My New Audio Nirvana Drivers

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
frugal-phile™
Joined 2001
Paid Member
I know a German site that tested 2 of the an10 qts around .411 while the website lists qts = .278

Not really a big deal, but it would be nice. And yes there is the 10 percent fudge factor for their manufactor.

8ft3 tuned to 30hz.
Or open baffle, big as you can trading the wall bounce though.

Norman

The TS varies widely with changes in temperature and humidity, and also with the change of air pressure.

More likely they measured and reported T/S from a different part of the curve.

dave
 
I have found they also change with signal output. So what is the correct output? Should they be tested at 1 Watt and 10 Watts or more apropriately what gives you 90 dB and 100 dB and then take an average? Should they be tested in free air or on a baffle? If on baffle then what size shoud the baffle be?
The enclousure are unimportant to the buyer, since it is informed which type of box was used.
The usual rule yet currently in use today is 1W on axis at 1 metre.
I unaware the new AES standard that specifies the details for drivers mesearuments.
I have never been interested in this AES rule, but it specifies several types of boxes for measuring raw speakers drivers.
Of course drivers manufacturers are free to follow it or no.
 
Last edited:
frugal-phile™
Joined 2001
Paid Member
A different cabinet design will be needed for the neo driver which is quite different from the ferrite 10 the An-Ken was designed for.

A poll:

I the range 8-10mm what thicknesses of material are readily available in your locale (for vent spacers)?

In NA 3/8" MDF = 9.5 mm. In UK 9 & 10mm are available, I recently had to do a new version as only 10mm was available in Italy.

For the 1st draft of the An-Ken10neo what jeff can get is of top priority.

dave
 
The enclousure are unimportant to the buyer, since it is informed which type of box was used.
The usual rule yet currently in use today is 1W on axis at 1 metre.

I was just referring to measuring driver parameters not frequency response. Anyway thanks for your input. Doesn't matter, I already have my own ideas about it, which I don't want to bore anyone with
 
A poll:

I the range 8-10mm what thicknesses of material are readily available in your locale (for vent spacers)?

In NA 3/8" MDF = 9.5 mm. In UK 9 & 10mm are available, I recently had to do a new version as only 10mm was available in Italy.

dave

In birch ply I can get 9mm, not sure about mdf. For the front baffle probably use 30mm Birch Ply since I already have some. I could also consider bamboo ply
 
I suspect that the recommended box for the AN15 works because it's smaller than the T/S would suggest is needed, but the bump in the low end that results from an under-sized box fills in the baffle step loss a little.
I suspect you are completely right, and I am starting to think it is quite a good idea. The last thing I want to do is use a BSC circuit on these speakers
 
I suspect you are completely right, and I am starting to think it is quite a good idea. The last thing I want to do is use a BSC circuit on these speakers

It maybe worth considering the use of a wider front baffle - your freedom to do this of course depends on other factors such as space.
 
Maybe it won't be an Onken after all. I started looking at some bass-reflex alignments using an on-line calculator.

A purpose of the box is to provide a load for the driver at low frequencies. With a published fs of 27Hz in a large sealed box (of say 250 litres) the -3dB point is already down at 40Hz. A vent splits the resonance peak and allows tuning to go lower, but this means growing the size of the box a lot if one is to gain another 10Hz. A vent in a box less than 500 litres seems pointless. It would also introduce group delay which the sealed box minimizes. And down at 40Hz we're into room gain territory where further extension may not be needed.

If an f3 of 40Hz is 'good enough' then I can only think of two reasons to want a port. One is the splitting of the impedance peak to make life easier on the amplifier. The Onken approach reduces the size of the lower peak even further so that the net result is only one significant peak which is smaller than for a sealed box. But it's still there, and it occurs at a higher frequency than the resonance peak for a sealed box - no free lunch.

The other reason would be to reduce cone excursion in the bottom octave. The Audio Nirvana drivers only have 1mm of x-max (in order to preserve good h.f. response) and so for this reason a vent may be useful. I need to figure out the excursion of the cone but the cone is relatively 'unprotected' below the vent tuning frequency and would be vulnerable if driven too hard whereas a sealed box doesn't unload the cone.
 
Last edited:
Just thinking out loud here but ... what about the Metronome enclosure for the AN10? It seems to offer everything the 5.6 can with the possible advantage that it is designed to perform well with a near wall placement. And at least to some people a rather striking handsome appearance.
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.