Cubo 12 driver Fs, Qts, Xmax..

Hello Cubo 15 and Everyone!
Such as indicated by Cubo 15 in others post, the best drivers to use in CUBO 12 are these with Qts lower than 0.3 and voice coil very big. However, I was wondering how much important is the resonance frecuency (Fs), the Frequency response (Fres) and the sensibility (SPL).
For instance, at now I am thinking to build two cubo 12, but i do not know which driver is better. The drivers candidates are:
Eminence LAB 12: ( www.eminence.com/pdf/LAB_12.pdf )
Qts=0.33, Fs=22.85Hz, voice coil=2.5" , SPL=88.9 dB, Fres=25-120Hz, 500W RMS, 1000W music progra
Recomended vented enclosure volume 40 - 140 L
Ciare 12.00SW ( oem.ciare.com/it/297/360/prodotti.php )
Qts= 0.38, Fs=43Hz, Voice coil=4" , SPL(1w/1m)= 91dB, Fres=20-200Hz, 1000W RMS, 2000W m.p
BMS 12S330 ( www.starsound.ru/bms/12s330.pdf )
Qts=0.30, Fs=28.6Hz, Voive coil=3" , SPL(1w/1m)=96dB, F.resp=25-300Hz, 600W RMS, 1200W m.p
Recommended reflex enclosure: 44L/31Hz, -3dB=35Hz, BRD=120mm/434mm long
60L/27Hz, -3dB=32Hz, BRD=110mm/517mm long

We we check the power in the Ciare is very atractive, but it will be work with frequencies lower that its Fs(45Hz), which are the implications it carry out?
on the other hand, the eminece also look like excellent choice for its Fs, Qts and Xmax(13mm, the ohters one +/-8mm) (I do not know if for the publicity I saw )
And finally the lowest Qts, good Fs and highest SPL for the BMS one...

I do not have experience, thus I need your opinion.... specially the Cubo15's suggestions....
I appreciate any suggestion. Thank you very much.....

Such as indicated by Cubo 15 in others post, the best drivers to use in CUBO 12 are these with Qts lower than 0.3 and voice coil very big

For the other Cubo designs (15, 18, Sub) I tend to mostly agree with your statement. For Cubo 12 I prefer a 3" VC or larger. Larger coil drivers usually need a bit more power to get going, most mid-bass drivers have a 3" VC, sound good and are a very good choice as long as you don't need to take it all output wise.

I always look at Fs, Qts and Vas first. Then Xmax (plus how it''s calculated), Xmech and Mms. Then the other parameters.

However, I was wondering how much important is the resonance frecuency (Fs), the Frequency response (Fres) and the sensibility (SPL)

For Cubo 12, Fs is not a prime issue, most T/S-parameters are connected however, get one to far off and things will get messy.
Fs can be up to 1.414 times higher than the low cut off. Sensitivity can be usefull when calculated, stated sensitivity figures can be misleading. I find frequency response graphs from spec sheets usefull for > pistonic range (200 - 300 Hz and up)

Important to note: The Lab has a higher Qts, IIRC around 0.38 (as does the BMS). Xmax might be calculated different for some drivers and I believe Xmech is very low for at least the Ciare.

Therefore, at this point, I think it would be easier if you describe what you''re looking for andfind a matching driver based on that.

With regards to the three mentioned drivers, I think they all fall in the power hungry category. On page three of the Cubo 12 topic, you''ll find my opinion on the Ciare and Lab12: www.freespeakerplans.com/forum/38-hosted...12?limit=10&start=20

I might have mentioned the BMS in that topic as well.

Best regards Cubo

Hello Cubo 15,
Thank you very much for replay.
Taking into account your comments, in the end, I think my choice will be between:
12TBX100 ( www.elseaudio.de/WebRoot/Store3/Shops/62...35/0A04/12tbx100.pdf )
or
12NW100 ( www.elseaudio.de/WebRoot/Store3/Shops/62...935/0151/12nw100.pdf )
These woofer look very good in my opinion, the main difference is the neodimium magnet in 12NW100.
Both have 4" in the voice coil, 1000W RMS, and Qts=0.2 (for 12NW100) and 0.26 (for 12TBX100). In addition, I can say that 12TBX100 has a better mechanical performance, but 12NW100 has more sensibility (+1dB) and electrical efficiency.
However, due to you are the creator of CUBO 12, it will be very helpful read your opinion about these woofers. Taking into accout only these woofer, what do you think about which of these could work better?
Thank you in advance for your replay!!
Best Regards

I would go for the 12NW100. Calculated sensitivity difference is 1.7 dB in favour of the 12NW100. I would say the sensibility is higher as well The sensitivity of a driver says most about the 60 -100 Hz area when placed in a Cubo, above and below that area is mostly governed by the design itself.

Mechanically I''m pretty confident that the TBX and NW are almost the same, at first sight the 12NW100 looks like a 12TBX100 topology/ structure with a raised flux density.

Best regards

Cubo

Hello Cubo 15,
I bought two B&C 12NW100. I want to make two subwoofer, these will be complement of two midrange box composed for:
8" unknow woofer, VC= 2" max. power 500W, F.response=70-4500Hz
6" eminence LA6 CBMR, VC=1,5", max power 300w, F. response= 500-5400Hz
one bullet type tweeter.
I am considering the possibility to buy two 10" drivers...
Anyway, I want to get the deepest bass as possible by using 12" woofer at SPL levels acceptable with minimum space occupancy possible.
In this link ( www.freespeakerplans.com/forum/38-hosted...t=10&start=100#15514 ) you have said "Personally I was charmed by the B&C 12NW100"
I am wondering if you did some simulations with 12NW100. Because, it would be very interesting to compare the graphics obtained for the k-sub12 enclosure created by B&C. This box has the next features:

Box Volume 40 L
Tuning Frequency 60 Hz
Nominal Impedance 8 ohm
LF Limit 55 Hz
Continuous Power Handling 1400 W
Nominal Power Handling (AES) 700 W
Sensitivity (1W/1m) 95 dB
Max Peak SPL 129 dB
Max Long SPL 123 dB
possible Components:
LF Drivers 12PS100 | 12TBX100 | 12NW100
You can see here the plans and graphics:
www.dropbox.com/s/gpbggjpjfn6s4c6/K-SUB12.pdf
www.dropbox.com/s/8ttl8x27w622d2t/sub12.jpg

I appreciate any suggestion about the box choice and the cutoff frecuency for pasive crossover in midrange box and subwoofer. Thank you in advance.....

Well, I did some simulations with the 12NW100 but imho more importantly, I did measure the 12NW100 vs other drivers as well (see plans). Personally I do not think simulations are the correct method to determine behaviour between different drivers in the same enclosure. Two different drivers can simulate almost equal but measure quite differently.

More then once I've build a reflex for comparison purposes, to see if the added complexity of a design was worth the effort. The reflex cabinets build either were the same external dimensions or were larger than the competitive hybrid design. Every time up till now the hybrid was in a different leaque.

So unless the reflex is tuned considerably lower (30 - 40 Hz) than the hybrid and preferably the same size or larger, personally I wouldn't bother. In this case the cabinet is tuned to ~60 Hz, so the only benefit is the smaller size.

I think you could easily go with a 10" for mid, or even 2 x 8".

Best regards

Cubo

Thank you very much!