Meausrements of the RS225 vs. the RS225S, as they apply to the Statements:

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Curt C
    Senior Member
    • Feb 2005
    • 791

    Meausrements of the RS225 vs. the RS225S, as they apply to the Statements:

    I spent about 6 hours yesterday doing a comparison between the two versions.

    The short story: Of the 4 drivers I measured, the NS version is a dB or 2 more sensitive, and can exist in a smaller enclosure, but will happily exist in the existing Statement enclosure. I currently have RS225's in one of my reference speakers, (not the Statements, but in a similar volume enclosure) and the original RS225S's in the other. So far any audible differences are so subtle as to be swamped by the room modes.

    See my post with more plots and measuremetns here: http://techtalk.parts-express.com/sh...5&postcount=12

    This is the 4 drivers modeled in an enclosure of similar size and tuning as the Statements. Red and Blue are the NS drivers:


    C
    Curt's Speaker Design Works
  • Jim Holtz
    Ultra Senior Member
    • Mar 2005
    • 3223

    #2
    ;x(Thanks Curt!

    Jim

    Comment

    • cjd
      Ultra Senior Member
      • Dec 2004
      • 5570

      #3
      Interesting on the sensitivity. I found the RS150 and RS180 almost identical. And absolutely swamped by room nodes. Tracking and integration with existing crossovers good.

      The folks that put together this revised line of drivers either got lucky, or did good work.
      diVine Sound - my DIY speaker designs at diVine Audio

      Comment

      • looneybomber
        Senior Member
        • May 2007
        • 194

        #4
        That's good news for those of us using the RS180's in other builds. Thanks Curt.

        Comment

        • Delta Dog
          Junior Member
          • May 2009
          • 28

          #5
          How much smaller of an enclosure is acceptable? I believe a 20% reduction was discussed using the published specs. Would you recommend a smaller reduction now or no reduction at all? I know that you said a reduction was not necessary.

          Thanks for all of your help,

          DeltaDog

          Comment

          • DeathMonk
            Senior Member
            • Jun 2008
            • 232

            #6
            Excellent news!

            Thanks for the work you put into this, Curt.

            Comment

            • DeathMonk
              Senior Member
              • Jun 2008
              • 232

              #7
              Originally posted by Delta Dog
              How much smaller of an enclosure is acceptable? I believe a 20% reduction was discussed using the published specs. Would you recommend a smaller reduction now or no reduction at all? I know that you said a reduction was not necessary.

              Thanks for all of your help,

              DeltaDog
              You would have to model the woofers in winISD or unibox. Just remember to keep the baffle width the same.

              Comment

              • Delta Dog
                Junior Member
                • May 2009
                • 28

                #8
                Model based on what? The reduction in volume Curt was recommending was based on published specs. Curt was going to test to confirm published numbers.

                DD

                Comment

                Working...
                Searching...Please wait.
                An unexpected error was returned: 'Your submission could not be processed because you have logged in since the previous page was loaded.

                Please push the back button and reload the previous window.'
                An unexpected error was returned: 'Your submission could not be processed because the token has expired.

                Please push the back button and reload the previous window.'
                An internal error has occurred and the module cannot be displayed.
                There are no results that meet this criteria.
                Search Result for "|||"