Who makes the best mini scoop

lol......
forget scrambled sunny side up for me with bacon and sausage........

... this evening was so boooooring and I thought: "hey .. we did not discussed mini-scoops long time now.. which is not good"
so I have decided to acquire original SM mini (Mk1) plan ..and succeed - do not ask how (used "dark side" techniques) :silent: :angel:

Than I have dissected it on layers (even separated single layers of plywood :think: )
After that H-Resped, AKA-baked, oven-baked and at least grilled them.

Resulting taste was:

IF you load MS-18 with same beastly driver which can survive large chambers and large x-max - (so same as recommended/proven/tested in SM Mini) .. you will get almost same result (freq. excursion,GD, phase, impedance.. ) - just MS-18 will go a bit lower and will be a bit louder from 60Hz-up.

This both designs in combination with TurboMax 1200i give pretty strong 40(MS)-45(SM)Hz peak (which flatten out a pretty much when stacked in group of four or more but it is still there and peaks 1-5 - 2 db at that freq. above more balanced designed scoops or miniscoops as Rhino/MS-18mk3..)

Especially listening to one or two of "large-chamberers" loaded with proper driver will seriously impress with brutality/depth and dominate most(or can say all) of flatter freq. designs partially because real effect of high SPL on 40-45Hz and partially psychologically strongly augmented even more with sensitivity drop (valley) as SPL aproaching higher end of operating range and than sharp "make-up" with peak on 90-110Hz which brings back impression of overall "flattnes".
As said ..In larger stack this effect will be less prominent and large chamber and small chamber ones will come each to other very very close (Large ones still 1.5-2db more dominant on tight 40-45 .. and small chamber ones still overall flatter and dominant from 50-60-up but seems all within +/-2db).

So Mr. Helmholtz and Mr.Hoffman have set things pretty simple..

Yes I am (somehow) full aware that those are just sim and theory ..blah..blah and real thing may-or-may not.. prove things ..

..but, however I have spent ma evening and now can go to sleep. :ugeek:


Hmmm .. get dressed in a aramide pajamas.. (just in case)

smiley4

Interesting as always.
So How do your rate these minis to next generation minis like your microscoop (18" loaded) ?

.. smiley1
It is hard to "rate" or compare them only on simulation.
At the end of day you come to conclusion which is already many times said (Tony A.S.S.) about moving panels inch left-right within fixed cabinet size.

Both approaches are proven to work.
SM mini is not really horn to support low cutoff but rather weird waveguide/port (but big one)
Design layout is very very similar to Wembley b-line.

So one approach (like SM, MS-18Mk1, RhinoMk1) relies on large chamber and huge (and low loss/efficient) port and Helmholtz resonance in reproduction low end of operating range and 1/4wl duct/horn for upper end of operating freq. range.
Other approach is vice-versa ..small chamber and low end defined mostly by 1/4wl freq....
Of course there is no border between those two and theories blur each into other.
What makes difference is very different working conditions set on to speaker unit in each of those designs and that is where all "game" is.

For low power applications there will not be problem for booth design approaches to achieve desired tonal/freq. results.. but on brutal all day high power battlefield (big all parties, carnivals.. etc.) it will be much easier to find suitable driver which will correctly work and "survive" in small chamber-1/4wl design while in this situation large-chamberers will require more exotic specifically designed speaker units which are harder to find between of-shelf universal bass 18"-ers.

So small chamber-ers may be "safe hit" choice because much wider range of available/suitable 18" units that will work in cabinet fairly correct and safe on long run (even if cabinet and driver are not ideally matched). In opposite situation, non suitable driver will not forget large chamber easily .. which most likely will end up as duck sound, teared suspension or bottomed voice coils (which is costly in all options)

Personally I would chose small (or medium) chamber with "proper" long horn ones with noted driver choice flexibility as one of main reasons.

Guess 1 on 1, Shortman mini, Rhino, Staiper all tested with PD1850/Tmax 1200i/V18-1000, will settle this once and for all.

As Sman mini is deadly with all of these drivers.

SM Mini + V18-1000 is as actually touch louder than ASS S118 Full scoop with PD1850. smiley16

what about sman loaded with v1200? or tmax 1500i mk3?

the only way is a mini scoop shoot out, with all cabs loaded with the same driver.... or having a few of the same driver and trying each one against each other......

So lev whens it happening...... Time....... date........ How much would the venue Motion uses for his events be I would be happy to chip in a few £'s to cover costs..... Maybe make it apart of the fsp meet 1012......... Ive been asked by a few members if im gonna organise one early next year.....

levyte357 wrote: ...SM Mini + V18-1000 is as actually touch louder than ASS S118 Full scoop with PD1850. smiley16

W fk*ng O W

HOW? ? smiley3
..on which frequency or in what freq. range? .. played/listened on exactly SAME points in space? (even ~half meter left/right or forward/back on any of those may make huge listening difference)

I really respect all possibilities but this really sounds impossible as S118 as proper full size scoop with minimum wasted spaces inside given cabinet volume (OK ..SM have only wasted spaces behind top and bottom scoop corner reflectors on cabinet back) ..but according to all physics S118 have to be at least 2-3db louder through most of operating range.

---

Of course that simulation can't tell us all about final sound of cabinet but can be indicative to give good general guide but this seems that "that" SM effect falls far out of simulation scope.


I know that most of you UK mates have listened in person to many of those designs in various situations and that there must be "something" but it really intrigues mind to make proper outdoor measurement and shine some light on according to witnesses - supernatural behavior of grown-up wembley box.

OK, on scoop's playground all seems that is :shh: smiley2 smiley16 .. but is it possible that through all this years none have tried to measure all this "winner-scoops" by some proper scientific way at least to satisfy curiosity .. or no just because it may blow all this mysterious mist away.

- I say this without sarcasm as I really would like to see what is "that" .. regardless is it real or psycho-acoustical .. (is it relevant at all .. if it just works "that".. hehe)

P.S.
If it do not cost leg&arm to obtain PD's or Turbomaxes here in Croatia I would be intrigued to build one SM for myself and throw it in jaws of Easera or Smaart. ... maybe some day in better times.

staiper wrote:

levyte357 wrote: ...SM Mini + V18-1000 is as actually touch louder than ASS S118 Full scoop with PD1850. smiley16

W fk*ng O W

HOW? ? smiley3
..on which frequency or in what freq. range? .. played/listened on exactly SAME points in space? (even ~half meter left/right or forward/back on any of those may make huge listening difference)

:lol:

Told you Staiper, HR does'nt tell you everything... smiley16


forum.speakerplans.com/results-scoop-sho...opic31627_page5.html


IMHO, real test to sort men from the boys would be measurement at 15M, wouldn't be so close then... LOL..

Corticyte wrote: Here are the SPL measurements I made.



1. Mr Ultimate Mini Scoop (PD1850)
2. Eminence Scoop modified but without cross brace (wardrobe) (PD1850)
3. A.S.S S118 (PD1850)
4. Hog (V18-1000)
5. Rens Eminence Scoop with cross brace (PD1850)
6. Shortman Minis (V18)
7. Shortman Full (Tmax/Fane)

Measurements were taken from the distance from the gaffer tape line to where the red carpet started (about 3m) unfortunately no one had a tape measure.

Notice the scale of the graph is only 122db to 123db, so all of the scoops were VERY similar in terms of SPL!

Again, with all respect (I do not want to "prove" or claim anything .. just constructive discuss/analyze) smiley1

I am still not convinced.

Handhold SPL meter can tell you generally close to nothing about bass cabinet this way.
SPL meter will just show you overall maximum noise spikes from cabinet regardless to freq. or bandwidth of that max. SPL zone.
I have quick sketched one example to show what may happen here:



+Now talking about pure freq. response - not fine tonal details and character..

Red lined one really will have effect to impress.. You can look this effect as smiley-face EQ setting but just on tight bandwidth .. so .. deep shaking/roling bass? HERE! .. chest-hitting bottom kick "speed"? HERE! = WOW (all in between is also HERE but on much lower level but our brain is happy to fill in)

Black line one will give more balanced sound over its operating range but sound may be perceived as somehow "plain" and first listen may impress less than "smiling" one. .. or due to "just-plainness" not impress at all.

I know which ones I would like to have in stack if I am on mixing console especially for live gigs .. but again we come to question of personal taste/preference and type of job and space where systems are used.



Only usable way to compare cabinets using SPL meter is to:

1. set meter fixed on fixed position and distance from test subject (cabinet) - ideally close to ground as possible (not directly touching the ground) ..Tom Danley measuring method of 10m between mic and speaker may be good to eliminate effect of air kinetic energy from bass horns
2. Mark on floor and use exact same position for tested speaker cabinets
3. Use tone generator with changeable freq. as signal source and play frequencies in range of interest with steps of few Hz and mark SPL reading of each played freq. on paper ..or excel table.
Repeat for each cabinet on test..

...yes, I know, boooring and time consuming.