Well, at the more extreme execution of multiples of small FR drivers - such as 25 per side in a line array - with requisite EQ and power, I think Ronald and others would suggest that you can definitely achieve more and deeper LF output, among other things.
The only thing even close to a line array that I've heard was to my ears horrendously coloured, but certainly dynamic as all get out, and definitely played loud.
edit: the sysyem was well over 15yrs ago, consisted of MCM metal cone drivers & tweeter I can't remember, unequalized, and driven by 300B mono-blocks - clearly not a good introduction to the genre, but certainly left a lasting impression. I'd truly like to hear something like wesayso's system for curiosity's sake, but can't quite envision actually living with one.
The only thing even close to a line array that I've heard was to my ears horrendously coloured, but certainly dynamic as all get out, and definitely played loud.
edit: the sysyem was well over 15yrs ago, consisted of MCM metal cone drivers & tweeter I can't remember, unequalized, and driven by 300B mono-blocks - clearly not a good introduction to the genre, but certainly left a lasting impression. I'd truly like to hear something like wesayso's system for curiosity's sake, but can't quite envision actually living with one.
Last edited:
Having built a 9-driver and a 16-driver line arrays, I'd say that anything under 16 drivers is going to bring more trouble than expected. 20 to 25 drivers and they will go lower than a single full range, with less distortion. HF and combing will not be a problem if one can sit at least 2m away from the arrays.
As Chris said, they need access to EQ and/or processing, but then again, I have never heard a speaker, even crazy expensive ones, that didn't need some little adjustments to compensate for room placement and interaction.
As Chris said, they need access to EQ and/or processing, but then again, I have never heard a speaker, even crazy expensive ones, that didn't need some little adjustments to compensate for room placement and interaction.
My two cents
Back to the original question about one or two candidates for a decent full-range driver: (1) I have a pair of Tang Band W3-1364S drivers in vented enclosures, optimized with micka.de/en. They sound quite natural, relaxed, unfatiguing, smooth, and resolving...though of course without any deep bass. My wife actually prefers them to Thiels and Magnepans. (2) Based on YouTube demos (though fully aware of their limitations), I suspect that the Markaudio Pluvia Seven speakers might also work well, though I have not yet tried them personally. On paper, an optimized vented enclosure should take them more than a perfect fifth lower in the bass than the Tang Band... in a 15L box with QL = 8 or higher, F3 can be brought as low as 43 Hz without notable ripple, which is within a half step of the lowest note on a conventional contrabass (though I'm aware you indicated that low bass was not a priority for you). To your other question about potential benefits or source of appeal of full-range drivers, for me the main benefit is a single point source for each channel, avoiding phase shifts from crossovers, comb filter distortion from non-concentric drivers, and an overall coherence and integrity to the sound. It's a personal preference; some folks like 'em and some don't. (The coherence is what my ears notice; the comments about comb filter and phase shift are an engineering approach to propose an explanation for the observed phenomenon. My wife and I are classical musicians with highly trained ears.)
Back to the original question about one or two candidates for a decent full-range driver: (1) I have a pair of Tang Band W3-1364S drivers in vented enclosures, optimized with micka.de/en. They sound quite natural, relaxed, unfatiguing, smooth, and resolving...though of course without any deep bass. My wife actually prefers them to Thiels and Magnepans. (2) Based on YouTube demos (though fully aware of their limitations), I suspect that the Markaudio Pluvia Seven speakers might also work well, though I have not yet tried them personally. On paper, an optimized vented enclosure should take them more than a perfect fifth lower in the bass than the Tang Band... in a 15L box with QL = 8 or higher, F3 can be brought as low as 43 Hz without notable ripple, which is within a half step of the lowest note on a conventional contrabass (though I'm aware you indicated that low bass was not a priority for you). To your other question about potential benefits or source of appeal of full-range drivers, for me the main benefit is a single point source for each channel, avoiding phase shifts from crossovers, comb filter distortion from non-concentric drivers, and an overall coherence and integrity to the sound. It's a personal preference; some folks like 'em and some don't. (The coherence is what my ears notice; the comments about comb filter and phase shift are an engineering approach to propose an explanation for the observed phenomenon. My wife and I are classical musicians with highly trained ears.)
Mmhh...a point source must be referred to the wavelength. Same wavelength is an example of what might happen in examining the phase shift and comb filtering produced by the cone, as any cone produces that, due to the flexibility of the membrane and the relative distance from the center of the cone (the voice coil that imprints the motus).
I've built speakers around the following fullrange:
Fostex -- ff85wk, ff105wk, fe126en, fe208en
Mark Audio -- Alpair 12pw, 10.3, 7.3, 7.3 MAOP, CHR70
Richard Allan -- CG10T
Goodman's -- Twinaxiom 10.
My wife, with better ears than mine, likes the Alpair 12pw run fullrange with help above 10kHz, better than anything else. These are in mltl designed by Scottmoose/Planet10. I like them too. They don't take much power for our listening levels either.
Those EMS 12" in the swap meet right now are VERY tempting!
Fostex -- ff85wk, ff105wk, fe126en, fe208en
Mark Audio -- Alpair 12pw, 10.3, 7.3, 7.3 MAOP, CHR70
Richard Allan -- CG10T
Goodman's -- Twinaxiom 10.
My wife, with better ears than mine, likes the Alpair 12pw run fullrange with help above 10kHz, better than anything else. These are in mltl designed by Scottmoose/Planet10. I like them too. They don't take much power for our listening levels either.
Those EMS 12" in the swap meet right now are VERY tempting!
Astrojet,
Wondering what you thought of the Richard Allan CG10T?
I’m currently running a pair, and while they’re definitely not perfect, I’ve found them the most musical/addictive speakers I’ve ever had.
Regards,
Matt
I enjoyed them very much. They were in the living room in some Karlson 12 cabs for a while. Lacked some highs but what was there was very pleasing. Now, I have them in my office running open baffle with EQ to get a bit of bass. It works great and doesn't upset the neighbouring offices. Nothing like having a pair of 10s on either side of the computer monitors!
What boxes do you have yours in?
What boxes do you have yours in?
All true, but doesn't change what I said. For brevity, engineers speak of point sources (see e.g. the final minute or so of Mark Fenlon's excellent discussion on YouTube, part 6) and everyone assumes that the essential meaning doesn't get lost.
If you ever make it out to this part of the world, you'd be welcome to come over for a visit
.
From the results of these listening tests by DIYA members:
A Subjective Blind Comparison of 3in to 5in Full Range Drivers
A Subjective Blind Comparison of 3in to 5in drivers - Round 2
A Subjective Blind Comparison of 2in to 4in drivers - Round 3
A Subjective Blind Comparison of 2in to 4in drivers - Round 4
A Subjective Blind Comparison of 2in to 3.5in drivers - Round 5
The top 5 of 6 are: 10F/8424, B80, TC9FD, TG9FD, 3FE22, and SB65WBAC25-4
Some notable ones also include the Alpine OEM Jeep Fullrange and the PS95-8.
Pick one of these for duties above 250Hz and you can’t go wrong really.
If you want it to make some real bass down to 50Hz and reach 20KHz, my current favorite is W5-2143. Superb driver.
A Subjective Blind Comparison of 3in to 5in Full Range Drivers
A Subjective Blind Comparison of 3in to 5in drivers - Round 2
A Subjective Blind Comparison of 2in to 4in drivers - Round 3
A Subjective Blind Comparison of 2in to 4in drivers - Round 4
A Subjective Blind Comparison of 2in to 3.5in drivers - Round 5
The top 5 of 6 are: 10F/8424, B80, TC9FD, TG9FD, 3FE22, and SB65WBAC25-4
Some notable ones also include the Alpine OEM Jeep Fullrange and the PS95-8.
Pick one of these for duties above 250Hz and you can’t go wrong really.
If you want it to make some real bass down to 50Hz and reach 20KHz, my current favorite is W5-2143. Superb driver.
Last edited:
Probably just the cost when compared to other brands’ drivers of putatively same size? I’m thinking particularly of the very popular Vifa / Peerless TC9 variants.
In fairness, from about $50, notably the R2604/8320 & 8330 ring-radiators. Which are superb performers, used properly (and, of course, like all drivers possessing their own balance of advantages / disadvantages). They can't get as low, obviously, but they have advantages elsewhere. The 9130 is also an excellent soft-dome (used to be the Peerless HDS), and well-priced. Name your poison. Either way, Scan's Discovery range has some excellent units, especially if you know which are the pick.
Here is a german speaker diy magazine design with the scanspeak 8424:
Scan-FAST
This one is with the 8414:
Pico Lino 3
This one is with the 8422:
Desktop-TL
I haven’t heard any of them though the pico lino designs always get good feedback.
Scan-FAST
This one is with the 8414:
Pico Lino 3
This one is with the 8422:
Desktop-TL
I haven’t heard any of them though the pico lino designs always get good feedback.
I'm not an expert of FR, so what I do not really understand is, it seems that $100 price tag of 10F/8424 is rather cheap compared to the other exotic FR (Lowther, Voxativ, Feastrex, etc), Fostex, or SEAS Exotic. Some of those $$$ units are considered to be the best FR by many here in this forum.
My question was, why many people here choose much more expensive units while we can get "perfect" 10F/8424 only for $100. More expensive units seem to have less flat frequency response and more THD than SS, so the difference should be subjective preference rather than objective performance.
Now, my question is how 10F/8424 is subjectively inferior to the other $$$ FR. Since people choose much more expensive units, so I think there is a reason... Or 10F/8424 is just underrated?
My question was, why many people here choose much more expensive units while we can get "perfect" 10F/8424 only for $100. More expensive units seem to have less flat frequency response and more THD than SS, so the difference should be subjective preference rather than objective performance.
Now, my question is how 10F/8424 is subjectively inferior to the other $$$ FR. Since people choose much more expensive units, so I think there is a reason... Or 10F/8424 is just underrated?
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.