Maybe, but with the inconsistency from model to model in TB drivers makes me wonder if they are all like that. It just seems strange to me that some TB drivers have excellent frequency response while having average or terrible non-linear distortion, and others have rough frequency response and excellent non-linear distortion. It is almost like a completely different person designs each driver so they never come up with a driver with the best of everything.
Zaph hasn't published diddle in quite some time, which is sad. We need more published test results, you know the information actually required to design a speaker or even what driver to choose.
Am interested in these new TB's for use as a mid, specifically the 2143. Reading through the comments disecting what the fullrange guys are looking for and what qualities are required to match my needs, ~150-2700. The 1611 looks good, but average non linear distortion. It's biggest advantage is at the bottom end of my required range with a slightly better Xmax (3mm vs. 2.5mm). The 10f altho loved cannot handle this lower octave or two and barely meets my min sensitivity (& power) requirement of 87, it's 86.6 and only 10w. It's always some compromise
Am interested in these new TB's for use as a mid, specifically the 2143. Reading through the comments disecting what the fullrange guys are looking for and what qualities are required to match my needs, ~150-2700. The 1611 looks good, but average non linear distortion. It's biggest advantage is at the bottom end of my required range with a slightly better Xmax (3mm vs. 2.5mm). The 10f altho loved cannot handle this lower octave or two and barely meets my min sensitivity (& power) requirement of 87, it's 86.6 and only 10w. It's always some compromise
I have various 2-3.5" results here:
http://tinyurl.com/lmqoe4r
No 5" and larger full rangers because I haven't seen a single one which performs well in the top 3 octaves, I neither have the need for high SPL or high sensitivity and they tend to be expensive (I personally purchase all the drivers tested).
They do indeed have dispertion issues, somewhat clanky top end, but the application in my case doesn't require the top 3. The top three is handled by an amt/waveguide and all actively crossed. Cannot find a 4" let alone smaller with the spl / headroom requirements required which is why I'm here. Btw one of my first designs was a FAST circa '79 well before it was called "FAST". My sons system is FAST, with panasonic 4" fullrangers. Makes a perfect bedroom system
Modified TABAQ with the Tang Band W3-2141
Well they are finally built! It took a while as this was my 6th build in a row. I think I am beginning to get burned out on doing builds until springtime.
They sound very good, with ample bass extension, and the highs are very smooth and natural. I listened for about an 1 1/2 hours to some Dianna Krall and Mazzy Star, and I was quite impress with the performance. Marantz 2245 Preamp with Musical Paradise MP301 MKIII providing the Amp output.
Thanks Bojorn for the sim, as it was right on the money for this driver.
Here's a couple of Pic's:
Well they are finally built! It took a while as this was my 6th build in a row. I think I am beginning to get burned out on doing builds until springtime.
They sound very good, with ample bass extension, and the highs are very smooth and natural. I listened for about an 1 1/2 hours to some Dianna Krall and Mazzy Star, and I was quite impress with the performance. Marantz 2245 Preamp with Musical Paradise MP301 MKIII providing the Amp output.
Thanks Bojorn for the sim, as it was right on the money for this driver.
Here's a couple of Pic's:
Attachments
Godzilla, this was my third build with Tang Band Drivers. I built 2 sets of TABAQ's with the W3-881 NEO's for my grandchildren, and now this Modiifed TABAQ with the W3-2141 for my little brother. My only other driver experience is with the MA CHR70.3M and the Alpair 7.3M Pencils. I also have a pair of Tang Band W4-1337 SFD for a pair of outdoor speakers that are built, but not assembled/finished.
For the money, in my humble opinion, they are an economical way for DIY'ers to experience the sound of fullrange speakers in an enjoyable way. The MA CHR70.3M is the only other economical rival of the Tang Band Drivers, but the additional cost of materials for the Pencil build makes the overall cost a little higher?
I have found this hobby to be something to keep me busy in retirement, but I have got to take a couple month break, from the non-stop builds!
Mac
Hi, newbies from Malaysia here, found this thread from google. I manage to get my hand on some Tang Band w3-2141 and w3-1878. I'm quite interested in making a pair of the famous Tabaq to put them in, But not sure if the new size for the w3-2141 suitable for w3-1878???
Or I might just make 4 and put both in and compare *(if I got the time)
Thank. Really appreciate this place. for audio DIY-er is kinda hard to come by in my home country >_<
Or I might just make 4 and put both in and compare
*(if I got the time)Thank. Really appreciate this place. for audio DIY-er is kinda hard to come by in my home country >_<
Hey there fellow countryman!
My guess is, the W3-2141 with the higher Qts would do better. The 1878 would need more BSC compensation to drop the rest of the higher frequencies to a more balanced level relative to the bass, and in so doing dropping the overall sensitivity considerably.
As a rule of thumb, MLTLs require a moderately high Qts, somewhere around 0.35-0.6 to work at their best. A designer with more math skills and experience might be able to make a variation suitable for low Qts drivers (under 0.35 IMO), but the extra complexity makes you want to think twice. They're most suitable for large expanding MLTLs and some horns, so you might as well build those for the W3-1878. The simplest would be having them sealed, and crossing them over to a Woofer.
EDIT: I tried modelling one with the 1878. It seems that placing them much higher than the original TABAQ plan (13 cm higher in fact) raises the bass considerably, but the bass isn't flat. In fact you get a hump, which would probably get you closer to that "one-note bass" that everyone is trying to avoid. Placing the W3-2141 5cm higher as suggested by bjohanssen helps too, and still keeps everything smooth.
My guess is, the W3-2141 with the higher Qts would do better. The 1878 would need more BSC compensation to drop the rest of the higher frequencies to a more balanced level relative to the bass, and in so doing dropping the overall sensitivity considerably.
As a rule of thumb, MLTLs require a moderately high Qts, somewhere around 0.35-0.6 to work at their best. A designer with more math skills and experience might be able to make a variation suitable for low Qts drivers (under 0.35 IMO), but the extra complexity makes you want to think twice. They're most suitable for large expanding MLTLs and some horns, so you might as well build those for the W3-1878. The simplest would be having them sealed, and crossing them over to a Woofer.
EDIT: I tried modelling one with the 1878. It seems that placing them much higher than the original TABAQ plan (13 cm higher in fact) raises the bass considerably, but the bass isn't flat. In fact you get a hump, which would probably get you closer to that "one-note bass" that everyone is trying to avoid. Placing the W3-2141 5cm higher as suggested by bjohanssen helps too, and still keeps everything smooth.
Last edited:
Hi. thank you for the info. Ya, the 1878's Qts only have 0.28 according to 2141's 0.39. Will try to make the enclosure using the suggestion from Bjohanssen-san. Hope everything comes out well.
Btw, Just a thought. What if I lined the top 2/3 sections wall with 5mm thick felt before putting in the stuffing, would it effect the sound? been doing that to AE Neo and some of my small speaker build (just get myself some off the shelf enclosure and drivers) and feel like there's improvement in mid-high range.
Sorry, I'm still new in DIY-ing so still haven have any instrument to measure them >_<
thank you for the info. Ya, the 1878's Qts only have 0.28 according to 2141's 0.39. Will try to make the enclosure using the suggestion from Bjohanssen-san. Hope everything comes out well. Btw, Just a thought. What if I lined the top 2/3 sections wall with 5mm thick felt before putting in the stuffing, would it effect the sound? been doing that to AE Neo and some of my small speaker build (just get myself some off the shelf enclosure and drivers) and feel like there's improvement in mid-high range.
Sorry, I'm still new in DIY-ing so still haven have any instrument to measure them >_<
Are Tang Band W5-2143 and W5-1880 the 5" standouts?
How about the W5-2143 and W5 1880? By the spec sheet, these have excellent frequency response, 90 dB efficiency, and also claim to be low distortion.
Also, for $50, the price for these 5" drivers come in below many 3" drivers.
In general, do you trust Tang Band spec sheets?
Would be very interested to see some tests on these drivers.
How about the W5-2143 and W5 1880? By the spec sheet, these have excellent frequency response, 90 dB efficiency, and also claim to be low distortion.
Also, for $50, the price for these 5" drivers come in below many 3" drivers.
In general, do you trust Tang Band spec sheets?
Would be very interested to see some tests on these drivers.
I believe the general opinion on this forum is that Tang Band factory specifications should be taken with some caution, but a number of respected builders including Bob Brines have used Tang Band drivers in both bass reflex and transmission line enclosures with good results.
The W5-2143 is the best full range speaker I have heard. I performed an informal listening comparison test with four full range speakers including the W5-2143 mounted on a 4ft. by 4ft. open baffle, and compared to the Tang Band W5-1611SAF, the Tang Band W8-1808, and the Markaudio A10P, the W5-2143 came out on top based on my preferences. The test is on this forum. You can also read some reviews at Parts-Express.
The W5-2143 is the best full range speaker I have heard. I performed an informal listening comparison test with four full range speakers including the W5-2143 mounted on a 4ft. by 4ft. open baffle, and compared to the Tang Band W5-1611SAF, the Tang Band W8-1808, and the Markaudio A10P, the W5-2143 came out on top based on my preferences. The test is on this forum. You can also read some reviews at Parts-Express.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.