Jump to content

SB Audience - New range of Pro Drivers!


Recommended Posts

I was browsing the SB Acoustics updated web site today, to which I found a link to "SB Audience" range of new pro drivers and horns.

http://www.sbaudience.com/

I thought i'd had my head in the sand. I'd never come across this link or this range of drivers before!

A quick search with the search bar on Stereonet has revealed no discussions/chat that i could find, so i'm guessing a few other members are not aware?

Anyway, for those who aren't aware........

 

2 open baffle drivers on offer, 12 & 15". 

http://www.sbaudience.com/index.php/products/various-drivers/bianco-15ob350/

 

15OPEN%20BAFFLE-1.pngBIANCO-12OB150.png

 

Heaps of good divers to pick from, right up to 2 large subwoofer offerings 21".

 

NERO-21SW1100D-PRODUK.pngSUBWOOFER-ROSSO-18SW1000D.png

Wagner has them for sale.

https://www.wagneronline.com.au/sb-audience-range/sb-acoustics/speaker-drivers/audio-speakers-pa/pl/

 

I'm already thinking about a new Open Baffle, DIY project with 2 x 15" BIANCO-15OB350 per side, with the new SB Acoustics 8" Full Range, or Tang Band 8" FR.

 

Anyway, happy viewing! Should give some other fellow DIYers some new project ideas.

 

Jason

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Could be OK but the Italians seem to do these type of speakers best-RCF,18 Sound,Faital Pro,Ciarre etc.

Also I am not confident that the drivers promoted as open baffle speakers have a higher enough Qts.-0.5 is borderline for that use.0.7 or even higher would probably be better.Eminence make higher qts drivers.As does MCM .

Edited by THOMO
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, THOMO said:

Could be OK but the Italians seem to do these type of speakers best-RCF,18 Sound,Faital Pro,Ciarre etc.

Also I am not confident that the drivers promoted as open baffle speakers have a higher enough Qts.-0.5 is borderline for that use.0.7 or even higher would probably be better.Eminence make higher qts drivers.As does MCM .

Yes..... B&C, Peavey & Lavoce to name a few others.

I too thought .5 maybe a little low for OB purpose. But then you have to wonder why a quality manufacturer would make such a product for OB use. 

Agree .7 and above is likely to be more suitable for OB application, such as the Eminence designed driver on offer from Pure Audio Project.

http://www.pureaudioproject.com/product/15inch-open-baffle-bass-woofers/ 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like the 15" BIANCO-15OB350  has more linear travel, a lower resonance and also has more sensitivity than the pure audio driver. So it should be ok for OB use as long as it not a noisy driver (from the rear of the basket). The higher Qt of the pure audio driver just makes it easier to use a passive filter, though adding a high R series inductor to the SB driver will bring the Qt up.

If you use a lower Qt driver for OB use, you are better off going active using EQ  

Link to post
Share on other sites


  • 5 months later...
On 19/02/2020 at 8:59 PM, Mushroom01 said:

I too thought .5 maybe a little low for OB purpose.

You only need to choose a high-Q driver for an OB if you want to use the Q of the driver as part of the EQ (to make the driver play flat).

 

If you're going to flatten the driver response in another way (eg. in the crossover filter design) .... then the Q of the driver is "irrelevant".

 

I say "irrelevant" in quotes, as most high-Q drivers are actually low performance in general (and vice-versa, although there's always exceptions) ....  so it can be very relevant (and undesirable).

 

Look at all the open baffle gurus.  They all say it doesn't matter..... and most coincidentally use very low-Q drivers.

 

On 19/02/2020 at 8:59 PM, Mushroom01 said:

But then you have to wonder why a quality manufacturer would make such a product for OB use. 

Because making the Q high is difficutl without making it a poor driver .... and you don't need a high-Q for an open baffle.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/02/2020 at 8:28 PM, THOMO said:

Also I am not confident that the drivers promoted as open baffle speakers have a higher enough Qts.-0.5 is borderline for that use.0.7

I use qts=0.2 in some of my OB, and regularly lower than 0.35.

 

Check out Linkwitz, John Krekovsky, and Kyron Audio  (all low-Q)

Edited by davewantsmoore
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, davewantsmoore said:

I use qts=0.2 in some of my OB, and regularly lower than 0.35.

 

Check out Linkwitz, John Krekovsky, and Kyron Audio  (all low-Q)

With active EQ though?

Link to post
Share on other sites


13 hours ago, tesla13BMW said:

@Mushroom01 did you go anywhere with these drivers?

@tesla13BMW Not yet. I don't have enough time to start another project.... And I think i might need approval from the "Boss" 👰 to build an OB speakers. I don't think she will be very happy with the large foot print! 😒

 

A Pro Subwoofer (or two) is on the future list too. Nero 15" in 100 - 120 L vented. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, THOMO said:

With active EQ though?

Yes.... but you could do it with passive (but why would you?!).

 

1 hour ago, Mushroom01 said:

I don't think she will be very happy with the large foot print! 

What about this?
It's only 30cm wide.
http://musicanddesign.speakerdesign.net/sitebuilder/images/Note_II_RS_UnderA-164x446.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Mushroom01 said:

I don't think she will be very happy with the large foot print! 😒

My Spatials, although not DIY, have a much smaller footprint than most box speakers. Wide-ish sure, but not very deep. As it happens these also use Eminence 15" drivers and a custom compression driver

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok.  Looking for guidance.  Planning 3 way active open baffle.  Mid being Wild burro Betsy for the start with GR Neo3 for top end.  Mid and tweeter will have 80W into 8ohm amps.  Woofer will have 150W into 8ohm.  Each amp will have its own power supply with 30,000 uF on each polarity DC rail.

 

Baffle size isn't really an issue - run stacked ESL57's currently!

 

Woofer contenders have been Eminence deltalite ii 2515 and Faital pro 15pr400.  But, the Bianco-15OB350 and Bianco-18SW450 seem good contenders.

 

Any views on one 15" Bianco per side, two 15" Bianco per side, one Bianco 18" or a Bianco 18" and 15" per side?  Would like to keep below the $1000 mark for all the woofers. 

 

Looking for high 80's SPL at 3.5m listening distance.  Two per side will allow me to run in parallel and have a nominal 4 ohm load.  Same with a 18 and 15 per side.  An 18 /15/ 8" combo will make an aesthetically pleasing tapering of drivers - fickle aye 9_9

 

Or any other suitable drivers that aren't made of gold or going to cost as much as the driver itself in freight?

 

P.S.  Been reading lots, but, still don't know enough to throw money at the woofer drivers!

 

P.P.S  I have allowed for DSP and volume control to give 4 channels per side in case I needed a low level subwoofer output, but, would like to avoid it.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites


10 minutes ago, tesla13BMW said:

in case I needed a low level subwoofer output, but, would like to avoid it.  

While I'm no expert on the DIY design or choosing of components. My twin 15" Eminence drivers per side still require a sub. There's heaps of mid bass, but they roll off around 40hz without the sub. I'm using a Rel S3HO sub

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, tesla13BMW said:

Baffle size isn't really an issue

Baffle size is inherent to the design to get the coverage pattern to be "right".

 

Said another way.   If you design the drivers so they have a "flat" frequency response and sum with each other correctly from one measuremnt axis ..... then if the coverage patterns don't match, then in other places you obsrve them from, the levels and frequency response tilts of the drivers will be all wrong.

 

34 minutes ago, tesla13BMW said:

Woofer contenders have been Eminence deltalite ii 2515 and Faital pro 15pr400.  But, the Bianco-15OB350 and Bianco-18SW450 seem good contenders.

You want a woofer that is capable of reasonably high excursion.

You also need a woofer/baffle which can reach up relatively high, as the betsy as very low excursion, and so can't get low.

 

34 minutes ago, tesla13BMW said:

Any views on one 15" Bianco per side, two 15" Bianco per side, one Bianco 18" or a Bianco 18" and 15" per side?

The question for the woofers... and all drivers.... is how are going to make them gave a flat frequency response.

 

Passive crossover?  Active crossovers?  Something else?

 

The combination of the drivers (and size/shapes of the drivers) plus their filters .... is the key thing.     Which 15" woofer (or any other driver) is kinda secondary.

 

It's a bit like saying if you were building s racing car.    The length of the car (eg. 2m long?  4m long?   8m long?)  .... and where the wheels were placed on the length of the car.... is much much more important than the type of tyres.

Hope  that makes "sense".

 

34 minutes ago, tesla13BMW said:

P.P.S  I have allowed for DSP and volume control to give 4 channels per side in case I needed a low level subwoofer output, but, would like to avoid it.  

I should have read further.  LOL.

 

 

Getting the right driver responses is key.     It doesn't matter how.    If you don't use "DSP"... then you'll have to use something else (what?) ..... If you don't get the right driver responses, then you'll have a sh t speaker.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@davewantsmoore thanks for your response.

12 minutes ago, davewantsmoore said:

Baffle size is inherent to the design to get the coverage pattern to be "right".

I guess I should have said I have no issue with a large baffle.  I have tried modelling in Basta and dipole design.

 

16 minutes ago, davewantsmoore said:

You want a woofer that is capable of reasonably high excursion.

You also need a woofer/baffle which can reach up relatively high, as the betsy as very low excursion, and so can't get low.

 The Bianco-12OB150 which is 12" has an Xmax of 6.79mm, the 15OB350 has an Xmax of 11mm and the 18SW450 has an Xmax of 10.93mm. 

 

Are you saying the Eminence Deltalite ii 2515 at Xmax 4.8mm and Faital pro 15PR400 at Xmax 5.75mm are not large enough?

 

I will be using DSP but don't want to back myself into a corner by choosing a driver that will need a lot of boost which my amps wont have enough power to give.

 

Any reason not to use an 18" and 15" or 15" and 12" woofer in parallel off the same amp?

 

So overall what you are saying is to model all the drivers in a baffle and apply filters to get a flat response?

 

P.S.  I really would prefer not to have a sh t speaker :no:

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tesla13BMW said:

not large enough?

That depends on how low you expect them to play (and how loud)?

 

They'll play 6dB/octave less max-SPL than a sealed box (below the dipole peak, which is set by the baffle size).

 

If you wanted them to play down to 20Hz.... then I would say no, not at all enough.   A driver with double the excursion might do for that in a sealed box (so not on an open baffle).

 

... but all this is crtically related to how loud and how low.     Every extra octave you go down you need 8 times the driver excursion.... and every 6dB you play louder, you need double the excursion.

 

So you can see the differnce between 100db and 105dB.... and 40Hz and 20Hz ...... is huuuuge.

 

1 hour ago, tesla13BMW said:

I will be using DSP but don't want to back myself into a corner by choosing a driver that will need a lot of boost which my amps wont have enough power to give.

Because the is no box, you will find that the power required is not very high.

A decent 100w amplifier will be plenty.

 

1 hour ago, tesla13BMW said:

Any reason not to use an 18" and 15" or 15" and 12" woofer in parallel off the same amp?

You could do that, sure.

1 hour ago, tesla13BMW said:

So overall what you are saying is to model all the drivers in a baffle and apply filters to get a flat response?

Yes.... BUT.

 

Once you have done that for a certain listening postion...... the response at all other angles, is going to be determined by things like the size of each cone,.... spacing between then.... and the size/shape of the baffle.


This is why you see the gurus of OB speakers going with quite narrow baffles (and baffles which are different width depending on the driver).

Without doing that .... you're going to have a big step in frequeny response between your 12" and your planar.

1 hour ago, tesla13BMW said:

P.S.  I really would prefer not to have a sh t speaker :no:

Hehehe...  I was just teasing, have fun.

 

... but just like a box speaker, one has to understand how the shape of the cabinet/baffle affects the radiation of sound at the different angles.     Some people might think that an open baffle speaker is easier or simpler in this regard..... but the opposite is true.

Putting most of the important sound in one driver (eg. 300 to 3000Hz in the 12") can be one way to sidestep some of the landmines.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites


My target and what I did my calculations on was for 90dB at listening position which is 3.5m from the speakers.  I'd like to get down to 30Hz without dropping too many dB.   My calculations included 15dB for dynamic range.

 

The sensitivity of the Wild Burro Betsy is going to limit this as my calcs say I need 118W, but, if I drop the dynamic range back to 10dB I only need 37W.

 

I think I have been conservative.

 

The Betsy is an 8" driver which is only 92.4 dB/W efficient starting to fall off from 70Hz down.  Perhaps I should be looking at a better mid range driver??

 

freq_chart.jpg

 

So perhaps I am getting the important sound into one driver?

 

The plan is for a wide baffle at the bottom tapering up to narrow at the top - stretched oblong??, tear drop.

 

Although Troel Gravesons OBL15 looks quite reasonable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tesla13BMW said:

My target and what I did my calculations on was for 90dB at listening position

That's isn't very loud, if you are accoutning for peaks (rather than average).

Quote

The Betsy is an 8" driver which is only 92.4 dB/W efficient starting to fall off from 70Hz down.  Perhaps I should be looking at a better mid range driver??

It seems ok.

It won't go very low (as it doesn't have much excursion).

Quote

So perhaps I am getting the important sound into one driver?

That avoids some problems.... but isn't a good general strategy.... because it means using th sam size driver and baffle wdith for a huge range (and you won't get constant dirctivity).

 

Depends on what you want to do.....It's obviouly a very deep topic.

Quote

Although Troel Gravesons OBL15 looks quite reasonable.

Well.... if you're not going to have a narrow baffle ......  then you can avoid the baffle problem making it super wide.

 

... but you won't get good dirctivity (coverage pattern) down to low frquencies.... and to me, that is precisely the reason to build an OB.

Edited by davewantsmoore
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, davewantsmoore said:

That's isn't very loud, if you are accoutning for peaks (rather than average).

I took a A weighted reading at the 3.5m listening position using my stacked ESL57's at what I considered a loud volume that I would not listen at, and it hovered around 80dB.  The 90dB I mentioned is an average and then I have calculated dynamic range above this and took 15dB.

 

18 minutes ago, davewantsmoore said:

It seems ok.

It won't go very low (as it doesn't have much excursion).

That's is where I am at looking at low pass somewhere between 150 and 200 Hz to a midwoofer or woofer.  Hence asking about the SB Audience 18" and 15" drivers.

 

21 minutes ago, davewantsmoore said:

That avoids some problems.... but isn't a good general strategy.... because it means using th sam size driver and baffle wdith for a huge range (and you won't get constant dirctivity).

I was looking at the top band of the Betsy at about 1500Hz and the high pass for the GR Neo 3 at about 1500 Hz.  Thinking this would achieve a smooth transition between the two drivers.

 

Ok need to go read about directivity - any good resources?  Martin Kings Quarter Wave  and Troel Gravesons sites have been my main readings.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, tesla13BMW said:

That's is where I am at looking at low pass somewhere between 150 and 200 Hz to a midwoofer or woofer.  Hence asking about the SB Audience 18" and 15" drivers.

They look like pretty good drivers.

22 minutes ago, tesla13BMW said:

Ok need to go read about directivity - any good resources?  Martin Kings Quarter Wave  and Troel Gravesons sites have been my main readings.

Ooo, goodness.  Where to start....  It's a long road.   Rather than theory, I would suggest practise.   Build the speaker, verify the result.... when it is not the greatest... figure out why.

 

eg.  Figure out your crossover on the "directly infront" axis .... build it.... measure the result from other angles.   What is the response?  Why?.... etc. etc.    Otherwise.... begin with some well documented builds (where they explain their choices, etc.)

 

Quote

I was looking at the top band of the Betsy at about 1500Hz and the high pass for the GR Neo 3 at about 1500 Hz.  Thinking this would achieve a smooth transition between the two drivers.

If you keep the crossover point that low .... then it might work out OK....   but it might need to be steep to keep the Neo3 happy.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 31/07/2020 at 10:59 AM, blybo said:

While I'm no expert on the DIY design or choosing of components. My twin 15" Eminence drivers per side still require a sub. There's heaps of mid bass, but they roll off around 40hz without the sub. I'm using a Rel S3HO sub

I don't believe I need the level of bass most people do.  Many say the ESL57's don't produce bass and although I do run subs with my stacked ESL's when the subs aren't turned on it isn't really missed. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...