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

[Bwap]

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.

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.

Click to read more...

 

[bbeljefe]

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]

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 5,000+ posts]

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 //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/crazy.gif.c13912c32de98515d3142759a824dae7.gif

 

[bbeljefe]

Apparently all the subs have the exact same type of suspension //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/crazy.gif.c13912c32de98515d3142759a824dae7.gif

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]

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]

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

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]

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]

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]

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 5,000+ posts]

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]

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]

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]

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

 

[mlstrass 5,000+ posts]

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.