Xmax, efficiency, and power handling? - Home Theater Forum and Systems - HomeTheaterShack.com

Thread Tools
post #1 of 5 Old 01-15-09, 01:44 PM Thread Starter
Senior Shackster
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 106
Xmax, efficiency, and power handling?

It seems that xmax results in greater overall SPL volume and also lower notes. But from what I can tell efficiency is impacted in that more excursion requires more power.

Can anyone clear this up?
ampire is offline  
Sponsored Links
post #2 of 5 Old 01-15-09, 02:29 PM
Elite Shackster
Blaser's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Cairo-Egypt
Posts: 1,940
Send a message via MSN to Blaser
Re: Xmax, efficiency, and power handling?

OK let's see what we have:

Efficiency is not directly related to Xmax, mathematically speaking efficiency = output (db) / input (power)

Greater Xmax means more output (assuming everything else equal)

More Xmax requires more power (assuming everything else equal), and will result in more output.

Lower notes required high Xmax drivers to reproduce them at a useable levels due to the inefficiency of our hearing down low. More power is also needed, that's true. To reproduce the same output down low, every octave down needs 4x excursion, hence the importance of a high Xmax for HT application.

Yamaha RX-V2500, Wharfedale Diamond 9.6 Fronts, Wharfedale Diamond CM Center, Diamond DFS Surround and rear, Behringer FBQ 2496, Dual RL-P18s 625L LLTs, Dual TA-2400 Pro (2 * 2000 W Amp), Samsung HD870 DVD player, Carada BW 16:9 106" screen, Epson TW-2000, 60 Gb PS3
Important HT proverbs:
- "You can never have too much headroom" (talking about bass)
- "you can never have too big a screen" (talking about still pictures)

Projector selection basics
Epson TW 2000 review
Blaser is offline  
post #3 of 5 Old 01-15-09, 02:47 PM
Elite Shackster
Ricci's Avatar
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 2,431
Re: Xmax, efficiency, and power handling?

The more SPL and the lower the freq's that you need to produce the more air you need the driver to be able to move (xmax). Each time you go an octave lower in frequency you need to quadruple the displacement to maintain the same SPL level. At 40hz you may be fine, but what about 20hz, or 10hz? In a normal system there will be some points where it is limited by the physical displacement of the driver( Xmech, really low notes, driver bottoms out) and at other points it will be limited by the ability of the driver to handle more power (heat, thermal power compression, the vc's burn). Ideally you would design your system to not exceed either limit.

There isn't really a guide for this but today's really long excursion drivers are generally thermally limited above the 30hz range and displacement limited somewhere below this. These are huge generalizations and depend a lot on the cabinet alignment being used, but basically true. If your intended range is 30hz-120hz you don't need a driver with 30mm xmax, you will never use it all. The driver's vc will melt first and would be better served with something like a pro audio driver with 10 or 15mm xmax but really high sensitivity and power handling. If your intended range is 8-80hz, that 30mm xmax is much more useful in the 8-25hz area. As you decrease in frequency the driver takes less power to move the cone and at something like 10hz in free air a very few watts can really get the cone moving. The more xmax that a driver is capable of the more power you will need to be able to apply to use it though.

The reason that you don't see very high xmax drivers with very high efficiency is because, long xmax necessitates a lot of power handling, and heavier cone and suspension components to deal with the increased stresses of such a long cone travel, also the peak BL of the motor is sometimes sacrificed to get a broader more even BL. You end up with a heavy cone assembly and a heavy massive vc combined with a reduction of peak BL. This all robs your efficiency greatly. It is not impossible to combine high xmax with high efficiency but it is difficult and the drivers that have done it are expensive because you need a really well engineered and powerful motor. (TC Sounds PA5100, ZR18, Worx 18, Aura 1808, JBL 2269H) none of them have class leading displacement either.
Ricci is offline  
post #4 of 5 Old 01-16-09, 10:44 AM Thread Starter
Senior Shackster
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 106
Re: Xmax, efficiency, and power handling?

Ok thanks guys that cleared it up very well.
ampire is offline  
post #5 of 5 Old 01-16-09, 07:24 PM
Senior Shackster
DrWho's Avatar
Mike Bentz
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 438
Re: Xmax, efficiency, and power handling?

For what it's worth, the reason high xmax drivers tend to be low efficiency is because they are also intended to be placed into small enclosures...it's hoffman's iron law. If you designed the driver for the same bandwidth and output, but with a much larger enclosure, the efficiency would be much higher.

Another thing to note is that hoffman's iron law is mostly just addressing electrical efficiency. When you have a motor that stays linear with increased power, then the electrical efficiency isn't as important. The surface area of the driver determines the "acoustical efficiency", which is the ability to create acoustical power for a given excursion. In other words, drivers of the same surface area must undergo the same amounts of excursion for the same SPL. Most of the distortion from speakers comes from the motor nonlinearities that results from excursion (like in the voice coil gap or the suspension or cone stiffness, etc...). Really awesome drivers will maintain as linear as possible excursion performance, but you will always decrease distortion with increased surface area (ie, more drivers).

So really, the only difference between a large enclosure and small enclosure for the same surface area and bandwidth is the amount of thermal nonlinearity. In other words, if thermal nonlinearity is kept in check, then two same sized drivers are going to sound very similar (in fact, the smaller cabinet will probably sound better since the resonances are pushed further away from the passband). And since people want small enclosures, it just follows that the efficiency goes down and the motor complexity increases. It's also convenient that more watts from amplifiers is really cheap (and keeps getting cheaper).

All that to say, the absolute ideal doesn't support the latest trend in subwoofer design, but the greatest bang for buck within the constraints of aesthetics and practicality very much supports the latest trends.

-Mike Bentz
~It's all about compromise~

"It's territorial with the soundboard. So you're mixing and some dude comes by spewing opinions and trying to turn knobs. It's akin to going up to an artist and painting over his unfinished masterpiece. You just want to shove your paint brush up his nose and throw the soundboard out the window!"
DrWho is offline  


efficiency , handling? , power , xmax

Quick Reply

Register Now



Confirm Password
Email Address
Confirm Email Address
Random Question
Random Question #2

User Name:
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.


Confirm Password:
Email Address



Activation requires you reply to an email we will send you after you register... if you do not reply to this email, you will not be able to view certain areas of the forum or certain images... nor will you be able download software.


See our banned email list here: Banned Email List

We DO NOT respond to spamcop, boxtrapper and spamblocker emails... please add @hometheatershack DOT com to your whitelist prior to registering or you will get nowhere on your registration.

Email Address:


Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML is not allowed!
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome