How do small woofers produce large bass?

Hmm, almost sounds like some room modes excited by the f3 @ 23hz sbeaker rattled ther room and/or skeletal structure, the uninitiated might refer to it as overload, etc and try to knock 9db off the apparently ’full range’ speaker, he was sold, instead of nullifying those modes with strategic integration of a li’l sub.

Speaking of, what is this mighty speaker you speak of,  mighty lord moloch. Tell me what it is, so i too shall become eternal...

@bartsw wrote

. In reality... real life, I have to knock down the lower frequencies by 7-9dB to reduce (not eliminate) the bass overload, F3 around 23Hz, 15"x35" room. Contrary, it sounds like your setup with four $100K 150" subwoofer and multiple $0.50 1" speaker is low standard.

@deep_333  you’re still making theoretical claims without actually trying it yourself. I mentioned earlier everything. Floor standing speakers combined with subs give you the best coverage and performance. You don’t need to break a budget on subs relative to speakers. btw there's a dip around 100Hz as the chart may show signs of the offset, which... tada overloads the frequencies below it.

No theoretical claims...i’ve moved subs around on wheels for 20 years and i have all kinds of measurements.

We agree on one thing though. I never said you needed expensive subs either!

I’ve always suggested it as active room treatment (with a positive of adding some bass to anemic sht speakers). A couple of cheap li’l subs kept in a couple of strategic spots will fix some modal hell that is close to impossible to fix, otherwise. If you see some of my posts in the past, i’ve even suggested a $199 sub called a verafi caldera.

But, a guy buying a 2000 dollar cable might be better served with a 100 dollar cable and a 2000 dollar sub instead.

As phusis hinted at in a previous post, and ime, it is a better idea to lose bass extension below 80hz, get the sensitivity up to 100db (can’t have both), and let subs in the correct spots handle the bass. No chaos in the cabinet from low bass extension, no chaos in the room, no compromise to other drivers sitting in the cabinet, high sensitivity and all its benefits with a reasonable size cabinet (not a refrigerator), lots of benefits....from going away from this "full range" poetry.

Of course, there is the argument, " Well, if i have full bass extension on my main speakers, they will act as quasi subs and become part of a Earl Geddes type of distributed array along with my other subs!",,,,Yeah, that’s fine if you can actually put your main speakers now in the right spot for a low bass/distributed bass Geddes array...problem is those spots will be lousy spots for everything else a speaker has to do, imaging, soundstage and so on.....

@bartsw  wrote

@deep_333  you’re still making theoretical claims without actually trying it yourself. I mentioned earlier everything. Floor standing speakers combined with subs give you the best coverage and performance. You don’t need to break a budget on subs relative to speakers.

@pcrhkr wrote:

As far as woofer size, the effective radiated area of 2 six inch woofers will be about the same as a 12" woofer.

No, dual 6" woofers only cover half the displacement of a 12" woofer. There’s a significant difference. 

My experience is that a larger woofer will give more slam, hit, kick, in a 12" woofer vs two 6". However, the two 6" will likely respond more quickly in music dynamics because there is less mass to control.

In this case a 12" woofer would first and foremost move more air, i.e.: twice of that produced by dual 6" woofers. The perceived difference between these two scenarios would depend on several factors, but certainly the 12" woofer must be expected to have more impact, albeit not necessarily how one would imagine it.

What I’ve found is that I prefer a single larger woofer vs. several smaller ones, however a comparison would have to factor in that a woofer of, say, 15" is typically a higher efficiency variant (you don’t see many 15" low eff. "Hi-Fi" woofers), and thus it’s likely used differently than an array of low fs woofers with all that implies sonically. 

As a general observation though I tend to find larger woofers (vs. several smaller) to be more tuneful, articulate and less conspicuous in the mix. Many may believe a 15" woofer to be this crazy beast that puts out loads of bass compared to a pair of 6.5 or 8" woofers, but the perceived outcome is actually quite different, I find. 

I run my pro pioneers (dual 12s) with a dual 18 horn loaded pro sub...or i swap it with a 21 inch  sub. There is something about these large subs covering the low octaves, i probably won't be going under 18 inch subs hereafter. The crap coming out of things at axpona and the like..these boys have some things to learn.

The Tekton guy perhaps managed to word some of this...

https://youtu.be/4PIE1znQv2U?si=uNAviV8EcHfLp502

@phusis wrote

What I’ve found is that I prefer a single larger woofer vs. several smaller ones, however a comparison would have to factor in that a woofer of, say, 15" is typically a higher efficiency variant (you don’t see many 15" low eff. "Hi-Fi" woofers), and thus it’s likely used differently than an array of low fs woofers with all that implies sonically. 

As a general observation though I tend to find larger woofers (vs. several smaller) to be more tuneful, articulate and less conspicuous in the mix. Many may believe a 15" woofer to be this crazy beast that puts out loads of bass compared to a pair of 6.5 or 8" woofers, but the perceived outcome is actually quite different, I find.