Image isn't loading for me.
The SB23 isn't a subwoofer. Just a larger woofer. So probably cross somewhere around 300Hz. But you're right it will go a little lower in the bottom end than the Satori and do it easier and cleaner. See below. But I respect your concern for your neighbors. But I would still put this on your possibility list or in other words, re-evaluate your aesthetic priorities. And from what you told us, you don't play loudly anyways, at least for the present in your currant situation.
If you are going with a dome tweeter than can cross lower, yes it's hard to get away from the highend value of the Satoris. But if you want to go with a ribbon, something like the Scan 10F or the Vifa NE123 are excellent choices too. Here a side woofer is harder to pull off, so you are back to the Peerless HDS, the Vifa NE180 or the Satori 16P to make it work again.
The SB23 isn't a subwoofer. Just a larger woofer. So probably cross somewhere around 300Hz. But you're right it will go a little lower in the bottom end than the Satori and do it easier and cleaner. See below. But I respect your concern for your neighbors. But I would still put this on your possibility list or in other words, re-evaluate your aesthetic priorities. And from what you told us, you don't play loudly anyways, at least for the present in your currant situation.
If you are going with a dome tweeter than can cross lower, yes it's hard to get away from the highend value of the Satoris. But if you want to go with a ribbon, something like the Scan 10F or the Vifa NE123 are excellent choices too. Here a side woofer is harder to pull off, so you are back to the Peerless HDS, the Vifa NE180 or the Satori 16P to make it work again.
Attachments
The image works for me but you need to click on the link.
That's a largish and very reflective room too. I would change direction entirely and definitely go for a waveguide design, even if it's just using the SEAS DXT tweeter. I am very tempted to say go for a floor mounted woofer even if its forward facing as this will help to combat floor bounce, which will be more of an issue in your room.
A larger wave guide will give you more control of the dispersion and make the reflective room even less of an issue but implementing the wave guide will be more work than not.
The other option is using a coaxial for your tweeter and midrange as the cone of the driver acts as a wave guide and will do the same thing as a similar diameter wave guide.
The coaxials I am thinking of at the moment are mainly the MR18 and C18 from SEAS.
E0057-08/06 C18EN001/M SEAS Excel Coaxial
Certainly isn't cheap and is probably over your budget.
The MR18 you can get here.
https://www.intertechnik.com/Shop/L...ge/Seas-Woofer/_MR18REXXF_1768,en,3630,156350
I've used intertechnik several times for drivers and xover components so don't hesitate to use them over falcon if you need to for more choice.
Given your room I would shy away from a ribbon too as these tend to have excellent horizontal dispersion which is something you're probably not going to want.
If you buy from intertechnik this also opens up several other manufacturers including Dayton Audio, which is important. The RS225 is one stonking bass driver and is literally the de facto, go to, bass driver for the bottom of a three way when you don't want scan speak.
If you don't like the idea of a coaxial then another option would be this.
Visaton Waveguide WG 148 R
It's designed to work specifically with soft domes and will give you more pattern control than a DXT but wont be that much harder to implement. Goran has used it here.
www.audioexcite.com Revelation Two ? Monitor WG
So you can get an idea of what's involved.
To kind of recap here's what I'd do with two choices.
1) Floor mounted RS225 either ported or sealed. MR18 or C18 coaxial driver.
2) Floor mounted RS225 either ported or sealed. Visaton WG 148 R with suitable tweeter + MW13P midrange. 2.5kHz xover point for a decent directivity match, or go as low as the tweeter will go for the best vertical off axis response.
Two slightly different ways of solving the same problem.
How wide are you current loudspeakers by the way? They seem quite wide would a front firing RS225 actually fit?
If you really can't go with an 8" driver for the bass then that doesn't really change very much the basic idea is the same. Just change out the bass driver for something else. I still recommend a design with a floor mounted woofer for control of floor bounce and a design with a waveguide for high frequency dispersion control in your reflective room.
That's a largish and very reflective room too. I would change direction entirely and definitely go for a waveguide design, even if it's just using the SEAS DXT tweeter. I am very tempted to say go for a floor mounted woofer even if its forward facing as this will help to combat floor bounce, which will be more of an issue in your room.
A larger wave guide will give you more control of the dispersion and make the reflective room even less of an issue but implementing the wave guide will be more work than not.
The other option is using a coaxial for your tweeter and midrange as the cone of the driver acts as a wave guide and will do the same thing as a similar diameter wave guide.
The coaxials I am thinking of at the moment are mainly the MR18 and C18 from SEAS.
E0057-08/06 C18EN001/M SEAS Excel Coaxial
Certainly isn't cheap and is probably over your budget.
The MR18 you can get here.
https://www.intertechnik.com/Shop/L...ge/Seas-Woofer/_MR18REXXF_1768,en,3630,156350
I've used intertechnik several times for drivers and xover components so don't hesitate to use them over falcon if you need to for more choice.
Given your room I would shy away from a ribbon too as these tend to have excellent horizontal dispersion which is something you're probably not going to want.
If you buy from intertechnik this also opens up several other manufacturers including Dayton Audio, which is important. The RS225 is one stonking bass driver and is literally the de facto, go to, bass driver for the bottom of a three way when you don't want scan speak.
If you don't like the idea of a coaxial then another option would be this.
Visaton Waveguide WG 148 R
It's designed to work specifically with soft domes and will give you more pattern control than a DXT but wont be that much harder to implement. Goran has used it here.
www.audioexcite.com Revelation Two ? Monitor WG
So you can get an idea of what's involved.
To kind of recap here's what I'd do with two choices.
1) Floor mounted RS225 either ported or sealed. MR18 or C18 coaxial driver.
2) Floor mounted RS225 either ported or sealed. Visaton WG 148 R with suitable tweeter + MW13P midrange. 2.5kHz xover point for a decent directivity match, or go as low as the tweeter will go for the best vertical off axis response.
Two slightly different ways of solving the same problem.
How wide are you current loudspeakers by the way? They seem quite wide would a front firing RS225 actually fit?
If you really can't go with an 8" driver for the bass then that doesn't really change very much the basic idea is the same. Just change out the bass driver for something else. I still recommend a design with a floor mounted woofer for control of floor bounce and a design with a waveguide for high frequency dispersion control in your reflective room.
Ok, I got the image open in a new tab and that is a bit of a tight space to work in. And probably pretty reflective too. I would definitely try to bring those speakers out so the fronts are flush with the front of the console unit and then toe them in towards the listening area. In that orientation, I think a side woofer could in fact work out fine.
Re 2 x 16P-8 + a tweeter: I don't think you'll have enough cabinet volume to run 2 of them vented.
A more narrow waveguided tweeter may in fact sound better in your room or some side wall acoustic treatment may achieve about the same thing. But I wouldn't completely discard a ribbon yet since they also have more limited vertical dispersion which would be beneficial with that floor without a rug and the Fountek CD3 is also available with a waveguide.
You may also want to consider that the speakers might not always be playing in this specific room.
I get a similar FR with the RS225-8 vented in 25L to the SB23 using Unibox but couldn't tell you which one sounds better. I've noticed lately that Troels is very much in favor of higher mechanical Q woofers these days and the SB23 wins out in that respect. Still, level matching with whatever mid is chosen may be more important in the end.
Re 2 x 16P-8 + a tweeter: I don't think you'll have enough cabinet volume to run 2 of them vented.
A more narrow waveguided tweeter may in fact sound better in your room or some side wall acoustic treatment may achieve about the same thing. But I wouldn't completely discard a ribbon yet since they also have more limited vertical dispersion which would be beneficial with that floor without a rug and the Fountek CD3 is also available with a waveguide.
You may also want to consider that the speakers might not always be playing in this specific room.
I get a similar FR with the RS225-8 vented in 25L to the SB23 using Unibox but couldn't tell you which one sounds better. I've noticed lately that Troels is very much in favor of higher mechanical Q woofers these days and the SB23 wins out in that respect. Still, level matching with whatever mid is chosen may be more important in the end.
Waveguide sounds interesting, I think instinctively I would prefer that to coaxial's.
I like the idea of driver role separation and coaxial's... I assume would be as good as dedicated drivers.
The max width of the front panel of my cab is 180mm. This does rule out the RS225. Larger woofers were originally suggested when the cab size was realised, the woofer selection was narrow down to the MW16P-8.. so far...
Yes you are right and good memory! the cab can;t support 2 x MW16P-8's
I think for the sake of progression. I'm going to rule out side firing a woofer and stick with a front facing design
I do really appreciate the suggestion and i'm sure it would give a better end result. I'm discounting it out of aesthetics, front firing makes sense in my head and the potential that when I move home I may add a sub-woofer to the setup
I can toe the speakers in a little more
Unfortunately I can't move the right speaker any further forward because of access to the living room. How about I front port the woofer and rear port the mid instead?Its becoming clear that speaker design and compromise go hand in hand
Just looking back over previous driver choices/suggestions/recommendation.
Originally the AUDAX HM100Z0 was going to be used for the Mid, however that's out of stock for the foreseeable future.
The AUDAX HM130Z0 is available and the response graph look great, although it's slightly larger than what's been suggested is best for a mid.
I'm wondering if the HM130Z0 a the MW16P-8 are a good idea and then investigating potentially a Fountek ribbon or a dome tweeter. I've not forgotten about waveguide, i'm just a little cautious (based on my understanding) of adding a waveguide drivers that might only suit my current living space.
Originally the AUDAX HM100Z0 was going to be used for the Mid, however that's out of stock for the foreseeable future.
The AUDAX HM130Z0 is available and the response graph look great, although it's slightly larger than what's been suggested is best for a mid.
I'm wondering if the HM130Z0 a the MW16P-8 are a good idea and then investigating potentially a Fountek ribbon or a dome tweeter. I've not forgotten about waveguide, i'm just a little cautious (based on my understanding) of adding a waveguide drivers that might only suit my current living space.
Here's the way I look at the 16P and this is going to reiterate basically what 5th element said. It's a great driver, it goes quite low vented in a smallish volume but it's real strength is its midrange. Thus paired with a tweeter that can cross suitably low, it's a great choice as the mid in a 3-way with a side-firing woofer. But that's not going to work for you. Fair enough.
But the midrange is often considered the heart of your speaker so if you just use 16P as the woofer in a 3-way, you are kind of leaving its greatest strength on the cutting room floor. Better in my mind to return to the Peerless HDS or perhaps the Vifa NE180 as your woofer and then:
1) if you want to go with a ribbon tweeter, you need a smaller mid, so the Vifa NE123-8 or the Scan 10F would be my choices; or
2) if you want to go with a dome tweeter, use the smaller Satori as the mid. The Audax 130ZO would be suitable here but I think the 13P is just a better driver.
Front or rear port the the woofer - whichever is more convenient. I don't think either will make any difference. But you don't need to port the mid. Especially because you are tight for space, keep it simple and go sealed.
But the midrange is often considered the heart of your speaker so if you just use 16P as the woofer in a 3-way, you are kind of leaving its greatest strength on the cutting room floor. Better in my mind to return to the Peerless HDS or perhaps the Vifa NE180 as your woofer and then:
1) if you want to go with a ribbon tweeter, you need a smaller mid, so the Vifa NE123-8 or the Scan 10F would be my choices; or
2) if you want to go with a dome tweeter, use the smaller Satori as the mid. The Audax 130ZO would be suitable here but I think the 13P is just a better driver.
Front or rear port the the woofer - whichever is more convenient. I don't think either will make any difference. But you don't need to port the mid. Especially because you are tight for space, keep it simple and go sealed.
Ribbons do have nicely controlled vertical dispersion but often very wide horizontal. A ribbon to consider would be the one from viawave.
viawave | Midwest Audio Club
It's most likely going to be difficult to get a pair but they are probably one of the only ribbon tweeters I'd be very interested in using. It has a much wider bandwidth, ie can be used lower, than most ribbons without issue and it has an integrated waveguide to boot for nicely controlled horizontal directivity.
Most ribbons need a very high xover to work properly and I'm talking prohibitively high. Even the well regarded Neo3 isn't as robust as people like to make out. The one with the horn attached, as jReave linked to, was on my mind too as it also has directivity control, but I'd still want to use it pretty high up.
If you want to go with a standard ribbon (ie not the viawave) then the 10F is necessary. The NE123 would also work but it's trade off time again. The NE123 will have lower distortion and a better time with going loud and low vs the 10F, but the 10F will have better ribbon mating capabilities due to its smaller diameter and smoother upper end.
jReave is right with regards to the Audax drivers though. I've used the 130Z0 and the 100Z0. Both are nice for high sensitivity drivers, but their motors are 20+ years old and their distortion performance is merely average.
I am still big on the idea of the Satori MW13P or Eton's 3-400/A8/25MG as the midrange. The Eton has a nice rigid cone and complete absence from resonances throughout the midrange that the Satori unfortunately does not (it has a mild cone edge surround issue at around 1500Hz). As a dedicated midrange driver I would choose it simply because of this (yes I an knit-picking a very small knit, but that's why we DIY right?). It is also small but isn't suited to crossing over to a ribbon as it needs a lower xover than they can really support.
Circles seem to be of the order at the moment as we keep going around in them. There are many ways to skin a cat but I think what really needs to be done is settling on a bass driver. We can argue the pros and cons of the midrange/tweeter section and directivity at a later date but we do need to come to some sort of conclusion as to what driver should sit on the bottom of this three way.
At 180mm wide your current cabinet isn't wide enough to support the RS225 but I do have a proposition. At the bottom of your loudspeakers there are supporting feet. Now these protrude wider than the cabinet by how much? Would it be possible to have a portion of the box wider at the bottom, wide enough to support an RS225 and then have it narrow once above the driver? Like a small square box at the bottom with the RS225 and a narrower main cabinet sitting on top? Well just a thought.
If that isn't an option and side firing woofers are out then we're back to the 6-7" bracket for bass drivers.
As far as I know the NE180 wouldn't be a good choice because all the drivers in that series suffer from surround limited xmax. The Satori suffer from a similar issue of unsymmetrical motors and soft parts that limit their useful xmax to less than the datasheet would otherwise indicate.
http://www.n-audio.com/Audio_Xpress.pdf
That can be seen here, but it is why the Satori MW16 driver doesn't have particularly compelling distortion performance in the bass, even though their T/S parameters simulate for impressive bass extension.
Trying to find 6-7" drivers for bass is hard as they are usually designed for midrange performance. I am looking through falcons catalogue though to see which might give you the best extension and not cost an arm and a leg.
viawave | Midwest Audio Club
It's most likely going to be difficult to get a pair but they are probably one of the only ribbon tweeters I'd be very interested in using. It has a much wider bandwidth, ie can be used lower, than most ribbons without issue and it has an integrated waveguide to boot for nicely controlled horizontal directivity.
Most ribbons need a very high xover to work properly and I'm talking prohibitively high. Even the well regarded Neo3 isn't as robust as people like to make out. The one with the horn attached, as jReave linked to, was on my mind too as it also has directivity control, but I'd still want to use it pretty high up.
If you want to go with a standard ribbon (ie not the viawave) then the 10F is necessary. The NE123 would also work but it's trade off time again. The NE123 will have lower distortion and a better time with going loud and low vs the 10F, but the 10F will have better ribbon mating capabilities due to its smaller diameter and smoother upper end.
jReave is right with regards to the Audax drivers though. I've used the 130Z0 and the 100Z0. Both are nice for high sensitivity drivers, but their motors are 20+ years old and their distortion performance is merely average.
I am still big on the idea of the Satori MW13P or Eton's 3-400/A8/25MG as the midrange. The Eton has a nice rigid cone and complete absence from resonances throughout the midrange that the Satori unfortunately does not (it has a mild cone edge surround issue at around 1500Hz). As a dedicated midrange driver I would choose it simply because of this (yes I an knit-picking a very small knit, but that's why we DIY right?). It is also small but isn't suited to crossing over to a ribbon as it needs a lower xover than they can really support.
Circles seem to be of the order at the moment as we keep going around in them. There are many ways to skin a cat but I think what really needs to be done is settling on a bass driver. We can argue the pros and cons of the midrange/tweeter section and directivity at a later date but we do need to come to some sort of conclusion as to what driver should sit on the bottom of this three way.
At 180mm wide your current cabinet isn't wide enough to support the RS225 but I do have a proposition. At the bottom of your loudspeakers there are supporting feet. Now these protrude wider than the cabinet by how much? Would it be possible to have a portion of the box wider at the bottom, wide enough to support an RS225 and then have it narrow once above the driver? Like a small square box at the bottom with the RS225 and a narrower main cabinet sitting on top? Well just a thought.
If that isn't an option and side firing woofers are out then we're back to the 6-7" bracket for bass drivers.
As far as I know the NE180 wouldn't be a good choice because all the drivers in that series suffer from surround limited xmax. The Satori suffer from a similar issue of unsymmetrical motors and soft parts that limit their useful xmax to less than the datasheet would otherwise indicate.
http://www.n-audio.com/Audio_Xpress.pdf
That can be seen here, but it is why the Satori MW16 driver doesn't have particularly compelling distortion performance in the bass, even though their T/S parameters simulate for impressive bass extension.
Trying to find 6-7" drivers for bass is hard as they are usually designed for midrange performance. I am looking through falcons catalogue though to see which might give you the best extension and not cost an arm and a leg.
How about squeezing in one of these?
Peerless 835026 HDS-205 AL Woofer Speaker
With their truncated edges you can squeeze them into a narrower cabinet.
Peerless 835026 HDS-205 AL Woofer Speaker
With their truncated edges you can squeeze them into a narrower cabinet.
I didn't read all the entries, so forgive me if I'm being redundant.
The most important things about woofers to me is the Xmax spec, that it has a rubber surround (foam deterioates over time), and a well vented spider and pole piece, and harder cones are cleaner but ring badly in the upper midrange, so require a very sharp cutoff several octaves below that ring frequency.
One of the most important things to consider in a 3 way speaker system is the off axis response. I prefer an 8 to 12 inch woofer for below 500HZ, but from there on up I try to get a pretty consistent off axis response. Otherwise you could have a response that jumps up several dB at each crossover frequency not very far off axis, and that energy bounces around the room and adds into what you hear anywhere.
My favorite mid driver lately is the Peerless/Tympany TG9FD1008 three inch driver, with an ABX plastic tube (4 inch inner diameter) half packed with padding and foam rubber, maybe 8 inches deep) as the sub-enclosure. It measures very flat from 400HZ to 15kHZ, but will have polar issues above about 5kHZ. I then cross it over at 500HZ and 7kHZ, to keep crossover anomolies out of the frequency range where the ear is most sensitive (800HZ - 5kHZ) to phase related issues. A 1.5 inch Fountek ribbon makes a great tweeter when only doing from 7kHZ on up, as do many other tweeters.
One thing I feel strongly about is to use 4 pole active crossover filters ahead of the poweramps. They minimize the bandwidth that gets damaged, they are very predictable and very accurate. They allow easy level calibration. They cut a driver off very effectively before the frequencies that it can't do well. Damping by the amplifier is consistent over frequency. Getting even a one pole passive crossover properly calibrated is a pain in the butt to do correctly. Plus, once you've built up a chassis for the active crossover, you can add an active EQ circuit for the woofer to make it acoustically flat at your chair to below 30HZ, which to me is a huge plus.
A port can give you another half octave of inconsistently damped bass, but active EQ with a closed box woofer will give you quite excellent bass how ever you want it. Hope I'm not too far off subject. I'm quite happy with top of the line Peerless 12 inch woofs in one system and some old Focal brand kevlar 8 inchers in another. Judging by the efficiencies of your mid and tweeter drivers, you are probably looking for very efficient woofers. I'm not very experienced with those. Efficiency is often a tradeoff with quality one way or another.
The most important things about woofers to me is the Xmax spec, that it has a rubber surround (foam deterioates over time), and a well vented spider and pole piece, and harder cones are cleaner but ring badly in the upper midrange, so require a very sharp cutoff several octaves below that ring frequency.
One of the most important things to consider in a 3 way speaker system is the off axis response. I prefer an 8 to 12 inch woofer for below 500HZ, but from there on up I try to get a pretty consistent off axis response. Otherwise you could have a response that jumps up several dB at each crossover frequency not very far off axis, and that energy bounces around the room and adds into what you hear anywhere.
My favorite mid driver lately is the Peerless/Tympany TG9FD1008 three inch driver, with an ABX plastic tube (4 inch inner diameter) half packed with padding and foam rubber, maybe 8 inches deep) as the sub-enclosure. It measures very flat from 400HZ to 15kHZ, but will have polar issues above about 5kHZ. I then cross it over at 500HZ and 7kHZ, to keep crossover anomolies out of the frequency range where the ear is most sensitive (800HZ - 5kHZ) to phase related issues. A 1.5 inch Fountek ribbon makes a great tweeter when only doing from 7kHZ on up, as do many other tweeters.
One thing I feel strongly about is to use 4 pole active crossover filters ahead of the poweramps. They minimize the bandwidth that gets damaged, they are very predictable and very accurate. They allow easy level calibration. They cut a driver off very effectively before the frequencies that it can't do well. Damping by the amplifier is consistent over frequency. Getting even a one pole passive crossover properly calibrated is a pain in the butt to do correctly. Plus, once you've built up a chassis for the active crossover, you can add an active EQ circuit for the woofer to make it acoustically flat at your chair to below 30HZ, which to me is a huge plus.
A port can give you another half octave of inconsistently damped bass, but active EQ with a closed box woofer will give you quite excellent bass how ever you want it. Hope I'm not too far off subject. I'm quite happy with top of the line Peerless 12 inch woofs in one system and some old Focal brand kevlar 8 inchers in another. Judging by the efficiencies of your mid and tweeter drivers, you are probably looking for very efficient woofers. I'm not very experienced with those. Efficiency is often a tradeoff with quality one way or another.
Okay ignore my previous suggestion the Peerless 8" drivers require very large boxes 60 litres and such.
Here is an image comparing various bass drivers for extension. I have corrected for the sensitivity differences so it's easier to see the difference in extension.
The black driver is the SEAS Excel 6.5" from falcon. The 4 ohm version from the back catalogue. Clearly this is not the best option where extension is required.
The blue driver is the MW16P Satori just for comparative purposes.
The green line is the interesting one though. This is the L16RN-SL from SEAS. This is going a step backwards from a 6.5" driver but its parameters indicated that it might give good bass extension and I wasn't wrong, it does, but at the cost of sensitivity and it also needs a large box.
The red curve is the 835025 HDS-164 AL from Peerless. This gives a very nice response imo, especially for the price.
The magenta curve is the 8" aluminium HDS from Peerless. I included this just for comparison. Here's what happens when you have a large box on your side. Similar in practise to the L16RN-SL as that also requires a large box. You get bass extension. The HDS needs a 60 litre box though whereas the L16 25 litres, which is doable.
Here are the responses with the sensitivity differences removed.
As you can see the 4 ohm back catalogue driver from SEAS storms ahead on voltage sensitivity, this isn't a surprise as it has the least extenstion.
The aluminium 6.5" Peerless, Satori and aluminium 8" Peerless all have the same sensitivity.
As can be seen the L16 has the least sensitivity but as mentioned very nice extension.
Here is an image comparing various bass drivers for extension. I have corrected for the sensitivity differences so it's easier to see the difference in extension.
The black driver is the SEAS Excel 6.5" from falcon. The 4 ohm version from the back catalogue. Clearly this is not the best option where extension is required.
The blue driver is the MW16P Satori just for comparative purposes.
The green line is the interesting one though. This is the L16RN-SL from SEAS. This is going a step backwards from a 6.5" driver but its parameters indicated that it might give good bass extension and I wasn't wrong, it does, but at the cost of sensitivity and it also needs a large box.
The red curve is the 835025 HDS-164 AL from Peerless. This gives a very nice response imo, especially for the price.
The magenta curve is the 8" aluminium HDS from Peerless. I included this just for comparison. Here's what happens when you have a large box on your side. Similar in practise to the L16RN-SL as that also requires a large box. You get bass extension. The HDS needs a 60 litre box though whereas the L16 25 litres, which is doable.
Here are the responses with the sensitivity differences removed.
As you can see the 4 ohm back catalogue driver from SEAS storms ahead on voltage sensitivity, this isn't a surprise as it has the least extenstion.
The aluminium 6.5" Peerless, Satori and aluminium 8" Peerless all have the same sensitivity.
As can be seen the L16 has the least sensitivity but as mentioned very nice extension.
Attachments
I've done a few more sims to give you another perspective on things.
I dropped the 8" driver and the 4 ohm SEAS as they really aren't suitable.
Here is a graph.
This is a maximum SPL graph showing how loud the different drivers will go before hitting xmax.
Black again is the Satori. As you can see its extension does come at a price it doesn't go particularly loud. This is also due to its lower surface area in relation to other 6-7" drivers.
Blue is the Peerless 6.5" alu cone. As you can see the slight loss in extension + greater surface area gives it quite a bit more in shear output capabilities.
Green is the L16RN-SL. It's maximum output is the lowest of the lot, but surprisingly, at least from my perspective, is that it only lags behind the Satori by about 1.5dB, whilst going a fair amount lower. If maximum SPL isn't your priority and bass extension is this might not be a bad choice.
The red line here is the interesting one. This is the L16RNX from SEAS. The brother to the L16RN-SL but with differently optimised parameters. This works in a box half the size of the L16RN-SL so I figured it would be interesting to see how it simnlated. Because the L16RNX fits into a box half the size I figured it would make sense to show you what two of them look like wired in parallel. These give you the best raw SPL capability in the available cabinet volume (that I've taken to be ~25 litres) but at the expense of amplifier power and little extension.
This is the same graph as above but with the SPLs brought in line so you can compare extension more easily.
As you can see the single L16RN-SL has the best extension. It requires a 25 litre cabinet tuned low. The cost is lower absolute maximum SPL. And according to Zaph's measurement it has very low distortion for a driver of its size and is actually more suited to absolute bass than the Satori is.
The other three have very similar f3s but the Satori has the shallower roll off. If we want to knit pick, the Satori has the best extension of the three, followed by the Peerless and then followed by the dual L16s.
I am personally a huge fan of dual opposed woofers. This means you put one woofer on the front of the cabinet and one on the back. One fires backwards and one forwards the forces cancel out and the cabinet remains inert. If you can mount the rear driver with its magnet facing out of the cabinet then you get even order distortion cancellation giving you even cleaner bass.
Given all of the options that I've looked at here so far my personal choice would be for the dual L16RNXs. Floor mounted, one driver on the front, one on the back, with the back one with its magnet facing out of the cabinet. You lose very little extension for more output potential and the benefits of push/pull dual opposed.
If you go this route then it will give you a loudspeaker with very high voltage sensitivity. We're talking 91-92dB sensitivity. This will need something sensitive as a midrange to match it. Floor mounting the woofer removes baffle step from the woofer section so you really do end up with 91-92dB sensitivity with no loss. If you want to go this dual opposed direction but want to use something like the MW13P as your midrange you will need to not floor mount the bass so as to soak up some of the extra sensitivity in baffle step compensation. One option for the midrange would be the 15m4624g from scanspeak as this also has high voltage sensitivity.
If you don't want to use the dual L16RNXs then my next choice would be for the 6" Peerless alu driver. Mainly because its extension is similar to the others but has more output potential than the Satori.
Then, like I said before, if you don't want this to go loud, which some don't. And you are really interested in getting the lowest bass out of this, then the L16RN-SL is good idea.
Once you can decide on a bass driver you can pick the rest more easily.
I dropped the 8" driver and the 4 ohm SEAS as they really aren't suitable.
Here is a graph.
This is a maximum SPL graph showing how loud the different drivers will go before hitting xmax.
Black again is the Satori. As you can see its extension does come at a price it doesn't go particularly loud. This is also due to its lower surface area in relation to other 6-7" drivers.
Blue is the Peerless 6.5" alu cone. As you can see the slight loss in extension + greater surface area gives it quite a bit more in shear output capabilities.
Green is the L16RN-SL. It's maximum output is the lowest of the lot, but surprisingly, at least from my perspective, is that it only lags behind the Satori by about 1.5dB, whilst going a fair amount lower. If maximum SPL isn't your priority and bass extension is this might not be a bad choice.
The red line here is the interesting one. This is the L16RNX from SEAS. The brother to the L16RN-SL but with differently optimised parameters. This works in a box half the size of the L16RN-SL so I figured it would be interesting to see how it simnlated. Because the L16RNX fits into a box half the size I figured it would make sense to show you what two of them look like wired in parallel. These give you the best raw SPL capability in the available cabinet volume (that I've taken to be ~25 litres) but at the expense of amplifier power and little extension.
This is the same graph as above but with the SPLs brought in line so you can compare extension more easily.
As you can see the single L16RN-SL has the best extension. It requires a 25 litre cabinet tuned low. The cost is lower absolute maximum SPL. And according to Zaph's measurement it has very low distortion for a driver of its size and is actually more suited to absolute bass than the Satori is.
The other three have very similar f3s but the Satori has the shallower roll off. If we want to knit pick, the Satori has the best extension of the three, followed by the Peerless and then followed by the dual L16s.
I am personally a huge fan of dual opposed woofers. This means you put one woofer on the front of the cabinet and one on the back. One fires backwards and one forwards the forces cancel out and the cabinet remains inert. If you can mount the rear driver with its magnet facing out of the cabinet then you get even order distortion cancellation giving you even cleaner bass.
Given all of the options that I've looked at here so far my personal choice would be for the dual L16RNXs. Floor mounted, one driver on the front, one on the back, with the back one with its magnet facing out of the cabinet. You lose very little extension for more output potential and the benefits of push/pull dual opposed.
If you go this route then it will give you a loudspeaker with very high voltage sensitivity. We're talking 91-92dB sensitivity. This will need something sensitive as a midrange to match it. Floor mounting the woofer removes baffle step from the woofer section so you really do end up with 91-92dB sensitivity with no loss. If you want to go this dual opposed direction but want to use something like the MW13P as your midrange you will need to not floor mount the bass so as to soak up some of the extra sensitivity in baffle step compensation. One option for the midrange would be the 15m4624g from scanspeak as this also has high voltage sensitivity.
If you don't want to use the dual L16RNXs then my next choice would be for the 6" Peerless alu driver. Mainly because its extension is similar to the others but has more output potential than the Satori.
Then, like I said before, if you don't want this to go loud, which some don't. And you are really interested in getting the lowest bass out of this, then the L16RN-SL is good idea.
Once you can decide on a bass driver you can pick the rest more easily.
Attachments
And just to finish off here. If you like the dual opposed idea you can always go with the 4 ohm version of the L16RNX instead. SEAS have done a very good job of maintaining performance from the 8 to 4 ohm driver. Both have literally identical bass performance when in the same sized cabinet tuned to the same frequency.
Wiring the two 4 ohm drivers in series will give you a sensitivity that will work with the Satori MW13P or the Eton midrange driver, even when floor mounted. It will also give you an 8 ohm impedance which is a lot nicer for the amplifier to drive.
So as far as I see it you have four options.
1) Dual 4 ohm L16RNXs.
2) One Peerless 6" Aluminium.
3) One Satori.
3) One L16RN-SL.
Wiring the two 4 ohm drivers in series will give you a sensitivity that will work with the Satori MW13P or the Eton midrange driver, even when floor mounted. It will also give you an 8 ohm impedance which is a lot nicer for the amplifier to drive.
So as far as I see it you have four options.
1) Dual 4 ohm L16RNXs.
2) One Peerless 6" Aluminium.
3) One Satori.
3) One L16RN-SL.
Last edited:
Nicely thorough analysis 5th. I had thought about those Seas drivers but in my dunderheadedness, I forgot about them.
I did think that your box alignments didn't necessarily optimize all the drivers for their best responses when you take room gain into account though. For that spark, you are better off with a slightly more gentle LF roll-off than a sharp one. I've attached another graph using Unibox and using a 3rd party's measurement data (Zaph) for the Satori and the Seas L16RN-SL (no data available for the other 2). The SPL level is set so that xmax is not exceeded for material above 20Hz since your present plan is to use these for movies without a sub. All 4 drivers give you pretty much the same limit of about 90dB (more or less) @ 1m which for your listening habits would be fine.
Blue is the Peerless in 20L tuned to 31Hz.
Pink is the Satori in 25L tuned to 30Hz.
Black is the Seas L16RN in 20L tuned to 33Hz.
Green is the Seas L16RNX in 12L tuned to 34Hz.
The best response is still the Satori followed very closely by the Peerless. I don't actually like the Seas L16RN as much because it has the sharpest roll-off and that's even with the addition of heavy stuffing to try to smooth it out more. And the Seas L16RNX has the poorest LF response of the lot. Still not bad though and I think better than the L16RN.
Since you think you might be moving in a year or so and then might use a sub, I thought it worthwhile to also look at what each driver will do if you want to play them for music only without a sub (2nd chart). So here we're looking at how loud they will play with content above 40Hz before exceeding xmax and again they are all pretty much in the same 100dB @1m ballpark with the Peerless this time coming out on top.
More or less consistent with 5th's analysis but just a little bit different here and there.
Something to keep in mind is spark's proposed budget of about £500. I suggested that he should be looking at about £300-350 for the drivers and the rest for the xo. So for a 3-way, that averages out to about £50 per driver. That kind of puts the Eton mids (> £125 each?), the idea of dual Seas L16RNX (£127), the Vifa NE180 (£87), I think the Viawave ribbons (£?) and actually the Satori 16P (£92) and 13P (£78) all over budget. Now of course, budgets get re-evaluated all the time but to my mind this puts the Peerless at £48 at the head of the list at this time. Pair that with the Vifa NE123-8 at £59 and then add in the waveguided Fountek CD3 at £42 and you are now looking at a driver total of £298. Well within budget and leaves room for a few more expensive xo parts I think. Or maybe the Scan 10F at £57.
And spark I think we should perhaps remember that your current setup is only using Dayton DC level drivers with a generic xo. Even the bottom dweller of the drivers we've been looking at done up in a 3-way with a properly designed xo is going to smoke your current system.
I did think that your box alignments didn't necessarily optimize all the drivers for their best responses when you take room gain into account though. For that spark, you are better off with a slightly more gentle LF roll-off than a sharp one. I've attached another graph using Unibox and using a 3rd party's measurement data (Zaph) for the Satori and the Seas L16RN-SL (no data available for the other 2). The SPL level is set so that xmax is not exceeded for material above 20Hz since your present plan is to use these for movies without a sub. All 4 drivers give you pretty much the same limit of about 90dB (more or less) @ 1m which for your listening habits would be fine.
Blue is the Peerless in 20L tuned to 31Hz.
Pink is the Satori in 25L tuned to 30Hz.
Black is the Seas L16RN in 20L tuned to 33Hz.
Green is the Seas L16RNX in 12L tuned to 34Hz.
The best response is still the Satori followed very closely by the Peerless. I don't actually like the Seas L16RN as much because it has the sharpest roll-off and that's even with the addition of heavy stuffing to try to smooth it out more. And the Seas L16RNX has the poorest LF response of the lot. Still not bad though and I think better than the L16RN.
Since you think you might be moving in a year or so and then might use a sub, I thought it worthwhile to also look at what each driver will do if you want to play them for music only without a sub (2nd chart). So here we're looking at how loud they will play with content above 40Hz before exceeding xmax and again they are all pretty much in the same 100dB @1m ballpark with the Peerless this time coming out on top.
More or less consistent with 5th's analysis but just a little bit different here and there.
Something to keep in mind is spark's proposed budget of about £500. I suggested that he should be looking at about £300-350 for the drivers and the rest for the xo. So for a 3-way, that averages out to about £50 per driver. That kind of puts the Eton mids (> £125 each?), the idea of dual Seas L16RNX (£127), the Vifa NE180 (£87), I think the Viawave ribbons (£?) and actually the Satori 16P (£92) and 13P (£78) all over budget. Now of course, budgets get re-evaluated all the time but to my mind this puts the Peerless at £48 at the head of the list at this time. Pair that with the Vifa NE123-8 at £59 and then add in the waveguided Fountek CD3 at £42 and you are now looking at a driver total of £298. Well within budget and leaves room for a few more expensive xo parts I think. Or maybe the Scan 10F at £57.
And spark I think we should perhaps remember that your current setup is only using Dayton DC level drivers with a generic xo. Even the bottom dweller of the drivers we've been looking at done up in a 3-way with a properly designed xo is going to smoke your current system.
Attachments
jReave & 5th, thank you very much for all the information and time you've put into producing graphs etc!!! I hope that I've digested it correctly
Satori MW16 distortion performance, was a very interesting read! Thank you for digging out the article. Budget wise, good spot! There's so many variables its easy to loose track of one of them! My budget has flexibility, i'm happy to up it a little to get the right solution.. within reason
I think I've narrowed down all the different suggestions and options to the following.
Woofer : Peerless 835025 : 6-1/2"
Mid Range: SATORI MW13P-8 : 5" (or) Scanspeak 15M/4624G Discovery : 5.25" (or) Vifa NE123-8 4" (or) Discovery 10F/4424G 4"
I'm leaning towards the SATORI MW13P-8 for the mid. Purely based on the flat-ish response graphs. However cost aside, what would you go with?
Tweeter
Ribbon Tweeter : NeoCD3.5H (or) Neo X 3.0
I think i'll go for ribbon and worse case if I don't like the sound i'll have to re-visit the xo design sometime in the future. Luckily the tweeter is enclosed so there would be not serious cab redesign issues. The only reasons I've listed the Neo X 3.0 is because its a newer generation of ribbon tweeter and it much flatter than the CD3. The Neo X 3.0 does push the budget up but i'm ok with that.
Satori MW16 distortion performance, was a very interesting read! Thank you for digging out the article. Budget wise, good spot! There's so many variables its easy to loose track of one of them! My budget has flexibility, i'm happy to up it a little to get the right solution.. within reason
I think I've narrowed down all the different suggestions and options to the following.
Woofer : Peerless 835025 : 6-1/2"
Mid Range: SATORI MW13P-8 : 5" (or) Scanspeak 15M/4624G Discovery : 5.25" (or) Vifa NE123-8 4" (or) Discovery 10F/4424G 4"
I'm leaning towards the SATORI MW13P-8 for the mid. Purely based on the flat-ish response graphs. However cost aside, what would you go with?
Tweeter
Ribbon Tweeter : NeoCD3.5H (or) Neo X 3.0
I think i'll go for ribbon and worse case if I don't like the sound i'll have to re-visit the xo design sometime in the future. Luckily the tweeter is enclosed so there would be not serious cab redesign issues. The only reasons I've listed the Neo X 3.0 is because its a newer generation of ribbon tweeter and it much flatter than the CD3. The Neo X 3.0 does push the budget up but i'm ok with that.
The dimensions of the cab, width wise are...
Total : 205
Front panel: 180 (the silver section)
Internal: 175
The MDF panels at 15mm
I found the old MS woofer the other day and thought i'd show you what was in the MS914 before the Dayton upgrade. Just for reference. Its a 6.5" driver. No idea what the specs are however the motor is Massive!
Cab (right click and open in new tab)
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Driver (right click and open in new tab)
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Last edited:
Okay so progress has been made.
We've narrowed this down to the Peerless 835025 as the bass driver and that helps considerably. For what it's worth I've used a Peerless 6.5" HDS driver myself, the good old sandwich cone 850467 and was extremely impressed with its bass in a ~20 litre cabinet I am sure you will not be disappointed.
For what it is worth I have never seen a compelling set of measurements for the NeoCD3.0 from Fountek so would urge you to steer clear of their smaller offerings.
It seems you are hell bent on a ribbon, which is fine, but we do have to take some things into consideration.
If you want to use the NeoCD3.5H then you absolutely MUST and I say this strongly, use the scanspeak 10F as a midrange driver. The motor and ribbon element in the CD3.5H cannot be too different from the CD3, two variants of which you can see measured here.
??-????????
To be perfectly honest they are both terrible and I don't care what anyone says about how 'usable' these tweeters are, if I saw a dome tweeter measure like this I'd throw it in the bin as defective. If you want to listen to distortion then be my guest.
Those ribbons are going to need a high and steep crossover, something that only the Scan 10F can realistically cope without too many compromises. If you want to go with a higher xover frequency then that puts a lot of importance on the centre to centre spacing of the drivers and the dispersion of the midrange driver. I'd want to go with an xover around 6-7kHz with that ribbon. Many use it much lower and say it sounds good, but I don't really care what they say, the measurements speak for themselves. We've been pouring over technical details, theory and simulation to pick the best bass driver for your application and using measurements etc to justify which midrange driver to pick, why ignore all of this when it comes to the tweeter just because you want to use a ribbon?
The simply fact is that if you want to use one of the CD3 based ribbons (at least given the data on hand) you are going to need to use a high xover point and a small midrange driver, with the ribbon and midrange mounted very close together. You are then going to want to cross over at around ~6kHz unless you want to compromise on the performance at the upper end. The 10F can do this. Not much else can.
Now I completely forgot that Gornir has measured the NeoCD3.5H on his website and the results can be found here.
www.audioexcite.com Fountek NeoCD3.5H
Not compelling in the least as far as I am concerned. The higher level distortion products appears to be extremely high in level. Really you want to see the 4th and 5th order harmonics at 0.01%. The second sample looks like it could cope with a 5kHz xover but the first sample...consistency is clearly an issue and that first driver? THROW IT IN THE BIN.
Now the idea of the Neo X 3.0 is far more compelling. I cannot find any measurements on it but longer ribbons typically have far better performance than shorter ones so I would hope that this one would. The increased length of the Neo X 3.0 gives it very limited vertical dispersion, which is a bonus in your room, but it will narrow the sweet spot and your high frequencies will vanish when you stand up. Head in a vice? Well not entirely, but your listening height will be of a concern. If you like to put music on in the background and do other stuff elsewhere then this is not going to be a good tweeter if you like the sound to hold up as you move about. So the narrow vertical directivity is good for your reflective floor when you're doing critical listening, not so much for everything else.
Carrying on the same vein of vertical directivity this also brings up the issue of centre to centre distance again. Due to its significant length this increases the C2C distance and creates issues, again, for the vertical off axis response of the finished loudspeaker. You are going to end up with a fairly narrow primary listening lobe, just so you are aware of this, if you use it. Good on one hand (reflective floor) bad on another (head in vice).
Apart from that the increased size should allow it to crossover easily to the MW13P, or NE123 without issue.
I do not like ribbons. You can see why. They are horrible things to work with and only the best ones in the world (which are hard to find due to a lack of measurements) even stand a chance at working in a realistic way. The viawave one is one of them. Controlled directivity due to its waveguide, the ability to cross over low enough and it's compact, so the vertical directivity isn't destroyed.
Using a ribbon results in a long list of compromises, if you do not mind these then so be it.
Personally I see going three way as a freedom from the off axis compromises that you usually encounter when designing two ways. Sadly using ribbons means you throw most of this away but that comes with the territory (usually).
I still think a better choice would be.
Bass - Peerless 835025.
Midrange - Satori MW13P or Vifa NE123.
Tweeter - SB Acoustics SB29RDNC or a SEAS DXT tweeter for its waveguide.
If you want to use a ribbon I've given you how I'd run with that choice above.
We've narrowed this down to the Peerless 835025 as the bass driver and that helps considerably. For what it's worth I've used a Peerless 6.5" HDS driver myself, the good old sandwich cone 850467 and was extremely impressed with its bass in a ~20 litre cabinet I am sure you will not be disappointed.
For what it is worth I have never seen a compelling set of measurements for the NeoCD3.0 from Fountek so would urge you to steer clear of their smaller offerings.
It seems you are hell bent on a ribbon, which is fine, but we do have to take some things into consideration.
If you want to use the NeoCD3.5H then you absolutely MUST and I say this strongly, use the scanspeak 10F as a midrange driver. The motor and ribbon element in the CD3.5H cannot be too different from the CD3, two variants of which you can see measured here.
??-????????
To be perfectly honest they are both terrible and I don't care what anyone says about how 'usable' these tweeters are, if I saw a dome tweeter measure like this I'd throw it in the bin as defective. If you want to listen to distortion then be my guest.
Those ribbons are going to need a high and steep crossover, something that only the Scan 10F can realistically cope without too many compromises. If you want to go with a higher xover frequency then that puts a lot of importance on the centre to centre spacing of the drivers and the dispersion of the midrange driver. I'd want to go with an xover around 6-7kHz with that ribbon. Many use it much lower and say it sounds good, but I don't really care what they say, the measurements speak for themselves. We've been pouring over technical details, theory and simulation to pick the best bass driver for your application and using measurements etc to justify which midrange driver to pick, why ignore all of this when it comes to the tweeter just because you want to use a ribbon?
The simply fact is that if you want to use one of the CD3 based ribbons (at least given the data on hand) you are going to need to use a high xover point and a small midrange driver, with the ribbon and midrange mounted very close together. You are then going to want to cross over at around ~6kHz unless you want to compromise on the performance at the upper end. The 10F can do this. Not much else can.
Now I completely forgot that Gornir has measured the NeoCD3.5H on his website and the results can be found here.
www.audioexcite.com Fountek NeoCD3.5H
Not compelling in the least as far as I am concerned. The higher level distortion products appears to be extremely high in level. Really you want to see the 4th and 5th order harmonics at 0.01%. The second sample looks like it could cope with a 5kHz xover but the first sample...consistency is clearly an issue and that first driver? THROW IT IN THE BIN.
Now the idea of the Neo X 3.0 is far more compelling. I cannot find any measurements on it but longer ribbons typically have far better performance than shorter ones so I would hope that this one would. The increased length of the Neo X 3.0 gives it very limited vertical dispersion, which is a bonus in your room, but it will narrow the sweet spot and your high frequencies will vanish when you stand up. Head in a vice? Well not entirely, but your listening height will be of a concern. If you like to put music on in the background and do other stuff elsewhere then this is not going to be a good tweeter if you like the sound to hold up as you move about. So the narrow vertical directivity is good for your reflective floor when you're doing critical listening, not so much for everything else.
Carrying on the same vein of vertical directivity this also brings up the issue of centre to centre distance again. Due to its significant length this increases the C2C distance and creates issues, again, for the vertical off axis response of the finished loudspeaker. You are going to end up with a fairly narrow primary listening lobe, just so you are aware of this, if you use it. Good on one hand (reflective floor) bad on another (head in vice).
Apart from that the increased size should allow it to crossover easily to the MW13P, or NE123 without issue.
I do not like ribbons. You can see why. They are horrible things to work with and only the best ones in the world (which are hard to find due to a lack of measurements) even stand a chance at working in a realistic way. The viawave one is one of them. Controlled directivity due to its waveguide, the ability to cross over low enough and it's compact, so the vertical directivity isn't destroyed.
Using a ribbon results in a long list of compromises, if you do not mind these then so be it.
Personally I see going three way as a freedom from the off axis compromises that you usually encounter when designing two ways. Sadly using ribbons means you throw most of this away but that comes with the territory (usually).
I still think a better choice would be.
Bass - Peerless 835025.
Midrange - Satori MW13P or Vifa NE123.
Tweeter - SB Acoustics SB29RDNC or a SEAS DXT tweeter for its waveguide.
If you want to use a ribbon I've given you how I'd run with that choice above.
My rational for ribbons was they seemed to have a nice flat response curve and a high frequency range. I am really interested in covering harmonics as best as possible. Thanks for digging out the distortion profiles. You are right, the ribbons are bad unless you cross 4k-5k and even then they aren't as good as a dome.
I think based on the data and your advice, i'll give ribbons a miss and go with domes
I like the response curves on the SB29RDNC however will do a little research and see if I can find one where the response is flat-ish up to 40kHz and low distortion too
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.