The Eminence Beta-10 I suggested doesn't get completely down to 50 Hz and the territory between home and pro is a desert. There are not many ten- or twelve-inchers with an Fs of 40, and finding one suitable for a sealed enclosure is even harder. Here is one that makes -5 dB at 50 Hz in 100 l sealed with a bit lower sensitivity, but lower Fs would of course be better than higher Qts.
http://www.ciare.com/pdf/catalogo/CS252S.pdf
And 160 Euro per piece plus shipping to the US would be a fortune for an array.
http://www.ciare.com/pdf/catalogo/CS252S.pdf
And 160 Euro per piece plus shipping to the US would be a fortune for an array.
If there are two, and both build two sixer-arrays then at 24 pieces maybe a custom solution is within reach. I heard that Eminence usually have a minimum number of 100, would make some extra fee. I once read that Ciare only have a minimum number of 20, but there was probably a "0" missing. They would have the advantage over Eminence that they have cones in any weight.
Here are the formulas for driver design:
HAUPT
Here are the formulas for driver design:
HAUPT
Bessel array for time alignment?
Bear
Have you considered how you will time align the midbass with your midrange? I'm in the same boat as you right now. I was thinking Onken cabinet with a Altec416's but there is the (very important) question of time alignment. One idea I had was something similiar to Dick Burwen's speakers but instead of the tweeters he used in his array I would use small sealed midbass cabinets. Perhaps in a Bessel array. Not the 30 drivers he has per side but 6(3 above and 3 below). Or an open baffle with a Bessel array in the 7 weighted type like Burwen has them set-up. The seventh element is the mid horn. That would keep the drivers in close to the plane of the compression driver of the mid and help time alignment.
-link to the seven weighted Bessel array (second down) http://www.angelfire.com/sd/paulkemble/soundf.html
You keep mentioning this 60-300hz as 'filler' but it is the much too important to be called filler. It is probably the most important couple of octaves.
Dick Burwen's Sound System
http://www.burwenaudio.com/Biography.html
Bear
Have you considered how you will time align the midbass with your midrange? I'm in the same boat as you right now. I was thinking Onken cabinet with a Altec416's but there is the (very important) question of time alignment. One idea I had was something similiar to Dick Burwen's speakers but instead of the tweeters he used in his array I would use small sealed midbass cabinets. Perhaps in a Bessel array. Not the 30 drivers he has per side but 6(3 above and 3 below). Or an open baffle with a Bessel array in the 7 weighted type like Burwen has them set-up. The seventh element is the mid horn. That would keep the drivers in close to the plane of the compression driver of the mid and help time alignment.
-link to the seven weighted Bessel array (second down) http://www.angelfire.com/sd/paulkemble/soundf.html
You keep mentioning this 60-300hz as 'filler' but it is the much too important to be called filler. It is probably the most important couple of octaves.
Dick Burwen's Sound System
http://www.burwenaudio.com/Biography.html
Last edited:
Increase of sensitivity due to enlarged cone area
Hi el'ol
'For each doubling of the cone area, the sensitivity rises 3dB' see link.
OrdinaThor_Loudspeakers_Multiple Arrays - fullrange speakers, horn, high efficiency, tqwt, multiple arrays, general audio topics>
I believe 6 drivers would have an increase of 7.5db over a single driver if taking increase in cone area alone. I'm just starting to look into this but this is what I come up with.
Hi el'ol
'For each doubling of the cone area, the sensitivity rises 3dB' see link.
OrdinaThor_Loudspeakers_Multiple Arrays - fullrange speakers, horn, high efficiency, tqwt, multiple arrays, general audio topics>
I believe 6 drivers would have an increase of 7.5db over a single driver if taking increase in cone area alone. I'm just starting to look into this but this is what I come up with.
I am not so careful in using the terms "sensitivity" and "efficiency". What is meant at the beginning of the page is the output at the same voltage when drivers are wired in parallel. This, however, needn´t mean an increase in efficiency.
Googling for bessel arrays there is claimed at several places that bessel arrays in fact have an increase in efficiency, but I couldn´t find how much exactly. Same as in line arrays it can´t just be 10 Log (Number of drivers used), since an infinite array can't have infinite efficiency.
Googling for bessel arrays there is claimed at several places that bessel arrays in fact have an increase in efficiency, but I couldn´t find how much exactly. Same as in line arrays it can´t just be 10 Log (Number of drivers used), since an infinite array can't have infinite efficiency.
AES E-Library: Effective Performance of Bessel Arrays
For linear bessel arrays the 5er array has a 0.6 dB efficiency gain over a single driver, whereas the longer arrays have lower efficiencies.
For linear bessel arrays the 5er array has a 0.6 dB efficiency gain over a single driver, whereas the longer arrays have lower efficiencies.
Hi el`Ol,
No increase in efficiency or array sensitivity is expected for a Bessel array when comparing with a line array but the efficiency/sensitivity is instead traded for wider dispersion characteristics .
You need to take a close look at this paper:
http://www.xlrtechs.com/dbkeele.com/PDF/Keele (1989-10 AES Preprint) - Bessel Arrays.pdf
b
midbass driver
Bear:
You are presenting a tough (impossible?) situation for the people responding: you are asking for suggestions, but then imposing judgements of their sound on the answers. No one can give you an answer you want, because they are not listening with your ears.
I second the suggestions about the JBL 2226, and the TD series, epsecially the TD-X. Contact John @ Audio-Video Logic about a 2226 in a custom built cabinet, flat within 2db of your range, and with felt on the front to tame a reflection. He has a pair for sale.
If you don't like the sound of JBL, go for the TD. Or, try the TAD 1201. 100db @ 1 watt. I ran mine from 100-300, great sound screaming loud. Never tried to go lower, so don't have any idea of what it would do. Mine was in a 1.7cf sealed box, but the driver will work in 1.1 cf. I found a free hunk of 5/8" thick plastic sewer pipe I'm going to stick the TAD in next to see how it sounds. I'd like to try to get the driver down below 60 hz to see if it could work as a nice (not huge) monitor.
Good luck with your project!
Bear:
You are presenting a tough (impossible?) situation for the people responding: you are asking for suggestions, but then imposing judgements of their sound on the answers. No one can give you an answer you want, because they are not listening with your ears.
I second the suggestions about the JBL 2226, and the TD series, epsecially the TD-X. Contact John @ Audio-Video Logic about a 2226 in a custom built cabinet, flat within 2db of your range, and with felt on the front to tame a reflection. He has a pair for sale.
If you don't like the sound of JBL, go for the TD. Or, try the TAD 1201. 100db @ 1 watt. I ran mine from 100-300, great sound screaming loud. Never tried to go lower, so don't have any idea of what it would do. Mine was in a 1.7cf sealed box, but the driver will work in 1.1 cf. I found a free hunk of 5/8" thick plastic sewer pipe I'm going to stick the TAD in next to see how it sounds. I'd like to try to get the driver down below 60 hz to see if it could work as a nice (not huge) monitor.
Good luck with your project!
I am currently investigating how one can have the 100dB killer-sub plus 100 db "filler" both in one (no horn).
High Efficiency Speaker Asylum - I want to build the Baronette - el`Ol - January 17, 2010 at 11:24:12
High Efficiency Speaker Asylum - I want to build the Baronette - el`Ol - January 17, 2010 at 11:24:12
Originally I had the problem to find/build speakers for my sister, who likes to have them invisible in the corners on the floor. Good sensitivity would also be nice, since she has a 12 Watt valve amp. So I asked in a German forum whether there is something like a little corner horn. I was told there is the EV Baronet. I made simulations with roughly estimated enclosure dimensions and found that the FR is much more dependent on the volume of the (huge) compression chamber and the length of the (very short) horn than on the opening factor of the horn. So my conclusion was that it is more a corner-friendly tuned BR than a backloaded corner horn. In simulations of BRs with Hornresp in the eighth-space I found that it is essential to produce a softer rolloff than that of typical BRs or Q=0.7 tuned sealed enclosures. (There were always simulations running of the same enclosures in half-space with a different software in parallel.)
I just simulated the Altec 416-8B and there seems to be an other way of getting a good corner-speaker: Just put it in a min. 350 l sealed enclosure (same volume as a typical BR and twice the volume of a Q=0.7 tuned sealed enclosure).
Hello,
Just my two cents. My proposal is not original. It has been largely documented by PaulW in the Large midrange for OB thread. The original idea was to use an array of 2x2 7" drivers to bring down distorsion and have an increase sensitivity. While doing it also preserves the delicate render of the smaller midranges. All this comes to a cost and that is the interferences occuring at higher frequencies by the spacing between drivers.
Now, in version no 2 of this type of array, PaulW addresses the problem by adding 8 more drivers, in pair of two to each side of the 2x2 square. The 4 drivers in the center are delayed by about 11 miliseconds and so a better polar response is obtained around 800Hz.
Now my proposal is to use a number of Mark Audio drivers such as Alpair5, Alpair 6 or CHE-70, which are considerably smaller but have a very flat response.
For example Alpair 5 has an overall diameter, including basket, of 100mm, while being flat from around 150Hz to 10Khz. The small diameter allows array arrangements similar to PaulW's version 2, in a circle area with a diameter of 400 mm, around the same used by a 15" driver. For comparison, the area used by PaulW's design was around 18".
See HERE
So how about this? 12xAlpair 5, reportedly having a very good midrange, with a surface area equivalent with a 10" driver, high power handling and at least 103 db sensistivity? Numberless configurations can be imagined.
edit: Well, I am sorry but only about now I've seen the 50Hz requirement in the title of the thread. I was being set-up on my own requirements - 100Hz - 800Hz. Besides, it's 2 o'clock in the morning on this side and I need some sleep.
However this is not changing the data very much regarding what I've sad above. How about 2x2 array with this very capable midrange: 6nd430. Subjective impressions are also reportedly very good.
Just my two cents. My proposal is not original. It has been largely documented by PaulW in the Large midrange for OB thread. The original idea was to use an array of 2x2 7" drivers to bring down distorsion and have an increase sensitivity. While doing it also preserves the delicate render of the smaller midranges. All this comes to a cost and that is the interferences occuring at higher frequencies by the spacing between drivers.
Now, in version no 2 of this type of array, PaulW addresses the problem by adding 8 more drivers, in pair of two to each side of the 2x2 square. The 4 drivers in the center are delayed by about 11 miliseconds and so a better polar response is obtained around 800Hz.
Now my proposal is to use a number of Mark Audio drivers such as Alpair5, Alpair 6 or CHE-70, which are considerably smaller but have a very flat response.
For example Alpair 5 has an overall diameter, including basket, of 100mm, while being flat from around 150Hz to 10Khz. The small diameter allows array arrangements similar to PaulW's version 2, in a circle area with a diameter of 400 mm, around the same used by a 15" driver. For comparison, the area used by PaulW's design was around 18".
See HERE
So how about this? 12xAlpair 5, reportedly having a very good midrange, with a surface area equivalent with a 10" driver, high power handling and at least 103 db sensistivity? Numberless configurations can be imagined.
edit: Well, I am sorry but only about now I've seen the 50Hz requirement in the title of the thread. I was being set-up on my own requirements - 100Hz - 800Hz. Besides, it's 2 o'clock in the morning on this side and I need some sleep.
However this is not changing the data very much regarding what I've sad above. How about 2x2 array with this very capable midrange: 6nd430. Subjective impressions are also reportedly very good.
Last edited:
I'm also very interested in Paul W's phase-array setup 
But how can it achieve a proper directivity along with low (enough) combing interference by a 2x2 array? I guess the minimum requirement would be 1 at the center + 4 around it. To 'fill' the surrounding area, I'm thinking 1+6... (It's a pity that it seemed not welcome in the 'fullrange forum' ... )
Regarding drivers of Mark Audio, they might have a little drawback in array application --their frames are large (with wider than normal rims). If the range reaches high, then the slightly larger c-c distances might get significant.
But how can it achieve a proper directivity along with low (enough) combing interference by a 2x2 array? I guess the minimum requirement would be 1 at the center + 4 around it. To 'fill' the surrounding area, I'm thinking 1+6... (It's a pity that it seemed not welcome in the 'fullrange forum' ... )
Regarding drivers of Mark Audio, they might have a little drawback in array application --their frames are large (with wider than normal rims). If the range reaches high, then the slightly larger c-c distances might get significant.
Hello,
well addressing the frame issue, there is this Alpair 6 version which I find to be the best for this kind of application. It is designed specifically for vertical arrays so it has a a very thin frame. It's also having a larger sensitivity than alpair 5 and it goes lower.
But also keep in mind that these are really small drivers. I've run some simulations with Alpair 5 and a 2x2 array will start lobing at about 1250Hz. By comparison an array composed of 6.5" drivers will start showing this effect at about 800Hz.
By any means I don't think this can be used over 1500Hz. And that's with carefull design and very small drivers, like the alpair5.
But with a crossover frequency of 300Hz, 4x6nd430 should really be the winner combination here.
edit: regarding the directivity problem, I really don't know very well how to look after directivity in array show, the software I am using. I am sure a 4x4 array will look to have better directivity figures than a 12" driver in the 50-300Hz area though..
well addressing the frame issue, there is this Alpair 6 version which I find to be the best for this kind of application. It is designed specifically for vertical arrays so it has a a very thin frame. It's also having a larger sensitivity than alpair 5 and it goes lower.
But also keep in mind that these are really small drivers. I've run some simulations with Alpair 5 and a 2x2 array will start lobing at about 1250Hz. By comparison an array composed of 6.5" drivers will start showing this effect at about 800Hz.
By any means I don't think this can be used over 1500Hz. And that's with carefull design and very small drivers, like the alpair5.
But with a crossover frequency of 300Hz, 4x6nd430 should really be the winner combination here.
edit: regarding the directivity problem, I really don't know very well how to look after directivity in array show, the software I am using. I am sure a 4x4 array will look to have better directivity figures than a 12" driver in the 50-300Hz area though..
Last edited:
In Paul W's work, the array is arranged as 2 different operation ranges for inner 4 and outer 8. The inner 4 operate all the way up, while the outer 8 sneak in much lower. So, when playing high, the effective area is smaller, thus a reasonable dispersion is maintained; when playing low, the effective area is larger, and the directivity can be 'tuned' almost constant. That's the beauty in this desgin.
So I'm thinking, a single driver at the center, say, a 5"~6.5" for playing up to 2~3kHz, while the drivers surounding it would support the lower range to have much better power handling and efficiency.
I think this would be a good thing for those drivers with up-tilting response, or for compensating the dipole loss in an OB.
One step further, if we put a coaxial driver at the center and suround it with the same or slightly larger size drivers, then a flat Synergy horn is born
So I'm thinking, a single driver at the center, say, a 5"~6.5" for playing up to 2~3kHz, while the drivers surounding it would support the lower range to have much better power handling and efficiency.
I think this would be a good thing for those drivers with up-tilting response, or for compensating the dipole loss in an OB.
One step further, if we put a coaxial driver at the center and suround it with the same or slightly larger size drivers, then a flat Synergy horn is born
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.