I'm asking BECAUSE I've read it, so where did other s post their own measurements? I did, xrk971 did, and?
And you got in response several "general" answers, which you then rejected as not good enough. You'll have at least to frame the question "objectively" if you want "objective" answers. You've been asked repeatedly what you mean by "very good dispersion" and "high xmax" and so far failed to answer . . .
You aren't going to get many. As has been said several times above. Not many DIYers have the facilities to be testing these particularly well, and you're making several assumptions:
-That people are using your criteria (which needs to be specific) for their testing. Comparisons between units under different conditions violates the first principles of scientific methodology (viz. only changing one variable).
-That 3rd party data is automatically going to be more reliable / accurate than that of manufacturers. It might be. On the other hand it might not. I'm sure we've seen cases where people have measured drivers which give spectacularly different results from manufacturer data. The question then becomes a matter of context, and the question arises: is this likely? Or is it suggestive of a problem with the test setup? For example, I imagine we all tend to accept that Seas make pretty consistent product to close tolerances, and their published data is basically good. They have a deserved reputation for this. But I can think of an example where somebody measured a pair of their midbass units which came out with an F0 25Hz higher than advertised, and Vas about 2x listed. Not one driver, which might have slipped through the net (these things happen), but two. And they came out very close to each other. So do we simply accept this, or might we raise the possibility of this suggesting a problem with the test setup? Since other 3rd party measures of the same model agreed closely with the manufacturer data, the balance of probability lies with the latter.
-The loose answer to your thread-title question are:
Mark Audio
Jordan (sort-of; current units are a bit larger)
EAD (old Jordan drivers & have one in roughly this size bracket)
Tang Band
Fostex
Vifa
HiWave (as in the BMRs)
Bandor (sort of -they've a nice 2in. Not this size category, but mentioned for the sake of interest / semi-completeness)
That's about it; these things are relative, especially sans specific criteria, performance varies dramatically depending on the unit in question, and as has been stated, if you want objective, then you will have to be objective. Clearly state what you mean by 'very good dispersion' and 'high xmax'. As in put specific numbers or criteria to it.
Not all the products of the manufacturers mentioned fall into this extremely loose category -you'll need to use some logic to narrow it down, since the data provided will not always show what you want. You will need to use common sense also; e.g. the flatter the cone profile, its polar response is likely to narrow somewhat less as frequency rises. As is 'likely', not 'automatically.' Nor will you necessarily like what they do in other respects. Almost certainly you won't.
-That people are using your criteria (which needs to be specific) for their testing. Comparisons between units under different conditions violates the first principles of scientific methodology (viz. only changing one variable).
-That 3rd party data is automatically going to be more reliable / accurate than that of manufacturers. It might be. On the other hand it might not. I'm sure we've seen cases where people have measured drivers which give spectacularly different results from manufacturer data. The question then becomes a matter of context, and the question arises: is this likely? Or is it suggestive of a problem with the test setup? For example, I imagine we all tend to accept that Seas make pretty consistent product to close tolerances, and their published data is basically good. They have a deserved reputation for this. But I can think of an example where somebody measured a pair of their midbass units which came out with an F0 25Hz higher than advertised, and Vas about 2x listed. Not one driver, which might have slipped through the net (these things happen), but two. And they came out very close to each other. So do we simply accept this, or might we raise the possibility of this suggesting a problem with the test setup? Since other 3rd party measures of the same model agreed closely with the manufacturer data, the balance of probability lies with the latter.
-The loose answer to your thread-title question are:
Mark Audio
Jordan (sort-of; current units are a bit larger)
EAD (old Jordan drivers & have one in roughly this size bracket)
Tang Band
Fostex
Vifa
HiWave (as in the BMRs)
Bandor (sort of -they've a nice 2in. Not this size category, but mentioned for the sake of interest / semi-completeness)
That's about it; these things are relative, especially sans specific criteria, performance varies dramatically depending on the unit in question, and as has been stated, if you want objective, then you will have to be objective. Clearly state what you mean by 'very good dispersion' and 'high xmax'. As in put specific numbers or criteria to it.
Not all the products of the manufacturers mentioned fall into this extremely loose category -you'll need to use some logic to narrow it down, since the data provided will not always show what you want. You will need to use common sense also; e.g. the flatter the cone profile, its polar response is likely to narrow somewhat less as frequency rises. As is 'likely', not 'automatically.' Nor will you necessarily like what they do in other respects. Almost certainly you won't.
Last edited:
OT posts removed.Have you performed measurements on drivers from any of the mentioned brands that would allow a comparison of dispersion characteristics and xmas?
Yes, I've measured some of them. Unfortunately they were not raw measures of the kind you claim to be after, since that was not the purpose I had, while the conditions & equipment varied. Xmax was not included, since I follow the mechanical definition (I don't really regard it as an especially valuable figure given that there is no consensus on what it is -a point I've often raised. HD plots are much more useful).
I rather suspect, like a few others, that what you are after simply does not exist. FWIW, other than the little Vifa mentioned here, the BMRs or flat cone Tang Bands (especially the 3in, if you can find any) will probably get closest by virtue of their construction. But I can tell you in advance that they have other issues inherent to their response (flat diaphragms are a swine to control) which I suspect you would find unacceptable.
I rather suspect, like a few others, that what you are after simply does not exist. FWIW, other than the little Vifa mentioned here, the BMRs or flat cone Tang Bands (especially the 3in, if you can find any) will probably get closest by virtue of their construction. But I can tell you in advance that they have other issues inherent to their response (flat diaphragms are a swine to control) which I suspect you would find unacceptable.
Last edited:
Markus, of every type and style of speaker I've ever experienced would fall short of your requirements. The only thing that I believe would suit you would be a wide band/fullrange AMT and are only available to those whom can make them.
Solution: learn how to make. The ultimate in DIY. For those who can, don't sell and if they do, perhaps only to a select few for which they feel are deserving recipients.
Mixing high Xmax in a small full range incurs other issues as well, like doppler distortion. Which is something I avoid like the plague
Solution: learn how to make. The ultimate in DIY. For those who can, don't sell and if they do, perhaps only to a select few for which they feel are deserving recipients.
Mixing high Xmax in a small full range incurs other issues as well, like doppler distortion. Which is something I avoid like the plague
This was "discussed" before. I didn't specify strict requirements. I'm simply asking for any useful data that would allow me to assess dispersion characteristics and xmax within the group of drivers (full range 3" or 4").
Last edited:
Raal 140-15d might work.
In all truth, I do believe that the TC9 or whatever has the best measure performance of any FR unit i have seen a graph on. At some point, it would seem you need to move to step two. Your question is out there and perhaps the lack of answers is due to the lack of viable data to present. In that case, you are left with only buying and trying. I would personally take the advice of other and try the TC9, fif you dont like the MA driver, otherwise it really does seem like a dead thread.
In all truth, I do believe that the TC9 or whatever has the best measure performance of any FR unit i have seen a graph on. At some point, it would seem you need to move to step two. Your question is out there and perhaps the lack of answers is due to the lack of viable data to present. In that case, you are left with only buying and trying. I would personally take the advice of other and try the TC9, fif you dont like the MA driver, otherwise it really does seem like a dead thread.
^
Which TC9? There are currently 5 different models listed at Full Range | Tymphany
TG9FD-10-04
TC9FD-18-04
TG9FD-10-08
TC9FD15-16
TC9FD-18-08
Which TC9? There are currently 5 different models listed at Full Range | Tymphany
TG9FD-10-04
TC9FD-18-04
TG9FD-10-08
TC9FD15-16
TC9FD-18-08
The one the xrk suggested. It truly is the best measuring FR driver I have seen. It meets your criteria. Its cheap. I like the MA 7.3 and 10.2. What they do, they do really well. If you want a really wideband 5", I would look at the 15H521206sdkm. It will need a tweeter, but in truth, any of these driver will to if you are looking for smooth off axis response. FWIW, even most good tweeters need help above 12k in this regard. I wish you well. I am checking out as I have nothing more of any value to add and do not want to clutter the thread.
I use the tc9fd 18-08 simply because that is all that is available in the US for cheap. I would buy the 4 ohm version if I could. It probably measures very close to the 8 ohm version. When they were on sale at PE for $10 ea I loaded up and regret I did not buy more than I did 
You know what is funny about this driver for me? It is the very first driver I bought based on a tip from member Sayrum about 16 months ago when I first got into DIY - and so far it is the only fullrange driver I have bought and I now chuckle because I got so lucky in picking such a great driver to start with.
You know what is funny about this driver for me? It is the very first driver I bought based on a tip from member Sayrum about 16 months ago when I first got into DIY - and so far it is the only fullrange driver I have bought and I now chuckle because I got so lucky in picking such a great driver to start with.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.