EX4 are a "little" excessive price wise for me. My wife would kill me because my poor priority capabilities. (new dining table, coffe table and what have you) I'm thinking of the EX2.
Pity vas is quite high on these babies. Thinking of a BIB here, or?
If I can ask, what box type do you have Steve?
Cheers/Peter
Pity vas is quite high on these babies. Thinking of a BIB here, or?
If I can ask, what box type do you have Steve?
Cheers/Peter
My recommendation is to stay away from the EX drivers and go with a DX driver. You will save yourself some money and get better performance. Also, don't neglect the C series if cost is a concern. The PM6C is very good in a resonant enclosure like a ML TL or a bass reflex and the PM2C will work in a back loaded horn.
What's the difference, Dx2-449 Euro versus EX2-479 Euro. In this price range it doesn't matter for me at least.
http://www.spectrumaudio.de/
http://www.spectrumaudio.de/
EX vs DX
The primary difference is that the EX driver has a back module which has some sound absorbing material in it. It is meant to absorb midrange and highs in order to prevent them from traveling down the horn, or from bouncing against the back wall of the compression chamber and back into the driver.
This module also lowers the Q of the driver, making it less suitable for a BIB style box. The module has a couple minor resonances associated with its use.
There is also a different phase plug on the EX driver, called the equalizer phase plug. The Equalizer phase plug has better dispersion, and maybe a little smoother response curve. The bullet phase plug sounds cleaner, and I personally prefer it.
In the end, most (but not all) of my EX customers took off the back module and put on bullet phase plugs, making them into DX drivers.
The primary difference is that the EX driver has a back module which has some sound absorbing material in it. It is meant to absorb midrange and highs in order to prevent them from traveling down the horn, or from bouncing against the back wall of the compression chamber and back into the driver.
This module also lowers the Q of the driver, making it less suitable for a BIB style box. The module has a couple minor resonances associated with its use.
There is also a different phase plug on the EX driver, called the equalizer phase plug. The Equalizer phase plug has better dispersion, and maybe a little smoother response curve. The bullet phase plug sounds cleaner, and I personally prefer it.
In the end, most (but not all) of my EX customers took off the back module and put on bullet phase plugs, making them into DX drivers.
Re: DX vs EX
I hate to point this out, but the BIB actually is a horn; a Voigt style chamberless corner horn to be exact. As such, low Q actually has little effect on them with a suitable amplifier. See some of the plots on www.zillaspeak.com/bib.asp that GM & I have generated. Pay particular attention to the FE166E / 166ES-R / 167. I didn't make any cabinet alterations for that. Note that the lower Q drivers have superior bass response. I builr a pair a year ago for a friend using the FF225K -Qt of 0.16, and believe me, they work very well indeed.
Not that I'm disagreeing with Martin here -I'm not. But in Steve's corner horns, the EX4s remain the best drivers I've heard. When I've heard a set of DX4s properly loaded, I'll see if my opinion changes.
Jon Ver Halen said:
I hate to point this out, but the BIB actually is a horn; a Voigt style chamberless corner horn to be exact. As such, low Q actually has little effect on them with a suitable amplifier. See some of the plots on www.zillaspeak.com/bib.asp that GM & I have generated. Pay particular attention to the FE166E / 166ES-R / 167. I didn't make any cabinet alterations for that. Note that the lower Q drivers have superior bass response. I builr a pair a year ago for a friend using the FF225K -Qt of 0.16, and believe me, they work very well indeed.
Not that I'm disagreeing with Martin here -I'm not. But in Steve's corner horns, the EX4s remain the best drivers I've heard. When I've heard a set of DX4s properly loaded, I'll see if my opinion changes.
like i say i think the ex is great ....for a back loaded horn..
i had dx3 before and when you part exchange with lowther, you have both for a couple of days... so i had a good play around, using my present 3.6 tratrix horns and a pair of fidelio cabs...
there was a teriffic difference..
the (ex/dx)3 or 4 is not just a number.. on a back loaded horn the strength of the magenet relates to the length of the horn loading the speaker will drive, that in turn tunes or reduces the rising response.. get the horn matched and you get a level (ish) speaker..
my veiw is that the ex4 are about right on around 3.4 to 4 metre horns...
simple as that.. there are picture of my horns on links to steve's site off the metronome thread .. look at eggfest 3 which i run or some of the meets at my home
cheers steve
i had dx3 before and when you part exchange with lowther, you have both for a couple of days... so i had a good play around, using my present 3.6 tratrix horns and a pair of fidelio cabs...
there was a teriffic difference..
the (ex/dx)3 or 4 is not just a number.. on a back loaded horn the strength of the magenet relates to the length of the horn loading the speaker will drive, that in turn tunes or reduces the rising response.. get the horn matched and you get a level (ish) speaker..
my veiw is that the ex4 are about right on around 3.4 to 4 metre horns...
simple as that.. there are picture of my horns on links to steve's site off the metronome thread .. look at eggfest 3 which i run or some of the meets at my home
cheers steve
On the SLS Loudspeakers web there is nice comparison of ribbon dynamic drivers and voice-coil dynamic drivers. The incoherency distortion CSD shows much about the character of the driver.
I would like to make listening test to compare the MANGER, RAVEN and AER drivers on identical hifi system. I have Manger and maybe will borrow some Lowther. I must find someone with e.g. some G-ribbons in my neighbourhood.
The amplifier will be very critical component.
I would like to make listening test to compare the MANGER, RAVEN and AER drivers on identical hifi system. I have Manger and maybe will borrow some Lowther. I must find someone with e.g. some G-ribbons in my neighbourhood.
The amplifier will be very critical component.
Its actualy designed ( or that design direction) for wall loading. Its little more than a modified Austin principal with a larger mouth and side wave implementation.I am going to include a shaped low diffraction baffle as with the larger width cab the baffle can blend into the cab sides and top. The calculated dip at XO is 4 Db.
Use , with some slight juggling of CC volume, can be for the EX higher strength motor or the 206 or even the 206 super. Its basic design use is for FR lower Qts, 8" drivers.
OT: i spent a great deal of time working on the H108. I just cant get it to deliver the LF response that i am aiming for. I know some in this forum have promised low 20s from a small enclosure (108)and if they can then all the better, but i still cant see it using current acoustical physics and it not having some major drawbacks in the balance of the FR curve or a truly limited SPL. Time will tell.
I am going back to my secondary design principal in which the 108 is a conical loaded four sided FH with calculated curved cutouts to achieve a balanced TL and horn action over the horns BW. There will be little true gain from the horn action , but a much greater directivity over a given BW.
ron
Use , with some slight juggling of CC volume, can be for the EX higher strength motor or the 206 or even the 206 super. Its basic design use is for FR lower Qts, 8" drivers.
OT: i spent a great deal of time working on the H108. I just cant get it to deliver the LF response that i am aiming for. I know some in this forum have promised low 20s from a small enclosure (108)and if they can then all the better, but i still cant see it using current acoustical physics and it not having some major drawbacks in the balance of the FR curve or a truly limited SPL. Time will tell.
I am going back to my secondary design principal in which the 108 is a conical loaded four sided FH with calculated curved cutouts to achieve a balanced TL and horn action over the horns BW. There will be little true gain from the horn action , but a much greater directivity over a given BW.
ron
Hi Jirka
I do not have any measurements that would be useful to you. What I do have is some experience and a strong opinion about Lowther base speakers. My horns are back loaded front firing 3.5m with a mouth 0.8m^2. The drivers are EX3 with the back removed. The contour is hipex M=0.8, the horns are round, made from custom composite - my own recipe.
The biggest advantage of Lowther drivers is the fact that they can work as a single driver and that justifies the high price. Lowther needs help with bass response. The only smart way to do it is with a large back loaded horn. Mid size front loaded horn makes things worse by blowing up mid frequencies - a sub and a tweeter is needed to level the response. I would not use Lowther in 2 or 3 way setup; there are less expensive drivers for that.
EX with its pre compression chamber is an unfortunate design. The “metal saucepan” behind the driver is designed to load the cone with symmetrical pressure when used in beck loaded horn with screwed up asymmetrical compression chamber. There was no acoustical absorbing material in my EX3, just a thin sponge to keep the thick layer of dust that was there from falling out. I chose EX3 over DX3 for the plug and marginally stronger magnet. The back module of EX3 was easy to remove. DX4 was too expensive for me. The parameters posted by Lowther are far from reality. On top of that the baskets of my EX3 are crooked and wiggly; the mounting holes are off more than 1mm. There are more quality issues to complain about but I stop here as I like the driver anyway.
When designing my own horns I did some computer modeling and concentrated on eliminating mistakes of other horns: too small, too short, too folded, too square, too flimsy, too boxy etc. The resulting sound is glorious with roaring bass. Even though the first octave is missing, I do not need a subwoofer.
Marek Stojek
Rest of my system:
DIY TT with 2 Schroeder clones
Cary PH302
Moth S2A3
DIY custom designed room
http://gallery.audioasylum.com/cgi/view.mpl?UserImages=21150
I do not have any measurements that would be useful to you. What I do have is some experience and a strong opinion about Lowther base speakers. My horns are back loaded front firing 3.5m with a mouth 0.8m^2. The drivers are EX3 with the back removed. The contour is hipex M=0.8, the horns are round, made from custom composite - my own recipe.
The biggest advantage of Lowther drivers is the fact that they can work as a single driver and that justifies the high price. Lowther needs help with bass response. The only smart way to do it is with a large back loaded horn. Mid size front loaded horn makes things worse by blowing up mid frequencies - a sub and a tweeter is needed to level the response. I would not use Lowther in 2 or 3 way setup; there are less expensive drivers for that.
EX with its pre compression chamber is an unfortunate design. The “metal saucepan” behind the driver is designed to load the cone with symmetrical pressure when used in beck loaded horn with screwed up asymmetrical compression chamber. There was no acoustical absorbing material in my EX3, just a thin sponge to keep the thick layer of dust that was there from falling out. I chose EX3 over DX3 for the plug and marginally stronger magnet. The back module of EX3 was easy to remove. DX4 was too expensive for me. The parameters posted by Lowther are far from reality. On top of that the baskets of my EX3 are crooked and wiggly; the mounting holes are off more than 1mm. There are more quality issues to complain about but I stop here as I like the driver anyway.
When designing my own horns I did some computer modeling and concentrated on eliminating mistakes of other horns: too small, too short, too folded, too square, too flimsy, too boxy etc. The resulting sound is glorious with roaring bass. Even though the first octave is missing, I do not need a subwoofer.
Marek Stojek
Rest of my system:
DIY TT with 2 Schroeder clones
Cary PH302
Moth S2A3
DIY custom designed room
http://gallery.audioasylum.com/cgi/view.mpl?UserImages=21150
Marekst
Hello, your system looks great. Excellent appearance.
I would like to have smaller system so the way of backhorns is not possible for me.
I use this
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=31681&highlight=JLow
and this is the largest system that I can accept.
The Manger in raindrop-like enclosure is the most acceptable from the long time point of view. The front horns will go to another room.
The Manger showed me some interesting things. It sounds real. I would like to buy some DEQX in the future and make the Manger project even better. After that it I would like to make one another loudspeaker system in the future and the AER or Raven drivers are very diffrent approaches which I like and both should sound excellent with DEQX.
Hello, your system looks great. Excellent appearance.
I would like to have smaller system so the way of backhorns is not possible for me.
I use this
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=31681&highlight=JLow
and this is the largest system that I can accept.
The Manger in raindrop-like enclosure is the most acceptable from the long time point of view. The front horns will go to another room.
The Manger showed me some interesting things. It sounds real. I would like to buy some DEQX in the future and make the Manger project even better. After that it I would like to make one another loudspeaker system in the future and the AER or Raven drivers are very diffrent approaches which I like and both should sound excellent with DEQX.
Jirka
The looks were not my priority but thank you for the complement. I did everything as cheap as possible without compromising the sound. The sound is most excellent but there is no way to show that. I have posted the pictures for technical details.
I heard good things about Manger, if my Lowther horn wasn’t a success I would try Manger myself.
Lowther is definitely good for big horns.
Good Luck
Marek
The looks were not my priority but thank you for the complement. I did everything as cheap as possible without compromising the sound. The sound is most excellent but there is no way to show that. I have posted the pictures for technical details.
I heard good things about Manger, if my Lowther horn wasn’t a success I would try Manger myself.
Lowther is definitely good for big horns.
Good Luck
Marek
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.