CHR-70 GENERATION 3 - COMING SOON - Page 4 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Commercial Sector > Manufacturers > Markaudio

Markaudio Designers and builders of audiophile grade drivers

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 5th March 2011, 07:59 PM   #31
AEIOU is offline AEIOU  United States
Account disabled at member's request
 
AEIOU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Send a message via AIM to AEIOU Send a message via MSN to AEIOU Send a message via Yahoo to AEIOU
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scottmoose View Post
Extra efficiency would be a bonus, but I am strongly opposed to a drop, just to obtain a couple of extra watts of power handling. The CHR is already a relatively low efficiency unit & I don't think it can really afford to loose any.
Absolutely!
  Reply With Quote
Old 6th March 2011, 01:38 AM   #32
diyAudio Member
 
markaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Hi Guys,
This members who'd like to chat more specifically on Amp voltage/current etc., I've made a new thread for you:

Amps - voltage/current discussion

I've migrated the relevant posts from this thread to the new. Apologies if I've missed any posts that should be moved.

In the meantime, please feel free to post more about the new CHR-70 on this thread.

Cheers

Mark.
  Reply With Quote
Old 6th March 2011, 01:39 AM   #33
germpod is offline germpod  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
I am in the camp that would prefer higher efficiency vs lower efficiency, along with being 8 ohms if possible. The QTS seems fine for both vented and sealed enclosures, so I would leave that where it is.

I may be wrong on this, but I am under the impression that most of the DIY full range audio people are using low powered amps in the form of Tubes, T-Amps, Gainclones, or First Watt clones. Lower efficiency would exclude all of those users, and the drivers would seem to be mostly usable by the home entertainment people (though that is a sizable market).

Making it 8 ohms makes it so you can use two drivers to get an extra 3db of efficiency which is quite appealing, to go along with the other benefits of using two drivers.

Ed Robinson
  Reply With Quote
Old 6th March 2011, 01:45 AM   #34
diyAudio Member
 
markaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Hi Guys,
Summarising so far we have................

1 - OK having a more rigid frame
2 - OK having a new cap
3 - Cotton spider with No.2 coil connection is looking OK
4 - Power handling around 20 watts (nom) is still OK
5 - A bit more SPL would be welcomed
6 - An 8 ohm version would be welcome

Please feel free to keep feeding back. Please encourage members on the full-range section to joint in. Now is the time to place opinions.

Thanks
Mark.
  Reply With Quote
Old 6th March 2011, 01:48 AM   #35
diyAudio Member
 
markaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by germpod View Post
I am in the camp that would prefer higher efficiency vs lower efficiency, along with being 8 ohms if possible. The QTS seems fine for both vented and sealed enclosures, so I would leave that where it is.

I may be wrong on this, but I am under the impression that most of the DIY full range audio people are using low powered amps in the form of Tubes, T-Amps, Gainclones, or First Watt clones. Lower efficiency would exclude all of those users, and the drivers would seem to be mostly usable by the home entertainment people (though that is a sizable market).

Making it 8 ohms makes it so you can use two drivers to get an extra 3db of efficiency which is quite appealing, to go along with the other benefits of using two drivers.

Ed Robinson
Hi Ed, Guys
Thanks for your thoughts
Question.......Should I only make the new CHR in 8 ohm (drop the 4 ohm coil)?
Please feel free to encourage more replies (thanks)

Thanks
Mark.
  Reply With Quote
Old 6th March 2011, 01:49 AM   #36
germpod is offline germpod  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
I am also under the impression that lower efficiency drivers are less capable of good dynamics then high efficiency drivers, though I have not verified if that is true or not. I have read it on the forum in the past though, and know that other people share that impression.

Ed Robinson
  Reply With Quote
Old 6th March 2011, 03:03 AM   #37
frugal-phile(tm)
diyAudio Moderator
 
planet10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Victoria, BC, NA, Sol III
Blog Entries: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by germpod View Post
I may be wrong on this, but I am under the impression that most of the DIY full range audio people are using low powered amps in the form of Tubes, T-Amps, Gainclones, or First Watt clones. Lower efficiency would exclude all of those users, and the drivers would seem to be mostly usable by the home entertainment people (though that is a sizable market).
The CHR is attracting a whole bunch of people using typical Japanese receievers and even thou they have low measured efficiency (i've gotten a touch over 82.5 db 1W/1m (T/S)) there are people happily using very low power amplifiers (3.5w)

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 6th March 2011, 03:07 AM   #38
frugal-phile(tm)
diyAudio Moderator
 
planet10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Victoria, BC, NA, Sol III
Blog Entries: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by markaudio View Post
1 - OK having a more rigid frame
Where the fixing holes moved so that they aren't so close to the driver cutout?

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 6th March 2011, 03:16 AM   #39
diyAudio Member
 
Scottmoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Re dynamics, depends on the drive unit in question. Dynamic BW is related to efficiency, power handling & linear powertrain deflection. You can have an HE unit with very little Xmax, and therefore it will have a relatively low linear dynamic BW. Conversely, you could have a drive unit with a little less efficiency, but significantly greater powerhandling & Xmax, which may have a wider dynamic range than the nominally HE driver.

All other things being equal the higher the efficiency the better. Problem is, it's almost impossible to only change efficiency & keep all other factors equal, so we're back to picking the compromises that best suits a given set of requirements.

Mark -I again strongly urge that the Gen.3 driver should be consistent with the current Gen.2 model in basic spec. (in T/S terms, Q, Vas & Fs as close as possible to the existing unit). If it significantly departs from these, remember that all the existing box designs for the CHR will need to be redesigned, and in many cases completely scrapped and new ones developed from scratch. As a wide variety of available projects tends to help unit sales, it's something to keep in mind.

Last edited by Scottmoose; 6th March 2011 at 03:44 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 6th March 2011, 03:19 AM   #40
germpod is offline germpod  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Scott,

Thank you for the clarification :-) It seems in audio it always comes back to what compromises make the most ideal situation for you in your room.

Ed Robinson
  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 05:02 PM
New CHR-70 markaudio Markaudio 68 3rd February 2011 01:44 PM
CHR-70, CHP-70, Alpair 7 Desktops - Japan markaudio Full Range 4 1st February 2010 01:42 AM
F.A.S.T. Project: Tangband W3-315 vs. MARK AUDIO CHR-70, CSS EL-70 or Alpair jockel77 Full Range 13 11th January 2010 11:20 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:43 PM.


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