PDA

View Full Version : Sundown Zv.4, DC XL, AQ/SQ HDC4.0, TC5200 comparison|3.7cubes, PR tuned to 25-28hz



Bwap
11-04-2013, 10:37 PM
So I did a quick comparison in winisd to see how each sub worked with a passive radiator.
I figured it was the best way to compare seeing as each sub has different needs for port volume.
With a passive radiator I seemed to get pretty consistent results at 3.7 cubes.
I just added mass until the fall off was about 25hz for each.
Each sub is the 15" version, I picked these subs for the comparison because they would each run well off of 2500rms and are top brands that I would consider buying.

http://s13.postimg.org/fj3nomqdz/Sub_compare.png
Zv.4-RED|XL-WHITE|5200-PURPLE|HDC4.0-YELLOW|ZCON-GREY... From top to bottom


The main question for me is, how does this all apply to real life situations.
Are the Zcon, HDC4.0, and 5200 all very peaky and similar sounding?
Am I dealing with two different groups of subs here?.. are the Zcon, HDC4.0, and 5200 all SPL subs and the Zv.4 and XL SQL?.. it seems I always get one of two type of results when using winisd.
This program really throws me for a loop, I just keep entering more and more woofers into it and I don't really know what to think with the output. Is there anyway I can apply the results to what will happen in real life?

Any knowledge anyone is willing to pass is appreciated, thanks.

bbeljefe
11-04-2013, 11:32 PM
Why should all of those subs have differing needs for port area? If xmax and piston diameter are very close, then port area will also be very close. I haven't checked them all but I can't help but think they're pretty close in those areas.

As the graphs go, the Zv4 is the only sub I would even consider in that alignment and that volume but I'm wondering why you modeled so many subs in the same volume. Is that the space constraint you have or is it an alignment you want to try?

And in real life, those graphs will be pretty close to the response you would get. All other things being equal, there may be peaks in some areas and dips in others but three of those five subs never even reach F3, let alone having any acoustical gain and the XL starts its decline at 50 Hz. So in practice, four of the five setups would **** and one of them would be okay.

Bwap
11-04-2013, 11:49 PM
Why should all of those subs have differing needs for port area? If xmax and piston diameter are very close, then port area will also be very close. I haven't checked them all but I can't help but think they're pretty close in those areas.

As the graphs go, the Zv4 is the only sub I would even consider in that alignment and that volume but I'm wondering why you modeled so many subs in the same volume. Is that the space constraint you have or is it an alignment you want to try?

And in real life, those graphs will be pretty close to the response you would get. All other things being equal, there may be peaks in some areas and dips in others but three of those five subs never even reach F3, let alone having any acoustical gain and the XL starts its decline at 50 Hz. So in practice, four of the five setups would **** and one of them would be okay.

Well the TC 5200 recommends 3.7cubes when using a PR and tuning 10-25hz, yet you say this box ***** for that sub?

So what your saying is that if you dont go above 0db when using winisd, then it will sound like crap?

Also you weren't very helpful at all. I had a lot of questions in my post because I am looking to learn, its like you went threw and questioned my whole post without answering any questions.

Its like your post is asking why did I post this...

mlstrass
11-05-2013, 03:05 AM
Why should all of those subs have differing needs for port area? If xmax and piston diameter are very close, then port area will also be very close. I haven't checked them all but I can't help but think they're pretty close in those areas.

As the graphs go, the Zv4 is the only sub I would even consider in that alignment and that volume but I'm wondering why you modeled so many subs in the same volume. Is that the space constraint you have or is it an alignment you want to try?

And in real life, those graphs will be pretty close to the response you would get. All other things being equal, there may be peaks in some areas and dips in others but three of those five subs never even reach F3, let alone having any acoustical gain and the XL starts its decline at 50 Hz. So in practice, four of the five setups would **** and one of them would be okay.

Apparently all the subs have the exact same type of suspension :crazy:

bbeljefe
11-05-2013, 09:16 AM
Apparently all the subs have the exact same type of suspension :crazy:

This is the trouble with cherry picking quotes...

I said, "Why should all of those subs have differing needs for port area? If xmax and piston diameter are very close, then port area will also be very close. I haven't checked them all but I can't help but think they're pretty close in those areas."

If you're interested in discussing, debating or arguing against my comments, it would be nice if you took them in context. And in case you're wondering what that means... all of those subs have similar characteristics relative to high compliance, low xmax subs and thus, have very similar needs of port area relative to the latter.

bbeljefe
11-05-2013, 09:51 AM
Well the TC 5200 recommends 3.7cubes when using a PR and tuning 10-25hz, yet you say this box ***** for that sub?

So what your saying is that if you dont go above 0db when using winisd, then it will sound like crap?

Also you weren't very helpful at all. I had a lot of questions in my post because I am looking to learn, its like you went threw and questioned my whole post without answering any questions.

Its like your post is asking why did I post this...

Actually, I was wondering why the modeling of a lot of different subs in the same box, which is why I asked. And I get why you posted this thread and, I'm happy to answer your questions to the best of my ability.... but I don't want to answer questions I don't completely understand, which is the reason for my questions.

If my post came across as snide or curt, my apologies. It wasn't meant that way.

As for the TC recommendations, perhaps you don't have the correct sized PR for the sub? I have no idea but in answer to your question, yes. If I model a box that doesn't at least provide flat response throughout the sub bass region... it's not one I'll build. The reason why is that if it peaks ~-4dB and then falls another one or two dB before starting back up (as the TC does in your model), it has no chance of performing well. In a vehicle or room, that dip might come up a bit but it isn't going to become flat and chances are that it'll get worse.

To clarify the lines on the graph, 0dB is flat and the -3dB line is where the loudspeaker you're modeling becomes increasingly inefficient.

Bwap
11-05-2013, 01:04 PM
Actually, I was wondering why the modeling of a lot of different subs in the same box, which is why I asked. And I get why you posted this thread and, I'm happy to answer your questions to the best of my ability.... but I don't want to answer questions I don't completely understand, which is the reason for my questions.

If my post came across as snide or curt, my apologies. It wasn't meant that way.

As for the TC recommendations, perhaps you don't have the correct sized PR for the sub? I have no idea but in answer to your question, yes. If I model a box that doesn't at least provide flat response throughout the sub bass region... it's not one I'll build. The reason why is that if it peaks ~-4dB and then falls another one or two dB before starting back up (as the TC does in your model), it has no chance of performing well. In a vehicle or room, that dip might come up a bit but it isn't going to become flat and chances are that it'll get worse.

To clarify the lines on the graph, 0dB is flat and the -3dB line is where the loudspeaker you're modeling becomes increasingly inefficient.

Hmm thanks, it seems its difficult to build a box with flat response for 3 of these subs. Im trying very hard to make the 5200 work in 4 cubes or less and it seems impossible.. actually it seems impossible to make it have a relatively good response at all. Cannot get this sub above 0db no matter what I do, unless it takes a 10db dip right after. (new to the program)

The area I have to work with is 39x16x14.5.. that is the max area I have to use, 4.1cubes. I am trying to figure out what driver is best for my situation. Meanwhile trying to make the TC work because that's the sub I would like to run. If you don't mind can you give me some assistance in trying to make the right box for the TC?.. here is the archive webpage. TC 5200 (http://web.archive.org/web/20070216022836/http://www.tcsounds.com/tc5200.htm)

As TC recommends, I made a 3.7 cube box with two of their 15" PRs. The results were exactly the same as with one PSI PR, crap. Does this sub only work well in sealed?

bbeljefe
11-05-2013, 02:25 PM
That sub has a super high EBP (134) and that indicates that it's gonna want a small ported enclosure rather than a large sealed one... which is really what a PR system is, from my understanding. But with that said, I'll also disclose that I don't have much experience at all with modeling PR loudspeakers so I can't really say with any authority what that sub needs in one.

I'd try tweaking the box size down from where they recommend and see if that doesn't bring the response curve upward. I'd also try bumping the tuning up to the mid/high 20s rather than having it at or below Fs. But in the end, that sub will do best in a ported alignment. A 6th order or t-line would be best but you don't have room for those.

bbeljefe
11-05-2013, 02:25 PM
That sub has a super high EBP (134) and that indicates that it's gonna want a small ported enclosure rather than a large sealed one... which is really what a PR system is, from my understanding. But with that said, I'll also disclose that I don't have much experience at all with modeling PR loudspeakers so I can't really say with any authority what that sub needs in one.

I'd try tweaking the box size down from where they recommend and see if that doesn't bring the response curve upward. I'd also try bumping the tuning up to the mid/high 20s rather than having it at or below Fs. But in the end, that sub will do best in a ported alignment. A 6th order or t-line would be best but you don't have room for those.

Bwap
11-05-2013, 03:26 PM
Idk after trying tons of different box designs, it seems the 5200 will always be peaky and drop to at least -3db.. im getting really frustrated, has anyone built a box for this sub that worked?.. or is this sub a very pricey lost cause? I mean even TC doesn't have a good box recommended for them.. put in what they say and you get a horrible peaky output.

hispls
11-05-2013, 05:10 PM
Idk after trying tons of different box designs, it seems the 5200 will always be peaky and drop to at least -3db.. im getting really frustrated, has anyone built a box for this sub that worked?.. or is this sub a very pricey lost cause? I mean even TC doesn't have a good box recommended for them.. put in what they say and you get a horrible peaky output.

Keep in mind, port area has no bearing on the response. ONLY box volume and tuning.

Also modeling software is very accurate in predicting response. It will not, however, take into account nulls and peaks from vehicle acoustics. Only testing with your vehicle and different box orientations will tell you this. Also plus or minus 3db is an acceptable response... those graphs often make things look a lot more dramatic than they really are to our limited perception of sound intensity.

bbeljefe
11-05-2013, 05:44 PM
If I can remember to I'll model a few boxes for it on WinISD Beta. It doesn't do PR alignments but it has always done a good job for me.

Bwap
11-05-2013, 06:11 PM
If I can remember to I'll model a few boxes for it on WinISD Beta. It doesn't do PR alignments but it has always done a good job for me.

Thanks, I appreciate it.

Bwap
11-06-2013, 12:03 AM
http://s13.postimg.org/n47x7iypj/tc5200_pr_box.png

This is the PSI PR with a few different tunings.. I assume none of these are adequate?

mlstrass
11-06-2013, 05:38 AM
This is the trouble with cherry picking quotes...

I said, "Why should all of those subs have differing needs for port area? If xmax and piston diameter are very close, then port area will also be very close. I haven't checked them all but I can't help but think they're pretty close in those areas."

If you're interested in discussing, debating or arguing against my comments, it would be nice if you took them in context. And in case you're wondering what that means... all of those subs have similar characteristics relative to high compliance, low xmax subs and thus, have very similar needs of port area relative to the latter.

Didn't need to quote the entire statement as you obviously knew what I meant. There is more to a sub then piston diameter and xmax....

And music played/power level can also play into port area requirements. Especially with the current trend of playing down to around 20Hz and throwing 2-3x RMS at a sub.

bbeljefe
11-06-2013, 08:46 AM
Didn't need to quote the entire statement as you obviously knew what I meant. There is more to a sub then piston diameter and xmax....

And music played/power level can also play into port area requirements. Especially with the current trend of playing down to around 20Hz and throwing 2-3x RMS at a sub.

Yes, you did need to quote the entire sentence in order to convey the context. I wasn't talking about all the parameters of a sub. I was talking about port area. And like I said, if piston area and xmax are similar, then port area requirements will also be similar... regardless of other parameters and without respect to the style of music one listens to. And while it is true that one can use less port area than required if the sub will be underpowered... that is not a necessity and it's also not wise. Proper port area on a low powered system will not cause tuning or performance problems but less port area than required on high power will.

So I'm wondering, what sort of variations in port area would you say are power & program dependant and also necessary?

Buck
11-06-2013, 11:31 AM
I hate PR's, they feel restrictive with most subs used today. I can imagine PR's almost blowing out of a box with a zv.4 and all it's travel.

bbeljefe
11-06-2013, 02:09 PM
I hate PR's, they feel restrictive with most subs used today. I can imagine PR's almost blowing out of a box with a zv.4 and all it's travel.

I tend to agree with you. I remember back in the late 90's when Earthquake was hawking their SLAPS PR along with the Magma subs. I used one with a 12" Magma on about 2kW and it did okay but frankly, the sub did much, much better in a ported box.

bbeljefe
11-06-2013, 02:11 PM
Hmm thanks, it seems its difficult to build a box with flat response for 3 of these subs. Im trying very hard to make the 5200 work in 4 cubes or less and it seems impossible.. actually it seems impossible to make it have a relatively good response at all. Cannot get this sub above 0db no matter what I do, unless it takes a 10db dip right after. (new to the program)

The area I have to work with is 39x16x14.5.. that is the max area I have to use, 4.1cubes. I am trying to figure out what driver is best for my situation. Meanwhile trying to make the TC work because that's the sub I would like to run. If you don't mind can you give me some assistance in trying to make the right box for the TC?.. here is the archive webpage. TC 5200 (http://web.archive.org/web/20070216022836/http://www.tcsounds.com/tc5200.htm)

As TC recommends, I made a 3.7 cube box with two of their 15" PRs. The results were exactly the same as with one PSI PR, crap. Does this sub only work well in sealed?

Just so you don't think I've forgotten about you... I can't access the TS numbers for this sub. Web Archive is down for maintenance, so if you don't mind dropping TS numbers in this thread or in my PM, I'll model a few boxes for it.

Bwap
11-06-2013, 02:17 PM
Just so you don't think I've forgotten about you... I can't access the TS numbers for this sub. Web Archive is down for maintenance, so if you don't mind dropping TS numbers in this thread or in my PM, I'll model a few boxes for it.

qts: .159
qes: .164
qms: 5.1
vas: 109L
fs: 22hz
re:4.52ohms
BL: 44.38 t/m
xmax: 30mm

I have been messing with ported boxes, trying to stay about the same ratio port to box volume as TC recommends and I have been able to get a somewhat flatter response. I can never get a flat response and above 0db though, its always very peaky if I get it above 0db.

bbeljefe
11-06-2013, 03:42 PM
Wow.... I'm having the same results. I question the accuracy of those TS numbers. I understand they're from the manufacturer but they're notorious for inflating things like BL to make their subs look better.

I wonder if anyone has ever run that sub on a DATS or some other TS device?

T3mpest
11-06-2013, 04:07 PM
I guess I'll throw my .10c in here, since I have plenty of experience with PR modeling and using them in a car as well. PR's can work very well in a car. While subwoofers have gotten pretty beastly in the last few years, so have passive radiators. Most good PR's have 30-40mm of xmax and you generally have 2x as much cone area in passives as you do speaker. Passives don't have the limitation of airspeed through the port and the boxes are MUCH smaller. The crazy excursion on these woofers with the high Bl means they can produce a lot of bass in small ported box, but need a BIG port do it. If he wants to do 25hz tuning, he can use passives and make a 3-4cubic foot box, or he can use a correctly sized port and end up with a 6 cubic foot box, with 2 feet being eaten up by the wide and very long port. That's the huge advantage of a passive, that and adjustable tuning. Nobody get's car boxes spot on first try, when adjusting tuning takes a few minutes (rear loaded passives or only a few seconds (front loaded passives) that's pretty sweet. I can tune my box between anywhere between 45hz and 15hz in a matter of seconds.

Now to address that 5200. Those T/S specs ARE correct, your looking at quite possibly the most overmotored sub in history. While it's EBP suggests a ported alignment, in this case, the specs are so far from most other woofers, it's misleading. The only way to NOT make a fart cannon box out of this thing is to use a sealed enclosure. Interestingly, ANY sealed enclosure. You can literally put this thing in a box just big enough to fit the magnet structure and not really effect it's low end output much. Go model it in a 6 cube sealed vs a 2cube sealed to see what I mean, it's just sooo low Q that it really doesn't matter, the motor force makes up the difference. Nothing ported you can build will not be peaky for this thing in a car, that's not what it was made for, in a car it's good for SPL and in a home, it can give you very low bass in a super small box with some EQ work applied.

Beyond all that, ported and PR alignments are the same thing, they are both using resonators, the only difference one uses air and one uses a speaker cone. The suspension acts as another order of a HPF, so it' rolls off just a hair faster (5th order vs 4th order) below tuning, but beyond that, they are the same. Unless of course your port isn't adequately sized, in which case the PR will outperform a port at higher levels. Out of what you've posted graphs for, I liked the the white graph on the first page, that was pretty flat response overall. I believe that's the SSA Zcon? I actually had my eye on the ssa dcon for PR use due to it's T/S. What you generally want to look for for a "good" candidate for PR boxes is something that will model well in a small ported enclosure, slowly falling response for flat in car response, that needs to be tuned very low to do that.. With a standard port, that's a PITA type of box as the port ends up eating up airspace, making your small box not so small. DCON fits the bill, apparently so does the XCON, which is good as their other lines didn't when I messed with it, never even bothered with the Zcon.

bbeljefe
11-06-2013, 04:55 PM
I guess I'll throw my .10c in here, since I have plenty of experience with PR modeling and using them in a car as well. PR's can work very well in a car. While subwoofers have gotten pretty beastly in the last few years, so have passive radiators. Most good PR's have 30-40mm of xmax and you generally have 2x as much cone area in passives as you do speaker. Passives don't have the limitation of airspeed through the port and the boxes are MUCH smaller. The crazy excursion on these woofers with the high Bl means they can produce a lot of bass in small ported box, but need a BIG port do it. If he wants to do 25hz tuning, he can use passives and make a 3-4cubic foot box, or he can use a correctly sized port and end up with a 6 cubic foot box, with 2 feet being eaten up by the wide and very long port. That's the huge advantage of a passive, that and adjustable tuning. Nobody get's car boxes spot on first try, when adjusting tuning takes a few minutes (rear loaded passives or only a few seconds (front loaded passives) that's pretty sweet. I can tune my box between anywhere between 45hz and 15hz in a matter of seconds.

Now to address that 5200. Those T/S specs ARE correct, your looking at quite possibly the most overmotored sub in history. While it's EBP suggests a ported alignment, in this case, the specs are so far from most other woofers, it's misleading. The only way to NOT make a fart cannon box out of this thing is to use a sealed enclosure. Interestingly, ANY sealed enclosure. You can literally put this thing in a box just big enough to fit the magnet structure and not really effect it's low end output much. Go model it in a 6 cube sealed vs a 2cube sealed to see what I mean, it's just sooo low Q that it really doesn't matter, the motor force makes up the difference. Nothing ported you can build will not be peaky for this thing in a car, that's not what it was made for, in a car it's good for SPL and in a home, it can give you very low bass in a super small box with some EQ work applied.

Beyond all that, ported and PR alignments are the same thing, they are both using resonators, the only difference one uses air and one uses a speaker cone. The suspension acts as another order of a HPF, so it' rolls off just a hair faster (5th order vs 4th order) below tuning, but beyond that, they are the same. Unless of course your port isn't adequately sized, in which case the PR will outperform a port at higher levels. Out of what you've posted graphs for, I liked the the white graph on the first page, that was pretty flat response overall. I believe that's the SSA Zcon? I actually had my eye on the ssa dcon for PR use due to it's T/S. What you generally want to look for for a "good" candidate for PR boxes is something that will model well in a small ported enclosure, slowly falling response for flat in car response, that needs to be tuned very low to do that.. With a standard port, that's a PITA type of box as the port ends up eating up airspace, making your small box not so small. DCON fits the bill, apparently so does the XCON, which is good as their other lines didn't when I messed with it, never even bothered with the Zcon.

That's interesting. I modeled it in a .2 cube box and a 6 cube box. The .2 cubes is WinISDs recommended .7 box and it starts dropping at 193 Hz and goes -3dB at 97 Hz. At 4 cubes it's already a full dB down at 250 Hz and F3 is 131 Hz. I wonder if the fact that I don't have Le and Sensitivity is affecting the modeling calculations?

T3mpest
11-06-2013, 05:19 PM
Absolutely. That's a 4inch coil with no shorting rings, inductance does play a big role with this speaker up top. You had to get the 5400 to get the a big coil with a a copper filled motor. Good luck making a .2 cube box lol. By the time you get something reasonable around the motor structure your at the point of diminishing returns in regards to box space. 2 cubes vs 6 cubes and you'll see very little difference in low end output at 25hz, which is unusual for a 15. A box small enough to bring the Q up to a normal number is too small to realistically build. They are a neat woofer for sure, sealed in a car you can literally just pack them into a box and more or less get the same output as you would if you tripled your box size, and they have the xmax to get low. Ported, they are a little too beastly to be anything but an SPL driver, but their cones and softparts weren't great for that application stock, although the motor is still probably king of the hill in SPL if you rebuild it. PSI made some nice ones from what I've heard. They did the same for the 5400, but that's a waste of a world class driver :( (NO LMS COIL!)

Bwap
11-07-2013, 05:33 PM
I guess I'll throw my .10c in here, since I have plenty of experience with PR modeling and using them in a car as well. PR's can work very well in a car. While subwoofers have gotten pretty beastly in the last few years, so have passive radiators. Most good PR's have 30-40mm of xmax and you generally have 2x as much cone area in passives as you do speaker. Passives don't have the limitation of airspeed through the port and the boxes are MUCH smaller. The crazy excursion on these woofers with the high Bl means they can produce a lot of bass in small ported box, but need a BIG port do it. If he wants to do 25hz tuning, he can use passives and make a 3-4cubic foot box, or he can use a correctly sized port and end up with a 6 cubic foot box, with 2 feet being eaten up by the wide and very long port. That's the huge advantage of a passive, that and adjustable tuning. Nobody get's car boxes spot on first try, when adjusting tuning takes a few minutes (rear loaded passives or only a few seconds (front loaded passives) that's pretty sweet. I can tune my box between anywhere between 45hz and 15hz in a matter of seconds.

Now to address that 5200. Those T/S specs ARE correct, your looking at quite possibly the most overmotored sub in history. While it's EBP suggests a ported alignment, in this case, the specs are so far from most other woofers, it's misleading. The only way to NOT make a fart cannon box out of this thing is to use a sealed enclosure. Interestingly, ANY sealed enclosure. You can literally put this thing in a box just big enough to fit the magnet structure and not really effect it's low end output much. Go model it in a 6 cube sealed vs a 2cube sealed to see what I mean, it's just sooo low Q that it really doesn't matter, the motor force makes up the difference. Nothing ported you can build will not be peaky for this thing in a car, that's not what it was made for, in a car it's good for SPL and in a home, it can give you very low bass in a super small box with some EQ work applied.



Beyond all that, ported and PR alignments are the same thing, they are both using resonators, the only difference one uses air and one uses a speaker cone. The suspension acts as another order of a HPF, so it' rolls off just a hair faster (5th order vs 4th order) below tuning, but beyond that, they are the same. Unless of course your port isn't adequately sized, in which case the PR will outperform a port at higher levels. Out of what you've posted graphs for, I liked the the white graph on the first page, that was pretty flat response overall. I believe that's the SSA Zcon? I actually had my eye on the ssa dcon for PR use due to it's T/S. What you generally want to look for for a "good" candidate for PR boxes is something that will model well in a small ported enclosure, slowly falling response for flat in car response, that needs to be tuned very low to do that.. With a standard port, that's a PITA type of box as the port ends up eating up airspace, making your small box not so small. DCON fits the bill, apparently so does the XCON, which is good as their other lines didn't when I messed with it, never even bothered with the Zcon.

Actually the sub that was represented by the white line was the DC xl. The zcon was the grey line and had the same response as the 5200 but at a lower DB.
How are DCs motors, are they powerful? I want to have the option of reconing in the future, so I want the motor to be strong.

Btw thanks for the input, you seem very knowledgeable. Is there a sub you would recommend for my situation?.. 4cubes max to work with, 15" sub, mmats 3500.05... can run ported or PR.. would prefer not to go sealed because I want it to romp... I haven't heard a sealed setup that was anything compared to ported.. then again the TC is pretty unique lol

Buck
11-07-2013, 06:16 PM
qts: .159
qes: .164
qms: 5.1
vas: 109L
fs: 22hz
re:4.52ohms
BL: 44.38 t/m
xmax: 30mm

I have been messing with ported boxes, trying to stay about the same ratio port to box volume as TC recommends and I have been able to get a somewhat flatter response. I can never get a flat response and above 0db though, its always very peaky if I get it above 0db.

There's something funky with those.

Qts and qms are too low for that Fs to be that low I feel. Vas seems reasonable to me. Bl seems too high, but I don't know the woofer at all besides what you showed.

Buck
11-07-2013, 06:18 PM
Like too low I mean too low maybe to work together properly? Maybe a bad combo of parts?

T3mpest
11-07-2013, 06:41 PM
Like too low I mean too low maybe to work together properly? Maybe a bad combo of parts?

Indeed. The suspensions on these were VERY soft for as much motor as they had. That's always been a weakness of TC sounds drivers when you push them. They have great T/S to model well and sound very nicely at low volumes as well as the capability for high output, however if your not careful they will break on you as the T/S make them far from idiot proof. Even the LMS ultras had that issue, the xmax was over 40mm, but you could easily crash the coil into the backplate without much isssue

Buck
11-07-2013, 07:15 PM
Indeed. The suspensions on these were VERY soft for as much motor as they had. That's always been a weakness of TC sounds drivers when you push them. They have great T/S to model well and sound very nicely at low volumes as well as the capability for high output, however if your not careful they will break on you as the T/S make them far from idiot proof. Even the LMS ultras had that issue, the xmax was over 40mm, but you could easily crash the coil into the backplate without much isssue

Hey if you still need help with that box I'm back up feeling better.

I like that theory of the woofer, big motor, softer suspension, but not so much where it becomes a problem like it seems like it has with some of their drivers.

Bwap
11-08-2013, 12:25 PM
Indeed. The suspensions on these were VERY soft for as much motor as they had. That's always been a weakness of TC sounds drivers when you push them. They have great T/S to model well and sound very nicely at low volumes as well as the capability for high output, however if your not careful they will break on you as the T/S make them far from idiot proof. Even the LMS ultras had that issue, the xmax was over 40mm, but you could easily crash the coil into the backplate without much isssue

Is there a sub that you think suits my situation better?... 4 cubes max, 15" sub, ported or PR, ran off of an mmats 3500.05, powerful motor.

The reason I want a powerful motor is because I would like to have it reconed by SPL or PSI at some point. That's why I was really leaning towards the TC.

Ive never heard a sealed setup that impressed me, but maybe the tc is different?.. considering just running it sealed until I get the new vehicle.

T3mpest
11-08-2013, 01:56 PM
If having a peaky box is going to annoy you, run it sealed because that's all you will get by porting. If your goal is to eventually recone it with different soft parts the TC is a great option, probably among the best IMHO. For a single sub sealed it's going to be pretty beastly, I've ran several 30+mm xmax subs sealed and honestly for how much real estate they take up, they are impressive and this thing can even take some power compared to what I've used. I'd do the TC for now if you really plan on getting a recone, ask him to bring the Q up a bit so that it wont' be as peaky near tuning. If you dont' plan on doing that, the ZCON looks to fit the box you planned on doing very well. I used a setup out of a trunk that had a similar response to the ZCON you graphed and it was my favorite SQL setup to date.

Buck
11-08-2013, 02:51 PM
If having a peaky box is going to annoy you, run it sealed because that's all you will get by porting. If your goal is to eventually recone it with different soft parts the TC is a great option, probably among the best IMHO. For a single sub sealed it's going to be pretty beastly, I've ran several 30+mm xmax subs sealed and honestly for how much real estate they take up, they are impressive and this thing can even take some power compared to what I've used. I'd do the TC for now if you really plan on getting a recone, ask him to bring the Q up a bit so that it wont' be as peaky near tuning. If you dont' plan on doing that, the ZCON looks to fit the box you planned on doing very well. I used a setup out of a trunk that had a similar response to the ZCON you graphed and it was my favorite SQL setup to date.

x2, these softer suspension woofers with big xmax, like the sundown x and zv.4, tc sounds lms (-r, 5400, maybe axis), re xxx, etc, will reproduce low frequencies with more authority than say a woofer with 15-20 mm xmax. Not saying I'd take sealed over ported, but your thoughts about these style woofers sealed may be slightly skewed because of how most woofers (the ones we know) react in sealed.

Bwap
11-08-2013, 07:16 PM
Im thinking about going with a PR and tuning low. If I tune the PR to 19.5hz the response 30hz+ is flat.
TC recommends 10-25hz in 3.7cubes tuning when using a PR.

Here is a graph comparing the two. At 30hz where the response is flat for the PR, it has 4db over the sealed.
http://s13.postimg.org/atlprs5nr/PR_19_5_vs_sealed_tc.png
Passive radiator(purple) vs Sealed(yellow)

Buck
11-08-2013, 07:18 PM
Winisd can't be used like that. I mean it can, but it doesn't mean much here. If you want SQ, aim mid 20's, but I'm not sure how a PR would reproduce "tuned" there.

Bwap
11-08-2013, 07:34 PM
The TC recommends 10-25hz tuning in 3.7cubes when using a PR.

Will the TC handle the power(Mmats 3500.05) when tuned this low?

Seeing as it takes a lot more power to make db at lower hz, would it even seem peaky to your ear with the PR tuned this low?
^If this is the case would a higher tuning(20-25hz), sound better?

The mmats doesn't have a subsonic filter, should I run Harrison fmods?.. if so what hz would you recommend?

Sorry about all the questions, I don't wanna miss anything lol..

Bwap
11-08-2013, 11:51 PM
@t3mpest

Buck
11-09-2013, 12:06 AM
The TC recommends 10-25hz tuning in 3.7cubes when using a PR.

Will the TC handle the power(Mmats 3500.05) when tuned this low?

Seeing as it takes a lot more power to make db at lower hz, would it even seem peaky to your ear with the PR tuned this low?
^If this is the case would a higher tuning(20-25hz), sound better?

The mmats doesn't have a subsonic filter, should I run Harrison fmods?.. if so what hz would you recommend?

Sorry about all the questions, I don't wanna miss anything lol..

Can you show me this? Tuned that low you shouldn't need a ssf. My box is 29 hz and my ssf is all the way down at like 10 hz or something, so you should fine.

Bwap
11-09-2013, 12:40 AM
Can you show me this? Tuned that low you shouldn't need a ssf. My box is 29 hz and my ssf is all the way down at like 10 hz or something, so you should fine.

TC 5200 (http://web.archive.org/web/20070216022836/http://www.tcsounds.com/tc5200.htm)

Hmm so the lower you tune the less of a need for ssf?

Bwap
11-09-2013, 12:56 AM
Its crazy after modeling HDC4.0 and zcon they seem to have the same bad response to boxes. Is it that subs with this layout on the graph geared more towards spl?

Buck
11-09-2013, 12:59 AM
Ok, I believe the tuning they recommended was for home theater, which is a totally different mindstate than car audio. In car- you have vehicle gain/boost/extra pressure so you don't have to tune as low to play as low (loudly) necessarily.

But generally, yes, the lower you tune, the lower you can play. With a high quality, big xmax woofer typically like 30 hz tuning you can play WELL into 20's without bottoming out. But with that being said, there's not much music that plays below 30 so maybe you should think why tune so far below it? SQ, I'd tune to mid 20's. Buddy on here danometal has a JBL 12 or 15, ported @ 25 hz iirc and it kicks hard and fast, sounds really good in my opinion.

So there's some info, I'm really tired but I could go on and on and on lol.

Buck
11-09-2013, 01:00 AM
When you tune low, that means your sub is getting the box out to help control the cone, so the lower you tune, the more control on low notes. But too low in a car can sound like absolute doo, so that's why I'm saying I don't think you should tune anywhere much below the mid 20's.

Bwap
11-09-2013, 01:10 AM
Ok, I believe the tuning they recommended was for home theater, which is a totally different mindstate than car audio. In car- you have vehicle gain/boost/extra pressure so you don't have to tune as low to play as low (loudly) necessarily.

But generally, yes, the lower you tune, the lower you can play. With a high quality, big xmax woofer typically like 30 hz tuning you can play WELL into 20's without bottoming out. But with that being said, there's not much music that plays below 30 so maybe you should think why tune so far below it? SQ, I'd tune to mid 20's. Buddy on here danometal has a JBL 12 or 15, ported @ 25 hz iirc and it kicks hard and fast, sounds really good in my opinion.

So there's some info, I'm really tired but I could go on and on and on lol.

Haha thanks for all the info, its crazy the endless amount of questions I always have. They just keep coming, so ill just see if anyone knows this one haha, good night.

Does a 15" sub and a 15" PR have the ability to move as much air as two 15s because its the same cone area?

Buck
11-09-2013, 01:17 AM
Haha thanks for all the info, its crazy the endless amount of questions I always have. They just keep coming, so ill just see if anyone knows this one haha, good night.

Does a 15" sub and a 15" PR have the ability to move as much air as two 15s because its the same cone area?

If it's ported, no.

If it's sealed, possibly. If the power is double and the woofer can effectively use that power.

Buck
11-09-2013, 01:18 AM
But a single PR for a high powered 15 I don't believe is going to work. gckless used two 18" PR's with his two tc 15's and iirc he said he probably could use another one.

Bwap
11-09-2013, 01:28 AM
But a single PR for a high powered 15 I don't believe is going to work. gckless used two 18" PR's with his two tc 15's and iirc he said he probably could use another one.

Hmm when I model in a second or third PR it doesn't make much of a difference. Why wouldn't it work? lol

The one im using for the model is a 15" psi PR and it has 3.5" xmax

Bwap
11-09-2013, 06:41 PM
From what I understood, a sub with a pr has the response of a ported at a slightly lower db and without the possibility of turbulence.

What would be the issue with having only one PR?

hispls
11-09-2013, 07:02 PM
The TC recommends 10-25hz tuning in 3.7cubes when using a PR.

Will the TC handle the power(Mmats 3500.05) when tuned this low?

Seeing as it takes a lot more power to make db at lower hz, would it even seem peaky to your ear with the PR tuned this low?
^If this is the case would a higher tuning(20-25hz), sound better?

The mmats doesn't have a subsonic filter, should I run Harrison fmods?.. if so what hz would you recommend?

Sorry about all the questions, I don't wanna miss anything lol..

WTF are you even listening to that you think you need to play down to 15hz ?

Bwap
11-09-2013, 07:11 PM
WTF are you even listening to that you think you need to play down to 15hz ?

Its not that I need it to play down to 15hz, its that I want a flat response 30hz+ and still have the db gain from PR vs sealed.

hispls
11-09-2013, 08:42 PM
Its not that I need it to play down to 15hz, its that I want a flat response 30hz+ and still have the db gain from PR vs sealed.

Nevermind. The whole premise here is very silly. You're trying to make a box that plays flat in anechoic chamber then going to throw it into a car and expect it to play flat? And you have a PR which you can simply add or remove mass to test any tuning you like after the box is constructed.

If you're dead set on having flat in-car response, invest in a good HU with 30 band EQ or invest in a stand alone 30 band EQ to cut down any peaks that you don't like, test multiple tunings by adding and removing mass from your PR.

Bwap
11-09-2013, 08:58 PM
Also ported isn't an option because there isn't enough room for the port seeing as I would need to tuned low for a flat response.

One thing that gets me is that I have been running many different subs thru winisd, and I realize that there are two specific types of layouts on the winisd graph.

The 5200 has a similar response to many of the spl subs ported and PR. The 5200, HDC4.0, Zcon, Mayhem all have the same/similar layout making it seem like any box you make will create a very peaky response. However I see many people using these subs in boxes tuned 30+ and saying that the SQ is good. Makes me wonder if they would say the same thing if they heard it right beside the other common layout I seem to find using winisd, I assume its SQL, and these subs have very flat response no matter the tuning compared to the SPL subs listed. The "SQL" subs also appear to respond to boxes a lot better, rather than only getting above 0db for a few hz, they seem to float there throughout the full range of the sub hz, rolling off at tuning obviously.

Pretty much what im getting at is the 5200 is an SPL sub?... is it very musical or does it have to be reconed with more spiders and a stiffer surround before it has good SQ?

Bwap
11-09-2013, 09:04 PM
Nevermind. The whole premise here is very silly. You're trying to make a box that plays flat in anechoic chamber then going to throw it into a car and expect it to play flat? And you have a PR which you can simply add or remove mass to test any tuning you like after the box is constructed.

If you're dead set on having flat in-car response, invest in a good HU with 30 band EQ or invest in a stand alone 30 band EQ to cut down any peaks that you don't like, test multiple tunings by adding and removing mass from your PR.

I guess my main debate is if its worth getting a pr or if I should just run it sealed?...

Then again another debate is if its going to be peaky in the car anyway, maybe I can manage a higher tuning ported and make it still sound good?

Idk any recommendation?.. PR seemed like the safest choice but I don't want to spend the money on a PR to find out there was a better option all along.

hispls
11-09-2013, 11:46 PM
I guess my main debate is if its worth getting a pr or if I should just run it sealed?...

Then again another debate is if its going to be peaky in the car anyway, maybe I can manage a higher tuning ported and make it still sound good?

Idk any recommendation?.. PR seemed like the safest choice but I don't want to spend the money on a PR to find out there was a better option all along.
Port/PR is free output and low extension. If you want linear in-car response go with either and buy a good EQ source.

mlstrass
11-10-2013, 04:04 AM
I guess my main debate is if its worth getting a pr or if I should just run it sealed?...

Then again another debate is if its going to be peaky in the car anyway, maybe I can manage a higher tuning ported and make it still sound good?

Idk any recommendation?.. PR seemed like the safest choice but I don't want to spend the money on a PR to find out there was a better option all along.

Yes that can be done and a while back many SQ guys over on diyma were doing that. Just takes a decent EQ for the natural valleys/peaks you'll need to straighten out...