PHY-HP or Supravox for Open Baffle

[eeyore]

Am looking to build an Open Baffle project. Want to start with one "wide range" and progressively add a sub and super tweeter as required. Have ruled out Fostex and those with a Whizzer cone.

Short list is either a PHY-HP H21 LB or a Supravox 215-2000. I think the prices are similar, but still awaiting confirmation from PHY on their current price.

Anyone use both of them, or can add their experiences to this decision?

[FullRangeMan]

Hi Eeyore,
As both are Alnico magnet, choose by the price or QTS(very important for OB panel), PHY-HP QTS is higher (0,59) than SupraVox.
AT the PHY-HP Site, 8inches is 522euros and the 12inches H30LB15 12 inches ''just'' 300euros more at 815 each, the 12inches do not need subwoofer, just a tweeter (PHY-HP have a coaxial crossoverless woofer line with a tweeter in center-good value-)
The SupraVox I do not know but it have a QTS very low for a OB, surely need a woofer and xover.
Just a idea.

P.S.: PHY-HP drivers have life warranty. Good Luck

[FullRangeMan]

P.P.S.: SUPRAVOX Freq. Charts do not show below 200Hz.

[LineSource]

I have only listened to the PHY-HP H21 LB in a 3 way Dipole and the music was wonderful. Female voices were rich in detail and powerful in dynamics. At reasonable SPLs, solo piano dynamics were also impressivly real in timbre and decay. He used Audio Research tube amps. I brought over a pair of Krell KMA100s that added more life to the bass with equally smooth vocals.

I built a pair of 102 db/watt dipole ribbon(0.7" wide by 6" long) tweeters for this friend who built the dipole 3 way with the PHY-HP H21 LB plus a pair of Lambda TD15D dipole speakers.

Search this forum for Graham's T-Bass circuit for dipole bass extension. It may fit your design goals.

[ScottG]

Originally Posted by eeyore

Am looking to build an Open Baffle project. Want to start with one "wide range" and progressively add a sub and super tweeter as required. Have ruled out Fostex and those with a Whizzer cone.

Short list is either a PHY-HP H21 LB or a Supravox 215-2000. I think the prices are similar, but still awaiting confirmation from PHY on their current price.

Anyone use both of them, or can add their experiences to this decision?

I remember a french magazine "shoot-out" with the 8" Phy, Supravox *215*, and a Fostex unit.. IF I remember correctly, the Phy wasn't "1st place"..

Another problem is the relative *size* of the baffle in comparison to the dipole cancellation. Look the "Edge" (freeware program) for that determination. I think you'll find that it is unlikely you'll achieve anything near a flat response without a "helper" woofer.

My suggestion:

165 GMF and
285 GMF with an appropriate baffle and air core inductor for the low-pass of the 285.

Supravox has something similar using the 215 here:
Supravox DIY

Note that this was conceived of BEFORE the 165 became available. IMO the 165 is THE full-range driver "to beat" for overall value.

[eeyore]

Hi all for the responses. A few question, why would the 165GMF be an ideal candidate? Given it has a low Qts, is it because of its sound quality? Is the Alnico thing really worth the extra money?

I also remember reading that magazine article, but can't seem to find it again...

How does Lowther or AER add to the mix?

[FullRangeMan]

Originally Posted by eeyore

Is the Alnico thing really worth the extra money?

Hi Eeyore,
The Alnico price/performance ratio is a personal choice, for me is obligatory have the Alnico magnet as I like it.
In the 1960 years my father have a AM tube radio with EL34 and a Alnico 8 inches, OB full open back side. and it is most realistic music I lsten in my life, mainly in voices.
The Alnico magnet have to be recharged after 10 or 15 years, the other magnets type last more years. For me Alnico worth every gauss it have, as I always will wish that sweet sound, it is like a Tube vs Transistor issue, Alnico have the ''tube'' sound of speakers...
Regards

[ScottG]

In and of itself for an open baffle and for "fullrange" use, the 165 is NOT ideal.

What it does have going for it is good linear decay, low Mms for its Sd, and relatively high eff. for its Sd and a usable (fairly extended) pass-band.

Lowther's and AER's are twin cone designs. AER's have the same problems as lowthers BUT are generally more eff. across their pass-band (..though note that lowthers in general don't exceed 94 db 1watt at 1 meter as an average eff.).

If you look over Troel's website (High Eff. section), you'll find a both the 215 RTF64 and the Lowther EX3 measured. The performance pretty much speaks for itself.

DIY Loudspeaker Projects

Is alnico worth the money? That isn't really the question that you should be asking, rather is the particular driver worth the money? In this instance is the 215-2000 (or the EXC version) better than the 165? Is it worth 5 times as much? That I don't know, but I can say that it's *highly* unlikely. That doesn't mean however that you might not find it to be worth the cost.

[ScottG]

Here is an alnico "fullrange" driver that *might* be worth the money:

eBay 香港 : L.Cao full range speaker 8 inches pair alnico !! (物� 220446904282 ��時間 2009-10-13 17�時09分39秒)

(..note that the response shown has an eq. circuit.)

(..I'd still go with what I recommended at the beginning however.)

IMO a *better* solution with alnico would be the Seas X2-08 EXOTIC W8 in combination with an appropriate filter and the Seas X3-06 EXOTIC T35.. AND a "helper" woofer or two (..perhaps from Acoustic Elegance).

[eeyore]

Having read a few more threads and the Internet, I am leaning towards the 165 series, either the 165GMF, 165-2000 or 165-EXC. Each has a different magnet, respectively, ferrite, AlNiCo and Electro-magnet. The AlNiCo and the Electro are the same price.

Can those who have used electro magnet powered speakers comment on whether that would be a better choice or an AlNiCo in an open baffle application. In this case, I think that I would cross the speaker at 200 Hz or thereabouts and leave the lower registers to a suitable woofer. The 165 may or may not need a tweeter, so I am keeping that out of the equation at the moment.

Thanks again.