XLS200 Diy Project

gregmcquaid · 13-03-2007, 9:06 AM

Hi,

In a quest for ever better bass i am going to be modding my current XLS200 to offer better extension down the the low 20's.

I am going to acheive this by using the current Peerlees XLS10 driver from the XLS200 and create a new box which will also house 2 Peerless 10" Passive Radiators, this i hope will be powered from the 275w BK Plate amp.

Early modelling seems that i should be able to get down to around 22hz before room gain in a 35l enclosure, this is also before passive radiators hit max excursion.

Now this is my question, is the plate amp in the XLS200 been modified to enhance the preformance of the sub (ie EQ and boost) ?

If the plate amp is all good then it looks like i will be going ahead!

Will keep you lot updated on how i get on as well.

atb,
greg

eviljohn2 · 13-03-2007, 9:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregmcquaid

Now this is my question, is the plate amp in the XLS200 been modified to enhance the preformance of the sub (ie EQ and boost) ?

There were certainly no modifications to the old model - the sealed cabinet protects the driver from overexcursion.

gregmcquaid · 16-03-2007, 10:59 AM

Ok new plan now, i am scrapping the idea of the two passive radiators and driver because of the complicated box design and other factors.

Instead i am going to be using the monolith driver in either a 60l ported enclosure(which should get me flat to 20hz) or a smaller sealed enclosure with some boost at the lower end.

But i still have some tweaking to do with my designs, ultimately my goal is to try and get extension down to 20hz or below in a smaller enclosure than the one the monolith resides in.

Any comments or suggestions are welcome.

atb,
greg

micb3rd · 16-03-2007, 12:42 PM

I recently modeled the Monolith driver in a few enclosures using both in WINISD and Bass Box Pro 6. The BKelec vented enclosure size is spot on in size as is the vent tuning point !

Reducing enclosure size will reduce it's efficency and bottom end performance FACT.

The peerless passives with added mass to retuned low a lower frequency one way to reduce the enclosue size and do what you want.

gregmcquaid · 16-03-2007, 1:02 PM

I beg to differ, i have been modelling the Monolith Driver in unibox in a 60l vented (2 vents) enclousure with a tuning frequency of 21hz provides a -3db point of 21hz. Although this is as small as i can go as over excursion becomes a problem if i go any smaller.

In room this could be even lower if there is any room gain to be had.

Now i am no expert at designing subs but i am just putting across what i have found thorugh experimenting with unibox.

atb,
greg

Russell.Williams · 16-03-2007, 4:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregmcquaid

Any comments or suggestions are welcome.

Well one would be buy a Monolith. Apparently they work quite well

I think mic was trying to indicate that for extension with the modded Lab12 driver, the 95L enclosure may be the closest to ideal to achieve you aims. 18Hz (-3dB) sn't to be sniffed. I can't help thinking the smaller enclosure may lead to a bigger gap between the enclosures natural tuning and that of the ports, resulting in increased distortion. But I am in no way expert.

Another would be, have you looked at the size and tuning of the MJ Acoustics Ref 1 MkIII as it is basically a ported XLS-200 with a larger cabinet. Don't know if it's relevant, or even helpful, but it seems to be leaning in the same direction as you.

Russell

gregmcquaid · 16-03-2007, 6:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by russ.will

Well one would be buy a Monolith. Apparently they work quite well

I think mic was trying to indicate that for extension with the modded Lab12 driver, the 95L enclosure may be the closest to ideal to achieve you aims. 18Hz (-3dB) sn't to be sniffed. I can't help thinking the smaller enclosure may lead to a bigger gap between the enclosures natural tuning and that of the ports, resulting in increased distortion. But I am in no way expert.

Another would be, have you looked at the size and tuning of the MJ Acoustics Ref 1 MkIII as it is basically a ported XLS-200 with a larger cabinet. Don't know if it's relevant, or even helpful, but it seems to be leaning in the same direction as you.

Russell

I was going to buy a monolith in the first place but i didn't due to the dimensions of the sub which wouldn't fit in the space that i had available.

I have been speaking to tom from bk and i ran some ideas past him, i must give credit to tom he has been very helpfull in answering my questions. The main idea now is "clone" the monolith but use my dimensions so that it fits into my required space, this will work as long as i keep the volume to 95l (20hz tuning for port) and leave enough space for the port to fit on one side. This will also work out cheap for me as i already have a plate amp and the cost of the port and the driver will be cheap.

Can anyone tell me why bk dont have the monolith driver advertised on their website? i know it's there as tom sent me the link to it yet i cant find it if i try and browse the site.

atb,
greg

Russell.Williams · 17-03-2007, 12:23 AM

IIRC correctly, somebody posted that same link at some point in the Monolith thread. Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to find it.

Sorry.

Russell

gregmcquaid · 17-03-2007, 12:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by russ.will

IIRC correctly, somebody posted that same link at some point in the Monolith thread. Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to find it.

Sorry.

Russell

easy :

The Monolith DF/FF Thread

Russell.Williams · 18-03-2007, 7:29 PM

Nice one. You obviously have far too much time on your hands.

Russell

**IronGiant** · 18-03-2007, 11:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregmcquaid

Can anyone tell me why bk dont have the monolith driver advertised on their website? i know it's there as tom sent me the link to it yet i cant find it if i try and browse the site.

atb,
greg

Perhaps BK have kindly let people here have access to the driver, without letting it out to the general public

Dave

micb3rd · 19-03-2007, 1:40 PM

I agree! just adjust the dimensions (make it taller

) and keep the 95l size.

AVdavid · 19-03-2007, 1:55 PM

I posted the monolith driver link, the driver has super specs and if you can rework the dimension's to give you 95L in your space then you should get a very nice sub out at the end

Dave

asdonk · 19-03-2007, 6:34 PM

I am also going to build a smaller 60 ltr enclosure for the monolith
because the original monolith is to big to place it in my room
it takes to much space and 60 litres frontfiering will do fine

gregmcquaid · 19-03-2007, 7:59 PM

I have been modelling the monolith driver for a while now and a 60l enclosure tuned to 22hz will provide a -3db point of 21hz.

Now the thing is up the enclosure volume to 95l and tune to 20 and you will get a -3db of 18hz. This is the dilemma i am faced with, do i go for the smaller cabinent and accept 21hz or go all out and get 18hz?

The only issue with going with the smaller cabinent is it is going to require a long port which you somehow have to fit into the small enclosure, then there is the problem of vent speed and noise.

Another design that could of been built was a smallish sealed cabinent with some boost down at 20-25hz which should provide decent output flat down to 20hz, only thing stopping me is the complicated design of a linkwitz transform circuit and a more powerfull amp.

I think that i will be going with the 95l litre cabinent which i have already modified to fit my dimensions.

Hopefully the monolith driver should be with me this thursday then i can get my mdf cut and start cracking on with the enclosure build.

atb,
Greg

asdonk · 20-03-2007, 7:02 PM

ordered the monolith woofer today
I go for the 60 ltr enclosure, almost the same size as the rel stadim II which is 66 ltr
21 hz is a good result, also put the data in winSD today

gregmcquaid · 22-03-2007, 3:22 PM

Just an update:

The monolith drive and port arrived today so i can start to get on with the enclosure when i have some time. The port is a very well constucted piece of kit as is the monsterous monolith driver (Which weighs a ton!)

atb,
greg

asdonk · 28-03-2007, 5:36 PM

the monolith driver arrived a few days ago,so building can get started
for a new sub used for the LFE signa
it will replace a klipsch rw12 sub, that is great , but not as good as the monolith
I have build a 60 ltr enclosure in the past and will use it to test the monolith
woofer, I also have a port with th right dimensions

gregmcquaid · 07-04-2007, 9:01 PM

Hi,

Right the diy sub is now all finished and completed and i have to say it sounds very good indeed, it blends in with my hifi so much better than the xls200 did.

The sub went very deep on movies even at the low volume levels i had it at!

I will get pictures up as soon as possible, but it is a ugly looking thing until i can finish off the enclosure.

atb,
greg

asdonk · 07-04-2007, 9:24 PM

I have ordered the bsb300 subamp to have enough power to get the best out of th monolith woofer
also ordered a xls200 to be used for the center channel

Nimby · 08-04-2007, 8:45 AM

I was amazed how much bass there was in the center channel when I connected my big cylinder to it just as an experiment.

I had always assumed the center channel was just there to lock the dialogue to the screen and improve clarity.

Difficult to see 'telly when a 16-46 is sitting in the middle though!