Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Peerless by Tymphany STW-350F-188PR01-04 in a Passive Radiator Set-up

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

  • Peerless by Tymphany STW-350F-188PR01-04 in a Passive Radiator Set-up

    Hello Community!

    I am building a studio in my house and would like to build a very nice studio sub-woofer. The reason for wanting to build vs. buy really boils down to two (2) reasons:
    1. It is fun to build your own enclosures and when they turn out great, there is no better satisfaction to me.
    2. Studio sub-woofers are so overpriced for what you get and the specs they offer

    I was looking at Adam, Dynaudio, Focal, etc. I used to have a Presonus Temblor T10, but it never really sounded accurate to me.

    My question refers to the driver in the title: Peerless by Tymphany STW-350F-188PR01-04

    My goal is to design a PR setup, but my experience is non-existent here. I have only built bass-reflex, and sealed. While using BassBox software I was able to plug in one (1) Dayton 18" PR and get a nice curve, but per the double Vd rule, I was not there. From here I decided to use two (2) 15" PRs, but per the specs listed on the website, everything was showing up read on the TS parameters and my curve looked like garbage. Any insight here and what am I doing wrong. Last bit of info was the box volume was somewhere between 2.2 ft^3 and 3.0 ft^3.
    "I don't know everything and do not claim to. I continue to learn and that is what makes me human."

  • #2
    Since 2 x 15" have more surface area than 1 x 18", you'll need more mass on the 15"s to get the same curve. What did you input for PR mass in each scenario?
    _____________________________
    Tall Boys
    NRNP Computer Sub
    The Boxers
    The Hurricanes
    The Baronettes
    Conneccentric
    UX3

    Comment


    • #3
      Is there some reason for a passive radiator? It looks pretty sweet in a sealed enclosure around the 2.5ft³ you suggested. What size box are you comfortable with?

      It is listed as 11mm xmax but the lit says more like 37mm+ so I pretty much ignored xmax in the sims. Literature also says not to use it vented as it will be noisy and I was not able to get a decent response w/out some wicked port resonances. A slot port may be an option. Chris Roemer

      STIchris722 Didn't spend much time on this so might want to verify it yourself.

      2.5ft³ sealed

      Click image for larger version

Name:	2.5cuft sealed.JPG
Views:	226
Size:	130.1 KB
ID:	1429804

      2.5ft³ w/2 passive dayton 15" w/925g.

      Click image for larger version

Name:	2.5passiverad.JPG
Views:	197
Size:	171.1 KB
ID:	1429805


      http://techtalk.parts-express.com/fo...khanspires-but
      http://techtalk.parts-express.com/fo...pico-neo-build
      http://techtalk.parts-express.com/fo...ensation-build

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by DanP View Post
        Since 2 x 15" have more surface area than 1 x 18", you'll need more mass on the 15"s to get the same curve. What did you input for PR mass in each scenario?
        I used 925g on each of the 15" PR's. For some reason my curve in Bassbox looked like garbage and every parameter in the TS input section was flagged as red whereas with the 18" single at full mass, everything was green and the curve almost resembled a ported enclosure with a steep curve on the left side.

        Kornbread In all my modeling it appears that sealed enclosures roll of very slowly on the lower frequency spectrum. Forgive my lack of knowledge here, but I always thought that the steeper the dropoff the more linear/flat the response of the sub-woofer would be. In looking at the driver sealed (approx 2.2 ft^3), the lower spectrum around 30Hz if I recall correctly was @ -6dB. Wouldn't that produce a noticeable change in volume if you were listening to a synth or bass guitar playing? I honestly don't know so any help is much appreciated. Oh and this long winded explanation is why I was driven to choose PR's.
        "I don't know everything and do not claim to. I continue to learn and that is what makes me human."

        Comment


        • #5
          Generally speaking, sealed enclosures tend to roll off slower than ported or pr's. To my understanding, if both a ported, pr, and sealed enclosure have the same flat response down to their knee (apples to apples), the sealed will sound like it has more bass ... and I guess it does. Compare the slopes below the knee. @2.5ft³, Unibox shows F³@33hz and F³@~26hz. After the knee, the pr drops like a rock trying to swim.
          From PE's website:
          Note: Due to the incredible amount of venting on this driver, when used outside of an enclosure, the air turbulance (sp) generated will create audible noise. Because of this, we recommend the use of a sealed enclosure.
          Unibox also suggests sealed.
          The room and placement in that room will play a very large role in response.
          http://techtalk.parts-express.com/fo...khanspires-but
          http://techtalk.parts-express.com/fo...pico-neo-build
          http://techtalk.parts-express.com/fo...ensation-build

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Kornbread View Post
            Generally speaking, sealed enclosures tend to roll off slower than ported or pr's. To my understanding, if both a ported, pr, and sealed enclosure have the same flat response down to their knee (apples to apples), the sealed will sound like it has more bass ... and I guess it does. Compare the slopes below the knee. @2.5ft³, Unibox shows F³@33hz and F³@~26hz. After the knee, the pr drops like a rock trying to swim.
            When you say it like that it makes more sense to me. With that said, I will probably just go with a sealed plan. Can I use DSP to get that roll-off a little flatter on the sealed design (within reason)?

            "I don't know everything and do not claim to. I continue to learn and that is what makes me human."

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by STIchris722 View Post

              I used 925g on each of the 15" PR's. For some reason my curve in Bassbox looked like garbage and every parameter in the TS input section was flagged as red whereas with the 18" single at full mass, everything was green and the curve almost resembled a ported enclosure with a steep curve on the left side.

              Kornbread In all my modeling it appears that sealed enclosures roll of very slowly on the lower frequency spectrum. Forgive my lack of knowledge here, but I always thought that the steeper the dropoff the more linear/flat the response of the sub-woofer would be. In looking at the driver sealed (approx 2.2 ft^3), the lower spectrum around 30Hz if I recall correctly was @ -6dB. Wouldn't that produce a noticeable change in volume if you were listening to a synth or bass guitar playing? I honestly don't know so any help is much appreciated. Oh and this long winded explanation is why I was driven to choose PR's.
              I'm guessing the red could mean that the parameters don't reconcile with themselves, which could be an issue, but there's no reason the 2 x 15" couldn't model identically to the 18" given 1) the Qms of the PRs are similar and 2) you could get enough weight on the 15"s, which will require more mass to tune to the same frequency. Post up some graphs and parameters and I'm sure we can figure it out.
              _____________________________
              Tall Boys
              NRNP Computer Sub
              The Boxers
              The Hurricanes
              The Baronettes
              Conneccentric
              UX3

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by STIchris722 View Post

                When you say it like that it makes more sense to me. With that said, I will probably just go with a sealed plan. Can I use DSP to get that roll-off a little flatter on the sealed design (within reason)?
                The stw can handle a boatload of power and has more stroke than a orn star. I'd imagine you could flatten it out quite a bit. The room will be a major player in .frd.

                These guys know their stuff and if they say a pr will work ... it will.
                http://techtalk.parts-express.com/fo...khanspires-but
                http://techtalk.parts-express.com/fo...pico-neo-build
                http://techtalk.parts-express.com/fo...ensation-build

                Comment


                • #9
                  I tuned a single 15" RS-PR w/400g in 3.0cf for an Fb and an F3 of 23Hz.
                  It's got a bit more area than the sub, and triple the stroke (going off the 10mm Xmax). Looks great w/a 500w or 1000w plate amp.
                  Definitely over 110dB @ 23Hz.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Chris Roemer View Post
                    I tuned a single 15" RS-PR w/400g in 3.0cf for an Fb and an F3 of 23Hz.
                    It's got a bit more area than the sub, and triple the stroke (going off the 10mm Xmax). Looks great w/a 500w or 1000w plate amp.
                    Definitely over 110dB @ 23Hz.
                    Chris - Did you model it or actually build it? Just curious as to the SQ of this driver. Below you can see what I am talking about with the Dayton RS-PR 15" passive radiator. I don't understand the yellow and red values. Did I do something wrong, is Dayton's information not correct, or is this just something that happens in the software?

                    I can tell you when I model the 18" PR, I get a much straighter line before it rolls off. My F3 was sub 20Hz if I remember correctly.
                    Click image for larger version

Name:	asdfsd.JPG
Views:	153
Size:	186.5 KB
ID:	1429890 Click image for larger version

Name:	peerless.JPG
Views:	148
Size:	560.8 KB
ID:	1429891



                    "I don't know everything and do not claim to. I continue to learn and that is what makes me human."

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Chris Roemer View Post
                      I tuned a single 15" RS-PR w/400g in 3.0cf for an Fb and an F3 of 23Hz.
                      It's got a bit more area than the sub, and triple the stroke (going off the 10mm Xmax). Looks great w/a 500w or 1000w plate amp.
                      Definitely over 110dB @ 23Hz.
                      Per PE's add, "... this driver is capable of 45.5 mm of excursion before any major loss in motor strength (Bl). In other words, this driver is capable of 90 mm (3.5") peak to peak excursion while still producing low distortion output."

                      http://techtalk.parts-express.com/fo...khanspires-but
                      http://techtalk.parts-express.com/fo...pico-neo-build
                      http://techtalk.parts-express.com/fo...ensation-build

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Kornbread View Post

                        Per PE's add, "... this driver is capable of 45.5 mm of excursion before any major loss in motor strength (Bl). In other words, this driver is capable of 90 mm (3.5") peak to peak excursion while still producing low distortion output."
                        Per PE's add:
                        "With an Xmax of 10.4 mm this driver might not seem all that impressive. However, Xmax is just a physical measurement and not actually the limit of linear excursion (Xmax = (Voice Coil Length - Magnetic Gap Height) / 2). The STW-350F has a remarkably long 36 mm magnetic gap with a 57 mm long voice coil. Thanks to such extreme dimensions and a well controlled magnetic field, this driver is capable of 45.5 mm of excursion before any major loss in motor strength (Bl). In other words, this driver is capable of 90 mm (3.5") peak to peak excursion while still producing low distortion output."

                        I understand the math for Xmax, but the 45.5mm is not derived from any numbers I can make sense of. I am probably way off here, but I thought anything passed your forward linear excursion (Xmax) that the coil winding would be above the magnetic gap. If someone could shed some light on this I would greatly appreciate it. As it stands now, this excerpt from the PE add completely confuses me on what Xmax ever meant and is making me question whether the figure is important or not. Is the Xmax 45.5mm or 10.4mm? If it is 45.5mm then that totally changes the passive radiator calculations doesn't it?

                        "I don't know everything and do not claim to. I continue to learn and that is what makes me human."

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by DanP View Post

                          I'm guessing the red could mean that the parameters don't reconcile with themselves, which could be an issue, but there's no reason the 2 x 15" couldn't model identically to the 18" given 1) the Qms of the PRs are similar and 2) you could get enough weight on the 15"s, which will require more mass to tune to the same frequency. Post up some graphs and parameters and I'm sure we can figure it out.
                          I posted my input data from Bass Box Pro. Any insight on why my numbers are coming in yellow and red?
                          "I don't know everything and do not claim to. I continue to learn and that is what makes me human."

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I'm not sure what the colors are about. Like I said, it might have something to do with the parameters not reconciling with each other, but I wouldn't be too concerned with that. It looks to me though like you're only modeling a single PR. If you were to add another PR, the tuning frequency would rise and you'd probably see a peak before rolloff instead of the droop the curve currently exhibits. I think the curve looks fine though, the only problem I see is that you'll need more than one PR and when you add another, you may not be able to add enough weight to bring the tuning frequency back down where you want it (if 7 disks is the max). What don't you like about the curve shown?
                            _____________________________
                            Tall Boys
                            NRNP Computer Sub
                            The Boxers
                            The Hurricanes
                            The Baronettes
                            Conneccentric
                            UX3

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by DanP View Post
                              I'm not sure what the colors are about. Like I said, it might have something to do with the parameters not reconciling with each other, but I wouldn't be too concerned with that. It looks to me though like you're only modeling a single PR. If you were to add another PR, the tuning frequency would rise and you'd probably see a peak before rolloff instead of the droop the curve currently exhibits. I think the curve looks fine though, the only problem I see is that you'll need more than one PR and when you add another, you may not be able to add enough weight to bring the tuning frequency back down where you want it (if 7 disks is the max). What don't you like about the curve shown?
                              Okay I guess I was confused about why the parameters wouldn't be happy with each other; I have never had this happen before unless I input something incorrectly.

                              I changed the box volume to 4ft^3 and added a second PR. This is what I got. F3 still looks about the same, but it looks ruler flat to 80Hz which is what I was after I believe. What do you think? I could always have tungsten weights made instead of the stamped steel washers if that made more sense.

                              Click image for larger version

Name:	pr2.JPG
Views:	119
Size:	445.4 KB
ID:	1429973
                              "I don't know everything and do not claim to. I continue to learn and that is what makes me human."

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X