Xsonics Bass Cab Company

[kringle77]

Im sure that you hear some extra mids indirectly but, the bandpass thing sounds about right. Those two cabs will sound different based on the drivers you are using mostly. I don't think it's reall going to matter that one is facing down and one to the side. Actually, an xsonics used vertically is doing just that anyway. Knowing which drivers are being used, I would expect the glasstone to have alittle more overall bottom and be more even. The xsonics will be tighter in the low end but have more aggressive upper mids. I'd bet money on that one. Both cool cabs which I have yet to try in person but, I will have an xsonics this week.

[astack]

Originally Posted by rpsands

So just like the glasstone, it cuts a ton of mids and highs from the second woofer and gives you way more lows and low mids relatively.

Originally Posted by Brad Johnson

That's an assumption that folks who haven't heard a Glasstone continue to make, along with many others. As far as "just like the glasstone" goes, since these are clearly different, particularly the direction the second driver is firing...


Even though I've been using a Glasstone for the better part of a year, this has me wondering... where do the mids and highs that are firing directly into the front firing port disappear to?

I have a switch that allows me to cut off the second driver and the second driver is clearly adding more than just depth and low mids when switched in. It sounds like adding a second cab.

Again, as far as I understand it, it's like a .5 alignment. When you cut the second driver in the mids and highs, your response will drop 3dB in that region, I believe. Which isn't a huge loss. Look at the frequency chart of most any driver; there are typically peaks and dips of more dB than that. I don't think rpsands is saying it sounds dark, just a slight cut in the uppers. Put another way, just boost your eq by a couple ticks and that's the difference. The slight attenuation of the highs is now back and with less beaming, so in a way it will seem louder off-axis (i.e. when you're not lying down on the stage.)

Point is, nobody's saying the Glasstone design sucks, dude.

[Brad Johnson]

Originally Posted by astack

Again, as far as I understand it, it's like a .5 alignment. When you cut the second driver in the mids and highs, your response will drop 3dB in that region, I believe. Which isn't a huge loss. Look at the frequency chart of most any driver; there are typically peaks and dips of more dB than that. I don't think rpsands is saying it sounds dark, just a slight cut in the uppers. Put another way, just boost your eq by a couple ticks and that's the difference. The slight attenuation of the highs is now back and with less beaming, so in a way it will seem louder off-axis (i.e. when you're not lying down on the stage.)

Point is, nobody's saying the Glasstone design sucks, dude.

The point is that many are saying incorrect things based on no experience IRL (aka assumptions) with a cab like this, dude. As someone who actually does have real life long term experience with this specific design, I'd hope you don't mind my objections.


Heck, look at what you quoted... how do you take this: "So just like the glasstone, it cuts a ton of mids and highs from the second woofer and gives you way more lows and low mids relatively" and come up with " I don't think rpsands is saying it sounds dark, just a slight cut in the uppers".



So anyway... the mids and highs the second driver in the Glasstone fire into the port go where?

[Brad Johnson]

Originally Posted by kringle77

Im sure that you hear some extra mids indirectly but, the bandpass thing sounds about right. Those two cabs will sound different based on the drivers you are using mostly. I don't think it's reall going to matter that one is facing down and one to the side. Actually, an xsonics used vertically is doing just that anyway. Knowing which drivers are being used, I would expect the glasstone to have alittle more overall bottom and be more even. The xsonics will be tighter in the low end but have more aggressive upper mids. I'd bet money on that one. Both cool cabs which I have yet to try in person but, I will have an xsonics this week.

If you mean the Xsonics and the Glasstone, the Glasstone is using a pair of OTS Faital Pro 12PR300 drivers (another driver set is also now available). I haven't heard an Xsonics yet so I won't guess what it sounds like. I have no idea why you think one would be tighter than the other (the Lil G is most definitely tight IME) and the thing that really doesn't present itself to me is that the cab with one outward firing driver/voicecoil would have more agressive upper mids. Based on that alone I'd take your bet.


Maybe as you say the Xsonics' driver firing in and the Glasstone's firing out won't be a major differentiator on performance nor the other obvious design differences.

[bb03]

Can we PLEASE not turn this into another "ears vs eyes" thread!

The physics and the "sounds good=is good" can and do coexist. This has been beaten to death in the amps forum, lately...and I can't be the only one who's sick of it.

It's certainly not fair to Xsonics. We've got a fellow TB'er here who's trying to make a go of it...let's give him some support.

Kringle...looking forward to your review!

[Brad Johnson]

Originally Posted by bb03

Can we PLEASE not turn this into another "ears vs eyes" thread!

The physics and the "sounds good=is good" can and do coexist. This has been beaten to death in the amps forum, lately...and I can't be the only one who's sick of it.

It's certainly not fair to Xsonics. We've got a fellow TB'er here who's trying to make a go of it...let's give him some support.

Kringle...looking forward to your review!

How could it be anything but eyes vs. ears?



We're talking about TWO cabinet designs that the vast majority of folks have zero actual experience in... yet no shortage of opinions. See a problem? I do. Maybe folks with experience should just let those opinions stand. After all, they're pretty much of equal value.

[Mike Arnopol]

One thing I'm confused about. I would assume conventional loading---both speakers moving in or out at the same time. But maybe I'm missing something, but if you wire them reverse---there is no enclosure. It would essentially be the front part of an Isobnaric.If one woofer was firing out (away from the enclosure) and the second was firing into the enclosure at the same time there would be no compliance of air as an enclosure.
I can't see how it could possibly work in that configuration.
But as you're wiring it---should be cool. How big is the air chamber? The second woofer is obviously going to lose some mids and highs, but depending on the driver (like a 3012ho) that can be a good thing.

Again--not criticizing anything. I'm just assuming that I'm missing something!--there is no reason that they wouldn't sound nice!

[bb03]

Originally Posted by Brad Johnson

How could it be anything but eyes vs. ears?



We're talking about TWO cabinet designs that the vast majority of folks have zero actual experience in... yet no shortage of opinions. See a problem? I do. Maybe folks with experience should just let those opinions stand. After all, they're pretty much of equal value.

Brad,

Nobody is saying these cabs sound bad! They are just saying how they would model in an acoustic engineering program. Once you figure out that what you're hearing is the same as what they're saying...there is no argument to be had.

[Chef]

Mod Insert:
I've got my eyes on this thread, and "if it turns into another one of those," that's not ok. Especially if you have a track record with that.

Ok then.

[Brad Johnson]

Originally Posted by Chef

Mod Insert:
I've got my eyes on this thread, and "if it turns into another one of those," that's not ok. Especially if you have a track record with that.

Ok then.

If you're referring to me I'll leave the thread now and let people say whatever they want about Glasstones. I already talked to ncognito and we have no problem. I'm offering what I consider an even handed response to some misinformation and assumptions based on actual experience. If that's not okay... cool. I'm looking forward to checking out an Xsonics cab so I can then know what it does. I already did that with a Glasstone. And Schroeder and Tech Soundsystems. And Eden D410XLT for that matter. I'm not guessing about anything.

EDIT: I just read the PM. I honestly don't know what I'm allowed to say at this point. I didn't think or say that anyone said Glasstones sound bad and that was problematic.

[rpsands]

If you turn an Xsonics on its side it's now firing like a glasstone.

Fundamentally the difference will be negligible.

(if the woofers and interior dimensions are the same)

[Chef]

Except that the secondary woofer is working in different directions between the two, I believe...
I could be wrong.

[Brad Johnson]

Originally Posted by rpsands

If you turn an Xsonics on its side it's now firing like a glasstone.

Fundamentally the difference will be negligible.

(if the woofers and interior dimensions are the same)

There are two ports and the woofers fire in different directions. That might make a difference, I still haven't heard an Xsonics.

[bb03]

Originally Posted by Chef

Except that the secondary woofer is working in different directions between the two, I believe...
I could be wrong.

It seems when looking at the Xsonics site, now, that conventional loading is going to be the standard, with compound as the option. Maybe ncognito can chime in on this.

Kringle...is your cab coming compound or conventional? Not that you won't try it both ways.

[Ncognito]

Just a quick clarification. I've designed the Xsonics cabinets to allow for conventional loading AND compound non-isobaric push-pull loading. IMO, the cabinet sounds terrific loaded either way. Frankly, I don't hear a huge difference between the two and I have 4 test review cabinets. Maybe a little less high end and a tad more mids with the push-pull. Because we gain internal volume flipping the driver to be outside the chamber (not cabinet) the compound push-pull goes a bit lower and louder. My intention is discuss the differences with any buyer and determine which loading fits best. Push-pull is my personl preference. I takes a total of 5 minutes to remove the side driver, flip it 180 degrees and reverse the wiring polarity for anyone who wants to have a listen to push-pull. The cabinet behaves a bit more like a sealed cabinet IMO with compound loading. Lots of sonic options to choose from if you care to experiment.

I hope to have my cabinets charted later in the year.

[Mike Arnopol]

I just can't see how if one woofer was firing away from the enclosure and the other was firing into the enclosure at the same time ---if the two share the same air cavity---there is no enclosure. No compliance of air to function as an enclosure. If there are 2 separate chambers---with one firing out from the enclosure--and the other firing in---there would be phase cancellation. What am I missing here?

[Mike Arnopol]

Oh---I think I understand now. You can have the side woofer either basket out or basket in? In either case---it's conventional loading---both speakers moving air away from the enclosure at the same time?
Should sound pretty similar both ways with a bit more mids and highs from the "basket in".

I didn't consider that you were flipping the woofer. I was also thinking that with the "basket out" you might have a smidge more low end as the internal enclosure size grows with the speaker now not displacing enclosure volume.

[rpsands]

They're at different places from the listener so they won't cancel as much. There's definitely some cancellation when they share the enclosure and are in push-pull.

It'll work basically identically to a dipolar cabinet except you won't get the extra mids/highs radiation pattern out the back.

http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=66471

[rpsands]

Originally Posted by Mike Arnopol

Oh---I think I understand now. You can have the side woofer either basket out or basket in? In either case---it's conventional loading---both speakers moving air away from the enclosure at the same time?
Should sound pretty similar both ways with a bit more mids and highs from the "basket in".

I didn't consider that you were flipping the woofer. I was also thinking that with the "basket out" you might have a smidge more low end as the internal enclosure size grows with the speaker now not displacing enclosure volume.

(As I understand it) The speakers are always both facing out, but you either get them wired out of phase or in phase.

Out of phase will get you a slightly wider dispersion pattern, but sacrifice overall sensitivity as I understand it. You might not get the wider dispersion pattern at all frequencies though, since it's not a true dipolar speaker.

[Ncognito]

Originally Posted by rpsands

(As I understand it) The speakers are always both facing out, but you either get them wired out of phase or in phase.

Out of phase will get you a slightly wider dispersion pattern, but sacrifice overall sensitivity as I understand it. You might not get the wider dispersion pattern at all frequencies though, since it's not a true dipolar speaker.

The speakers are Not always both facing out. My compound non-isobaric push-pull flips the chambered woofer 180 degrees so it fires into the enclosure with polarity out of phase for that woofer. The conventional does not fire into the enclosure and is in phase.

I'm trying my best to stem the confusion.