For Freddi try these links:
Alison Krauss (with Union Station) sings my favorite "When you say nothing at all":
Alison Krauss + Union Station - When You Say Nothing at All 2002 Video Live stereo widescreen - YouTube
and Fleetwood Mac's "Rumors":
Fleetwood Mac - Rumours (Full Album) - YouTube
Alison Krauss (with Union Station) sings my favorite "When you say nothing at all":
Alison Krauss + Union Station - When You Say Nothing at All 2002 Video Live stereo widescreen - YouTube
and Fleetwood Mac's "Rumors":
Fleetwood Mac - Rumours (Full Album) - YouTube
I added a little BSC to my filter and I do mean a little. Tried .45 mH with a 3 ohm shunt and it sucked the life out of the music. I liked the smoothness though and thought about one third the effect would be good.
It is good. I'm done -
For referance;
I am using a Bottlehead Stereomour to power these things and need all the sensitivity I can get. They sound incredible.
It is good. I'm done -
For referance;
I am using a Bottlehead Stereomour to power these things and need all the sensitivity I can get. They sound incredible.
I added a little BSC to my filter and I do mean a little. Tried .45 mH with a 3 ohm shunt and it sucked the life out of the music. I liked the smoothness though and thought about one third the effect would be good.
It is good. I'm done -
For referance;
I am using a Bottlehead Stereomour to power these things and need all the sensitivity I can get. They sound incredible.
I'm glad to see there's somebody else who adds a zobel network to a 'full-range' driver without a crossover, and likes the results.
Do you find that the zobel takes some of the 'sparkle' from the high frequencies, or that it tames 'nasties'? Whether one chooses to use it or not might depend on the amp you're using. A single-ended tube amp is going to have a high output resistance, which will be different than a push-pull amp like I'm using. I'm just hoping you can tell us why you chose the zobel and what benefits you feel you're getting from it with this driver. Thanks.
--
The zobel flattens the impedance curve and removes some of the nasties. I would use one on any driver. Especially with tube amps. The BSC has quite a bit more effect being in series with the driver and the itty-bitty one I ended up with adds some smoothness but doesn't "suck the life out of the music"
Well, yea! Your step filter is way too high to act as a BSC filter. I use 2mH and 10+/- ohms. I also use a "zobel" of slightly different values from yours, but same idea. "Suck the life out" to me means that the 1-3kHz band has been brought into balance or a bit of BBC dip. You are probably so used to hearing bright speakers that a flat speaker doesn't sound right.
Bob
Could be. I'm also 58 and my ears are rolled off -
Everyone wants flat. What if your ears are not flat?
My zobel starts becoming effective at 5 KHz and the little series network at 1 KHz. Yes, my filter is way less intrusive than yours. Thats why we DIY yes? To get what we want.
I didn't think the TB's sounded bad with no filter. This does sound better, just takes the edge off. At most ~3 dB I think.
Everyone wants flat. What if your ears are not flat?
My zobel starts becoming effective at 5 KHz and the little series network at 1 KHz. Yes, my filter is way less intrusive than yours. Thats why we DIY yes? To get what we want.
I didn't think the TB's sounded bad with no filter. This does sound better, just takes the edge off. At most ~3 dB I think.
Isn't that like -8dB at about 750Hz for a (narrow) 6" baffle width? That seems to be an awful lot of correction.
For those of us who are fanatics for our weenie little DHT amps (only weenie in their power out, not in size or heat generated), that much loss of sensitivity defeats the purpose of choosing a crossover-less speaker in the first place.
But I am pleasantly surprised to see others who know more than I do are putting zobel (or zobel-like) networks on their 'full-range' speakers. I tried very gentle zobels on my Alpair 10's and thought they smoothed out the highest highs nicely (10R + 0.47uF for Re = 7R and Le = .09mH).
Compromises, compromises, everything is compromises.
Just checked those values and found that these should make -3dB centered at about 1000Hz.
Using this online calculator, which might not apply with 100% to real-world drivers -- Loudspeaker Diffraction Loss and Baffle Step Compensation Circuits
--
I am sorry that you are married to a flea-power amp. Severely limits your choices. However....
What is the true SPL rating of the W8-1772? is it the 93dB/w/m that TB advertises? Or is is the 100dB above 10kHz? Or is it 90dB at 100Hz? All of these numbers taken off of the TB spec sheet. No, it is the 90dB at 100Hz minus the baffle step. Now you see where the 8dB BSC comes from. The ||RC filter tames the high end rising response. So....
The W8-1772 is an 87dB driver if you want a balanced bass and midrange. That will give you a full, realistic bass. If you trade bass to SPL, you get a thin, excuse me, tight bass and a lively midrange. Choices, choices. Now, I am not trying to tell you how to enjoy your music, but you know mine.
Bob
What is the true SPL rating of the W8-1772? is it the 93dB/w/m that TB advertises? Or is is the 100dB above 10kHz? Or is it 90dB at 100Hz? All of these numbers taken off of the TB spec sheet. No, it is the 90dB at 100Hz minus the baffle step. Now you see where the 8dB BSC comes from. The ||RC filter tames the high end rising response. So....
The W8-1772 is an 87dB driver if you want a balanced bass and midrange. That will give you a full, realistic bass. If you trade bass to SPL, you get a thin, excuse me, tight bass and a lively midrange. Choices, choices. Now, I am not trying to tell you how to enjoy your music, but you know mine.
Bob
So basically what that circuit does is create a BBC dip. Makes the speaker sound laid back, perhaps "not lively". But in any case, way too high to affect the bass and baffle step.
Bob
Bob,
I keep two amps around, one is a homebrew, push-pull 2A3 amp that makes 6W/ch, the other is that internet-sensation Panasonic SA-XR57 home theater receiver from about 2005, rated at 100W/ch. What you wrote about taming the W8-1772 might explain why I prefer the receiver over the tube amp for driving the Alpair 10's (87dB/1W/1m, with the baffle step 'built in' the driver design). But I prefer my big Snell C's or 10" 2-ways w/ tractrix horns driven by the 2A3 amp. I find that the Snell C's sound sizzly and indistinct when driven by the 100W receiver, but clearer and smoother driven by the weenie tube amp, which results in a really good combination. I'm not sure why.
As you know, a push-pull amp is going to have better damping factor than an equivalent single-ended amp, so I guess I'm not quite that far in 'flea-power' land. An SET amp with output resistance of 2 or 3 ohms would be really limiting indeed. I split the difference and go push-pull with the best OPT's I could afford, without a global NFB loop around it. I know that's not the best solution scientifically, but I like the amp so much I haven't changed it in 15 years.
Compromises...
PS - Re: BBC dip -- I could see how that could be useful with some drivers...
I keep two amps around, one is a homebrew, push-pull 2A3 amp that makes 6W/ch, the other is that internet-sensation Panasonic SA-XR57 home theater receiver from about 2005, rated at 100W/ch. What you wrote about taming the W8-1772 might explain why I prefer the receiver over the tube amp for driving the Alpair 10's (87dB/1W/1m, with the baffle step 'built in' the driver design). But I prefer my big Snell C's or 10" 2-ways w/ tractrix horns driven by the 2A3 amp. I find that the Snell C's sound sizzly and indistinct when driven by the 100W receiver, but clearer and smoother driven by the weenie tube amp, which results in a really good combination. I'm not sure why.
As you know, a push-pull amp is going to have better damping factor than an equivalent single-ended amp, so I guess I'm not quite that far in 'flea-power' land. An SET amp with output resistance of 2 or 3 ohms would be really limiting indeed. I split the difference and go push-pull with the best OPT's I could afford, without a global NFB loop around it. I know that's not the best solution scientifically, but I like the amp so much I haven't changed it in 15 years.
Compromises...
PS - Re: BBC dip -- I could see how that could be useful with some drivers...
Last edited:
My network is not a baffle step corrector, that just what I called it as it's a parallel LR filter in series with the driver. It's purpose is just to take the edge off.
For bass improvement I have them high up on the wall venting into the wall-ceiling boundary.
I also use an auxillary woofer (can't call it a sub) a 10" Dayton DVC in a 40 liter sealed box with one coil wired to a rheostat so I can change the Q.
Yup, only have three and a half watts, so I can't be throttling heavily. I think my whole network (zobel & series) only cuts 3 dB.
It sounds wonderful!
For bass improvement I have them high up on the wall venting into the wall-ceiling boundary.
I also use an auxillary woofer (can't call it a sub) a 10" Dayton DVC in a 40 liter sealed box with one coil wired to a rheostat so I can change the Q.
Yup, only have three and a half watts, so I can't be throttling heavily. I think my whole network (zobel & series) only cuts 3 dB.
It sounds wonderful!
And I repeat -- What ever floats your boat.
Those Snell's are probably designed to work with "smaller", whatever that means, tube amps where high speaker sensitivity is required. There is no doubt some synergy between your amp and speakers. The 1772's were designed expecting a low Z SS amp. The Alpair's, according to many who post here don't sing unless tube powered, but I find that a stout class D/T amp works just fine. I am currently enamoured with the new A10P's. BTW, I do have a nice PP tube amp and the Alpair's do sound a bit different on it. Not necessarily better. Different.
I do have a pair of 1772's cooking at the moment while I build cabinets for a customer. They are in their shipping boxes and sound thin and honky. Go figure! They will have about 50hr on them when they get their new home. I'll report back.
Bob
Those Snell's are probably designed to work with "smaller", whatever that means, tube amps where high speaker sensitivity is required. There is no doubt some synergy between your amp and speakers. The 1772's were designed expecting a low Z SS amp. The Alpair's, according to many who post here don't sing unless tube powered, but I find that a stout class D/T amp works just fine. I am currently enamoured with the new A10P's. BTW, I do have a nice PP tube amp and the Alpair's do sound a bit different on it. Not necessarily better. Different.
I do have a pair of 1772's cooking at the moment while I build cabinets for a customer. They are in their shipping boxes and sound thin and honky. Go figure! They will have about 50hr on them when they get their new home. I'll report back.
Bob
1772 is a good little driver - (I like several of my coaxial better - overall)
this 13.5"x13" x ~20" K-coupler was the smallest where I got really good sound with the 1772
here's kinda what one sounded like in a tiny 1955 Karlson 8 whose rear chamber is a bit less than 0.5 cubic feet and Fb near 95Hz (small signal but still - lol) when sitting on top of one of my K-horns - a subwoofer would probably help quite a bit. K8 were made of 1/2" plywood - -going to 3/4" thick helps a lot
Karlson 8 cabinet from ~1955 with Tangband 1772 - YouTube
this 13.5"x13" x ~20" K-coupler was the smallest where I got really good sound with the 1772
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
here's kinda what one sounded like in a tiny 1955 Karlson 8 whose rear chamber is a bit less than 0.5 cubic feet and Fb near 95Hz (small signal but still - lol) when sitting on top of one of my K-horns - a subwoofer would probably help quite a bit. K8 were made of 1/2" plywood - -going to 3/4" thick helps a lot
Karlson 8 cabinet from ~1955 with Tangband 1772 - YouTube
I've been listening to the 1772's cousin the 1808 and find they have tremendous potential because they do so much right. I'm assuming they sound similar to the 1772 so please take my comments with a grain of salt.
I have the 1808 in a sealed .8cf box. There is not a lot of bass but what's there is tuneful and natural sounding. Without building a larger box for them I've decided to build a powered subwoofer to sit them atop. These drivers are very clear sounding making lesser drivers sound veiled by comparison.
Zilla
I have the 1808 in a sealed .8cf box. There is not a lot of bass but what's there is tuneful and natural sounding. Without building a larger box for them I've decided to build a powered subwoofer to sit them atop. These drivers are very clear sounding making lesser drivers sound veiled by comparison.
Zilla
When will they come out with an affordable ceramic motor?
I just noticed how this driver has a very low Qm value at ~1.02 (spec sheet) and 1.3 as measured by Bob Brines in post#1. As I've been toying with current drive lately, I see this driver as a potentially good candidate. I'm guessing large sealed/aperiodic boxes or reflex with lots of R in the vent would be good. It might get a bit of a lift on the top end due to a slight rise in impedance, but not much as its Le seems very low. A zobel could be used to great advantage under current drive to EQ/tailor the top end if needed. I've mostly tested this on smaller FR drivers I had, designed under classic voltage driver paradigm, so they rather sucked on current drive, but measurements were most enlightening. I do have a pair of FF225WK I suspect could be decent in the right box.
IG
I just noticed how this driver has a very low Qm value at ~1.02 (spec sheet) and 1.3 as measured by Bob Brines in post#1. As I've been toying with current drive lately, I see this driver as a potentially good candidate. I'm guessing large sealed/aperiodic boxes or reflex with lots of R in the vent would be good. It might get a bit of a lift on the top end due to a slight rise in impedance, but not much as its Le seems very low. A zobel could be used to great advantage under current drive to EQ/tailor the top end if needed. I've mostly tested this on smaller FR drivers I had, designed under classic voltage driver paradigm, so they rather sucked on current drive, but measurements were most enlightening. I do have a pair of FF225WK I suspect could be decent in the right box.
IG
I just ran a sim of the W8-1772 in a K15 scaled by 12/15 in length, 15/15 in depth, and 8/15 in width. It produces a pretty nice result that has bass extension down to 45 Hz (90 dB) and has beautiful ideal impulse response. Main post is in this thread: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/162253-build-thread-k-slot-rear-loaded-horn-tangband-w8-1772-a-12.html#post3636454
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.