No chance yet, I'm afraid. I've got nowhere to put them that would be out of reach of my two sprogs. House move is due soon, so hopefully after that....
Is the 10F/4424 just as good as the 8424?
Being that I need a 4 ohms drivers in this instance. But it doesn't seem to behave as well as the 8424 around 10kHz... if we follow scans' own FR plots.
Although, ZaphAudio show a very well behaved FR in their measurements... Who to believe!? ha ha!
Being that I need a 4 ohms drivers in this instance. But it doesn't seem to behave as well as the 8424 around 10kHz... if we follow scans' own FR plots.
Although, ZaphAudio show a very well behaved FR in their measurements... Who to believe!? ha ha!
I have the actual units that Zaph tested. Mark K. tested these same drives also and his measurements showed similar excellent linear frequency response.
Why not go with the TC9FD18-08, which costs even less than the RS100 and won't require a new crossover as the RS100 probably would.
Attachments
Last edited:
Yes, the TC9 would've been nice, except that the good model is the 8 Ohms. I need 4 Ohms to pair with the woofers I already have. The TC9 4 Ohms is not as good as the 8 Ohms.
Plus, since my baffle is close to 5cm thick, a round bezel will be a lot easier to deal with than a square one.
Thanks for the feedback.
Plus, since my baffle is close to 5cm thick, a round bezel will be a lot easier to deal with than a square one.
Thanks for the feedback.
Agree at first sight but in they use OmniMic for data think there is probably more up there if they for example used B&K mic, USB interface in OmniMic is probably running 44kHz so 22kHz point will be decades down meaning RS100 probably have even more "tizz" very high and RS-100P have less roll off than shown. Nice points for these Dayton's is their over average better low reach and high 4mm stroke compared to other in same diameter size, below curves for ALU and PAPER is from their data files which is available for download because this is reference series. RS-100P looks very smooth and roll off doesn't start before 14-15kHz area, and that's when measured with OmniMic.
Attachments
Last edited:
Is the 10F/4424 just as good as the 8424?
Being that I need a 4 ohms drivers in this instance. But it doesn't seem to behave as well as the 8424 around 10kHz... if we follow scans' own FR plots.
Although, ZaphAudio show a very well behaved FR in their measurements... Who to believe!? ha ha!
I'd trust Zaph
.
It would be even lower if you combined two 4 ohm drivers. But it doesn't work that way - it depends on the type of crossover and the crossover essentially isolates the amp from driving both drivers bar full power simultaneously. It splits the load according to frequency - that's what a XO does.
If you look it that way then actual a 4 Ohms woofer combined with an 4 Ohms full range that you seek for will be worse in it get you 2.0 Ohms total. The passive XO components for HP and LP section is what save situation so that when amp looks thru LP section 4 Ohms impedance at lows will gradually increase to higher impedance as we reach XO point and for mid-tweeter amp will see 4 Ohms at highs but as we get down to XO point impedance will increase so when combined you also get approx. 4 Ohms impedance in XO area. To simulate this behavior suggest download frd and zma files from Dayton for RS100P and set it up into XSim.
EDIT Thanks xrk971 you was faster than me : )
Last edited:
Well, duh!
Ha ha!
Sometimes, my mind gets stuck in a track... and it's hard to go around it. Getting older, I guess.
It's one of those moments when I slap my head and say to myself: "well, that was obvious! Why was I thinking that way? Made no sense!"
Of course, I've censured myself in this post, after calling myself a few unprintable words! ha ha!
Thanks again for correcting me on something that should have been obvious in the first place. I have no idea where I got into my head the fallacious reasoning that happened.
Ha ha!
Sometimes, my mind gets stuck in a track... and it's hard to go around it. Getting older, I guess.
It's one of those moments when I slap my head and say to myself: "well, that was obvious! Why was I thinking that way? Made no sense!"
Of course, I've censured myself in this post, after calling myself a few unprintable words! ha ha!
Thanks again for correcting me on something that should have been obvious in the first place. I have no idea where I got into my head the fallacious reasoning that happened.
I'd trust Zaph
Zaph's on-axis graph is nearly identical to Scanspeak's. It is just scaled differently. Scan shows it on a 50db y-axis, Zaph uses a 90db y-axis
eyeballing the graphs:
Scan shows +6db at 9K, Zaph shows +5db at 9K
Scan shows +3db at 15K, Zaph shows +4db at 15K
Scan shows -4db at 19K, Zaph shows -3db at 19K
Both show a couple db lumpiness in the 2K-3K region
either way its a great measuring full-range
Sean
I don't have a drawing but it's not critical if you follow some guidelines you will end up about where I am. The Dagger volume needs to be about 1.0 to 1.5 liters. The main woofer chamber needs to be about 24 liters. The baffle needs to be at least 11.5in wide to accommodate the thickness of the panels and the bezel diameter of the woofer. The Dagger should be at least 7in on a side so that makes the height of the 3 sided pyramid about 10 to 11inches. That sets the depth of the box. Internal width is 10in x 11in = 110 Sq inches. 110 sq in x 6.45cm2 / sq in = 710cm2. Total volume desired is 24,000cm3 + 1500cm3 so height internally needs to be 25500cm3 / 710cm2 = 36cm or 14.2in. So add wall thickness (say 1.5in for 3/4in ply) then baffle height is about 15.75in.
So external dimensions are about 11.5in W x 15.75in H x 12.5in deep. Location of 10F should be about 5in from top and put woofer as close to 10F as possible. You can offset 10F left or right by 0.75in if you want to reduce baffle diffraction. Many people like symmetric center better. Your choice.
That's about it.
Last edited: