Yes, the Dayton is erring in the direction of the Alpairs.And hear I though that the Holy Grail was max flat on axis.
Bob
Funny thing that . . . all the "positives" of the Dayton were "negatives" with the 7.3 . . .
Thanks X,
No, it was just if usefull for the tests ! I could give you rock or world music tracks or Melody Gardot reccordings which go higher than Nora Jones, but my only purpose was to find some tracks where a FR has according to me pain to work with ! (clip 1 & Nora are for me not usefull for such a test - e.g. Nora jones reccording sounds good on many speakers !)
I listening more Rock and Jazz than classical, but love classical when I fall on Something hearable and easy ! But the moment where one can really enjoy classical music is at a live event (big or small) : you realize more than with jazz and rock-world music the gap with hifi reproduction and non amplified music ! And frankly, listen to a good symphonic in live is... Something ! (at least for me !)
Ah, the drivers are not enough deep to putt some wine... nice table you have !
(I plan more a high efficienty system with such PRV or others same drivers... but I continue the test as it's a funny exercice !)
No, it was just if usefull for the tests ! I could give you rock or world music tracks or Melody Gardot reccordings which go higher than Nora Jones, but my only purpose was to find some tracks where a FR has according to me pain to work with ! (clip 1 & Nora are for me not usefull for such a test - e.g. Nora jones reccording sounds good on many speakers !)
I listening more Rock and Jazz than classical, but love classical when I fall on Something hearable and easy ! But the moment where one can really enjoy classical music is at a live event (big or small) : you realize more than with jazz and rock-world music the gap with hifi reproduction and non amplified music ! And frankly, listen to a good symphonic in live is... Something ! (at least for me !)
Ah, the drivers are not enough deep to putt some wine... nice table you have !
(I plan more a high efficienty system with such PRV or others same drivers... but I continue the test as it's a funny exercice !)
Thanks X,
No, it was just if usefull for the tests ! I could give you rock or world music tracks or Melody Gardot reccordings which go higher than Nora Jones, but my only purpose was to find some tracks where a FR has according to me pain to work with ! (clip 1 & Nora are for me not usefull for such a test - e.g. Nora jones reccording sounds good on many speakers !)
I listening more Rock and Jazz than classical, but love classical when I fall on Something hearable and easy ! But the moment where one can really enjoy classical music is at a live event (big or small) : you realize more than with jazz and rock-world music the gap with hifi reproduction and non amplified music ! And frankly, listen to a good symphonic in live is... Something ! (at least for me !)
Ah, the drivers are not enough deep to putt some wine... nice table you have !
(I plan more a high efficienty system with such PRV or others same drivers... but I continue the test as it's a funny exercice !)
Hi Eldam,
Lately, I find myself mostly listening to live recorded jazz - it sounds really good on transient perfect speakers. Really enjoying Check Corea's "Trilogy" triple disc album recorded live at the Blue Note. But then I will sometimes go back to some classic rock or female vocals like Patricia Barber, Ann Bisson, or Rebecca Pidgeon. The vocals sound good on a lot of speakers, and are rather forgiving. However, on an accurate (read, flat response) speaker, they sound best to my ears. The jazz however, with lots of piano and drums with cymbals and snares really shine on an accurate speaker with a clean impulse response and transient perfect response. Piano is a particularly difficult instrument for a speaker to reproduce well.
Are you talking about this "table" of cheeses to be sampled with a glass of wine? (actually a stool that I use as 29in tall speaker stands)
Or this table (new to me)?
My eye spys a Jeep 68223392AA and a Tang Band W2-852SH on that stool.
JLH,
Thanks for the driver contributions!
The Jeep one is very interesting and sounds quite nice, but I have to say that the build quality of a driver that is meant to never be seen bare by eye does something to the manufacturing. They absolutely built it for function and not for looks - that frame and bezel, once I removed the fabric grille and plastic ring looks very cheap in an industrial way.
The Tang Band on the other hand, was meant to be viewed and touched directly so looks beautiful and is well built.
Member
Joined 2006
An accurate speaker with a clean impulse response and transient perfect response.
﹉﹉
Assuming I have a fast enough and relative flat mid woofer with compatible efficiency to mate with a heil tweeter, how could I achieve the above goal?
Using first order, Hasch, or LR 4th order? And could you recommend the corresponding electrical xo freqs to me? Many thanks!
﹉﹉
Assuming I have a fast enough and relative flat mid woofer with compatible efficiency to mate with a heil tweeter, how could I achieve the above goal?
Using first order, Hasch, or LR 4th order? And could you recommend the corresponding electrical xo freqs to me? Many thanks!
I agree that the PS95 is one of the prettiest drivers I have. That copper nose cone really adds some bling to it.
The performance is enough to garner substantial votes despite elevated HD levels relative to 10F/B80/TC9/TG9:
Truth be told, maybe it's the pleasing 2nd order HD that makes it sound good and "tubey"
The $65 is the 10F/8414 (higher 0.51 Qts) vs the $95 10F/8424 (lower 0.37 Qts). For OB, the $65 is probably better.
I have some less biased opinions than this:
Having liked this driver myself, also the SB from the other round, I feel I should seek to clarify some things.
Firstly, this is the THD plot of the nautiloss (according to legend), which you already showed higher overall THD
Am I right?
And unless the actual SPL is incorrect, then the rise from ~95-100dB between 1-2kHz would seem actually rather loud, to me at least...
So all in all, the 1% second order (the most benign order) at 95-100db@ 1kHz really isn't a huge deal.
But in the interests of fairness, its usual for paper coned drivers, yes? And also responsible for the general characteristic of natural sound, possible even with a level of second order THD.
And another question beckons:
What did I like about the 2.5" SB in the other round?
Did that have dominating second order THD?
Do you have similar plots at the same SPL?
But forgetting that...
I'll definitely be interested in the 2"/3" showdowns
I'll have to find out what the shipping is from here for 100-150g
The TB (bit unknown to me but same size chassis as the W2-800sl)
The fountek58(?)
Well.those two interest me. I really don't get those Peerless ones. The only one I liked the datasheet for was the inverted surround model (cant tell.if that's the one you've got from.the photo) well even that model...
That being said, I don't think any data sheets tell the whole story.
But I didn't like the sound either IIRC
Should really send my W2 things over and see how good/bad they are!
I'll definitely be interested in the 2"/3" showdowns
I'll have to find out what the shipping is from here for 100-150g
The TB (bit unknown to me but same size chassis as the W2-800sl)
The fountek58(?)
Well.those two interest me. I really don't get those Peerless ones. The only one I liked the datasheet for was the inverted surround model (cant tell.if that's the one you've got from.the photo) well even that model...
That being said, I don't think any data sheets tell the whole story.
But I didn't like the sound either IIRC
Should really send my W2 things over and see how good/bad they are!
@ X, this table of the picture (the chair with the liitle FRs... they really looks like glass waiting for wine but not deep (big) enough !
Piano ! Yes : did you listen to my clip 2 on page 11 ? I believe we are both biased in our examples because mp3 doesn't match the quality enough ! I liked the Dropbox possibility of BYRTT... not easy for tests here, but flac is really what we need for your tests imho ! Think twice also to the harmonica I talked above ! ok its a "breathed" instrument, but it's really hard to reproduce... in the clip 1 : this J-J Milteau who is playing as guest on a live of Musica Nuda (Live at FIP) : I was at the live session at Radio France !
@ CFT : Hi Cheung... same ideas than I have ? If you talk about the ESS V1, xrq971 says it's ok below 1000 Hz, but I read some La revue du Son test where the V1 with the black diagphragm was measured (now it is yellow) there is some vibration and reflexion below 1500 in their measurement and they advise >1700 hz (LR4); Lautsprescher Shop in Germany advises the same minimum XO but I don't know if this is relativ to Klang magazine or their own test. Maybe at low level it is less problematic (Xrq971 input!)...?
With the Beyma, 1800 minimum is advised with the horn version and more with the non horn, some advise 2000 to avoid the impedance problem seen at 1600 Hz... that's on the paper !
If you talk to the mid driver... I really don't know, this knowledge is above my head for the moment !
What is the driver you would like with such Heil tweet ? My opinion for what it worths is there are no cones which can match perfectly the transcient of a ribbon or AMT, or horn... if exists it should have a high electrical damping and few mvts : Xmax : 1 mm or half : 0.5 mm, so a sensivity which match the AMT ! Angeloitacare spoke of a 12" with a huge transcient despite the Mms of 56 g because a Le of 1.5 ! Unfornatully it seems a little short to climb as high for both the ESS V1 and the Beyma AMTS.... (or maybe at low level with the ESS V1 could say X if XO is low to match this ") ! I thinked myself to two PRV 5" for a XO above 5k (to avoid M&F sensibility zone theory), but the transcient with Qts is low >0.5 ! maybe in OB... but the low EQ is a no go for a fast transcient !
So I didn't answer directly... because I haven't find yet the ideal mid & tweets for my needs for the moment to swap my Lynnfield 400L (a question also of skill & money !)
Sorry X for this off topic,
PS : I always desired a Jeep Wrangler ! Now I know it's polute less than a WW Golf... i let you the drivers and I keep the Jeep !
this table of the picture (the chair with the liitle FRs... they really looks like glass waiting for wine but not deep (big) enough !Piano ! Yes : did you listen to my clip 2 on page 11 ? I believe we are both biased in our examples because mp3 doesn't match the quality enough ! I liked the Dropbox possibility of BYRTT... not easy for tests here, but flac is really what we need for your tests imho ! Think twice also to the harmonica I talked above ! ok its a "breathed" instrument, but it's really hard to reproduce... in the clip 1 : this J-J Milteau who is playing as guest on a live of Musica Nuda (Live at FIP) : I was at the live session at Radio France !
@ CFT : Hi Cheung... same ideas than I have ? If you talk about the ESS V1, xrq971 says it's ok below 1000 Hz, but I read some La revue du Son test where the V1 with the black diagphragm was measured (now it is yellow) there is some vibration and reflexion below 1500 in their measurement and they advise >1700 hz (LR4); Lautsprescher Shop in Germany advises the same minimum XO but I don't know if this is relativ to Klang magazine or their own test. Maybe at low level it is less problematic (Xrq971 input!)...?
With the Beyma, 1800 minimum is advised with the horn version and more with the non horn, some advise 2000 to avoid the impedance problem seen at 1600 Hz... that's on the paper !
If you talk to the mid driver... I really don't know, this knowledge is above my head for the moment !
What is the driver you would like with such Heil tweet ? My opinion for what it worths is there are no cones which can match perfectly the transcient of a ribbon or AMT, or horn... if exists it should have a high electrical damping and few mvts : Xmax : 1 mm or half : 0.5 mm, so a sensivity which match the AMT ! Angeloitacare spoke of a 12" with a huge transcient despite the Mms of 56 g because a Le of 1.5 ! Unfornatully it seems a little short to climb as high for both the ESS V1 and the Beyma AMTS.... (or maybe at low level with the ESS V1 could say X
if XO is low to match this ") ! I thinked myself to two PRV 5" for a XO above 5k (to avoid M&F sensibility zone theory), but the transcient with Qts is low >0.5 ! maybe in OB... but the low EQ is a no go for a fast transcient !So I didn't answer directly... because I haven't find yet the ideal mid & tweets for my needs for the moment to swap my Lynnfield 400L (a question also of skill & money !)
Sorry X for this off topic,
PS : I always desired a Jeep Wrangler ! Now I know it's polute less than a WW Golf... i let you the drivers and I keep the Jeep !
Last edited:
Going IRR route think take Harsch and FIR route LR2/LR4/LR8, haven't tried Harsch in real world but BW1 and LR4/LR8.
BW1 seems impossible in real world.
Both drivers need to cover each others passband perfect to not get small errors inside the passband they supposed to sum. Its hard to get perfect acoustic slopes except at one mic spot in space and drivers need heavy EQ to make them smooth cover all their summed passband that they end up heavy SPL limited. Also vertical lobe is unsymmetrical because of odd order XO where phase always 90º apart, think this is more audio able and anoying than the even order Harsch or LR's that have symmetrical vertical lobes and not so sensitive if one sits down or are standing up under listening.
Harsch is possible with route of IRR filters but still need DSP delay or real precision physical offset, vertical lobe is symmetrical and ctc could probably benefit if distance is below 1/4 wave length relative to XO point. Harsch is a compromise way to have better but not perfect step response and it will give small wriggles on frq response.
LR2/LR4/LR8 if done by IRR filters phaseturn will ruin step response, so either excute them with IRR filters and make a FIR correction filter to neutralize the phase turn or make pure FIR LR2/LR4/LR8 XO filters instead, free tool Rephase program can help create both phase correction for those IRR LR XO's or make pure LR FIR XO's. Also FIR filters can be set to correct for hole systems passband phase turn if wanted. Vertical lobe is symmetrical and ctc could probably benefit if distance is below 1/4 wave length relative to XO point. Drawback for FIR filters is they take some small processing time but think not a problem for a reproduce system.
Last edited:
@ X,
Piano ! Yes : did you listen to my clip 2 on page 11 ? I believe we are both biased in our examples because mp3 doesn't match the quality enough ! I liked the Dropbox possibility of BYRTT... not easy for tests here, but flac is really what we need for your tests imho ! Think twice also to the harmonica I talked above ! ok its a "breathed" instrument, but it's really hard to reproduce... in the clip 1 : this J-J Milteau who is playing as guest on a live of Musica Nuda (Live at FIP) : I was at the live session at Radio France !
@ CFT : Hi Cheung... same ideas than I have ? If you talk about the ESS V1, xrq971 says it's ok below 1000 Hz, but I read some La revue du Son test where the V1 with the black diagphragm was measured (now it is yellow) there is some vibration and reflexion below 1500 in their measurement and they advise >1700 hz (LR4); Lautsprescher Shop in Germany advises the same minimum XO but I don't know if this is relativ to Klang magazine or their own test. Maybe at low level it is less problematic (Xrq971 input!)...?
With the Beyma, 1800 minimum is advised with the horn version and more with the non horn, some advise 2000 to avoid the impedance problem seen at 1600 Hz... that's on the paper !
If you talk to the mid driver... I really don't know, this knowledge is above my head for the moment !
What is the driver you would like with such Heil tweet ? My opinion for what it worths is there are no cones which can match perfectly the transcient of a ribbon or AMT, or horn... if exists it should have a high electrical damping and few mvts : Xmax : 1 mm or half : 0.5 mm, so a sensivity which match the AMT ! Angeloitacare spoke of a 12" with a huge transcient despite the Mms of 56 g because a Le of 1.5 ! Unfornatully it seems a little short to climb as high for both the ESS V1 and the Beyma AMTS.... (or maybe at low level with the ESS V1 could say X
So I didn't answer directly... because I haven't find yet the ideal mid & tweets for my needs for the moment to swap my Lynnfield 400L (a question also of skill & money !)
Sorry X for this off topic,
PS : I always desired a Jeep Wrangler ! Now I know it's polute less than a WW Golf... i let you the drivers and I keep the Jeep !
I had great luck with B&C 6MDN44 as the mid to go with Heil. It has matching 95dB sensitivity and very smooth in the 300Hz to 3kHz range - I cross to Heil at 1.2kHz.
Try BW4 LP on woofer at 400Hz; mid: Bessel 2 HP at 400Hz Bessel 2 LP at 3kHz; AMT BW4 HP at 3kHz. Delay mid from woofer by half period of freq at XO of 400Hz; delay AMT relative to mid by half cycle at 3kHz. The acoustic offsets of each driver needs to be added. The delays here assume zero acoustic offsets.
I did this with conventional dome tweeter in Harsch XO thread and it worked.
Also, the goal is to have the driver follow the acoustic filter textbook profile. So you may only need a first order filter on mid high pass to achieve 2nd order Bessel 2.
It's really useful to import a measured FRD file of each driver into a simulator program like PCD and tweak the EQ and XO in the software prior to implementing it on miniDSP. You can achieve much more accurate results that way and spend less time using trial and error miniDSP approach.
Last edited:
Eldam and xrk971,
new 6MBX44 coming soon sensitivity 98dB
website: B&C Speakers
pdf: http://www.bcspeakers.com/products/lf-driver/6-5/6mbx44.pdf.
6MDN44 sensitivity 96,5dB
website: B&C Speakers
pdf: http://www.bcspeakers.com/products/lf-driver/6-5/6mdn44.pdf.
new 6MBX44 coming soon sensitivity 98dB
website: B&C Speakers
pdf: http://www.bcspeakers.com/products/lf-driver/6-5/6mbx44.pdf.
6MDN44 sensitivity 96,5dB
website: B&C Speakers
pdf: http://www.bcspeakers.com/products/lf-driver/6-5/6mdn44.pdf.
That 6MBX44 looks real nice. Smoother than the previous one although have to stay away from those breakup peaks. Probably cross over no higher than 2k. I am not sure where they get 98dB from. Looks more like 95dB to me.
My PRV 5MR450NDY might make an excellent midrange - it doesn't have cone breakup until higher up in 7k range IIRC.
My PRV 5MR450NDY might make an excellent midrange - it doesn't have cone breakup until higher up in 7k range IIRC.
On my note during the listening in round four, I have noted that A [Dayton] and B [TGnine] have distortion. But I have never mentioned that I was disturbed by A, only by B...
Technically I think this is what we know about masking of high order distortion by second order distortion...
I think it's not about what you like, it's about what others don't like...
Visaton, Peerless, SBAcoustics [may include the Tangband] are top drivers which are on different level with the other drivers...
Peerless was the most natural. If you look only from 2k5 and above, it is imo the best of all. And what's going on with the SBA? It has rising response around 10k. And this is with rising third order distortion. The other drivers which have similar properties [Alpair and may be FRS] just out of the competition much sooner. There is more airy treble, but I don't think it is what you like, because it is there with distortion.
