Hi Jose,
You may also want to consider the ATC SB75-314SC (12") and SB75-375SC & SB100-375SC (15")
SB=Studio Bass, First figure = Voice coil diameter, Second figure = Overall diameter, SC = Underhung
All of these drivers seem to fit your stated requirements.
ATC also makes the same drivers with overhung voice coils and a complementary range of PA drivers.
Cheers, Ralph
You may also want to consider the ATC SB75-314SC (12") and SB75-375SC & SB100-375SC (15")
SB=Studio Bass, First figure = Voice coil diameter, Second figure = Overall diameter, SC = Underhung
All of these drivers seem to fit your stated requirements.
ATC also makes the same drivers with overhung voice coils and a complementary range of PA drivers.
Cheers, Ralph
The interesting Iconic driver may be a good choise for low level resolution with small amps .... but it might be a question whether it will work with the 6" Thiel ... but we havent heard any prices yet
But to me its still not exactly clear which type of speaker you are aiming at, other than you want it very big
I may have missed information about which type of tweeter, amps and xo will be used
But to me its still not exactly clear which type of speaker you are aiming at, other than you want it very big
I may have missed information about which type of tweeter, amps and xo will be used
Well, here's some information then. Enjoy !
- Source : dedicated audio PC with a Lynx TWO-B card
- Software : foobar (KS) + ASIO FX Processor + 3 x IZotope Ozone (bass, mid, high)
- xo : with Ozone, estimated 200-250 Hz and 2500-3000 Hz
- Amps : 12 DIY lateralMOSfet-based mono amps (6 for the stereo, the other 6 for the HT part in 7.1 or so) : 170W/8Ohm, SNR=128dB (yes, really), THD>100dB @ full power (yes, really too), almost unmeasurable @ 80% of full power, 48A capability. Quite decent stuff IMHO.
- Tweeter : not choosen yet (first the mid, then the bass, and in the end the tweeter). Some good candidates (Accuton C24/6 of course, Scanspeak 2904-7000x, Fountek NeoPro 5I and some other ribbons... but let's stay within this subject please).
BTW, the Accuton C90-T6 is a 7", not 6.
Regarding the Iconic drivers, I was wondering the same. I fear they might appear somewhat colored, just like old-fashioned Altec drivers. But maybe I'm thinking too much, I don't know yet. Oh BTW, Iconic doesn't provide all the T/S information, and I just can't find it over their site (strange !). For all 3 models (165-8G, 165-16G, 165-8GHP), I am still missing BL, Mms, Cms, Rms and Le1k. If somebody can help... thanks !
- Source : dedicated audio PC with a Lynx TWO-B card
- Software : foobar (KS) + ASIO FX Processor + 3 x IZotope Ozone (bass, mid, high)
- xo : with Ozone, estimated 200-250 Hz and 2500-3000 Hz
- Amps : 12 DIY lateralMOSfet-based mono amps (6 for the stereo, the other 6 for the HT part in 7.1 or so) : 170W/8Ohm, SNR=128dB (yes, really), THD>100dB @ full power (yes, really too), almost unmeasurable @ 80% of full power, 48A capability. Quite decent stuff IMHO.
- Tweeter : not choosen yet (first the mid, then the bass, and in the end the tweeter). Some good candidates (Accuton C24/6 of course, Scanspeak 2904-7000x, Fountek NeoPro 5I and some other ribbons... but let's stay within this subject please).
BTW, the Accuton C90-T6 is a 7", not 6.
Regarding the Iconic drivers, I was wondering the same. I fear they might appear somewhat colored, just like old-fashioned Altec drivers. But maybe I'm thinking too much, I don't know yet. Oh BTW, Iconic doesn't provide all the T/S information, and I just can't find it over their site (strange !). For all 3 models (165-8G, 165-16G, 165-8GHP), I am still missing BL, Mms, Cms, Rms and Le1k. If somebody can help... thanks !
I would really rethink about the AER SC 12" .... its surely not a sub driver as it is a 97db intended to be used with their own fullrange drivers
What is remarkable is the very low Fs of 25hz .. it cant be a heavy cone with the 97db
The medium Qts=0.35 gives a -3db at 50hz in 65 liter closed(0.5) ... should be quite perfect with a sub
At 658 EUR/pr with NEO motor I consider it a small bargain .... but would like to see some pictures
I still dont understand why you need big VAS with a midbass, when you will use a sub
I think that a midbass that goes "straight" down to 50hz in closed should be way better than the use of BR, when used with subs
And if you really prefer BR it is straight down to 30hz in the same 65liter
But you will need VERY good subs to get much lower than this driver seems to do - I admit, I dont quite understand how they manage this with a 97db
What is remarkable is the very low Fs of 25hz .. it cant be a heavy cone with the 97db
The medium Qts=0.35 gives a -3db at 50hz in 65 liter closed(0.5) ... should be quite perfect with a sub
At 658 EUR/pr with NEO motor I consider it a small bargain .... but would like to see some pictures
I still dont understand why you need big VAS with a midbass, when you will use a sub
I think that a midbass that goes "straight" down to 50hz in closed should be way better than the use of BR, when used with subs
And if you really prefer BR it is straight down to 30hz in the same 65liter
But you will need VERY good subs to get much lower than this driver seems to do - I admit, I dont quite understand how they manage this with a 97db
Hey tinitus,
I really am not ready to give a close look at the AER SC 12". First, there's no much info available at AER site. Second, maybe I'm wrong but I'm not sure that a car woofer really has its place in a high-end Home-Hifi cabinet. Three, it looks quite expensive (for that price I could have almost every other speaker mentioned in this thread, including the TADs !). And fourth... who has already listened to it ?...
As for the VAS, let me give you a small explanation. In fact it's not the Vas we're interested in : it's the Cms (but the Vas is always given, not the Cms). If you take a close look at T/S parameters of a bunch of speakers, you'll see that a high Vas also means a high Cms : both parameters are quite close to being proportional, right ? But why a high Cms then ?
Well, we believe that a high Cms means (if the speaker is charged correctly of course) a good quality of the transients when you listen at a moderate power (let's say in "everyday's listening conditions"). Of course this is not the complete explanation, it's just the beginning of it. It's just our opinion, but please let's not start a debate over it. You don't have to agree, but we are not here to discuss that over and over. Thanks.
Come on tinitus, you know that as long as we speak of T/S, everybody will have a different opinion / a different "recipe" / etc. That's part of the fun isn't it ? (well, I'm not sure it's really funny but anyway... )
PS : BTW, we have nothing against sealed enclosures, and we have not decided yet if we'll go sealed or BR. It will surely depend on the driver we choose.
I really am not ready to give a close look at the AER SC 12". First, there's no much info available at AER site. Second, maybe I'm wrong but I'm not sure that a car woofer really has its place in a high-end Home-Hifi cabinet. Three, it looks quite expensive (for that price I could have almost every other speaker mentioned in this thread, including the TADs !). And fourth... who has already listened to it ?...
As for the VAS, let me give you a small explanation. In fact it's not the Vas we're interested in : it's the Cms (but the Vas is always given, not the Cms). If you take a close look at T/S parameters of a bunch of speakers, you'll see that a high Vas also means a high Cms : both parameters are quite close to being proportional, right ? But why a high Cms then ?
Well, we believe that a high Cms means (if the speaker is charged correctly of course) a good quality of the transients when you listen at a moderate power (let's say in "everyday's listening conditions"). Of course this is not the complete explanation, it's just the beginning of it. It's just our opinion, but please let's not start a debate over it. You don't have to agree, but we are not here to discuss that over and over. Thanks.
Come on tinitus, you know that as long as we speak of T/S, everybody will have a different opinion / a different "recipe" / etc. That's part of the fun isn't it ? (well, I'm not sure it's really funny but anyway...
)PS : BTW, we have nothing against sealed enclosures, and we have not decided yet if we'll go sealed or BR. It will surely depend on the driver we choose.
First I think that a big box might not be the very best, in respect to ressonanses, but thats a different matter
AER ... its really NOT one of the ordinary car woofer like you seem to think ... but its apparent that they would like to get into this market with their special consept
A special 8" fullrange with a 12" woofer, in a car .... well, who knows
BTW... 658EUR is a pair
Damm .... no more advertising
AER ... its really NOT one of the ordinary car woofer like you seem to think ... but its apparent that they would like to get into this market with their special consept
A special 8" fullrange with a 12" woofer, in a car .... well, who knows
BTW... 658EUR is a pair
Damm .... no more advertising
It's easy to calculate. If we go up to 200 Hz, the half-wavelength is 86cm... and I haven't said that we'd use a very big box. If we go sealed we'll try to approach Qtc = 0,50, but if we go BR, we'll probably try a low tuning to avoid group delay problems, and a volume not too big to avoid excursion / distorsion problems.
But again, all this is another subject.
Ah ! That's different !
(but I don't like them anyway)
Jose Hidalgo said:
The 165-8G is identical to the Altec Lansing 515-8G. You can use the same T/S parameters.
For the 515-8G, I found at http://www.thielesmall.com
BL = 17.3 Tm
Mms = 58.42g
Now that you have these, you should be able to calculate the other parameters except for Le. Would Le be significant at 250Hz? I wouldn't think so.
I don't have a large frame of reference from which to compare these Altec 515-16Gs I'm using, so I wont say anything other than I think they're pretty good.
Hi Jose,
See this pdf:
http://www.altecpro.com/pdfs/vintage/SpeakerAndMics/speakers/515-G series LF Speaker.pdf
It agrees with the Iconic data for their identical drivers and it offer a little more data. The previous Bl and Mms I posted both seem too high.
Cheers,
Jeff
See this pdf:
http://www.altecpro.com/pdfs/vintage/SpeakerAndMics/speakers/515-G series LF Speaker.pdf
It agrees with the Iconic data for their identical drivers and it offer a little more data. The previous Bl and Mms I posted both seem too high.
Cheers,
Jeff
Jose Hidalgo said:
I think if you key in the known parameters into UniBox or similar software, you will find that the calculated numbers for the Altec vs Iconic are identical.
Those Mms figures were calculated with Sd = 890 cm^2, but the Altec sheet shows Sd as somewhat less, so Mms (and BL) will be less. Unibox says 53.28g for the Altec 515-8G. This would be true of the Iconic drivers as they use exactly the same cone assemblies as the Altec units.
I'm confused here. You are talking about a large diaphram, correct? If so you're talking about a speaker that is intended for the lowest octaves, right? If not please correct me.
If that holds true i.e., larger diaphrams have difficulty with higher frequencies then (anything above maybe 5-700Hz), why are you not looking at the only parameters that really matter for such a large diaphram? So, what are they?
A: X-max - ability to move large volumes of air. X-Dam needs to be over 20mm (estimate).
B: QTS - the difficulty of enclosure design associated is clearly an issue. To achieve resonable low frequency response how much equalization will be required? Some of these drivers suggested have qts figures below .20.
C: MMS or weight (combined with it's stiffness) of the diaprahm assumes an ability to respond quickly and to decay quickly and to be able to handle higher frequencies (let's say 500hz to 1000hz).
D: VAS appears to be little more than the combination to determine ideal enclosure size, which, still matters little when considering equalization will be necessary. It's merely a matter of how much.
E: Published distortion graphs/figures. Are they truly relevant? Is it not true that you'll have to push a 12" twice as hard to achieve the same output as a 15"? I think this is simply a matter of physics, is it not? If so then you can expect, without exception, that a 12" will produce considerably more distortion than a 15", not true?
Therefore, published distortion figures can almost be assumed to be irrelevant, why? Because if you have to push the driver that hard, to obtain the same results, you are looking at the wrong driver.
The reality is very simple; You can count on one hand the drivers that can produce the lowest octaves, with ease (i.e.: low Fs) while still being able to produce higher frequencies with alsolute accuracy, correct? Wouldn't MMS (and the diaphram's stiffness) be of paramount importance in order to accomplish this?
As a result, wouldn't only 2 parameters matter (assuming you're speaking of a quality built driver)? That would be MMS and then Fs? The rest will take care of itself, would it not?
I guess it depends on your goal. Mine was to have a low frequency driver that had the innate capacity to move more than the necessary amount of air with ease (i.e.: a 15" or larger), then to drive it cleanly without ever having to push it toward it's limits (i.e.: controlling it's need to approach distortion producing levels)? X-max requirements for 15" drivers is markedly lower than for a 12", is it not? If so then you can expect them to sing with ease all that a 12" simply cannot (physics, right?). And then, what of a transform circuit? Which would be easier to implement without worry of pushing the driver into distortion? This is where efficiency above 95db becomes essential.
If this makes sense then, Jose, you need to focus more on the bottom end capabilities of the drivers you are considering along with the lightest, stiffest, diaprahm you can find. Does this make sense?
Then you need to find the material that creates the least amount of artifacts, right?. The last thing you need is more circuitry to have to eliminate bad behavior. Most easily this is either paper or Mineral filled PP, right?
Then you have to choose a enclosure design. That's easy! You're looking for speed, tighness and extension, right? Sealed is not only the best option but the only reasonable option. Why? you know there is not a driver in the world that wouldn't need equalization to the lowest octaves regardless of the enclosure design, right? Also any other design will push you to larger enclosures correct?
So then what drivers are you left with that can do this? From my view, and research, there are only 2: The McCauley 6174 or the TAD TL-1602. I have been looking for over 2 years and I can find no others. 300 watts with either would easily drive a transform ciricuit to volume levels that no one could handle (that is, for stereo LF units). They will overpower even the most efficient ribbon tweeter and possibly even the TAD Berlium HF drivers which I thought you were not considering? In the end you won't even be able to push them into distortion in a room of less than 600 square feet (mine is 520 square feet), that's a room that is 30 x 20 feet.
The McCauley is just too large for the speakers I wanted to end up with. I didn't want giants!
I built my TAD's in a 68 ltr enclosure and I am totally pleased with their performance and their capabilities are beyond what the rest of my system can handle.
I guess I'd like to know if I'm missing something here? You guys seem so focused on the 80-500 hz range (??) yet it appears this is the easiest range for any of these drivers to reproduce.
What am I missing?
TEH
If that holds true i.e., larger diaphrams have difficulty with higher frequencies then (anything above maybe 5-700Hz), why are you not looking at the only parameters that really matter for such a large diaphram? So, what are they?
A: X-max - ability to move large volumes of air. X-Dam needs to be over 20mm (estimate).
B: QTS - the difficulty of enclosure design associated is clearly an issue. To achieve resonable low frequency response how much equalization will be required? Some of these drivers suggested have qts figures below .20.
C: MMS or weight (combined with it's stiffness) of the diaprahm assumes an ability to respond quickly and to decay quickly and to be able to handle higher frequencies (let's say 500hz to 1000hz).
D: VAS appears to be little more than the combination to determine ideal enclosure size, which, still matters little when considering equalization will be necessary. It's merely a matter of how much.
E: Published distortion graphs/figures. Are they truly relevant? Is it not true that you'll have to push a 12" twice as hard to achieve the same output as a 15"? I think this is simply a matter of physics, is it not? If so then you can expect, without exception, that a 12" will produce considerably more distortion than a 15", not true?
Therefore, published distortion figures can almost be assumed to be irrelevant, why? Because if you have to push the driver that hard, to obtain the same results, you are looking at the wrong driver.
The reality is very simple; You can count on one hand the drivers that can produce the lowest octaves, with ease (i.e.: low Fs) while still being able to produce higher frequencies with alsolute accuracy, correct? Wouldn't MMS (and the diaphram's stiffness) be of paramount importance in order to accomplish this?
As a result, wouldn't only 2 parameters matter (assuming you're speaking of a quality built driver)? That would be MMS and then Fs? The rest will take care of itself, would it not?
I guess it depends on your goal. Mine was to have a low frequency driver that had the innate capacity to move more than the necessary amount of air with ease (i.e.: a 15" or larger), then to drive it cleanly without ever having to push it toward it's limits (i.e.: controlling it's need to approach distortion producing levels)? X-max requirements for 15" drivers is markedly lower than for a 12", is it not? If so then you can expect them to sing with ease all that a 12" simply cannot (physics, right?). And then, what of a transform circuit? Which would be easier to implement without worry of pushing the driver into distortion? This is where efficiency above 95db becomes essential.
If this makes sense then, Jose, you need to focus more on the bottom end capabilities of the drivers you are considering along with the lightest, stiffest, diaprahm you can find. Does this make sense?
Then you need to find the material that creates the least amount of artifacts, right?. The last thing you need is more circuitry to have to eliminate bad behavior. Most easily this is either paper or Mineral filled PP, right?
Then you have to choose a enclosure design. That's easy! You're looking for speed, tighness and extension, right? Sealed is not only the best option but the only reasonable option. Why? you know there is not a driver in the world that wouldn't need equalization to the lowest octaves regardless of the enclosure design, right? Also any other design will push you to larger enclosures correct?
So then what drivers are you left with that can do this? From my view, and research, there are only 2: The McCauley 6174 or the TAD TL-1602. I have been looking for over 2 years and I can find no others. 300 watts with either would easily drive a transform ciricuit to volume levels that no one could handle (that is, for stereo LF units). They will overpower even the most efficient ribbon tweeter and possibly even the TAD Berlium HF drivers which I thought you were not considering? In the end you won't even be able to push them into distortion in a room of less than 600 square feet (mine is 520 square feet), that's a room that is 30 x 20 feet.
The McCauley is just too large for the speakers I wanted to end up with. I didn't want giants!
I built my TAD's in a 68 ltr enclosure and I am totally pleased with their performance and their capabilities are beyond what the rest of my system can handle.
I guess I'd like to know if I'm missing something here? You guys seem so focused on the 80-500 hz range (??) yet it appears this is the easiest range for any of these drivers to reproduce.
What am I missing?
TEH
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.