how is this seas driver?
Speaker Building Supplies from Madisound
when compared to scanspeak revelators?
I see the qts of this driver being low .24
and would suffer from vocal problems of its bigger driver size.
Infact the vc inductance is also .43mH and also
the driver size is 8 inch would suffer beaming?
Fs is also higher 36Hz when compared with ss.
how far scanspeak Revelator 7 inch compared with this driver? which is good for bass and vocals? and also transients?
Zaph|Audio - ZRT - Revelator Tower , chalk and cheese.
Those Seas are really pretty drivers but the Scan Speaks are a better deal. You can't get much better performing drivers than Scan Speaks at any price.
any reviews on the seas exotic drivers? especially the one you gave..
Hi Sreten, I have ever restrained myself from mentioning your acting like an advertising person for Zaph audio.
But in the case with the LR-4 claims from the link to Zaph's site it is getting intolerable.
You see, LR-4 is all about phase and lobing. It has very little to nothing to do with slopes! Please consider finding another guru to hail to, because this is getting annoying.
If I was asked to give LR-4 a definition, it would be:
360 degrees out of phase, acoustic centers time aligned, controlled and predictable vertical dispersion. That is what it is all about.
So this source is untrustworthy.
About the Seas driver, well, it has an alful SPL plot, bad off axis response despite the phase plug and is immensly expencive. For this price you could have a pair of beautiful Fane, Dayton and etc. nice drivers that don't brag with AlNiCo and don't cost a fortune, but sound nice... then you could mate them to a ribbon driver of choice and have a great sounding speakes.
For the price of one of those things you could even get the needed parts for bass+compression midrange+ribbon tweeters and have an even better sounding stereo pair.
And because I believe that there is no such thing like excessive pomposity, you could even use an LR-4 (an actual one) and time align the drivers.
Further down the scientific approach, anyone could put a deciding/choosing criteria such as level of distortion.
yeah the spl curve is very bad its freq resp is raising and more over the bass region is also not looking promising.
I believe scanspeaks should do the job better and better tradeoff with Qts and freq response...
lol at t101. Zaphs designs for the revelator are nice though. I still baulk at the drivers prices. I also dont like their high end trend for ultra low Qts, Audax HM series had it, and many of the Seas and SS. They have a strange DIYaudio porn quality it has to be said.
There is nothing wrong with Zaphs description of LR4.
In order to achieve the phase response of LR4 you must implement
the correct acoustic slopes for LR4. Otherwise its not LR4, or the
slightly assymetrical version of LR4 Zaph targets to account
for the offsets in the drivers acoustic centres.
Saying it has "very little to nothing to do with slopes!" is just plain
wrong as fact. There nothing "guru" about Zaphs design descriptions.
Get "annoyed" as much as you like, its you that is missing the
understanding the time and frequency domain are completely
interchangeable in describing a filters function.
Zaph knows as long as he hits his target acoustic slopes over
the x/o region then the phase response and the vertical
dispersion he is after will automatically follow.
He understands LR4 more thoroughly than you do, (as do I).
You'd probably learn a lot by proper perusal of his site,
rather than trying to denigrate good designs you haven't
taken the time or made the effort to understand properly.
I mention Zaph's site a lot because its pretty much the
best site out there for fully documented speaker designs,
and there is not a trace of "guru" BS on the site.
Some opinions, fair enough, its his site.
|All times are GMT. The time now is 01:23 AM.|
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2014 diyAudio