Advice on highest quality full range driver - Page 4 - 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 2005, 04:30 PM   #31
soongsc is offline soongsc  Taiwan
diyAudio Member
 
soongsc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Taiwan
Monster horns seem to rely on some resonance to achieve the low end, wouldn't that make the low end ring longer? That would really effect the "Punch quality" wouldn't it?

With the same air volume, I think the larger cone would perform better than a smaller cone in terms of punch capability.
__________________
Hear the real thing!
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th December 2005, 08:15 PM   #32
deandob is offline deandob  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Brisbane, Australia
8 hours sleep overnight and I come back to a page full of replies - especially when a few of the posters are in my time zone!

The new Jordan JX53 do sound interesting, although my ISD model of the preliminary specs dont show it doing as well down low compared to the old model (probably a mistake in the data). The old model has a reputation of burning out if overdriven, so hopefully the new model will be better in this regard, and using an active highpass filter will help.

The B200 is a little too big for my needs, but if a 8" paper speaker can do a good job reproducing the treble it is indeed a marvel.

Regarding subs, as I'm listening near field, if I cross over around 100Hz and have the bass unit very close nearby I dont have a problem with any slight directonality in the bass. Also with near field I dont need such high SPLs.

Bandor dont get the same rave reviews as the Jordans and it seems the Jordans have had ongoing development/tweaking.

The Hartley sure is a monster, but can't find any data about them.

Regards,
Dean
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th December 2005, 08:52 PM   #33
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Ohio
Interesting thread. It's nice to read about options beyond some of the usual suspects. I have to say that the Veravox looks really intriguing to me. Could be the next on my list.

With regards to the JX53, the current version. I read that it's not recommended to cross it much below 500hz. While it seems you could get away with it, I guess it doesn't have much body at in the upper bass / lower mids area.

Just thought I'd share. I'll be curious to hear what everyone thinks of the new JX53. Good luck with your search.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th December 2005, 09:17 PM   #34
Dumbass is offline Dumbass  British Antarctic Territory
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: British Antarctic Territory
I think the JX92S would be an excellent choice, but I always feel that if you are willing to part with much dosh, you ought to actually listen to a pair before buying.

The new JX6 allegedly has an octave-lower resonance than the JX53 and could theoretically reach 100Hz, so don't rule it out either.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th December 2005, 11:14 PM   #35
lithoc is offline lithoc  Malaysia
diyAudio Member
 
lithoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Seremban2
Quote:
Originally posted by deandob
Lithoc,

Not sure a 8" woofer is going to reproduce decent treble. I'm looking for 6.5" and below, and want to build a smaller speaker with a sub.

Another interesting alternative is the Jordan JX53, which has better highs than the JX92 but obviously does not go down as low. The JX53 is being replaced with a new model that has a resonance frequency of 80Hz, so it may also be a candidate to be used with my sub (peerless 8" XLS with linkwitz transform).

I did a quick WinISD on the old JX53 using my tang band W3-871S in a 4L cabinet and the JX53 does slightly better on the bass. However with the preliminary specs on the new JX53 with lower Fo I thought it would go lower but the Q of the new driver is considerably smaller so it wont go down as low as the old driver.

Regards,
Dean
Dean,

I do agree with you that 2.1 is a very good setup. Initially I thought you were asking for single driver fullrange.

8" fullrange speaker at high frequency(>10khz) usually are very directional.

IMHO, I prefer <4" mid/high & >8" woofer for 2.1 setup. crossover at 100hz.
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2005, 03:37 AM   #36
deandob is offline deandob  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Brisbane, Australia
lithoc,

Yes, a <4" driver with a 8" or larger sub at 100Hz looks to be the best setup for near field. The new Jordan JX6 would be worth hanging out for, especially if it does go lower by an octave (even if my preliminary WinISD model says it wont).

I currently use a 2.1 active highpass filter for a set of TangBand monitors with a lowpass Linkwitz transform for a small sub and get excellent results. Using this approach with the new Jordan should raise the performance bar even higher.

Dumbass, agreed, it would be good to listen before parting with the cash. I'm looking forward to initial reports.

One1speed, if you can dig up more info on the veravox or listening impressions, please post.

Regards,
Dean
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2005, 08:04 AM   #37
soongsc is offline soongsc  Taiwan
diyAudio Member
 
soongsc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Taiwan
Quote:
Originally posted by one1speed
Interesting thread. It's nice to read about options beyond some of the usual suspects. I have to say that the Veravox looks really intriguing to me. Could be the next on my list.

With regards to the JX53, the current version. I read that it's not recommended to cross it much below 500hz. While it seems you could get away with it, I guess it doesn't have much body at in the upper bass / lower mids area.

Just thought I'd share. I'll be curious to hear what everyone thinks of the new JX53. Good luck with your search.
How low the XO would be depends on listening levels.
With my experience with Jordan drivers, the later versions are always better than the earlier ones. If the cone area is increased, then it will have better low frequency driving capability. Got our fingers crossed.
__________________
Hear the real thing!
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2005, 08:59 AM   #38
diyAudio Member
 
Scottmoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Bandors don't get the same rave reviews? True. Doesn't make them bad drivers though. They all come from the same person as I understand it. You see, the good lady who owns Bandor is, I believe, Ted Jordan's ex-wife, and the Bandor drivers are I suspect based upon some of his earlier designs which went with the divorce settlement. I hasten to add that I don't know that for certain, and anyone who knows better do correct me if I'm wrong.

As for larger cones performing better than smaller in the same air volume -sort of. Again, depends on the circumstances, and how the enclosure has been optimised. Assuming properly engineered and optimised enclosures (and drivers), I agree that the larger driver will tend to have more punch in the bass than a smaller one as it can shift more air. I think the DX55 etc strike a pretty good compromise.

Big horns relying on some resonance? Probably, I'm no expert on horns, so I'll leave better qualified people to comment on that and stick to my TL variations for the moment. That said, 99% of BLHs are actually QW loaded, not horn loaded at bass freqencies, and the smaller you go, the greater and higher up the QW loading tends to be. The Buschorn is a classic example -if you look at the measured response and frequency curves, it screams quarter wave loading -there's hardly the slightest hint of horn loading at all. I would tend to classify that as more of a resonance issue than that seen in larger enclosures, like the J-Lo for example. Then again, I'm just conjecturing here.

8" drivers can indeed do decent high treble -but it'll cost you. Lowther DX4 for example, or higher. The cheaper 8" units like the Fostex range and the cheaper Lowthers make a very good fist of it indeed, but if you're after treble quality as good as a high-end tweeter, you have to pay a whole lot more, or downsize to a slightly smaller driver like the DX55, a Fostex 6 1/2" unit etc.

Best
Scott
__________________
Community site www.frugal-horn.com Commercial site www.wodendesign.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2005, 11:39 AM   #39
Colin is offline Colin  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Quote:
Originally posted by deandob
lithoc,

The new Jordan JX6 would be worth hanging out for, especially if it does go lower by an octave (even if my preliminary WinISD model says it wont).
Don't rely on the simulations, particularly with some of Ted's drivers which can be a law unto themselves as the suspension is unusual. Ted himself uses computer sims so far then goes for the box and listen approach (I think he has something to say about it on his website). Although the JXR6 cone area hasn't significantly increased (as far as I know) from the specs I've seen, the xmax has increased considerably. (I've seen a pair 'breathing' at less than 10Hz).

Ref the Bandors, when I last heard several Bandor systems in the late 90s at a trade show, I thought the Jordans had the edge and they've probably been subject to more continuous development since. The JX53 got up to mk3 and the 6 is supposed to be a significantly better driver.
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2005, 01:45 PM   #40
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Ohio
Quote:
Originally posted by deandob
lithoc,

One1speed, if you can dig up more info on the veravox or listening impressions, please post.

Regards,
Dean
I looked a bit online through Google and didn't find a whole lot, though did find a retailer in Canada, (for those of us in North America). Post #20 of this thread has a link that leads to a discussion of this driver. Hoping to do more research in the near future myself.
  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
Vintage Full range- Need some cab advice waam68 Full Range 7 19th August 2008 09:30 PM
Full range vs. quality studio monitors schn0354 Full Range 28 17th August 2008 04:12 AM
Full Range Dipole Designs - Any Advice? Forster Full Range 5 9th January 2007 01:13 PM
Advice: a fence post for a full range? sol Full Range 25 1st January 2007 10:26 PM
Advice on full range enclosure for 5.1 setup CDJ Multi-Way 3 21st January 2003 05:28 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:24 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