Well I've finished reading "Suitable midrange cone, for bandpass mid in Unity horn"; what an epic. Unfortunately in more recent years it goes off topic more frequently and contains a fair bit that should really have been in other/new threads so it takes progressively longer to get through, but there are still some useful nuggets of info in later pages. This time I took bookmarks, so hopefully won't need to go through it all a third time, anyway. Though there are so many even of those that they will now take me some time to sort out and assimilate.
Time is one of the wider messages that come through; the thread spans 16years as people work on and gain knowledge with multiple entry horns. It has taken some a long time to make theirs, and often they go on to make more refined/improved versions too, before they're content with the results. Not just the physical horn, but taking (audio) measurements and sorting out the DSP can take months and much learning.
It probably will be similar for me; I'm getting a handle on the physical layout of the horns and I've used many basic PC-based active crossovers before, but for this project theres a whole field of software involving terms like IIR, FIR, PEQ etc that I shall probably want to learn about. Reading some threads, I may even have to learn about MS Windows (once it is finally installed) to stop it secretly dicking around with test signals and recordings.
TBH I had been frustrated with laptop issues delaying me, but now I can better put that into perspective. I'm seeing this as a journey to relax into and enjoy, rather than expecting a finished product any time soon. So even if I end up with a design similar to others, it won't simply be a quick copy but something I have hopefully understood, and juggled to meet my own requirements. I'm quite looking forward to it, I was getting a bit bored with building direct radiators so this might renew my interest in speakers. I'm increasingly keen on the concept, the more I read about unitys and synergies.
Time is one of the wider messages that come through; the thread spans 16years as people work on and gain knowledge with multiple entry horns. It has taken some a long time to make theirs, and often they go on to make more refined/improved versions too, before they're content with the results. Not just the physical horn, but taking (audio) measurements and sorting out the DSP can take months and much learning.
It probably will be similar for me; I'm getting a handle on the physical layout of the horns and I've used many basic PC-based active crossovers before, but for this project theres a whole field of software involving terms like IIR, FIR, PEQ etc that I shall probably want to learn about. Reading some threads, I may even have to learn about MS Windows (once it is finally installed) to stop it secretly dicking around with test signals and recordings.
TBH I had been frustrated with laptop issues delaying me, but now I can better put that into perspective. I'm seeing this as a journey to relax into and enjoy, rather than expecting a finished product any time soon. So even if I end up with a design similar to others, it won't simply be a quick copy but something I have hopefully understood, and juggled to meet my own requirements. I'm quite looking forward to it, I was getting a bit bored with building direct radiators so this might renew my interest in speakers. I'm increasingly keen on the concept, the more I read about unitys and synergies.
I'm trying to decide if 2x cheap faitalpro 4FE35 will be "enough" for me, or whether I should either step up to 4x or move on to 2x B&C 4NDF34. On paper, I believe a 1.7" (44mm) diaphragm compression driver should safely reach about 102db at xmax before any horn gain. But even a single 4fe35 will reach that, so in theory two should be more than fine for keeping up, assuming similar horn/waveguide gain.
The mids are not operating as normal; they're in a band-pass situation, so should get some gain there too. However in my ignorance, I don't know precisely what this implies for driver selection, but e.g. some have suggested that BL and robust cones are important - not just for SPL but also for things like low distortion and longevity. The faitals are similar sensitivity but have less than half the BL of the B&Cs, about 1/3rd the power handling, and softer weaker looking rubber surrounds. The qes & fs formula can be broken so this may not matter, but FWIW it also gives an impressive result for the B&Cs, whilst the faitals score very low by comparrison.
I know that a few people have tried the faitals or similar, and in fact Mark100 moved up from them to the B&Cs, no doubt for good reason. So I'd be keen to hear opinions on this choice. I have some of the faitals so would only need a few more (and they're much cheaper here anyway). But this project is likely to span many months and a number of iterations so if the B&Cs were a substancially better or safer bet then I'd work a few more days of overtime to get them.
Thanks,
Kev
The mids are not operating as normal; they're in a band-pass situation, so should get some gain there too. However in my ignorance, I don't know precisely what this implies for driver selection, but e.g. some have suggested that BL and robust cones are important - not just for SPL but also for things like low distortion and longevity. The faitals are similar sensitivity but have less than half the BL of the B&Cs, about 1/3rd the power handling, and softer weaker looking rubber surrounds. The qes & fs formula can be broken so this may not matter, but FWIW it also gives an impressive result for the B&Cs, whilst the faitals score very low by comparrison.
I know that a few people have tried the faitals or similar, and in fact Mark100 moved up from them to the B&Cs, no doubt for good reason. So I'd be keen to hear opinions on this choice. I have some of the faitals so would only need a few more (and they're much cheaper here anyway). But this project is likely to span many months and a number of iterations so if the B&Cs were a substancially better or safer bet then I'd work a few more days of overtime to get them.
Thanks,
Kev
Hi Kev, my vote is to start with the 4fe35's you already have.
They worked totally fine in my first syn9 prototype, which was my first attempt at adding small mids.
On second syn9, I went with the 4NDF34's mainly because I was hoping to build a 'killer' final build, imagining better mids would help.
The second version didn't sound as good as the first haha. I attributed the downtick to a narrower 75x50 pattern, than the proto's 90x60.
And then built third try, another 90x60 and am happy with it....it's my current speaker in LCR., that i ended up calling syn10.
I do not know if it would matter to syn10, whether it uses the B&C or the Faitals...i really doubt it would.
Oh, Nice thing is, the screw mounting holes are the same for both drivers, so substitution is easy-peasy if you later decide to give a try / move up, to the B&C
They worked totally fine in my first syn9 prototype, which was my first attempt at adding small mids.
On second syn9, I went with the 4NDF34's mainly because I was hoping to build a 'killer' final build, imagining better mids would help.
The second version didn't sound as good as the first haha. I attributed the downtick to a narrower 75x50 pattern, than the proto's 90x60.
And then built third try, another 90x60 and am happy with it....it's my current speaker in LCR., that i ended up calling syn10.
I do not know if it would matter to syn10, whether it uses the B&C or the Faitals...i really doubt it would.
Oh, Nice thing is, the screw mounting holes are the same for both drivers, so substitution is easy-peasy if you later decide to give a try / move up, to the B&C
Thanks! That is really helpful, it doesn't sound like I could go far wrong either way then, but if their mounting holes are the same then even better. I could probably even make the frustrum (and any back chamber) customisable, in case I ever felt the need to upgrade as you did. I'm happy with that; I quite like the little faitals so may never want to upgrade.
Thanks again!
Kev
Thanks again!
Kev