Halo,
I'm helping my friend to build two way high efficency speakers. The speakers have to be easy to drive by a low wattage amplifiers, either tube or transistors.
The basic problem is my friend wants a fullrange sound, the REAL FULL RANGE for listening full scale orchestra and classic music, not just typical full range sound from Lowther or Fostex.
There have to be dynamics, power and drive, quite deep and excellent bass.
I'm wondering if it's possible for two way system (midbass + tweeter) or there have to be 3 ways to get a fullrange sound in 25 cubic meters room.
The sensitivity must be some 92-93db or higher, might be even 100db, 8 ohm nominal impedance.
The tweeter will be a ribbon, most probably Raven. I would like to cross it at some 4-7Khz.
As to the midbas/wide range drivers I want no whizzer cone and probably no low QTS drivers.
The enclosure will be either bass reflex or might be some kind of transmission line.
What would you recommend for the wide range driver?
I was thinking of some of the Supravox drivers:
1. 215 Signature - works only with OB, and I don't expect the bass to be trully deep and excellent from 21cm driver in OB, I know OB sound very well, it sounds natural, but usually lacks power and pressure, unless huge cone sizes used.
2. 285 GMF - seems ok and Supravox says it works up to 7Khz but I doubt it and I think the crossover point will have to be as low as some 2-2,5Khz for it to work fine.
3. 215 RFT - seems most possible. It seems to work good and have a good extension down to 40Hz in a huge bass reflex or Onken enclosure type, but it's still 21cm driver. Is this enough for great bass in 25 cubic meters room???
The best solution would be probably to use Supravox 215-2000 or 215 electromagnet, put it on open baffle and use additional 15" bass drivers. But that with expensive ribbons and high quality bass drivers makes too much cost.
What are your opinions. Any suggestions for driver to use?
Bartek
I'm helping my friend to build two way high efficency speakers. The speakers have to be easy to drive by a low wattage amplifiers, either tube or transistors.
The basic problem is my friend wants a fullrange sound, the REAL FULL RANGE for listening full scale orchestra and classic music, not just typical full range sound from Lowther or Fostex.
There have to be dynamics, power and drive, quite deep and excellent bass.
I'm wondering if it's possible for two way system (midbass + tweeter) or there have to be 3 ways to get a fullrange sound in 25 cubic meters room.
The sensitivity must be some 92-93db or higher, might be even 100db, 8 ohm nominal impedance.
The tweeter will be a ribbon, most probably Raven. I would like to cross it at some 4-7Khz.
As to the midbas/wide range drivers I want no whizzer cone and probably no low QTS drivers.
The enclosure will be either bass reflex or might be some kind of transmission line.
What would you recommend for the wide range driver?
I was thinking of some of the Supravox drivers:
1. 215 Signature - works only with OB, and I don't expect the bass to be trully deep and excellent from 21cm driver in OB, I know OB sound very well, it sounds natural, but usually lacks power and pressure, unless huge cone sizes used.
2. 285 GMF - seems ok and Supravox says it works up to 7Khz but I doubt it and I think the crossover point will have to be as low as some 2-2,5Khz for it to work fine.
3. 215 RFT - seems most possible. It seems to work good and have a good extension down to 40Hz in a huge bass reflex or Onken enclosure type, but it's still 21cm driver. Is this enough for great bass in 25 cubic meters room???
The best solution would be probably to use Supravox 215-2000 or 215 electromagnet, put it on open baffle and use additional 15" bass drivers. But that with expensive ribbons and high quality bass drivers makes too much cost.
What are your opinions. Any suggestions for driver to use?
Bartek
A suggestion...
Hawthorne Silver Iris
Put it in an appropriate open baffle and you're done (and you can skip the Raven).
Paul Ebert
Hawthorne Silver Iris
Put it in an appropriate open baffle and you're done (and you can skip the Raven).
Paul Ebert
Thanks a lot for the answers. I have already seen and thought of Howthorne drivers. They are very nice but two things:
1. Very high shipping cost to Europe.
2. I'm afraid it might be not as good quality as Supravox and Raven combo. After all they are just quite cheap drivers.
I also know Dick Olsher kits.
They are very nice indeed, but what I wanted is to try to stay with two way system. If we were buy Dick Olsher kit it would be the one with Lowther driver. This along with Eminence bass drivers is quite expensive, and still we would like to get a bit better highs than with Aurum Cantus G2Si.
Have anyone heard any of Supravox 215 in bass reflex or TL enclosure? How is the bass ?
Maybe Hartley drivers would work well? Something like 47 Labs Hotei speakers is what I was thinking about:
http://www.sakurasystems.com/products/hotei.html
Bartek
1. Very high shipping cost to Europe.
2. I'm afraid it might be not as good quality as Supravox and Raven combo. After all they are just quite cheap drivers.
I also know Dick Olsher kits.
They are very nice indeed, but what I wanted is to try to stay with two way system. If we were buy Dick Olsher kit it would be the one with Lowther driver. This along with Eminence bass drivers is quite expensive, and still we would like to get a bit better highs than with Aurum Cantus G2Si.
Have anyone heard any of Supravox 215 in bass reflex or TL enclosure? How is the bass ?
Maybe Hartley drivers would work well? Something like 47 Labs Hotei speakers is what I was thinking about:
http://www.sakurasystems.com/products/hotei.html
Bartek
Hi,
Look here: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=118695&highlight=#post118695
and also here: http://www.audiofanatic.it/Diffusori/Tqwt215/TQWT215.html
Try google automatic translation.
Best of luck martin
Look here: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=118695&highlight=#post118695
and also here: http://www.audiofanatic.it/Diffusori/Tqwt215/TQWT215.html
Try google automatic translation.
Best of luck martin
I think you are going about it the complete wrong way; the wide range driver should operate on top, with large woofer below.
I think you also have the wrong attitude that a Lowther couldn't satisfy your friend's needs. They would have to, however, be put in the correct enclosure, think Big Fun.
IIRC Thorsten Loesch has Suprovoxes in open baffle, with some sort of active bass unit(s) operating below. That sounds like a very good way to go.
I think you also have the wrong attitude that a Lowther couldn't satisfy your friend's needs. They would have to, however, be put in the correct enclosure, think Big Fun.
IIRC Thorsten Loesch has Suprovoxes in open baffle, with some sort of active bass unit(s) operating below. That sounds like a very good way to go.
> SumacSK
Many thanks for the links, they are very very interesting!
>Dumbass
Thanks for your opinion.
What I want is to try to avoid 3 way system and try to get a nice bass extension from wide range driver. More mid/bass wide range (that needs supertweeter on top) than typical ful range driver.
As to the Lowther, first I don't say it can't satysfiy me or my friend, but there are several limitation of using Lowther:
1. There will be some trouble with integrating it with the woofer.
2. Lowthers with additional high quality bass drivers will cost 2-3 times more than similar quality wide range drivers for two way system.
3. I'm sicking tired of drivers with whizzer cones sound. I for now prefer wide range drivers without it.
As to the Lowther in rear loaded horn... no matter what enclosure you put Lowther or Fostex driver in, the bass and highs will always suck. Sorry I've been there and 've done that, never again!
I personally like Lowther and Fostex , but for now I think they are only usable with additional bass drivers and tweeters.
This time we would like to stay with two ways, becouse of the cost of three way system of similar quality and becouse the room is just 25 square meters.
Bartek
Many thanks for the links, they are very very interesting!
>Dumbass
Thanks for your opinion.
What I want is to try to avoid 3 way system and try to get a nice bass extension from wide range driver. More mid/bass wide range (that needs supertweeter on top) than typical ful range driver.
As to the Lowther, first I don't say it can't satysfiy me or my friend, but there are several limitation of using Lowther:
1. There will be some trouble with integrating it with the woofer.
2. Lowthers with additional high quality bass drivers will cost 2-3 times more than similar quality wide range drivers for two way system.
3. I'm sicking tired of drivers with whizzer cones sound. I for now prefer wide range drivers without it.
As to the Lowther in rear loaded horn... no matter what enclosure you put Lowther or Fostex driver in, the bass and highs will always suck. Sorry I've been there and 've done that, never again!
I personally like Lowther and Fostex , but for now I think they are only usable with additional bass drivers and tweeters.
This time we would like to stay with two ways, becouse of the cost of three way system of similar quality and becouse the room is just 25 square meters.
Bartek
Hello Dan!
From looking at the 60° dispersion of the 215 GMF I assumed that there would still be 90° dispersion at 2Khz. I just looked at it again and saw that 30° and 60° curve is identical, probably an error. Somebody would have to ask Supravox to correct this.
In principle the advantage of such an arrangement is that you have full coherence of the sound, both directly and for the early wall reflections.
Greets, Oliver
From looking at the 60° dispersion of the 215 GMF I assumed that there would still be 90° dispersion at 2Khz. I just looked at it again and saw that 30° and 60° curve is identical, probably an error. Somebody would have to ask Supravox to correct this.
In principle the advantage of such an arrangement is that you have full coherence of the sound, both directly and for the early wall reflections.
Greets, Oliver
I've had an excellent listening experience with the Supravox 165GMF + FT17H tweeter. Very fast, ultra-detailed and not tiring driver.
The 165GMF is the only Supravox driver that is really interesting : all the others have a very very uneven frequency response, and a bad waterfall spectrum.
When I measured the system, I was amazed to see how flat the frequency response was : no correction needed !!
Consider it as an extended range driver, with a tweeter (ribbon must be an excellent match) and a sub if you want bass below 40Hz.
The 165GMF is the only Supravox driver that is really interesting : all the others have a very very uneven frequency response, and a bad waterfall spectrum.
When I measured the system, I was amazed to see how flat the frequency response was : no correction needed !!
Consider it as an extended range driver, with a tweeter (ribbon must be an excellent match) and a sub if you want bass below 40Hz.
Youyoung, James, Nielso
Bert Doppenberg uses the Supravox 285GMF as a single bass or double bass helper in Quasar variants, now going for his "custom" and highly priced 15 inch, which would require separate EQ and amplification...
what do you think/know about the 285GMF 99db, open baffle, with the new 98db tweeter on top, open baffle. With Fs/47, Xmax 8mm, it will be easy to get bass to 40Hz as suggested by Doppenberg. The entire side could theoretically be powered by one very small tube amp of 1-2 wpc.
Instead of "full ranger" + bass augmentation, what about a wide range starting from bass, + high sensitivity tweeter? ~98db
Bert Doppenberg uses the Supravox 285GMF as a single bass or double bass helper in Quasar variants, now going for his "custom" and highly priced 15 inch, which would require separate EQ and amplification...
what do you think/know about the 285GMF 99db, open baffle, with the new 98db tweeter on top, open baffle. With Fs/47, Xmax 8mm, it will be easy to get bass to 40Hz as suggested by Doppenberg. The entire side could theoretically be powered by one very small tube amp of 1-2 wpc.
Instead of "full ranger" + bass augmentation, what about a wide range starting from bass, + high sensitivity tweeter? ~98db
285GMF looks like a good driver, though its CSD graph isn't that pretty compared to the 165GMF's. It is at least flat up to 2kHz.
I'm not sure about the fact of cutting such a big driver directly with a tweeter in the full sensitivity bandwidth of human hearing. (2kHz)
I'd rather use an extended range driver for 150~10000Hz + big woofer + supertweeter.
I'm not sure about the fact of cutting such a big driver directly with a tweeter in the full sensitivity bandwidth of human hearing. (2kHz)
I'd rather use an extended range driver for 150~10000Hz + big woofer + supertweeter.
Along the same lines as the Hammer Dynamics, but on OB, nothing really new here, ... using accepted methodologies, such as the "Panneau" plan at Supravox, chopping that thing down to 42" and adding the tweeter right on top of the low rider 285GMF. The baffle for this driver has already been widely used, and now Doppenberg has taken things a step further, wrapping the baffle around to, and including the back, with cutouts = DIA + 1" of the driver, in this case 12" ...so, a 42 inch Quasar style baffle, with the 285 riding low to take advantage of floor coupling, and a little tweeter on top.
There is a guy in one of the above links stating that with EQ he can squeeze all kinds of HFr out of this driver, right into the sparkle zone, says he. Within limitations, it makes the 285 VERY interesting, IMO.
EQ if necessary to take advantage of the 285GMF linear Xmax of 8mm, and use any >97db tweeter. OB goodness + high dynamic capability coupled with ~99db, ability to be micro-powered. Sounds good to me..
Youyoung -- I also agree with everything you have said in the above post. But there are always exceptons, new ground. My main concern, frankly, is build quality, and the fact that I would have to import them all the way from Frankfurt.
There is a guy in one of the above links stating that with EQ he can squeeze all kinds of HFr out of this driver, right into the sparkle zone, says he. Within limitations, it makes the 285 VERY interesting, IMO.
EQ if necessary to take advantage of the 285GMF linear Xmax of 8mm, and use any >97db tweeter. OB goodness + high dynamic capability coupled with ~99db, ability to be micro-powered. Sounds good to me..
Youyoung -- I also agree with everything you have said in the above post. But there are always exceptons, new ground. My main concern, frankly, is build quality, and the fact that I would have to import them all the way from Frankfurt.
youyoung21147 said:
This is the route I'm going. I'm going to be using the Fostex 12" FW305, yet to be decided 6.5" driver and T90A supertweeter. I had wanted to do it all full open baffle, but don't really have the room to do it properly and let the woofers breathe.
I'll be crossing the woofers and full ranger at 200 hz, and the supertweeter will roll in pretty high. I may try bringing the super tweeter in lower down the road, as they probably provide better treble than the full ranger, in reality.
Anyway, similar concept to what you're after. If you do a search for the poster "Illusus", you'll see he went this route as well.
Onespeed
A fine spread you have, methinks. What made you decide on the Fostex 12? JohnK?
Hemp is coming out with an 8 inch wide ranger, sans whizz, supposedly good to ~9-10KHz, Fs45Hz, and I can tell you first hand that the sound of the hemp cone whiz model is sooooooo good, the coming WB unit can only be an improvement of sorts, sans whizz, that is.-- Any whizzer on this cone is out of its league, IMO, and the critical midrange is To Die For. I am using Louis' OEM version in his SuperHemps to try, and 'tis a mighty fine, organic sounding quite abit "larger" than any 8 inch I have heard. That one might be worth the wait.
A fine spread you have, methinks. What made you decide on the Fostex 12? JohnK?
Hemp is coming out with an 8 inch wide ranger, sans whizz, supposedly good to ~9-10KHz, Fs45Hz, and I can tell you first hand that the sound of the hemp cone whiz model is sooooooo good, the coming WB unit can only be an improvement of sorts, sans whizz, that is.-- Any whizzer on this cone is out of its league, IMO, and the critical midrange is To Die For. I am using Louis' OEM version in his SuperHemps to try, and 'tis a mighty fine, organic sounding quite abit "larger" than any 8 inch I have heard. That one might be worth the wait.
dmason
Thanks for that. It took me a long time to decide what to do on the low end. JC, (Joe Cole) was a great help with his thoughts and he helped me model a handful of drivers.
I wanted a 12" so the box could be a bit narrower than a 15" would require. (plus, I live in an apartment) And, the Fostex has an Fs of 25 hz, so this gave me some tuning options. It should be pretty good down into the upper / mid 30s.
As for the wide band driver, I've got the 168 and the 166ES-R on an OB right now so I can compare them a bit. The hemps do sound interesting. I'll hopefully be able to audition one of the smaller Lowther drivers in the very near future.
Any thoughts on when the new Hemps will be available?
Thanks for that. It took me a long time to decide what to do on the low end. JC, (Joe Cole) was a great help with his thoughts and he helped me model a handful of drivers.
I wanted a 12" so the box could be a bit narrower than a 15" would require. (plus, I live in an apartment) And, the Fostex has an Fs of 25 hz, so this gave me some tuning options. It should be pretty good down into the upper / mid 30s.
As for the wide band driver, I've got the 168 and the 166ES-R on an OB right now so I can compare them a bit. The hemps do sound interesting. I'll hopefully be able to audition one of the smaller Lowther drivers in the very near future.
Any thoughts on when the new Hemps will be available?
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.