You getting those from Madisound? The woofer looks to be 8 ohms.
The paper cone Aura for $11.50 looks like it might do better bass, but introdices issues with efficiency if you are going to try for passive XO. The Aura 3" are quite good too.
The differing impedances do aid you in keeping passive XO parts sizes down
Which does bring up issues of efficiency, sensitivity and amp.
dave
The paper cone Aura for $11.50 looks like it might do better bass, but introdices issues with efficiency if you are going to try for passive XO. The Aura 3" are quite good too.
The differing impedances do aid you in keeping passive XO parts sizes down
Which does bring up issues of efficiency, sensitivity and amp.
dave
If you have the space and the extra dough, maybe the Silver flute W20 is worth a try for the bass driver. According to the published specs you could make a smallish vented enclosure for it, or if Chad Gray's specs are closer to what you're likely to get, then a small sealed enclosure should work great. With a choice of 91 or 94 DB efficiency, passive XO at baffle step seems like a natural step.
W20RC38-08
ChadGray.info
W20RC38-08
ChadGray.info
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks all 
CHeers for the help here guys, With any luck ill build some budget 'decent' sounding speakers, and when he says on a budget, all in maybe £100...$150(?) either way the aura car woofers looked nice and cheap, and reasonable to x-o even if not stunning in the bass dept...
...Ive seen the Wool cone 5½" driver and the datasheet looks quite reasonable, im just not sure.
...Oh and if its 8 Ohm then apologies...If anything thats probably a bonus! I thought it was 4 Ohm since it was auto audio.
I was actually considering using some 10" aluminium coned Bass guitar speakers, in some freakish experiment since i have 4 lying around, maybe 3 of which are usable....I havent measured the TS yet though...SPL ~93-95dB though, the frames are the thinnest stamped frames ive seen in a while, and ripe for strengthening. but to be honest i was concerned that maybe a 10" bass driver was too large to pair with a with extended range type driver, In a FAST application, and maybe a 4" might be better suited for the fullrange part. I even considered H frame or ripole, since i have a little efficiency to play with If I use the 10" bass driver, but Id be quite happy to stay within my limits of knowledge and just go sealed or vented lol. The only issue I think ill have is the 3" driver keeping up with the 10".
CHeers for the help here guys, With any luck ill build some budget 'decent' sounding speakers, and when he says on a budget, all in maybe £100...$150(?) either way the aura car woofers looked nice and cheap, and reasonable to x-o even if not stunning in the bass dept...
...Ive seen the Wool cone 5½" driver and the datasheet looks quite reasonable, im just not sure.
...Oh and if its 8 Ohm then apologies...If anything thats probably a bonus! I thought it was 4 Ohm since it was auto audio.
I was actually considering using some 10" aluminium coned Bass guitar speakers, in some freakish experiment since i have 4 lying around, maybe 3 of which are usable....I havent measured the TS yet though...SPL ~93-95dB though, the frames are the thinnest stamped frames ive seen in a while, and ripe for strengthening. but to be honest i was concerned that maybe a 10" bass driver was too large to pair with a with extended range type driver, In a FAST application, and maybe a 4" might be better suited for the fullrange part. I even considered H frame or ripole, since i have a little efficiency to play with If I use the 10" bass driver, but Id be quite happy to stay within my limits of knowledge and just go sealed or vented lol. The only issue I think ill have is the 3" driver keeping up with the 10".
Last edited:
The silverflute definately seem worth a look, although the temptation to get shot of these 10" srivers is making me think I may just get a smallish cheap FR to pair with them...I have some TB W2-800sl...6 off, so maybe small array mids and 10 helper? Im thinking that a single 2" Tb wouldnt be good, even a 3" MAY be pushing the fullranger.
What do you think? I agree, the bookshelf FAST concept really appeals to me, but the silver flute was a little expensive after i consider shipping costs.
What do you think? I agree, the bookshelf FAST concept really appeals to me, but the silver flute was a little expensive after i consider shipping costs.
Have you tried them, Dave? I was always interested in putting together a project like this. Maybe silverflute sealed/vented + the new CHP-70 open baffle for an inexpensive all paper design?
I have 6 of the W14 (a quad & a pair) all tweaked up ready to go. They just haven't reached the top of the queue.
dave
Haha Dave...Im not 100% about the 2" TBs...but, the 10" driver was part of a quad in a box perhaps 4-5ft³ with a 4"x4" port tube. from guessimation i reckon fs ~50-60, and low Q due to magnet size, so i figure about 1 cubic foot could be reasonable for sealed box, IF thats still a bookself system....still like the silver flute though for a wide range 2way with shallow filters, but id also love to get some audax...since ive seen them on madisound again! I havent looked for the 8" AP/HT(?)210zo, the HDA cones are just so light. Metal drivers are great, but I believe a composite OF SOME KIND is better than pretty much any alloy. be that paper, or paper plus xxxxxxxxx.
with shallow filters, but id also love to get some audax...since ive seen them on madisound again! I havent looked for the 8" AP/HT(?)210zo, the HDA cones are just so light. Metal drivers are great, but I believe a composite OF SOME KIND is better than pretty much any alloy. be that paper, or paper plus xxxxxxxxx.
hmmmmmmm.
I was considering something similar. in a sealed box ill get an F3 of 300-400hz i reckon. say an 8" baffle width is roughly 800hz(?) roughly so 12" is about 600hz. So originally i was planning on LPing a pair at around 400-800hz partly in the (perhaps) vain hope that i may extend f3 a touch lower as a result. the HF would be HP'ed at the box f3 most likely, the mid pair i didnt plan what order xo yet
I was considering something similar. in a sealed box ill get an F3 of 300-400hz i reckon. say an 8" baffle width is roughly 800hz(?) roughly so 12" is about 600hz. So originally i was planning on LPing a pair at around 400-800hz partly in the (perhaps) vain hope that i may extend f3 a touch lower as a result. the HF would be HP'ed at the box f3 most likely, the mid pair i didnt plan what order xo yet
perhaps an ill conceived idea here but ill shoot anyway...
What about an MTM Bessel array, with the M's XO'd at the BS point?
Or maybe Just a power tapered Bessel array...?
May be worth a try, while im in the experimental stage, since the array of 3 drivers could be 'short' enough to be good (or better than expected) in the nearfield.
I assuming that I would still invert the phase of the centre driver.
Or... If I persued the MTM with XO at BS point, perhaps an odd order HP on the 'T' and even on the 'M'.....hmmm or Bessel with the 'M's wide open, and the 'T' +/-90° due to HP and pole inversion....maybe a 'Semi-Psuedo-Bessel Baffle Step midrange MTM array'..... I have too many ideas to try.....lol
What about an MTM Bessel array, with the M's XO'd at the BS point?
Or maybe Just a power tapered Bessel array...?
May be worth a try, while im in the experimental stage, since the array of 3 drivers could be 'short' enough to be good (or better than expected) in the nearfield.
I assuming that I would still invert the phase of the centre driver.
Or... If I persued the MTM with XO at BS point, perhaps an odd order HP on the 'T' and even on the 'M'.....hmmm or Bessel with the 'M's wide open, and the 'T' +/-90° due to HP and pole inversion....maybe a 'Semi-Psuedo-Bessel Baffle Step midrange MTM array'.....
I have too many ideas to try.....lol
Last edited:
maybe loaded in something like this, dimensions undefined as yet though....
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
A good question indeed. From what little i know, and have read, the probably not. I have seen 5 drivers as the minimum, so I understand why you say this.
Having said that, at what point a group of identical drivers is called a line array, I dont know either. I wouldve assumed 3, but perhaps the behavior is not particularly good, from a line source point of view, using so few drivers. So maybe it is 5 in this case also.
I was just wondering to myself.....3 drivers of 2" would be quite near a point source in ways too... perhaps a good middle ground? Either that or an awful Chimera...I havent been able to find anything on the interweb concerning the behavior of 3 drivers in a line array, and from what i have read, the longer the line the better tends to be the popular opinion, so perhaps its not so great an idea. May just settle for a triangular:
Having said that, at what point a group of identical drivers is called a line array, I dont know either. I wouldve assumed 3, but perhaps the behavior is not particularly good, from a line source point of view, using so few drivers. So maybe it is 5 in this case also.
I was just wondering to myself.....3 drivers of 2" would be quite near a point source in ways too... perhaps a good middle ground? Either that or an awful Chimera...I havent been able to find anything on the interweb concerning the behavior of 3 drivers in a line array, and from what i have read, the longer the line the better tends to be the popular opinion, so perhaps its not so great an idea. May just settle for a triangular:
T
M M
Type array, since the maximum centre to centre distance would be reduced, but i figure im going to run into trouble with the 3 centre line paths being identical, rather than 2 identical and one twice as long in the case of a line array of 3 drivers.M M
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.