@mijostyn wrote:
I think it is more a matter of, you have this idea in your head and dam the torpedoes you are going to do it regardless. I certainly am that way.
Exactly.
Each enclosure has 84 individual pieces. I have a total of 4 coats of polyester lacquer to spray, wet sanding between coats and the last coat has to be sanded 4 times to 2000 grit then polished two times. I am putting together a pictorial diary of their construction in case someone wants to give it a go. I am not making any more for any reason ever.
Bring on the pictorial!
I have a much different situation than you. My main speakers are line sources all the way down to 1 Hz. The subwoofers, in order to match the volume at increasing distance have to act like line sources. I achieve that by spacing the drivers at the right interval right into both side walls so that they are acting acoustically as one driver, a bass line source array.
You mean as a horizontally configured subs array?
No matter how large and powerful you make a horn it is still point source unless you space one every four feet from wall to wall.
If addressing the full audible frequency spectrum the problem to me is not a point source being a point source, but rather merging more of them and instead have a single ditto cover a suitably wide range to minimize issues. That’s what’s I do having a single point source from just over 600Hz all the way up to about 17-18kHz, while - importantly - controlling directivity down to the crossover region with a fittingly large horn for a smooth dispersion pattern transition to the vertically mounted woofers below. Next step, in theory at least, would be a Synergy horn for a single point source all the way down to the 100Hz, if proper energy coherence can be maintained handing over to the subs - certainly when thinking of the lack of a dedicated midbass section.
Instead of one very efficient driver in each channel I use four 12" drivers in each channel and 2500 watts per woofer. The over all distortion at any given volume below 100 dB (already too loud) is probably about the same. You do not see horns at big concerts any more. They hang two 40 foot curved line arrays and A LOT of WATTS. Who cares about electricity bills?
My aim is for at least 20dB headroom in the bass region on top of the max. desired SPL level. That’s when efficiency comes in handy, at the expense of size (and, ultimately, ultra low end extension), but sonically it makes a difference few have experienced. Yours is simply a different approach with multiple woofers and a bucket load more power that’s needed here, but you’ll have even deeper extension (flat to 15-ish Hz?) and a no doubt excellent performance in the lower octaves when dialed in.
Honestly, I’ve never much cared about the sound of curved line arrays at concerts. They very generally lack midbass presens and impact. I would have preferred the industry officials here cared more about sound than catering to install convenience from smaller boxes and being indifferent to power requirements. Moreover, the variety of bass horns I’ve heard from concerts are vastly better sounding than those typically dual 18" ported subs with their pounding out one-note LF, which is just tiring.
@100Hz and 36 dB/oct you will only be 20 dB down at 200 Hz. Imagine a phono stage with a signal to noise ratio of 20 dB. using 48 dB per octave you will be 60 dB down at 200 Hz which is low enough to be masked by louder signals.
It comes down to listening evaluations eventually. If it works out with higher high-pass, it works out. If not, ~85Hz is where it’ll remain.
Other drivers are better at doing midrange than big woofers, that’s just life. With ESLs there is a stark difference.
My gripe with ESL’s in general has been a lack of overall substance or density to their sound, certainly compared to larger horn variants or hybrid iterations with large woofers. To you that may be about cone-based speakers being too thick (i.e.: slow) sounding, but to me it’s about what lends itself more naturally to my ears. Never heard those Sound Labs - they may be different in this regard due to their sheer size and ceiling-to-floor termination.
With regard to large woofers (say, 15") as mids, they do cover less range upwards compared to smaller drivers for them to really be called midrange drivers, but importantly they have a power region fullness and realism here that smaller drivers can only dream of. It’s no comparison, period (when they’re high-passed accordingly they’re even low mids rockets, and run actively will give you another level), so all that talk about smaller drivers being more ideal as mids, when also going down into the upper bass area, fails to take both of these aspects into consideration. ESL’s when large enough, or so I gather, are no doubt different beasts with regard to speed and lack of inertia.
If the subs run into the midrange you will easily be able to localize them which to me is very annoying. The subs are integrated correctly when the low bass is there, more felt than heard and you would swear there wasn’t a sub in the room.
If you cross the subs at 100Hz the subs can be localized no matter how steep the slopes. My subs are positioned close to and symmetrically to the mains and configured in stereo, so no issues here.
And I fully agree; when the subs are dialed in correctly it’s just a coherent of-a-piece presentation. I love how the lower octaves "morph" effortlessly in intensity and presence depending on the material. Great bass just "happens" in the air, right in front of you between the speakers or as this immersive presence.
