Seas Standard line? Peerless HDS?

[catapult]

Michael, I didn't mean to give you a hard time so I'll see if I can be a little more helpful.

If you're on a budget, I'd suggest going with a proven design. As others have pointed out, 8" drivers that can play high enough for a 2-way tend to be expensive. As well, tweeters that can play low enough to cross to an 8" are expensive. You'd probably be better off going with a 7".

Ed Frias designed a 7" 2-way using Peerless drivers. It has gotten good reviews. Danny Ritchie measured it and published what he considered to be an improved crossover. Then Ed changed his crossover a little. These would probably be hard to beat for the price. Here are the basics of Ed and Danny's work. I haven't heard the crossover variations so I can't tell you which sounds better. You could try them both and decide for yourself.

Peerless Mid-woofer Model # 850122
Peerless Tweeter Model # 812687

Cabinet specs:
3/4" MDF material
13" high X 8 3/4" wide X 9 1/4" deep

Rear port size is 2" dia X 6" deep from rear surface.
Rear Port hole is centered (widthwise) and 3" from top to center of port.
Loose polyfill damping behind the woofer.

Ed's crossover:

An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.

Danny's crossover:

An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.

 

[catapult]

And here's another project using the Peerless 7" CSX.

http://www.speakerbuilder.net/web_files/Projects/peecreek/pcrkmain.htm

 

[michael]

but i can get the 8" CSX woofers cheaper than the 6.5" (from a friend who never got around to using them) not overly cheaper but cheaper all the same.
Could anybody here help me in crossover design, using the 850136, i downloaded "crossover simulator" and designed a 2nd order hi pass and a 2nd order low pass. what is the difference between the crossover types: butterworth, linkwitz-Riley, bessel, chebychev, guassian, legendre, linear-phase.

please help me out with this.

 

[rabbitz]

You've got your heart set on the 8", then go for it. Use the WES xo in the 850136.pdf as a starter and use a 3rd order L-R and not a second order.



If you want to learn about the different crossover types, get the Loudspeaker Design Cookbook - helps in all other areas too. Easy to calculate, but takes time to fine tune and get it right.

 

[gary f]

For crossover design, please, do yourself a favor and get Calsod.

The 1.40 version cost approx 100 aus$ and it is an australian program.

You can get quite good results even with your first try.

Calculate phase coherence, frequency response, etc. etc. etc.
Optimise your targets slopes, etc.etc.

F

 

[michael]

i just punched i 3nd oder in crossover simulator and it gave me different results to that pdf. knowing almost nothing about how a crossover works i am baffled, i think i need to buy that book. So why is 3rd order important here, are the higher freq of the 8" nasty? and must that tweeter be rolled off so steeply, the reason i ask is that if i am forced to have a complex crossover i may go stingy and get cheaper components but the fewer components i have to buy the more likely it is i will buy quality ones.

 

[Eul]

Because you’re going to use both drivers on the edge what they are capable doing and you don’t want to lose too much quality you have to filter steep. This will properly have a better result than filter less steep with fewer components. Unfortunately it is sometimes (!) harder to get right.

 

[catapult]

Michael, I'll repeat what others have told you. The 8" Peerless is a Bad Driver above 500 Hz. If you don't care if your speakers sound bad, just say so and we will all stop wasting our time trying to help you.

Look at the response curve. See that dip in the output at about 700 Hz and, more important, the squiggle in the impedance curve at the same frequency? That indicates cone breakup and/or resonance. Translation - big distortion at that frequency. You have to cross the 8" below 700 Hz and you won't find a tweeter that will play that low.

An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.

 

[michael]

i didnt know that those "squiggles" meant cone breakup, i thought that it was just variation in the response and wouldnt be noticed.
okay well this makes my job alot easier now, the 850122 it is i suppose it has almost the same performance and this way i could maybe build peerless pipes or or maybe even MTM depending on my cash flow
so yes thank you catapult for being blunt and telling me whats what
what does cone breakup sound like?

and because i would now be using the 850122 before its limits could i cross it with a 2nd order slope to save components, for both the high and low pass?
sorry im new to crossovers, i was thinking 3KHz?

 

[qwad]

I have to agree with CATAPULT this is not the driver you should be looking at if you are insisting on an 8 in one why don't you check out the PAE by PEERLESS ACOUSTIC ENGINEERING- LOGIC SERIES there is an 8 in unit either 4 or 8 ohm wes code 22wj 08 for the 8ohm 1 22wj 06 for the 4 ohm 1 they are both au $38.50 ea a big saving on the danish made peerless 8 in units you are looking at if you give me your email address I CAN SCAN THE PAGE FOR YOU AND SEND IT these are an addition to wes comps main catalogue so you will not find them on their web site I KNOW ÇAUSE i looked! and it's not there... cheers from a fellow adelaidien or else you can call me on 8396 2032 anytime szia kis barátom Tamás

 

[catapult]

sorry im new to crossovers

That's why you should go with a proven design unless you want to buy some test gear and spend a lot of time learning.

Designing crossovers isn't easy. A 2nd order crossover doesn't mean feeding the driver a 2nd order electrical signal. It means the acoustic output of the driver+crossover is 2nd order. Drivers aren't perfect so the only way you'll get that is with test gear and a lot of experimenting and/or simulating in crossover software. And even when you get a 2nd order response from the individual drivers, it will have to be modified so the drivers are in phase at the crossover point.

I Strongly Suggest you go with a proven design rather than trying to reinvent the wheel without the proper tools for "wheel invention." The three I showed above are a good starting point. You can always modify them if you feel the need to experiment. Wayne's Pee Creek is likely the best of the bunch because of the better tweeter. However that tweeter may be too expensive in Oz. Most likely Danny's version of the AR is next best because he optimized the Peerless tweeter which is a bit quirky. Crossover components are cheap unless you go for exotic stuff. I wouldn't choose one crossover over another because of the component count - it's only a few bucks difference and can make the difference between so-so sound and great sound. Choose the one that sounds the best.

Danny's measurements:
http://www.gr-research.com/edspeaker.htm

 

[rabbitz]

Crossed over at 3225Hz on mine and used a series crossover. 1 resistor, 1 cap and 1 inductor per speaker.

Tested 13 series variations plus 8 parallel variations before I settled on one.

 

[michael]

i just finished writing a big post and it crashed
so this will not be so long due to my internet fury

Okay, her are a series of links that i have found to crossovers involing the 850122 woofer.

This one uses the tweeter that i want to use
http://www.kaiaudio.com/diy2001/jasonopen.html

This one is in a TL and i think it might be a winner, both XO and cabinet.
http://www.geocities.com/rbrines1/Pages/Peerless_Pipe.html

and last but not least
http://www.speakerbuilder.net/web_files/Projects/peecreek/pcrkmain.htm


right now i really like the idea of the peerless pipe and think i will go through with it.
but just a few questions:
how do TL's do on the power handling and max SPL side of things?
what do you think of the peerless pipe?

 

[Mos Fetish]

Well, we're on the subject of the 850122, anyone know if it's been used in a 3 way?

It's got a nice low end response, handles plenty of power and if it was xo'ed at 300hz it would probably form a great bottom end for a small yet capable 3 way project.

Any thoughts?

Mos

 

[michael]

i agree that it would be good in a 3 way, but i dont see why as it extends up to 4Khz as is, perhaps it would be nice to have 3 of them and a tweeter, with one of them in a separate sealed chamber crossed at 2-300.

but regardless of that answer my previous post.

how do TL's do on the power handling and max SPL side of things?
what do you think of the peerless pipe?

 

[Eul]

I have the CSX 6.5 in a 2-way and it is crossed at about 2500Hz (with a vifa XT-300 K/S4). I went from 12dB/oct. to 6dB/oct. for the woofer after the measurements because it sounded too sharp in the mid, that was solved by that.

It might help you…

 

[michael]

bump,
alot of peple have used this driver havent they. all the more reason to use it myself

no someone tell me what they think it would be better in, a 40L vented enclosure tuned to 33Hz, or would a TL(peerless pipe design)?

 

[Wombat2]

MOS I'm planning to use a couple of WES 'exclusive' drivers in a three way centre. Limited to selection due to shielding but the WES Peerless 850594 and the 850528 look good on paper. These are HDS drivers and have the Peerless series numbering 164 WR and 134 WR.

Using a Vifa D26NC as tweeter

I'd like to see the 6.5" go a bit lower but as I said shielding for a centre limits the selection.

David L

 

[rabbitz]

A vented design is much easier. I don't know if 40 litres might be too much as WinISD has 34.2 litres and Peerless recommends 30 litres.

If you want a bigger box but need a smaller volume just partition of a section. Did that with mine with a 45 degree panel.

 

[michael]

rabbitz, thats a really nice looking cabinet so far. is that the same as the one you emailed me finished. could you send me the internal dimmentions, i might do a copy of yours if you have no objections.
how do they sound by the way, and could you show me your crossover.