What's the attraction? - Page 3 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Full Range

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 23rd June 2012, 04:14 AM   #21
qusp is offline qusp  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
qusp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Brisbane, Australia
many of the advantages mentioned seem to be moot vs a multiamped active (in my case digital) XO. of course it could be argued the purity of sound is messed with, but myself I find that a bit precious. all the same i'm going to build some fullrangers to see what all the fuss is about. Has anyone got any suggestions for $400 for a basic cabinet and drivers? i'm covered for amps

Last edited by qusp; 23rd June 2012 at 04:17 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd June 2012, 07:06 AM   #22
BHTX is offline BHTX  United States
diyAudio Member
 
BHTX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by qusp View Post
many of the advantages mentioned seem to be moot vs a multiamped active (in my case digital) XO. of course it could be argued the purity of sound is messed with, but myself I find that a bit precious. all the same i'm going to build some fullrangers to see what all the fuss is about. Has anyone got any suggestions for $400 for a basic cabinet and drivers? i'm covered for amps
$400 for a pair of drivers and cabinets? Look into the newest MarkAudio Alpair 12P that so many are thinking about.

edit: What are you using for digital XO? I was interested in this approach long ago (behringer DCX2496) but let it go when I realized the issues with lack of volume control in the digital domain.

Last edited by BHTX; 23rd June 2012 at 07:09 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd June 2012, 08:09 AM   #23
frugal-phile(tm)
diyAudio Moderator
 
planet10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Victoria, BC, NA, Sol III
Blog Entries: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5th element View Post
While it is true that you might be able to use some amplifier with a very low damping factor to ameliorate the issues that some full rangers present, it is not a fix imo and is only akin to sweeping something bad under the carpet.
And yet you are happy to use EQ?

It is a system. A speaker/amp (and cabling) is a system and has to be considered as a whole.

dave
__________________
community sites t-linespeakers.org, frugal-horn.com, frugal-phile.com ........ commercial site planet10-HiFi
p10-hifi forum here at diyA
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd June 2012, 11:51 AM   #24
diyAudio Member
 
mondogenerator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: City Of Villans
Blog Entries: 1
Im on the fence, despite having several small widerange drivers (2" and 3").

Im still hesitant in trying larger sizes. Theres just too many compromises, inescapable really.

Still the 2 and 3" drivers like the Founteks and TBs can make rather good Midtweeters.

Thats how I view their best use, In my Humblest of opinions.
__________________
Every new piece of knowledge pushes something else out of my brain - Homer.....................Simpson
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd June 2012, 12:20 PM   #25
tvrgeek is offline tvrgeek  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Md
Well, I will go ahead and put in a step at 590, add a notch at 7k to see how good they could be, but I agree with mondo, good wide range midrange. So this little experiment is already successful.

BTY, any favorite PC based real time eqs out there? My e-mu has plugins but it crashed the system, my new M-audio has none.
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd June 2012, 12:39 PM   #26
zman01 is online now zman01  Bangladesh
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Dhaka
Mondo,

If you get the chance, try out the Alpair 7.3 (4" nominal) in a bi-amped FAST configuration - probably you'll like it. Very good mid-range and extended highs.

A good FR unit assisted with a woofer (essentially a 2 way) crossed low (below 350 Hz depending on taste and SPL) is a very satisfying combo.
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd June 2012, 12:40 PM   #27
diyAudio Member
 
DBMandrake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Glasgow, UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pano View Post
Hmmmm??? They do change some - I've measured them and so have people I know. Even old drivers that have sat around for ages can be rebroken-in. You do have to beat them up, gentle music won't do much.
What I'm objecting to is the common audiophile (and speaker reviewer) notion that new speakers must be "broken in" and that there is some significant and permanent change in the response of the speakers after a period of break-in lasting between hours and weeks, usually which involves an increase in bass, presumably from changes in T/S parameters.

(Never mind that the speaker may have already been soak tested in the factory while testing for defects...)

The only T/S parameter which could change with break in would be compliance Cms, (which has knock on effects in Fs, Vas, Qms etc) but I haven't seen any evidence that there is any permanent change in Cms.

Cms does vary though, its highly dependant on excursion levels, and has a non-linear memory effect as well due to spider creep.

In another thread I presented some measurements of Fs of two drivers at different drive/excursion levels and the shift can be dramatic.

One was some 8" full range drivers with cloth surrounds whose Fs varied from 47.5Hz at very low excursions right down to 34.5Hz at 1/2 Xmax, the other was a Visaton W300S 12" woofer with rubber surrounds which varied from 28Hz at low drive levels to 24Hz at half Xmax. (Manufacturers spec is 23Hz btw)

Obviously the moving mass can't be changing so the change in Fs is due to an almost 2x change in Cms in the case of the first driver...

Whats interesting is that the change with excursion isn't dependant on instantaneous excursion but has a memory effect. If I measured the 12" woofer with a very low drive level but moved the cone manually back and forth through its full excursion just once, a second or two before taking the measurement, the Fs was also 24Hz despite the low drive level but smoothly slid back up to 28Hz over a period of about 10-20 seconds, presumably due to the spider tightening up again. (The noise measurement mode in LIMP allows you to see the shift in the impedance curve in real time)

Any attempt to measure the effects of long periods (hours or more) of break in would have to be done under precisely the same measurement conditions with exactly the same drive level to have any significance, since the drive level has such a huge effect on the result.

You would also need to give the speaker a rest for a few minutes for the spider to fully tighten before comparing it to an unbroken in measurement, by which time it should be the same again.

Permanent changes in Cms due to extended periods of break-in I think has been pretty well debunked elsewhere.

Quote:
I've never heard break-in change a shouty driver into butter, tho.....
Exactly. Any speaker that is a bit bass shy / midrange forward is going to sound better after a few hours of listening, but its us thats breaking in, not the speaker itself...

Most people should be familiar with the trick where you put one hand in ice cold water and the other in hot water for a couple of minutes, then plunge both hands into the same tub of warm water - the hand that was previously in the ice water will think the middle tub is a lot hotter than the hand that was previously in the hot water. The same thing happens with our hearing when exposed to prolonged periods of tonal imbalance. We adapt.
__________________
- Simon

Last edited by DBMandrake; 23rd June 2012 at 12:44 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd June 2012, 01:03 PM   #28
diyAudio Member
 
DBMandrake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Glasgow, UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by planet10 View Post
And yet you are happy to use EQ?

It is a system. A speaker/amp (and cabling) is a system and has to be considered as a whole.

dave
Couldn't agree more. I've never understood the reluctance to apply EQ to full range drivers, whether at line level or with a simple passive network.

Unless you've got a backloaded horn design or you mount the drivers in the wall you're going to have to deal with baffle step correction at the very least, its no good living in denial about it.

Some driver resonances can also be corrected very successfully with one or more PEQ's, particularly if the drivers only have 2-3 widely separated discrete resonances to deal with. (Uncontrolled cone breakup where there are multiple resonances in close proximity can't be dealt with with EQ though)

For example on my Coral drivers (when in full range mode) I have BSC, a peaking filter at 1Khz for the surround dip, a broad notch at 2Khz, a narrower notch at 4Khz, and a gradual upwards baxendall type taper in the treble starting at about 3Khz of a few dB to give the best balance at the listening position. (Which is around 10-15 degrees off axis about 2.5 metres away)

Do they sound good without any BSC or EQ ? No, not really, forward lower midrange in the 400-1.5Khz range (due to the large baffle boosting the midrange) and lacking in bass and treble. Do they sound good with BSC and just a bit of simple treble lift ? Yes. Do they sound much better with all the notch/peaking filters to deal with the worst resonances and a more careful EQ of the balance of the entire range. You bet!

With the right EQ I sometimes forget whether I've got the system in 2 way mode or full range mode - at the listening position the result is very similar indeed, although the imaging coherency is slightly better in full range mode with just a little bit less crispness in the very high treble. (Standing up though reveals that its in full range mode due to the drop in off axis treble compared to 2 way mode)

The right carefully done EQ with a full range driver can be the difference between a mediocre result and an excellent result that makes it hard to believe that everything is coming from the one driver...

(I've managed to fool people before where the tweeter at the top is turned off and the system is running in full range mode and they didn't realise until I pointed out the deception )
__________________
- Simon

Last edited by DBMandrake; 23rd June 2012 at 01:11 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd June 2012, 01:13 PM   #29
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Sydney
Replacing the term "Full Range" with "Wide Range" changes everything.

The former is usually flawed, but the latter has many benefits over a typical WT or WMT design.
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd June 2012, 01:18 PM   #30
diyAudio Member
 
DBMandrake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Glasgow, UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by mondogenerator View Post
Im on the fence, despite having several small widerange drivers (2" and 3").

Im still hesitant in trying larger sizes. Theres just too many compromises, inescapable really.
Funny, that's just how I feel about small full range drivers

No matter how clean and flat they might be, drivers of that size always just sound like good quality computer speakers to me...they don't have the dynamics/weight/realism etc of the larger full range drivers, and while smoother in the midrange (without EQ) the treble extension isn't really any better than a good whizzer cone design. (My 8" Coral's go up to 15Khz with a radiating dust cap and a bit of EQ, and down to 40Hz with ease at the bottom end)

A larger full range driver is inevitably going to require more EQ than a smaller driver, especially through the midrange, and its hard to find a larger driver that has well controlled cone breakup (many have severe, uncorrectable cone breakup) but if you do, the end result is far better IMHO.

The sweet spot is 8" IMHO, just big enough to produce "real" bass, and still small enough to produce adequately smooth midrange and decent treble extension, with the right cone design / damping and a bit of EQ.
__________________
- Simon

Last edited by DBMandrake; 23rd June 2012 at 01:23 PM.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Altmann Attraction Dac w/ Jisco and BYOB Amp rodge827 Swap Meet 1 31st March 2011 02:38 PM
Altmann Attraction DAC jeff mai Digital Source 18 20th October 2006 10:24 AM
Altman Attraction DAC. Ulas, Poobah, rfblw, Guido, anyone? MGH Digital Source 10 26th August 2006 09:17 AM
The attraction of vacuum tubes / valves. Circlotron Tubes / Valves 135 17th March 2003 01:37 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 05:36 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2