Ray- CAPS are considered as shouting, and therefore some see them as rude, ( personally I just find them difficult to read quickly 
).
I have never used the Z2, but the Z0 is a great little driver, as long as you keep it running between above about 1.2k and 5.5k, as with a low order crossover it can get nasty at about 800hz, and it naturally drops off over 6k.
Because of the very lightweight cone material, back reflections from the rear of the cabinet can be a problem, so you need to put thought into enclosure design
).I have never used the Z2, but the Z0 is a great little driver, as long as you keep it running between above about 1.2k and 5.5k, as with a low order crossover it can get nasty at about 800hz, and it naturally drops off over 6k.
Because of the very lightweight cone material, back reflections from the rear of the cabinet can be a problem, so you need to put thought into enclosure design
Hi-fi world magazines DIY section extolled the HM100Z0 quite a few years ago, including it in a couple of their designs along with the other drivers in the range made of 'Aerogel' (Kevlar / Carbon Fibre composite). I don't have access to the articles right now, but they came up with a novel open baffle cabinent for the midrange, to eliminate the rear wave problem.
I remember they also suggested glueing a nosecone to the open pole piece to eliminate the minor resonance around 6kHz.
When I get the chance, I'll see if I can find the articles.
Cheers, Adrian
I remember they also suggested glueing a nosecone to the open pole piece to eliminate the minor resonance around 6kHz.
When I get the chance, I'll see if I can find the articles.
Cheers, Adrian
Hi Adrian
Now you mention it I remember those articles too, but I also have no idea where I put them!
The HM100Z0 comes with a phase plug fitted as standard now.
Ray
My speakers started off as straight versions of the Hi-Fi World KLS11 kit, using the HD3P Tweeter ( still the best tweeter I have ever heard, but not mentioned on this forum much as it doesn't seem to be exported outside Europe ), the HM100Z0 for mids, and the PR240Z0 for bass.
However since I first built them 5 years ago they have changed beyond all recognition- mid and high are in a separate enclosure, with mids loaded with an aperiodic TL (heavily stuffed open back tube) constructed with real hardwood on an MDF core, with bass in a reflex cabinet, made with a curved rear to the enclosure, again with MDF and a wood finish, but the rear curve is made from layers of thin ply, fibre loaded concrete and thick vinyl flooring material, heavily internally braced.
The crossover has also had more mods than I can remember, and is mounted externally to the cabinet.
The next step is to transform the whole system again, by using active crossovers, and then when my research has finished, put all the drivers in Terminated TLs.
As regarding other mid drivers, the Audax is definately the best at the price I have heard, but is outclassed by the best mid in the world -the ATC soft dome SM75.150S, but that driver is 6 times the price !
But bear in mind- many drivers that are easily available in the States are not available in Europe, and vice-versa, so there are many drivers I have not listened to...
Cheers
Now you mention it I remember those articles too, but I also have no idea where I put them!
The HM100Z0 comes with a phase plug fitted as standard now.
Ray
My speakers started off as straight versions of the Hi-Fi World KLS11 kit, using the HD3P Tweeter ( still the best tweeter I have ever heard, but not mentioned on this forum much as it doesn't seem to be exported outside Europe ), the HM100Z0 for mids, and the PR240Z0 for bass.
However since I first built them 5 years ago they have changed beyond all recognition- mid and high are in a separate enclosure, with mids loaded with an aperiodic TL (heavily stuffed open back tube) constructed with real hardwood on an MDF core, with bass in a reflex cabinet, made with a curved rear to the enclosure, again with MDF and a wood finish, but the rear curve is made from layers of thin ply, fibre loaded concrete and thick vinyl flooring material, heavily internally braced.
The crossover has also had more mods than I can remember, and is mounted externally to the cabinet.
The next step is to transform the whole system again, by using active crossovers, and then when my research has finished, put all the drivers in Terminated TLs.
As regarding other mid drivers, the Audax is definately the best at the price I have heard, but is outclassed by the best mid in the world -the ATC soft dome SM75.150S, but that driver is 6 times the price !
But bear in mind- many drivers that are easily available in the States are not available in Europe, and vice-versa, so there are many drivers I have not listened to...
Cheers
I still have the article, I remember after reading it I really had to have those drives! I have tried both the Z0 and the Z2, I think the Z0s were better, as they had 93 db sensitivity. The Z0 goes further down (Fs is 70Hz compared to 200 Hz of Z0), but at the expense of MANY dbs- it's only 86.5 now...I don't get why they did it . If I want to play 70 Hz I use a proper woofer. Anyway, both Z0 and Z2 are great, and I want to remind you the main point of that article: the human ear is most sensitive around 2-3KHz. That's why 2-way boxes crossing there are just wrong. What we need is a midrange that covers almost the entire range of musical instruments, with the woofer and tweeter only as a fill in for the extremes. The Z0 and Z2 are up to the job. The article suggested crossing them at 200 Hz and 7 Khz, with only a 6db/oct crossover. I tried it and it sounds great, albeit somewhat dry. 300Hz/6Khz is ideal for me.
Try it and you will be impressed. The sheer sense of presence is breathtaking - when someone sings you think that their mouth is exactly wher the Audax is! When a flute is playing you could point right to the midrange and swear it is there, if your eyes were shut. Moving the low part of the crossover higher (800 Hz or more) destroys the illusion, as now instruments and voices start coming from many places, depending on which note is being played.
After trying these drives, I honestly never tried another midrange.
Try it and you will be impressed. The sheer sense of presence is breathtaking - when someone sings you think that their mouth is exactly wher the Audax is! When a flute is playing you could point right to the midrange and swear it is there, if your eyes were shut. Moving the low part of the crossover higher (800 Hz or more) destroys the illusion, as now instruments and voices start coming from many places, depending on which note is being played.
After trying these drives, I honestly never tried another midrange.
Wow, this has come back from the dead!
It's a crying shame that Audax have dropped out of the diy market. Aerogel was great to start with, and I suspect, had R&D carried on, now be the best cone material available.
I'm suprised you liked crossing over the Z0s so low. In my experience, they started to sound a little strained below about 200Hz. With the aerogel PR240s being quite happy up to about 1.5K, I ended up using a second order crossover at about 300Hz, much the same as you!
It's a crying shame that Audax have dropped out of the diy market. Aerogel was great to start with, and I suspect, had R&D carried on, now be the best cone material available.
I'm suprised you liked crossing over the Z0s so low. In my experience, they started to sound a little strained below about 200Hz. With the aerogel PR240s being quite happy up to about 1.5K, I ended up using a second order crossover at about 300Hz, much the same as you!
Audax HM100Z0
I am thinking of using this mid from around 800-1200hz to around 2500-3500hz. First, would you do a MTM or just MT and what would I gain by using two HM100Z0 per side and is it really worth it since all the speakers are 93db with the exception of the dayton subs 86db hence the reason I have two of them per side in order to gain 6 db. I would be crossing over the AE TD6m low mid to the Audax HM100Z0 upper mid and from the HM100Z0 at 2500-3500hz to Audax TW025A20. The pair of AE TD12s per side would handled all the bass and midbass duties from say 60-80hz to 250-400hz and the sub duties will be handled by two RSS315HFA-8 ohm per side at 60-80hz & below. The subs will be powered by W4S SX-1000 mono amps, the mids will either be powered by modified Will Vincent Dyna MKIII tube mono amps or a Big Sky Audio modified adcom GFA-535 MKII. Do you think the Audax mids would sound better with tube or solid state amps. All the other drivers will be powered by Big Sky Modified Adcom GFA-XXX (Nelson Pass) amps. Opinions please as to weather you think the Audax upper mid and tweet are in the same league as Acoustic Elegance speakers and Dayton Reference subwoofers? WOULD YOU DO ANYTHING DIFFERENT IF YOU HAD THE FUNDS TO BUY WHAT YOU WANTED AS LONG AS IT IS A BIG UPGRADE. WE WANT TO GET THE BEST POSSIBLE SOUND FOR THE MONEY? Your suggestions are deeply appreciated. Thanks in advance! All tweeking will be done with the minidsp 4X10HD & Plug-in and Mic.
I am thinking of using this mid from around 800-1200hz to around 2500-3500hz. First, would you do a MTM or just MT and what would I gain by using two HM100Z0 per side and is it really worth it since all the speakers are 93db with the exception of the dayton subs 86db hence the reason I have two of them per side in order to gain 6 db. I would be crossing over the AE TD6m low mid to the Audax HM100Z0 upper mid and from the HM100Z0 at 2500-3500hz to Audax TW025A20. The pair of AE TD12s per side would handled all the bass and midbass duties from say 60-80hz to 250-400hz and the sub duties will be handled by two RSS315HFA-8 ohm per side at 60-80hz & below. The subs will be powered by W4S SX-1000 mono amps, the mids will either be powered by modified Will Vincent Dyna MKIII tube mono amps or a Big Sky Audio modified adcom GFA-535 MKII. Do you think the Audax mids would sound better with tube or solid state amps. All the other drivers will be powered by Big Sky Modified Adcom GFA-XXX (Nelson Pass) amps. Opinions please as to weather you think the Audax upper mid and tweet are in the same league as Acoustic Elegance speakers and Dayton Reference subwoofers? WOULD YOU DO ANYTHING DIFFERENT IF YOU HAD THE FUNDS TO BUY WHAT YOU WANTED AS LONG AS IT IS A BIG UPGRADE. WE WANT TO GET THE BEST POSSIBLE SOUND FOR THE MONEY? Your suggestions are deeply appreciated. Thanks in advance!
All tweeking will be done with the minidsp 4X10HD & Plug-in and Mic.
Last edited:
A much more elegant and simpler design I would suggest.
AE Dipole 12 + AE TD 6M + waveguided dome tweeter.
Dipole model has the necessary Qts for a sealed box and
then you can apply the Linkwitz transform. No need for a
sub. Waveguided tweeter would let you cross it lower than
a usual non guided one.
Is it me that I can't find any measured response of AE drivers
or what?
AE Dipole 12 + AE TD 6M + waveguided dome tweeter.
Dipole model has the necessary Qts for a sealed box and
then you can apply the Linkwitz transform. No need for a
sub. Waveguided tweeter would let you cross it lower than
a usual non guided one.
Is it me that I can't find any measured response of AE drivers
or what?
I'm slightly confused. If you're multi-amping, why are you concerned with matching the sub sensitivity to the mid-high part?
In any case, I've done two designs with the HM100Z0 and gotten great results; my current project also uses them. Use a good, clean amp to drive them and it won't matter much (if at all) what the amp's particular technology might be. My previous speakers were also multiamped and used them in an MTM with a now-unavailable Audax tweeter. Dynaudio 17W75s as mid-bass, the system set up using Roy Allison's approach to bass loading and transition to mids- this required the '100s to be high-passed at about 400Hz, and that worked very well indeed. You may want to consider taking one of your crossover points out of the mix.
Current project will not be MTM. It all depends on what you want your target polar pattern to look like.
In any case, I've done two designs with the HM100Z0 and gotten great results; my current project also uses them. Use a good, clean amp to drive them and it won't matter much (if at all) what the amp's particular technology might be. My previous speakers were also multiamped and used them in an MTM with a now-unavailable Audax tweeter. Dynaudio 17W75s as mid-bass, the system set up using Roy Allison's approach to bass loading and transition to mids- this required the '100s to be high-passed at about 400Hz, and that worked very well indeed. You may want to consider taking one of your crossover points out of the mix.
Current project will not be MTM. It all depends on what you want your target polar pattern to look like.
Wow, this has come back from the dead!
It's a crying shame that Audax have dropped out of the diy market. Aerogel was great to start with, and I suspect, had R&D carried on, now be the best cone material available.
I'm suprised you liked crossing over the Z0s so low. In my experience, they started to sound a little strained below about 200Hz. With the aerogel PR240s being quite happy up to about 1.5K, I ended up using a second order crossover at about 300Hz, much the same as you!
Seems to have a fine knowledge about Audax drivers
! What do you think about the PHL Audio stuffs ? My understanding is Philippe Lesage which was Head of the studies dpt of Audax before launching PHL Audio uses the same surface acrylic damping treatment ? Unluckily cone are "only" paper and not the same kevlar-carbone+paper Audax had !
Do you not think nowadays with some drivers like the ScansPeak 10F, one have not better alternativs ? (same type of sound according my little experience !)
Not rare, just discontinued. DT101, Ti dome, very inexpensive but worked superbly. I posted pix of the project a few years ago- if I can find them, I'll put them in this thread. All amplification for that version was solid state.
Ah, ok ! I believe one can still find them in France, maybe in Germany http://www.ebay.com/itm/Audax-1-pol...h-frequency-driver-/171301898453?rmvSB=trueor ? http://www.ebay.com/itm/AUDAX-25mm-...025A8-Made-in-France-/400888457940?rmvSB=true
I was thinking of this one made by Gilles Millot NAZCA & ICA | Living Leedh : Leedh can reload the pression in the rear load for the pizzo effect : they add an "air valve", you after reload it by yourself carrefully when the air doesn't bump the oval cone enough ! http://www.audax.com/archives/hd3p.pdf
But my understanding at reading some french blogs is the traffo provided with it was not good enough ! The best made was for the Millot's prototypes of the Ica & Nazca speakers... but where to expensive to produce for the markett ! Leedh made great speaker but not too much known outside France.. but maybe by japoneeses enthusiasts !
the HM100Z0 4" should suffer of distorsion if XOed too low to have the 300-400 Hz effect you are looking for ? Otr maybe do you use a smooth slope (first or second order on the Audax and third on the Dynaudio woof ?).
Old thread than this thread. Audax were very fine speaker, but I didn't read too much serious benchmark with their todays alternatives by PHL Audio !
Davis acoustic are making as well some not too bad wooden kevlar cones but seing a measurement is even more rare than with an Audax !
I was thinking of this one made by Gilles Millot NAZCA & ICA | Living Leedh : Leedh can reload the pression in the rear load for the pizzo effect : they add an "air valve", you after reload it by yourself carrefully when the air doesn't bump the oval cone enough ! http://www.audax.com/archives/hd3p.pdf
But my understanding at reading some french blogs is the traffo provided with it was not good enough ! The best made was for the Millot's prototypes of the Ica & Nazca speakers... but where to expensive to produce for the markett ! Leedh made great speaker but not too much known outside France.. but maybe by japoneeses enthusiasts !
the HM100Z0 4" should suffer of distorsion if XOed too low to have the 300-400 Hz effect you are looking for ? Otr maybe do you use a smooth slope (first or second order on the Audax and third on the Dynaudio woof ?).
Old thread than this thread. Audax were very fine speaker, but I didn't read too much serious benchmark with their todays alternatives by PHL Audio !
Davis acoustic are making as well some not too bad wooden kevlar cones but seing a measurement is even more rare than with an Audax !
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.