MANGER driver - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Full Range

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12th December 2004, 06:51 AM   #1
diyAudio Member
 
ERICSPEEd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Head of the Lakes
Default MANGER driver

I can't afford these but was curious if anyone out there was ever used or heard them.

http://www.e-speakers.com/products/manger.html
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2004, 08:05 PM   #2
The one and only
 
Nelson Pass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
I've used them. They are good full range drivers, measuring
quite well, but not particularly efficient. They have two voice
coils, apparently nearly identical and designed to be driven
parallel, as they are about 15 ohms each.

The fundamental resonance is about 80 Hz.

The sound is fairly neutral, although not as apparently dynamic
as the higher sensitivity Lowthers or Fostex - more on the order
of Jordans.

And they are expensive.

I am posting a 400 Hz + curve.
Attached Images
File Type: gif manger.gif (48.2 KB, 4126 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2004, 09:06 PM   #3
diyAudio Member
 
serengetiplains's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Canada
The Manger drivers are, to me, somewhat intriguing. I've been listening to a pair of 109s for about a month now, and have several observations, a few of which I'll share here. The first is that, in a process still ongoing, I have undergone a certain relearning process listening to the Mangers, and this relearning process seemingly has much to do with the way the Mangers reproduce high frequencies. The Mangers seem to offer different sonic cues to other drivers I've heard (I'm familiar with horns, ribbons, electrostats and cones-n-domes) in a way that, on first impression, seemed to deprive the sound of a certain high frequency content. The Mangers, again on first impression, seemed to dull the music, or as some might say, create a less dynamic sound. My slightly more seasoned view is that the missing high frequency content is probably mostly noise in what the manufacturer calls "transient noise." Whatever can be said of the phrase "transient noise," I'm personally growing to prefer the type of high frequency content the Mangers produce which, lacking the fizzz and shushhh of other drivers, especially domes, and extending to 35KHz, is more highly resolved, especially in near-field listening. HF SACD noise, for example, is easily heard on these speakers. Transparency---again, especially in near-field---is the best I've experienced.

I might mention, here, that the difference in sound between near and farther field listening with the Mangers is the difference I hear listening to live orchestral music close and far. I infer from this observation that the Mangers are doing something better than other drivers I've heard.

My second observation is these speakers are wonderfully coherent. They create minimal phase shift, and they lack the overlap/breakup phenomena produced by a 2k/3k crossover.

Robert E. Greene reviewed the Mangers in TAS in what reads to me as a careful, seasoned review. He called the Mangers a "landmark" design. I tend to agree.

BTW, what the Kharma speaker cabinet has done for cone drivers seems the object of what Overkill Audio is attempting to do for the Mangers. I suspect the sonic betterment offered by improved cabinet design marginally favours the Manger driver.

My extended 2c.
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2004, 09:11 PM   #4
diyAudio Member
 
jackinnj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Llanddewi Brefi, NJ
definitely the season for mangers, in little towns, where soft and stillness lies,

above the deep and dreamy sleep while silent stars go by.

yet in those dark streets shineth...
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2004, 10:02 PM   #5
ScottG is offline ScottG  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: US
Quote:
Originally posted by serengetiplains
The Manger drivers are, to me, somewhat intriguing. I've been listening to a pair of 109s for about a month now, and have several observations, a few of which I'll share here. The first is that, in a process still ongoing, I have undergone a certain relearning process listening to the Mangers, and this relearning process seemingly has much to do with the way the Mangers reproduce high frequencies. The Mangers seem to offer different sonic cues to other drivers I've heard (I'm familiar with horns, ribbons, electrostats and cones-n-domes) in a way that, on first impression, seemed to deprive the sound of a certain high frequency content. The Mangers, again on first impression, seemed to dull the music, or as some might say, create a less dynamic sound. My slightly more seasoned view is that the missing high frequency content is probably mostly noise in what the manufacturer calls "transient noise." Whatever can be said of the phrase "transient noise," I'm personally growing to prefer the type of high frequency content the Mangers produce which, lacking the fizzz and shushhh of other drivers, especially domes, and extending to 35KHz, is more highly resolved, especially in near-field listening. HF SACD noise, for example, is easily heard on these speakers. Transparency---again, especially in near-field---is the best I've experienced.

I might mention, here, that the difference in sound between near and farther field listening with the Mangers is the difference I hear listening to live orchestral music close and far. I infer from this observation that the Mangers are doing something better than other drivers I've heard.

My second observation is these speakers are wonderfully coherent. They create minimal phase shift, and they lack the overlap/breakup phenomena produced by a 2k/3k crossover.

Robert E. Greene reviewed the Mangers in TAS in what reads to me as a careful, seasoned review. He called the Mangers a "landmark" design. I tend to agree.

BTW, what the Kharma speaker cabinet has done for cone drivers seems the object of what Overkill Audio is attempting to do for the Mangers. I suspect the sonic betterment offered by improved cabinet design marginally favours the Manger driver.

My extended 2c.
There are a few problems with the drivers that should explain the reasons for subjective qualities noticed by you and others..

Hi-freq.s: Off-axis performance suffers, so as you go higher in freq. there is less overall sound-output. This is NOT a dynamic constraint thing, but it will lead to a subjectivly "duller" sound - especially with an extended bass response.

Dynamics: People tend to prefer more moving-mass as freq.s decrease. Increased mass with increased motor gauss/force gives a more dynamic sound. You have to have BOTH (its not an either-or affair). The Mangers have fairly strong motors with a guass aproaching a respectable 1.4, however they only have a mass thats about five times that of a conventional tweeter - subjectivly this isn't nearly enough for freq.s below 1kHz. Most of this can be "made-up-for" with freq.s limited to 400Hz.

Now combine both elements and you'll end up with a subjective "life-less" quality.

The overkill audio uses the beyma lx60 - one of the best woofers PERIOD. Its a high-mass design for a woofer with a fairly high fundamental resonace and an sd typical of 12incher's (though its mass is "medium" in comparison to most woofers with this sd). This woofer has the ability to be used higher in freq. up to 800Hz (on and off-axis) with low distortion and excellent freq. linearity. IF they use a shallow crossover slope (1st order) as high as 300-400Hz then they should overcome the "dynamic" problems people associate with the Mangers (with only a small loss of midrange detail).

They could also alieviate the problem of high-freq. loss over the spectral balance by increasing the output of the Manger as freq. increases (via the digital crossover), AND listen to the speaker off-axis where the response is flat for the listener.
__________________
perspective is everything
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2004, 10:31 PM   #6
BTW is offline BTW
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Singapore
Here them at a dealer's shop, I felt that it did have the dynamic jump factor that a lot of the high efficiency single drivers have. I suspect this is due to the not so high efficiency, the dealer also mentioned that they sounded best high power amps ie power hungry. Of course it has all the coherency that a single driver can give.
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2004, 11:01 PM   #7
diyAudio Member
 
serengetiplains's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Canada
Quote:
Originally posted by ScottG

There are a few problems with the drivers that should explain the reasons for subjective qualities noticed by you and others..

Hi-freq.s: Off-axis performance suffers, so as you go higher in freq. there is less overall sound-output. This is NOT a dynamic constraint thing, but it will lead to a subjectivly "duller" sound - especially with an extended bass response.
Scott, my observations derive from on-axis listening positions at three sitting distances: 1', 4' and 10'. The HF differences I mention in my note are apparent at all distances and, to the extent apparent in the near field, relate not to quantity of output, per your explanation, but to quality, ie, to a differently shaped HF waveform.

Quote:
Dynamics: People tend to prefer more moving-mass as freq.s decrease. Increased mass with increased motor gauss/force gives a more dynamic sound. You have to have BOTH (its not an either-or affair). The Mangers have fairly strong motors with a guass aproaching a respectable 1.4, however they only have a mass thats about five times that of a conventional tweeter - subjectivly this isn't nearly enough for freq.s below 1kHz. Most of this can be "made-up-for" with freq.s limited to 400Hz.
"People tend to prefer ...." Let's put it this way: different drivers sound different. Any such difference, IME, comes with costs and benefits, said costs and benefits usually being inextricably intertwined. Example: getting heavy moving mass bass comes at the cost, in the case of the Manger, of a loss of coherence in the 100-1kHz range. Benefit and cost together.

Quote:
Now combine both elements and you'll end up with a subjective "life-less" quality.
That's not my experience. Is it yours?

Quote:
The overkill audio uses the beyma lx60 - one of the best woofers PERIOD. Its a high-mass design for a woofer with a fairly high fundamental resonace and an sd typical of 12incher's (though its mass is "medium" in comparison to most woofers with this sd). This woofer has the ability to be used higher in freq. up to 800Hz (on and off-axis) with low distortion and excellent freq. linearity. IF they use a shallow crossover slope (1st order) as high as 300-400Hz then they should overcome the "dynamic" problems people associate with the Mangers (with only a small loss of midrange detail).

They could also alieviate the problem of high-freq. loss over the spectral balance by increasing the output of the Manger as freq. increases (via the digital crossover), AND listen to the speaker off-axis where the response is flat for the listener.
I think the Overkill crossover is in the range of 200-300Hz, 90dB+.
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2004, 11:48 PM   #8
ScottG is offline ScottG  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: US
I think you missed my meaning with regard to off-axis performance. I wasn't describing direct sound off-axis or the monopole behaviour between low and high freq.s. Instead I was refering to the summed-output of the driver both on and off-axis where off-axis out-put is decreased relative to on-axis. Graphically this can be seen with a polar plot (and you'll notice a lack of this in the Manger literature). This subjective effect is relativly invariant to distance - though it becomes more pronounced at extended distances due to room reflections, (and made far worse with monopole behaviour in-room between low and high freq.s). Be assured, this will effect quality substantially. (i.e. quantity and quality are often intertwined..)

As to different drivers sounding different - rather than simply saying it, I was giving an emperical reason WHY. (science-wise look to impeadance - not electrical.)

Combining a loss of subjective dynamics with high freq. loss does indeed provide a "life-less" quality (and its not just my opinion).
__________________
perspective is everything
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2004, 11:52 PM   #9
diyAudio Member
 
serengetiplains's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Canada
Quote:
Originally posted by ScottG


Dynamics: People tend to prefer more moving-mass as freq.s decrease. Increased mass with increased motor gauss/force gives a more dynamic sound.
There's more to this aspect of Scott's comment than first met my eye. My oversimplifying tendencies suggest to me that a heavy-mass, high-gauss driver will reproduce certain elements of bass frequencies with greater fidelity to the live experience than others. For instance, an important element of the sound of a tympani drum is an explosive, high energy bass transient. I assume the HM/HG driver better reproduces this element of the tympani drum sound solely on account that certain driver properties match the properties of the sound generating source, the drum membrane. But the tympani drum is also a bending wave transducer which by necessary implication produces a characteristic bending wave sound, whatever that characteristic might be. It's not a large leap, at least as an initial tentative assumption, to suggest the Manger driver is better suited to reproducing the bending wave element of the tympani drum sound, despite never accurately reproducing the explosive bass element.

Change the bass sound in question .... say, to a cello. Cello bass lacks the high energy transients of the tympani drum bass (cellos aren't typically struck, though a string may be plucked). Which driver, the Manger or the HM/HG cone, will reproduce which of the perhaps several important elements of cello bass better?

My point, here, is that dynamic heft is one element of a given low frequency "sound" which, depending on the sound in question (drum-sound, cello-sound, tuba-sound), varies in relative prominence, if you will, as a contributing element.
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th December 2004, 12:10 AM   #10
diyAudio Member
 
serengetiplains's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Canada
Quote:
Originally posted by ScottG

Combining a loss of subjective dynamics with high freq. loss does indeed provide a "life-less" quality (and its not just my opinion).
Some would say (me among them) that the Mangers more faithfully recreate, in a reverberant field called the listening room, the ear's experience of high frequencies in a diffuse field, depending, perhaps, on the type of music. At least for orchestral music, which provides a good reference point, I'm hard pressed to describe row-10+ sound as bright and lively .... "dull" is the more fitting description. "Live" electronically generated music has always to my ear sounded more lively, and dynamically lively, in comparison. Mind you, when was the last time you heard live electronic music generated by a wall of Mangers?

HF quantity issues aside, the Manger reproduces HFs of a different *character* or quality (I prefer the term character as it does not imply better/worse the term "quality" does in its usual use). That difference is in part measurable and accounts for a different listening experience, much like the differing tympani drum "character" and cello "character" produce a different listening experience.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Manger phase_accurate Multi-Way 84 19th November 2007 04:20 PM
Manger MSW Bending Wave Driver ShinOBIWAN Swap Meet 34 7th December 2006 01:49 PM
Manger v ESL rick57 Planars & Exotics 15 23rd September 2006 09:45 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 07:22 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2