jamesV Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 For my different 2-channel setup I don't have a sub. A few reasons why, 1. I only have one sub and that is in the HT setup. 2. The rooms the 2-channel setups are in aren't that big and to me they sound great without a sub. 3. None of my 2-channel setups have a option for a sub, at least I don't think so. I understand that some people like them, it's been stated that it depends on music and preference. If and when I get another sub I would like to try it out in my setups but as stated above it would need the correct input and output for it to happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WPS Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 Cask05 What kind of tapped-horn subs are you using? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted October 10, 2009 Author Share Posted October 10, 2009 Cask05 What kind of tapped-horn subs are you using? http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1698483 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psg Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 Sweet. That's the Danely design? Gotta build me one of those! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudy81 Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 Chris: I use my SVS sub for 2 channel listening all the time now. Originally, I did not and felt that the Khorns should provide all the bass music had to offer. I found my expectation for the Khorns was wrong when experimenting with the sub and 2 channel Jazz listening. Much of the Jazz I listen to tends to have material that goes well below what the Khorns can provide. As an example, Billy Cobham's 'Warning' album, has some low frequencies that I could not hear without my sub. I am currently trying to located an RSW-15 that can keep up with the music and not just be used for the HT experience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike stehr Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 Do you use a sub in your 2-channel? I use a couple SVS 16/46 CS series in stereo. A Audio Control active crossover set to 40Hz, with a bass restoration type circuit in the unit. A Mackie FR2500 with Noctua case fans is the sub amp. It works....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted October 11, 2009 Author Share Posted October 11, 2009 I'm thinking about placing the Jubs on top of the subs (i.e., the subs would lay flat on the floor), which would raise the Jubs 11" (28 cm) higher..Not sure if the rise will significantly affect K402 performance in-room. I'll certainly find out. I would hazard a guess that the real difference will be vertical coverage angle, i.e., the K402s will be looking slightly further down at the listening audience. Might be interesting. Well, This is interesting - the WAFapproves. Her comments: "they sound clearer and the sound fills this end of the room..." It took a little while to get used to the 402s being raised 11", but it actually sounds better. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators dtel Posted October 11, 2009 Moderators Share Posted October 11, 2009 Glad to hear that because I was looking where I could put two of those subs and considered between the MWM and the 402. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted October 11, 2009 Author Share Posted October 11, 2009 dtel, By the way, these two subs can more than keep up with the Jubs, and I would assume your MWMs, too. I haven't heard our movies like this before, even at the theaters...things were resonating all around the room, and there was no "boominess" at all. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators dtel Posted October 11, 2009 Moderators Share Posted October 11, 2009 It will be a while before I can do it but after reading reviews (including yours) and looking at the price it looks like the way to go. Also I kind of like the idea of a folded sub for all horn mains, seems to make sense ? Unless I find another folded horn design that don't cost a fortune. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted October 12, 2009 Author Share Posted October 12, 2009 For those of you not familiar with the tapped horn sub (TH-SPUD) referenced here, I think the following information is relevant: 1) This is a patented design by Tom Danley of Danley Sound Labs (a really nice guy, BTW), and this particular design (the TH-SPUD) is about a year old. The plans for building the sub were not intended to be placed on the web, therefore, your conscience is your guide. 2) This design is not a "DIY" design, but a recent commercial design that you can buy from Danley Sound Labs: http://www.danleysoundlabs.com/tapped_horn.asp?MODEL=TH%20SPUD 3) It has been reported that the TH-SPUD design puts out greater output than the older DTS-20 design, but I have no way of independently verifying that since I do not own a DTS-20. The output of the DTS-20 has been reported to be capable of filling up medium-sized venues like walk-in theaters at Disneyworld, etc. 4) Tapped horn designs take advantage of the design efficiency/sensitivity of folded bass bin horn-loaded speakers, such as the K-horn, La Scala, and the Jubilee. The reason why this design is so small relative to other horn-loaded subwoofers of the same sensitivity is that the tapped horn concept ports one side of the driver(s) to the mouth area and one side to the throat of the horn, giving at least 3 dB more sensitivity over a like-size standard folded horn design. To do this design without the tapped horn concept would result in a significantly increased volume of the enclosure - probably by a factor of 2. It also doesn't take much power to drive these units to drywall-shaking levels. 5) The design also nulls the effects of truncating the horn path length to less than a full wavelength (i.e., the wavelength of a 19 Hz is ~59 feet or 17.4 metres, while the SPUD's path length is about 23 feet) because it has been carefully designed by Mr. Danley to place the drivers in the right positions to do this using what appears to be proprietary design codes. This basically eliminates the need to EQ the subwoofer assembly for flat response down to its cutoff frequency in anchoic half-space conditions, i.e., when tested outside on a groundplane with no other reflectors nearby. All other subwoofer designs for the home environment (i.e., non-commercial) that I have seen require some form of EQ to get flat response on their low end under half-space anechoic conditions. 6) The distortion (THD) of the design is significantly below direct-radiating subwoofers of like size or even much larger designs, and in fact gives an extremely clean and tight performance. It has been my observation that many folks may not recognize the cleaness of its output relative to a like-sized direct radiator subwoofer of the same low-end frequency response: the SPUD does not produce second and third harmonic overtone distortion figures of like-sized direct radiator designs driven at reference THX output levels (ref: http://nodef.blogspot.com/2008/11/0-db-thx-reference-level.html) Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators dtel Posted October 12, 2009 Moderators Share Posted October 12, 2009 The plans for building the sub were not intended to be placed on the web, therefore, your conscience is your guide. I guess I will have to change it a little..........how would blue look ? [8-|] Just kidding, I couldn't make an exact copy even if I wanted to, there are alot of things I don't know about there design, also I read about how much different areas being stuffed/insulated/dampened changes the tuning point, it's kind of a guess unless you buy one to copy. I still like the idea but it would be nice to have it in a different shape, which would be easy to figure out but if you can't test the changes you would be just guessing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted October 12, 2009 Author Share Posted October 12, 2009 ...there are alot of things I don't know about their design, also I read about how much different areas being stuffed/insulated/dampened changes the tuning point, it's kind of a guess unless you buy one to copy. I still like the idea but it would be nice to have it in a different shape, which would be easy to figure out but if you can't test the changes you would be just guessing.Yes, I didn't use stuffing at all. I guess that I should get them outside to test sometime, but my ears tell me that they are working quite well as-is... There was at least one structural modification in my units to allow more clearance for the angled driver installation/removal, and some fastener details were customized to use pocket screws on one side to hide the screw heads for appearance sake. But other than that, the units look similar to the Danley units. I think that the reason for the original shape is obvious, at least to me...it only takes two 4x8 feet sections of birch plywood to make one unit. And even then, there is a little bit left over to correct for mistakes during cutting and drilling. I like the size/shape for my needs. If I have a home theater built or if I move into roomier quarters, I'd have the option of using these things as a second row riser. Right now the right place is under the Jubs, for room-driven reasons. The corner-room gain/coupling is also very nice in their present place under the Jubs...very smooth and deep lf performance. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.