3db in that range sounds pretty bad to me. If it was higher or lower it probably wouldn't be a problem, but around 2k 3db probably sounds like 6db; this is the range where your ears are most sensitive.
I would probably take the manufacturers measurements with a grain of salt. Have you seen any 3rd party measurements?
Looks pretty big to me. That's about the same size as the woofer so it's not surprising that it's a good directivity match
400Hz is awfully low for a 1 inch tweeter in a wave guide that size, I wouldn't try it with a tweeter that you actually like!. The best polar match is usually with a waveguide the same size as the woofer, so 12" WG with a 12" woofer. Maybe a tweeter in a 12" WG could be crossed that low, I don't know.
I don't disagree there. Well, sure - this whole thread topic of a 2-way with a full range 10F handling 350Hz to 18kHz and a 8in woofer handling below is in most ways, a superior speaker to any single driver full range speaker from the standpoint of distortion, dynamics, headroom,... etc. all because we de-coouple the requirements for lots of air pumping effected by the woofer from the 3.5in full range which is very good at mids and highs, but not bass.
Wesayso's towers achieve it with the same full range x 25 to get the cone area of an 18in driver to effect the bass. It has some tradeoffs but not much.
I will have to see why this is - I agree that is a sensitive spot for a bump.
I have seen one other and it did not have the bump at 2.5kHz.
I meant use the LSR305 as a 2-way top in a 3-way system to relieve it of bass duties, kind of like a FAST but treating the LS305 as a "full range".
Last edited:
Look at inventions JBL has on the subject of horn/waveguide. These inventions are nothing more than a proof that horn/waveguide has so many issues that only high technology can solve.
Such LSR305 waveguide, which DIYer has the capacity to design one. Most DIYers can only buy arbitrary waveguide and put it in front of any driver and think that nothing wrong with the sound...
Also don't forget, the good sound from the LSR might be caused by anything but what we think is.
I hate to disagree with both of you... but i guess I have to disagree! I've used and designed both numerous times and to my ears, multi way is just better if done right. FR has a bit more magic than most multi ways, no doubt, but at the expense of multiple trade offs or short comings. Beaming, higher distortion, ragged FR, using breakup to extend treble response, etc. they just make too many compromises to get one smallish driver to do everything. I've never heard a FR have the perfect elegant shimmer of a good tweeter, especially off axis, and I've never heard them have the drive down low that you need with most music. (big horns not withstanding)
And yes, I know i'm in the full range forum! I'll shut up now
Of course it's really all just a matter of opinion.
As to symmetrical slopes having the best phase tracking, on a flat baffle, the best phase is often achieved with asymmetrical slopes.
No, X, I was not talking about bass. That's why I mentioned my 2-way (which can be augmented to 3-way or 4-way). I was talking about the blending of midwoofer with tweeter.
The superiority of a 2-way like this over FR in aspects such as distortion is clear from the start. But what I'm talking about here is aspects where FR usually win... Mids, highs, soundstage, etc...
Waweguide/horn is good, especially if it is the solution to a problem. I'm just saying it is difficult to design.
The other part is unrelated. About what make the speaker sound as it does. Of course, the polar response has contribution, but there are too many things contribute to the end result. The waveguide contribution is to the good polar response of course
I say good. They're one of the only free lunches in speaker design. The only down fall I see is CC spacing and drooping top end, but they allow you to cross lower than normal so CC doesn't really apply and with the right tweet and throat design no dip in the top octave either
On the plus side you get acoustic centers aligned (so time aligned xo), smooth power response, less distortion for the tweeter, less room interaction and a wide sweet spot and the big round ones look cool!
We all know the shortcomings of FR. What we rarely know is that multi-way can be (a lot more) more magical than FR.
There is a special case of the Heil AMT, which, technically is a tweeter but with its ability to go as low as 600Hz to 700Hz, it is almost in the same range where I am crossing over with my full range dynamic cone drivers. The Heil is IMHO, the best sounding tweeter ever. But it is almost a full range from a FAST standpoint. To have one tweeter handle the phase-sensitive 600Hz to on up to 20kHz is really amazing.
When I ran my Heil AMT like a FAST, I could hold it in my hand, and it felt like the singer was magically shrunken and teleported to the 1in wide x 4.75in tall aperture, and singing her lungs off. Like a little prisoner in the AMT. I have not experienced this with a dome tweeter. Must be the coherence of the wave and the V-waveguide.
But the Heil still isn't a FR. You can't put it in an enclosure and get satisfying bass from it
It's a really amazing and capable tweeter from what I hear, but still a tweeter.And in my opinion, a fast is a two way speaker. That's they way I always thought of them. You're just using a larger "tweeter" to cross lower, but you are still applying a xo. You're trading a poorer off axis response for a xo mostly out of the midrange. Not really much different than using a 1-1/8" tweeter to cross lower than a 3/4" tweeter.
I started working that a while back, but the 10F was sealed.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/273524-10f-8424-rs225-8-fast-ref-monitor-16.html#post4327732
You need something like a B&C 6MDN44 (which I have) with 95dB sensitivity to keep up with the Heil. So on the bass you need a pair of 18in 95dB pro woofers in an OB.
That would be a killer OB.
I don't even think that way... I don't bother thinking about what tweeter might give better highs or what sub gives better low end. I have only one sound source that is very convincing. Sure, better tweeters are out there, better mids even. And better bass. But to me the integration of the sound is much more important to be truly convincing over the entire frequency area. That's hard to do with multi way. Sure it can be done but I haven't seen that many good examples yet.
DSP can get us there better than before. But it still needs all the help it can get.
My 25 way
is still full range. With processing I can get it to be very convincing... Still working on it to get even more out of it.I wouldn't want to trade what I've got right now for a 3 way second order or even higher order slopes. I'm sold on this concept, there, I said it.
I'm still free to experiment with added subs etc. but right now I don't feel the need.
If I had more room I'd be all over wave guides/horns, but I'd still do it with the help of DSP.
I like this view on the stereo event:
http://www.moultonlabs.com/more/brave_new_world_loudspeakers_to_the_left/
I'm just making sure my "early reflections" perform the best they can. Seems to work very well.
Last edited:
I started working that a while back, but the 10F was sealed.
You need something like a B&C 6MDN44 (which I have) with 95dB sensitivity to keep up with the Heil. So on the bass you need a pair of 18in 95dB pro woofers in an OB.
That would be a killer OB.
Yes, I remember that. 10f sealed kind of defeats the purpose though. That was only dipole in the treble and the wavelengths get so short that it's not really even dipole there. By opening up your woofer and mid, you could conceivably get perfect dipole response from 100Hz up to 8-10k depending on baffle width, so you could try a full dipole set up with what you have now, those drivers are perfect for it really, and very little construction effort. The controlled directivity that you're so impressed with from the JBL's, you could see over nearly the full spectrum. Dipole bass is another story and takes some serious effort; I have dual bass cabs with four 10's each and I still cross at 40Hz to sealed subs.
You don't exactly have to "keep up" with the Heil. You can pad it like you did before but probably not as much. The dayton and 10f should be capable of close to 90 spl in a dipole after eq is applied to the woofer. With dsp, instead of cutting the top end to account for baffle effects, you would boost the low end of the lower mid (dayton) and cross to subs around 100Hz.
I know this is far off from what you're trying to do, but looking at the drivers you're playing with it's what comes to mind for me.
I don't even think that way... I don't bother thinking about what tweeter might give better highs or what sub gives better low end. I have only one sound source that is very convincing. Sure, better tweeters are out there, better mids even. And better bass. But to me the integration of the sound is much more important to be truly convincing over the entire frequency area. That's hard to do with multi way. Sure it can be done but I haven't seen that many good examples yet.
DSP can get us there better than before. But it still needs all the help it can get.
My 25 way
I wouldn't want to trade what I've got right now for a 3 way second order or even higher order slopes. I'm sold on this concept, there, I said it.
I'm still free to experiment with added subs etc. but right now I don't feel the need.
If I had more room I'd be all over wave guides/horns, but I'd still do it with the help of DSP.
I like this view on the stereo event:
Moulton Laboratories :: The Brave New World: Loudspeakers to the Left of Us! Loudspeakers to the Right of Us!
I'm just making sure my "early reflections" perform the best they can. Seems to work very well.
Yes, line arrays are a different animal. I had forgotten that that's what you built. I would certainly call that a full range system of course.
I still stand by my comment about the treble though, line array or not. I still don't feel that a full range reproduces the treble as accurately as a tweeter, I suppose it just has something to do with the speed needed and the weight of the cone. Not to mention the beaming of a FR driver which is just as big of an issue to me.
