Ahem ... at UKP90 = AUS$163 each, plus freight to Australia from UK (possibly doubling the cost), I think that while the BMS might be a great driver, it is firmly in the "Phase III" cost class. Can anyone suggest an alternative at a more modest cost?
cheers
Doug
The Monacor DT300 + waveguide are both available locally in Australia: AUS$68 + AUS$17.50.
I'll arbitrarily add this driver to the "Phase II" list.
Troels Gravesen has an interesting commentary on the DT300 here: Vifa C17WH-
cheers
Doug
(Getting off topic here, but I'll ask anyway ...)
The SEOS12 wavguide is pretty large! Denovo SEOS-12 Waveguide 2/3 Bolt Matte with 1-3/8"-18 TPI Adapter
What compression driver did you have in mind?
cheers
Doug
Last edited:
Again off topic, but a quick perusal of some 1" compression drivers at Parts express raises two questions:
1. Most compression drivers appear to cross over from the bass drivers at 1kHz to 1.5kHz. That sort of implies a mid-range is necessary, or does it? Are there any compression drivers that can start low enough to make a 2-way feasible?
2. Titanium vs polyamide. What's to recommend either one?
cheers
Doug
Now it is your speaker but I am not sure how much Gale 401 appeal is going to be left if you use an active crossover, waveguide (where is that going to fit?), turn it the wrong way round, modern crossover frequencies,...
Assuming we are interested in something that is reasonably close to the Gale using standard range drivers (the very expensive Scan-Speak 8"s would work nicely) then some options for the woofers would seem to be Dayton RS225-8, SEAS CD22RN4x, SEAS L22RN4X/P but none are a perfect fit. Most of the more efficient 8"s want a much bigger volume and will not perform well at the low end. There may well be more suitable 8" woofers out there.
The SB Acoustics 4" midrange is a good price and looks a good fit with inefficient 8" woofers. This assumes the objective is to cover 500-5k with the midrange which is not what one would do with a modern design. The SEAS 4" mid is a less efficient 8 ohm design.
Crossing at 5kHz means the tweeter could be pretty much anything. The SEAS 19TFF 19mm fabric dome is a good price and, according to the web, is something of an equivalent for the Celestion HF2000 used in the Gale. It could be one to pencil in.
Not really. A small efficient(ish) 4" mid means the woofer needs to be well behaved to fairly high frequencies which, for example, the SEAS CD22 is not. A 5" mid crossed lower would be less of a problem for such a woofer. Similarly 8" woofers designed to work nicely at the top end are unlikely to have acceptable bass behaviour in small sealed cabinets. You need to make a decision about what you want to do in the midrange before you can choose an appropriate woofer or tweeter.
I am getting the impression you are not overly concerned about keeping the sound of the Gale in which case a 5" mid with lower crossover frequencies and a 1" tweeter is going to significantly widen the choice of suitable drivers. It is a less interesting project to me but others are contributing.
Hmm. I want to maintain the look and the approximate size of the Gale, also keeping it's usual orientation (on a stand). I want to keep the sealed cabinet. I can live with either a 4" or a 5" mid, and I take your point about one better suiting my woofer requirements, so let's opt for that and see where things lead. I'm not fussed at all about at what frequencies the crossovers occur. Let's just go with what suits the driver selection.
Thanks.
Doug
Thanks.
Doug
For what it's worth, I happen to have a spare pair of WR125ST. How would they suit as a mid?
http://basaudio.net/datasheets/CSS-FR-WR125-datasheet.pdf
Doug
http://basaudio.net/datasheets/CSS-FR-WR125-datasheet.pdf
Doug
I think the Scan disco 10F is the perfect mid for this project:
5F8422T01-10F8414G10
http://www.scan-speak.dk/datasheet/pdf/10f-8414g10.pdf
Run it up to 4k plus in honor of the original design and live with a little bit of beaming at the crossover point.
I would then add the disco ring radiator as well:
http://www.scan-speak.dk/datasheet/pdf/r2604-833000.pdf
A little less bloom than a conventional dome at the crossover point since these have naturally less wide dispersion, so a good fit here without going to a waveguide which would strain baffle real estate.
And then the big risk... since you are active, why not take a chance on these new tang bands that are just a tad bigger than a typical 8 but should punch real low in a small sealed cab and if the factory specs and description are reasonably accurate, should have no trouble playing up to 400-600 so that the little mid would be well protected.
Tang Band W8-2022 8" RBM Subwoofer 8 Ohm
I would mount these two woofers behind the baffle rather than flush, and I think the flat cone actually adds to the design ethos of the speaker overall, which I think is kind of modern and I love the end caps by the way.
I think these drivers would provide great SPL/dynamics with good coverage at the frequency extremes while still giving a wide band and hopefully very coherent midrange.
5F8422T01-10F8414G10
http://www.scan-speak.dk/datasheet/pdf/10f-8414g10.pdf
Run it up to 4k plus in honor of the original design and live with a little bit of beaming at the crossover point.
I would then add the disco ring radiator as well:
http://www.scan-speak.dk/datasheet/pdf/r2604-833000.pdf
A little less bloom than a conventional dome at the crossover point since these have naturally less wide dispersion, so a good fit here without going to a waveguide which would strain baffle real estate.
And then the big risk... since you are active, why not take a chance on these new tang bands that are just a tad bigger than a typical 8 but should punch real low in a small sealed cab and if the factory specs and description are reasonably accurate, should have no trouble playing up to 400-600 so that the little mid would be well protected.
Tang Band W8-2022 8" RBM Subwoofer 8 Ohm
I would mount these two woofers behind the baffle rather than flush, and I think the flat cone actually adds to the design ethos of the speaker overall, which I think is kind of modern and I love the end caps by the way.
I think these drivers would provide great SPL/dynamics with good coverage at the frequency extremes while still giving a wide band and hopefully very coherent midrange.
Hi There,
Been following this thread with interest, Unfortunately it seems to dwindle towards advising the OP to employ everyones personal favorites.
Tweeter: any decent 25 mm will do, x/o at approx 3kHz. Do not waste money on exotics
Midrange: CSS 125 will work excellently in enclosure of 3 liters, x/o at 400Hz andd 3 kHz.
The original KO40 had a rather high Fo, and was somewhat overrated i.m.o.. I think the CSS plus any modern dome will be substantial improvements to the original, if properly filtered.
Woofers: This is your biggest challenge: few manufacturers make low Fs,high Cms mid Qt drivers these days. Todays high Mms, low Cms, 4 Ohms woofers will most likely not work in passive system, mainly because of their lowish sensitivity. With most of these, you not only end up at 2 Ohms with parallel connection, but lose a few dB's sensitivity in a passive low-pass at 400 Hz as well.
The only woofer having somewhat usuable specs is the Scan Speak 21W/8558. Furthermore, SS is one of the few woofer manufacturers whose T/S parameter are to be trusted. However, its use will turn your project in an expensive affair after all. The mid-tweet lay-out is not necesserely optimal.
Good Luck,
Eelco
Been following this thread with interest, Unfortunately it seems to dwindle towards advising the OP to employ everyones personal favorites.
Tweeter: any decent 25 mm will do, x/o at approx 3kHz. Do not waste money on exotics
Midrange: CSS 125 will work excellently in enclosure of 3 liters, x/o at 400Hz andd 3 kHz.
The original KO40 had a rather high Fo, and was somewhat overrated i.m.o.. I think the CSS plus any modern dome will be substantial improvements to the original, if properly filtered.
Woofers: This is your biggest challenge: few manufacturers make low Fs,high Cms mid Qt drivers these days. Todays high Mms, low Cms, 4 Ohms woofers will most likely not work in passive system, mainly because of their lowish sensitivity. With most of these, you not only end up at 2 Ohms with parallel connection, but lose a few dB's sensitivity in a passive low-pass at 400 Hz as well.
The only woofer having somewhat usuable specs is the Scan Speak 21W/8558. Furthermore, SS is one of the few woofer manufacturers whose T/S parameter are to be trusted. However, its use will turn your project in an expensive affair after all. The mid-tweet lay-out is not necesserely optimal.
Good Luck,
Eelco
@and19191y: why cross over high? 400Hz.
Furthermore, a sensitivity of approx 85 db/W/m , although not high, is good nuff. The whole 401 remake affair will not write history as a high output, high sensitivity design.
@Brisso: has the thought crossed your mind of simply scoring 4 AR-4 woofers on Ebay or whatever second hand/flea market medium is most connvenient for you and re-surround them for just a handfull bucks?
Regards,
Eelco
Furthermore, a sensitivity of approx 85 db/W/m , although not high, is good nuff. The whole 401 remake affair will not write history as a high output, high sensitivity design.
@Brisso: has the thought crossed your mind of simply scoring 4 AR-4 woofers on Ebay or whatever second hand/flea market medium is most connvenient for you and re-surround them for just a handfull bucks?
Regards,
Eelco
I see now that the cabinet volume appears critical to both woofer selection and also the bass extension. After thinking further, I calculate that a +25% volume allowance would only result in the external dimensions increasing by the cube root of 1.25, i.e. 1.077. I think therefore that I could let the cabinet volume rise to 45 litres.
Cheers
Doug
I ruled out buying secondhand because the Gale woofers were not stock AR items, and also, the chances of getting 4 drivers of that age with similar characteristics is perhaps poor. My budget doesn't force me to buy used, so I'll use new drivers.
Doug
Last edited:
The crossover frequency is set by the size of driver. In a balanced design one of the drivers should not start distorting at a much lower SPLs than the others. This means a woofer needs to cross higher to a small midrange than a larger one. I don't know the power rating of the CSS but if it is 10-20W then the low efficiency and the low power handling will mean it cannot keep up whatever you do.
The Gale was not particularly efficient but it played reasonably loud if you pumped in the Watts. A speaker with two 8" woofers that can only play at modest levels because the small midrange is distorting does not look like a balanced design. Nonetheless if the op is confident he is only going to need modest sound levels it need not be a stopper.
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.