I still want a set of speakers that are really nice for general listening, and these are what they'll be used for 95% of the time. I just also want have it so friend can mix through them for after parties etc. Not talking massive SPLs, for lounges and communal area in houses.
Maybe build up a 3 way system with subs, full range drivers later along down the line add some tweeters?
Maybe build up a 3 way system with subs, full range drivers later along down the line add some tweeters?
Why not add a sub or two to what you already have?
Then build a full range for own use and hide them away when you're all smashed out of your skulls.
I once went to a party and the host was mixing through a pair of Tannoy D700's, sounded chuffing glorious they did, right up to the point when some 'cool' bint slopped her alke-pop over one of them. She had to sell her car to get the speaker repaired and was struck off the 'After Party' list.
One respected member on this forum said this of the 12lta:
Then build a full range for own use and hide them away when you're all smashed out of your skulls.
I once went to a party and the host was mixing through a pair of Tannoy D700's, sounded chuffing glorious they did, right up to the point when some 'cool' bint slopped her alke-pop over one of them. She had to sell her car to get the speaker repaired and was struck off the 'After Party' list.
One respected member on this forum said this of the 12lta:
The quoters name is Pano
CHP-70.1 is a candidate as long as you are not turning the wick up too much. For some more money the EL-70 will deliver more bass and SPL. If you like brighter sound then you can consider CHR-70.3 among the budget MA drivers; If budget permits then Alpair 7. Please note that the metal drivers, specially Alp 7 will have better treble dispersion vs paper.
Sippy, quite a story about the Tannoys... poor girl!
Last edited:
tvrgeek,
Alpair 7.3 perhaps?
Alp 7.3 should get you down to 110-120... But would your subs go up there?
Would love to hear (more like read about) what you hear.
My Peerless XXLX are fine up to about 200, but you get terrible problems with localization if you are not using the subs as stands for the mains. Even 80 Hz, THX standard, at third order is not steep enough. I prefer about 60 Hz fourth. Neither of my Daytons go that high even though they are 10's.
Yes, the Mark Audio drivers are next on my list. 10P maybe with a crossover at 5K. Been through Fountec and Fostex. My FE85's do 110. Fine for computer speakers to do bings and bongs and a few on-line lectures. Useless for music even though they get up to about 10K.
I still have decent hearing to 18K. I know this when testing drivers. What do I hear? Music! Just switching to the metal dome from the silk dome Seas, which on measurement was only about 2 dB hotter at 18K, I heard a background thimble on a record I thought I knew completely. There is a LOT of music above 7K including a lot of the clues to localization. Imaging that is; height and depth. Unfortunately, between loud clubs, car stereo's and the worst problem, ear buds, we have a couple of generations who have severely damaged hearing so a midrange sounds fine to them. I have to believe those who favor full range do so because they have limited hearing and are most sensitive to the midrange. You can only evaluate what you hear. That's where their music pleasure resides.
OK, there are a lot of really bad amps out there, some very expensive. Some of them are so bad they can't drive difficult loads. Bad amp, bad speaker. But, even my old Denon DRA-35 was better than a pair of Wilsons. Will a really good amp sound better? Yes. But better speakers would make a bigger difference than the best amp money can buy.
If a driver is so sensitive that amps make a big difference, I offer that it is a driver that should only be used in a pre-packaged system.
My Paradigm Studio 20's were slightly edgier with my Parasound than my Rotel. Why? The 20's had just too much distortion that the Rotel did not excite due to the VAS output compensation vs Miler. My fix was to build much better speakers. (Seas two ways) Now the Parasounds are cleaner with more detail. The Rotels still mask a bit of the high end detail. Audible, but not massive. Speaker differences were massive. The amp difference was about that between an electrolytic cap and a Mylar in the crossover. On that scale. I did try the unmodified Fostex drivers on a couple of amps. (6W tube, 60W MOSFET, 200W BJT) I could not hear a difference at all because the driver breakup and distortion was so much worse than the amps it made no difference. Your modified drivers are far better behaved, maybe an amp difference is audible. I only got a brief hear of them on a very nice old Luxman amp. It was not a problem.
Synergy I guess is a personal judgement. I don't find crossovers evil, but I find driver breakup in the usable range evil. Just as you work to control breakup issues, I work to manage the problems with crossover design. For my taste and skill, so far the crossover is winning.
For the subject of this thread, I still say a full range is harder to make a decent first project than a two way if the goal is a pair of speakers that will be used as main speakers. ( Not always the best choice) Pushing past the limits of a driver is far harder than building a two way with fairly fault tolerant parts.
An option is to start with a full range to see what the limitations are and then add a tweeter. Only with one of these really wide band drivers can one hear the difference between an LR4 @2K and an LR2 @ 5K one with the same drivers. No one said this was easy.
Looking at how this project is directing, how are the Fostex full ranges compared to the Mark Audio drivers? Considering that I'll being using subs low end isn't much of an issue. Looking for something with plans available and no more than about £130 for the pair. (This is how much a pair of Alpair 7 1st gen cost).
Just one opinion -- the Mark Audio's are delightfully robust in their sound, enough for home theater. They can often be "plug and play" as long as you get them in the right box. Drawbacks: the Alpair 7 (and other metal-coned models in this line) can have a teensy bit of "zing" which is great on cymbals, but can annoy the really sensitive listener (but only slightly). Also, they can sound a little "smooth" in the upper treble (to me) and a bit less gutsy and "real" than paper (to my ears).
Over-generalizing, the Fostex are (usually but not always) fussier, more sensitive to the quality of the rest of the system, and can have audible limitations on certain records, but (for me) overall worth the trouble and have the potential to get closer to perfection. But it will take more effort to every part of the system, so is it worth it? For me, lately, yes but I wouldn't hesitate to go with the Mark Audio's and would in fact recommend them to people who want more of that "plug and play" thing.
One last note: don't ever touch the metal cones, and don't crank them up too loud. Oddly, the Fostex sound so delicate, yet can take a ridiculous pounding -- but the Mark Audios (despite the very robust sound) are comparatively delicate and break-able. I've never blown a Fostex but have blown multiple Mark Audio's (not a criticism, that's just how it goes).
Over-generalizing, the Fostex are (usually but not always) fussier, more sensitive to the quality of the rest of the system, and can have audible limitations on certain records, but (for me) overall worth the trouble and have the potential to get closer to perfection. But it will take more effort to every part of the system, so is it worth it? For me, lately, yes but I wouldn't hesitate to go with the Mark Audio's and would in fact recommend them to people who want more of that "plug and play" thing.
One last note: don't ever touch the metal cones, and don't crank them up too loud. Oddly, the Fostex sound so delicate, yet can take a ridiculous pounding -- but the Mark Audios (despite the very robust sound) are comparatively delicate and break-able. I've never blown a Fostex but have blown multiple Mark Audio's (not a criticism, that's just how it goes).
"Zing" A bright top end is also a symptom of no baffle step compensation. No driver is plug and play. It is also a symptom of cone breakup.
To keep them alive, be sure to use a real HP crossover.
RWB,
I have not heard the Alp 7 gen1; have listened to Alp 7.3 and to my ears it is superior to the CHR70.2 in midrange and treble. CHP-70.1 being a paper cone is a bit different in presentation of midrange; in treble definitely Alpair is more extended and airy. A driver like the CHP-70.1 will be more forgiving of source and amp compared to the Alp 7 and, and the trade off will be a bit of midrange detail and treble extension. One other quality where I found Alp 7.3 to be superior is its ability to play complex material (vs not only CHP, also other drivers) and the separation of voices/instruments.
P10 and ChrisB should have a lot of expereince with the gen 1 Alp 7 and if they are following this thread maybe they can comment.
I have not heard the Alp 7 gen1; have listened to Alp 7.3 and to my ears it is superior to the CHR70.2 in midrange and treble. CHP-70.1 being a paper cone is a bit different in presentation of midrange; in treble definitely Alpair is more extended and airy. A driver like the CHP-70.1 will be more forgiving of source and amp compared to the Alp 7 and, and the trade off will be a bit of midrange detail and treble extension. One other quality where I found Alp 7.3 to be superior is its ability to play complex material (vs not only CHP, also other drivers) and the separation of voices/instruments.
P10 and ChrisB should have a lot of expereince with the gen 1 Alp 7 and if they are following this thread maybe they can comment.
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.