Comparing three different Alpair's

[hajj]

Scott can correct me on the short answer - sure they'd fit and make sound, but not likely work as well as the drivers for which the design was targeted - the new 10.3 and P. On initial listening, the 10.3 seems to be less of a "bass monster" than the earlier 2 versions, and far more extended in the upper registers. Of course only a few dozens of hours of break-in and playing time on either of these yet, so the next couple of weeks should be fun.

For my money the best performing enclosures that I've heard for the 10.2 would be an MLTL like Brines' A10-M10, the Pensils, or with a smaller real estate cost, any of the MarKens. If you want a BLH type, and can afford the space, the Silbury - Scott, would that one need revisions for the new drivers?

Thanks for the answer Chris.
Well, concerning the FHXL, I just thought it would be worth a shot to try and see if the general dimensions would allow the 10.2 to make decent sound, especially considering that the differences in key T/S parameters (Fs, Qts, Vas) do not differ much from the 10.3's.

I have nearly finished assembling a pair of 10.2 pensils (interested in hearing how the pensils' pro-like alignment sounds like) and have bought the Silbury plans months ago, but only managed to have the large panels CNC'd so far.
I have 4 Markaudio pairs of drivers that I need to listen to and only 2 of them have been built into enclosures (Alpair 7 FH3 still breaking in, and CHR-70 pensils)

I am very much interested in hearing your opinion about the different enclosures especially how the MarKens sound in the bass registers compared to the pensils and Bob's A10-M10. (They most probably don't go as low, but what's the upshot besides the smaller real estate cost?)

Thanks

Nick

 

[chrisb]

Definitely the Pensils or A10M10 will dig much deeper and have more impact than the MarKens - with whichever driver model used - but the trade-off made with the latter enclosure if for more smoothly controlled roll off.

To be fair, if you're not mounting on a shelf or existing table, etc, which may certainly not the best acoustically, by the time you consider a decent stand for the MarKens, the effective real estate footprint will be approx the same as a floorstander - not to mention the cost of buying or building a decent stand could easily surpass the additional cost of materials for a full size enclosure.

While I've built dozens of pairs of Fonken/MarKens of various sizes for at least a half dozen makes / models of drivers, and as one can imagine, a wide range enclosures transit through my HT "test" system, the longest lived design in the upstairs music system is currently a pair of Pensils. (Alpair7s)

 

[Lerg]

I found that the Mar-Kel70^2 dug quite deep, never got to experience those drivers in a Pensil. It does make me wonder if a Mar-Ken10.3^2 floor stander would compare to a Pensil.

The comparisons are interesting, it seems like the drivers are all very good with differences in presentation. I will have to try and get boxes built for the 10.3's I have sitting around, hopefully trapezoid boxes aren't too much harder to build than rectangular boxes.

 

[Bob Brines]

Got a couple of hours with the A10M.3 and A7.3. I'll tell you there isn't much to pick between these. The A7.3 is a bit softer in presentation and the A10M.3 is a bit more sibilant. I didn't find the huge hump centered around 10kHz objectionable. It sure makes cymbals ring!

I'll have to revisit this after a put a few more hours on the A10M's. I have a hunch that there will be so little to choose from in the mids and highs that the nod will go to the A10M because of the better bass.

The A7.3 is in my T7-A7 TL tuned to 43Hz and the A10M.3 is in what will be my B10-A10 BL -- currently tuned to 38Hz. Too low! The speakers are 2.25m apart and the mic 2.25m back. The speakers are toed to cross 15cm in front of the mic. Both channels driven and the amp set the same for both speakers. (REW decides on its own what the SPL level will show -- I set the amp to give 75dB with pick noise.

Bob

 

[chrisb]

I found that the Mar-Kel70^2 dug quite deep, never got to experience those drivers in a Pensil. It does make me wonder if a Mar-Ken10.3^2 floor stander would compare to a Pensil.

The comparisons are interesting, it seems like the drivers are all very good with differences in presentation. I will have to try and get boxes built for the 10.3's I have sitting around, hopefully trapezoid boxes aren't too much harder to build than rectangular boxes.

maybe 10% (degrees) harder and if using 18mm material the 2 steps of chamfers on the sides is a bit of a pain - personally, I like to key the back panel into the sides and full length port spacer blocks

in fact a pair of those is on the short list , hopefully to b completed before the 16th

 

[Squeak]

Got a couple of hours with the A10M.3 and A7.3. I'll tell you there isn't much to pick between these. The A7.3 is a bit softer in presentation and the A10M.3 is a bit more sibilant. I didn't find the huge hump centered around 10kHz objectionable. It sure makes cymbals ring!

I'll have to revisit this after a put a few more hours on the A10M's. I have a hunch that there will be so little to choose from in the mids and highs that the nod will go to the A10M because of the better bass.

The A7.3 is in my T7-A7 TL tuned to 43Hz and the A10M.3 is in what will be my B10-A10 BL -- currently tuned to 38Hz. Too low! The speakers are 2.25m apart and the mic 2.25m back. The speakers are toed to cross 15cm in front of the mic. Both channels driven and the amp set the same for both speakers. (REW decides on its own what the SPL level will show -- I set the amp to give 75dB with pick noise.

Bob

Weird that the off-axis behavior seems to be better with the A10 (smoother and not quite as much falloff) considering a larger driver should do worse (I'm looking at the official documentation here).
This would not only bode for better everyday/casual use but also get you better room integration.
Is this something you can hear in you setup too mr. Brines?

 

[Bob Brines]

I think you read the traces wrong. The black trace is the A7, the red the A10M. The A10M recovers sooner from the treble roll-off that this accounts for the increased sibilance I notice in the A10M.

All of the Alpairs have very shallow cone contours, and this makes for better off-axis response. It also makes for a very smooth power response as one moves around the room.

BTW, the listening chair is a good 2m from the back wall. There is very little back splash from the rear wall.

Bob

 

[Squeak]

No no, I wasn't looking at your curves but at the official documents an the MA site.
Even if they have the same angle og steepnes it is still remarkable that the larger driver performers so well off-axis (better in fact as it appeals?) and that your traces are so close save for a bit at both ends.

 

[BYRTT]

Thanks for Measurement result in shop.
Looks very much one get A7.3+10hz at bottom in the 10M.3.
Have 10M.2 and always because of positive reviews of A7.3 had nearly bought myself a pair.
Now i think i go for 10M.3 in BR after your review, and get the mentioned beatifull top.
Will check your web later in sommer if you will offer plans for BR model.
BR Ricky