorium to find an electrical fire smell and a bunch of teens slapping each others back saying things like "SICK!!" "never heard ANYTHING like that before!" and clueless in full CYA mode saying "dude! I didn't even have it up that loud!".
Apparently, clueless has never heard clean bass before.
At that point, I fully expected the concert to turn into four KF730 per side only nightmare, but all four TH115's got through the evening with no audible problems in a room averaging about 103dB SPL A weighted. Minus the sine wave like special effect of course.
I'm thinking of setting the sub limiter for RMS -3dB for the unknown BE's in the future until they prove themselves. I really have no idea what to do...
Post by: Elliot Thompson on February 03, 2007, 06:17:33 AM
| Tim Morin wrote on Fri, 02 February 2007 16:10 |
I would like your thoughts on the EM acoustics boxes and the Outline boxes |
Hello Tim.
Please keep in mind, that I didn't have the opportunity to fully appreciate what the EM Acoustics QUAKE can offer because I was helping Bennet outside bring in his EONA 618s. I can only estimate what I heard in the hallway and day 1. So, my listening review on that box, is as far as I can go.
The EM Acoustics 215 Peaked on the third indicator, whereas, the OUTLINE 218 Peaked on the forth.
When the Danely TH 215 completed their test, the EM Acoustics 215 were next. Now, I would like you to keep in mind the output levels the EM Acoustics 215 were getting, versus the Danely TH 215 on the Powersoft K 10. The TH 215s set the standard on the output level (They were driven harder than the TH 115s) and whatever came after either met or exceeded those output levels listed on the amplifier.
The EM Acoustics 215 were driven much harder than day 1. IMHO it was driven too hard from the start based on the distortion you heard standing in front of the box. Was it as loud as the Danely 215 from near field? Yes. From far field? No. (I just want to say that the Danely TH 215 offers a narrower beam. So, to the average person not paying attention, they would say the EM Acoustics was louder because it offered a wider coverage from a near field perspective) And I wouldn't expect it to because the EM Acoustics 215 is a Band-pass design, and the Danely TH 215 is a Horn.
I was sitting next to Ivan Beever, at the time and he was explaining to me the concept of the TH 215 (That would be a few inches away from FOH) While I'm listening to Ivan, I'm listening to the Speaker as well. Suddenly I hear this Squelch which sounds like the speaker is dying. A few seconds later some says "We've Got Smoke" and Smoke is coming out the vents.
I actually like how this box sounded on Day 1. And won't take in account what happened to it on day 2 as a mechanical, or electrical flaw. The box handles 2000 watts Program @ 4 ohms and the K 10 delivers 4000 watts per channel @ 4 ohms. It died because it got too much power.
As for the OUTLINE 218. If it were up to me, I would've taken off the grill, removed the foam from the ports to hear what this box sounds like. These two factors (The Grill, & foam on the ports) really created a problem for me to hear the quality of this box. It seems as the woofers can handle power. When I put my ears in front of each woofer and listen they sound fine. I don’t hear any distortion. But, they sound muffled like something is blocking the sound to escape. I really think the foam under the grill is too thick. I’ve never seen anyone put foam over ports. It changes the whole tuning frequency of the box. That may have been the culprit. I’m pretty sure if you removed those two obstacles, the box would sound great.
Best Regards,
Post by: Elliot Thompson on February 03, 2007, 07:06:17 AM
| Donnie Ricciardi wrote on Wed, 31 January 2007 23:46 |
Just stopped by to thank Paul and Elliot for making me feel like i was part of the gang. It was a real pleasure to hang out with you guys even though it was only for a short period of time. A special thanks to Paul for your warm hospitality and effort you put in to make it happen. Although i don't frequently post here, i try to visit as often as i can. It's comforting to know that there are some genuinely nice people in this business. Until next time... Donnie Ricciardi |
Hey Donnie great meeting you. I'm pretty sure we will cross paths again. Although I live in Great Neck, I'm in the City everyday.
| Tim McCulloch wrote on Fri, 02 February 2007 17:15 |
Elliot, you are one VERY observant guy, and have a great ear. It was a pleasure meeting and talking to you! Tim Mc |
Thank you.
It was a great speaking to you as well. You reminded me about the bass on stage syndrome. Running around throughout the club I forgot to take that into account.
I would like to appologize to all who I didn't formally introduce myself. I have a tendency to just talk to people and forget say
"Hi My Name Elliot." I guess that's why the name badges were so important.
| David J Lee wrote on Fri, 02 February 2007 22:12 |
Current plans are for us to have 12 to 16 of these (and/or the X2Cs) in Miami for the Ultra Fest on March 23rd and 24th. Hope to see you there! |
Hmm...... That's around Spring Break.
If I don't have anything booked those days, I try to make it.
Best Regards,
Post by: Elliot Thompson on February 03, 2007, 09:01:43 AM
| Langston Holland wrote on Sat, 03 February 2007 06:02 | ||
Good points Elliot. Expensive, irritating points. You bring up two areas of distortion that old-school (push it until it sounds really bad) BE's are clueless about. The first point is that many of us now have amps like the K10's and I-T8000's that can produce a great deal more clean power than most subs can handle even with limiters set to a reasonable RMS +3dB if the signal has an unusually low crest factor, like low synth tones or in a recent $900 out of pocket situation for me, a special effect from a drummer's laptop. The second point is subs like the TH115 simply don't get to the point where they sound nasty before the white smoke comes out of their voice coils. |
I agree on both points. I think we need to remember that all speakers have a limit. And when they are exceeded using an amplifier with lots of headroom providing music material that offers lot of dynamics, the pulse will be so severe the coils will become scorched.
| Quote: |
In my situation I had four TH115's packed two wide by two high powered by a single I-T8000 in stereo mode, two subs per channel. The concert was in a high school auditorium that only seated about 600. A very small room for that much sub horsepower, but the band was an excellent hard rock act with a 10 year history and a strong following. It also has a pretty new BE. I was about a hundred yards away in a bathroom during part of soundcheck when I felt the cinder block walls vibrating like a 40Hz sine wave. I ran to the auditorium to find an electrical fire smell and a bunch of teens slapping each others back saying things like "SICK!!" "never heard ANYTHING like that before!" and clueless in full CYA mode saying "dude! I didn't even have it up that loud!". Apparently, clueless has never heard clean bass before. At that point, I fully expected the concert to turn into four KF730 per side only nightmare, but all four TH115's got through the evening with no audible problems in a room averaging about 103dB SPL A weighted. Minus the sine wave like special effect of course. I'm thinking of setting the sub limiter for RMS -3dB for the unknown BE's in the future until they prove themselves. I really have no idea what to do... |
Sounds like a question I would pose to Tom Danley.
Thanks for sharing the story. The electrical fire smell would best describe what I smelt as well. After reading how the TH 115s made it through the show, I know understand why Tom wish the TH 115 weren't "Handled With Care" after that minor incident. Evidently, they have more drive in them.
Best Regards,
Post by: Ivan Beaver on February 03, 2007, 09:25:47 AM
The cabinets were located between 2 block walls and on the floor. The ceiling above was poured concrete and flat. Lots of modal issues getting set up from those dimensions.
The stage was behind the cabinets and was hollow with plywood lying across the front. The rear of the room got a little difused from FOH, bar etc, so probably not so much a issue as the lateral and vertical.
The room was really tight (concrete will do that for you) so the walls did not give at all and I am sure that was helping to get us a good tight loud sound out of only 2 boxes.
Give a look at this as see if it is any better.
I also changed the scale to 5db.
Do not even think about trying to compare different traces to the other graph. The traces were thrown in at random amd this is not all of them, just a sampling.
Post by: Gareth James on February 03, 2007, 10:30:52 AM
Just trying to get the facts straight in my head, I read this paragraph and was confused if you meant to refer to the 115 or 215 running into trouble...
Either way I'm still confused as to why either speaker would run into trouble at low levels on this amp. The 115 being rated for 2000w program and 8ohms and the 215 being rated for 2800w program and 4ohms, unless we're talking sine waves I'd have thought both would have been fine on a channel of K10?
Forgive me if maybe I'm missing something?!
Cheers!
| Elliot Thompson wrote on Sat, 03 February 2007 11:17 |
I was sitting next to Ivan Beever, at the time and he was explaining to me the concept of the TH 215 (That would be a few inches away from FOH) While I'm listening to Ivan, I'm listening to the Speaker as well. Suddenly I hear this Squelch which sounds like the speaker is dying. A few seconds later some says "We've Got Smoke" and Smoke is coming out the vents. I actually like how this box sounded on Day 1. And won't take in account what happened to it on day 2 as a mechanical, or electrical flaw. The box handles 2000 watts Program @ 4 ohms and the K 10 delivers 4000 watts per channel @ 4 ohms. It died because it got too much power. |
Post by: Ivan Beaver on February 03, 2007, 11:20:32 AM
we used several club/dance tracks that had extended low freq sinewaves as part of the music. That is what started taking out drivers. Under normal more "pop" type stuff, I doubt any of the drivers would have been damaged.It was the same sine waves that caused the breakers on Bennetts 6x18 to trip. They also would have been fine under normal usage, but these were extreme conditions (and the breakers were not the right size for 110V operation).
Many people would be really surprised how little power a driver can really take when exposed to sine waves.
Take your 1000watt driver and put a couple hundred watts sine wave into it and see how long it lasts.
I personally think the wattage ratings have gotten really out of hand. I remember when the JBL 200watt drivers were the king of power handling. Give me sensitivity anyday.
Post by: Elliot Thompson on February 03, 2007, 11:30:04 AM
| Gareth James wrote on Sat, 03 February 2007 15:30 | ||
Sorry Elliot, I don't mean to sound like I'm nitpicking! Just trying to get the facts straight in my head, I read this paragraph and was confused if you meant to refer to the 115 or 215 running into trouble... Either way I'm still confused as to why either speaker would run into trouble at low levels on this amp. The 115 being rated for 2000w program and 8ohms and the 215 being rated for 2800w program and 4ohms, unless we're talking sine waves I'd have thought both would have been fine on a channel of K10? Forgive me if maybe I'm missing something?! Cheers!
|
I think you are confusing the EM Acoustics 215 with Tom Danley's TH 215. What you quoted is in reference to the EM Acoustics 215.
When Ivan and I were discussing the TH 215, the EM Acoustics 215 were playing, and the TH 215 had already completed the listening test.
As for program power, it seems you are trying to do everything by the books.
I'll use the EM Acoustics 215 as an example since that's the one (Not the Danley TH 215) that smoked.
From EM Acoustics website; The EMS 215 takes 2000 watts Program 1000 watts RMS @ 4 ohms. That's 1000 watts Program for each driver (8 ohm) or 500 watts RMS.
The Powersoft K 10 puts out 4000 watts @ 4 ohms or 2000 watts using two 8-ohm drivers. So, as you can see this amplifier exceeded the EMS 215 Program rating by 2000 watts.
Under those conditions, if you are not familiar with the characteristics of the box, the amplifier's true power, and the program material being used, something going to fail.
Let's not forget that Live Audio is one part Books, and two part Real World Conditions. Which opens a whole plethora of things that books will not answer.
Best Regards,
Post by: Elliot Thompson on February 03, 2007, 11:33:58 AM
Didn't you mention that the room offered a 50 Hertz drop, why all the boxes dipped within that region?
Best Regards,
Post by: Ivan Beaver on February 03, 2007, 11:57:18 AM
This could very well have been a room modal issue at the mic position.
Post by: Mark Seaton on February 03, 2007, 01:38:03 PM
| Mac Kerr wrote on Thu, 01 February 2007 21:04 | ||||
Mac |
Hi Mac,
While it outwardly seems that it's just "adding another box," that's not the whole picture. A horn makes for a long acoustic pathway that has a reactive device (speaker/driver) loaded to it. From many measurements of bDeaps, BassTech7s, etc, I have repeatedly observed an adjacent, unpowered box "suck up" significant energy. So I would point out that having the un-connected TH-115 next to the one playing was handicapping it.
I'm well behind on following all the posts, and will try and catch up as time permits.
Post by: Mac Kerr on February 03, 2007, 01:43:12 PM
| Mark Seaton wrote on Sat, 03 February 2007 13:38 |
While it outwardly seems that it's just "adding another box," that's not the whole picture. A horn makes for a long acoustic pathway that has a reactive device (speaker/driver) loaded to it. From many measurements of bDeaps, BassTech7s, etc, I have repeatedly observed an adjacent, unpowered box "suck up" significant energy. So I would point out that having the un-connected TH-115 next to the one playing was handicapping it. |
Mac
Post by: Mark Seaton on February 03, 2007, 02:14:59 PM
| Ivan Beaver wrote on Sat, 03 February 2007 10:57 |
That was the first common "issue" I noticed when we started the process. It was later when I started laying the graphs on top of each other that I noticed the other "trends". As you can see, every sub had the same dip. This could very well have been a room modal issue at the mic position. |
We most certainly have many influences from the room in the measurements. This was fully expected and understood. The 4' measurement distance managed to keep the direct sound dominant enough to give us repeatable measurements that have some relation to an outdoor measurement. I'll see later if I can get a general correlation to Jeff's Growlers and the response measured in our test, but right now the measurements I have of the Growler were in about 28 deg weather. Which BTW would seem like a heat wave in Chicago right now!
Unfortunately it wasn't practical to take ultra-high level sweeps on all of the subwoofers BEFORE listening, as it would have been much too likely/easy to kill many good performers. The response and distortion measurements and the relative differences observed at 2.8V vs. 28V should show some interesting differences and behavior. The +3dB & +5dB graphs will show what happens as the power starts increasing, but there are some complicating factors.
One problem I ran into was with the phantom power provided by the TEF25. It is solid when powered with the wall wart, and not a problem for my less demanding TEF04 or SuperLux mic, but the Earthworks M30 is a bit more sensitive. I realized about 1/3rd of the way in that I had forgotten to power with the wall-wart, after I saw some clipping on the input to the TEF on I think the EM horn (will check later). We then corrected the phantom power issue and re-calibrated, confirming before and after measurmenets of the same box and continued on without input clipping on the TEF. This means I have less confidence in +3dB & +5dB measurements, particularly at higher SPLs.
Obviously this has no impact on the listening or on what was observed the second day with the RTA displaying a fast 1/6th reading while keeping track of peak hold.
Post by: Rob Spence on February 03, 2007, 03:59:52 PM
Paul?
Post by: David J Lee on February 03, 2007, 04:00:38 PM
| Bennett Prescott wrote on Fri, 02 February 2007 22:46 | ||
David, I've read this several times and I can still only see it as an unjustified attack on our design and company philosophy. Have I somehow wronged you? Are you suggesting that our product doesn't meet spec? I think what makes a cardioid pattern is fairly well understood, and its limitations are also fairly well understood. We happen to be getting additional front to rear rejection from a phase network and rear facing drivers. You're doing it with large horns. Both methods are valid, and I think we're both getting remarkable output from a relatively compact box. The end result is what's important. We're not sneaking around in the dark trying to foist extra drivers and amplifier channels on our customers, and I am personally insulted by your insinuation that we would be in business to fool people into buying "extra" components. |
Whoa there, Bennett!
Maybe you should read it agian. You're reading in things I never said. You're inferring a lot of bad intent on my part which simply isn't the case. You are not my enemy, Bennett. I have nothing but the highest regard for you and your products. I can't imagine what would give you the idea that I would attack you? Why would I want to do that? Of course you haven't wronged me, that's ridiculous! On a personal level I found you to be a super nice, very honest and helpful guy.
I heard your cardioid box and thought it was very well behaved, loud and deep as well as having well controlled amplifiers and limiters. It was also very compact and lightweight for the amount of output it produced and I have never even seen any of your marketing materials so I'm definitly not accusing you or ADR of producing the 'cardioid subwoofer' marketing hype.
I have no beef with your company philosophy, either. I fully embrace the idea of self-powered, internally processed loudspeakers. I intend to be selling some in the near future.
I certainly didn't insinuate that you were trying to fool people into buying unneccesary components. Those are your words, not mine. I think this misunderstanding may stem from the fact that yours was the only box at the shootout that was self-powered and actively processed to be cardioid. While it was the only one there, it's not the only one on the market. Nexo and Meyer also make them, as do others, and it was not your box that was foremost in my mind when I went ranting about this buzzword. It was actually another manufacturer whose 'cardioid subwoofer' I have heard in arrays of 16 boxes.
Granted it's an assumption but I was sure that when Scott called the Z-5000 a 'non cardioid subwoofer' he wasn't making a direct comparison to your box but rather to a larger group of boxes that are specifically marketed as cardioid subwoofers. His comment simply made me think that if a subwoofer can maintain decent pattern control to a reasonably low frequency, no matter how it does it, it should be considered a cardiod box. My question to myself was why did he consider the Z-5000 to be non-cardioid when it does exhibit a cardioid pattern?
I met Scott, and, like you and I, he certainly seems to be a knowledgable, reasonable and thoughtful guy. I certainly wasn't implying that he did something wrong by calling the Z-5000 an non cardioid box. To me it simply appeared that Scott considered the Z-5000 to be non-cardioid because either A) it didn't have any additional components that made it actively cardioid or B) he hadn't seen any marketing materials that referred to it as a cardioid design, or perhaps C) all of the above. This was enlightening to me. To me, in terms of subwoofers, cardioid is a description of an output pattern but how it is achieved is not a part of the definition in my mind. There are numerous different ways to produce a cardioid pattern, all of them are valid and some are more effective than others at producing certain results. My point was that it seems the only method that's being called cardioid right now is the method you guys, Nexo and Meyer are using and there still is more than one way to skin that cat.
I'm sorry you felt offended, Benett. My comments really weren't about you or your box. They were about the overall perception that there is only one way to build a cardioid box. To be perfectly clear, no one should infer from my comments that Bennet Prescott or Eona ADR are producing loudspeakers that don't meet spec or include any unnecessary components. I've no doubt that all the compnents in them are necessary and functional to produce the design objective. Nor should you believe for a moment that I harbor any ill will toward you, Bennett. I certainly didn't expect you to take my comments personally. I'm not in the habit of making personal attacks on anyone. I enjoyed meeting you, I appreciate all you did to make the event happen and run smoothly and I wish you the best success in your endeavors.
I bid you peace and happiness, my friend.
Post by: Iain_Macdonald on February 03, 2007, 04:06:41 PM
| Tom Danley wrote on Fri, 02 February 2007 14:14 |
Hi Elliott The TH-215’s have a new drivers in them too, these should be.... Tom Danley |
Were these new drivers just experimental for the shootout, or are they going to be a standard item ?
Iain.
Post by: Dave Dermont on February 10, 2007, 03:58:44 PM
The continuation of this discussion can be found here:
http://srforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/t/20482/81/
Thank you for your time, patience, and participation.
Dave Dermont