I have heard quite a bit about the Audax and fantastic midrange. I am curious about what you mean by having trouble implementing them.
Oon
I'm working on a 3way with SB12. listening to it full range crossed to two 6.25 woofers. Need to cross it with tweeter to filter out distortion higher up, but its really clean and detailed otherwise. Oldspkrguy describing it very well indeed.
oonthekid; the Audax sounded all righ in free air (brilliant, actually), but once mounted in a cabinet, it was like it was placed inside a soft plastic bucket, very colored, and all the low-level resolution was gone. I changed the cabinet volume, the cabinet shape, the stuffing, and I adjusted the filter, and in the end I concluded that the HM13 needs a very wide and very deep cabinet, 20 liters or more, and a narrow bandwidth, no more than 800-2600Hz with steep slopes, and it doesn't like to play loud, and that makes it pretty useless IMO. Maybe the ultrathin kevlar/paper/epoxy membrane just doesn't like to be pushed around by (even the smalles amount of) cabinet reflections?
Oldspeakerguy, your listening impressions and comparisons on the SP12 is just what I hoped for, thank you very much for the effort. And I think I know what you mean, you can tell pretty much about a driver just by listening to it in simple conditions. I practise this myself with all the drivers I use, preferably in free air with a simple filter. A test like this can tell a lot about a drivers potensial for low level resolution, how it distort when you increase the volume, what the breakup sounds like, how much natural "warmth" it produce, etc …
Of course the only way to decide what SB12M really sounds like is to give it a proper implementation. My hope was the SB12M would fill the gap between the smaller 35cm2 10F and the larger 70cm2 MR13, like the old 8640 did, but now I'm worried that it doesn't have the low-level resolution, the clean engine and the well behaved breakup that these drivers have. The search for the perfect 50cm2 midrange has only just began. …
The Monacor kevlar midwoofer could be an interesting alternative to Audio Technology 15H. With a nice behaving 95cm2 cone and cm2/gram around 10 it can (IMO) be crossed around 350/2600Hz in a larger 3-way. What I look for now is a 50cm2 midrange with cm2/gram around 12 and a strong engine that can be used as a 600-3500Hz filler driver. I always look for the "right" cm2/gram number, this, together with the engines force/watt can tell a lot about how much natural warmth the driver can produce in a small midrange cabinet, and which potensial it has for delivering the resolution I want. But in the end it also comes down to how the surround works, how clean the engine works, how stiff and well damped the cone is, the drivers linear headroom, etc …
Oldspeakerguy, your listening impressions and comparisons on the SP12 is just what I hoped for, thank you very much for the effort. And I think I know what you mean, you can tell pretty much about a driver just by listening to it in simple conditions. I practise this myself with all the drivers I use, preferably in free air with a simple filter. A test like this can tell a lot about a drivers potensial for low level resolution, how it distort when you increase the volume, what the breakup sounds like, how much natural "warmth" it produce, etc …
Of course the only way to decide what SB12M really sounds like is to give it a proper implementation. My hope was the SB12M would fill the gap between the smaller 35cm2 10F and the larger 70cm2 MR13, like the old 8640 did, but now I'm worried that it doesn't have the low-level resolution, the clean engine and the well behaved breakup that these drivers have. The search for the perfect 50cm2 midrange has only just began. …
The Monacor kevlar midwoofer could be an interesting alternative to Audio Technology 15H. With a nice behaving 95cm2 cone and cm2/gram around 10 it can (IMO) be crossed around 350/2600Hz in a larger 3-way. What I look for now is a 50cm2 midrange with cm2/gram around 12 and a strong engine that can be used as a 600-3500Hz filler driver. I always look for the "right" cm2/gram number, this, together with the engines force/watt can tell a lot about how much natural warmth the driver can produce in a small midrange cabinet, and which potensial it has for delivering the resolution I want. But in the end it also comes down to how the surround works, how clean the engine works, how stiff and well damped the cone is, the drivers linear headroom, etc …
@ oldppkrguy, says on memory...on perception...on "air" that sb12 distorts early against the monacor.
until now only a lot of words but none distortion measurements to confirm this.
i am sure that if he has instrumentation and measure that phantom distortion on sb12 will have nasty surprises on monacor.
until now only a lot of words but none distortion measurements to confirm this.
i am sure that if he has instrumentation and measure that phantom distortion on sb12 will have nasty surprises on monacor.
If you want higher quality, maybe the smaller Satori is the way to go. I had some MW16 M/W and still have the MR16 mids. The cone sounds good, the motor, suspension, etc are are very well designed and implemented. My guess is the MR13 would do very well but obviously much more expensive. All Satoris I have need a really good X/O to bring out their best, same thing with any Mark Audio full range I have ever tried. The more resolution a driver has, the more important it is to use higher quality crossover parts.
Back to the Audax, sorry, I was mistaken. I looked up the old specs, I had the 4 inch HDA not the 5 1/4 inch HDA. The 4 inch did a really good job within its limits.
Many people REALLY like the MA Alpair 7.3 (gen 3) and say it is the one to beat for clean mids; the Planet10 modified (En) version even better still. If I had enough money, I would buy high end Accuton, MAOP 7 and 10 and probably the ATC mid (dome) and then we could get serious about high end mids!
Many other people really seem to like the SS Illuminator 12MU; again, pricey!
from the Mdisound site, 4 inch mids listed:
Approx 4" Midrange: Madisound Speaker Components
planet_10 hifi
planet 10; the A7.3 is discontinued but some people still stock them
Again, I use FR as wide band mids for myself; I like the sound of a real tweeter and not FR for the top octave or so; just sounds more real. And, at my age, I need all the SPL I can get above 10 KHz ha ha ha...exactly why I use the Fostex ST...
Back to the Audax, sorry, I was mistaken. I looked up the old specs, I had the 4 inch HDA not the 5 1/4 inch HDA. The 4 inch did a really good job within its limits.
Many people REALLY like the MA Alpair 7.3 (gen 3) and say it is the one to beat for clean mids; the Planet10 modified (En) version even better still. If I had enough money, I would buy high end Accuton, MAOP 7 and 10 and probably the ATC mid (dome) and then we could get serious about high end mids!
Many other people really seem to like the SS Illuminator 12MU; again, pricey!
from the Mdisound site, 4 inch mids listed:
Approx 4" Midrange: Madisound Speaker Components
planet_10 hifi
planet 10; the A7.3 is discontinued but some people still stock them
Again, I use FR as wide band mids for myself; I like the sound of a real tweeter and not FR for the top octave or so; just sounds more real. And, at my age, I need all the SPL I can get above 10 KHz ha ha ha...exactly why I use the Fostex ST...
I would really like to see a TexTreme fullrange in the 3 1/2 inch to 5 1/4 inch size. Something that is good for 100 Hz to 10 KHz (TRUE full range, not mid range). I would most likely use it from 300 Hz to 6 KHz. The best 3-ways (or more) I have experienced for myself, have a very wide band mid. TexTreme seems like an almost ideal cone material and the Satori motor, suspension, etc. I think are on par with SS Illuminator and other very well designed higher end drivers.
"Animal Farm" has the right ideas I think about cone size and material. 50 cm^2 is a good target; 100 cm^2 is on the larger size. Maybe the ideal size is around 60 to 75 cm^2???.
Light, stiff and strong but also good self damping are what we need here for the most accurate mids. Smooth, flat and extended FR, minimal phase and break up issues and very quick but precise transient response.
The search continues...
"Animal Farm" has the right ideas I think about cone size and material. 50 cm^2 is a good target; 100 cm^2 is on the larger size. Maybe the ideal size is around 60 to 75 cm^2???.
Light, stiff and strong but also good self damping are what we need here for the most accurate mids. Smooth, flat and extended FR, minimal phase and break up issues and very quick but precise transient response.
The search continues...
How about SEAS FR with Curv cone??? Curv is said to be detailed and smooth and warm all at the same time and the price is about right...
H1600-08 FU10RB
H1600-04 FU10RB
H1600-08 FU10RB
H1600-04 FU10RB
More info for serious people....Monacor I have and SB12 both SUCK a being "musical"
Give me a break guys; I have an Engineering degree; I also have a Technicians Diploma and I am am a Musician. If you "think" you have a better understanding of recorded music, acoustics, or speaker design....I call your bluff! I have played almost every musical instrument on the planet and have designed very well received speaker systems!
Some of you people obviously just don't get what I am talking about; not my problem!!!
Give me a break guys; I have an Engineering degree; I also have a Technicians Diploma and I am am a Musician. If you "think" you have a better understanding of recorded music, acoustics, or speaker design....I call your bluff! I have played almost every musical instrument on the planet and have designed very well received speaker systems!
Some of you people obviously just don't get what I am talking about; not my problem!!!
Really nice to hear from you, speakerguy. I was born in 1962. I sang along with the Beatles on my mothers lap on the bus, I grew up in the 70's (you know, music!!) and have played guitar for more than 40 years, I have two engineering degrees (electronics and high voltage systems), and I have fooled around with DIY loudspeakers since the Seas CA17 was launched a hundred years ago. The best part of all this is that the rest of my family is as fond of 1966-1980 music as I am, and I will build these new speakers for my oldest daugher (yes, the one who ran away with all my LPs).
Over the years I've made a set of "rules" that I follow when I pick new drivers. A 7-8" woofer in a small 3-way should have cm2/gram between 7-8 to produce strong enough self-resonance to reach down to 40Hz without loosing bass-power in a not too big cabinet. A midrange driver with cm2/gram around 10 in a 5 liter cabinet can be crossed around 300-350Hz without loosing warmth or size&dynamics in the lower midrange. 12-13 is a nice number if I want to cross a midrange driver in a 2-3 liter cabinet around 600-700Hz. Based on the drivers Bl and Rdc, I then calculate the engine's force/watt, and dived this number with the Mms to se how quick it is, how fast it accelerates. Just my own simple guidelines, nothing more.
The Seas MU/FU10 with 8,5 cm2/gram are midwoofers IMO, too heavy, too weak, and too slow to perform up to a 3500Hz crossover. The Illuminator 12MU would be perfect, but $300 … Same goes for the Esotar 430, that would be the ultimate 600-3500Hz driver, but at €500 each, …. The 12MU, SS 8640, 10F, Satori MR13 and SB12M all have cm2/gram around 12. The 10F is the quickest, the MW13 the slowest, and the acceleration-difference between the two is more than 70% (but then again, the MW13 has twice the SD).
With the OWI on top, the midrange must be quick enough to manage a 3500Hz crossover. The 10F does 3500Hz with ease, and both the MR13 and SB12M seem capable. But I'm worried about the dispersion from the MR13's 70cm2, I don't want no narrow-wide distortion. And I'm not sure about the SB12M's engine quality. And the 10F in a small cabinet sounds a weak below 1000Hz IMO. The dark horse in the race might be the Eton 3-212, on paper this looks like a smaller (and cheaper) version of the Esotar 430, with a heavy cone but with a very strong engine to back it up. Righ now, I think I'll go for the 3-212, it seems perfekt for a 700-3600Hz job together with the MW19 and the OWI.
Over the years I've made a set of "rules" that I follow when I pick new drivers. A 7-8" woofer in a small 3-way should have cm2/gram between 7-8 to produce strong enough self-resonance to reach down to 40Hz without loosing bass-power in a not too big cabinet. A midrange driver with cm2/gram around 10 in a 5 liter cabinet can be crossed around 300-350Hz without loosing warmth or size&dynamics in the lower midrange. 12-13 is a nice number if I want to cross a midrange driver in a 2-3 liter cabinet around 600-700Hz. Based on the drivers Bl and Rdc, I then calculate the engine's force/watt, and dived this number with the Mms to se how quick it is, how fast it accelerates. Just my own simple guidelines, nothing more.
The Seas MU/FU10 with 8,5 cm2/gram are midwoofers IMO, too heavy, too weak, and too slow to perform up to a 3500Hz crossover. The Illuminator 12MU would be perfect, but $300 … Same goes for the Esotar 430, that would be the ultimate 600-3500Hz driver, but at €500 each, …. The 12MU, SS 8640, 10F, Satori MR13 and SB12M all have cm2/gram around 12. The 10F is the quickest, the MW13 the slowest, and the acceleration-difference between the two is more than 70% (but then again, the MW13 has twice the SD).
With the OWI on top, the midrange must be quick enough to manage a 3500Hz crossover. The 10F does 3500Hz with ease, and both the MR13 and SB12M seem capable. But I'm worried about the dispersion from the MR13's 70cm2, I don't want no narrow-wide distortion. And I'm not sure about the SB12M's engine quality. And the 10F in a small cabinet sounds a weak below 1000Hz IMO. The dark horse in the race might be the Eton 3-212, on paper this looks like a smaller (and cheaper) version of the Esotar 430, with a heavy cone but with a very strong engine to back it up. Righ now, I think I'll go for the 3-212, it seems perfekt for a 700-3600Hz job together with the MW19 and the OWI.
You might want to consider PA type drivers for a change. I am a big fan of Faitalpro from Italy when it comes to full range drivers for their mids.
You could consider a 4Fe32. 4" driver with frequency response to 15kHz reasonably flat.
Oon
You could consider a 4Fe32. 4" driver with frequency response to 15kHz reasonably flat.
Oon
Looking at the graphs, I believe the SB12 has a higher bass response, which also means that it could be running a higher excursion for whatever music you are playing and might be the source of distortion.
Or maybe the cone break up at high frequency that is distorting?
In any case, IMHO, while SB acoustics is good, There might be better dedicated mids out there. Have to remember SB12 is a midbass so they have to design it for bass work as well...
Oon
I was born in 1956, I played every single reed woodwind, guitar and bass. Anyone that thinks that musicians don't know what they are talking about just need to SHUT UP!
I have been doing speakers for OVER 50 years! You people stuck on math, science and measurements are MISSING OUT!!!!
Yes, the science and math are real; when is the last time you played a musical instrument or heard a live band in a small setting???
I have been doing speakers for OVER 50 years! You people stuck on math, science and measurements are MISSING OUT!!!!
Yes, the science and math are real; when is the last time you played a musical instrument or heard a live band in a small setting???
OK, let me step back just a bit. I started playing and reading music at age 8; I designed my first speaker system almost from scratch at age 12. I am TIRED of ANYONE that thinks I don't know what I am doing or talking about! You guys just need to listen to us old timers and respect what we are trying to tell you! I will be knocking on the door of 70 in just a few short years; yes technology has advanced; science and math are real. BUT, music is magic, so is speaker design...get over it and just LISTEN...trust your EARS...not just the specs!!!
I used to listen to the "natural" response of drivers a lot. But after comparing drivers with the proposed filtering in place so changed how they sounded compared to each other, I no longer listen with no filter in place so I'm not subconsciously biased when I compare drivers in an actual completed speaker.
You just can't compare drivers without filtering to the intended acoustic response.
You just can't compare drivers without filtering to the intended acoustic response.
Well, sorry, had to get that out! Ignore my rants; there are people shooting each other in the streets and stores here just about wearing a mask! People are on edge from the politics and covid, me too; I just get overly excited from time to time...again, take it with a grain of salt, no harm meant...
The dog keeps getting me up in the wee hours so here I am again. I think I have been spoiled by the mids from Satori and Mark Audio; anything else just can't compare musically. I am OVERLY critical I realize and also get my tail feathers ruffled from time to time. If you want to get serious about the music, most mids in the lower price ranges just have way too many compromises, not all certainly but most. I heard a 5 inch 2-way in Tokyo about 1976 that I still vividly remember. There was an El-Cassette recording of a Bach Cello Suite and it was PURE MAGIC! I have no clue about the brand or the price but I VIVIDLY remember that exact sound quality from all those years ago. Yes, memory WORKS!
