So, after my pair of pluvia 11s were shipped back and re-tested by the factory, they reported that to them there is no problem at 40-50 Hz.
I had also bought a stroboscope before shipping them back, and made a video where the buzz was evident and the displacement was not more than a couple mm p-p.
Luckily I asked for a full refund before shipping them back, so I am only out of shipping cost back to Madisound. The price of knowledge..
Given that to them there is nothing wrong with the drivers, I guess the nicest thing I can say is that this model is not for me. And I really hoped that it was too. Maybe next revision will take care of this issue.
I had also bought a stroboscope before shipping them back, and made a video where the buzz was evident and the displacement was not more than a couple mm p-p.
Luckily I asked for a full refund before shipping them back, so I am only out of shipping cost back to Madisound. The price of knowledge..
Given that to them there is nothing wrong with the drivers, I guess the nicest thing I can say is that this model is not for me. And I really hoped that it was too. Maybe next revision will take care of this issue.
I don't think the cone is the problem.
It is pretty evident to me that the noise is generated at the back of the driver, possibly by the spider.
Your friend probably can't hear it when the driver is mounted and other content is playing on top of the frequencies in question.
I have to say, other than this issue, they do sound very good, so I'm not surprised by what you said.
It is pretty evident to me that the noise is generated at the back of the driver, possibly by the spider.
Your friend probably can't hear it when the driver is mounted and other content is playing on top of the frequencies in question.
I have to say, other than this issue, they do sound very good, so I'm not surprised by what you said.
Dropbox - Pluvia 11 Stroboscope.mp4
My DA11 has a digitally controlled volume control, which has a maximum setting of 56 and goes by increments of 1 dB.
The max rated power of the amplifier is 300W at 4 ohms.
I start to play the 50 Hz tone and increase the volume until the noise is very evident, with the Lavry DA11's volume at 30, that is -26 dBFS.
Then I sit the driver down and use a stroboscope at around 50.5 Hz, so that the motion is clearly shown.
Right next to it I put the paper ruler, with the full 15 mm peak-to-peak theoretical travel length in evidence, for clarity.
My DA11 has a digitally controlled volume control, which has a maximum setting of 56 and goes by increments of 1 dB.
The max rated power of the amplifier is 300W at 4 ohms.
I start to play the 50 Hz tone and increase the volume until the noise is very evident, with the Lavry DA11's volume at 30, that is -26 dBFS.
Then I sit the driver down and use a stroboscope at around 50.5 Hz, so that the motion is clearly shown.
Right next to it I put the paper ruler, with the full 15 mm peak-to-peak theoretical travel length in evidence, for clarity.
Back on topic, I've been sorting through one of my old HDDs prior to it being recyled & discovered a handful of designs I haven't posted before for half a dozen different drivers. Three were for the Pluvia 11, so I'll put them here. Nothing novel about two, just straightforward vented boxes, but may be of interest / use. The third is a bit different though. 
First up, compact standmount / desktop monitor (using the term purely to describe a modestly sized box). Looking back at the box alignment & brief notes I'd stuck onto the line drawing, it was done as a deliberately small box, with a very lightly elevated LF alignment to help compensate for the higher Fb & lend a little extra subjective weight to the bottom end. Vent tuning is reasonably broad so shouldn't have the on-off effect of a very narrowly tuned alignment. Resaved as a png file from the original bitmap to keep size down. Please excuse the simple (rubbish) drawing. CAD is not my thing. It should be sufficient though as these are very simple boxes. I assumed a non-flared vent; for anyone who wants to change the duct size, Dave's pdf is also attached.
First up, compact standmount / desktop monitor (using the term purely to describe a modestly sized box). Looking back at the box alignment & brief notes I'd stuck onto the line drawing, it was done as a deliberately small box, with a very lightly elevated LF alignment to help compensate for the higher Fb & lend a little extra subjective weight to the bottom end. Vent tuning is reasonably broad so shouldn't have the on-off effect of a very narrowly tuned alignment. Resaved as a png file from the original bitmap to keep size down. Please excuse the simple (rubbish) drawing. CAD is not my thing. It should be sufficient though as these are very simple boxes. I assumed a non-flared vent; for anyone who wants to change the duct size, Dave's pdf is also attached.
Attachments
And the second. Larger standmount, this one with two drivers. I suspect I had a mixture of TAD and Omega in mind with this one. Given the impedances, I'd probably series wire & if you want to low-pass the lower driver, simplest way would be to shunt with a 56uF cap (& adjust from there as desired).
Same remarks as above apply re the vent: non-flared was assumed, if you want to adjust, feel free, Dave's pdf with scaling formulas attached here too. I wouldn't reduce the size though if you want to avoid potential excess velocities.
Same remarks as above apply re the vent: non-flared was assumed, if you want to adjust, feel free, Dave's pdf with scaling formulas attached here too. I wouldn't reduce the size though if you want to avoid potential excess velocities.
Attachments
Last edited:
How is talking about the Pluvia 11 being plagued by extreme noise at the back of the cone not on topic on a thread called Pluvia 11?
Seriously, stay away from this driver. The Eikona 2 is infinitely better when it comes to noise at the back. Too bad its piston area is much smaller, therefore not capable to produce as much bass (in a closed box). But at least it's clean bass.
Seriously, stay away from this driver. The Eikona 2 is infinitely better when it comes to noise at the back. Too bad its piston area is much smaller, therefore not capable to produce as much bass (in a closed box). But at least it's clean bass.
Well, you appeared to have made your point about being dissatisfied with your units (I understand Madisound provided you a full refund), and since you had not posted anything else for some time, I assumed you had finished & that the thread could return to wider discussion, box designs &c.
Third one.
Yes, this is a bit 'different'. Don't bother telling me all the things wrong with it, because I'm very well aware of them, and did it anyway. It's a little (well, 5ft) reference to Winslow Burhoe & EPI as it was in the early 1970s, and their then range-topper, the M1000 quadratic tower. Yes, it's a square section MLTL with a driver on each vertical face, all wired in the same electrical polarity (you won't get much cabinet output if you wire drivers sharing the same internal volume out of polarity ). Eccentric, yes. But the EPI M1000 did & still does have its fans, so it clearly does some things very right for some people. Is it hi-fi in the usual sense? No. But that misses the point as it doesn't prioritise the same things.
Third one.
Yes, this is a bit 'different'. Don't bother telling me all the things wrong with it, because I'm very well aware of them, and did it anyway. It's a little (well, 5ft) reference to Winslow Burhoe & EPI as it was in the early 1970s, and their then range-topper, the M1000 quadratic tower. Yes, it's a square section MLTL with a driver on each vertical face, all wired in the same electrical polarity (you won't get much cabinet output if you wire drivers sharing the same internal volume out of polarity
). Eccentric, yes. But the EPI M1000 did & still does have its fans, so it clearly does some things very right for some people. Is it hi-fi in the usual sense? No. But that misses the point as it doesn't prioritise the same things.Attachments
Last edited:
Fair enough. Just making the point that my grievances with this driver are not off topic on a thread whose subject is the driver itself.
To be fair, I just had to send back a $800 pair of speakers that claimed to have addressed the air flow at the back of the cone through their special basket/magnet design. They were only slightly less noisy than the Pluvia 11.
So although I clearly don't like this driver, I have to put it in context and realize that unfortunately most of the drivers out there have the same problem.
The good news is that there are drivers that don't, and for about the same price. Mentioning the Eikona 2 earlier was maybe somewhat unfair given it costs more than twice. But the driver cost is such a small part of a speaker's total cost that I thought someone looking for the same qualities as myself in a driver might benefit from that piece of information.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.