Let's say we have a 4 inch midrange and midwoofer to choose between , same manufacturer both speakers looks identical the difference is in parameters:
midrange has lower mms , higher efficiency , lesser power handling and excursion, shorter voice coil . It would play as midrange between 500-2500 hz so both speakers are perfectly capable in this range. Midwoofer has even slightly better FR . So which do i choose ? Will there be any sonic benefits to using decicated midrange driver ? Micro details etc. ?
midrange has lower mms , higher efficiency , lesser power handling and excursion, shorter voice coil . It would play as midrange between 500-2500 hz so both speakers are perfectly capable in this range. Midwoofer has even slightly better FR . So which do i choose ? Will there be any sonic benefits to using decicated midrange driver ? Micro details etc. ?
How big a mid woofer? Cause if it's 7-8" then it will definitely play less detailed than a good 4".
But again.... Are we comparing a two way - 1" dome with 8" woofer against a 3 way with 1" dome 8" woofer and then a dedicated 4" midrange??
But again.... Are we comparing a two way - 1" dome with 8" woofer against a 3 way with 1" dome 8" woofer and then a dedicated 4" midrange??
If mid-woofer has better fr response in 500-2k5 region, it will likely sound better, assuming all other parameters being equal (distortion, of axis response, step response, breakups and so on). I assumed they are both the same size. If the mid-woofer is bigger, than it may beam sooner.
If the limited excursion is not a problem, then maybe it's worth to use the dedicated midrange. It probably have lower Le via the shorter voice coil. Higher efficiency means more SPL for same input power, so maybe the lower electrical power handling not a big problem compared to the midwoofer brother. But these are general thoughts. If you want to use the midrange driver in the future in a 2-way speaker then the midwoofer is probably better choice.
I would also look at behavior in the crossover region and would prefer the one with the least break.
How about HD or other distortion comparison? A dedicated midrange might be better in this respect.
The idea was to choose between same sized speakers in active 3 way setup. Sacrificing power handling and excursion for ???? . If i went with midwoofer i could also experiment with lower cutoff frequency . But maybe that midrange thanks to its shorter coil and lower mass is more capable . Just asking generally , if i had distortion plots the answer would be clear.
The thing is.... some woofere bahve badly above just 400hz some keep being nice until 1500hz. You got to measure and figure our what beasts you are working with. But when it comes to off-axis - which I find very important. Then you got to keep it pretty low, when crossing to a tweeter, as soon as the woofer/midrange becomes larger. I have a 5" midrange, and cross it at 2Khz to a Seas DXT tweeter. So my guess is that any 6" midwoofer or bigger, needs a bigger waveguide... or you will suffer som loss of upper midrange detail, cause you have way less dispersed energy, when the midrange/midwoofer starts beaming.
The "perfect" speaker system covering all frequencies in the audio band would be ONE single driver.
However, we all know that's impossible to attain. (those die-hard single driver enthusiasts can cry and moan endlessly now)
Any given driver can only produce a particular band of frequencies comfortably.
So the next best thing is adding in another driver to handle those frequencies that the other one has trouble with.
Enter - the Two-Way System. - a woofer and tweeter.
Each driver has its own band to cover, increasing effectiveness over the whole audio spectrum.
Depending on the size, power handling, and frequency capability of each driver, determines what the other driver is counted on to do.
Blending each driver's "end range" be it higher for the woofer, and lower for the tweeter, is important in designing the crossover itself.
Ideally, that point should be a relatively smooth (dB level) transistion as the frequency is swept through the crossover points.
Also, interaction between drivers has to be considered - things like standing waves, etc.
Three-way systems involving a midrange are of course more complex.
Speaker manufacturers got into the 3-way and "more the better" designs decades ago, partly to impress the consumer, and also to cover up shortcomings of the individual drivers themselves.
It all boils down to the driver's ability.
I never heard a "single driver" that impressed me.
Nor was I impressed with those 5, 6 way systems like Pioneer put out in the 1970's.
Some of the nicest ones were 2-way, a few 3-ways.
Advent, AR, KLH, among others, seemed to be my choice over time.
Non-fatiguing, natural sonics, but of course everyone has their own tastes.
However, we all know that's impossible to attain. (those die-hard single driver enthusiasts can cry and moan endlessly now)
Any given driver can only produce a particular band of frequencies comfortably.
So the next best thing is adding in another driver to handle those frequencies that the other one has trouble with.
Enter - the Two-Way System. - a woofer and tweeter.
Each driver has its own band to cover, increasing effectiveness over the whole audio spectrum.
Depending on the size, power handling, and frequency capability of each driver, determines what the other driver is counted on to do.
Blending each driver's "end range" be it higher for the woofer, and lower for the tweeter, is important in designing the crossover itself.
Ideally, that point should be a relatively smooth (dB level) transistion as the frequency is swept through the crossover points.
Also, interaction between drivers has to be considered - things like standing waves, etc.
Three-way systems involving a midrange are of course more complex.
Speaker manufacturers got into the 3-way and "more the better" designs decades ago, partly to impress the consumer, and also to cover up shortcomings of the individual drivers themselves.
It all boils down to the driver's ability.
I never heard a "single driver" that impressed me.
Nor was I impressed with those 5, 6 way systems like Pioneer put out in the 1970's.
Some of the nicest ones were 2-way, a few 3-ways.
Advent, AR, KLH, among others, seemed to be my choice over time.
Non-fatiguing, natural sonics, but of course everyone has their own tastes.
If you do the math, the pioneers proved it takes a tri-flex 8" frame [W.E. 755, though actual 'Sd' closer to 7"], so the best overall performing wide/full-range ~7-8" with a nominally flat ~125-10 kHz BW to ensure plenty of smooth XO overlap, ~62-88 Hz Fs [depending on XO slope order], all the rest is just power handling, Qt preferences that best overall meets the needs of the app.
Smaller drivers on a baffle big enough to support < 250 Hz [preferably < 125 Hz] is considered by some to be an acceptable alternative, though obviously at ~1.4-2.8 ft wide defeats most of the point of using a smaller driver. 🙁
In short, if you don't buy/have what you need, then choose the one that comes closest specs wise and it 'is what it is'. 😉
GM
