Bear,
Was surprised to see this thread come back after a year in "hibernation".
No experience with field coil drivers other than they are super expensive.
Some personal observations from "back in the day", D-130s and D-140s are musical instrument speakers, they have lots of harmonic distortion, great for guitar amps, not great for Hi Fi, though lots were used back in the days when 100 watts was considered a fair amount of power.
For speakers of that vintage, the EV-15B, though also somewhat a musical instrument speaker, had a cleaner sound and similar sensitivity.
The Eminence Definimax 4015LF at 96 dB is a few dB shy of your goal, but has more LF than most of the "100 dB" sensitivity cones that fall off down low.
I built a drum monitor using the 4015LF, it delivers the punch needed for the application, and is quite clean to it's rated power. I'm using four 8" and two tweeters above it passively crossed at about 250 Hz.
It does have a peak around 900 Hz, but with a steep crossover that should be no problem in your <300 Hz application.
It has what I want in a speaker - excellent dynamics over a wide power range, low distortion, smooth response, and decent price.
It will work in a small box, a sealed 1.77 foot cube has an F3 of 72 Hz, a 3 cube box with a 45 Fb has an F3 of 48 Hz.
And it sounds good too :^).
Art Welter
Last edited:
AT drivers strike what I feel is an almost perfect balance between every single factor except cost
Hi Bear,
I have been on the hunt for the same thing but in a 12" woofer so I empathise with you. Scanspeak, Seas, JBL, B&C, Faital Pro and others have not done it for me and I'm running out of money
Once you have heard this range executed well it is hard to be happy with anything that can't pull it off regardless of how well everything else sounds.
The best woofer I have heard do this was a vintage celestion. The cone is very "dead" sounding when tapped but actually not very stiff. Made of paper I think but almost looked like a compressed fabric and was rough to the touch. I can only describe the sound as rich and textured yet very clear. Jazz double bass sounds very real and "live". I find double bass tell alot about a woofer and while some of the pro drivers sound great reproducing kick drums they have trouble making double bass sound real. I dont know if this is the key but your story of the well damped cotton fibre cone got me thinking - might be another piece to add to the puzzle.
Maybe the old celestion guitar speakers might be a good start? There are truck loads for sale second hand on ebay with good resale value if they dont work for you.
I have been on the hunt for the same thing but in a 12" woofer so I empathise with you. Scanspeak, Seas, JBL, B&C, Faital Pro and others have not done it for me and I'm running out of money
Once you have heard this range executed well it is hard to be happy with anything that can't pull it off regardless of how well everything else sounds.
The best woofer I have heard do this was a vintage celestion. The cone is very "dead" sounding when tapped but actually not very stiff. Made of paper I think but almost looked like a compressed fabric and was rough to the touch. I can only describe the sound as rich and textured yet very clear. Jazz double bass sounds very real and "live". I find double bass tell alot about a woofer and while some of the pro drivers sound great reproducing kick drums they have trouble making double bass sound real. I dont know if this is the key but your story of the well damped cotton fibre cone got me thinking - might be another piece to add to the puzzle.
Maybe the old celestion guitar speakers might be a good start? There are truck loads for sale second hand on ebay with good resale value if they dont work for you.
Actually - did I say this before? - one of the nicest sounding speakers for this application in terms of tone was the Vieta, which I think did not last long, it had a white cotton fiber cone and a foam surround. Of course it had awful construction in several regards (terrible spider, among other things) and also rather low sensitivity. But the cone being that white cotton fiber is what was unique. Haven't seen anything like it before or since.
Btw, anything with a "peak" - out of band or not - is likely off the table. (unless it can be controlled and eliminated by the application of something mechanical to the cone...
Guitar speakers usually have cones intended to break up - I'm looking for clean, articulate and natural sounding. The type of thing when you hear it, you just say "aaaahhhh".
_-_-bear
Btw, anything with a "peak" - out of band or not - is likely off the table. (unless it can be controlled and eliminated by the application of something mechanical to the cone...
Guitar speakers usually have cones intended to break up - I'm looking for clean, articulate and natural sounding. The type of thing when you hear it, you just say "aaaahhhh".
_-_-bear
I'm looking for clean, articulate and natural sounding. The type of thing when you hear it, you just say "aaaahhhh".
_-_-bear
Yup, AT drivers..
..and your wallet goes: OMG!
could you elaborate ?
Doug, specifically, what do you mean by Dual opposing ?
Do you mean both firing at each other and then again in a common cavity ?
Doug, specifically, what do you mean by Dual opposing ?
Do you mean both firing at each other and then again in a common cavity ?
Electro-acoustic models
Seems as though you are going to need to go to multiple drivers.
Have you already decided how your drivers will be mounted? Would you dismiss the "W" baffle?
celection woofer
Hi Bear,
I have which celestion woofer you like so much?
thank you
been on the hunt for the same thing but in a 12" woofer so I empathise with you. Scanspeak, Seas, JBL, B&C, Faital Pro and others have not done it for me and I'm running out of money
Once you have heard this range executed well it is hard to be happy with anything that can't pull it off regardless of how well everything else sounds.
The best woofer I have heard do this was a vintage celestion. The cone is very "dead" sounding when tapped but actually not very stiff. Made of paper I think but almost looked like a compressed fabric and was rough to the touch. I can only describe the sound as rich and textured yet very clear. Jazz double bass sounds very real and "live". I find double bass tell alot about a woofer and while some of the pro drivers sound great reproducing kick drums they have trouble making double bass sound real. I dont know if this is the key but your story of the well damped cotton fibre cone got me thinking - might be another piece to add to the puzzle.
Maybe the old celestion guitar speakers might be a good start? There are truck loads for sale second hand on ebay with good resale value if they dont work for you.
In such cases a horn based approach is too large for most cases. My favorite approach here is a so called "BOOM-BOX" - one of the BB4/SBB4 (super-) boom-box alignment. The SPL aera arround the tuning frequency is enhanced very strongly - thus an appropriate passive high pass network is necessary (two resistors, one cap and one inductor for an acoustical slope of 36db/oct).
By a tuning freqency arround 60-90Hz the vented aera has an larger surface than the diaphragm of the transducer, if the chamber volume is above 70 liters by one transducer and 140 liters by the use of two transducers with diameter between 30 and 38 cm ('12-'15).
This ensures very low distortion by the sonic radiation of the vented port.
By vented port surface lower than 75% of the cone aera avoid vented boxes (in all cases, where only a low chamber volume is possible).
Very important is also the use of drivers with very low mechanical losses inside of surround and spider.
There are very few rubber surround devices in real "low-loss" version by low influence through present ambient temperature at the same time. Thus a cloth material is to prefer.
Some years ago I prefer Fostex 12W360 - now US-Magnetics - go to
12W360-8 US-magnetics 12" Woofer - BELL AUDIO STORE
There are additional other good quality chassis available like FANE Colossus series, Precision Devices, '18-sound (eighteen-sound) and McCauley.
The attached example (sandwich box, 100db/1W/1m, 80-500Hz, equipped with Fostex 12W360, approximately 100 kg) has a tuning frequency arround 70 Hz and an internal chamber volume of 80 liters.
The associated subwoofer you will find by post #12 (image 2) about
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/subw...ld-milano-full-power-down-10hz-galerie-2.html
If you want a deeper lower cut-off frequency without reduction of the chamber volume, TAD, JBL or TC-Sound (transducers with lower resonance frequency) is a good choice - but you don't get the same tight and clean sound in this critical acoustical range of the upper bass aera.
Attachments
Last edited:
P.S. - supplement to my last post #129:
here an URL from Japan with the Fostex 12W360:
ƒE�[ƒn�[�ì�íŠJŽn�@ŽR�…‚Ì‚r‚o‚T‚O‚Tƒ{ƒbƒNƒX‚É�@ƒtƒHƒXƒeƒNƒX‚Ì‚o‚`—pƒE�[ƒn�[�@12W360‚ð“ü‚ê‚Ä‚Ý‚é
here an URL from Japan with the Fostex 12W360:
ƒE�[ƒn�[�ì�íŠJŽn�@ŽR�…‚Ì‚r‚o‚T‚O‚Tƒ{ƒbƒNƒX‚É�@ƒtƒHƒXƒeƒNƒX‚Ì‚o‚`—pƒE�[ƒn�[�@12W360‚ð“ü‚ê‚Ä‚Ý‚é
the ~53 gram mms Peavey SC-15 seems ok - -here's one stuffed into a very small K-coupler- in the original Karlson it would meet most of the criteria and do better than a reflex (imo) The ferrite version is called 1508-8-HE
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Bear,
Of course one parameter doesn't the sound of the speaker.
When you have fs = 22 hz, ef = 100 db VAS = 750 L QTS = 0.25 BL = 19 T ...... A good emissive surface for exmeple 15 ".
But one parameter didn't mentionned.it's the FA factor ( Acceleration factor ) = BL/MMS . This parameter is the most important for the dynamics and the physical impact.
For exemple the FA of the 1601 or 1602 is very bad arround 170. Why because the MMS is important more than 100g.
The FA of the SUPRAVOX 400, ALTEC 416 or EMS B15EX is >300
It's very important for a good bass to have a very small MMS, for a 15" beteween 50 g and 60 g.
I prefer use one speaker of 15 " than two speaker of 12". Because the parameter of each speaker is variable at +- 10%. If you are at the maximum, you have 20% of difference.
Now, the speaker is important, but the cabinet and this material is also impotant to.
In the past i listenned to the ONKEN W with 416-A and OS 255 Es. i never headed a best sound, a best bass.
You use a sub and for me is a very bad solution. The sound of the sub isn't clear and you have effects on the bass.In past have used a sub, i decided to change and to build a ONKEN 360 cabinet.
The bass and sub bass are very lightness with more details and no coloration and no distortion. It's not possible to have this sond with a sub. Why ? becausse the FA of the sub are generaly very bad.
When you said, ALTEC isn't no good for you, for me it'snt possible because the ALTEX speaker used in a good condition have a very good sound.
Have used in the past, FOCAL audiom, 10 C01
Of course one parameter doesn't the sound of the speaker.
When you have fs = 22 hz, ef = 100 db VAS = 750 L QTS = 0.25 BL = 19 T ...... A good emissive surface for exmeple 15 ".
But one parameter didn't mentionned.it's the FA factor ( Acceleration factor ) = BL/MMS . This parameter is the most important for the dynamics and the physical impact.
For exemple the FA of the 1601 or 1602 is very bad arround 170. Why because the MMS is important more than 100g.
The FA of the SUPRAVOX 400, ALTEC 416 or EMS B15EX is >300
It's very important for a good bass to have a very small MMS, for a 15" beteween 50 g and 60 g.
I prefer use one speaker of 15 " than two speaker of 12". Because the parameter of each speaker is variable at +- 10%. If you are at the maximum, you have 20% of difference.
Now, the speaker is important, but the cabinet and this material is also impotant to.
In the past i listenned to the ONKEN W with 416-A and OS 255 Es. i never headed a best sound, a best bass.
You use a sub and for me is a very bad solution. The sound of the sub isn't clear and you have effects on the bass.In past have used a sub, i decided to change and to build a ONKEN 360 cabinet.
The bass and sub bass are very lightness with more details and no coloration and no distortion. It's not possible to have this sond with a sub. Why ? becausse the FA of the sub are generaly very bad.
When you said, ALTEC isn't no good for you, for me it'snt possible because the ALTEX speaker used in a good condition have a very good sound.
Have used in the past, FOCAL audiom, 10 C01
“But one parameter didn't mentionned.it's the FA factor ( Acceleration factor ) = BL/MMS . This parameter is the most important for the dynamics and the physical impact.
For exemple the FA of the 1601 or 1602 is very bad arround 170. Why because the MMS is important more than 100g.”
If you are dealing with a woofer (acoustically small compared to the wavelength) and the object is flat response, then you already have an acceleration based device. It may be counter intuitive, but you can take a woofer driver, measure it’s rise time , “speed of attack” or high frequency response and then triple the moving mass by gluing a lead ring to the VC.
When you triple the moving mass, it has NO effect on the high frequency response or rise time. It does lower the efficiency, it does lower the LF resonance where acceleration behavior begins, but it has no effect on anything related to speed or attack. What you describe is correct for a horn driver which has a velocity response.
The confusion arises because a large heavy woofer will have a large motor which has more inductance and this lowers the high frequency corner where the inductive roll off begins. While it would seem logical that mass is the culprit (as many think in car terms), that is not how a woofer works and it is the corner caused by the Rdc and Le which makes large heavy drivers have a lower HF corner.
A problem too is what yardstick to use.
For example, if one were looking for a subwoofer, it is common to audition them by playing a kick drum. In this case, your ears will steer you towards the subwoofer that has a higher LF corner and or more harmonic distortion because both of these make the spectrum closer to what we know a drum sounds like.
Conversely, the engineering view says the subwoofer is part of a system and should do nothing more and nothing less than reproduce what comes out of the subwoofer crossover and that is an entirely different sound.
The subwoofer output isn’t supposed to sound like a kick drum even when producing a kick drum because it is supposed to be only the lowest components.
If you want gage technical accuracy, what we do at work is make generation loss recordings of loudspeakers. VERY FEW loudspeakers are even listenable after four generations, most bad after two, some after one.
Best,
Tom Danley
For exemple the FA of the 1601 or 1602 is very bad arround 170. Why because the MMS is important more than 100g.”
If you are dealing with a woofer (acoustically small compared to the wavelength) and the object is flat response, then you already have an acceleration based device. It may be counter intuitive, but you can take a woofer driver, measure it’s rise time , “speed of attack” or high frequency response and then triple the moving mass by gluing a lead ring to the VC.
When you triple the moving mass, it has NO effect on the high frequency response or rise time. It does lower the efficiency, it does lower the LF resonance where acceleration behavior begins, but it has no effect on anything related to speed or attack. What you describe is correct for a horn driver which has a velocity response.
The confusion arises because a large heavy woofer will have a large motor which has more inductance and this lowers the high frequency corner where the inductive roll off begins. While it would seem logical that mass is the culprit (as many think in car terms), that is not how a woofer works and it is the corner caused by the Rdc and Le which makes large heavy drivers have a lower HF corner.
A problem too is what yardstick to use.
For example, if one were looking for a subwoofer, it is common to audition them by playing a kick drum. In this case, your ears will steer you towards the subwoofer that has a higher LF corner and or more harmonic distortion because both of these make the spectrum closer to what we know a drum sounds like.
Conversely, the engineering view says the subwoofer is part of a system and should do nothing more and nothing less than reproduce what comes out of the subwoofer crossover and that is an entirely different sound.
The subwoofer output isn’t supposed to sound like a kick drum even when producing a kick drum because it is supposed to be only the lowest components.
If you want gage technical accuracy, what we do at work is make generation loss recordings of loudspeakers. VERY FEW loudspeakers are even listenable after four generations, most bad after two, some after one.
Best,
Tom Danley
Sorry, I did not understand at all what this last bit is saying??
I think you mean that you record the output of the speaker, then play it through, iterate a number of times until it becomes "mud"? Those with a greater number of passes through are adjudged to be superior??
_-_-bear
EBA, imo the Audiom line is more or less an updated clone of the Altec...
I have heard the Altec line... they are ok... in fact I have some running right now... my problem with them probably stems from their somewhat extended HF response (don't need or want that... and imo using a xover in order to get "rid" of either peaks or extended response can be problematic... the reason being that the cone still gets excited to some extent by lower frequency energy and the result is in effect "distortion" - added energy), it would be best to have a woofer that is really intended to not try to be a high mid/low HF driver... that would be nice.
I have used the Audiom 15" some years ago in a design (it's on my website, but you can't see the driver). And it was actually very good. But not up to the sensitivity rating I would like to see.
I am not convinced that for this narrow range (>~70Hz --> <300Hz) of two octaves that a thin cone driver is desirable at all. Maybe it is.
Look, the usual application revolves around trying to squeeze the lowest F3 point possible. I do not want or need that. My Quadripole subs are not quite like the usual subs, when there is a pulse of LF (try Mickey Hart's Dafos, Gates of Dafos) the THUD pins you against your chair. No thud - no superfluous woofing going on.
They are not perfect, I designed them back in 1980... Today there are some other ways and techniques I'd incorporate, but I'm not trying to build a commercial sub, and these are in the "good enough" for me category, sitting on top of the wide range compression driver horns the sound is dominated by their effortless response...
Btw, I spoke to someone who was involved with the original recording and I said to them "it sounds like someone dropped a safe on the back of the stage... he said to me "they did." And he went on to explain what Mickey did. Ha ha!
So if you play it and it doesn't sound like REALLY someone is now dropping a SAFE, then ur not "getting all of it".
The goal for me is to fill in in a lovely way that range between the subs and the fabulous horn - the horn has outstanding "jump factor" (very uncompressed and alive, but very flat).
I guess the sound I am looking for could be described as articulate, clear, natural and unmechanical...
_-_-bear
Hi bear
I should have explained a bit more. You have the idea, we use a tower and raise the speaker off the ground so that there are no close reflections. A precision measurement mic is placed at a meter or so on axis and fed to a 24/96 multi-track recorder.
Several sections of difficult music are chosen and played through the speaker. At the same time, one track records the mic signal and the other the music direct. As you suggest, the speaker recording is played back through the speaker and re-recorded.
Sometimes they also make a direct copy of the music too but even after 10 generations it is WAY better than most speakers are after one or two.
Microphones do not hear like your two ears and brain do, it only samples pressure from one location but if you make a recording with just one measurement mic, you will be amazed how real it sounds, it is just lacking the stereo image..
The generation loss recording of a loudspeaker produces no measurable data but does produce a very audible caricature of everything that is wrong with the speaker.
The basic idea (a generation loss test) is an ancient one, it was what one did to evaluate recording tape in the olden days.
I never heard of doing it with loudspeaker before but it made sense give the engineering goal and i found it useful for gauging the results of the Synergy horn design I was trying to refine at the time and compare it to what was available elsewhere. After all, the better it worked, the more like ideal and the more generations one could do.
While not the hifi market, here is a large scale speaker that was refined this way. like all of them, the idea was to have a single broad band point source as if a single broadband driver was driving a single horn. This was done with three cabinets (one facing the right and left sides and one forward) that array so that you are only in the pattern of one cabinet at any time.
Try this with headphones, remember this is a “tough room” to make nice sound in, in fact next year a system based on these will be installed.
Danley Sound Labs, Inc.'s Videos | Facebook
One of those cabinets at 700’
Danley Sound Labs Jericho Horn playing Jennifer Warnes track.MOV - YouTube
One thing I found developing this kind of speaker (much smaller ones haha) was that you can hear the self interference multiple sources produce when not coherently coupled. It is not a property in the frequency response etc but one your head /ears detect that a microphone does not.
Play a quiet voice through one speaker and close your eyes. It will be easy to tell what direction the speaker is with your eyes closed but it may or MAY NOT be easy to hear how far away the speaker is. With a speaker that radiates a simple portion of a sphere like an esl63 or SH-50 in th single voice test, it is easy to hear direction but the sound “sounds like” it is coming from somewhere well behind the grill. They do not radiate artifacts that allow your ears to identify he depth of the source, artifacts that are necessarily within difference between the sound arriving at your right and left ears.
On the SH-50, with the voice test, without a grill, even when your head is well inside the horn, like an esl-53, the voice still floats somewhere in front of you, there is no clue of “a source” or that there are three frequency ranges involved.
When the speakers do not radiate much of an identity, then when you go to stereo, the speakers do not shout out “hey here we are” allowing a much stronger recorded image to be revealed.
A speaker that radiates these clues, when faced with producing a mono phantom image, will instead produce three images or the feeling of sound coming from right, left and the image in the center. Eliminate those clues and close reflections and one can make a mono phantom as believable as a center speaker, more believable than a home theater center channel.
Best,
Tom Danley
Danley Sound Labs, Inc. | Facebook
I should have explained a bit more. You have the idea, we use a tower and raise the speaker off the ground so that there are no close reflections. A precision measurement mic is placed at a meter or so on axis and fed to a 24/96 multi-track recorder.
Several sections of difficult music are chosen and played through the speaker. At the same time, one track records the mic signal and the other the music direct. As you suggest, the speaker recording is played back through the speaker and re-recorded.
Sometimes they also make a direct copy of the music too but even after 10 generations it is WAY better than most speakers are after one or two.
Microphones do not hear like your two ears and brain do, it only samples pressure from one location but if you make a recording with just one measurement mic, you will be amazed how real it sounds, it is just lacking the stereo image..
The generation loss recording of a loudspeaker produces no measurable data but does produce a very audible caricature of everything that is wrong with the speaker.
The basic idea (a generation loss test) is an ancient one, it was what one did to evaluate recording tape in the olden days.
I never heard of doing it with loudspeaker before but it made sense give the engineering goal and i found it useful for gauging the results of the Synergy horn design I was trying to refine at the time and compare it to what was available elsewhere. After all, the better it worked, the more like ideal and the more generations one could do.
While not the hifi market, here is a large scale speaker that was refined this way. like all of them, the idea was to have a single broad band point source as if a single broadband driver was driving a single horn. This was done with three cabinets (one facing the right and left sides and one forward) that array so that you are only in the pattern of one cabinet at any time.
Try this with headphones, remember this is a “tough room” to make nice sound in, in fact next year a system based on these will be installed.
Danley Sound Labs, Inc.'s Videos | Facebook
One of those cabinets at 700’
Danley Sound Labs Jericho Horn playing Jennifer Warnes track.MOV - YouTube
One thing I found developing this kind of speaker (much smaller ones haha) was that you can hear the self interference multiple sources produce when not coherently coupled. It is not a property in the frequency response etc but one your head /ears detect that a microphone does not.
Play a quiet voice through one speaker and close your eyes. It will be easy to tell what direction the speaker is with your eyes closed but it may or MAY NOT be easy to hear how far away the speaker is. With a speaker that radiates a simple portion of a sphere like an esl63 or SH-50 in th single voice test, it is easy to hear direction but the sound “sounds like” it is coming from somewhere well behind the grill. They do not radiate artifacts that allow your ears to identify he depth of the source, artifacts that are necessarily within difference between the sound arriving at your right and left ears.
On the SH-50, with the voice test, without a grill, even when your head is well inside the horn, like an esl-53, the voice still floats somewhere in front of you, there is no clue of “a source” or that there are three frequency ranges involved.
When the speakers do not radiate much of an identity, then when you go to stereo, the speakers do not shout out “hey here we are” allowing a much stronger recorded image to be revealed.
A speaker that radiates these clues, when faced with producing a mono phantom image, will instead produce three images or the feeling of sound coming from right, left and the image in the center. Eliminate those clues and close reflections and one can make a mono phantom as believable as a center speaker, more believable than a home theater center channel.
Best,
Tom Danley
Danley Sound Labs, Inc. | Facebook
Mms/Bl and mass on spring
Hi Tom,
My ears tell me low mass / high Bl bass drivers and bass / mid drivers with cloth / linen surrounds sound much better than high mass / low Bl drivers with heavy rubber surrounds.
I have massive respect for your knowledge and experience and I would be so gratefull if you could take 10 minutes to read my attachment and let me know your thoughts....
I totally get that low inductance extends the top end frequency response, high inductance reduces high end response of any driver.
I also get that copper sleeves on the pole piece reduces inductance and can extend the Xmax...But personally I believe in minimising cone travel...Not maximising it... see attached!
Thanks in advance for your thoughts.
Cheers
Derek.
Bear,
I can highly recomend Precision Devices PD 158 and PD 1550 drivers.
I have used both in open baffle and sealed box designs mating with the Manger driver at 400Hz to 800Hz. The PD 158 is even better than the original ( circa 2005) Beyma 12LX60 which was my previous best all round driver for the 30Hz to 300Hz ish band.
The new Beyma 12 P80Nd is also fab, if money and space are no problem twin Beyma 12P80Nd drivers may well be the best yet....Unless you go twin PD 158 drivers...!
All the best
Derek.
Hi Tom,
My ears tell me low mass / high Bl bass drivers and bass / mid drivers with cloth / linen surrounds sound much better than high mass / low Bl drivers with heavy rubber surrounds.
I have massive respect for your knowledge and experience and I would be so gratefull if you could take 10 minutes to read my attachment and let me know your thoughts....
I totally get that low inductance extends the top end frequency response, high inductance reduces high end response of any driver.
I also get that copper sleeves on the pole piece reduces inductance and can extend the Xmax...But personally I believe in minimising cone travel...Not maximising it... see attached!
Thanks in advance for your thoughts.
Cheers
Derek.
Bear,
I can highly recomend Precision Devices PD 158 and PD 1550 drivers.
I have used both in open baffle and sealed box designs mating with the Manger driver at 400Hz to 800Hz. The PD 158 is even better than the original ( circa 2005) Beyma 12LX60 which was my previous best all round driver for the 30Hz to 300Hz ish band.
The new Beyma 12 P80Nd is also fab, if money and space are no problem twin Beyma 12P80Nd drivers may well be the best yet....Unless you go twin PD 158 drivers...!
All the best
Derek.
Hi Tom,
Sorry, i'm not according with you. Had you read " the speaker " and " les carnets de l'audiophile tome 2 " of Jean HIRIGA or please go to this web site :
It's the best web side of the ONKEN cabinets and speakers philo :
www.planet-inc.co.jp/onken-hp/tab-a1
Jean HIRAGA explane clearly what's " the trainage " in this books. It's evident if you have a speaker with small MMS, this speaker have a better sound. I verified that with differents 15 " in my ONKEN 360.
Best regards.
Eric BALLET
Sorry, i'm not according with you. Had you read " the speaker " and " les carnets de l'audiophile tome 2 " of Jean HIRIGA or please go to this web site :
It's the best web side of the ONKEN cabinets and speakers philo :
www.planet-inc.co.jp/onken-hp/tab-a1
Jean HIRAGA explane clearly what's " the trainage " in this books. It's evident if you have a speaker with small MMS, this speaker have a better sound. I verified that with differents 15 " in my ONKEN 360.
Best regards.
Eric BALLET
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.