Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Any good recent 10" Dayton HF (RSS265HF) designs posted or older proven designs?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Any good recent 10" Dayton HF (RSS265HF) designs posted or older proven designs?

    I was looking into and strongly considering Paul Carmody's Pony Sub with the Dayton 8" RSS210HF but after looking at the specs of both and considering I will be using it in a somewhat larger open concept room and will be 90% HT/TV watching I was thinking the benefits of the 10" would outweigh the size and cost increase (especially since they are on sale right now). What do you all think? I could not find many 10" RSS265HF designs when doing a search for the model number. I will not be listening at reference levels on this system so maximum output is not required.

  • #2
    I did a T-line and they turned out spectacular. I will try and see what data I have on them. Off the top of my head the internal volume was about 55 litres and line length was about 7 to 7.5 feet.

    Comment


    • #3
      i am interested as well

      looking to do a dual passive radiator build of about 2cu ft with the RSS265HF.

      i can't get WINISD to cooperate though.

      Comment


      • #4
        Here's the one I have in my car. The alignment was built without consideration of cabin gain, and it's good down to 30Hz F3.

        http://woggmusic.com/the-art-of-do-i...peaker-design/

        There's a lot of extra fluff in there, wrote that as a woofer design primer. I would go a little larger with the box for HT use though, get it into the 20's. I've borrowed that box for the house, bi-amped it to add some bottom to my studio monitors and I can attest it does well for music.
        Electronics engineer, woofer enthusiast, and musician.
        Wogg Music
        Published projects: PPA100 Bass Guitar Amp, ISO El-Cheapo Sub, Indy 8 2.1 powered sub, MicroSat, SuperNova Minimus

        Comment


        • #5
          I would post my build, but the specs have changed since then. I have been modeling the newer version. You should still expect to use a 2 cu.ft. ported box tuned to the low twenties. Use the Denovo knock down box and an spa250 or 500 and you can get it down into the high teens.
          -Bob
          -Bob

          The PEDS 2.1 mini system
          My A7 Project - another small desktop speaker
          The B3 Hybrid Dipole - thread incomplete and outdated

          Comment


          • #6
            For a pair of 10" RS PRs in 2cf, use either 2 or 3 "disks" per PR (150g or 225g).
            225g tunes the box to 24, w/a 26Hz F3, F10 of 20.
            Takes 230w RMS down to 21Hz, w/PRs @ +/-18mm @ 20Hz.

            Comment


            • #7
              Here is part of a design thread I copied to my files from a long time ago. the thread is a discussion about a design by Roman Bednarek. He didn't publish the design on his website but i built it for my in-laws and it's a terrific small sub good for music and HT.

              02-23-2009, 06:08 PM
              I really need to add this design to my project page (I've built one and it sounds great, have yet to push it beyond its capabilities despite loud movie levels that shake the room)...

              PE 1 cuft sub enclosure (14" cube, DIY if you want) + Dayton RSS265HF 10" sub driver + PE SA240W plate amp (w/6dB bass boost @ 30 Hz). Performance shown below...

              Go with Roman's recommendation. He knows and has earned respect with his terrific designs and knowledgeable advice. Just make sure you brace the cabinet. If you need some ideas, the guys here have pix they can show you on how they did their internal bracing. That's where the commercial subs fail. Even the expensive ones I've been inside of have no bracing at all. If you can, double the thickness of your front baffle for 1.5". Those RS subs are substantial and heavy. AFA outperforming the BIC...no contest. The RS driver with a well-built box will knock the wee outta that thing and be more musical. I have friends who've had BIC, Velodyne, Infinity, Sony, Polk, and many other brands. The RS 12" sub with the 500 watt HPSA amp I made for my nephew is way beyond any of those retail offerings. My sister had an Advent that she replaced with the pre-built Dayton SUB-100. No comparison. She was actually mad and sent Advent an e-mail expessing her disappointment (that's my sister!). I'm sure you'll be very happy.

              01-26-2009, 06:47 PM

              For ported, wide range speaker enclosures I strongly suggest using convoluted foam or some equivalent reflection absorbing material on the walls because it is very effective at reducing internal midrange reflections within the enclosure.

              I've experimented with adding stuffing to ported enclosures and I've found that it tends to reduce the amount of sound coming from the port. Stuffing can still be used to fine tune the sound if you find a ported speaker to be too strong in the lower bass but ever since I performed this experiment (along with several measurements and configurations to prove this phenomenon) I've tried not to use stuffing in ported two-way speaker designs. I understand that placing stuffing directly behind the midbass driver can help reduce backwave reflections but only at the cost of lower port output in most cases. However, perhaps the use of stuffing at the bottom of a tower speaker (not anywhere in between the port and the driver) may be beneficial at reducing internal standing waves while having a minimal effect on the port output.




              Now regarding subwoofer design principles, I would have to agree with most of what has been said here but I hold the opinion that the "law of diminishing returns" comes into play with regards to making the best subwoofer enclosure. I've never seen any of these techniques analyzed from a subjective point of view and one thing to keep in mind is that our ears probably aren't as sensitive at picking up issues in the bass region (aside from harmonic distortion that can add false detail to bass). Remember that this thread started with "lunchmoney" asking what he should do with the 1 cubic ft sealed cabinet the PE sells that he plans to use with the Dayton RSS265HF driver and SA240 plate amp w/bass boost at 30 Hz. I built this exact combination over a year ago and only added stuffing and I couldn't be happier with the sound. I suspect that if I were to do anything to improve the performance that it would start with adding additional bracing to the cabinet (but the walls are fairly short in dimension so the stock cabinet is already fairly solid). The next thing would be to add heavy dampening material to the walls to make them less resonant but too much of this may reduce the internal volume too much. These things "might" make an improvement in performance (they certainly will from a scientific standpoint but I'm not sure how much of a subjective difference could be detected in a blind test and as far as I'm concerned that is what really matters).
              __________________
              Quote:
              Originally Posted by lunchmoney
              I know that stuffing is often used in a sealed enclosure in order to increase it’s “apparent” volume…

              But what if the volume of the sealed enclosure is already right on the money? Do you stuff it anyways? Why? What other advantages does stuffing provide, other than increasing apparent volume?

              Can you hurt performance by stuffing an already ideal volume, thereby making its apparent volume too large?

              Do you intentionally make the enclosure slightly too small in anticipation of the stuffing?

              I’m making a sub, a Dayton Ref 10 in a sealed PE 1 cu ft sealed enclosure, and according to Winisd the volume is just about perfect… should I stuff it anyways?

              Thanks
              In the case of the sealed box subwoofer, I would say that stuffing it (or at least partially filling it, or lining it with 3" fiberglass) would be not only serve as damping of internal waves and upper frequency absorption, but also, serves another purpose.....heat absorption.....as the bass unit plays at louder volumes, the compression of the air inside the enclosure is going to make a little heat....this is turn is going to effect voice coil cooling to some degree. Heat buildup in the voice coil could alter it's operating parameters.
              The LDC (Loudspeaker Design Cookbook) discusses this, and also suggests Fiberglass stuffing or wool as the best means of absorbing/dissipating this potention heat.

              John

              Quote:
              Originally Posted by lunchmoney
              Thanks Dennis!

              If I set the Qa to 27 I get a Qtc of .707 (that's ideal, right?)

              So if Qa of 10 means 1 lb of stuffing (it's a one cubic foot enclosure), and Qa of 100 means no stuffing, then a Qa of 27 would mean .81 lb of stuffing.

              I'll start there, and then maybe experiment with more/less and see how it sounds. Thanks.
              I think that you're going a bit too far by trying to optimize your sub to the nth degree. Regarding the Qtc, I think the general consensus for a sub is that 0.707 or lower is good and that there isn't any specific ideal configuration because it all depends on the goals of the design. The only reason why I don't like higher Q designs is that they often have a peak in their response and the f3 isn't as low but some people choose to use a configuration like that to keep the enclosure small and have an emphasis in the bass to some degree where the peak is.

              You're on the right track with experimenting with stuffing but based on my experience if you hear any difference between 0.81 lbs of stuffing and 1 lb of stuffing the difference is most likely in your head.
              __________________

              So the sub is done...

              I ended up adding a couple of braces, to tie the top and bottom walls to the horizontal brace (creating a cross shape), and used about 80% of a 1 lb bag of polyester stuffing ($3 at a fabric store).

              I didn’t bother lining the walls, and to be honest I’m glad I didn’t… it would have been more money and more effort to do so, and I can’t identify anything wrong with how it sounds.

              Anyways, it sounds amazing. I’ve never had a sub that produces such well-defined bass. I listen to lots of music with some very deep bass, and this thing does it effortlessly.

              I’ve got it crossed with the SR71’s at about 90 hz (sub low passed, SR71’s high passed), and it seems to blend very well. I couldn’t be happier.

              Thanks for everyone's input!
              __________________


              Comment


              • #8
                Click image for larger version

Name:	10 inch sub.png
Views:	96
Size:	35.2 KB
ID:	1431486
                Attached Files

                Comment


                • #9
                  Also there is a web page by John Conover that goes into great detail with the various design options for the HF. I'm not sure the specs have changed that much but probably should be checked.

                  http://www.johncon.com/john/subwoofers/

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    cool

                    ran it through WINISD and seems right

                    2.0cu ft with 2-10" passive radiators should get me where i want to be

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X