I wouldn;t make a bifg thing of teh 'top end roll-off' at all.
I've just checked - I am using an 8ohm pair. To my ears the roll-off at both ends of the spectrum is beautifully balanced - at the top it's very, very subtle, and really, in all honesty, not missed* The clarity and presence energy is all there in spades. HF roll-off , such as it is say above 15-17Khz, only enhances tolerance to poor recordings - which these little drivers will tell you all about!
On power ratings - they may be rated at 25w or more , but in practice in the recommended cab volume they'll actually hit the end stops quite easily around the 3-5W level.
* NB It's a much smaller roll-off, for example, than between a properly-engineeered CD player and a NOS 16/44.1 DAC (which willfully, unavoidably chucks-away 4dB at 20Khz) I can't stand the latter. Oh, and axial response can be a pretty meaningless predictor for real speakers in real rooms - when power response that tells you more about the way it sounds. Such a small-diameter FR radiator really shines there
I've just checked - I am using an 8ohm pair. To my ears the roll-off at both ends of the spectrum is beautifully balanced - at the top it's very, very subtle, and really, in all honesty, not missed* The clarity and presence energy is all there in spades. HF roll-off , such as it is say above 15-17Khz, only enhances tolerance to poor recordings - which these little drivers will tell you all about!
On power ratings - they may be rated at 25w or more , but in practice in the recommended cab volume they'll actually hit the end stops quite easily around the 3-5W level.
* NB It's a much smaller roll-off, for example, than between a properly-engineeered CD player and a NOS 16/44.1 DAC (which willfully, unavoidably chucks-away 4dB at 20Khz) I can't stand the latter. Oh, and axial response can be a pretty meaningless predictor for real speakers in real rooms - when power response that tells you more about the way it sounds. Such a small-diameter FR radiator really shines there
Last edited:
lol dont get me wrong here, I havent HEARD them side by side ie 4/16 ohm versus 8 ohm, just that by the fr graphs alone, i would pass the 8ohm by for 'the presence in spades', since the 4/16 look considerably flatter with no real over emphasis on any area. from my experience with the alpair5 greys, i would have to be honest and say i find ANY real bumps/holes from1-6k highly objectionable whether off or on axis. the detail and speed of these drivers isnt in question, so that is why i wont run the A5s without a notch, despite the drawbacks.
should i be considering an array, then the 8 ohms versions would be more attractive from a 0.5 BSC driver point of view, or a power tapered, frequency tapered array(or whatever the proper term is lol) and in combination with EITHER the 4 or 16 ohm versions.
all in all i like these drivers and the 'genre' of these small fullrangers immensely, and wouldnt discourage ANYONE from trying whichever of the Bandor drivers they wish, OR the small TBs, mark audios, aurasounds, hivis blah blah. I only state my preference and confusion concerning the difference in FR. the latter probably due to a lack of understanding of driver design on my part, i just know which i would implement and how i would implement them, and my reasons for doing so arent unreasonable
should i be considering an array, then the 8 ohms versions would be more attractive from a 0.5 BSC driver point of view, or a power tapered, frequency tapered array(or whatever the proper term is lol) and in combination with EITHER the 4 or 16 ohm versions.
all in all i like these drivers and the 'genre' of these small fullrangers immensely, and wouldnt discourage ANYONE from trying whichever of the Bandor drivers they wish, OR the small TBs, mark audios, aurasounds, hivis blah blah. I only state my preference and confusion concerning the difference in FR. the latter probably due to a lack of understanding of driver design on my part, i just know which i would implement and how i would implement them, and my reasons for doing so arent unreasonable
Last edited:
bandor 50mm units
I have been using Bandor 4 ohm 50mm drivers in sealed cabinets for the past 23 years. They were certainly better than the old Jordan 50mm modules that were being manufactured at the time (before the JX series). Do NOT expect bass response from these drivers; 130 to 150Hz is the practical bottom end. That being said, they are quite "electrostatic" in their behavior (which, if you hate electrostatics, means that you should stay away from them. I built my speakers when I no longer had room for QUAD ESL57s, so you know where I stand.)
I am experimenting with Audience A3s at present. Audience found the same faults with the Bandors that I do, which are all due to the older technology involved. Their dynamic range leaves a lot to be desired (about the same as the QUADs), they need a woofer below their range, and they INSIST upon having non-parallel interiors for their enclosures because they are VERY sensitive to internal reflections. Audience has improved greatly on the dynamic range and low-end response (thanks to Dan Wiggins), but they, too, want something other than a rectangular box to eliminate internal reflections.
Lastly, Doreen Bance is a WONDERFUL woman and she really knows her stuff.
I have been using Bandor 4 ohm 50mm drivers in sealed cabinets for the past 23 years. They were certainly better than the old Jordan 50mm modules that were being manufactured at the time (before the JX series). Do NOT expect bass response from these drivers; 130 to 150Hz is the practical bottom end. That being said, they are quite "electrostatic" in their behavior (which, if you hate electrostatics, means that you should stay away from them. I built my speakers when I no longer had room for QUAD ESL57s, so you know where I stand.)
I am experimenting with Audience A3s at present. Audience found the same faults with the Bandors that I do, which are all due to the older technology involved. Their dynamic range leaves a lot to be desired (about the same as the QUADs), they need a woofer below their range, and they INSIST upon having non-parallel interiors for their enclosures because they are VERY sensitive to internal reflections. Audience has improved greatly on the dynamic range and low-end response (thanks to Dan Wiggins), but they, too, want something other than a rectangular box to eliminate internal reflections.
Lastly, Doreen Bance is a WONDERFUL woman and she really knows her stuff.
With you on Doreen - what a fantastic lady and she's getting her health back which is good news
Its interesting that you say not to expect bass response- while I await my order for the new version, I've finally hooked up the 'deadstock' Bandors she's lent me; a pair of 8 ohm but the early type with the short throw. Even with the little sealed cab I've bodged together I'm getting pretty good bass response below 100 hz and the sound is butter smooth, no treble spikes etc.
I've not tried the Audiences, not sure I can afford them but wd like to hear them one day.
Its interesting that you say not to expect bass response- while I await my order for the new version, I've finally hooked up the 'deadstock' Bandors she's lent me; a pair of 8 ohm but the early type with the short throw. Even with the little sealed cab I've bodged together I'm getting pretty good bass response below 100 hz and the sound is butter smooth, no treble spikes etc.
I've not tried the Audiences, not sure I can afford them but wd like to hear them one day.
In my experience, although two Bandor 4 ohm units per side COULD reach below 130Hz, I couldn't reach a REASONABLE level on the low end (about 85db), even in a small room, without them "bottoming out" due to their limited excursion. Perhaps in a nearfield setup at limited SPL, their low-end response would be adequate.
A 6dB/octave crossover at 130 and a woofer below that point allows the Bandors to shine. I have had other QUAD owners comment very favorably on their sound. And yes, you're right: No BSC necessary.
It's all worth it for the mids and highs. I have loved mine for over two decades!
I got a GREAT deal on eight Audience A3s - otherwise I'd never have been able to afford them!
I'm glad to her Doreen is doing better.
A 6dB/octave crossover at 130 and a woofer below that point allows the Bandors to shine. I have had other QUAD owners comment very favorably on their sound. And yes, you're right: No BSC necessary.
It's all worth it for the mids and highs. I have loved mine for over two decades!
I got a GREAT deal on eight Audience A3s - otherwise I'd never have been able to afford them!
I'm glad to her Doreen is doing better.
Full Ranger -
How well do the 4Ohm Bandors handle orchestral music? I understand that the laws of physics cannot be violated, but some small drivers work better with sudden dynamic shifts better than others. I have a pair of commercial mini monitors and once played with Fostex FF85K drivers.
Do you cross to a sub? One or one per channel? How low? Would it be wise or necessary to use a high pass filter on each Bandor?
Regards,
Karl
How well do the 4Ohm Bandors handle orchestral music? I understand that the laws of physics cannot be violated, but some small drivers work better with sudden dynamic shifts better than others. I have a pair of commercial mini monitors and once played with Fostex FF85K drivers.
Do you cross to a sub? One or one per channel? How low? Would it be wise or necessary to use a high pass filter on each Bandor?
Regards,
Karl
Karl,
As you say, the laws of physics cannot be violated. That being said, my 23 year-old Bandors, crossed over very simply at 130Hz (6dB/8ve) to a PAIR of woofer/subwoofers (It would be unfair to call them strictly subwoofers because they go up so high) do quite a creditable job on orchestral music in my small (10 X 13) listening room. It's not so much about the sheer volume but more about them having such a "correct" balance, at least to my ears (and I have been an orchestral bassist for over 40 years).
The simple crossover (using nothing but a good quality capacitor) is all the high-pass filter they need.
As you say, the laws of physics cannot be violated. That being said, my 23 year-old Bandors, crossed over very simply at 130Hz (6dB/8ve) to a PAIR of woofer/subwoofers (It would be unfair to call them strictly subwoofers because they go up so high) do quite a creditable job on orchestral music in my small (10 X 13) listening room. It's not so much about the sheer volume but more about them having such a "correct" balance, at least to my ears (and I have been an orchestral bassist for over 40 years).
The simple crossover (using nothing but a good quality capacitor) is all the high-pass filter they need.
Full Ranger -
A few things worry me about Bandors. First, I have never heard a pair of stats that I have liked (I have listened to two pairs of Martin Logan speakers). I mention this because Bandors are frequently compared to stats. Second, I am concerned about any "tizzyness" in the top end of the range (I have read that they can exhibit a nasal quality). My Fostex FF85K drivers could sound tizzy (the aluminum foil cap was directly glued to the voicecoil). Third, just how fragile are they?
Soundwise, I very much prefer paper and kevlar cones to plastic and doped paper. They sound "slow" to me. I also do not like metal tweeters very much.
I have been on the fence about these for a few years now and can finally afford to get a pair. However, I want to be as sure as possible,
I appreciate your comments.
Regards,
Karl
A few things worry me about Bandors. First, I have never heard a pair of stats that I have liked (I have listened to two pairs of Martin Logan speakers). I mention this because Bandors are frequently compared to stats. Second, I am concerned about any "tizzyness" in the top end of the range (I have read that they can exhibit a nasal quality). My Fostex FF85K drivers could sound tizzy (the aluminum foil cap was directly glued to the voicecoil). Third, just how fragile are they?
Soundwise, I very much prefer paper and kevlar cones to plastic and doped paper. They sound "slow" to me. I also do not like metal tweeters very much.
I have been on the fence about these for a few years now and can finally afford to get a pair. However, I want to be as sure as possible,
I appreciate your comments.
Regards,
Karl
Karl,
Keeping in mind that I have not heard the new neodymium-magnet Bandors, the OLD Bandors have NO "tizzyness" or nasality whatsoever. I, too, dislike metal-dome tweeters, so we're on the same page there. (In the 1970s, everyone seemed to rave about Dahlquist DQ10s, which looked very much like QUADs but didn't sound like them. I put a pair of QUAD ESL57s next to a pair of DQ10s and fired them up. The QUADs sounded like real life. The Dahlquists were so nasal, they sounded like the sound was going through a megaphone. Very "honky".) I have not listened to "new" electrostatics because I have lived with "old" QUAD ESL 57s, which had such a very natural balance, again, without "tizzyness" or nasality, that I felt they couldn't be beaten.
Having lived with Bandors for over two decades, I can say that their similarity to electrostatics (at least, QUAD ESL 57s) is in their "immediacy" of delivery of the sound. That, coupled with a very QUAD-like tonal balance, is what attracts me to them. They are not "slow" but they are not "metallic"-sounding.
You say that you can now afford a pair which would give you one driver per side. My system has used two Bandor drivers per side as well as one woofer per side. I don't think I would attempt to build a Bandor-based system with only one driver per side. I did that once and was not at all pleased by the results.
I recall an old article about Bandor drivers from a British magazine. Its title was: "Bandor drivers: They cost a packet and they hunt in packs". Both parts are true.
If you can afford only one driver per side, another possibility is an Audience A3 and a Peerless 830880 passive radiator (available very cheaply at Madisound) per cabinet. That would make a speaker very similar to audience's" The ONE". Placed within a few inches of a wall, it ought to go down to the low 40s.
I am currently working on my own version of Audience's LSA 2+2 for a larger listening room. (I got eight Audience A3s at a bargain price.) As far as I know, the A3 is basically a Bandor-inspired driver with Dan Wiggins' XBL2 technology and a neodymium magnet.
Kindest regards,
FR
Keeping in mind that I have not heard the new neodymium-magnet Bandors, the OLD Bandors have NO "tizzyness" or nasality whatsoever. I, too, dislike metal-dome tweeters, so we're on the same page there. (In the 1970s, everyone seemed to rave about Dahlquist DQ10s, which looked very much like QUADs but didn't sound like them. I put a pair of QUAD ESL57s next to a pair of DQ10s and fired them up. The QUADs sounded like real life. The Dahlquists were so nasal, they sounded like the sound was going through a megaphone. Very "honky".) I have not listened to "new" electrostatics because I have lived with "old" QUAD ESL 57s, which had such a very natural balance, again, without "tizzyness" or nasality, that I felt they couldn't be beaten.
Having lived with Bandors for over two decades, I can say that their similarity to electrostatics (at least, QUAD ESL 57s) is in their "immediacy" of delivery of the sound. That, coupled with a very QUAD-like tonal balance, is what attracts me to them. They are not "slow" but they are not "metallic"-sounding.
You say that you can now afford a pair which would give you one driver per side. My system has used two Bandor drivers per side as well as one woofer per side. I don't think I would attempt to build a Bandor-based system with only one driver per side. I did that once and was not at all pleased by the results.
I recall an old article about Bandor drivers from a British magazine. Its title was: "Bandor drivers: They cost a packet and they hunt in packs". Both parts are true.
If you can afford only one driver per side, another possibility is an Audience A3 and a Peerless 830880 passive radiator (available very cheaply at Madisound) per cabinet. That would make a speaker very similar to audience's" The ONE". Placed within a few inches of a wall, it ought to go down to the low 40s.
I am currently working on my own version of Audience's LSA 2+2 for a larger listening room. (I got eight Audience A3s at a bargain price.) As far as I know, the A3 is basically a Bandor-inspired driver with Dan Wiggins' XBL2 technology and a neodymium magnet.
Kindest regards,
FR
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.