Which subs are you using for your HT system.
- Thread starter audioguy
- Start date
I am using the Genelec HTS6, a brilliant sub, to coin a phrase from Keith Yates, instead of just giving you pants flappage this sub gives you an internal massage. Such a clean sounding subwoofer, I am thrilled with it and cant imagine changing. No matter how hard you hit it, and no matter what material you throw at it, it never stutters. The only Sub I would think of changing the Genelec for would be the Procella P18.
The Wilson surround system is in my HT room. I'm not using any subs in the mastering room with the MM3's.
The Only Subwoofer
Meet the only true subwoofer that will outdo any other subwoofer on the planet. Eminent Technology TRW-17 Rotary Subwoofer with response from 25 hz to below 1 hz. It reproduces very low bass with awesome power, transient response that is awesome, and with very low distortion.
Meet the only true subwoofer that will outdo any other subwoofer on the planet. Eminent Technology TRW-17 Rotary Subwoofer with response from 25 hz to below 1 hz. It reproduces very low bass with awesome power, transient response that is awesome, and with very low distortion.
The claim that one can not hear below 20 hz is simply not true. I have owned the rotary subwoofer for over two years and I can hear down to 10 hz. One feels the pressure as well, but because the rotary sub can play these frequencies with ease (very low distortion; no added harmonics) it is definitely discernible. One of the main reasons the rotary sub produces low distortion is the ability to do so by low pressure. Conventional subwoofers are just the opposite as they produce bass with high pressure (moving back and forth madly). The rotary matches the impedance of the air and the result is low bass that sounds very real. One exception, is woofers that are horn loaded, once again matching the impedance of the air. Unfortunately to produce bass to well below 20 hz the horn enclosure must be extremely large. Check out the Burwen horn system, which is enormous in size, but the cutoff is 30 hz. Listening to the Mormon Tabernacle Choir with that large pipe organ (the largest pipe organs can hit 8 hz) with this rotary subwoofer is very realistic I have never had motion sickness or any other side effects using this rotary subwoofer. Transients on the rotary subwoofer are awesome. Low distortion, great head room, low pressure bass, transients response (no ringing) and the ability to go down to below 1 hz is an experience.
I use a single M&K MX150 THX sub, it's going on ten years old and still has the musical ablities as day one and the HT slam when needed, But I think its time to add that second sub
I guess the .01% won out. I went with a pair of these for my HT...
They are like Subwoofers for dummies. That is, if you are mating them with medium sized floor standers. They just seem to hop into the bottom octaves without much fiddling around. I don't think they'd work well with small monitors given their narrow frequency range but with speakers that are maybe down 3 or 6dB at 20Hz they're a relief for the weary.
They are like Subwoofers for dummies.
That is, if you are mating them with medium sized floor standers. They just seem to hop into the bottom octaves without much fiddling around. I don't think they'd work well with small monitors given their narrow frequency range but with speakers that are maybe down 3 or 6dB at 20Hz they're a relief for the weary.In the past month I have built two subs. They do not go into the single digits but then it is a small room. The first is a Shiva X-II in a prebuilt 3cf enclosure with a 15" TC Sounds passive radiator. It goes down to about 18Hz quite loudly and clean. The second is a Tempest X-II in a custom made 4cf box with a Exodus 18" passive radiator. It goes lower and louder than the first. I use both together. I don't really appreciate the need for 2Hz signals being reproduced in my room but its all about enjoyment of sound so to each their own. I am totally satisfied at this point with my subs and my other speakers, most of which are DIY actively crossed over by miniDSPs. Active crossovers are wonderful especially for DIY.
This is what the hobby is all about, and you have met your goal. I have been an audiophile for 50 years and enjoy sharing my ideas and goals with others. One of the rotary
subwoofers best attributes is transient response. This area is the most difficult for conventional woofers to perform without any ringing, overshoot, etc. I have a recording
of a very loud thunder clap that has enormous "transient energy" and the rotary subwoofer handles this with frightening realism. The rotary subwoofers transient response is
essentially perfect, and this has been corroborated by Peter Moncrieff of International Audio Review. If you are interested, please read the article in IAR, titled "The Only
Subwoofer" and Peter Moncrieff explains the operation, benefits, for the rotary subwoofer and uses science to back up all his claims.
subwoofers best attributes is transient response. This area is the most difficult for conventional woofers to perform without any ringing, overshoot, etc. I have a recording
of a very loud thunder clap that has enormous "transient energy" and the rotary subwoofer handles this with frightening realism. The rotary subwoofers transient response is
essentially perfect, and this has been corroborated by Peter Moncrieff of International Audio Review. If you are interested, please read the article in IAR, titled "The Only
Subwoofer" and Peter Moncrieff explains the operation, benefits, for the rotary subwoofer and uses science to back up all his claims.
Servodrive ContraBass
http://www.ultimateavmag.com/content/way-down-deep-part-two-servodrive-contrabass
I also have an older M&K 12" for the more quiet bass since the ContraBass doesn't get going until things get a little loud. I live near a gun range, so my neighbors are fairly noise tollerant. They don't seem to mind my beekeeping much either.
http://www.ultimateavmag.com/content/way-down-deep-part-two-servodrive-contrabass
I also have an older M&K 12" for the more quiet bass since the ContraBass doesn't get going until things get a little loud. I live near a gun range, so my neighbors are fairly noise tollerant. They don't seem to mind my beekeeping much either.
2 JL F113s. I've worked tirelessly to integrate them into both my HT and 2-ch playback chains. Getting real close....
Lee
Lee
Boy those bring back memories.
That was back when i worked at a NASA flight hardware contractor. My boss was a hifi buff and when i built the first servodrive woofer, he allowed me to start a small speaker division which grew to be the Servodrive subwoofer business.
While we flew experiments on sounding rockets and two shuttle flights, the business shrived and died after the Shuttle disaster (when the work stopped).
That speaker was an off shoot of one made for Cornell University. A woman named Joyce Poole wanted a subwoofer that went down to 14Hz as loud as possible and could survive bouncing around in the Jungle in an Isuzu trouper. Her land mark work on low frequency elephant communication (using that speaker) was published in the National Geographic (Aug 1989).
WE had a rep who was a theater organ fan and convinced me that a sub with a low cutoff and high output would be popular with the organ market.
I had a pair in a small front room back in the day in my stereo.
I had a friend over from work (who assembled the Contra's) and played a Star wars laser disk.
This was before "home theater" and even at the time of that review, they, while the smallest subwoofer i had designed, were thought to be much too large for the home.
Anyway, when the flying pod hit the tree, it made the house shake to the extent my friend (having returned from Nam) flew out of the room in full panic..
That has been my reference for "enough", if you can strike genuine "jump out of your seat fear" with your stereo, your close haha.
Best,
Tom Danley
http://www.danleysoundlabs.com/
Hello Mr Danley,
Love your work! The ContraBass is awesome. Powerful and deep, but musical and accurate. I'd even describe it as unobtrusive most of the time, but then the action happens and I'm glad my house got retrofitted for seismic hazards because it is one. I love telling friends to peak behind the TV and watch their eyes get big when they see it.
Had to look up sounding rocket, but I don't see anything about subwoofers. How were they used? Propulsion?
Love your work! The ContraBass is awesome. Powerful and deep, but musical and accurate. I'd even describe it as unobtrusive most of the time, but then the action happens and I'm glad my house got retrofitted for seismic hazards because it is one. I love telling friends to peak behind the TV and watch their eyes get big when they see it.
Had to look up sounding rocket, but I don't see anything about subwoofers. How were they used? Propulsion?
Hi Clayton
Well not exactly, I worked with very intense high frequency sound, over 160 dB, up to about 175dB used for acoustic levitation. My interest in audio happened to influence what I did. I will paste a short history of that time.
Also, the sounding rocket we flew on was one of the larger Black-Brandt boosters under a re-purposed Nike motor. The rocket’s were about 90 feet tall and about 18 inches in diameter.
In the late 70’s I was hired by a small company called Intersonics to do electronic and acoustic work.
They were an R&D company that built flight hardware for NASA, a part of the area called Containerless Processing. The idea was that one could “levitate” samples of material in the center of a very hot furnace, using high intensity sound with the idea that without a container, there would be no chance for cross contamination which is a problem at >1500 deg C.
During my time there (17 years) we designed, built and flew payloads on Sounding rockets, the KC-135 (the Zero G, “vomit comet” airplane) and two shuttle flights (STS 51A, STS7) .
My Job was to develop the control and drive electronics and then to develop a new class of sound sources (which turned out to be about 100X more powerful than the St. Clair sources they had been using, see patent # 4,757,227, 4,841,495, 5,036,944 if interested)
Also, if one has a copy of the movie “Mystery of the Sphinx” with Charlton Heston, I am in it briefly demonstrating acoustic levitation (and no I don’t think it was used to build the Pyramids).
My hobby and main free time interest had been speakers, electronics and sound, particularly low frequencies (an after effect of my Grandfather letting me go into the pipe loft for the organ at church while the organist was playing at age 9).
I had tried my hand at speaker building several times previously, right out of H.S. with a friend from drafting class, T.C. Furlong at his company Steamer Sound. Later I did side work building boxes and made one of DB sounds first systems ( for Harry Witz, also a local guy) and then Hifi speakers but never made much of a living at it, hence the need for a “normal” type job as an electronic tech and then finally at Intersonics.
: .
I found that the President (an old English acoustician named Roy Whymark, from Mullard Labs) was a hifi buff and we soon had a common ground to speak on. After I bypassed the annoying protection circuits on his Quad speakers we had a good relationship. I learned a lot from both him and the VP, a physicst, I would wave my arms and draw pictures and they would tell me in scientific terms what I was describing.
On the flight home from one of our countless trips to MSFC Huntsville, I showed the physicist I was traveling with, a motor I found in a surplus catalogue (which I recognized from a local junk store called Harrison Supply) . I asked if the motor might be fast enough to make sound? maybe was the answer.
After returning home I went and bought the motor (2) for $12 ea.
On the third try, I had a speaker I felt was demonstrable (and would now be embarrassingly crude as I had no loudspeaker parts and hand built all of it) and brought it in to show Roy and all at work..
He was sufficiently impressed to tell me that I could pursue it as long as it didn’t cost any money and didn’t interfere with my real other work. He also said if it were ever successful, that I could spin the company off (like he had Intersonics from Interand). From that came patent# 4.564,727 and its root idea 4,531,025 if interested
Years of difficult boot strapping went by and both the NASA and speaker part of the company grew.
T.C Furlong was our first speaker salesman (a hat I wore until then)….until his band had a hit record (The Curly Shuffle, a 3 stooges tribute) took him away to tour and fame.
We continued a slow steady growth taking on scientific acoustic tasks that the other speaker company’s began to refer our way .
Some years later, we were all in the book-keepers office watching the launch when the Shuttle blew up, our hearts sank both at the thought of the astronauts, several we had met, and also in the not to distant background, for the cloud over our NASA future building space station hardware..
Some short time later, the President of Intersonics , passed away and with him went his promise that I could spin off the speaker division. This was a double bummer to be sure.
The VP, a pretty nice guy and physicist was now in charge, he did not share the interest in speakers as much as Roy, more importantly, to counter act the NASA cutbacks after Challenger, he hired a bunch more scientists and branched the company into materials sciences. At this point I was also involved with electromagnetic levitation, in my area using high frequency radio waves so that “non-conductors” like glass and ceramics could be levitated.
While running the speaker division, I was Principal investigator on one EML project where I developed a system which levitated and heated separately while being much more stable than the old way (patent # 5,150,272)
One problem was that some of the folks in charge didn’t really want to be in the speaker business, many of the Science staff thought it was “beneath them” to do that as well as flight hardware.
As I was a key person and directed a number of peoples work, they did not want to make me too unhappy so the speaker division continued on under conditions that our salesman described as the “sales suppression effort” enacting many “rules” that made life more difficult, kind of like a Bonsai company.
I suppose we didn’t (the speaker side) really fit in all the time, on one occasion a band called Mannowar was in for a demo. We made a big pile of subs and rattled their eyeballs suitably.
At the same time a bunch of suits from NASA HQ were in and it was a coincidence that they were walking one way down a narrow hall when the Manowar contingent came walking the other. I thought it was pretty funny how the suits plastered against the wall to let the band folks by but apparently some of the science staff was not pleased with this interaction.
The speaker side started to take off, we were finally profitable even by the book keepers accounting.
I guess that was why the speaker division absorbed ALL of the first two rounds of cutbacks needed because of the shrinking NASA work, first to go was the small marketing budget we fought so hard to get.
When JPL (our only and much less successful competitor in this area) took over the job at NASA of not only building hardware but also deciding what was “worth doing” AND who should do it (them or us), it was an ominous sign. It is telling too that after the dump trucks of money poured into JPL, they never reached the temperatures we routinely ran at and essentially killed off this area as it is “too hard”..
Who would know that the “level playing fields” the NASA director in Washington promised would soon be vertical and our funding would be cut from 6 mil in R&D per year to zero within a year. Thus, the end of Intersonics inc.
I went back into loudspeakers full time and eventually ended at Danley sound Labs, a part of the levitation business has continued under Paul’s direction. Last month I went to see the latest configuration, a ground based 3 axis levitation system that can process up to about 2800 degrees Centigrade on earth. Here is a pea sized sample (washing out the camera) melted at 2500 degrees in that system.
Best,
Tom Danley
Danley Sound Labs
Well not exactly, I worked with very intense high frequency sound, over 160 dB, up to about 175dB used for acoustic levitation. My interest in audio happened to influence what I did. I will paste a short history of that time.
Also, the sounding rocket we flew on was one of the larger Black-Brandt boosters under a re-purposed Nike motor. The rocket’s were about 90 feet tall and about 18 inches in diameter.
In the late 70’s I was hired by a small company called Intersonics to do electronic and acoustic work.
They were an R&D company that built flight hardware for NASA, a part of the area called Containerless Processing. The idea was that one could “levitate” samples of material in the center of a very hot furnace, using high intensity sound with the idea that without a container, there would be no chance for cross contamination which is a problem at >1500 deg C.
During my time there (17 years) we designed, built and flew payloads on Sounding rockets, the KC-135 (the Zero G, “vomit comet” airplane) and two shuttle flights (STS 51A, STS7) .
My Job was to develop the control and drive electronics and then to develop a new class of sound sources (which turned out to be about 100X more powerful than the St. Clair sources they had been using, see patent # 4,757,227, 4,841,495, 5,036,944 if interested)
Also, if one has a copy of the movie “Mystery of the Sphinx” with Charlton Heston, I am in it briefly demonstrating acoustic levitation (and no I don’t think it was used to build the Pyramids).
My hobby and main free time interest had been speakers, electronics and sound, particularly low frequencies (an after effect of my Grandfather letting me go into the pipe loft for the organ at church while the organist was playing at age 9).
I had tried my hand at speaker building several times previously, right out of H.S. with a friend from drafting class, T.C. Furlong at his company Steamer Sound. Later I did side work building boxes and made one of DB sounds first systems ( for Harry Witz, also a local guy) and then Hifi speakers but never made much of a living at it, hence the need for a “normal” type job as an electronic tech and then finally at Intersonics.
: .
I found that the President (an old English acoustician named Roy Whymark, from Mullard Labs) was a hifi buff and we soon had a common ground to speak on. After I bypassed the annoying protection circuits on his Quad speakers we had a good relationship. I learned a lot from both him and the VP, a physicst, I would wave my arms and draw pictures and they would tell me in scientific terms what I was describing.
On the flight home from one of our countless trips to MSFC Huntsville, I showed the physicist I was traveling with, a motor I found in a surplus catalogue (which I recognized from a local junk store called Harrison Supply) . I asked if the motor might be fast enough to make sound? maybe was the answer.
After returning home I went and bought the motor (2) for $12 ea.
On the third try, I had a speaker I felt was demonstrable (and would now be embarrassingly crude as I had no loudspeaker parts and hand built all of it) and brought it in to show Roy and all at work..
He was sufficiently impressed to tell me that I could pursue it as long as it didn’t cost any money and didn’t interfere with my real other work. He also said if it were ever successful, that I could spin the company off (like he had Intersonics from Interand). From that came patent# 4.564,727 and its root idea 4,531,025 if interested
Years of difficult boot strapping went by and both the NASA and speaker part of the company grew.
T.C Furlong was our first speaker salesman (a hat I wore until then)….until his band had a hit record (The Curly Shuffle, a 3 stooges tribute) took him away to tour and fame.
We continued a slow steady growth taking on scientific acoustic tasks that the other speaker company’s began to refer our way .
Some years later, we were all in the book-keepers office watching the launch when the Shuttle blew up, our hearts sank both at the thought of the astronauts, several we had met, and also in the not to distant background, for the cloud over our NASA future building space station hardware..
Some short time later, the President of Intersonics , passed away and with him went his promise that I could spin off the speaker division. This was a double bummer to be sure.
The VP, a pretty nice guy and physicist was now in charge, he did not share the interest in speakers as much as Roy, more importantly, to counter act the NASA cutbacks after Challenger, he hired a bunch more scientists and branched the company into materials sciences. At this point I was also involved with electromagnetic levitation, in my area using high frequency radio waves so that “non-conductors” like glass and ceramics could be levitated.
While running the speaker division, I was Principal investigator on one EML project where I developed a system which levitated and heated separately while being much more stable than the old way (patent # 5,150,272)
One problem was that some of the folks in charge didn’t really want to be in the speaker business, many of the Science staff thought it was “beneath them” to do that as well as flight hardware.
As I was a key person and directed a number of peoples work, they did not want to make me too unhappy so the speaker division continued on under conditions that our salesman described as the “sales suppression effort” enacting many “rules” that made life more difficult, kind of like a Bonsai company.
I suppose we didn’t (the speaker side) really fit in all the time, on one occasion a band called Mannowar was in for a demo. We made a big pile of subs and rattled their eyeballs suitably.
At the same time a bunch of suits from NASA HQ were in and it was a coincidence that they were walking one way down a narrow hall when the Manowar contingent came walking the other. I thought it was pretty funny how the suits plastered against the wall to let the band folks by but apparently some of the science staff was not pleased with this interaction.
The speaker side started to take off, we were finally profitable even by the book keepers accounting.
I guess that was why the speaker division absorbed ALL of the first two rounds of cutbacks needed because of the shrinking NASA work, first to go was the small marketing budget we fought so hard to get.
When JPL (our only and much less successful competitor in this area) took over the job at NASA of not only building hardware but also deciding what was “worth doing” AND who should do it (them or us), it was an ominous sign. It is telling too that after the dump trucks of money poured into JPL, they never reached the temperatures we routinely ran at and essentially killed off this area as it is “too hard”..
Who would know that the “level playing fields” the NASA director in Washington promised would soon be vertical and our funding would be cut from 6 mil in R&D per year to zero within a year. Thus, the end of Intersonics inc.
I went back into loudspeakers full time and eventually ended at Danley sound Labs, a part of the levitation business has continued under Paul’s direction. Last month I went to see the latest configuration, a ground based 3 axis levitation system that can process up to about 2800 degrees Centigrade on earth. Here is a pea sized sample (washing out the camera) melted at 2500 degrees in that system.
Best,
Tom Danley
Danley Sound Labs
Attachments
-
IMG_1187..jpg
That's an amazing story. I grew up in a Boeing family, so I've heard all to many stories like yours regarding promising research that fell to funding cuts. I'm glad to see that your technology was merely delayed in application and not entirely abandoned like so many others. So what exactly is this used for?
I've seen a video about your Matterhorn project, that's certainly exciting! I wondered when I saw it if my neighbors would notice one parked in my driveway with the buisiness end set at the opening to the garage as my theater is in the adjacent room. I quickly discarded the idea as it could damage the structure of my house and marriage. I'm curious about what projects you might be working on these days, but perhaps that's covered in another thread?
I've seen a video about your Matterhorn project, that's certainly exciting! I wondered when I saw it if my neighbors would notice one parked in my driveway with the buisiness end set at the opening to the garage as my theater is in the adjacent room. I quickly discarded the idea as it could damage the structure of my house and marriage. I'm curious about what projects you might be working on these days, but perhaps that's covered in another thread?
Last edited:
I am running 2 Chase Home Theater (CHT) 18.2's (2 sealed 18 inch subs in one box powered by a 1000 watt Dayton amp w tuning capabilities) up front and behind I am running a CHT.T (2 separate 18 inch subs powered by one amp).
This set up will make my walls flex on movies like Cloverfield.
This set up will make my walls flex on movies like Cloverfield.
Currently, due to temporary living situations, the current mutlisub system:
1) a DIY sub with a ~40L cabinet holding Peerless XLS12 (830500), Peerless XLS12-PR tuned to 17Hz, and a Dayton 240W plate amp, placed in a front corner. (I built this sub maybe 7 years ago.) This sub is basically a quarter of the big Genelec sub. (Same driver, similar tuning but from a PR rather than a port, similar power.)
2) Two KEF HTB2 flying saucers, one close to the front on the opposite side wall from the big sub, and one on the same sidewall as the big sub, but much further down. These little saucers actually aren't bad at all, for tiny "designer" subs tuned to ~40Hz with no level or crossover controls and relatively modest power by modern standards. The drivers are beefy, use shorting rings, and the sub/amp combination are clean to over 200Hz.
Placement/calibration using Dr. Geddes methods. Levels/delay/EQ via miniDSP with their Advanced 4-Way Plugin.
Here's a 5-point spatially-averaged measurement, taken using a Velodyne SMS-1 with their MIC-5 spatial averaging kit. (SMS-1 not in the output chain, used only for measurements.)
Once I finish the boxes, hopefully next week, I'm going to upgrade this system to the following: Aurasound NS12-794-4A in a 65L closed box hidden in a chest/kitten-perch where the XLS12 currently sits, push-pull Peerless XLS-12's in a ~20L closed box placed in a bookshelf near where one of the HTB2's currently sits, and an Aurasound NS10-794-4A in a 15L closed box where the third HTB2 currently sits. The NS12 will be powered by a Dayton SA-1000, and the other two subs will be powered by NHT A1 monoblocs. The miniDSP will still be in use.
Why change, given the measured result obtained above, and honestly sound quality exactly what one would expect from that response profile? First, the cabinets will be fit to this room, so no subwoofers will be visible. Second, closed-box subs can pressurize the room below their nominal cutoff, unlike vented or passive radiator subs. Lastly, I have the parts sitting around, so I may as well use them, right?
Once I find a condo/townhome I like that's walkable to my office, and doesn't have leaky pipes above it, the reference system will come out of storage:
1x M-Design Eleganza Godfather (Aurasound NS15-992-4A and unbranded variant of the Dayton 1kW Class G plate amp in a gigantic 250-odd pount piano-black-and-cherry pie wedge)
2x M-Design Eleganza Bellas (Aurasound NS12-794-4A and a 500W Class G plate amp in an elegantly-shaped cabinet), ports plugged
DIY Aurasound NS10-794-4A in 15L closed box, powered by an NHT A1 monobloc (300W/4?), mounted on a bookshelf above the room centerline.
Also, the Tannoy System 12 DMT II-based mains (new cabinets, closed boxes with giant roundovers for low diffraction) will be run full-range, so they will contribute to ULF, too. (In my old room, they measured -3dB at 40Hz by themselves, or about an octave higher than their modeled anechoic performance. I think that was a fluke of that room, honestly.)
1) a DIY sub with a ~40L cabinet holding Peerless XLS12 (830500), Peerless XLS12-PR tuned to 17Hz, and a Dayton 240W plate amp, placed in a front corner. (I built this sub maybe 7 years ago.) This sub is basically a quarter of the big Genelec sub. (Same driver, similar tuning but from a PR rather than a port, similar power.)
2) Two KEF HTB2 flying saucers, one close to the front on the opposite side wall from the big sub, and one on the same sidewall as the big sub, but much further down. These little saucers actually aren't bad at all, for tiny "designer" subs tuned to ~40Hz with no level or crossover controls and relatively modest power by modern standards. The drivers are beefy, use shorting rings, and the sub/amp combination are clean to over 200Hz.
Placement/calibration using Dr. Geddes methods. Levels/delay/EQ via miniDSP with their Advanced 4-Way Plugin.
Here's a 5-point spatially-averaged measurement, taken using a Velodyne SMS-1 with their MIC-5 spatial averaging kit. (SMS-1 not in the output chain, used only for measurements.)
Once I finish the boxes, hopefully next week, I'm going to upgrade this system to the following: Aurasound NS12-794-4A in a 65L closed box hidden in a chest/kitten-perch where the XLS12 currently sits, push-pull Peerless XLS-12's in a ~20L closed box placed in a bookshelf near where one of the HTB2's currently sits, and an Aurasound NS10-794-4A in a 15L closed box where the third HTB2 currently sits. The NS12 will be powered by a Dayton SA-1000, and the other two subs will be powered by NHT A1 monoblocs. The miniDSP will still be in use.
Why change, given the measured result obtained above, and honestly sound quality exactly what one would expect from that response profile? First, the cabinets will be fit to this room, so no subwoofers will be visible. Second, closed-box subs can pressurize the room below their nominal cutoff, unlike vented or passive radiator subs. Lastly, I have the parts sitting around, so I may as well use them, right?
Once I find a condo/townhome I like that's walkable to my office, and doesn't have leaky pipes above it, the reference system will come out of storage:
1x M-Design Eleganza Godfather (Aurasound NS15-992-4A and unbranded variant of the Dayton 1kW Class G plate amp in a gigantic 250-odd pount piano-black-and-cherry pie wedge)
2x M-Design Eleganza Bellas (Aurasound NS12-794-4A and a 500W Class G plate amp in an elegantly-shaped cabinet), ports plugged
DIY Aurasound NS10-794-4A in 15L closed box, powered by an NHT A1 monobloc (300W/4?), mounted on a bookshelf above the room centerline.
Also, the Tannoy System 12 DMT II-based mains (new cabinets, closed boxes with giant roundovers for low diffraction) will be run full-range, so they will contribute to ULF, too. (In my old room, they measured -3dB at 40Hz by themselves, or about an octave higher than their modeled anechoic performance. I think that was a fluke of that room, honestly.)
Members online
- HORTON
- wisnon
- morricab
- matthias
- iaxel
- andromedaaudio
- MusicFellow
- jaxdr
- Zarir
- dminches
- EiK
- pjwd
- Wjhen
- Dvuc
- hopkins
- bonzo75
- digitaldevil
- Laoman
- Hyperion
- Massimo66
- Argonaut
- admin1959
- rpk
- BCRich1960
- hols
- Geoffkait
- nkjtbushwood
- magiccow
- Michael S.
- Strad
- joeling
- orrman
- lok
- filidan
- the sound of Tao
- haiwenchen
- Nsxturbo
- jadis
- bouncing_noobs
- GroovySauce
- Audio Quack
- buzzlulu
- an.vamv
- Armsan
- Rexp
- Maril555
- Flamenko
- JGlacken
- kabrio69
- jazzdude99
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |