I haven't compared the two, but my impression is that they are very similar speakers. If you are definitely planning an open baffle speaker, I would suggest going with the 1808, as it will work better on open baffle, largely due to its higher Qt. For most other designs, its not as easy to use.
Hi and thx.
but, remember that I will not use this driver for the lower frequency. I believe that the high Qts is to help the lows in OB, but this not my case. The two models have different sensitivity...For detailed and dynamic sound, one is better than the other?
but, remember that I will not use this driver for the lower frequency. I believe that the high Qts is to help the lows in OB, but this not my case. The two models have different sensitivity...For detailed and dynamic sound, one is better than the other?
The difference in Qts will affect not only the bass but also the mids in open baffle. The 1808 has a very detailed and dynamic sound as well. I think its the better pick if you are definitely going with an open baffle design. Bob Brines would tell you that going with an 8" for open baffle is too large, that you should use a smaller speaker altogether.
2 drivers in one box
Dear friends,
Can you help me? What do you think about use 2 of these drivers in one box? In parallel to obtain 4 ohms and a little high global performance?
Excusme for my poor english! http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/images/smilies/frown.gif
Dear friends,
Can you help me? What do you think about use 2 of these drivers in one box? In parallel to obtain 4 ohms and a little high global performance?
Excusme for my poor english! http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/images/smilies/frown.gif
OB's Too Large
If you relieve the OB driver of low bass duty, the OB can be made much smaller. Then just cross over to a 'sub' for low bass duty. Each does what it does best. The lack of box-related colorations and spacious quality from the rear radiation allow the OB driver to excel at the mids. A pair of 15-18 inch drivers in H-frames can provide extraordinary bass reproduction. Incredible depth, detail and dynamics, in a very compact package. You can even put the small OB's on top of the h-frames. IME, at low to moderate (safe and sane?) listening levels few loudspeakers of any kind can match or better the realism offered by such a system.
Both the TB's will work well in a small OB as described above. The choice is a matter of taste. With the 1772 you might have to provide some frequency contouring if listening off axis around 20* didn't work for you. This would be less likely with the 1808. IME the sense of musical dynamics and flow, along with detail improve with icreasing sensitivity, so I might favor the 1772. However, if you choose the 1772's and find that you need frequency contouring, the Qts and sensitivity end up being close to the 1808 anyway. By most accounts both are fine drivers so it's more a difference of win degree (win-win, but one is a little better) than win-lose. You can't really go wrong.
Regards,
Bob
If you relieve the OB driver of low bass duty, the OB can be made much smaller. Then just cross over to a 'sub' for low bass duty. Each does what it does best. The lack of box-related colorations and spacious quality from the rear radiation allow the OB driver to excel at the mids. A pair of 15-18 inch drivers in H-frames can provide extraordinary bass reproduction. Incredible depth, detail and dynamics, in a very compact package. You can even put the small OB's on top of the h-frames. IME, at low to moderate (safe and sane?) listening levels few loudspeakers of any kind can match or better the realism offered by such a system.
Both the TB's will work well in a small OB as described above. The choice is a matter of taste. With the 1772 you might have to provide some frequency contouring if listening off axis around 20* didn't work for you. This would be less likely with the 1808. IME the sense of musical dynamics and flow, along with detail improve with icreasing sensitivity, so I might favor the 1772. However, if you choose the 1772's and find that you need frequency contouring, the Qts and sensitivity end up being close to the 1808 anyway. By most accounts both are fine drivers so it's more a difference of win degree (win-win, but one is a little better) than win-lose. You can't really go wrong.
Regards,
Bob
>>> Small 1" whizzers and big 4" whizzers (Beta12LTA) with or without phase plug do not fatigue my ears.
Interesting comment. I have both the Beta 12 and TB 1808. I use the TB just as described above by Astro...
>>> You can even put the small OB's on top of the h-frames.
I think you can put just about anything on top of H-frames to good effect from OB to bookshelf speakers.
The TBs have great tone and reveal lots of detail in an easy fashion. They are rich thru the midrange with a nice soft treble. I chose to add a super tweeter but they really don't require one as long as you like a soft subtle treble.
The Beta12lta speaker in the pic has since been modified (in smaller sealed boxes sitting on top of the H-frames) and the TBs have been set aside for the moment. My personal preference (for now anyway) is that the Beta 12lta (with dustcaps cut out) sound better overall. They don't have the micro detail of the TB but they have more impact and sound more lifelike.
But i do miss the sound of open baffle. I plan to revisit OB in the coming weeks with the intention of using the Beta12lta, Alpha15 and a little compression driver seen in the photo. The bass won't be as good as the H-frames but the look will be cleaner overall... which is what i want since the room is really cluttered.
Zilla
Interesting comment. I have both the Beta 12 and TB 1808. I use the TB just as described above by Astro...
>>> You can even put the small OB's on top of the h-frames.
I think you can put just about anything on top of H-frames to good effect from OB to bookshelf speakers.
The TBs have great tone and reveal lots of detail in an easy fashion. They are rich thru the midrange with a nice soft treble. I chose to add a super tweeter but they really don't require one as long as you like a soft subtle treble.
The Beta12lta speaker in the pic has since been modified (in smaller sealed boxes sitting on top of the H-frames) and the TBs have been set aside for the moment. My personal preference (for now anyway) is that the Beta 12lta (with dustcaps cut out) sound better overall. They don't have the micro detail of the TB but they have more impact and sound more lifelike.
But i do miss the sound of open baffle. I plan to revisit OB in the coming weeks with the intention of using the Beta12lta, Alpha15 and a little compression driver seen in the photo. The bass won't be as good as the H-frames but the look will be cleaner overall... which is what i want since the room is really cluttered.
Zilla
Attachments
Maybe time to dig mine out and start working them over. I have phase plugs for mine.
dave
its been about 3 years since I mucked with 12LTA - one brief setup was a biamped U baffle with 21" helper (250W on those), 50 watts moosefart on 12LTA and various helper tweeter -maybe I'll buy a 2nd Cannabis Rex for more foolery - it might (?) be cool if Eminence could mate the C-Rex with 12LTA
1772 ain't a bad driver -
1772 ain't a bad driver -
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Yes, but the big question still in my mind is, At what frequency? I'm dieing to build some iteration of MLK's design, but I'm stuck in "analysis paralysis" trying to decide on the right size FR on top of the H. If a 20" x 20" baffle will not allow anything past, say, 200 hz anyway (is this true BTW?), will cone size still matter much? Does room size or listening distance matter here? My listening distance is around 13' in a 16' x 30' room.
So, I guess what I still need to know is, what criteria should one use in deciding FR size on a MJK-type design? Right now, I lean towards an 8" like the Wild Burro Betsy but mostly because it seems more likely to allow a low crossover and maybe be stronger at 15' distance. But if a 4"-6" FR will reach down to the point where the edge affects strangle it anyway, then maybe they would be fine, and maybe sound better anyway?
The other question is what difference does size make in listening qualities like image, sound stage, dispersion, etc? BTW, high freq response isn't an big issue for me because my hearing stops at about 11Khz anyway.
Those are reached with the driver placed on a narrow ,non reflective baffle .
Doubling them ,in vertical ,spreads the dispersion ( or it narrows...
)
LOL Norman! My basement is a mess these past few weeks... building a BIB for the discontinued 127e (nearly done!) and fabricating three interchangeable baffles to hear the inexpensive Dayton 5" full range driver and the relatively expensive TB 4" Bamboo... They all have different hole sizes... grrrrrr! If the saw at the local Home Depot was not busted i'd also have large baffles for my next OB project. I am psyched about building a simple full range BIB (no tweeters or circuits) and a multi-way, (open baffle and bi amped). Fun stuff!
>>> I have a pair of 1808 in OB and love the sound. I am curious to use it like you did in the H-frame. Therefore i ordered Eminence Alpha 15 this afternoon.
>>> Could you please tell me the measures on the H-frame? Do i need a filter?
Superlian, enjoy your speakers! I think the Alpha 15 in H-frames is awesome! Check this link:
http://www.quarter-wave.com/OBs/U_and_H_Frames.pdf
It will explain all.
An observation i can offer is that crossing the H-frames lower sounds better. I use a typical sub amp (anything 100+ watts should be great) with variable crossover and volume. I did not want to figure the passive crossover and the sub amp does the trick for me. You will get an immense sound with these H-frames that has to be heard/felt to be appreciated. There may be better bass systems available but these really satisfy me. The 1808 will sound best with minimal interference from the H-frames... i really think the 1808 is a great driver regardless of how others feel about it. It's an ambitious attempt at a great sounding full range driver. It's a total pleasure to listen to.
>>> I have a pair of 1808 in OB and love the sound. I am curious to use it like you did in the H-frame. Therefore i ordered Eminence Alpha 15 this afternoon.
>>> Could you please tell me the measures on the H-frame? Do i need a filter?
Superlian, enjoy your speakers! I think the Alpha 15 in H-frames is awesome! Check this link:
http://www.quarter-wave.com/OBs/U_and_H_Frames.pdf
It will explain all.
An observation i can offer is that crossing the H-frames lower sounds better. I use a typical sub amp (anything 100+ watts should be great) with variable crossover and volume. I did not want to figure the passive crossover and the sub amp does the trick for me. You will get an immense sound with these H-frames that has to be heard/felt to be appreciated. There may be better bass systems available but these really satisfy me. The 1808 will sound best with minimal interference from the H-frames... i really think the 1808 is a great driver regardless of how others feel about it. It's an ambitious attempt at a great sounding full range driver. It's a total pleasure to listen to.
The Cure for 'Analysis Paralysis'
Sprinter,
Most of us have been in the state of "analysis paralysis". The best cures that I know of are 1) simply build a completed design (like the MJK's), or to get the knowledge and experience that comes most easily from actually building. Build the h-frames and OB's, but keep them simple. These don't need to be the finished product, just 'test beds'.
While the size of the OB is important, LF performance is only moderately sensitive to it (IME). This is likely die to the high degree of interaction the OB's have with the room.
If you are considering passive crossovers, understand that the parts are relatively expensive for low crossover frequencies. I suggest initially running the OB's full range, allowing them to roll off on their own, and running the h-frames from inexpensive plate amps. The latter have builtin crossovers with adjustable crossover frequencies. Simply adjust the crossover frequency and power level (sub volume) until you get the best blend.
Regarding driver size, the smaller ones have more detail and HF extension... generally. However, there is so much variability between drivers of a given size, and so many other important variables (whizzer vs non-whizzer, cone composition, sensitivity, rising HF, response peaks and dips, etc.), that you will have to make a decision based on what you know of your own sound quality preferences and sensitivity to various colorations. Then simply research comments on various drivers on the forums and choose.
BTW, we can be more helpful if we have some idea of your budget, taste in music, desired spl's and existing equipment (esp. amplifier).
Regards and good luck,
Bob
Sprinter,
Most of us have been in the state of "analysis paralysis". The best cures that I know of are 1) simply build a completed design (like the MJK's), or to get the knowledge and experience that comes most easily from actually building. Build the h-frames and OB's, but keep them simple. These don't need to be the finished product, just 'test beds'.
While the size of the OB is important, LF performance is only moderately sensitive to it (IME). This is likely die to the high degree of interaction the OB's have with the room.
If you are considering passive crossovers, understand that the parts are relatively expensive for low crossover frequencies. I suggest initially running the OB's full range, allowing them to roll off on their own, and running the h-frames from inexpensive plate amps. The latter have builtin crossovers with adjustable crossover frequencies. Simply adjust the crossover frequency and power level (sub volume) until you get the best blend.
Regarding driver size, the smaller ones have more detail and HF extension... generally. However, there is so much variability between drivers of a given size, and so many other important variables (whizzer vs non-whizzer, cone composition, sensitivity, rising HF, response peaks and dips, etc.), that you will have to make a decision based on what you know of your own sound quality preferences and sensitivity to various colorations. Then simply research comments on various drivers on the forums and choose.
BTW, we can be more helpful if we have some idea of your budget, taste in music, desired spl's and existing equipment (esp. amplifier).
Regards and good luck,
Bob
Thank you.
Budget is >Shack<Lowther, let's say <$100 each for the FR driver unless a bit more is justifiable. Always looking for good bang/buck.
Taste is multiple genre, but easy on the metal, hold the hiphop. I love to hear percussive detail in instruments, and vocal detail on solos. Life-like, I guess. I love a great sound stage image. Do I have a champagne taste and beer budget? Why should audio be any different than my other pursuits? I figure there has to be a great deal out there somewhere. The 1808 sure sounds like the ticket, but $400/pair is a huge stretch for me. Is it worth it? If it is, I guess I could aim that way. I was also thinking about the AN Super 8 (not alnico) and Wild Burro Betsy. On the smaller front, thinking about Fostex Fe166en. or one of the smaller TangBand offerings.
I figured on bi-amp with an active xover. What I want to do is use a SET tube amp (to be built) or a Class D amp which I will buy, for the FR drivers. I'll experiment with both of those, but I know that I need a sensitive FR driver. Casual listening is usually at moderate SPL, but sometimes I do like to crank 'er up, I have to get my excitement wherever I can...
So, if there are a lot of reflective components in the room, could you use a 20x20" OB and still be able to cross over to a sub at less than 200hz, like 150 or so? Am I right that the sims which show sharp edge losses at 200hz from a 20"x20" OB are assuming a completely free and open environment and that room issues may actually reinforce the lower frequencies? I just need to understand that issue better and then I think I can go forward. If this assumption is correct, then maybe that would suggest an advantage to a larger driver in OB as long as it still provides the other needs such as image, midrange clarity, etc. Detail clarity is important, especially in the mids.
"The 1808 sure sounds like the ticket, but $400/pair is a huge stretch for me. Is it worth it? If it is, I guess I could aim that way. I was also thinking about the AN Super 8 (not alnico) and Wild Burro Betsy. On the smaller front, thinking about Fostex Fe166en. or one of the smaller TangBand offerings."
You might also consider one of the Alpairs.
"What I want to do is use a SET tube amp (to be built)"
If you are interested in drivers with a sensitivity below about 92db/w/m (including after an speaker level frequency contouring), you should consider a 300B SET for adequate power (spl). For 2A3 or 45 based SETs consider staying above 93 or so.
"could you use a 20x20" OB and still be able to cross over to a sub at less than 200hz, like 150 or so?"
That has certainly been my experience. I am not sure about all the sims, but many are for 4pi space. The LF cutoff is not just OB dimension dependent, but also a function of driver Qts and Fs. A 20x20 inches OB is a good practical size.
"If this assumption is correct, then maybe that would suggest an advantage to a larger driver in OB as long as it still provides the other needs such as image, midrange clarity, etc. Detail clarity is important, especially in the mids. "
I have tried several 4 - 8 inch drivers and was able to get a satisfactory blend with all of them, although it was easier and smoother with the larger drivers. I really liked the TB 4" bamboo cone driver (1320SJ) up to moderate spl's. Once broken in, it provided a smooth, detailed and refined sound. however, the larger drivers did provide substantially better upper bass and lower mids, and were considerably more dynamic - not just capable of higher spl's, but conveying a greater sense of musical pace and flow. The little TB did provide more inner detail. They all imaged quite well (point sources and OB - hard to go wrong), not the same, but little to complain about. I have not tried the TB 1808 or 1772 drivers, but IME, you mostly get what you pay for: so my guess is that they would be worth the price. However, there is always better. Where do you stop? I suggest setting a budget and doing the best you can with it (or overspend by a factor of 2!). For speakers, read the various threads here, searching for posts on particular drivers. Look for favorable comments on performance aspects you value. Also look for performance issues (shouts, peaks, suckouts, etc). Remember that there will be favorable and unfavorable posts for every driver. None are perfect, that's just the way it is.
There are a couple of important issues when considering an FR driver. There is a tendency for a rising HF range, with more rise with increasing efficiency. For me, some medium efficiency drivers can be used with a little toe in - no need for frequency contouring. I can hear a mild loss of dynamics and detail with frequency contour networks. Not everybody hears this, and in some cases (with contouring) the result is still very good - for some folks and drivers, beter than without the contouring. They also cost a few db of sensitivity. Others find that even the bamboo TB needs contouring. It's a personal preference/tolerance thing.
There are widely differing reactions to the cone elements contributing to the high frequencies: whizzer cones, metal (and paper) dust caps and phase plugs. I know of no other way of finding out your own reaction/preferences to these, other than to simply listen to a few examples. I have heard examples of each of them that I liked or disliked.
Hope some of this is helpful.
Regards,
Bob
You might also consider one of the Alpairs.
"What I want to do is use a SET tube amp (to be built)"
If you are interested in drivers with a sensitivity below about 92db/w/m (including after an speaker level frequency contouring), you should consider a 300B SET for adequate power (spl). For 2A3 or 45 based SETs consider staying above 93 or so.
"could you use a 20x20" OB and still be able to cross over to a sub at less than 200hz, like 150 or so?"
That has certainly been my experience. I am not sure about all the sims, but many are for 4pi space. The LF cutoff is not just OB dimension dependent, but also a function of driver Qts and Fs. A 20x20 inches OB is a good practical size.
"If this assumption is correct, then maybe that would suggest an advantage to a larger driver in OB as long as it still provides the other needs such as image, midrange clarity, etc. Detail clarity is important, especially in the mids. "
I have tried several 4 - 8 inch drivers and was able to get a satisfactory blend with all of them, although it was easier and smoother with the larger drivers. I really liked the TB 4" bamboo cone driver (1320SJ) up to moderate spl's. Once broken in, it provided a smooth, detailed and refined sound. however, the larger drivers did provide substantially better upper bass and lower mids, and were considerably more dynamic - not just capable of higher spl's, but conveying a greater sense of musical pace and flow. The little TB did provide more inner detail. They all imaged quite well (point sources and OB - hard to go wrong), not the same, but little to complain about. I have not tried the TB 1808 or 1772 drivers, but IME, you mostly get what you pay for: so my guess is that they would be worth the price. However, there is always better. Where do you stop? I suggest setting a budget and doing the best you can with it (or overspend by a factor of 2!). For speakers, read the various threads here, searching for posts on particular drivers. Look for favorable comments on performance aspects you value. Also look for performance issues (shouts, peaks, suckouts, etc). Remember that there will be favorable and unfavorable posts for every driver. None are perfect, that's just the way it is.
There are a couple of important issues when considering an FR driver. There is a tendency for a rising HF range, with more rise with increasing efficiency. For me, some medium efficiency drivers can be used with a little toe in - no need for frequency contouring. I can hear a mild loss of dynamics and detail with frequency contour networks. Not everybody hears this, and in some cases (with contouring) the result is still very good - for some folks and drivers, beter than without the contouring. They also cost a few db of sensitivity. Others find that even the bamboo TB needs contouring. It's a personal preference/tolerance thing.
There are widely differing reactions to the cone elements contributing to the high frequencies: whizzer cones, metal (and paper) dust caps and phase plugs. I know of no other way of finding out your own reaction/preferences to these, other than to simply listen to a few examples. I have heard examples of each of them that I liked or disliked.
Hope some of this is helpful.
Regards,
Bob
1772 has a more damped sound overall and less sensitivity than FE206EN - 1772's Z lays lower also
is 1808 more sensitive than 1772?.
is 1808 more sensitive than 1772?.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
so an amp will have an easier job on the 1772 (less high z spikes).
Amps with massive rails (70v +) would not have a problem though.
And 5db rise in the 1772's response versus the 206e's +10db climbing response.
For the 1772, I'm thinking 12" wide 18" deep 28" tall tuned to 50hz with bsc of 10-12 ohms plus 4mH (baffle step and bring the highs down a squeek). Oh yea, don't forget bass support.
Now if parts express would just put them on sale.................
Norman
Amps with massive rails (70v +) would not have a problem though.
And 5db rise in the 1772's response versus the 206e's +10db climbing response.
For the 1772, I'm thinking 12" wide 18" deep 28" tall tuned to 50hz with bsc of 10-12 ohms plus 4mH (baffle step and bring the highs down a squeek). Oh yea, don't forget bass support.
Now if parts express would just put them on sale.................
Norman
Yep, that's what usually happens, alright, usually by trying to cheap out the first time, then spend more later to get it right. I guess you can correct some mistakes on eBay, though. A current case in point is a pair of Fostex FE166en's for about $210 shipped. (new). They're about $134/pr at Madisound, but I don't know what their shipping is.
Anyway, Bob, thanks very much for the detailed responses. That's the kind of info I was looking for to fill in the gaps. I know that ultimate satisfaction is very subjective and a constantly moving target, but I just needed a bit more info to make my stab-in-the-dark a more informed one...
It's clear that I'm going to have to pay special attention to efficiency and Qts because of the low power amp thing. Actually, I'm first going to try one of the inexpensive Tripath Class D amps to see what I can get away with on power before building the SET, which I want to do from scratch, but not unless it will do the job! I read something from MJK that he actually prefers SS amps on his OB designs, Also, I intend to use a MiniDSP for a crossover between amps, which also provides for six PEQ's on each channel. Should have plenty of space for EQ tweaking.
And, just so it doesn't look like I'm hijacking the thread, I'm still considering one of the TB's!
Thanks again
Ron
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.