What are your suggestions for midrange driver for 3-way speaker that's going to be medium sensitive? Like 12" woofer sealed, midrange/fullrange + maybe little dome above 6-10 kHz?
If woofer is 90 dB and crossed around where baffle step is (400-500 Hz), midrange could be 86 dB/W?
Experiences of dome midranges?
What I had in my mind... :
http://www.scan-speak.dk/datasheet/pdf/d7608-920010.pdf
http://www.scan-speak.dk/datasheet/pdf/10f-8424g00.pdf
H1304-08 MCA12RC
If woofer is 90 dB and crossed around where baffle step is (400-500 Hz), midrange could be 86 dB/W?
Experiences of dome midranges?
What I had in my mind... :
http://www.scan-speak.dk/datasheet/pdf/d7608-920010.pdf
http://www.scan-speak.dk/datasheet/pdf/10f-8424g00.pdf
H1304-08 MCA12RC
Last edited:
With a 12" 90dB, go to a 6/7" cross near 300Hz
Your suggested drivers don't have enough area...
CA18RNX H1215-08 CA18RNX
HDS-P830990 http://tymphany.com/files/HDS-P830990 Rev2_0.pdf
etc. you have a large choice. Better to use the same series of speaker 12" + 6" ?
A pro midrange ?
Overview
etc.
Your suggested drivers don't have enough area...
CA18RNX H1215-08 CA18RNX
HDS-P830990 http://tymphany.com/files/HDS-P830990 Rev2_0.pdf
etc. you have a large choice. Better to use the same series of speaker 12" + 6" ?
A pro midrange ?
Overview
etc.
For me true midrange is 8" (150-1500Hz) 
The problem is non linear distortion from too small area. The too small speaker will start yelling at high level. The 12" can produce very high level at 400Hz.
You can achieve 400-6000Hz with the scan speak 10F or a fullrange but you will cover midrange treble. A very large bandwidth for the 3", better to use it 800-6000Hz. You can use it in the range 400-6000, it can work but i think it is far from the optimum.
Too efficient driver = less distortion = very simple crossover
The problem is non linear distortion from too small area. The too small speaker will start yelling at high level. The 12" can produce very high level at 400Hz.
You can achieve 400-6000Hz with the scan speak 10F or a fullrange but you will cover midrange treble. A very large bandwidth for the 3", better to use it 800-6000Hz. You can use it in the range 400-6000, it can work but i think it is far from the optimum.
Too efficient driver = less distortion = very simple crossover
A couple other mid range options
I am in the middle of designing a 12" three way in two versions.
One using the Peerless 830669 12" in a sealed alignment:
http://www.tymphany.com/files/SLS-P830667 Rev1_0.pdf
The other using the Eminence Kappalite in a ported alignment:
Speaker Detail | Eminence Speaker
After rummaging around the parts bins and the internet, decided to try 2 midrange solutions.
First choice that can work well with either woofer or alignment is the Eminence Alpha 6A:
Speaker Detail | Eminence Speaker
Second choice is the Parts Express RS52:
Dayton Audio RS52AN-8 2" Dome Midrange
On top, for now I am using the Seas 27TDFC:
SEAS Prestige 27TDFC (H1189) Textile Dome: Madisound Speaker Store
I consider all of these drivers to be great "bang for the buck" items that are fairly flexible and easy to work with.
I think the Eminence Alpha 6A is a sleeper. It sounds really good. As dynamic as any midrange available at the price. It has enough area to be dynamic, is easy to work with, slightly rising smooth response just like Eminence shows in the product info sheet, can handle a lot of power, good Xmax, excellent build quality and very consistent. It requires a 1/2 liter stuff sub enclosure.
I have test enclosures built and am in the crossover design - implementation stage. BTW, the RS52 is a great midrange too, IF you can cross it above about 650, 2nd order electrical or higher. No sub enclosure and both of the above woofers are good enough up to 1K to make the RS52 a viable option. The Peerless is a better match as it is flat to 1.75K. The Emi is fairly flat out to about 1.5K.
As time goes on I will mix and match to see what works best with what. The TDFC can work well down to under 2K with proper crossover and that provides a lot of design flexibility.
It will be interesting to see which way things go ALSPE's project decisions and progress.
I am in the middle of designing a 12" three way in two versions.
One using the Peerless 830669 12" in a sealed alignment:
http://www.tymphany.com/files/SLS-P830667 Rev1_0.pdf
The other using the Eminence Kappalite in a ported alignment:
Speaker Detail | Eminence Speaker
After rummaging around the parts bins and the internet, decided to try 2 midrange solutions.
First choice that can work well with either woofer or alignment is the Eminence Alpha 6A:
Speaker Detail | Eminence Speaker
Second choice is the Parts Express RS52:
Dayton Audio RS52AN-8 2" Dome Midrange
On top, for now I am using the Seas 27TDFC:
SEAS Prestige 27TDFC (H1189) Textile Dome: Madisound Speaker Store
I consider all of these drivers to be great "bang for the buck" items that are fairly flexible and easy to work with.
I think the Eminence Alpha 6A is a sleeper. It sounds really good. As dynamic as any midrange available at the price. It has enough area to be dynamic, is easy to work with, slightly rising smooth response just like Eminence shows in the product info sheet, can handle a lot of power, good Xmax, excellent build quality and very consistent. It requires a 1/2 liter stuff sub enclosure.
I have test enclosures built and am in the crossover design - implementation stage. BTW, the RS52 is a great midrange too, IF you can cross it above about 650, 2nd order electrical or higher. No sub enclosure and both of the above woofers are good enough up to 1K to make the RS52 a viable option. The Peerless is a better match as it is flat to 1.75K. The Emi is fairly flat out to about 1.5K.
As time goes on I will mix and match to see what works best with what. The TDFC can work well down to under 2K with proper crossover and that provides a lot of design flexibility.
It will be interesting to see which way things go ALSPE's project decisions and progress.
I have a pair of Alpha-6C which are bereft of their dust caps - I am hoping this will fix some of the response irregularities higher up. Also, the motor performance (or geometry of the speaker) does not seem to be ideal as there are many hiccups in the impedance which usually indicate that something is not right.
Still, it wouldn't be worth it to rip apart the soft parts and put a copper sleeve on the pole - the driver is only $40 at most...
OP - sorry to go off topic there.
The 12" SLS will probably work well up to around 500hz with a steep xover. The 10F will cover 500-6k without too many issues and it's sensitivity is also within the ball park of what you'd be after. I'd personally cross the 10F a little lower then 6k, maybe 4k or so. It should work well unless you're after effortless sound at really high SPLs.
Member
Joined 2009
I vote for the SS 10F.
Fostex FF85WK and the Fountek FR88EX look like good alternatives. I would rather chose no tweeter over one crossed >4kHz. I'm becoming a believer in the FAST concept (Fullrange And Subwoofer Technology).
The mid would run to about 500Hz which shouldn't pose any excursion problems. 3" or 4" should do fine unless you are considering an open baffle setup.
Fostex FF85WK and the Fountek FR88EX look like good alternatives. I would rather chose no tweeter over one crossed >4kHz. I'm becoming a believer in the FAST concept (Fullrange And Subwoofer Technology).
The mid would run to about 500Hz which shouldn't pose any excursion problems. 3" or 4" should do fine unless you are considering an open baffle setup.
Seems that 12" SLS and 10F could match well together. SLS is 91 dB and 8 ohm 10F 87 dB. Might be too bass heavy with that compination. 4 ohm 10F is 3 dB more sensitive which is enough and might insist damping down a bit.
Simple speaker SLS 12" + 10F crossed passive around where baffle step is (400Hz). Both drivers allow 1st order XO and don't demand any notch filters.
The 4dB advantage of the SLS over the 10F will give you around 3-4dB of baffle step compensation without having to pad down the mid. You do not need the 3dB more sensitive 4ohm version unless you are going to place the SLS close to the floor and this isn't even counting band pass gain yet.
First order electrical networks aren't going to cut the mustard with those two either. The 10F will definitely appreciate at least a 2nd order acoustic filter at around 400hz. This will most likely require a 2nd order electrical filter to give enough flexibility for shaping the response and will definitely require at least a 2nd order electrical filter if you want to add a high Q hump at fc to compensate for baffle step losses. The SLS appears to have a small resonance @ around 900hz that you're probably going to want to avoid, yes it has a nice flat frequency response apart from this, but it's going to require at least a 2nd order acoustic target at around 400hz to get this out of the picture. The cone also has it's primary resonance at 2khz, this could inject a spike in the 3rd harmonic @ ~666hz, the spike @ 2khz is about 8dB tall so it could inject an 8dB spike @ 666hz. A second order acoustic target @ 400hz would just be about good enough to keep this satisfactorily attenuated. This is all theory, I haven't measured an SLS and I don't remember ever having seen measurements, but it would be a decent place to start.
First order electrical networks aren't going to cut the mustard with those two either. The 10F will definitely appreciate at least a 2nd order acoustic filter at around 400hz. This will most likely require a 2nd order electrical filter to give enough flexibility for shaping the response and will definitely require at least a 2nd order electrical filter if you want to add a high Q hump at fc to compensate for baffle step losses. The SLS appears to have a small resonance @ around 900hz that you're probably going to want to avoid, yes it has a nice flat frequency response apart from this, but it's going to require at least a 2nd order acoustic target at around 400hz to get this out of the picture. The cone also has it's primary resonance at 2khz, this could inject a spike in the 3rd harmonic @ ~666hz, the spike @ 2khz is about 8dB tall so it could inject an 8dB spike @ 666hz. A second order acoustic target @ 400hz would just be about good enough to keep this satisfactorily attenuated. This is all theory, I haven't measured an SLS and I don't remember ever having seen measurements, but it would be a decent place to start.
Keep in mind that in a three way there will be crossover gain for the midrange due to overlap. Figure at least 3 db. And you will have paracitic loss from the large inductor and baffle diffraction for the woofer. Figure a db of so. Bottom line, you may end up having to pad the mid a db or two to obtain a flat summed on axis response.
Agreed ! Second order electrical minimum for the two drivers.
To go to first order electrical, a 5"...7" near 500Hz..300Hz.
The SLS have a +7dB peak at 1800Hz, i don't like it effect on the treble. It should be suppressed.
I measured the distortion profile of the SLS315, it is very smooth. The cone is not enough hard, is well damped (perhaps too damped ?)The breakup peak doesn't influence the low range.
The 10F placement should be carefully done to have a smooth response.
Illustration of john's response :
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Hi,
FWIW for the FAST concept a 1st order series c/o will be somewhat
more effective than a 1st order parallel c/o. Driver impedance issues
for a parallel network actually help the series network work better.
But it won't work well with a peaky bass driver ......
rgds, sreten.
The Tangband W4-1337SA is a very nice 86dB midrange driver,
Good for c/o to small domes, or possibly ribbons/planars that don't like low c/o points.
FWIW for the FAST concept a 1st order series c/o will be somewhat
more effective than a 1st order parallel c/o. Driver impedance issues
for a parallel network actually help the series network work better.
But it won't work well with a peaky bass driver ......
rgds, sreten.
The Tangband W4-1337SA is a very nice 86dB midrange driver,
Good for c/o to small domes, or possibly ribbons/planars that don't like low c/o points.
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.