phsycoandy Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 You have stated several times that one of your 1x15s will out perform a 4x10 excursion wise as apposed to thermal rating, which you say in someways is inconsiquential. Now my probably ignorant mind says 4x10 equals cone area of 40, 1 x 15 is cone area of 15 simple! (cant get into areas of circles etc but u get my drift) surely a 4x10 shares the input equally and therefore the excursion equally aswell and so they have to only work a quarter as hard with a given input therefore their excusion per driver is a quarter of a single driver, am i barking mad or what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alien Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 (edited) [quote name='phsycoandy' post='518823' date='Jun 19 2009, 08:21 PM']You have stated several times that one of your 1x15s will out perform a 4x10 excursion wise as apposed to thermal rating, which you say in someways is inconsiquential. Now my probably ignorant mind says 4x10 equals cone area of 40, 1 x 15 is cone area of 15 simple! (cant get into areas of circles etc but u get my drift) surely a 4x10 shares the input equally and therefore the excursion equally aswell and so they have to only work a quarter as hard with a given input therefore their excusion per driver is a quarter of a single driver, am i barking mad or what?[/quote] Areas of circles isn't critical when comparing one driver against another, but it is important to realise that you do need [i]some kind[/i] of square measurement, since a speaker cone has a surface area (ie 2 dimensions, not just the 1 you've used). If you say that a 4x10 is equivalent to 10 x 10 x 4 = 400 and that a 1x15 is equivalent to 15 x 15 x 1 = 225 then you'd be on the right track. Thing is, you then need to bring in the third dimension (ie how much air the speakers move). Assuming the 10's you're using have an Xmax of 4mm (which is more than most of them have) then you're looking at a displacement of 10 x 10 x 4 x 4 = 1600 The 3015LF has an Xmax of 9.6mm, which gives you 15 x 15 x 9.6 x 1 = 2160. 3015LF wins, hands down. A Edited June 19, 2009 by alexclaber 3015LF not 3015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Protium Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 [quote name='Alien' post='518892' date='Jun 19 2009, 09:55 PM']Areas of circles isn't critical when comparing one driver against another, but it is important to realise that you do need [i]some kind[/i] of square measurement, since a speaker cone has a surface area (ie 2 dimensions, not just the 1 you've used). If you say that a 4x10 is equivalent to 10 x 10 x 4 = 400 and that a 1x15 is equivalent to 15 x 15 x 1 = 225 then you'd be on the right track. Thing is, you then need to bring in the third dimension (ie how much air the speakers move). Assuming the 10's you're using have an Xmax of 4mm (which is more than most of them have) then you're looking at a displacement of 10 x 10 x 4 x 4 = 1600 The 3015LF has an Xmax of 9.6mm, which gives you 15 x 15 x 9.6 x 1 = 2160. [b]3015 wins, hands down.[/b] A[/quote] But only in terms of excursion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexclaber Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Exactly! And what swings it even more in the 15"s favour is that the diameter of the speaker that moves is almost two inches smaller than the nominal diameter, so it isn't so much 15x15=225 vs 4x(10x10)=400, but 13x13=169 vs 4x(8x8)= 256. So if the 15" can move (256/169)=1.5 times as far at the four 10"s then it will move as much air. The fifteen I use in the Compact can move about 40% further without distortion than the best neo 10"s whilst the fifteen I use in the Big One can move more than twice as far. Years ago I read a review of what sounded like the most amazing speaker cab ever and only recently rediscovered it - I should have realised it would be something by the geniuses (geneii?) at Meyer Sound. If you've seen the huge main studio monitors they have the in the very biggest recording studios, this is one of them - yet it features a single 15" woofer in each cab that can move more air than the dual 18"s normally found in competing cabs. And by using a single high-excursion woofer rather than multiple lower excursion woofers it exhibits more consistent response wherever you stand, much like my cabs. [url="http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/may00/articles/meyersound.htm"]http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/may00/arti.../meyersound.htm[/url] Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexclaber Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 [quote name='Protium' post='518959' date='Jun 19 2009, 11:19 PM']But only in terms of excursion [/quote] And displacement. Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Jack Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 [quote name='Alien' post='518892' date='Jun 19 2009, 09:55 PM']If you say that a 4x10 is equivalent to 10 x 10 x 4 = 400 and that a 1x15 is equivalent to 15 x 15 x 1 = 225 then you'd be on the right track.[/quote] But only if you were using square speakers. For some reason, the number 3.1416 keeps flashing across my brain ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexclaber Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 [quote name='Happy Jack' post='519007' date='Jun 20 2009, 12:43 AM']But only if you were using square speakers. For some reason, the number 3.1416 keeps flashing across my brain ...[/quote] Is that because you're feeling like a midnight snack? Mmm, Pi... Fortunately in all these examples Pi cancels out! Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bythesea Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 [quote name='Happy Jack' post='519007' date='Jun 20 2009, 12:43 AM']But only if you were using square speakers. For some reason, the number 3.1416 keeps flashing across my brain ... [/quote] I thought that and checked - the ratio of the areas is more or less the same square or round Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MythSte Posted June 20, 2009 Share Posted June 20, 2009 [quote name='Happy Jack' post='519007' date='Jun 20 2009, 12:43 AM']But only if you were using square speakers. For some reason, the number 3.1416 keeps flashing across my brain ... [/quote] Im glad these guys have put that to bed, It was playing on my mind also but i didnt want to say...! Mr Claber would have pointed it out by now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phsycoandy Posted June 20, 2009 Author Share Posted June 20, 2009 What is there stopping a 10" driver being made with equal excursion, surely its just a case of getting the right amount of cone suspension and a deeper voice coil arrangement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alien Posted June 20, 2009 Share Posted June 20, 2009 [quote name='phsycoandy' post='519073' date='Jun 20 2009, 08:35 AM']What is there stopping a 10" driver being made with equal excursion, surely its just a case of getting the right amount of cone suspension and a deeper voice coil arrangement.[/quote] In theory, nothing. Have a look at a 10" sub sometime. The problem is the width of the suspension - to have greater excursion you need a wider suspension, which in turn leaves less diameter for the pistonic cone area. If you figure on losing 2" off the diameter for the frame and the existing suspension, then a 10 is really an 8, and a 15 is really a 13. Lose another inch for wider suspension and the 10 becomes a 7, and the 15 becomes a 12. A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danlea Posted June 20, 2009 Share Posted June 20, 2009 [quote name='bythesea' post='519014' date='Jun 20 2009, 12:50 AM'] I thought that and checked - the ratio of the areas is more or less the same square or round [/quote] Or in fact, [i]exactly[/i] the same! Think *rounding errors*... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soopercrip Posted June 20, 2009 Share Posted June 20, 2009 (edited) [quote name='Alien' post='518892' date='Jun 19 2009, 09:55 PM']Areas of circles isn't critical when comparing one driver against another, but it is important to realise that you do need [i]some kind[/i] of square measurement, since a speaker cone has a surface area (ie 2 dimensions, not just the 1 you've used). If you say that a 4x10 is equivalent to 10 x 10 x 4 = 400 and that a 1x15 is equivalent to 15 x 15 x 1 = 225 then you'd be on the right track. Thing is, you then need to bring in the third dimension (ie how much air the speakers move). Assuming the 10's you're using have an Xmax of 4mm (which is more than most of them have) then you're looking at a displacement of 10 x 10 x 4 x 4 = 1600 The 3015LF has an Xmax of 9.6mm, which gives you 15 x 15 x 9.6 x 1 = 2160. 3015LF wins, hands down. A[/quote] WHOOOSH!!! (looks up...) wassssaaattt!!! (only just come to terms with an indoor lavvy) Edit: Sorry guys, find this stuff interesting and want to learn, but it won't sink in! I'll persevere... Edited June 20, 2009 by soopercrip Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bythesea Posted June 20, 2009 Share Posted June 20, 2009 [quote name='danlea' post='519140' date='Jun 20 2009, 10:43 AM']Or in fact, [i]exactly[/i] the same! Think *rounding errors*...[/quote] Doh - yes - you would have thought someone who has a maths degree would have seen that one (it was some time ago your honour!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phsycoandy Posted June 21, 2009 Author Share Posted June 21, 2009 (edited) The 3015LF has an Xmax of 9.6mm, which gives you 15 x 15 x 9.6 x 1 = 2160. [/quote] 9.6mm is a hell of a distance of travel and keep all things parralel and true, i think my old MB 15s must have travelled that much from memory I remember thinking it was scary to watch sometimes, I think they are BC drivers. Edited June 21, 2009 by phsycoandy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexclaber Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 [quote name='phsycoandy' post='519916' date='Jun 21 2009, 01:00 PM']9.6mm is a hell of a distance of travel and keep all things parralel and true, i think my old MB 15s must have travelled that much from memory I remember thinking it was scary to watch sometimes, I think they are BC drivers.[/quote] Yes it's a hell of a lot of travel but that woofer can move that far with <10% distortion so it does indeed stay aligned and accurate. It can actually move up to 17mm in either direction without damage. The drivers in your old MB 15s would have had roughly half that much undistorted excursion, possibly less. The woofer in the Compact also probably has more clean excursion than your MBs, yet is likely to be more similar in performance - and unless you boost the lows tons it really doesn't move a huge amount, it's very tightly damped. The woofer in the Big One does move a lot but it can handle it and still sound great. Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts