hmmm, this sims as having a 2dB "knee" around 100Hz, not ideal, but I supose you can only trust sims so far. Maybe this would elminate the need for BSC, although I would think it might be somewhat underdamped. Of course I don't always know as much as I like to pretend I do
.
Now that I think about it though Tim from this forum was kind enough to let me listen to a couple of pair of his CSS WR125S's which were in small vented boxes, they sounded quite nice. If this didn't break your budget I doubt you would be disapointed with these. If it does I still have high hopes for my friend's tang-band HT setup.
Joe
.Now that I think about it though Tim from this forum was kind enough to let me listen to a couple of pair of his CSS WR125S's which were in small vented boxes, they sounded quite nice. If this didn't break your budget I doubt you would be disapointed with these. If it does I still have high hopes for my friend's tang-band HT setup.
Joe
FWIW, I did a T/S max flat (~0.87ft^3/43.6Hz Fb) ML-TL and positive taper version of the WR125S awhile back with some early specs, so don't know how accurate they are:
Fs = 68
Qes = .77
Qms = 3.85
Qts = .64
Vas = 5.8L/0.204825ft^3
Sd = 57cm^2/8.835"^2
dia = 8.519cm/3.354"
Xmax = 6mm/0.2362" one way
Re = 7ohms
Le = .32mH
BL = 4.01N/A (4.1362 calc'd)
Mms = 4.3gr (4.4046 calc'd)
SPL = 85.6/W/m
The tapered one has a sim that corresponds to a BoxPlot max flat design and has a very smooth FR, ergo requires BSC if away from a boundary, while the ML-TL shows enough gain below ~125Hz that it may not need any BSC if not too far away, and due to the long pipe (both 49.55" i.d.) its response is a bit 'lumpy' looking with the same amount of minimal stuffing, but can be smoothed out with additional stuffing if need be.
GM
Fs = 68
Qes = .77
Qms = 3.85
Qts = .64
Vas = 5.8L/0.204825ft^3
Sd = 57cm^2/8.835"^2
dia = 8.519cm/3.354"
Xmax = 6mm/0.2362" one way
Re = 7ohms
Le = .32mH
BL = 4.01N/A (4.1362 calc'd)
Mms = 4.3gr (4.4046 calc'd)
SPL = 85.6/W/m
The tapered one has a sim that corresponds to a BoxPlot max flat design and has a very smooth FR, ergo requires BSC if away from a boundary, while the ML-TL shows enough gain below ~125Hz that it may not need any BSC if not too far away, and due to the long pipe (both 49.55" i.d.) its response is a bit 'lumpy' looking with the same amount of minimal stuffing, but can be smoothed out with additional stuffing if need be.
GM
Ok. Even going by the WR125S route doesn't make it any easier because it puts me in the same ballpark of cost(~$300 completed) and size(~0.25 cu. ft.) as the other 2-ways that I was considering.
North Creek Music - Echo (http://www.northcreekmusic.com/Echo/EchoInfo.htm)
Dennis Murphy - MB27 (http://murphyblaster.com/content.php?f=MB27.html)
CSS - WR125S full range speaker
All these speakers are very close in terms of size and cost. probably sensitivity too. Actually the MB27 should go quite a bit lower than 80hz but like I said its not very essential in my application since I will be always using the subwoofer of HT as well as music. Also, the FR of the WR125S is a little more bumpy than the other 2-ways.
Now the question that you all were just waiting for - which one should I build ? Guess its not the right question to ask on a full range forum but - has anyone heard any of the other 2-ways as compared to the WR125S ? Any comments that would help make a decision are highly appreciated!
From what I have seen in my very limited encounter with full range speakers, it looks like it would be best to go with full range speakers when space is not a constraint, and high sensitivity, flat impedance are desired - like in a tube amp application. But I might be wrong. Dont intend to change the subject of the thread but any insight into this would be helpful!
Thanks!
North Creek Music - Echo (http://www.northcreekmusic.com/Echo/EchoInfo.htm)
Dennis Murphy - MB27 (http://murphyblaster.com/content.php?f=MB27.html)
CSS - WR125S full range speaker
All these speakers are very close in terms of size and cost. probably sensitivity too. Actually the MB27 should go quite a bit lower than 80hz but like I said its not very essential in my application since I will be always using the subwoofer of HT as well as music. Also, the FR of the WR125S is a little more bumpy than the other 2-ways.
Now the question that you all were just waiting for
- which one should I build ? Guess its not the right question to ask on a full range forum but - has anyone heard any of the other 2-ways as compared to the WR125S ? Any comments that would help make a decision are highly appreciated!From what I have seen in my very limited encounter with full range speakers, it looks like it would be best to go with full range speakers when space is not a constraint, and high sensitivity, flat impedance are desired - like in a tube amp application. But I might be wrong. Dont intend to change the subject of the thread but any insight into this would be helpful!
Thanks!
Sorry Percy, I want to help, but I can't follow what your real (preferred) criteria is. Price, size, SPL's, efficiency, F3, or FR? And I don't think you can be OT on this thread, not at this point anyway.
Small boxes just don't go low. I've built the "Esquire ala Rabbitz" (Vifa P13WH-00-08 woofer/midrange and the Vifa D27TG-45-06) with both the series xover and a single cap. (something only doable with these drivers) and I would suspect your choices above are similar in sound, namely, clear and detailed. It's a great bookshelf speaker. But no doubt, I'd always suggest to build the best you can, and go with the TLb found at Planet10's site with those drivers. That would be a front you won't want to upgrade soon. But it's a higher priced floorstander.
I can't hear the bumps in the graphs. The CSS WR125 is a significantly different speaker in full range presence and imaging with comparable clarity and detail. A little larger perhaps and not as efficient, but I'd call it a better speaker for the same price. I'm not really into HT surround sound, and feel a TB 871 or two for rears is all you need if you want to go for cheap and small, perhaps you can save money there. Heck, B@$e uses those cube thingies for decent rear sound and one 871 is an order of magnitude better.
Maybe if you spell out what you're used to and what you want exactly, you'll get more specific replies? (See sentence 2) Full rangers can be either more or less efficient and big or small in cab size and price. One of those "Cheap, Small, or Good" things...pick two.
Small boxes just don't go low. I've built the "Esquire ala Rabbitz" (Vifa P13WH-00-08 woofer/midrange and the Vifa D27TG-45-06) with both the series xover and a single cap. (something only doable with these drivers) and I would suspect your choices above are similar in sound, namely, clear and detailed. It's a great bookshelf speaker. But no doubt, I'd always suggest to build the best you can, and go with the TLb found at Planet10's site with those drivers. That would be a front you won't want to upgrade soon. But it's a higher priced floorstander.
I can't hear the bumps in the graphs. The CSS WR125 is a significantly different speaker in full range presence and imaging with comparable clarity and detail. A little larger perhaps and not as efficient, but I'd call it a better speaker for the same price. I'm not really into HT surround sound, and feel a TB 871 or two for rears is all you need if you want to go for cheap and small, perhaps you can save money there. Heck, B@$e uses those cube thingies for decent rear sound and one 871 is an order of magnitude better.
Maybe if you spell out what you're used to and what you want exactly, you'll get more specific replies? (See sentence 2) Full rangers can be either more or less efficient and big or small in cab size and price. One of those "Cheap, Small, or Good" things...pick two.
I'd put it in this order -
Size
F3
FR
Price
SPL and efficiency IMO not all that important.
To put the above order in a statement -
if there is an option that will give me the smallest size(less than 0.25 cu ft), and an F3 of 80hz, which does not mean it can misbehave in the rest of the audio spectrum, then I am willing to bear the extra cost.
Keep in mind though that this is primarily for music and then some HT, kinda like 70% music 30% HT.
<edit>
That should make a good speaker like the NorthCreek Okara or John's and other's designs using the same drivers.
Significantly different from the Vifa 2-way ? Could you please elaborate. This is the kind of information I am looking for.
Wish I could turn around and A/B them for a quick write-up, but the WR125 is one that hasn't spent too many nights here since I built them.
First, the Esquire needs a sub and crossed over more around 100 than 80Hz, and it's a little bright for some people who can sit here and quicky listen to a half dozen DIY speaks. It does amaze some people that those little boxes fill the room with sound. It's usually the first ones I play for visitors to my shop piled high with protos and attic amps and GC's in various stages of construction. Give em a chance to hear a nice sound, even if they can't tell which ones are playing.
Like I've said, clear, detailed, perhaps a tiny bit bright in the highs, below the snap and sizzle, but not siblant, very sweet mids....really shows off how the BGT3875 places the drums IN the room.
I also have some small line arrays of 4,TB871s and a horn tweet on either side of my monitor, this is a nice demonstration of imaging in the nearfield especially. With a sub under the desk I think you'd be hardpressed to beat them as PC speaks. They're clear at very quiet levels and will comfortably play at 95dB at 3 meters. For full rangers, they have a very flat FR, and can use a small box. For what they can do, I can't imagine a better bargain for rears.
Upstairs, around my TV I have Audax MTM fronts, and they serve as my present reference. Link These drivers may be available for less than listed there, but the xover isn't cheap. If your budget was higher, they'd be my recommendation, as the boxes aren't that large for the full range they produce. Like I was saying before, the FE127E Bipole w/(minimal)sub produces 96% of the range of these, with perhaps even more detail, and at this level you start being critical of "the mix."
Now to compare the CCS WR125, I built the tall, narrow, deep 11L box tuned to about 55Hz and installed the Audax TMO25F1, but I haven't yet connected the tweeter.
The sound is very full, it seems the cabinet is too small to sound that big, not quite as detailed as the Fostex or the Audax, maybe more like the TB, but a rich presence, all there, a little laid back, but very musical. The first thing you notice is the deep bass coming from this small driver, then you can't believe the tweeter isn't on. My first impression is that this was the perfect nearfield monitor for my friends with very small studios...and so far they all agree. (waiting for xover parts and we'll see) Excluding that my other complaint is that they need fussy placement for the best imaging further out.
But like I said, try em, if you don't like em, I"ll find them a home.
First, the Esquire needs a sub and crossed over more around 100 than 80Hz, and it's a little bright for some people who can sit here and quicky listen to a half dozen DIY speaks. It does amaze some people that those little boxes fill the room with sound. It's usually the first ones I play for visitors to my shop piled high with protos and attic amps and GC's in various stages of construction. Give em a chance to hear a nice sound, even if they can't tell which ones are playing.
Like I've said, clear, detailed, perhaps a tiny bit bright in the highs, below the snap and sizzle, but not siblant, very sweet mids....really shows off how the BGT3875 places the drums IN the room.
I also have some small line arrays of 4,TB871s and a horn tweet on either side of my monitor, this is a nice demonstration of imaging in the nearfield especially. With a sub under the desk I think you'd be hardpressed to beat them as PC speaks. They're clear at very quiet levels and will comfortably play at 95dB at 3 meters. For full rangers, they have a very flat FR, and can use a small box. For what they can do, I can't imagine a better bargain for rears.
Upstairs, around my TV I have Audax MTM fronts, and they serve as my present reference. Link These drivers may be available for less than listed there, but the xover isn't cheap. If your budget was higher, they'd be my recommendation, as the boxes aren't that large for the full range they produce. Like I was saying before, the FE127E Bipole w/(minimal)sub produces 96% of the range of these, with perhaps even more detail, and at this level you start being critical of "the mix."
Now to compare the CCS WR125, I built the tall, narrow, deep 11L box tuned to about 55Hz and installed the Audax TMO25F1, but I haven't yet connected the tweeter.
The sound is very full, it seems the cabinet is too small to sound that big, not quite as detailed as the Fostex or the Audax, maybe more like the TB, but a rich presence, all there, a little laid back, but very musical. The first thing you notice is the deep bass coming from this small driver, then you can't believe the tweeter isn't on. My first impression is that this was the perfect nearfield monitor for my friends with very small studios...and so far they all agree. (waiting for xover parts and we'll see) Excluding that my other complaint is that they need fussy placement for the best imaging further out.
But like I said, try em, if you don't like em, I"ll find them a home.
Even with the Jordan I am not gaining anything in size, even after spending more, so I am afraid that will not become an option.
Either it has to be less than 0.25 cu ft (7 lt) or it should cost less than $300 and still have an F3 80hz with decent full range performance. If these criteria do not meet, there is no motivation for me to try out this speaker. One of the 2-ways that I mentioned earlier still seem to be the better option.
Either it has to be less than 0.25 cu ft (7 lt) or it should cost less than $300 and still have an F3 80hz with decent full range performance. If these criteria do not meet, there is no motivation for me to try out this speaker. One of the 2-ways that I mentioned earlier still seem to be the better option.
I like the idea of the WR125S for HT and using Dan Wiggins' design with the Audax tweeter would make a good music speaker too.
http://www.creativesound.ca/pdf/WR125S-TM025F1Design.pdf
If that's still too big then perhaps you would want to consider the Aurasound NS3-193-8A. I've tested it in my HT and music systems and while it may not provide the huge SPL numbers of a larger driver, power handling is decent and it still performs very well with an F3 far below 80Hz.
http://www.timn8er.com/Aurasound NS3.htm
http://www.creativesound.ca/pdf/WR125S-TM025F1Design.pdf
If that's still too big then perhaps you would want to consider the Aurasound NS3-193-8A. I've tested it in my HT and music systems and while it may not provide the huge SPL numbers of a larger driver, power handling is decent and it still performs very well with an F3 far below 80Hz.
http://www.timn8er.com/Aurasound NS3.htm
Thats an interesting project! (Aurasound NS3-193-8A).
Yes I did see John's and your website a few days ago after I started this thread. Looks like you posted this on your website very recently since I didnt see it before.
I had kinda formed an impression in my mind that there is no way a driver smaller than 4.5-5" can go lower in a small enclosure so I never even considered going further from John's results since they were all 3" drivers.
Anyway, I will check it out - looks very promising. That 5.5mm Xmaxx oughta help!
Yes I did see John's and your website a few days ago after I started this thread. Looks like you posted this on your website very recently since I didnt see it before.
I had kinda formed an impression in my mind that there is no way a driver smaller than 4.5-5" can go lower in a small enclosure so I never even considered going further from John's results since they were all 3" drivers.
Anyway, I will check it out - looks very promising. That 5.5mm Xmaxx oughta help!
percy said:
any 2 way using a 4.5" woofer would exceed the 7 lit. criteria. if you are considering a small 2 way remember to add space to compensate for the tweeter and crossover (it may be small but every cubic inch counts in a 7 liter box. Any 3" would not get be able to make 95db at 80Hz at 1m (what i consider adequate for most HT).
Timn8ter said:
this config is gaining a lot of traction. i wont be surprised if commercial speakers also follow this soon. i heard about it from dave aka planet 10.
maybe this thread will help.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=27033&perpage=10&pagenumber=4
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=27033&perpage=10&pagenumber=4
navin said:
Already have.
http://www.omegaloudspeakers.com/super 3 bpc.htm
http://www.definitivetech.com/loudspeakers/powertower/BPSpkrs_AVMntly_404.pdf
Both of these examples are essentially two enclosures attached back to back rather than two drivers back to back in the same air space. I understand there is someone developing a "kit" similar to these designs.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.