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?
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?
Hi,
http://www.madisound.com/pdf/exotic-2way-plans.pdf
Zaph|Audio - ZRT - Revelator Tower , chalk and cheese.
rgds, sreten.
http://www.madisound.com/pdf/exotic-2way-plans.pdf
Zaph|Audio - ZRT - Revelator Tower , chalk and cheese.
rgds, sreten.
any reviews on the seas exotic drivers? especially the one you gave..
http://www.madisound.com/pdf/exotic-2way-plans.pdf
http://www.madisound.com/pdf/exotic-2way-plans.pdf
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.
Best regards!
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.
Best regards!
Hi,
Intolerable ?
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.
rgds, sreten.
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.
Last edited:
Sure you can. The Revelators generate more harmonic distortion 300-1000Hz than all its competition, due to cone nonlinearities. It sounds dark and lacking the clarity of more rigid, lighter cones from Seas Excel, Peerless Exclusives, or SB Acoustics. The Seas Exotics (I never heard, just going by design and specs) would sink the Scanspeaks in sound quality.
Not to keep plugging zaph's page like above, but the SS 15W/8530K00 has the lowest HD of the 5" drivers he tested. I don't know where you're getting your findings...
Later,
Wolf
I've not heard his ZD5, but I built my own Scandivifias apparently in the same time-frame he built his with the same drivers, so I'd like to.
However- the ZRT were imperfect, and overly neutral in my opinion. A fellow poster over on PETT had to retune his boxes and swap resistors due to driver specs being a touch different and the preassembled xovers being wrong. Once he got them right, they were nice, but still overly neutral, IMO.
That's zaph's house sound, so that's what you get, cuz that's what he likes.
Others have described it as being 'afraid of midrange'.
Just my 2c,
Wolf
Hi,
And thats is fair enough, it is his site and his free designs.
I think he'd be quite pleased to have his designs criticised
as being "too neutral". His reposte might be well if neutral
isn't right then what is ?
The same applies to loads of other speaker designs that
are designed to be essentially flat. If you don't like flat
speakers and prefer designs that are clearly not flat
for the intended placement well that is your perogative.
If you understand the target sound you like there is no
real problem redesigning a speaker to that target sound.
Usually entails ignoring BSC for people who use and have
used speakers with no BSC for years. Problem is that BSC
varies with baffle width (mainly) so unBSC'd speakers of
different sizes sound different.
BSC'd speakers of different sizes sound more consistently the same.
If a system is optimised around unBSC'd speakers then clearly
neutral speakers won't work and other size speakers might not.
rgds, sreten.
If you look at the 2nd harmonics, at 500Hz and 1000Hz the Revelator 5" has 10dB higher distortion than the Seas Excel and Peerless Exclusive. So it basically has 10x more distortion. I've used all 3 drivers in real 2-ways, and sold the Revelators.
If you look at Zaph's measurements for the AC130/50CK (http://zaphaudio.com/temp/AurumCantus-AC130-50CK-HD.gif) it kills the Scanspeak for far cheaper. I will be using this one for my next project.
Last edited:
cotdt-
I'll take a second look at those, as I was going from memory. Last I checked it, the 8530 was the lowest, so I'll reinform myself.
sreten-
By 'overly neutral', I mean all recordings even compressed ones would sound decent. To me the midrange is murky and undetailed in his ZRT. 'Overly neutral' would be the way the masses would typically accept his speakers since they are non-fatiguing and make music sound good. 'Sterile' would be another adjective. Zaph's stuff typically sounds like BBC dip to me, but many like that approach, so it's not incorrect either. Jon's 'Spassvogels' design sounds much more realistic and better than the ZRT with the same drivers.
To me- you can still have a flat measuring speaker, that makes most music sound good, sound more realistic without sucking some of the life out of the midrange. To tell me I don't strive for flat is kind of a low-blow, as that is how I model all my designs. I do believe realism, accuracy, and character can all be obtained in a design. I want that emotional connection that makes the design grab me and almost slip into a state of sonic euphoria.
There is more to a speaker design than just a flat response, even if that is part of the goal.
Later,
Wolf
I'll take a second look at those, as I was going from memory. Last I checked it, the 8530 was the lowest, so I'll reinform myself.
sreten-
By 'overly neutral', I mean all recordings even compressed ones would sound decent. To me the midrange is murky and undetailed in his ZRT. 'Overly neutral' would be the way the masses would typically accept his speakers since they are non-fatiguing and make music sound good. 'Sterile' would be another adjective. Zaph's stuff typically sounds like BBC dip to me, but many like that approach, so it's not incorrect either. Jon's 'Spassvogels' design sounds much more realistic and better than the ZRT with the same drivers.
To me- you can still have a flat measuring speaker, that makes most music sound good, sound more realistic without sucking some of the life out of the midrange. To tell me I don't strive for flat is kind of a low-blow, as that is how I model all my designs. I do believe realism, accuracy, and character can all be obtained in a design. I want that emotional connection that makes the design grab me and almost slip into a state of sonic euphoria.
There is more to a speaker design than just a flat response, even if that is part of the goal.
Later,
Wolf
The 3rd (F3) order is lower on the 15W8530 than the 830882, which is more important than the F2. This is the same case on the Excel W15CH. The 8530K00 has lower 3rd harmonic distortion than both of the others do.
The AC looks to be on par with the 8530K00, in both the F2 and F3 below 1kHz minus that spot just below 1kHz (which is normally notched anyway), and has lower distortion in the upper bandwidth overall. It looks like a good driver.
The W4-1757 has lower F2 and F3 than both the 15W8530K00 and the AC130/50CK, BUT the blemish at 2kHz needs filtered out with an LCR. I have the W4-1798S, and find it every bit as clean if not cleaner than the 8530's I have.
Later,
Wolf
Last edited:
Yes ! The ears of the designer
(if you take into account all types of measurement : that is a part of the goal)That is somewhere logical
but it is not the subject of this thread.
Yes ! The ears of the designer
Wolf has "loaned me his ears" on occasion. This has lead me into an appreciation of things I had never "heard before". I trust his input anytime-anywhere. ...doesn't mean my ears are the same or as capable, or that I like the same things. I think we share a similar pursuit.
I am truth seeker. I approve this message.
Hi,
You forgot the "to me" and probably quite a few other
things related to the type of system the speaker is used in.
(The SV thread says they have not been compared.)
What ever, they both target 4th order L/R, Zaphs a little lower.
After that I can't be bothered to argue, the SV's sensitivity and
BSC is not made explicit, and it certainly has a nicer cabinet.
The astute with more details of the SV could make up their
own mind of with approach they'd prefer to take, YMMV.
rgds, sreten.
I think Zaph contribution to the DIY community is great and don't think That Sreten's promotion of Zaphs designs is wrong. They are well engineered, but of course they are tuned to his own preferences, but why shouldn't it be?
On the other hand one thing that bothered me when I measured the Zaph ZA-SR71 designed it seemed as it was designed and optimized around the 1m measurements.
ZaphAudio ZA-SR71 Review!
I don't know if that's the case about the ZRT design, but I hardly think anyone listen to such a loudspeaker at a 1m distance?
Regards
/Göran
On the other hand one thing that bothered me when I measured the Zaph ZA-SR71 designed it seemed as it was designed and optimized around the 1m measurements.
ZaphAudio ZA-SR71 Review!
I don't know if that's the case about the ZRT design, but I hardly think anyone listen to such a loudspeaker at a 1m distance?
Regards
/Göran
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.