The original Goldwood GW-1858. The bass given off by these is brilliant.
After listening to it for a while I think the narrower baffles were a mistake as there seems to be a bit of a mid range dip. I need to do some measurements to quantify exactly what it is and figure out what needs to be done to correct it, but I recommend that anyone trying their first build stick to the original design completely.
audiodesign ,You could try here and see if shipping is any better and price etc, it's where I bought mine.. Q-Components loudspeakers & audio products
I think the trans-oceanic shipping of large drivers like these would still be an issue - either very expensive by air, or long trip time by boat.
audiodesign-
Since you are outside the North American distribution area, perhaps if you contacted Goldwood they would sell directly to you if you and some other Europeans did a group buy. Since these are Chinese-made (at least I think they are), the shipping should only be from China to Europe, rather than China to U.S. to Europe. Or, if you have enough people interested, contact one of the European speaker distributors and see if they would be interested in picking up the line. It seems odd tha no one in Europe would carry these.
Since you are outside the North American distribution area, perhaps if you contacted Goldwood they would sell directly to you if you and some other Europeans did a group buy. Since these are Chinese-made (at least I think they are), the shipping should only be from China to Europe, rather than China to U.S. to Europe. Or, if you have enough people interested, contact one of the European speaker distributors and see if they would be interested in picking up the line. It seems odd tha no one in Europe would carry these.
So if OT but it seems like the perfect place to ask..
My long search for a bass driver that has a little more control than say the alphas but are more suitable for use in a H frame, (mid-high qts with as low an fs as possible), than Betas I have found a 12 inch with what seem to my untrained eyes to be very favourable ts figures. Can someone with a little more experience give their opinion?
made by Davis
27cm
Fs 31
8ohm
94db
0.81qts
L1.17mh
BL 8.8
Vas 58L
They cost €120 ea though, so I really need to be sure of how they would perform before taking the plunge!
My long search for a bass driver that has a little more control than say the alphas but are more suitable for use in a H frame, (mid-high qts with as low an fs as possible), than Betas I have found a 12 inch with what seem to my untrained eyes to be very favourable ts figures. Can someone with a little more experience give their opinion?
made by Davis
27cm
Fs 31
8ohm
94db
0.81qts
L1.17mh
BL 8.8
Vas 58L
They cost €120 ea though, so I really need to be sure of how they would perform before taking the plunge!
Hi,
I just substituted the available data for the Davis in the OB+H frame Mathcad sheet.
I don't know if it would be valid without Qes and Qms?
Also I entered 260 mm membrane diameter.
Everything else is unaltered and the dimensions are the same as the ones for the 18 inch Goldwood.
The plots look nice, but I would rather not interpret them as there might be not enough data. If you find full TS parameters, I can run the Mathcad again.
Missing parameters are:
- Re;
- Qes; and
- Qms.
I just substituted the available data for the Davis in the OB+H frame Mathcad sheet.
I don't know if it would be valid without Qes and Qms?
Also I entered 260 mm membrane diameter.
Everything else is unaltered and the dimensions are the same as the ones for the 18 inch Goldwood.
The plots look nice, but I would rather not interpret them as there might be not enough data. If you find full TS parameters, I can run the Mathcad again.
Missing parameters are:
- Re;
- Qes; and
- Qms.
Attachments
FYI, these numbers don't 'compute', so Caveat Emptor [buyer beware] applies.
In HornResp, using the pertinent Sd, BL, Mms, Cms, Re, Qms, it calculates almost spot on to the published Qes, Qts, Vas, but Fs must ~doubled.
Recalculating using 31 Hz yields a ~doubling of Qes to 2.11, increasing Qts to 1.31, or if we keep all the published specs except Vas, it ~doubles. If we keep them all except BL, then it increases ~1.4x, which isn't likely.
GM
In HornResp, using the pertinent Sd, BL, Mms, Cms, Re, Qms, it calculates almost spot on to the published Qes, Qts, Vas, but Fs must ~doubled.
Recalculating using 31 Hz yields a ~doubling of Qes to 2.11, increasing Qts to 1.31, or if we keep all the published specs except Vas, it ~doubles. If we keep them all except BL, then it increases ~1.4x, which isn't likely.
GM
Considering the light cone, Vas is the most suspicious to me. Fs and BL seem plausible, Le too, so Qes should be as stated 
Nothing could be guessed on Qms and Cms though... But why not? If Qts is right Qms should be too and the compliance is directly related to Vas...
Maybe a tougher googling can lead us to someone who have taken measurements.
Also the efficiency is an issue with 12 inches in H frame since it is the most inefficient design although with the best extension.
Nothing could be guessed on Qms and Cms though... But why not? If Qts is right Qms should be too and the compliance is directly related to Vas...
Maybe a tougher googling can lead us to someone who have taken measurements.
Also the efficiency is an issue with 12 inches in H frame since it is the most inefficient design although with the best extension.
Hhhmmmm so a typo somewhere maybe, there is a M version of this driver which has a slightly more substantial motor and higher damped cone all the figures seem to reflect this and the vas is way up to 260L, this makes me think Vas may of been misprinted on the first driver?? What about if we add a 1 in front to make it 158L im totally guessing mind...
The sensetivity is ok too as I intend on using it with an alpair 7.3 at 86db and I think 6db between mid/high and H frame drivers is recommended and here I have 8 db diff.. Besides I will be bi-amping with a big power amp for the bass and im only going for low level listening with these, (quality over quantity) so not really an issue.
The sensetivity is ok too as I intend on using it with an alpair 7.3 at 86db and I think 6db between mid/high and H frame drivers is recommended and here I have 8 db diff.. Besides I will be bi-amping with a big power amp for the bass and im only going for low level listening with these, (quality over quantity) so not really an issue.
Me too, but no way to know if any of it is accurate, just look at Lowther published specs.........
GM
Too good to be true?
Again nothing except the bass driver parameters is altered. Crossover, geometry, positioning and etc. are as preset by MJK in the mathcad sheet.
If this is true, it would be quite a discovery.
Onform, why don't you send an e-mail to Davis with request for confirmation or a new set of T/S parameters?
Best regards!
Again nothing except the bass driver parameters is altered. Crossover, geometry, positioning and etc. are as preset by MJK in the mathcad sheet.
If this is true, it would be quite a discovery.
Onform, why don't you send an e-mail to Davis with request for confirmation or a new set of T/S parameters?
Best regards!
Attachments
Not familiar with MJK's speaker design details, but [2*Fs/Qts] defines the driver's upper mass corner where the box loading [excluding some horn alignments] is done and if it changes much it may not only affect the baffle's 'HF' response, but the XO design also depending on its point and/or slope.
GM
Just finished a pair of Goldwood H-frames (thanks Martin!) with Audio Nirvana Super 8" in a 18"W x 24"H baffle on top. Bi-amping both full range for the moment as I still have not received my miniDSP 2x4 that I hope to use as an active crossover. Dayton DTA-100a t-amp for the top, vintage Yamaha M-65 for the bottom, using each amps volume controls to help balance things out a bit at the moment.
Question: Goldwood break in. Those of you that have played with these drivers, have you noticed much change after running them for awhile, and if so would you mind sharing your experience?
I've also attempted a sort of magnet brace on the goldwoods. Not really a magnet mount since they are still screwed into the baffle but just something to help stabilize vibrations and give me a place to mount the binding posts. Just an excuse to make sawdust really. Thoughts?
Thanks in advance!
Question: Goldwood break in. Those of you that have played with these drivers, have you noticed much change after running them for awhile, and if so would you mind sharing your experience?
I've also attempted a sort of magnet brace on the goldwoods. Not really a magnet mount since they are still screwed into the baffle but just something to help stabilize vibrations and give me a place to mount the binding posts. Just an excuse to make sawdust really. Thoughts?
Thanks in advance!
Attachments
I understand my miniDSP 2x4 is shipping today. I have REW, a Dayton EMM-6 cal mic, and a PC. Hopefully between the four of them I'll get them blended pretty soon... although I have to say even with both of them running fullrange I think they actually sound pretty good!
I wouldn't expect much break in difference from the Goldwoods if any at all!
Wait until you hear them with a proper crossover! I have auditioned the goldwoods fullrange, they go surprisingly high and unpleasant too
About the position of the fullranges on the OB, well it seems too off center this leads to uneven horisontal dispersion diagram. You probably designed the mounting position with EDGE, but it simulates only on axis response Have it in mind and consider new OB's in the future, especially if you find yourself struggling to align the H frames with the OB's.
Congrats for the build!
P.S. M-65 is a piece of jewelry is has the best possible characteristics any amplifier could have! Why don't you consider switching the amplifiers? M-65 driving a bass section is like powering a concrete mixer with a 5.0 Coyote
Wait until you hear them with a proper crossover! I have auditioned the goldwoods fullrange, they go surprisingly high and unpleasant too
About the position of the fullranges on the OB, well it seems too off center
this leads to uneven horisontal dispersion diagram. You probably designed the mounting position with EDGE, but it simulates only on axis response Have it in mind and consider new OB's in the future, especially if you find yourself struggling to align the H frames with the OB's.Congrats for the build!
P.S. M-65 is a piece of jewelry is has the best possible characteristics any amplifier could have! Why don't you consider switching the amplifiers? M-65 driving a bass section is like powering a concrete mixer with a 5.0 Coyote
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.