Future woofer production - Page 5 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Commercial Sector > Manufacturers > Markaudio

Markaudio Designers and builders of audiophile grade drivers

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 9th January 2013, 06:04 PM   #41
wron is offline wron  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: canada
I've been working on my Gen.1 Alpair 10 (notch filters) using Dave's surplus Fonken boxes over the Christmas break - so I thought I'd chime in to express my wishlist for a future EL166 woofer (I have a pair of them as well). I've read the thread discussion regarding the difficulties of mass production, inventories and competing products. My take on the matter is produce a value oriented product but use several unique features to differentiate it from competing products. My dream woofer from Mark would include: natural paper cone, natural rubber surround, and a natural coloured Alpair frame -"all natural" and just for grins, an incorporated embossed EnABLed pattern on the cone near the surround edge (instead of the embossed cone rings on the prevoius design). Given the past performance of Mark's drivers, I wouldn't hesitate to pay 2X the price of the EL166 and, perhaps, this would compensate for smaller production runs. Certainly, the monochromatic colour of the woofer would help it stand out in a crowded marketplace. Thanks again to Mark for participating in this forum and supporting to the DIY market.
Cheers,
Ron
Listening to: Echo and the Bunnymen - Ocean Rain
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th January 2013, 06:46 PM   #42
wron is offline wron  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: canada
My inspiration - fitting with Markaudio's Asian heritage and manufacture
Attached Images
File Type: jpg CoralFlat5010.jpg (48.7 KB, 330 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th January 2013, 03:17 AM   #43
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Willamette Valley
Default 6 inch pansy

There are other players in this arena. Pansies are not allowed on the court.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th January 2013, 10:36 PM   #44
diyAudio Member
 
markaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuxedocivic View Post
If I may, I'd like to register my thoughts/interest.

As to the rhetorical question Mark stated about, why use woofers with heavy cones, big cone break ups, etc. No, it's not about the challenge. It's about stiff cones that stay very pistonic and linear even at high xmax and make very deep bass in small 10L enclosures because they have powerful motors. The better question in my mind, is why sacrifice point source, power response, and off axis linearity by using a cross over right around 2khz, just to achieve linear high output bass from a small box. My design philosophy as of late has been to not sacrifice those things to get bass yet still achieve. That means doing it one of 2 ways:

- FAST
- Waveguide tweeter 2-way with cross over between 900 and 1500hz.
- Multi Subwoofers with high effeciency waveguide 2-way

To speak to the first way of doing it, I think there is a lot, I mean a LOT of potential in the FAST arena and DIY'ers have only scratched the surface. You get point source, huge bass, 20 to 20 output, cheap to do, with very very few minor downsides. IMO, the best way to do a FAST (assuming no size or $ restraints) is to use a 12" woofer and a 3" full ranger crossed around 250hz with an active cross over.

As such, I believe DIY'ers should push this FAST market. Post designs and builds. Beg Mark to develope the A6 for this purpose. Push him for a real 10 or 12" woofer. Not a 6" pansy. And then build them
Hi Tux,
A set of interesting comments, keep them coming.

Ref. your statement (see the highlighted red text), please exercise more care as its a large over-simplification. While I appreciate you posting your opinions, your not a driver designer so its best to ask questions regarding the function and performance of cones.

Cones have a complex job to perform. For Full-Range/Wide band drivers, they have to oscillate (mechanical movement) and resonate (vibrate) in one operation and be part of the linear damping power-train arrangement. A cone by itself can't be considered "pistonic and linear", its the whole power-train that is required to perform these functions. The major components controlling linearity are the suspensions, the design of these items is more complex than the cone in many cases. A good performing Full-Range cone will have to be both resonant and micro-resonant capable. Driver designers with enough knowledge will chose a flex ratio, area to material mass ratio and design a dispersion profile to deliver the desired performance goal.

For woofers in domestic home audio, the issue of generating micro-resonance remains. Should the designer wish to produce a unit capable of re-producing reasonably accurate music in the lower frequency ranges, he/she must address the issue of keeping mass low and design accordingly. Sadly, most driver designers are "forced" into over-massing, over stiffening cones simply to handle marketing hyped power demands.

Please feel free to comment further but lets get away from over-simplified assertive comment. Your ideas are interesting, think more about how better to present them.

Thanks
Mark.

Last edited by markaudio; 11th January 2013 at 10:53 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th January 2013, 03:48 PM   #45
diyAudio Member
 
tuxedocivic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ladysmith, BC
Quote:
Originally Posted by markaudio View Post

Woof No.6 (EL-166) showed what could be done (near flat/linear response) for modest money once a bit of elbow grease design effort was put in. Ask yourself this question: Why is it that so many woofs have got large peaked outputs, yet sell so well? Surely a crossover design challenge, but why do so many users put themselves through such challenges, maybe because it is a test of their skill to tame an errant driver. Or is it simply that they little alternative product choice?
If the Woofer 6 was remade... it's one of those things, do you make it for a FAST application to compliment your full range drivers, or do you make it compete with the other competition offerings. If you make it a mid bass, then I'd suggest keeping the focus on midrange (80hz and up). If it's to be used in a FAST, then I'd suggest increasing Sd (substantially imo) and being concerned with 750hz and down. Chances are others may want that last part different. I know Dave would want something that is clean up to and beyond 1khz even for a FAST application, because he uses single order cross overs. So the myriad of desires is yours to ponder.

Last edited by markaudio; 14th January 2013 at 10:36 PM. Reason: removing commercial conflict
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th January 2013, 10:45 PM   #46
diyAudio Member
 
markaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuxedocivic View Post
If the Woofer 6 was remade... it's one of those things, do you make it for a FAST application to compliment your full range drivers, or do you make it compete with the other competition offerings. If you make it a mid bass, then I'd suggest keeping the focus on midrange (80hz and up). If it's to be used in a FAST, then I'd suggest increasing Sd (substantially imo) and being concerned with 750hz and down. Chances are others may want that last part different. I know Dave would want something that is clean up to and beyond 1khz even for a FAST application, because he uses single order cross overs. So the myriad of desires is yours to ponder.
Tux,
This section of your last post is good. Less confrontational and appreciative of other members views. Lets see more of this style in your future posts.

The first part of your previous post was confusing. You appeared to advocate the use of stiff heavy cones, something that runs against Markaudio design knowledge/philosophy/application. Should you wish to expand/advocate your assertive views about heavy stiff coned woofs/subs, the Sub-woofer section of Diyaudio is the appropriate place:

Subwoofers - diyAudio

For those members who wish to follow Tux's system design ideas, he's made a new thread on the full range section:

Cross Over design and Woofer choices for FAST

Mark

Last edited by markaudio; 14th January 2013 at 11:48 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th January 2013, 10:56 PM   #47
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Upplands Vsby (Sweden)
Mark, be proud of Woofer No.6 (EL-166) no matter what speakerbox I have put it in, it has always sounded amazing and suppriesed me in the best possibly way. Everything from small 9 liter "soft wall" box to THAM6 witch is a small tapped horn, more info here Martinsson's Blog - .

Next build is a "clone" of a swedish speaker OM2000 that Olle Mirsch built in 1985...
Click the image to open in full size.
Dimensioner: 70 x 32 x 25 cm, 1 Woofer No.6 and 2 Tweeter No.3, simple seriel crossover.

I just regret not to buying more, i'm a lucky owner of two pairs, one white and one black. Guess it is time to place a order on some more Tweeter No.3 i think, as you only regret what you didn't do, and I do regret that I didn't got more Woofer No.6.

Best regards
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th January 2013, 11:20 PM   #48
diyAudio Member
 
markaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Default Clear Design message on Markaudio woofers

Guys,
Many thanks for the various views and ideas raised on this thread, all much appreciated. There's allot for me to ponder. Feel free to keep your ideas coming.

Its possibly time for me to focus on the outline design of the next Woof:

It will be a lower power handling unit. My cone/power-train design knowledge affords me the opportunity to make an LF emitter that micro-resonant capable. Its cone will be able to carry and emit complex waves forms necessary for the more accurate detailed reproduction of music. Commercially, its a risky approach but having pondered all the views on this thread, I can't betray Markaudio's low-mass design philosophy.

As to size, range, SPL, look, paper or metal etc etc, I'm open to continuing ideas, thoughts based upon the principle I've outlined.

For those members who strongly support and advocate high power-handling LF drivers with higher massed power-trains, use the other forums (like the Sub-woofer section) to expound your thinking on this aspect of driver design and function.

Thanks
Mark.

Last edited by markaudio; 14th January 2013 at 11:28 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th January 2013, 01:38 AM   #49
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Willamette Valley
Well I'm fine with low mass low power high fidelity devices, since I hope to go in that direction as a human approaching 70 years myself. I still have the 1958 vintage Ampex console that my father provided as our basis for learning about music via recordings and radio. 12 watt 6V6 pp amps and 8" FR speaks in asymmetrical enclosures are the basis of my ear, so moving to wide range plus woofer is totally natural. I'm still disappointed in the failure of multiway systems to convince me, but so be it. We still don't have multiway microphones as far as I know.
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th January 2013, 02:24 AM   #50
diyAudio Member
 
markaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by phivates View Post
Well I'm fine with low mass low power high fidelity devices, since I hope to go in that direction as a human approaching 70 years myself. I still have the 1958 vintage Ampex console that my father provided as our basis for learning about music via recordings and radio. 12 watt 6V6 pp amps and 8" FR speaks in asymmetrical enclosures are the basis of my ear, so moving to wide range plus woofer is totally natural. I'm still disappointed in the failure of multiway systems to convince me, but so be it. We still don't have multiway microphones as far as I know.
Hello phivates (guys),
Thanks for your comments and support. You've hit the nail squarely on the head with by linking "low power" with "high fidelity". Sadly today, in the context of most musical re-production, many end-users have been negatively influenced by the sectors of the industry that more power delivers more quality.

For those members and observers of Diyaudio, a recap of the basic definition of original-histoical "High Fidelity" is:

That the reproduction is as close to the original source as possible

Granted there are degrees of "grey" in this debate. Those guys into "rock un roll, heavy beat/house music and dramatic home theatre, might naturally lean towards heavier duty speaker drivers and big amps. They might argue that in the case of some of their sourced material, it demands a system of large proportions. For example, the Terminator films might be at their most dramatic when played on large power audio systems. I don't have any problem with their system design approach in this context.

However, in the context of accurate musical re-production, their high-power philosophy won't work well. There is a misguided assumption amongst some members who fall into the "power" camp, that somehow a big thick cone can "magically" create accurate musical output, for example a basso profundo (baritone) vocal, or the subtle nuance of the Double Bass. Those of us who have professional driver design knowledge knows the physics and mechanics involved and understand the design limitations of such an approach.

Like member phivates (et.al) I've rarely been convinced by 2 way or multiway systems. I have only found a few gems in all my years. Those members who know me well might recall my passion for the Victor SX500 Spirit series (I've got 2 pairs in mint/near mint condition):

VICTOR ƒXƒs[ƒJ[ƒVƒXƒeƒ€SX-500‚Žd—l ƒrƒNƒ^[

Norio Nakajima san has recently produced a corker (fab) of a small 2 way named the "Duo 60" - see pic. He spent around 200 hours of experimental time just to get the cross-overs sorted. I'm more than happy to support such a high level of dedication - see pic.

Markaudio concentrates its efforts on the design and manufacture of drivers that focus on historical/traditional High Fidelity concepts and thinking. Technically, our expertise is in low mass wide band drivers so it makes natural sense for us to mostly stay in the sector we understand best.
Thanks
Mark.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Duo60-1.jpg (33.1 KB, 188 views)

Last edited by markaudio; 15th January 2013 at 02:58 AM.
  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
Woofer-Fullrange-Woofer vs Tweeter-Midrange-Woofer fakeout Multi-Way 5 11th August 2012 06:17 PM
VAM1202 out of production ? ashok Chip Amps 5 12th January 2010 08:01 PM
Tubes currently in production Nevod Tubes / Valves 4 3rd August 2008 10:47 AM
Best production EL34? Pyre Tubes / Valves 39 26th December 2007 12:32 AM
Is piezosource in production yet? Mikael Abdellah Planars & Exotics 0 7th January 2007 06:58 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 05:55 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