Just wondering if anyone has tried the HiVi D8.8 or D8.8+ bass driver loaded into about a 45-50L Bass Reflex box ??
The HiVi appears to be a copy of a Dynaudio driver, and seems to model on WIN-ISD better than almost any other 8" bass driver out there, with an F3 of 27Hz and an almost flat response down to about 35Hz.
The D8.8 has got me perplexed ?!?! It is the equal of my beloved Eton (at ten times the price) on paper, but does it translate in listening tests?
Just after some real world experiences before I take the plunge to buy the HiVi's ...
Thanks,
Steve M.
The HiVi appears to be a copy of a Dynaudio driver, and seems to model on WIN-ISD better than almost any other 8" bass driver out there, with an F3 of 27Hz and an almost flat response down to about 35Hz.
The D8.8 has got me perplexed ?!?! It is the equal of my beloved Eton (at ten times the price) on paper, but does it translate in listening tests?
Just after some real world experiences before I take the plunge to buy the HiVi's ...
Thanks,
Steve M.
Thats an easy one....
G'day Steve:
I have used both of those woofers, and in my opinion, there is no comparison. The Eton 11-581 is one of those classic old school music woofers. I put it in the same class at the Focal 11K (Which I use in one of my setups), The Scan 25W (also used), and a few other of the Vifa/Scan type. These work well in a vented box, although you must have yours in more like 70 litres.
I tried, and tried is the right word, to do a 3-way with the D8.8 with a Dynaudio dome tweeter and an OW-1 tweeter. It modelled like a dream. It looked nice too, and was well built. If I recall, there were a pair of D8.8's in about 90 litres tuned to about 30 Hz. I never seriously got to a passive crossover version, since I could not get it to sound right with the active crossover. I concluded that this driver, although it measured very well, would not play up to 750 Hz to mate with the dome. I also found the bottom end to be quite colored. Without going through a litany of woes, the D8.8 was the worst 8" woofer I have ever used. I bet some people have used these in compact subwoofer applications, but I could never get it to sound nice at higher frequencies.
For low price and high performance, the Dayton RS-225 can't be beat. The Eton is still a better driver to my ears, but the Daytons give you most of the Eton performance for a lot less money. Another one that surprised me was the Peerless SLS....lots of nice woofer for the money.
Cheers,
Dick
G'day Steve:
I have used both of those woofers, and in my opinion, there is no comparison. The Eton 11-581 is one of those classic old school music woofers. I put it in the same class at the Focal 11K (Which I use in one of my setups), The Scan 25W (also used), and a few other of the Vifa/Scan type. These work well in a vented box, although you must have yours in more like 70 litres.
I tried, and tried is the right word, to do a 3-way with the D8.8 with a Dynaudio dome tweeter and an OW-1 tweeter. It modelled like a dream. It looked nice too, and was well built. If I recall, there were a pair of D8.8's in about 90 litres tuned to about 30 Hz. I never seriously got to a passive crossover version, since I could not get it to sound right with the active crossover. I concluded that this driver, although it measured very well, would not play up to 750 Hz to mate with the dome. I also found the bottom end to be quite colored. Without going through a litany of woes, the D8.8 was the worst 8" woofer I have ever used. I bet some people have used these in compact subwoofer applications, but I could never get it to sound nice at higher frequencies.
For low price and high performance, the Dayton RS-225 can't be beat. The Eton is still a better driver to my ears, but the Daytons give you most of the Eton performance for a lot less money. Another one that surprised me was the Peerless SLS....lots of nice woofer for the money.
Cheers,
Dick
Hello Dick,
I like the G'day greeting, are you an Aussie by any chance ?
Thanks for the info, exactly what I was looking for. Its quite unbelievable that the cheap HiVi actually models slightly better than my Eton on WIN-ISD, I guess the Chinese manufacturer may have fudged up the figures a bit in order to sell the driver, although thats not Thorsten's opinion ??
The Eton 11-581 is an awesome driver for low end bass, I've heard none better, mine is in a 90L BR box. I have also got a fresh pair of kevlar Focal 11K-7511 which sound very nice too, they may actually be a bit faster in the upper bass than the Eton, but not quite as good with lower notes or impact. I think if you want to plumb the depths go with Eton, or if you want fast tight high quality bass in a smaller box go for the Focal.
Its good to discuss these things, it widens the DIY speaker web data base...
Cheers,
Steve.
I like the G'day greeting, are you an Aussie by any chance ?
Thanks for the info, exactly what I was looking for. Its quite unbelievable that the cheap HiVi actually models slightly better than my Eton on WIN-ISD, I guess the Chinese manufacturer may have fudged up the figures a bit in order to sell the driver, although thats not Thorsten's opinion ??
The Eton 11-581 is an awesome driver for low end bass, I've heard none better, mine is in a 90L BR box. I have also got a fresh pair of kevlar Focal 11K-7511 which sound very nice too, they may actually be a bit faster in the upper bass than the Eton, but not quite as good with lower notes or impact. I think if you want to plumb the depths go with Eton, or if you want fast tight high quality bass in a smaller box go for the Focal.
Its good to discuss these things, it widens the DIY speaker web data base...
Cheers,
Steve.
Steve:
I have no reason to believe that Hi-Vi fudged anything in the spec sheets. It appeared to behave exactly as advertised, and yet, I did not think that it sounded very good. Interestingly, it DOES resemble the Dynaudio 24W in many ways, and yet the Dynaudio is a substantially better sounding driver as well. This observation was yet another brick in the wall for the "FR and Distortion is all that matters" argument. It simply does not match my experience. You have to take this for what its worth - One man's tests and observations on a single rig with a few dozen test tracks in one room. No doubt I am busily voicing speakers that sound good to me in my environment, which is hardly definitive. Thorsten may well have come up with a great sounding design, it just did not happen for me.
And no, I'm neither Aussie nor even a Kiwi, although I have travelled the world down under on a few occasions. The G'Day habit was acquired right here at home. It seems that many of your countrymen seem to head here for the skiing, and quite a few never manage to catch the flight home! I'm convinced that 10% of the people born in Perth wind up in Vancouver
.
Cheers,
Dick
I have no reason to believe that Hi-Vi fudged anything in the spec sheets. It appeared to behave exactly as advertised, and yet, I did not think that it sounded very good. Interestingly, it DOES resemble the Dynaudio 24W in many ways, and yet the Dynaudio is a substantially better sounding driver as well. This observation was yet another brick in the wall for the "FR and Distortion is all that matters" argument. It simply does not match my experience. You have to take this for what its worth - One man's tests and observations on a single rig with a few dozen test tracks in one room. No doubt I am busily voicing speakers that sound good to me in my environment, which is hardly definitive. Thorsten may well have come up with a great sounding design, it just did not happen for me.
And no, I'm neither Aussie nor even a Kiwi, although I have travelled the world down under on a few occasions. The G'Day habit was acquired right here at home. It seems that many of your countrymen seem to head here for the skiing, and quite a few never manage to catch the flight home! I'm convinced that 10% of the people born in Perth wind up in Vancouver
.Cheers,
Dick
Re: Thats an easy one....
Can you comment further on the RS225 compared w/the Peerless SLS? Looking at spec sheets, the SLS-10 looked far finer than the SLS-8. I need to make some bass bins soon, and the SLS-10 and RS225 are a couple of the finalists in the running. Please, as many subjective opinions as you are willing to share!
Ah, good to read your poor opinion of the HiVi D8.8 - they're a bit expensive to just try only to find out they're crap.dickmorgan22 said:
Can you comment further on the RS225 compared w/the Peerless SLS? Looking at spec sheets, the SLS-10 looked far finer than the SLS-8. I need to make some bass bins soon, and the SLS-10 and RS225 are a couple of the finalists in the running. Please, as many subjective opinions as you are willing to share!
I'm not sure I can help too much.
I did a 3-way with a Peerless SLS-12 handing off to a SEAS MCA-15 at 300 Hz a few years back. The lower cross was active, so it was really a 2-way with a sub woofer. The SLS really surprised me. I was expecting typical sub "thumper" behavior, but it was clean and true up over 300 Hz, despite the very high cone mass. I could not class it with the Focal or Eton, but it is a lot cheaper too. This is a much better driver than a typical sub, which it is advertised as - Its a music woofer.
Its tough to compare this with an RS-225, they are two different tools. The RS-225 is clean up over 1K, the SLS-12 would not be, although I never tried it. A Pair of RS-225's ( the right way to use it in a large speaker) would probably outperform the SLS-12, certainly in sensitivity and "speed", if not overall output or extension. They would probably go in a smaller box too, although I have not modeled that scenario.
So it depends on what your design goals are. If you are building a passive crossed 3-way, I would look at the pair of RS-225's first on sensitivity alone. In an active cross situation where you can tolerate the large box, the SLS-12 is an option where output and extension are of primary interest. As for the SLS-8 or -10, I have never used them, and cannot say.
Dick
I did a 3-way with a Peerless SLS-12 handing off to a SEAS MCA-15 at 300 Hz a few years back. The lower cross was active, so it was really a 2-way with a sub woofer. The SLS really surprised me. I was expecting typical sub "thumper" behavior, but it was clean and true up over 300 Hz, despite the very high cone mass. I could not class it with the Focal or Eton, but it is a lot cheaper too. This is a much better driver than a typical sub, which it is advertised as - Its a music woofer.
Its tough to compare this with an RS-225, they are two different tools. The RS-225 is clean up over 1K, the SLS-12 would not be, although I never tried it. A Pair of RS-225's ( the right way to use it in a large speaker) would probably outperform the SLS-12, certainly in sensitivity and "speed", if not overall output or extension. They would probably go in a smaller box too, although I have not modeled that scenario.
So it depends on what your design goals are. If you are building a passive crossed 3-way, I would look at the pair of RS-225's first on sensitivity alone. In an active cross situation where you can tolerate the large box, the SLS-12 is an option where output and extension are of primary interest. As for the SLS-8 or -10, I have never used them, and cannot say.
Dick
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.