18sound NSD1095N v's B&C DE250 - Page 3 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Multi-Way

Multi-Way Conventional loudspeakers with crossovers

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 31st December 2008, 03:00 AM   #21
D OB G is offline D OB G  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Hi 454Casull,

Of course the comp driver has much less distortion at high levels (and it gets to those high levels through less compression- a bit of an oxymoron )

It's the low level signals that I am concerned about. Not just the Esotar, but the good Scanspeak, Seas e.t.c. dome tweeters produce that shimmer and DECAY on a stuck jazz cymbal, the air of an orchestral triangle e.t.c that are missing in action on a DE250.

I go to concerts. I know what the real thing sounds like. I'm talking about maybe 1/4 sec, 1/2 sec of triangle (or something) that just isn't there on the DE250 (but it is there on my recordings).

Norris,

Thanks for the tip. I'll do a bit of research

David
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st December 2008, 04:30 AM   #22
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Mountain View, CA
"I've tried the waveguide (horn?) with and without the open-cell foam. Better without the foam IMO in every way."

No "horn sound" without the foam?

That would be good news, saving me of cutting up layers of the foam I got for the XT1086's.

I have BMS 4552ND to use with them. They're highly regarded, but I don't know if they're better than the DE250.
__________________
-----------------------------------------
Noah
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st December 2008, 05:17 AM   #23
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: flyover country
"If I can hear fine detail on the Esotar and not on the DE 250, which is the more accurate (at least at lowish levels)? i.e. which is really distorting?"

If the fine detail includes better spatial presentation, it is probably an improvement. Some apparent detail by itself may be due to midrange frequency anomalies.
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st December 2008, 05:28 AM   #24
kceenav is offline kceenav  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Cologne
Hi --

Quote:
Originally posted by D OB G (...) but the good Scanspeak, Seas e.t.c. dome tweeters produce that shimmer and DECAY on a stuck jazz cymbal, the air of an orchestral triangle e.t.c that are missing in action on a DE250.
I don't have experience with compressiondrivers and horns, but want to mention that according to others, who tried "waveguides" on dome-speakers(!), the "shimmer" you mention tends to "get lost" WITH the guide ... But it's supposed to be not a real "loss" but rather the absence/reduction of room-reflections that accounts for the difference.
So in reality there IS NO "shimmer", just "detail" added by the room ... (?)

But I have to admit, I don't know if that's really all there is to this "phenomenon" of "micro-detail".


Regards

Bernd
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st December 2008, 05:29 AM   #25
D OB G is offline D OB G  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Hi noah,

I look forward very eagerly to your results. (I'm working on a direct comparison between the DE250 and the 18sound NSD1095N!).

With the foam they sounded like they had a sock in them- the dynamics sounded just that bit compressed (supposed to be no attenuation, and I've got to admit that I didn't measure any either).

thoriated,

That's a good way of putting it- better spatial presentation.
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st December 2008, 08:29 PM   #26
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Mountain View, CA
D OB G,

It will be awhile, there's a long list of projects ahead of them.

"supposed to be no attenuation"

I believe Earl said that the foam attenuates 2 - 3 dB.
__________________
-----------------------------------------
Noah
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st December 2008, 09:58 PM   #27
gedlee is offline gedlee  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Novi, Michigan
Quote:
Originally posted by D OB G

I am happy with the sound of CD and compression horn overall. The dynamics, lack of compression, the way it loads the room.
I just want a better driver....please.....???

David

I don't think that another driver is going to solve your problem. The differences in compression drivers are not that great, especially compared to the difference between a direct radiator and a CD waveguide.

Make no mistake about it there is a "sizzling" quality about a direct radiator that is beaming HFs right into your ear. If you like this sound then stay away from CD waveguides and try an exponential horn or something like that which has a much narrower HF directivity. Personally, when I listen to dome tweeter now, this same "sizzle" drives me up a wall after a few minutes (many others have made this same comment). Initially it sounds like "detail" later on it sounds like ...

Also, never use a DEQ to EQ a waveguide because it can screw it up badly. A waveguide should be EQ for flat power response not flat axial response which a single point microphone can't do.

From your discussion I don't think that you are setting up the waveguide/horn properly which is the problem, not the driver. Direct radiators are easy to set up and so they are more difficult to screw up. Its very easy to mess up a waveguide.

You opinion of foam, for instance, is completely the opposite of anyone else that I have talked to who has tried it. I would strongly suggest NOT using the DEQ and EQing in a more conventional way.
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st December 2008, 10:04 PM   #28
gedlee is offline gedlee  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Novi, Michigan
Quote:
Originally posted by D OB G

With the foam they sounded like they had a sock in them-

What was the PPI of the foam? Sounds like yours was way to small. (And if you don't know what the PPI is then I can pretty much guarantee that you don;t have the right stuff.)

Was the DEQ used to EQ with and without the foam? This could also be an issue.
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st December 2008, 10:58 PM   #29
D OB G is offline D OB G  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
35 ppi.

I used the DEQX to eq on the listening axis i.e. not on the speaker's axis (speakers crossed in front of listening position, by about your 22 degrees) with the foam, and then again without the foam.

Why wouldn't that eq properly?
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st December 2008, 11:49 PM   #30
gedlee is offline gedlee  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Novi, Michigan
You re-EQ'd each trial?

Basically, I don't EQ to any single axis, but to the average of the forward sound. The whole concept of EQing precisely to a single point leaves me cold. Does the EQ gate the reference? and if so what is the window? There are so many ways for an "automatic" process to screw up that I don't think that I could enumerate them all.

Your experience with the foam appears to be unique and I might be concerned about that if I was in your position.

It could also be just what I said, that you are looking for that pin-point sound that a direct radiator has at HFs. People have come to expect it and when its not there, as with a well done CD device, the sound is a little strange at first. This has been a big hump to get over in auditioning my speakers. This is why I prefer to do auditions here - I don't let people leave in 60 seconds, they have to stay an hour or more. By this time they have acclamated to the different sound and find it far more appealing.

But the bottom line here is that changing drivers is not likely to change your perceptions. I've measured dozens of drivers and they are all very very similar if they are of the same size throat and diaphragm. In fact many of these devices you can interchange the diaphragms, which are more than likely all made in the same place (ATON in Thailand).

You might try the De500 as the titanium diaphragm will go a little higher. I don't expect that you'll find much difference, but you can try it. As to other manufacturers, they are all very competitive with each other. I once tested a Chinese knock-off of the DE250 - the diaphragms were interchangable. It was $17, did not quite measure as good as the DE250, but I'm guessing that in the system you wouldn't know the difference.
  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
2.5 way with DE250 / RCFH100 AudioGeek Multi-Way 4 22nd February 2009 09:48 PM
B&C DE250 comparison on XT1086 kstrain Multi-Way 42 3rd February 2009 03:11 PM
Polarity of B&C DE250? Horizons Multi-Way 0 31st October 2008 05:57 PM
B & C DE250 assembly Ed LaFontaine Multi-Way 3 18th August 2008 03:56 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:17 AM.


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