15" subwoofer design.

**Dennis H** · 13 October 2006, 21:09 Friday

If I could do a sealed enclosure with a 18" by 18" baffle and maybe 2ft if depth that would be awsome and extremely prefereable. But I want this sub with BLOW my current HSU STF-2 10" sub out of the water.

Okay, you've defined your design goals pretty well. Small box enclosure and small front baffle. That means the enclosure needs to be sealed and the driver no bigger than 15". Within those constraints, you can't do better than the Soundsplinter RLp-15 or the similar 15" TC-2000. You'll need an amp with lots of power and an EQ to flatten out the response. Build the box the size you can live with and EQ it flat. And yes, it will Blow Away your HSU 10".

**m1ke323** · 13 October 2006, 21:30 Friday

Thanks for the quick response Thomas.

From the same website I got these pictures from, he mentioned that he tested both ported and sealed and he was suprised when he found out the he could barely tell a difference with music and HT was only a small improvement, not worth the larger size.

I guess I am asking how much will I lose with sealed versus going ported. Will it mainly be that it won't go as low, or will a loose alot of output as well?

The thing I hate the most is a sub bottoming out in an explosion during a movie. I want to listening to my movies at 90+ db's and have the sub keep up very well. Could a sealed 15 do this?

Also, you said that I should just build a box with the size I can live with. What sealed size is recommended? Thanks for dealing with the noob questiosn.

Mike

**Jerm357** · 13 October 2006, 21:48 Friday

With the budget of $500 you might want to look at the TC-3000. Its cheaper then $500 and from what I hear It does great in a sealed applications.

HugeDomains.com

http://www.tcsounds.com/tc3000.htm

**Dennis H** · 13 October 2006, 23:15 Friday

Ha, he thinks I'm Thomas. I'm flattered.

Answering the questions, a ported sub will be about 6dB louder than a sealed one at the lowest frequencies. But the ported box will be at least twice as big. So you could do a box the same size as the ported one and put two sealed drivers in it and get the same or more SPL. Bottom line, ported is good for getting the most bang for the buck, i.e. maxing the output from one driver. Sealed is good for getting the most out of your box size but it costs more for the extra drivers. You have defined a very small box so sealed is really the only option. You would have to go MUCH bigger to make the driver work in a ported box.

**ThomasW** · 13 October 2006, 23:18 Friday

Originally posted by Dennis H

Ha, he thinks I'm Thomas. I'm flattered.

Or very embarrassed .... :B

Dennis pretending to be me has pretty much nailed the design... :T

With the budget of $500 you might want to look at the TC-3000. Its cheaper then $500 and from what I hear It does great in a sealed applications.

$500 is for an operational sub, not just the driver.

**RandyMidd** · 13 October 2006, 23:21 Friday

Ryan, aka ---k---, built a couple of 90 liter sealed subs using two RLp15 drivers...check out his build thread under Mission Accomplished...keep in mind he later upgraded to a Behringer EP2500 and a DEQ to power and EQ them...I'm building a couple of 2.55 cu. ft. sealed sonosubs with the same drivers, amp and EQ...expecting about 108 dB...my build thread is below.

I know you indicated you'd prefer boxes...the advantage I see with a small sonosub is that once draped with a table cloth it appears as an ordinary end table and no longer needs to match your existing speakers...that should save you some expense and effort...plus it can be placed virtually anywhere in your room to maximize sonic performance...important for subs :T

**Amphiprion** · 13 October 2006, 23:21 Friday

Wait for TC Sounds to introduce their passive radiators. With the motor strength they're putting into some of their drivers, there's no reason to think small has to mean sealed. You could easily get a 15" and two 15" PR's into a cabinet that size, flat to below 20. Heck I've got a TC Sounds 15 and two PR's in my garage that were prototypes for someone else that will do that (they are already spoken for unfortunately, I am just waiting for the shipping crates to get them to their new owner).

**Dennis H** · 13 October 2006, 23:44 Friday

Wait for TC Sounds to introduce their passive radiators

Why? A PR is just another way of doing a ported design. It doesn't really reduce the required box volume other than the internal volume of the port.

**Jerm357** · 14 October 2006, 01:02 Saturday

Originally posted by ThomasW

Or very embarrassed .... :B

Dennis pretending to be me has pretty much nailed the design... :T
$500 is for an operational sub, not just the driver.

Well he wrote "Price isn't to big a deal, around $500 for the driver is the limit."
So I figured the $500 was for the driver not the whole project.

**m1ke323** · 14 October 2006, 04:29 Saturday

Thanks for the responses guys. I was talking about $500 for the driver alone, but don't have to spend that if it isn't necessary.

I forgot to mention this will be going in a room about 12ft by 25ft.

Dennis and Thosmas, I apologive for mixing you to up. I knew you weren't Thomas, but was looking at another thread where he had posted something, and just typed his name by accident.

Dual drivers might work. I just have never dealt with anything other then a sealed 12" velodyne and a ported HSU 10". I want more output then both of them, but have no idea what the single or dual 15" will sound like. My ported HSU 10" bottoms out pretty bad if I turn it up to keep up with my movies, so I can't turn it up that loud.

What kind of box sizes are needed for the sealed and ported versions. Can two sealed drivers fit in the same size as a single ported?

Last question, what would I gain by going with the TC-3000 over the TC-2000 for the single sealed design? Thanks again for the help.

Edit: I just checked the enclosure volumes on TC's website and the TC-3000 has a recommened enclosure if 3.0ft^3 vs the TC-2000's sealed size of 4ft^3.

The TC-3000 in a sealed 18"H x 18"W and 18-24"D (will adjust the depth when I calculate the volume of 3ft^3 with curved sides) enclosure looks to be the most attractive solution so far.

I can't find much on the TC-3000 though so I would like to know how it compares to the TC-2000 ported and sealed.

**RandyMidd** · 14 October 2006, 08:25 Saturday

I don't know about the TC Sounds drivers but Sound Splinter, the maker of the RLp15 driver and offshoot of TC Sounds, recommends a much smaller sealed cab than what the experts around here use & recommend. I think the consensus is to shoot for a cabinet volume that'll give you a Qtc of .50.

For the Sound Splinter driver that means increasing substantially what's recommended on their website...this may be the case with the TC Sounds driver as well.

Don't forget for calculating your sealed cab, your fiberglass/poly fill will add to your net internal volume...

You know if you go sealed as opposed to a big ported sub you'll need to have something to force it to play low, right? This and more power to drive it is the price to pay for saving space.

**AJINFLA** · 14 October 2006, 10:13 Saturday

Within those constraints, you can't do better than the Soundsplinter RLp-15 or the similar 15" TC-2000.

IMHO, I can: http://www.rythmikaudio.com/servo_product.htm
The DS15 is a TC(2+) driver, but it's the sensing coil/Servo amp that provides icing for the cake.
Alum cone, 3cu ft enclosure, $550 with amplifier, etc,etc. seems to fit Mikes need.
If its anything like the 12's I own, it will be as good on music as it is for HT.
When I feel the need for 15" subs, I'm looking no further.

cheers,

AJ

**ThomasW** · 14 October 2006, 12:10 Saturday

Originally posted by RandyMidd

Don't forget for calculating your sealed cab, your fiberglass/poly fill will add to your net internal volume...

It's unnecessary to make this compensation. The damping occupies an insignificant amount of volume, and it's presence makes the box appear larger to the driver.

m1ke323,

Be aware that high-excursion, front firing, single driver subs, occasionally have a tendency to 'walk' across the floor. A carpeted floor and spikes on the bottom of this sub eliminate this situation.

**Amphiprion** · 14 October 2006, 13:04 Saturday

Why? A PR is just another way of doing a ported design. It doesn't really reduce the required box volume other than the internal volume of the port.

Port length.

**RandyMidd** · 14 October 2006, 18:11 Saturday

The damping occupies an insignificant amount of volume, and it's presence makes the box appear larger to the driver.

Sorry for the confusion...yeah, that's what I meant...your driver could think it's cabinet is 36% bigger than what it really is according to this .

**m1ke323** · 23 October 2006, 05:10 Monday

I have been doing some more research and have been modeling a few drivers in Unibox.

I was about to give the go ahead on a TC-2000 320L 14.5hz sontube, until I saw a post over at AVS.

SteveNN built dual RL-p15 sealed 3.9 cu ft enclosures. I would prefer to build to smaller sealed cabinets if it is at least equal to the large ported single 15.

I mainly want deep extended bass in movies, which would be the better method:

1: Dual Sealed TC-2000/RL-p15 maybe TC-3000?
2: Ported TC-2000

Thanks for the help.

Mike

**ThomasW** · 23 October 2006, 11:26 Monday

Sealed with an LT gives very low bass in the smallest box possible. The drawback to this is the need for more Vd and a big amp. Fortunately watts are now cheap, and there are many high exursion drivers...

**Brian Bunge** · 23 October 2006, 15:43 Monday

I'm actually planning on 4 of the Dayton RS 15" HO's in a single cabinet. Two mounted on the front, two mounted on the back. The cabinet will be slightly "undersized" and an LT will be implemented along with the Behringer amp.

When talking with Mark Seaton about this he felt that this was superior to using dual RL-p 15's.

**m1ke323** · 23 October 2006, 16:39 Monday

Brian, is there a thread following this here or at AVS?

What size cabinet are you making, and do you have any response graphs?

**Scott Simonian** · 23 October 2006, 17:14 Monday

Why? A PR is just another way of doing a ported design. It doesn't really reduce the required box volume other than the internal volume of the port.

Dennis, don't make me go all 'Mark Seaton' on you. Lol, jk. ;D

Low tune + small box with PRs = not having to worry about port resonances. Amongst other things...

**kramskoi** · 23 October 2006, 17:24 Monday

Originally posted by m1ke323

Thanks for the responses guys. I was talking about $500 for the driver alone, but don't have to spend that if it isn't necessary.

I forgot to mention this will be going in a room about 12ft by 25ft.

Dennis and Thosmas, I apologive for mixing you to up. I knew you weren't Thomas, but was looking at another thread where he had posted something, and just typed his name by accident.

Dual drivers might work. I just have never dealt with anything other then a sealed 12" velodyne and a ported HSU 10". I want more output then both of them, but have no idea what the single or dual 15" will sound like. My ported HSU 10" bottoms out pretty bad if I turn it up to keep up with my movies, so I can't turn it up that loud.

What kind of box sizes are needed for the sealed and ported versions. Can two sealed drivers fit in the same size as a single ported?

Last question, what would I gain by going with the TC-3000 over the TC-2000 for the single sealed design? Thanks again for the help.

Edit: I just checked the enclosure volumes on TC's website and the TC-3000 has a recommened enclosure if 3.0ft^3 vs the TC-2000's sealed size of 4ft^3.

The TC-3000 in a sealed 18"H x 18"W and 18-24"D (will adjust the depth when I calculate the volume of 3ft^3 with curved sides) enclosure looks to be the most attractive solution so far.

I can't find much on the TC-3000 though so I would like to know how it compares to the TC-2000 ported and sealed.

i've had a tc3000 in a 3.4 cu. ft. enclosure and now 2 in a 5.4 cu. ft. enclosure...two things...tight bass and loud!...depending on what subs you've had in the past, the bass may seem a little leaner than you're used to...the final Qtc. of the single and the dual are between .48 and .45 respectively...these subs begin to exhibit an IB type sound signature...i would describe it as being well behaved...scary dynamics, with rapid attack and decay...you could'nt sleep with the sub on, even at a low level...the dynamics are that sharp...it goes down to 8 Hz in my room and the bass is like a bottomless pit...unfathomable.

A single would be nice but a dual is definitely something special...WOTW becomes a "listening event" with this type of sub...reference level all the way...in a smaller room, air shifting is quite impactful...you can shake the chair with music as well as movies...

with two of them you will need (2) ep2500's to drive them into compression, if it's even possible with two of them...lots of coil in these subs...the amp will give out long before the drivers.

The biggest difference with the tc3000 is its high-roll surround/excursion envelope, which also protects against bottoming and nonlinearities at higher drive levels...

That said, given the better sensitivity, thermal characteristics, excursion capability, lowered Qes/Qts. and smaller footprint, i'd never even consider a tc2000... :T

**m1ke323** · 23 October 2006, 17:26 Monday

I was looking at some posts over at TC-sounds forums and hometheatershack and found a dual TC-3000 .45Q 5.4cu ft sealed sub that looks like it might work for me.

How would this compare to a single TC-2000 ported and tuned to 14.5hz? Again this will be mostly for watching movies.

Here is the thread at TC-sounds,

HugeDomains.com

http://www.tcsounds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=273

Edit: I posted this at the same time as kramskoi, so my question has already kinda been answered. From what he said, this seems to be the answer I have been looking for. A small sub that will go deep with high spl. Two amps though, didn't want to spend that much since I am spending $800 on drivers already. Maybe I can start with one and buy a second later.

kramskoi, do you have any graphs to post so I can compare it to some other designs I have seen around here? Thanks in advance

Mike

**m1ke323** · 23 October 2006, 17:53 Monday

Sorry if these images are to large for forum posts, I left them large so you could seem them easier.

I don't fully understanding speaker modeling yet and can't really equate a graph to real world performace.

I can see the ported has a flatter response, but isn't as loud above about 25Hz. Which design is best for going low and loud? I apologize for all these questions, I just want to make sure my $1000 is going to the right place.

Dual Sealed TC-3000 150L with a .48Q

Image not available

Single Ported TC-2000 320L 14.5Hz tune

Image not available

**Scott Simonian** · 23 October 2006, 18:25 Monday

M1ke323 - Check off the "include effect of port resonance" and "FR affected by Le".

Then repost those last two pics, plz.

**m1ke323** · 23 October 2006, 19:26 Monday

Originally posted by Scott Simonian

M1ke323 - Check off the "include effect of port resonance" and "FR affected by Le".

Then re-post those last two pics, plz.

Here is the Dual TC-3000 Sealed

Image not available

The Single TC-2000 Ported

Image not available

I think I am doing something wrong when modeling the ported design though, I don't haven't met the min diameter, but most designs I have seen use a 6" port.

**Scott Simonian** · 23 October 2006, 19:32 Monday

Depends on how much power you want to use. I find squeezing two drivers in one bigger box is easier to port than just one driver in a box. Looks like unibox wants you to use a port about 8 inches in diameter, that wont fit in that box.

Dunno, Ive been modeling the DVC version in pairs. I have modeled two in 900liters tuned to 14hz with a 10 inch diameter port. 500 watts a piece.

**m1ke323** · 23 October 2006, 19:48 Monday

I don't have much understanding of all these graphs yet but it looks to me the single TC-2000 ported has better response down low. Subs generally are crossedover at like 80hz I think so the single TC-2000 is far cheaper and except for around 100hz is louder too. Is that correct?

**Brian Bunge** · 23 October 2006, 20:04 Monday

Mike,

I haven't started a thread about it anywhere. I've just been talking to Mark Seaton online about it.

Try modeling 4 of the 15" HO's in a total of 170L with 600W nominal per driver (will give you the response for 2400W) and use "walls covered" for damping. Let me know what you think.

**kramskoi** · 23 October 2006, 20:55 Monday

Originally posted by m1ke323

I don't have much understanding of all these graphs yet but it looks to me the single TC-2000 ported has better response down low. Subs generally are crossedover at like 80hz I think so the single TC-2000 is far cheaper and except for around 0-100hz is louder too. Is that correct?

short and sweet...the 2x15 will do the business better below 14 Hz and above 20 Hz...if you have a smaller room, the sealed 2x15 will perform down to 8 Hz, if you design the way i did mine...you won't get there with a single ported tc2000...you'll either have to highpass or amp limit the sub...it'll drop pretty fast below 14 Hz, regardless...

The dual sealed will be louder in the midbass, tighter and extend lower...if that's your taste...especially in a smaller room this sub will play "lights out" with visceral impact...i'll leave it at that...

Here is WillD's FR of his recently completed tc2000...the plans were 320 liters tuned to 14.6 Hz i think...

Image not available

and my 2x15:

Image not available

Image not available

as you can see, the sub rolls off rapidly below 14 Hz but the dual sealed is still going straight to 10 Hz and below...this will be room dependent of course...just something to think about if you have a smaller room...

**m1ke323** · 23 October 2006, 21:37 Monday

The room this sub will be going in is realatively small, only 12' x 23' so the dual sealed might be the better choice. I have some thinking to do, two TC-3000 drivers ($800) and two buttkicker or ep2500 amps (~$550) is decent amount of money. This would be a $1500 project when all said an done.

**Nichol1997** · 23 October 2006, 22:53 Monday

Originally posted by m1ke323

The room this sub will be going in is realatively small, only 12' x 23' so the dual sealed might be the better choice. I have some thinking to do, two TC-3000 drivers ($800) and two buttkicker or ep2500 amps (~$550) is decent amount of money. This would be a $1500 project when all said an done.

Mike,
Where are you finding the ep2500 for $275 each? Sorry, don't mean to hijack the thread.

**m1ke323** · 23 October 2006, 23:06 Monday

Originally posted by Nichol1997

Mike,
Where are you finding the ep2500 for $275 each? Sorry, don't mean to hijack the thread.

Nowhere actually, I just knew the buttkicker amp was about $275 so I just doubled that. The ep2500 is around $325 I think.

**Dennis H** · 23 October 2006, 23:47 Monday

If you went with 4 of the RS 15" HO as Brian suggested, the driver cost would be $556 + shipping. I think that's a pretty cool idea. Either one box with four drivers or two boxes with two drivers each. 1.5 cu.ft. per driver and EQ it flat.

**WillyD** · 24 October 2006, 00:23 Tuesday

Originally posted by m1ke323

Nowhere actually, I just knew the buttkicker amp was about $275 so I just doubled that. The ep2500 is around $325 I think.

The BKA is actually $252 shipped from Amazon.

Kramskoi is absolutely correct. With the ported TC-2000 you'll get solid response down to around 13-14Hz, then it'll drop off pretty rapidly. A sealed unit like his gives you much better VLF capability, among other things.

I would like to add that my FR is in a completely untreated room with zero EQ...and my net volume is closer to 334, and my tuning is somewhere in the low 14s, but I haven't verified it yet.

I think the TC-3000s would need more than just a pair of BKAs, though. As Kram has said, they can take a ton of power.

**RandyMidd** · 24 October 2006, 11:22 Tuesday

I don't have much understanding of all these graphs yet but it looks to me the single TC-2000 ported has better response down low. Subs generally are crossedover at like 80hz I think so the single TC-2000 is far cheaper and except for around 0-100hz is louder too. Is that correct?

I have some thinking to do, two TC-3000 drivers ($800) and two buttkicker or ep2500 amps (~$550) is decent amount of money. This would be a $1500 project when all said an done.

I apologize if I'm stating the obvious...but these remarks make me wonder:

Kramskoi's sealed units aren't playing that low by themselves...I'm assuming he's using some sort of LT / EQ to force them low...you realize this right Mike? Please correct me if I'm in left field here but it's (this part of the thread) is reading like a possible misunderstanding is occurring.

If so Mike, then unless you already own an LT / EQ that you can use for this project you'll need to add that to the budget.

If you want low, loud and sealed you must pony up $$$ 8O

**kramskoi** · 24 October 2006, 11:45 Tuesday

Originally posted by RandyMidd

I apologize if I'm stating the obvious...but these remarks make me wonder:

Kramskoi's sealed units aren't playing that low by themselves...I'm assuming he's using some sort of LT / EQ to force them low...you realize this right Mike? Please correct me if I'm in left field here but it's (this part of the thread) is reading like a possible misunderstanding is occurring.

If so Mike, then unless you already own an LT / EQ that you can use for this project you'll need to add that to the budget.

If you want low, loud and sealed you must pony up $$$ 8O

the total amount of boost i'm using amounts to 5-6 dB down to 5 Hz...this is quite modest and if i'd built the cabinet to 6 cubic feet, the sub would run flat to 10 Hz without boost...the FBQ2496 would add $150 to the cost but you also need it to cut room modes anyway...you could get by with just one ep2500, which is how i'm currently running it until i add a third tc3000 in a single ELQ cabinet...you can see my thread at tcsounds for details on performance with one ep2500...in rooms <2,000 cubic feet, it should play to reference levels. :T

**m1ke323** · 24 October 2006, 16:15 Tuesday

I appreciate the heads up on the LT, I knew he was using some sort of eq but wasn't sure what.

Spending $1,500 on a sub that isn't a dedicated HT yet isn't looking too attractive. More then likely I will be doing a ported design.

Has anyone read anything on the TC PA-5000, I saw a post over at AVS of a guy installing dual 18"s in his HT. Would that fact that it is a pro audio sub make the SQ significantly lower?

**WillyD** · 24 October 2006, 16:45 Tuesday

Has anyone read anything on the TC PA-5000, I saw a post over at AVS of a guy installing dual 18"s in his HT. Would that fact that it is a pro audio sub make the SQ significantly lower?

I've been following pclausen's thread from the beginning.

And no, not really. Those TC Sounds PA-5000s are not your average "Pro Audio" drivers.

**kramskoi** · 24 October 2006, 17:47 Tuesday

Originally posted by m1ke323

I appreciate the heads up on the LT, I knew he was using some sort of eq but wasn't sure what.

Spending $1,500 on a sub that isn't a dedicated HT yet isn't looking too attractive. More then likely I will be doing a ported design.

Has anyone read anything on the TC PA-5000, I saw a post over at AVS of a guy installing dual 18"s in his HT. Would that fact that it is a pro audio sub make the SQ significantly lower?

yeah...the vented route may be a better choice for you, given your circumstances...$425x2 drivers shipped, $150 fbq, $325 ep2500, and $385 for a built cabinet...so ~$1800 painted, cabled and finished...a pretty stiff price but worth IMO...good luck with whatever you choose... :T

15" subwoofer design.

15" subwoofer design.

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment