Jump to content
djtomczak

Obsidian audio?

Recommended Posts

While the WinISD graphs aren't going to predict response in a real world scenario, it successfuly puts all woofers on the same plane, to be compared without bias.

It really doesn't even do that... the real responses aren't like the graphs at all when we measured them.

These days I don't use a box program for anything more than calculating port tuning as they are so often separated by a big margin from what really happens.

not bashing or anything, but if you dont see the graph, how do you figure what tune you want? do you base it on the music you listen to, how low you wanna get, or spl?

In reality when tuning an enclosure, you should take the acoustical properties of the vehicle and sub/port placement into consideration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
While the WinISD graphs aren't going to predict response in a real world scenario, it successfuly puts all woofers on the same plane, to be compared without bias.

It really doesn't even do that... the real responses aren't like the graphs at all when we measured them.

These days I don't use a box program for anything more than calculating port tuning as they are so often separated by a big margin from what really happens.

not bashing or anything, but if you dont see the graph, how do you figure what tune you want? do you base it on the music you listen to, how low you wanna get, or spl?

In reality when tuning an enclosure, you should take the acoustical properties of the vehicle and sub/port placement into consideration.

. . . But in reality, who has the equipment and know-how to accomplish this? Very few.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of us who have some sort of program that we trust, are the ones that developed something from scratch.

And before everyone starts asking for that to be published or produced. The system I have is far from marketable even for free. lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
While the WinISD graphs aren't going to predict response in a real world scenario, it successfuly puts all woofers on the same plane, to be compared without bias.

It really doesn't even do that... the real responses aren't like the graphs at all when we measured them.

These days I don't use a box program for anything more than calculating port tuning as they are so often separated by a big margin from what really happens.

How are you measuring them?

SPL meter in the vehicle under power (~600 watts) at 5 Hz intervals.

The giant peak on the ISD graph shown for the Skar woofer simply doesn't happen for instance... the shape of the response is very much like the Obsidian despite a VERY different model.

----

We use box programs to calculate port size and anechoic F3 -- then use knowledge of how things typically react in a car to suggest box spec to customers. Over-studying the graphs in box model programs is something I was VERY guilt of early in my audio years... but I've learned better :)

Edited by sundownz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
While the WinISD graphs aren't going to predict response in a real world scenario, it successfuly puts all woofers on the same plane, to be compared without bias.

It really doesn't even do that... the real responses aren't like the graphs at all when we measured them.

These days I don't use a box program for anything more than calculating port tuning as they are so often separated by a big margin from what really happens.

How are you measuring them?

SPL meter in the vehicle under power (~600 watts) at 5 Hz intervals.

The giant peak on the ISD graph shown for the Skar woofer simply doesn't happen for instance... the shape of the response is very much like the Obsidian despite a VERY different model.

----

We use box programs to calculate port size and anechoic F3 -- then use knowledge of how things typically react in a car to suggest box spec to customers. Over-studying the graphs in box model programs is something I was VERY guilt of early in my audio years... but I've learned better :)

Well of course the graphs don't match the program, you're measuring in-vehicle :P

I think Duran's point was even though the box programs don't show in-vehicle response, you can compare the relative differences between two different subs. When placed in the same installation, while the response will change, that change will be common to both subs. So you can get an idea of relative differences even though actual response won't be exactly that of the program generated graph. With a little guesstimation you can get a general idea of how the in-vehicle response will look.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
While the WinISD graphs aren't going to predict response in a real world scenario, it successfuly puts all woofers on the same plane, to be compared without bias.

It really doesn't even do that... the real responses aren't like the graphs at all when we measured them.

These days I don't use a box program for anything more than calculating port tuning as they are so often separated by a big margin from what really happens.

How are you measuring them?

SPL meter in the vehicle under power (~600 watts) at 5 Hz intervals.

The giant peak on the ISD graph shown for the Skar woofer simply doesn't happen for instance... the shape of the response is very much like the Obsidian despite a VERY different model.

----

We use box programs to calculate port size and anechoic F3 -- then use knowledge of how things typically react in a car to suggest box spec to customers. Over-studying the graphs in box model programs is something I was VERY guilt of early in my audio years... but I've learned better :)

Well of course the graphs don't match the program, you're measuring in-vehicle :P

I think Duran's point was even though the box programs don't show in-vehicle response, you can compare the relative differences between two different subs. When placed in the same installation, while the response will change, that change will be common to both subs. So you can get an idea of relative differences even though actual response won't be exactly that of the program generated graph. With a little guesstimation you can get a general idea of how the in-vehicle response will look.

I completely agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Brad.

I was stating that WinISD brings the drivers into a controlled area and is completely unbiased. In vehicle testing yields different results, of course, but if they are compared on the same plane, one driver can be found to be better suited in one specific installation vs. a different installation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so back to the Obsidian sub real quick...I see the specs for the sub and that people say its a SQ designed sub...but how does it compare to the SSA lineup? I've been waffling about which sub to buy...I keep thinking I've settled on the SSA Icon only to find this thread and you guys talking about Obsidian again (which I was thinking about a few months back.

Is the Obsidian a fair comparison to the SSA Icon? Or would it be closer to the Dcon?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so back to the Obsidian sub real quick...I see the specs for the sub and that people say its a SQ designed sub...but how does it compare to the SSA lineup? I've been waffling about which sub to buy...I keep thinking I've settled on the SSA Icon only to find this thread and you guys talking about Obsidian again (which I was thinking about a few months back.

Is the Obsidian a fair comparison to the SSA Icon? Or would it be closer to the Dcon?

Nick Lemons of Stereo Integrity designed the subwoofers, he is a SQ guy but like a lot of sub woofers they have the potential to be very loud depending on the goals of the installation.

The Obsidian is a budget friendly sub woofer that would fall in between the DCON and ICON.

Depending on budget, get the one you can afford. You won't be dissapointed with either brand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
While the WinISD graphs aren't going to predict response in a real world scenario, it successfuly puts all woofers on the same plane, to be compared without bias.

It really doesn't even do that... the real responses aren't like the graphs at all when we measured them.

These days I don't use a box program for anything more than calculating port tuning as they are so often separated by a big margin from what really happens.

How are you measuring them?

SPL meter in the vehicle under power (~600 watts) at 5 Hz intervals.

The giant peak on the ISD graph shown for the Skar woofer simply doesn't happen for instance... the shape of the response is very much like the Obsidian despite a VERY different model.

----

We use box programs to calculate port size and anechoic F3 -- then use knowledge of how things typically react in a car to suggest box spec to customers. Over-studying the graphs in box model programs is something I was VERY guilt of early in my audio years... but I've learned better :)

Well of course the graphs don't match the program, you're measuring in-vehicle :P

I think Duran's point was even though the box programs don't show in-vehicle response, you can compare the relative differences between two different subs. When placed in the same installation, while the response will change, that change will be common to both subs. So you can get an idea of relative differences even though actual response won't be exactly that of the program generated graph. With a little guesstimation you can get a general idea of how the in-vehicle response will look.

I understand that... it's not my first day messing with speakers. All of the subs were compared in the same vehicle in the same boxes on the same day so the same transfer function applied to all of them... The large peak the program shows on the VVX does not happen AT ALL. Despite any transfer function added the peak would carry through if it existed. The program is showing large differences that simply aren't there -- eg: It is not accurate.

If someone were to study these charts as a way to see "relative differences" between the subs they would gather information that is simply wrong and assume a massive difference in the response curves of the drivers that isn't real.

Best case the programs are "better than nothing" -- worst case they give the wrong impression of what is going to happen as is the case of the graphs in this thread used as examples to compare the three woofers in question.

Edited by sundownz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nick, check your PMs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yall got my man jacob working late shutting theory's down... hardest working man in audio ... just goes to show WHY SUNDOWN HAS BLOWN UP FAST!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just sharing my testing...

Another one to try in the box programs... model the SA-8 v.1 and the SA-8 v.2 and tell me what, if any, difference you would expect at 30 Hz assuming they are both in 0.6 tuned to 35 Hz. The programs are not even close.

There are too many dynamic parameters in speakers for the charts to be as accurate as we would hope in comparing drivers with significantly different design aspects from one another. I find them very useful to calculate port tuning, though!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jacob, have you found this across all programs for the most part?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×