Is the current production Vifa P13WH-00-08 the same product as highly rated in the past? I know it was unavailable for a while but is now available as a Tymphany product. It is one of the few candidates for a dedicated mid-range in my upcoming active 4-way project. It will handle frequencies in the range 350Hz-3.5 kHz. I considered a dome mid-range but rejected the idea because of restrictions at the bottom of this range and I don't want to crossover in the sensitive mid-range. There seems to be limited choice for a mid range that will not need to deal with bass. The original P13WH had a reputation for excellent behaviour at the upper crossover frequencies and since this is a 4-way project, I would like to cross-over somewhat higher than the usual 2-3 kHz.
Last edited:
Where did you find it. I have not seen it at the Tymphany site. I used it for about 15 years. It was a beautifully sounding driver within its range. Some claim that it could be used wide open but I found its best top end to be about 3.2 KHz. Above that it seemed to lose its transparency. Mine suffered from hardening of the surround with age, its resonance going from about 68 Hz to 112 Hz over 15 years. In its prime it made a wonderful combination with the Scan Speak 9500 tweeter.
Have you looked at the Seas MCA15 for similar top end behavior. Also, the U16RCYP with the woven cone. I would consider raising the lower crossover to 400-500 Hz and use one of the Scan Speak 10F series drivers. They may just have the best upper mids in the business.
Have you looked at the Seas MCA15 for similar top end behavior. Also, the U16RCYP with the woven cone. I would consider raising the lower crossover to 400-500 Hz and use one of the Scan Speak 10F series drivers. They may just have the best upper mids in the business.
It is on page 515 of the Wagner catalogue
Online Catalogue | Wagner Electronics
Will this affect the performance above 350Hz? Surely this is only affecting the bass performance?
I have used it with the Scan Speak 9700, which I actually prefer to the 9500. I tend to dislike the sound of ferro-fluid damped tweeters.
For some reason Seas are not so readily available at competitive prices in Australia. I have in the past preferred Scanspeak for performance, though pricey. Recently though SB Acoustics have been attracting my attention. They are very good for the price but their 4" and 5" drivers all seem to be optimised for mid-woofer application.
Last edited:
In addition to higher compliance, the Rms value has risen to over 4. I am not sure how this affects the top end as I have not measured their response recently.
I too prefer the sound of no ferrofluid. The 9500 with lower viscosity fluid was about the only one I found acceptable but am replacing with SB. In general, I do not find ferrofluid drivers as transparent. I do not like the sound of drivers where Qms is lower than Qes. That includes the Scan Speak 3" domes. To me, mechanical damping in a loudspeaker is a no-no.
The SB 12MNRX has very good response in the upper mid, but relatively high distortion. The Poly SB15MFC30 has a very hot top end compared to the P13WH. I wish they would develop that driver a bit more to tame the top end. The same with the Satori MR13P.
Don't you realize that these damping values ( Qms, Qes ) are affecting the resonant frequency and the shape of impedance peak, how it behaves at this frequency? It does not define the overall sound, crossover network and voicing does that.
The Scan speak (discovery) 15W/4424G00 looks like an updated version of the classic vifa p13wh, same chassis, 25mm voice coil but glass fiber over pp cone. The FR remains similar and very smooth
The TB w4-1337 is also often quoted as being a very good mid woofer in three and four way speakers.
W4-1337SD - 4" TI Full Range - TB SPEAKER CO., LTD.
W4-1337SD - 4" TI Full Range - TB SPEAKER CO., LTD.
I disagree. A low Qms value (high Rms) indicates resistance to movement, like a shock absorber instead of a spring. It is most evident at resonance but I believe it is one of the factors that also consumes the fine details of a diaphragm at higher frequencies. This is why manufacturers like SB and Scan Speak will accept the 1-1.5 KHz rim resonance dip rather than dampen the surround. Dampened surrounds as well as air flow restrictions show up as high Rms.
Look at it this way. Whenever we try to tune the woofer in an enclosure, we add the stuffing to kill the airborne standing waves and to lower its Qtc by reducing the Qms value and there goes your originally high Qms down the drain. It doesn't consume midrange details, if it did we would measure these as being low passed or sudden holes in the FR. The very mental image that we have put something strange in the box looking as if it would have restrained the woofer from breathing normally, makes us believe that there is something wrong about it.
Last edited:
The first time I stuffed a closed box (1973) I hated the midrange even though it lowered the resonance from 64Hz to 56 Hz and gave an almost perfect system Q around 0.7. I preferred the sound unstuffed, lined only. That box was 40 liters and was for a 10" Isophon PSL245. For me, there has always been a correlation between my subjective liking of a system with the percentage of damping being provided by BL^2/Re rather than Rms or Ras. My favorite commercial speaker of the time, the Dynaco A25 had the port restricted for aperiodic but the box was not stuffed. I liked its midrange much better than the AR 3 and AR 5 which were stuffed. At that time I was in college in Engineering school and read everything I could on loudspeaker behavior. The best reference at the time was "Acoustics" by Leo Beranek. It gave an excellent model of the electro acoustic system long before Thiele and Small, who were actually publishing at that time.
We must accept that the Vifa P13-WH-00-08 is a thing of the past. 🙁
I don't know why it is not made any more. But if you are very alert, there is a driver almost as good still around: Peerless 830860 HDS 134 PPB MidWoofer Speaker
Troels Gravesen notes it would make a pretty good midrange too: Peerless HDS PPB 830860
What I would do with it is build it MTM D'Appolito: Vifa PL14WJ-
This gets you more loudness with less distortion, and series wired MTM is a particularly easy bass filter conversion because the loudness is exactly the same for doubled filter inductance, resistance and halved capacitance. Ring-radiators are quite the new modern wheeze, and definitely work better than regular domes. 5" works extremely well in about 12L per driver or 25L in MTM. Why go smaller?
It wouldn't be hard to design a three way filter for this driver too, a la Chartwell PM400 style. Either conventional, or this Wharfedale E70 style with the PA projection of the all important vocal range. Lot to like, either way. 😀
I don't know why it is not made any more. But if you are very alert, there is a driver almost as good still around: Peerless 830860 HDS 134 PPB MidWoofer Speaker
Troels Gravesen notes it would make a pretty good midrange too: Peerless HDS PPB 830860
What I would do with it is build it MTM D'Appolito: Vifa PL14WJ-
This gets you more loudness with less distortion, and series wired MTM is a particularly easy bass filter conversion because the loudness is exactly the same for doubled filter inductance, resistance and halved capacitance. Ring-radiators are quite the new modern wheeze, and definitely work better than regular domes. 5" works extremely well in about 12L per driver or 25L in MTM. Why go smaller?
It wouldn't be hard to design a three way filter for this driver too, a la Chartwell PM400 style. Either conventional, or this Wharfedale E70 style with the PA projection of the all important vocal range. Lot to like, either way. 😀
Attachments
I actually have a pair of P13-WH-00-08 lying around, but they are the recent production, hence my question about consistency with earlier production. Thanks for the heads up about the Peerless 830860. It does indeed resemble the the P13-WH-00-08 in many respects. I have used other HDS models in the past, mainly the 6.5" mid-woofers. I don't know why I overlooked the smaller HDS, probably the annoyance of the straight-sided rebate required, though this makes possible closer centre-to-centre mid-tweeter spacing.
Since I want to build a 4-way, MTM would be too hard to fit into my size requirements. Also I find the vertical lobing makes the listening height too restrictive for domestic listening.
My crossover is active, so I have no awkward component requirements to satisfy.
I wonder if the 4" Peerless 830870 would be even more suitable for my application? I definitely don't need the excursion in the range 350 Hz-3.5 kHz, or the penalty of higher cone mass.
The tweeter will probably be the SB29RDC-C0004, which I have used before and quite like.
System 7, you are quite right about the Peerless. I don't know why many of us always overlook the HDS. It is probably the closest thing to a P13WH.
The picture of the Chartwell takes me back to vintage driver spotting mode. The woofer looks like a maybe a Richard Allan HP12. The tweeter is definitely an Isophon KK10 or KK8. The mid, I do not recognize.
Bon, I went into the Tymphany website but found no trace of the reintroduced P13WH. However, it would not surprise me if something is up because I found the Vifa C13WH-09-08 which was a treated paper cone steel chassis with similar performance. Parts-Express just re-introduced the old classic Peerless polypropylene 5" as part of the Peerless "Heritage Family" for $35.00. I did not see this one on Tymphany. Maybe the P13 is actually close behind. See the attached data sheets.
That is a blast from the past! Reminds me of so many 80's drivers. Thanks for the efforts. I don't know why the P13 is apparently available in Australia but invisible elsewhere.
I am toying with the idea of building a tweeter/mid/low mid box with removable front baffle and compare three combinations that should be compatible. The tweeter will be the same in all three, the SB29RDC-C0004. The mid/low-mid pairings will be:
1. 5" Vifa P13WH-00-08, 6.5" Vifa P17WJ-00-08
2. 4" Peerless P830870, 6.5" Peerless P830874
3. 4" SB Acoustics SB12NRXC25-4, 6.5" SB Acoustics SB17NRXC35-8-UC
Options 1 and 2 are polypropylene whereas option 3 is Norecx, the modern standard paper composite. I already have the drivers for options 1 and 3. This will give me an opportunity to compare some modern components with the classic Vifa. The sealed enclosures will be identical and the crossover active. The SB drivers have a far superior build quality to the Vifa's but will it translate to better sound? I aim to give it a shot.
I am only interested in performance above 100Hz since a seperate bass enclosure is planned for the 4-way project. Extreme power handling and bass extension will not be a requirement.
SB15MFC30-8 is a good replacement for the P13 and was a drop in for the xo on the D27/P13 speaker in most cases.
I noticed that the SB15 series all have some nasty resonance problems in the 4-10 kHz region, which is bit too close to where I intend to crossover. The SB12 series are better behaved up till near 10kHz, which is why I am going with them. I wanted drivers that had good behaviour in this region to have a fair comparison with the venerable P13. I actually have a pair of SB15NRXC30-8-UC but don't plan on using them. But you never know.
It's not an issue when used with the xo. I've used the SB12NRX25-4 in a couple of speakers and is a nice driver. Don't crossover too high and I wouldn't go over 3kHz. They do make a mid-range version.
Even the good old P13 doesn't like high crossover points and I never went much over 3kHz.
Even the good old P13 doesn't like high crossover points and I never went much over 3kHz.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.