Bucket Sub Revisited

This will turn out poorly...

Having watched this thread with both mirth and amazement I realized that I had a bucket and cement. Only problem is the drivers I have on hand are 6.5 Neo tang band sub woofers.

Eh, couldn't hurt, right...

well the cement is curing in the bottom of the bucket. The wife is on the phone probably calling the the guys in the white jackets with the butterfly nets after watching me cut the bucket and hammer the feet and nails in while sitting in the living room. it will be a few days before I learn just how badly this thing can turn out but so far it has been an absolute blast. :D

By Tuesday I should be able to wire it up and see whats what. Maybe sooner. I expect nothing so I should not be surprised if it falls through the baffle and implodes.
 
This will turn out poorly...

Having watched this thread with both mirth and amazement I realized that I had a bucket and cement. Only problem is the drivers I have on hand are 6.5 Neo tang band sub woofers.

Eh, couldn't hurt, right...

well the cement is curing in the bottom of the bucket. The wife is on the phone probably calling the the guys in the white jackets with the butterfly nets after watching me cut the bucket and hammer the feet and nails in while sitting in the living room. it will be a few days before I learn just how badly this thing can turn out but so far it has been an absolute blast. :D

By Tuesday I should be able to wire it up and see whats what. Maybe sooner. I expect nothing so I should not be surprised if it falls through the baffle and implodes.

Ed, the inventor, is adamant when he says "do not deviate" from his design as you'll end up with something very different.

I was afraid mine wouldn't work as well since I added the mounting ring but the rings don't affect it's performance.

If the smaller TB's ( which I assume you already owned ) don't work out you can always buy the Peerless woofers, enlarge the hole and you've lost nothing by trying.

By the way those Tang Bands are highly regarded.
 
Ed, the inventor, is adamant when he says "do not deviate" from his design as you'll end up with something very different.



I was afraid mine wouldn't work as well since I added the mounting ring but the rings don't affect it's performance.



If the smaller TB's ( which I assume you already owned ) don't work out you can always buy the Peerless woofers, enlarge the hole and you've lost nothing by trying.



By the way those Tang Bands are highly regarded.


How about if he mods the volume by using more concrete? It will be really heavy, but might just work, or decrease volume by lining with wool felt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Played Master and Commander the other night. The SO had already gone upstairs to bed but not yet sleeping. She noticed their was now a sub.... :D

It's just a simple 2.1 system for her house with a pair of Minimus 77s powered by a Panasonic SA-XR55, then the bucket sub on the sub output, using a Phase Linear A15 in bridged mono to power it. Sounds OK.

Playing music off a USB stick through the BD player sounds decent too.
 
Last edited:
The buckets sound best with lots of power.

Ed says a minimum of 300 watts.

He uses a Crown XLS 1000 and it sounds better than my Yung SD300. He says he wished he'd bought the XLS 1500.
 
The A15 is ~190W @ 8 ohms bridged, as best I can gather.

I'm a firm believer more power matters.... if you are pushing the amp that hard. The A15 has clipping indicators and they've not lit up yet. At least in this case, so far there isn't any need for more power.
 
Some additional technical and sonic information from Bruce Rozenblit:

Real time analysis in a typical live listening room shows the Bucket Sub to be essentially flat from 25 Hz to 100Hz. One Bucket Sub can produce that output up to about 106 dB then it starts running out of steam. Two should be able to reach at least 109 dB. That is a tremendous amount of low frequency energy that will cause dishes to rattle and the house to shake. The sound is smooth, without being boomy or uneven. Transients are quick and not the least bit mushy. The relatively small and lightweight cone contributes to its speed. The Bucket Sub greatly benefits from lots of current drive so a high power class D plate amp is essential. Performance improves as current drive goes up. Several hundred watts will get the job done. Corner placement works well as it is up firing.

The way the thing works is by taking a speaker that was never intended for pure subwoofer operation and forcing it acoustically and electrically to perform as a super sub. The massive current drive pushes it in a very linear fashion. Since it is basically operating out of its intended range, it must be crossed over at low frequencies. At frequencies above 150 Hz, the output will begin to rise relative to the bottom octaves. For this reason, its use must be restricted to pure subwoofer operation. A minimum 12 dB/octave low pass filter is required and 24 dB/octave will increase performance.

Properly adjusted, the Bucket Sub will blend seamlessly into a main speaker system. It just disappears, except for the low end foundation that it provides. This is ideal performance for a subwoofer. This thing can be built for $75 in about one hour. It is no doubt the greatest value in DIY audio available.
 
Besides the mentioned Peerless woofer, has anyone tried a similar one? Which one? Did it work?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You can use any driver that will fit in the bucket. How it performs is another matter...

If you want similar performance then I'd expect you'd need to find a driver with similar parameters as the recommended Peerless.
 
The concrete adds incredible mass and solidarity to the whole structure and there's no flex or give like one might expect from a plastic bucket.

Those long deck screws just above the bottom lid as well as the long bolts attaching the feet act like rebar and re-enforce the concrete.

I just read Mr.Schilling's posts at the hornshoppe forum about development of this thing. He noted the lid was flexing and acting as a passive radiator, so the concrete is only for restraining this. He also notes a layer of sand would work as well.
 
I picked up two of these $4.00 10" waffle style grills ( 260-373 ) from Parts Express.

I was amazed that they are an exact fit for the bucket sub. They snap securely in place inside the bucket rim. :thmbsp:

269-106_HR_0.jpg
 
Thank you whoaru99,
I will probably source peerless from part-express

thank you Poultrygeist for posting this bucket sub which
i think is very easy to build sub under $200

You can use any driver that will fit in the bucket. How it performs is another matter...

If you want similar performance then I'd expect you'd need to find a driver with similar parameters as the recommended Peerless.
 
Has anyone compared the bucket subs to OB bass? If so, what's your impression? I currently have the buckets but have never had the opportunity to hear OB bass so I'm just curious.
 
Has anyone compared the bucket subs to OB bass? If so, what's your impression? I currently have the buckets but have never had the opportunity to hear OB bass so I'm just curious.

OB bass is more accurate than enclosure bass but it doesn't plumb the depths nor is it visceral. My H-frames cover 40hz which is perfect for acoustic jazz whereas the buckets are true subwoofers. There might be times when I'd use both in the same system.
 
...The way these are integrated is through the Yung SD300 plate amp...

I've been using this amp for awhile now, and just noticed a 5000 hz (+/-) tone being produced through speakers connected to it. Am wondering if anyone else has this? A wire came loose last night and it got shorted, but the fuse did not pop. If no one else has this, then I guess it's time to get another, and then tear this one open to try and repair.
 
Back
Top Bottom