Parlay that into a full bandwidth design!
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/144099-thread-tysen-variations-fast.html
Don't know about that... the uFonken flat-pak with the FF85KeN is my most popular full kit ($275). Note that if you ignore its LF & dynamic limitations (largely overcome in a FAST) this is probably the best driver in Fostex's catalog (unfortunately discontinued, but i have a good stash)
You won't get any argument from me -- my next big project is Alpair 7eN + 4 CSS SDX7eN per side. The key is having a "full-range" that has top end that rivals tweeters.
dave
..and you chose to use your comment(s) to attempt to discredit any information from Zaph's site.
I've nothing against you or your products.. how would you like it if I proclaimed to others: "..you can't trust anything on the MarkAudio site, all of it is highly suspect." Of course I'm not about to, because I think it's patently untrue.
From this recent post it seems as if you have a "beef" with Zaph, as if he did something "under-handed" to you. But I think your problem is bogus. Moreover the measurements aren't really a "review" at all. If your problem is with his comments or "stars".. OK, separate issue - but the point of this thread is on the OBJECTIVE performance of the 10F and it's relationship to the OBJECTIVE performance of other extended range drivers.
Finally Zaphs mic is CALIBRATED! ..and if you bothered to read that it was the Behringer unit mic, then it really shouldn't have been that difficult to discover that it was calibrated.
Zaph|Audio
Under the moderate power testing conditions that Zaph uses it's essentially perfect.
Hi ScottG,
It's very clear that you're devoted to John's work. That's your choice and to be respected, but you need to give more respect to those who don't feel the same as you. Unlike John's site, this forum is open where opinion and debate is available to all. I'm glad that you're passionate about DIY audio, an fantastic hobby that we all enjoy; But some of your comments are becoming too offensive in tone, does nothing to illustrate your point of view.
To clarify my position, I have 2 main issues relating to John's work.
1 - Impartiality: John now has a commercial interest. I've already explained my thinking on this in previous posts. Putting the point this way, if I started reviewing John's driver and kits tomorrow, I'd be rightly criticised for bias, yet here I am, along with other makers on the receiving end of John's turkey shoot while Zaph stickers are glued on drivers. It aint right Scott and if you were is my boots, trust me, you'd feel as I do.
2 - Reliable and accurate testing: I've long advocated improved testing and data presentation. Re the EMC8000, you can't "calibrate in" accurate sensitivity beyond its optimal range. A mic's optimal range is NOT the total range quoted by the makers. Depending on the quality of the mic, best practice is to use around 75% of its total range. For example, we use the M52 to measure drivers up to 30-kHz because its accuracy starts to fall away from 34-kHz to its 40K limit. The foundation of a reliable accurate outcome from a sweep test has to be the mic and its environment. Any significant compromises in these 2 areas, the data becomes open to question. John's putting his faith in a 50 buck mic and a non or semi-anechoic environment, making lots of publicised judgement calls based from the output. You're happy with this level of testing, that's your choice, but don't expect me to be.
Moving on to the 10F, a nice driver but there is a greater fall-off in the HF response on the makers specs that those given in other evaluation. More important, its very difficult to make a synthetic crossed-weave fibre cone accurately micro-resonate in the upper bands. This likely explains why the 10F is described as a "mid" by its maker. Having said this, the cone on the 10F is coated. This could make a difference to its micro-resonance capacity, mainly in the reduction of frictional values. Friction is the result of energy conversion and explains why you see so few cones of this type being used for wide-band and full range purposes. Will this driver sound like a "full ranger"? Will its dynamics emit the dimensional qualities associated with descent purpose designed full rangers? That's where guys are going to have to experiment and decide for themselves. I certainly don't want to put folks off this driver. I'm all for experimentation and all credit to Scan-Speak for their work.
All being well, I'll be producing Gen 2 Alpair 6's and 10's next month. I'm going to take the plunge (again) and publish LMS RAW data. I'll be using custom cut suspended baffle plates, tested in an temperature/humidity anechoic chamber using mics that cost the most of 3000 bucks, final assembling and testing in a Japanese run factory. I owe every DIYer my best efforts to get the data as accurate and reliable as possible.
Got to dash, lots of work to do.
Cheers
Mark.
Last edited:
I enjoy Zaph's website. I love the charts he posts! But when he did not comment favorably on one of my favorite drivers, the Fostex 165k, i decided to take his opinions as just that, opinions. I have a lot of drivers packed away in boxes but enjoy that driver. I give my opinion on drivers all the time and hope others take it as nothing more than that. But by providing technical frequency response charts along with driver build comments it can come across to many as more factual. It's a great service for the diy community to post charts! Thanks for that. I did see some nice comments about some TB drivers i also enjoy... but i still enjoy the 165k more regardless. I'm glad he posts what he does tho and will continue to enjoy.
Godzilla
Godzilla
Hi Mayhem,
Understood and appreciated. Agreed there's always likely to be debate over John's work and indeed mine for that matter. I'm not out to "bash" John's overall efforts, he has done much to help DIYers, rather address the issues of impartiality and the reliability of testing because they arose on this thread, 2 subjects that aren't easy to resolve.
I have to navigate a fine line and try my best to balance helping DIYers and the commercial aspects of my work. So the bulk of my posts and threads are in the forum's commercial section.
The 10F is worth considering, so hoping I've offered constructive comment. I'd normally say nothing on specific drivers but freely admit to admiring Scan-Speak's quality over the years.
Cheers
Mark.
Last edited:
No, no.. FULL RANGE and NOT ACTIVE!
30Hz at the average in-room (i.e. factoring room gain, but not boundary gain) withOUT an active amplifier or "boost". Near average extension below 30 Hz.
Good efficiency, easy/resistive load from the midrange up. Dynamic and L O U D !
Capable of challenging *any* commercial product.
..and after all, what's life without a challenge?
Actually I'm not "devoted" at all. In fact I don't even agree with many of the things he espouses on his website.
I"m just not fond of someone/anyone discrediting someones work based on an apparently baseless self-serving argument that lacks any real evidence.
And yes, I'm sure that's offensive as well.
Btw, if it was done to you and I was reading it ..bet your @ss I'd be every bit as offensive to that wrong-doer.
..hmm, makes me wish the forum had the tattle-tale/moderator feature of the old one. ALL of your posts in this thread (and various replies to you including my own) should be removed, in that not one really concerns the topic of the thread. (..excluding your recent commentary on the 10F.)
Last edited:
Seems like the SS driver would make a nice and very easy to work with midrange driver, but the limitation here might be power handling. For nearfield fullrange use (where Xmax will run out before thermal handling) they should be great. Shame they arn't perfect for mids though, perhaps as an MTM, but then that makes the high crossover point they otherwise have potential for difficult due to driver spacing.
>>> I "ran some numbers", and it's amazing what the Dayton Pro 10 can offer this little driver.
Do you mean as a 'helper woofer' for this driver? I like the way this Dayton looks and was thinking about using it for a future project. It appears to have smooth enough extended response to mate with a tweeter of some kind. But i was not thinking of combining it with a full range driver.
I'd like to hear this Scan Speak driver but am not drawn to it just because of the smooth frequency response. I wish i could remember the quote from Paul Klipsch about flat frequency responses... anyone remember it?
Godzilla
Do you mean as a 'helper woofer' for this driver? I like the way this Dayton looks and was thinking about using it for a future project. It appears to have smooth enough extended response to mate with a tweeter of some kind. But i was not thinking of combining it with a full range driver.
I'd like to hear this Scan Speak driver but am not drawn to it just because of the smooth frequency response. I wish i could remember the quote from Paul Klipsch about flat frequency responses... anyone remember it?
Godzilla
Yes in either a 1.5, or a classic 2 way.
There is so much "gain" from the woofer that baffle-step compensation shouldn't be a problem (when used with this driver).. Plus, it has good low freq. extension vs. enclosure volume when compared to other driver's of similar spl at 1watt/1meter in relation to it's response at 150 Hz. A 3.5-4 cubic foot enclosure volume with a *low* tuning freq. results in a pretty spectacular low freq. response when you "shelve" the baffle step loss area. (..and there are a number of ways to do this, both electrically and acoustically.)
It obviously has some problems in response in the mid-range 400-600 Hz region, and generally that suggests bass driver use only.. BUT there are design schemes that will mitigate an issue like this - and can work favorably with BSC. (..hint, hint
)It's not too shabby from Mark's (.25 meter) tests either:
Attachments
Last edited:
Looks very impressive for a high powered high quality 3 way project!
Tony.
Just ran across this thread...
I am in the finishing process with a 3-way project with the ss 10F (4-ohm). Bass is the PA unit Deltalite ii 2510 and tweeter monacor DT-28N. Crossover at 400 and just below 4000 Hz and all 2.order. Sounds good. Good power handling. I used a magnum bottle for the 10F enclosure and left the neck open so it's vented and tunes to 50 hz. Have Filter values if anyone's interested. Posted elsewhere in this forum but I have made significant improvements on crossover!
Jacob
well make your own picture:
ScanSpeak measurements:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Zaph's measurements:
to my eyes, that is pretty damn close and discrepancies could well be production method induced variations
I have the actual units (which I sent to Zaph) that he tested and I will be receiving professionally calibrated microphones soon. The 10F that MarkK tested also happen to be the same actual drivers (again, sent by me to him, then returned back to me).
I can use a $2 Panasonic electret capsule mic, and if I have it calibrated I can get very accurate and useful measurements without an anechoic chamber. Regardless of the "cheapness" of this, or of ECM-8000 measurement microphones, if they are calibrated they most certainly can deliver to you measurements which are not significantly inferior, for our purposes, to measurements taken by the best microphone on the planet, in a lab grade highest quality anechoic chamber - so long as one is competent doing the measurements, using methods such as mixing near field, far field, and, on occasion, outdoor measurements.
Objectively, what precisely do you think you can measure with your more expensive mic, in your anechoic chamber, that I can't measure with my $2 mic in my home office, that is of use to a speaker designer???
I would much much rather have the use of a laser vibrometer, than an expensive microphone and test facility, if were going to get nit-picky, or into the gritty details of superior driver design.
This is obvioulsy not a full range driver, and no, it won't/shouldn't be expected to sound the same attempting to cover the same full range of frequency response.
Yes, it should do impressively well, when used within it's appropriate pass band, implemented in a well designed overall system.
Last edited:
The 8ohm version 10F/8424 has been tested and chosen by many in the Subjective Blind series of threads as one of the best sounding full range drivers out there. I have also used it in a front loaded tractrix horn, and there, it solidly goes to 20kHz. IMO, it is one of the finest full range drivers available for use above 200Hz. Super low HD that I have not seen matched by another driver. Also, great CSD.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full...ind-comparison-3in-5in-drivers-round-2-a.html
Last edited:
thread -revived from the dead, last seen August 2010... 
He's also got a point about use of a calibrated mic with proper methods to blend near field and far field and on occasion, outdoor measurements to provide data that is not significantly inferior to a $2k mic and an anechoic chamber. Really, most DIY'ers now have had pretty good success with these methods in characterizing their systems for comprehensive XO simulations without the need for big dollar mics or anechoic chambers. Given the graph produced by 3rd party DIY methods above closely match the factory 10F curves, I am not sure how all the extra $ and chamber result in anything more that a DIY'er would need.
I think it may be "zombie" as vampires don't die and come back later, they are just un-dead from inception and then parasitically kill off hosts.
I think it may be "zombie" as vampires don't die and come back later, they are just un-dead from inception and then parasitically kill off hosts.
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.