# Peerless XXLS 12" 830845



## npdang (Jul 29, 2005)

I can see why Peerless has such a highly regarded name in subwoofers. This driver is just gorgeous to look at. The biggest difference that I can see from the previous XLS version is the large bumped backplate. Other than that, the usual features such as venting under the spider and dustcap, dual aluminum rings in the motor, and an open cast basket. This driver also comes in several versions, suitable for sealed box, ported, or passive radiator applications.

I recommend a quick look at the XXLS application note if you're interested in the design of this driver. You can see alot of attention to detail here in the design, which is probably why the driver measures and sounds so great. 

http://www.d-s-t.com/link/main/tech/xxls_intro.htm


















Excellent quality control. This is where I believe Peerless truly shines. Specs are nearly all spot on.










No inductive hump below 200hz. Nice  Measurements taken at 2.83Vrms unbaffled, in free-air nearfield.










Wow. This is about as good as it gets. Nearly perfect symmetry and centering for both BL and KMS curves. However, BL is not "quite" as flat as the Dayton reference throughout it's linear range. Very low inductance variation, around -15% max throughout it's usable range.

Xmax ~13mm 1 way.


















Inevitably, people will ask which is better... the Dayton reference HF or the Peerless XXLS. Toss a coin really. I might choose the Peerless if price were not an issue, and I needed to be able to choose between several models with different t/s parameters. Also, Peerless quality control is just excellent. If you don't have the ability to measure t/s parameters for yourself, this may be a better choice. However, the Dayton is a real buy at current pricing and may give you slightly better although inaudible performance.


----------



## newtitan (Mar 7, 2005)

call me different but the $30 difference in price( w/ daytom), less power requirements, smaller box, smoother plot

ill take the xxls well as soon as the 4ohm car version hits madisound


thx for the review !!


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2005)

NP,

awesome work. Here is another californians site for similar testing. Don't know if you have seen it before. http://206.13.113.199/ncdiyaudio/mark/index.htm Not car audio of course, but I do like the format and detail. He also explains what is going on for some of the folks who may be graphically challenged  . Perhaps you could post a little preface here so that some of the folks who are asking can better comprehend what they are seeing. Basically an explaination of how the higher order products are (generally) more offensive that the lower order, etc. Also, do you think it would be better to list the 2nd and 3rd order at a -db level to the ref? I'm having to do too much math here  .
Lastly, where are you getting all these drivers from? I thought I had alot of drivers laying around, but you're putting me to shame!

Cheers,

AJ


----------



## Guest (Sep 20, 2005)

Doh!

Maybe I should have read some more before mouthing off :blush: . NP, looks like you've covered it right here already http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4
People, add this site to your favorites if you haven't already!!!! Great stuff.

Cheers,

AJ


----------



## Silvercans (Aug 9, 2005)

How does it compare to the Ascendant Audio Atlas 12?


----------



## dcibel (Sep 21, 2005)

Thanks for this information on the XXLS. I feel bad for not buying one now.

I am also interested in a speaker test involving an Atlas 12", although they are not being produced anymore since the company is changing motor technology, it may not be possible. When I was designing my subwoofer, it was a tossup between the Atlas and the XXLS 830847 but I chose the Atlas due to it's lower price. 

It may be hard to make a side by side test of an Atlas to any other driver since the Atlas can be wired in many different configurations which would give different results. For example I have the coils wired in series for a 6 ohm configuration which increases sensitivity and BL over the single coil / variable Qts configurations. Distortion measurements on the Atlas would be nice to see though.


----------



## npdang (Jul 29, 2005)

I have tested the Atlas against the Tc2+. Please check the review forum.


----------



## dcibel (Sep 21, 2005)

Thanks for the tip!


----------



## lv_v (Aug 24, 2005)

In a trunk should I go with the recommended 62 liter sealed box per sub? I am going to be running 2 830845's sealed off about 350 watts. Should I go with a smaller box because of cabin gain?


----------



## DopieM3 (Aug 23, 2005)

where can i buy the Dayton reference HF that eveyrone is referring to?
is this it? please confirm...

http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?&DID=7&Partnumber=295-464


----------



## Nothingness (Mar 31, 2005)

DopieM3 said:


> where can i buy the Dayton reference HF that eveyrone is referring to?
> is this it? please confirm...
> 
> http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?&DID=7&Partnumber=295-464


That's the one that was reviewed and is what most are using. This one seems more suited for a smaller sealed box: 

http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?&DID=7&Partnumber=295-466


----------



## tktran303 (Dec 30, 2005)

You reckon this thing will go well in a sealed box of only 1.5cu ft? Home use btw...

For some reason I'm getting a lower F3 and Qtc with the dual voice coiled 830847, which according to Tymphany/DST, is designed for vented boxes...


----------



## Guest (Oct 19, 2007)

thread from the dead ... sorry if this has been covered?

But why does the Klippel data show a voicecoil inductance that's _one third_ the value reported on the datasheet?

http://www.tymphany.com/datasheet/printview.php?id=30

I noticed the same trend with the XXLS automotive sub (830877) i tested on a Woofer Tester II ... spec sheet shows 1.3mH, but the measured data was almost exactly _half_  

Now i know there can be some variation depending on measured signal level and measurement frequency ... but different by a factor of 2 or 3?

By the way, a simple calculation based on the impedance curves (for example, impedance at 10kHz) aligns much more closely with the _measured_ values, than with the _spec-sheet_ values.


----------



## DS-21 (Apr 16, 2005)

werewolf said:


> thread from the dead ... sorry if this has been covered?
> 
> But why does the Klippel data show a voicecoil inductance that's _one third_ the value reported on the datasheet?


FWIW, I've found the same thing on all three in my FuzzMeasure measurements of my XLS12s. I believe HobbyHiFi or K+T's results were similar on one of the drivers, though I can't find the magazine.

It makes sense to me that the spec sheet is wrong, because frankly I can't imagine a woofer with the spec-sheet Le of the XLS series would sound as good as these do. But why Tymphany hasn't updated their spec sheets to reflect a reality that is very favorable to them, I have no idea.


----------



## kevin k. (May 5, 2005)

^^^ Good to 'see' you, DS-21... it's been a while. I hope all is (and has been) well with you and yours.


----------



## mazzasec (Oct 25, 2007)

very helpful1


----------



## darkist240sx (Aug 8, 2007)

always love your reviews


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

Bringing it up from the dead. Is there any chance for a plot of VC endurance? I've seen some of the new reviews now covering power/thermal.


----------



## my89_928gt (Aug 22, 2006)

Cool, just might try one down the road for a home project.


----------



## Candisa (Sep 15, 2007)

For home use, I would recommend the ....44 version with a (couple of) PR('s). I heard both the sealed (DVC) and PRed version in-room and I find the PRed version is a bit better in the lower notes.

In-car: Use the ....45 version if you don't want to build a large complicated enclosure. I use the ....44 version in car, but I'm building a 6th order bandpass enclosure around it to push the higher notes a little.

I attached the curves of:
830844 + PR (wich I would recommend for home use)
830844 'Candisa style' (wich should be great for car, but complicated to build)
830845 Sealed (great for car use)

greetz,
Isabelle


----------



## Candisa (Sep 15, 2007)

Ow yeah, after I made this print screen, I simulated the 45 version (2 of them, ment to put in a sealed enclosure) in a 100L box with 2 12"PR's and it gives pretty much the same curve, output and mechanical power handling as my 'Candisa Style' enclosure with the 44 version, and that would be a lot easier to build and a bit smaller in size... (DOH  )

greetz,
Isabelle


----------



## dftnz7 (Mar 2, 2008)

I would love to use this driver, but was concerned about its output level, and I dont have room for 2. Strictly SQ setup, it is probably adequate, but I want it to get after it when it needs to as well. My IDQ wasnt enough output for me in a truck, and am guessing the XXLS wouldn't be either.


----------



## FoxPro5 (Feb 14, 2006)

dftnz7 said:


> My IDQ wasnt enough output for me in a truck, and am guessing the XXLS wouldn't be either.


I've never used the IDQ, but I'm a big fan of the Arc sub that's very similar. Compared to it, the XXLS should have no problem doing what you want it to do...especially in a truck. I'd certainly never guess it was an 8 ohm driver. I run a PDX 1.600 on it (600x1 @ 4/2 ohm) and it's a great match power-wise with the XLS's up front. I could go down to 40 hz on both, but my system sounds more optimal with both (or at least the 8's) at 50hz. I'm telling you this because I think both drivers combine well in my car.


----------



## infamous_e46 (Dec 6, 2008)

i have always wanted to try these


----------



## norcalsfinest (Aug 30, 2008)

how much power will the XXLS 12 take sealed?


----------



## veltinorian (May 23, 2009)

Hi Npdang, 

i am happy that i found this interesting discussion and i read your thread from 09-19-2005 where you say:

"
Breaking this driver in with pink noise, I also noticed very little rub/buzz and mechanical noise. However, the cone breakup was very clearly audible giving a noticeable metallic coloration to the sound. I only mention this to discourage anyone from using it as anything but a subwoofer, even though inductance is astonishingly low. Looks like a great candidate for IB use.
"
i found it disturbing for this high end device, could you please give me a hint what exactly have you observed in this case?

i wanted to ask you which one of the both subs Peerless XXLS 12" 830845 or Dayton RSS315HF-4 is more suitable for my transmission line sub project, as the Peerless one has three times lighter cone (and tree times of course higher Cms) than Dayton's, would that mean that Peerless is the more efficient per Watt from the two? the lower Qts is also a disadvantage in this case 

Thanx, veltinorian


----------



## ItalynStylion (May 3, 2008)

I have a pair of these and I can't hear any rub/buzz from mine. I freakin love these subs. They are possibly the only pair of speakers I wont ever sell.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

Does anybody else find the sensitivity on this guy to be very high? As far as I can tell it's 2db more sensitive than the next 12 that has been tested. So it may have 1mm of xmax less than the Dayton but it more than makes up for it in efficiency. I'm also a big fan of the quality control, this is textbook material, CMS and BL are nearly copies. The big box requirement is a pain in the ass but with so many XXLS versions around that becomes one of the strengths of the Peerless. This sub is probably king 30hz-100hz from what we have seen tested so far. The ubber subs (Eclipse, ED) might have a slight edge under 30hz but only when driven by several jigawatts whereas this guy is loud and clean everywhere with a mere fraction of the power. 

I know this might not be a big issue with others but the waterproof cone and thin aluminum basket means reliability and light weight, and I'm a big fan of those in a convertible/sports car mobile environment. Maybe some owner could weigh one, but based on shipping weights it should be 10lbs lighter than the Dayton and offers a smaller frame diameter.


----------



## ItalynStylion (May 3, 2008)

Are you really looking for a weight? If you desperately need the info I could pull one.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

Not desperate but if you ever have one laying out that would be awesome.


----------



## blamus (Mar 9, 2009)

I assume these are similar to the XXLS 10s on sale on PE for less than $100 each. So tempting.... 

Peerless 830876 10" XXLS Subwoofer 4 Ohm | Parts-Express.com

92db 2.83V/1m........

I mean, come on, is that for real... my DIYMA R12 is 80db zzzzzzz


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

blamus said:


> I assume these are similar to the XXLS 10s on sale on PE for less than $100 each. So tempting....
> 
> Peerless 830876 10" XXLS Subwoofer 4 Ohm | Parts-Express.com
> 
> ...


That's one of the best deals around for sure. Sensitivity is more important for higher frequencies. Low sensitivity down low is no big deal with subwoofers.


----------



## Cruzer (Jul 16, 2010)

blamus said:


> I assume these are similar to the XXLS 10s on sale on PE for less than $100 each. So tempting....
> 
> Peerless 830876 10" XXLS Subwoofer 4 Ohm | Parts-Express.com
> 
> ...


when i put the t/s in winisd it gives only 86db. still a great sub for the money, cheaper than my 10" and does the same output on half the wattage and should have lower distortion as well.


----------

