Fellas,
Need help with some modeling for those of you have the software (I've got WinISD and that's pretty much it!).
B&C 15BG100 versus BMS 15N850 v2; enclosure is sealed and only 2 cubic feet (~60L).
Let me know what "theoretical" response would look like; I'm primarily concerned with midbass (>40Hz).
Overview
B&C Speakers
Thanks again!
Anand.
Need help with some modeling for those of you have the software (I've got WinISD and that's pretty much it!).
B&C 15BG100 versus BMS 15N850 v2; enclosure is sealed and only 2 cubic feet (~60L).
Let me know what "theoretical" response would look like; I'm primarily concerned with midbass (>40Hz).
Overview
B&C Speakers
Thanks again!
Anand.
Will you be using EQ to shape response?
The BMS has better specs but both will work well in a home environment. I have a pair of 15N850's but haven't tested them yet.
WinISD Pro does a pretty good job.
The BMS has better specs but both will work well in a home environment. I have a pair of 15N850's but haven't tested them yet.
WinISD Pro does a pretty good job.
Last edited:
Yes, absolutely.
It's in a multisub system and this is just another broadband sub design but no low bass as that is already taken care of by a 21 inch driver
I noticed that the BMS on WinISD had a response with an F3 80Hz, F6 60Hz; whereas the B&C had an F3 of 55Hz since it has a higher Qts.
The BMS would need more boost to extend the low end, but also may have a superior motor design judging from Vance Dickason's measurements on Pearl Hifi. The inductance variance is very small. The Xmax of the BMS is 12mm while the B&C is 9-10mm.
Honestly both are great drivers, it's just that the BMS might be better.
I'm not the best at modeling so if some folks can look at this and also show how excursion requirements change for a given spl that would be great. I'm looking for 105-110 dB in the 50-200Hz passband with very little compression and distortion.
I'll probably be using a pair of them which should ease some of the burden.
Best,
Anand.
It's in a multisub system and this is just another broadband sub design but no low bass as that is already taken care of by a 21 inch driver
I noticed that the BMS on WinISD had a response with an F3 80Hz, F6 60Hz; whereas the B&C had an F3 of 55Hz since it has a higher Qts.
The BMS would need more boost to extend the low end, but also may have a superior motor design judging from Vance Dickason's measurements on Pearl Hifi. The inductance variance is very small. The Xmax of the BMS is 12mm while the B&C is 9-10mm.
Honestly both are great drivers, it's just that the BMS might be better.
I'm not the best at modeling so if some folks can look at this and also show how excursion requirements change for a given spl that would be great. I'm looking for 105-110 dB in the 50-200Hz passband with very little compression and distortion.
I'll probably be using a pair of them which should ease some of the burden.
Best,
Anand.
Either driver will easily perform in that circumstance. I don't have computer access at the moment but those number will be easy to achieve with a pair of either. Keep in mind that the BMS is almost twice the price of the B&C.
I only chose the BMS because I wanted the most clean spl output possible in a very compact package for bass guitar or PA sub use.
I only chose the BMS because I wanted the most clean spl output possible in a very compact package for bass guitar or PA sub use.
BMS has more Xmax, Higher BL, lower Qts, I'd go with this one but both are good drivers.
What about the costs?
What about the costs?
Here are the simulations:
Note: That's a fullspace simulation.
The B&C goes deeper in that volume (less steep drop) but it's not that clean tuning. At first the differences don't seem that different. But I'd go for the BMS, it will sound a lot cleaner and more 'crisp', 'faster'. It's not that deep though but with just 60l you'd sacrifice spl (probably a lot) if you want to go deeper.
Edit: the B&C got much worse group delay
Note: That's a fullspace simulation.
The B&C goes deeper in that volume (less steep drop) but it's not that clean tuning. At first the differences don't seem that different. But I'd go for the BMS, it will sound a lot cleaner and more 'crisp', 'faster'. It's not that deep though but with just 60l you'd sacrifice spl (probably a lot) if you want to go deeper.
Edit: the B&C got much worse group delay
Attachments
Last edited:
Nice!
Cost is not the issue so no worries there!
Honestly fellas I am more curious about the differences in the motor design between these 2 drivers. Because I think that is what will dominate above 50Hz or so, it isn't going to be the box volume or xmax.
What I have read is that the BMS has less of a varying inductance than the B&C unit. Of course the BMS costs more.
See this review by Vance Dickason on the BMS (page 20):
https://pearl-hifi.com/06_Lit_Archive/15_Mfrs_Publications/40_Voice_Coil/2012/2012_1_Jan.pdf
See this review by Vance Dickason on the B&C (page 12):
https://pearl-hifi.com/06_Lit_Archive/15_Mfrs_Publications/40_Voice_Coil/2010/2010_7_Jul.pdf
Keep it coming fellas, I love the input!
Best,
Anand.
Cost is not the issue so no worries there!
Honestly fellas I am more curious about the differences in the motor design between these 2 drivers. Because I think that is what will dominate above 50Hz or so, it isn't going to be the box volume or xmax.
What I have read is that the BMS has less of a varying inductance than the B&C unit. Of course the BMS costs more.
See this review by Vance Dickason on the BMS (page 20):
https://pearl-hifi.com/06_Lit_Archive/15_Mfrs_Publications/40_Voice_Coil/2012/2012_1_Jan.pdf
See this review by Vance Dickason on the B&C (page 12):
https://pearl-hifi.com/06_Lit_Archive/15_Mfrs_Publications/40_Voice_Coil/2010/2010_7_Jul.pdf
Keep it coming fellas, I love the input!
Best,
Anand.
Last edited:
ICG,
I’m a little unsure but did you model them in sealed 60L enclosures or bass reflex?
Thanks,
Anand.
I’m a little unsure but did you model them in sealed 60L enclosures or bass reflex?
Thanks,
Anand.
In 60L sealed they are both very similar below 100hz. BMS has a bit more going above. If cost is no object BMS all the way. More advanced motor, better suspension linearity.
BMS made quite the showing on Data-Bass with very low distortion at very high output levels.
BMS made quite the showing on Data-Bass with very low distortion at very high output levels.
BR. You can see the port parameters in the small box on the right lower corner.
Rohrfläche = port surface
Rohrlänge = port length
Ah!
Do you mind modeling them sealed? I am pretty sure the BMS will need some EQ for it’s F3 to match the B&C. I am wondering how this will affect max SPL even though the BMS has 12-13 mm one way Xmax versus the B&C which is about 9 mm.
I am considering to use 2 drivers in 1 cabinet for total of 120L volume. The goal is 105-110dB max from 50Hz - 200 Hz.
ICG, it appears you like to save diy’ers resources & time and I thank you in advance!
Thank you!
Anand.
Last edited:
Sure, np.
While ported I'd prefer the BMS, sealed it's reversed. As you can see here, the BMS won't give you satisfying results in a sealed cabinet, -8 dB at 56 Hz isn't worth building, at least IMO. And you can also see the B&C could easily be EQ'd to extend the bass much deeper, don't forget, you also get roomgain, this is a fullspace simulation.
That is absolutely reasonable, with two drivers you'll be slightly above that figure. 60l each is also what I'd chose. Go for it! 😀
Yes I do. 😉 And you're welocme. 🙂
Attachments
Hello,
With 90L-100L sealed, which is better, the BMS or B&C ?
Do you think bass reflex enclosure is better for domestic listening
I used activ crossover for 40-300 hz
With 90L-100L sealed, which is better, the BMS or B&C ?
Do you think bass reflex enclosure is better for domestic listening
I used activ crossover for 40-300 hz
BMS is the better driver.
In practice both will be nearly indistinguishable when eq'd to the same curve.
I would personally port them low or use passive radiators. You can always plug the ports if you decide to go with a sealed box.
Prosound drivers do have a break in period IMO. Keep that in mind during initial testing.
In practice both will be nearly indistinguishable when eq'd to the same curve.
I would personally port them low or use passive radiators. You can always plug the ports if you decide to go with a sealed box.
Prosound drivers do have a break in period IMO. Keep that in mind during initial testing.
Thanks!
-what are your tips for blocking the ports, i have 2 rectangular events
-i know I'm off topic but B&C offers 14" pilots. I'm interested in this size. What do you think of the 14ndl76, 14ndl88 and 14na100 for 90-100 liters sealed or BR
-what are your tips for blocking the ports, i have 2 rectangular events
-i know I'm off topic but B&C offers 14" pilots. I'm interested in this size. What do you think of the 14ndl76, 14ndl88 and 14na100 for 90-100 liters sealed or BR
Rolled up mattress topper foam is what I use...nothing fancy. Might take a little work to make it visually appealing if the vents are exposed.
Any material that can seal the hole without vibrating will work equally well.
The 14" drivers don't offer any advantage over 15" drivers for the range you'll be using them for.
It comes down to clean displacement for this range.
Any material that can seal the hole without vibrating will work equally well.
The 14" drivers don't offer any advantage over 15" drivers for the range you'll be using them for.
It comes down to clean displacement for this range.
Thanks
It is especially that the size of a 14" is better for my enclosure. the BMS is quite expensive. this kind of 14 "is it possible in sealed enclosure?
It is especially that the size of a 14" is better for my enclosure. the BMS is quite expensive. this kind of 14 "is it possible in sealed enclosure?
Any driver can work in a sealed enclosure. I consider eq mandatory for best results.
It comes down to what kind of output you expect from your system. For example, the BMS puts out about 5 more decibels than the B&C 14" at 40hz at xmax.
Oberton and Lavoce are other quality brands that offer good value. They make drivers with similar xmax to the 15N850 at less than half the price.
It comes down to what kind of output you expect from your system. For example, the BMS puts out about 5 more decibels than the B&C 14" at 40hz at xmax.
Oberton and Lavoce are other quality brands that offer good value. They make drivers with similar xmax to the 15N850 at less than half the price.
thank you very much for this advice, in addition the Oberton and Lavoce have the good dimensions for my enclosure, less than 388 mm.
I don't know any of these brands though.
for you which are the oberton/lavoce which comes closest to the BMS15N850 for a volume of 90-100 liters?
I don't know any of these brands though.
for you which are the oberton/lavoce which comes closest to the BMS15N850 for a volume of 90-100 liters?