I would like to build a full range single driver speaker using Markaudo drivers but I’m having a hard time making sense of the product lineup. It’s unclear which ones are newer, older, and the pros and cons of the different materials. I’m hoping that if I describe my goals people can offer advice:
Thank you!
- My goals are low distortion, neutral to warm turning, great imaging and sound stage, simple design, and cohesive sound of a single point source. Cost is not a concern.
- I have DSP and can EQ.
- They will be used with a sub, crossed over between 60-80 Hz, I don’t need super low extension, but I guess it would be nice to have the option in the future.
- Cabinet volume can be up to 3 cubic feet / 85 L
- Single listening position, centered, 9 ft from speakers, I can toe in or not if needed.
- I listen mostly to jazz and classic rock, some metal and pop.
- Amplifier has 50WPC class AB
- I cannot hear above 17kHz
- I appreciate a great natural mid range - big fan of HD650 headphones.
- MAOP 11, 10, 7
- Alpair 12P, 12PW, 11MS, 10P, 10M
- CHR 120
Thank you!
Hi wbag,
MAOP and MICA cones combine the best parts of metal and paper, and the treble peaks are not bothersome at all.
If you want to listen from 1.5 meters away, I recommend MAOP7, CHP-90 mica, and MAOP10.
Please use DSP, EQ, and subwoofer, if you feel it necessary. I do not use them.
MAOP7
CHP-90 mica
MAOP10
MAOP and MICA cones combine the best parts of metal and paper, and the treble peaks are not bothersome at all.
If you want to listen from 1.5 meters away, I recommend MAOP7, CHP-90 mica, and MAOP10.
Please use DSP, EQ, and subwoofer, if you feel it necessary. I do not use them.
MAOP7
CHP-90 mica
MAOP10
Hi Nandappe,
I'm in the process to build new speakers, and I'd like to use full range drivers but I have some questions about them, could you help me ?
I love to listen to the smooth music styles of the videos, but I love also much more complex like symphonical, I wonder if these speakers are well suited to reproduce this type of music too ?
Similarly I wonder if you can have any bass impact with such small drivers ?
And last, I struggle to find distorsion figures on Mark Audio speakers, do you know where i could find these data ?
Thanks
I'm in the process to build new speakers, and I'd like to use full range drivers but I have some questions about them, could you help me ?
I love to listen to the smooth music styles of the videos, but I love also much more complex like symphonical, I wonder if these speakers are well suited to reproduce this type of music too ?
Similarly I wonder if you can have any bass impact with such small drivers ?
And last, I struggle to find distorsion figures on Mark Audio speakers, do you know where i could find these data ?
Thanks
Greetings!
First, nice work @nandappe!
I have already made my MarkAudio selection, and it is perhaps influenced by my personal penchant to tinker. I'm one of those people who modifies cones to 'tune-out' certain resonant properties that are (more or less) commonly found in suspended cone drivers. For that reason I chose Alpair 12.2P because the uncoated paper best accepts the materials that will be added. Those 12.2P suspensions are breaking in now, and after that I'll get to work on the cones. I will use them with Class A amplification in 16.5 liter reflex enclosures plus a small sub having a 10" driver with very tunable Hypex amp. If I were not going to mess with the cones, I would probably choose one of the MAOP series. [I believe Alpair 12PW are no longer produced.]
In my opinion and experience, we all listen differently to (the same) recordings. My goal is to be able to close my eyes and be completely unable to sense and point to the drivers (with well-made live performance recordings). That's when you are really brought into the performance space. Love that! ...and for me, flawless reproduction of 'difficult' singers' voices is the best possible outcome. Fingers crossed as my project progresses, and good luck with yours!
First, nice work @nandappe!
I have already made my MarkAudio selection, and it is perhaps influenced by my personal penchant to tinker. I'm one of those people who modifies cones to 'tune-out' certain resonant properties that are (more or less) commonly found in suspended cone drivers. For that reason I chose Alpair 12.2P because the uncoated paper best accepts the materials that will be added. Those 12.2P suspensions are breaking in now, and after that I'll get to work on the cones. I will use them with Class A amplification in 16.5 liter reflex enclosures plus a small sub having a 10" driver with very tunable Hypex amp. If I were not going to mess with the cones, I would probably choose one of the MAOP series. [I believe Alpair 12PW are no longer produced.]
In my opinion and experience, we all listen differently to (the same) recordings. My goal is to be able to close my eyes and be completely unable to sense and point to the drivers (with well-made live performance recordings). That's when you are really brought into the performance space. Love that! ...and for me, flawless reproduction of 'difficult' singers' voices is the best possible outcome. Fingers crossed as my project progresses, and good luck with yours!
Greetings @maillard,
Here is a considered personal opinion, offered merely in hopes of helping your enjoyment. The concept of "distortion", as we think about it when applied to everything upstream of the speakers, does not easily apply to working speakers and their drivers. Speakers are much more like musical instruments than are the electronics that supply them. They always interact acoustically with the space they are in. Plus, the drivers are typically in a state of change where the more they are used, the better their sound. Brand new drivers do not represent the performance or enjoyment of well used ones. And I have found that, if unused for even a week or two, drivers need to be played a while before they regain their best performance. So any performance specs related to new drivers will not well predict the full enjoyment that they will give in your system and in your room.
Not surprising, model names are so jumbled now it is hard to use them to determine quality.
When the Alpair 7/11ms came out, A7.3 got Pluvia status (P7HD), and i suspect A10.3/p got shrunk a bit and became CHR/CHP90.
And some are now designed to go lower inbigger boxes, ie CHN-110. CHR-120.
The dirt cheap CHN-50 and CHN-110 are outstanding. it is confusing, and few can properly listen to all of them.
MAOP are definity top of the heap, that is easy.
My big WAW uses MAOP 7.
A smaller driver should work better in a WAW. Or are you wanting a Sub/Sat system?
dave
Last edited:
The drivers striked out are getting difficult to find they are NLA. I expect A12p to follow.
dave
A coat of puzzlekoat/ModPodge makes a positive improvement. And one can go even further.
dave
Dave, are the photos of Alpair 12P's? Those rings are just about where first tap tests would suggest. I see patterns on the outer mounting ring. 🙂 When I've done that on reflex vents I found that little pieces of electrical tape worked well. My drivers are breaking in now, and I'll get back to them in a week or two...
Concerning acrylic sealant, yep! I believe that the patterns are more effective on raw paper by virtue of being able to penetrate slightly. Thus, I seal coat only after I'm 100% sure I'm done with patterns.
Also, and off topic here so forgive me, I ran across this thread from a person who makes custom Lowther cones! 😵
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/lowther-dx4-rebuild.392290/page-3#post-7702207
OEM cones are sealed with shellac, of course. This person suggested Krylon Satin Finish, marketed for preserving artwork. I'm going to evaluate, and compare to acrylic with various kinds of cellulose products and application methods. It is plausible that the Ethyl 3-Ethoxypropionate in the Krylon aids penetration by displacing H2O from the cellulose. ...just a hypothesis... Will report back if I give it a try on drivers.
Cheers, Frank
Concerning acrylic sealant, yep! I believe that the patterns are more effective on raw paper by virtue of being able to penetrate slightly. Thus, I seal coat only after I'm 100% sure I'm done with patterns.
Also, and off topic here so forgive me, I ran across this thread from a person who makes custom Lowther cones! 😵
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/lowther-dx4-rebuild.392290/page-3#post-7702207
OEM cones are sealed with shellac, of course. This person suggested Krylon Satin Finish, marketed for preserving artwork. I'm going to evaluate, and compare to acrylic with various kinds of cellulose products and application methods. It is plausible that the Ethyl 3-Ethoxypropionate in the Krylon aids penetration by displacing H2O from the cellulose. ...just a hypothesis... Will report back if I give it a try on drivers.
Cheers, Frank
Yes, rings are at the tap points, taking with Mark coincide with the transition from one curve to the next in the cone profile.
Tape (i tried vinyl stick0on worked) should work well.
On these Mar-Kel70T Bernie used 144 pieces of douglas fir,
They want to stay above the cone and create a bump. The pre-coat helps withother issues and makes it a bit easier to recover from mistakes.
Careful, too much will stiffen the cone and induce HF ringing.
dave
In practice, I have only sealed drivers after patterning, and only ones with heavier cones. The Alpair 12.2P cones are so light! If the patterns get me where I want to be, I'll think twice before adding any sealant. One 50:50 coat on those pictured above?
A slightly diluted coat of ModPodge. The spots, then 2 coats 50_50 acrylic gloss on the main cone, 1 on the dust cap. A spot ofPVA onthtip ofth edustcap and a bit of gloss over the top of that.
Sensitivity is within the variations in a stock batch. Added mass is negligible.
dave
Sensitivity is within the variations in a stock batch. Added mass is negligible.
dave
Last edited:
Surprisingly, I preferred the sound demo from MAOP7 of the 3. I guess smaller does sound faster and clearer.
What I would do is program an EQ curve to use only with already-peaky or hot sounding records.
wbag,
A few answer to the questions you have raised in your first post:
- Difference between the Alpair 12P and Alpair 12PW: The 12P model is a wide-band (full-range) unit covering the frequency range from ~Fs to HF frequencies. The 12PW unit was designed to be used as a high bandwidth mid-woofer with a more robust suspension (spider?) and cone, and less high frequency extension. By design the 12PW has greater bass output capability, a little lower sensitivity and the T&S parameters indicate that cabinet alignments can be designed/tuned for greater low frequency extension. AFAIK the Alpair 12PW has been discontinued.
- My understanding is that the CHR aluminum alloy driver cones are a different alloy and slightly thicker/heavier vs the Alpair aluminum alloy cones. The assumption is that the cone and suspension assembly is more robust vs the Alpair's and these units can be pushed a little harder. However the new Alpairs come with an "arrestor" that will provide an audible warning if there is any over-excursion happening.
If you really like the HD-650 it looks like you prefer a more neutral frequency response; wide-band / full-range drivers tend to have some peaks/troughs, but with careful placement and with simpler, less demanding material (girl and guitar, acoustic, small jazz ensembles, smooth jazz, vocals), the listening experience can be definitely enjoyable. DSP can help too.
I did not enjoy metal music much with wide-band drivers. I eventually moved on to a 2 way, and then 3 way design.
Hi maillard,
As for the bass, I don't know because everyone feels differently.
However, the duct is producing enough bass even at 4inch driver.
I think orchestral reproduction needs to be 5.5inch or more to have enough grandeur and sound pressure.
The CHP-90 is my "daily driver" favourite at the moment. Unfortunately, I have a Catch-22 situation, in that the project is meant to be a gift, when it's finished one day.😛
I use it in 14L sealed, and the bass is very nicely damped. 10-12L would probably also work fine. Unlike most woofers these days, the motor does not have a "vented pole piece", so while the rating may be 7mm Xmax or something like that, it's firmly in the "civilised" category, and chest-thumping bass could be outsourced to dedicated subwoofers. In terms of "fit", I can see them in the bedroom, as big desktop monitors, or tidy bookshelf speakers for the living room.
From my experience with the CHN-50, I found that source quality can make a big difference. Adding resistors in series (approx 10 or 22 ohms) can be a quick way to reduce distortion and increase the available overhead by quite some margin. As a side effect, it also changes the tonal balance, but that's not the purpose of that mod. Upgrading to high quality class-A or tube amplifiers with a high output impedance (low damping factor) would be a next logical step.
But the CHN-50 is 3", so there's only so much it can do, unassisted. The 4" range probably meets them about half-way, and IMO would probably make some really smooth computer speakers with great vocals for skype/meet or background music.
My personal impression, comparing the CHN-50 and Alpair 5 back-to-back: the Alpair was simultaneously 'tighter' with a better perception of clarity and point-source accuracy, but also harsher and less pleasant-sounding out of the box. The resistor mod gave the advantage to the Alpair, but that really got me thinking about how further I could take it by improving the amplifier quality. I imagine the spider behind the CHN-50 cone works hard behind the scenes to help dampen vibrations, so there's less pressure on the amplifier, but it's also imperfect and blurs the transients a little.
I use it in 14L sealed, and the bass is very nicely damped. 10-12L would probably also work fine. Unlike most woofers these days, the motor does not have a "vented pole piece", so while the rating may be 7mm Xmax or something like that, it's firmly in the "civilised" category, and chest-thumping bass could be outsourced to dedicated subwoofers. In terms of "fit", I can see them in the bedroom, as big desktop monitors, or tidy bookshelf speakers for the living room.
From my experience with the CHN-50, I found that source quality can make a big difference. Adding resistors in series (approx 10 or 22 ohms) can be a quick way to reduce distortion and increase the available overhead by quite some margin. As a side effect, it also changes the tonal balance, but that's not the purpose of that mod. Upgrading to high quality class-A or tube amplifiers with a high output impedance (low damping factor) would be a next logical step.
But the CHN-50 is 3", so there's only so much it can do, unassisted. The 4" range probably meets them about half-way, and IMO would probably make some really smooth computer speakers with great vocals for skype/meet or background music.
My personal impression, comparing the CHN-50 and Alpair 5 back-to-back: the Alpair was simultaneously 'tighter' with a better perception of clarity and point-source accuracy, but also harsher and less pleasant-sounding out of the box. The resistor mod gave the advantage to the Alpair, but that really got me thinking about how further I could take it by improving the amplifier quality. I imagine the spider behind the CHN-50 cone works hard behind the scenes to help dampen vibrations, so there's less pressure on the amplifier, but it's also imperfect and blurs the transients a little.
Vented pole pieces are essentially about heat dissipation & reducing pressure build up. For the sake of interest, these units are not vented because they don't benefit from it. The VC former is, & heating / pressure build is sufficiently minor not to require any more. Which isn't to knock the idea -it can be very useful, just not in most of these units which are not designed for continuous high output.
Adding resistors in series with a drive unit will not 'increase the available overhead' -it will actually decrease it as you're burning up amplifier power as heat. It will have the effect of raising the output impedance / lowering the electrical damping however, shifting the behaviour of a regular voltage source amplifier (e.g. a typical solid-state) toward a current source, so the box / whatever alignment needs to factor this in.
Adding resistors in series with a drive unit will not 'increase the available overhead' -it will actually decrease it as you're burning up amplifier power as heat. It will have the effect of raising the output impedance / lowering the electrical damping however, shifting the behaviour of a regular voltage source amplifier (e.g. a typical solid-state) toward a current source, so the box / whatever alignment needs to factor this in.
This got me thinking about the MarkAudio motors, because I've always focused my cone-modding efforts on those with good-to-great motors. Looking at the T/S parameters for comparisons, I divided BL X 1000 by Sd X Mmd. In words, It's kind of like power-to-weight ratio of a race car. Here are the results:
Alpair 12P - 5.57
Alpair 11MS - 6.21
MAOP 11 - 6.45
MAOP 7 - 20.21
So, the 7cm cones are much more dominated by the motor's power. But of course, it might take much more of a 'near-field' setup to appreciate.
But have you tried it?
The power loss is a lot lower than intuition might suggest:
100W @ a nominal 8 ohms would swing around +/-40V at clipping.
Working backwards: 40V / 8ohm = 5A
5A * 40V / 2 = 100W
If we change that to 40V / 30 ohm = 1.33A
1.33A * (8/30ths of 40V) / 2 = 7.1W for the speaker, and
1.33A * (22/30ths of 40V) / 2 = 19.5W for the resistor. And in practice a 5W rated resistor is barely likely to get warm.
As an added bonus, those class-D modules that only use smallish laptop-style power supplies to start with, would also run cooler, so I can't discount part of the improvement being from that.
I did turn the volume pot a couple notches higher to make up the shortfall, but on top of that found that the subjective upper limit of how far the CHN-50s could be pushed went up, all within that power band of just a few watts going to the speaker.