CHR-70 GENERATION 3 - COMING SOON - Page 2 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Commercial Sector > Manufacturers > Markaudio

Markaudio Designers and builders of audiophile grade drivers

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 4th March 2011, 03:55 PM   #11
sarte is offline sarte  Finland
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Hooray!! I totally fell in love with my gen2 CHRs and the sound is quite amazing in this price range. Really looking forward for your first impressions how they sound compared to gen 2

As your previous question... If I understood the spider dilemma correctly difference between conex and cotton is mainly in power handling? If so I would give my vote for unchanged T/S. 20 wats is quite enough for most of the applications I can think of. Of course better power figure might increase sales just because it looks better.

8 Ohms would also be great
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2011, 05:25 PM   #12
Lerg is offline Lerg  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
I don't think that an extra 3 watts in power handling is a great choice if it means a drop in efficiency of 1 db or more.
I trust you to make the best choice, but option 1 and 2 looks like better options.
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2011, 08:35 PM   #13
djanci is offline djanci  Croatia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Mark,
thanks for sharing designing ideas and building progress of your drivers with us.

What spider to coil connection type do you use for current drivers? 20 to 23W gain is only 0,6dB maxSPL gain so not worth of any drop in efficiency.

It's a little off topic but can you please explain why all your current drivers has Qms<2. Is that some kind of compromise? I recently found interview with Joachim Gerhard founder and head engineer of the Audio Physic and he stated: "...What many driver manufacturers have done the last years, is to increase the damping to make the frequency response more flat...The old drivers had Qms values of maybe 5 to 7! We found that drivers with a very high mechanical Q sound more open, more clean and dynamic...So a high mechanical Q is a very good indicator of energy storage behavior. This is one of our secrets. One of the many!". Full article is HERE.
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2011, 08:47 PM   #14
frugal-phile(tm)
diyAudio Moderator
 
planet10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Victoria, BC, NA, Sol III
Blog Entries: 5
A driver with low mechanical Q becomes a candidtae for current drive... and the MA drivers crtainly have no issues with open, clean, and dynamic.

dave
__________________
community sites t-linespeakers.org, frugal-horn.com, frugal-phile.com ........ commercial site planet10-HiFi
p10-hifi forum here at diyA
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2011, 10:05 PM   #15
diyAudio Member
 
markaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by sarte View Post
Hooray!! I totally fell in love with my gen2 CHRs and the sound is quite amazing in this price range. Really looking forward for your first impressions how they sound compared to gen 2

As your previous question... If I understood the spider dilemma correctly difference between conex and cotton is mainly in power handling? If so I would give my vote for unchanged T/S. 20 wats is quite enough for most of the applications I can think of. Of course better power figure might increase sales just because it looks better.
8 Ohms would also be great
Hi Sarte,
Many thanks for you support.
Yes, the advantage of cotton is its light weight and flexibility. But a bit more tricky to mould if we use the No.4 shape. I'm sort with you on the un-changed T/S although theres an opportunity to get a bit more SPL.

Ummmmmmmph...... more opinions please.

Cheers
Mark.
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2011, 10:18 PM   #16
diyAudio Member
 
markaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lerg View Post
I don't think that an extra 3 watts in power handling is a great choice if it means a drop in efficiency of 1 db or more.
I trust you to make the best choice, but option 1 and 2 looks like better options.
Many thanks Lerg,
From the engineering/assembly point of view No.2 and No.3 on the spider line drawing are likely the best compromise. We could use Cotton while keeping control on glue volumes (especially No.2), the joint being reasonably robust.

Thing is I'm working with fantastic X Fostex guys, they really enjoy pushing the driver performance envelope. Given that I also enjoy doing the same, its rather like watching one of the "mad scientist" movies from the 50's. Guys in white coats running inventing all sorts. Anyway, back to earth...........

The CHR-70 appears to sell into 2 areas. First is the fairly traditional DIY build market, second is the newer computery/desk-top'ish and Home Theatre markets. SPL on the one side, power on the other?

Maybe we should try to make an additional 8 ohm or "power model"?

More opinion is welcome.

Cheers
Mark.
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2011, 10:24 PM   #17
frugal-phile(tm)
diyAudio Moderator
 
planet10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Victoria, BC, NA, Sol III
Blog Entries: 5
8 ohms would suit the lower budget HT receivers better, and would allow more traditional parallel wiring of systems with 2 drivers /box

dave
__________________
community sites t-linespeakers.org, frugal-horn.com, frugal-phile.com ........ commercial site planet10-HiFi
p10-hifi forum here at diyA
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2011, 10:27 PM   #18
diyAudio Member
 
Rullknufs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Sweden
Send a message via Skype™ to Rullknufs
Quote:
Originally Posted by markaudio View Post
Many thanks Lerg,
From the engineering/assembly point of view No.2 and No.3 on the spider line drawing are likely the best compromise. We could use Cotton while keeping control on glue volumes (especially No.2), the joint being reasonably robust.

Thing is I'm working with fantastic X Fostex guys, they really enjoy pushing the driver performance envelope. Given that I also enjoy doing the same, its rather like watching one of the "mad scientist" movies from the 50's. Guys in white coats running inventing all sorts. Anyway, back to earth...........

The CHR-70 appears to sell into 2 areas. First is the fairly traditional DIY build market, second is the newer computery/desk-top'ish and Home Theatre markets. SPL on the one side, power on the other?

Maybe we should try to make an additional 8 ohm or "power model"?

More opinion is welcome.

Cheers
Mark.
To find new awesome stuff you have to experiment and do new stuff
I really like the... way you are working. Asking the DIY-community what they want and then you do it and the result is awesome products.
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2011, 10:40 PM   #19
diyAudio Member
 
markaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by djanci View Post
Mark,
thanks for sharing designing ideas and building progress of your drivers with us. What spider to coil connection type do you use for current drivers? 20 to 23W gain is only 0,6dB maxSPL gain so not worth of any drop in efficiency.

It's a little off topic but can you please explain why all your current drivers has Qms<2. Is that some kind of compromise? I recently found interview with Joachim Gerhard founder and head engineer of the Audio Physic and he stated: "...What many driver manufacturers have done the last years, is to increase the damping to make the frequency response more flat...The old drivers had Qms values of maybe 5 to 7! We found that drivers with a very high mechanical Q sound more open, more clean and dynamic...So a high mechanical Q is a very good indicator of energy storage behavior. This is one of our secrets. One of the many!". Full article is HERE.
Hi Dj,
On the Alps, No.1 and similar as they afford low mass. We do have access to super-strong industrial/aerospace adhesives so it all helps. But looking a past threads, especially those focusing on CHR/P and EL-70, the guys do like to drive their speaks.....ummmmmph hence flagging up this issue before I build the next batch.

It OK to mention other stuff. If the additional topic becomes popular, we can give it a new thread. I don't agree with the suggestion that increased damping automatically = more clean and open sound. Driver design/build is far more complex than this statement suggests. "Open and clean" sound is more an design issue for front of power-train (cone, cap and front suspension design).

Cheers
Mark.

Last edited by markaudio; 4th March 2011 at 10:42 PM. Reason: additional
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th March 2011, 01:02 AM   #20
Lerg is offline Lerg  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
I may be ill informed, but I would expect that the more moving mass you have, the more important it becomes to have additional mechanical damping built into the driver.
The prospect of an 8 ohm driver does seem interesting for dual driver designs or HT use.
  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
chr-70 vs. chp-70? Sonogasm Full Range 10 26th November 2011 06:02 PM
New CHR-70 markaudio Markaudio 68 3rd February 2011 02:44 PM
CHR-70, CHP-70, Alpair 7 Desktops - Japan markaudio Full Range 4 1st February 2010 02:42 AM
F.A.S.T. Project: Tangband W3-315 vs. MARK AUDIO CHR-70, CSS EL-70 or Alpair jockel77 Full Range 13 12th January 2010 12:20 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:52 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