First let me describe my current loudspeaker:
1 x RAAL 70-20X ribbon tweeter.
1x Audio Technology C-Quenze 15H midrange driver.
2 x Dayton Audio RS225 8” bas/lower midrange drivers.
2 x Corner subwoofers, each with one Audio Technology Flexunit 12” (sandwich cone).
Currently everything is crossed over actively with a miniDSP OpenDRC-DA8.
I do have a 4-way Ground Sound (DCN24) active crossover which I have been testing with as well.
I am looking for a replacement for my Audio Technology C-Quenze 15H midrange driver.
Preferably about the same size so it will fit in the baffle of the current loudspeaker – but if a great point is made for a different size – I am not going to rule out changing the size.
The weird part is that I am not really missing anything in the music – it sounds absolutely great (!!)
But I have this feeling that I can improve on the midrange driver itself somehow.
I seem to gain a little in the upper midrange with the C-Quenze 15H SDKM (which I have used previously) but I am not entirely sure it is better musically – even though it is a dedicated midrange driver with special suspension.
I have been using both the SB Acoustics Satori MW16P and the smaller MR13P with great success in another speaker I have built (and currently using in another setup). But the MW16P sounds a little more smoothening (= not as dynamic as C-Quenze) and the MR13P is just too small to really impose its will with the other drivers (cone area probably to small).
Maybe the MR16P is better that the MW16P but I would think it would only be marginal better – and I am not sure that paper (papyrus) is neutral enough for a midrange – paper is in my experience not dynamic and neutral even though it can be great sounding.
Several Scan-Speak and other SB Acoustics midranges has been through my crunching machine without real success. I have tried a couple of Accuton and Seas drivers but have not been impressed with the sound characteristics in generally – but maybe there is a gem out there I might have missed?
I have been searching far and wide (including the countless threads here on diyaudio) but I have not found anything that really pops out as an great replacement.
There is a lot of suggestions everywhere but I rarely see more substantiated suggestions backed up with real life tests, constructions and experiences. Usually it is just loose based claims with no hands on experiences.
I have been through many drivers and I am an experienced loudspeaker builder so I am really looking for some qualified suggestions.
I really want to spare myself of the money and time consumption of just testing several drivers, more or less randomly because of loose based suggestions – I have been through that process several times before.
Right now I am having a 70+ midrange driver stock and I really do not want to increase my stock.
Am I sounding cranky?
Not my intention
– I just would like the suggestions to be followed up by describing the setup in which they were used and some subjective description of the strengths.
So…
Any suggestions?
- I dare you
1 x RAAL 70-20X ribbon tweeter.
1x Audio Technology C-Quenze 15H midrange driver.
2 x Dayton Audio RS225 8” bas/lower midrange drivers.
2 x Corner subwoofers, each with one Audio Technology Flexunit 12” (sandwich cone).
Currently everything is crossed over actively with a miniDSP OpenDRC-DA8.
I do have a 4-way Ground Sound (DCN24) active crossover which I have been testing with as well.
I am looking for a replacement for my Audio Technology C-Quenze 15H midrange driver.
Preferably about the same size so it will fit in the baffle of the current loudspeaker – but if a great point is made for a different size – I am not going to rule out changing the size.
The weird part is that I am not really missing anything in the music – it sounds absolutely great (!!)
But I have this feeling that I can improve on the midrange driver itself somehow.
I seem to gain a little in the upper midrange with the C-Quenze 15H SDKM (which I have used previously) but I am not entirely sure it is better musically – even though it is a dedicated midrange driver with special suspension.
I have been using both the SB Acoustics Satori MW16P and the smaller MR13P with great success in another speaker I have built (and currently using in another setup). But the MW16P sounds a little more smoothening (= not as dynamic as C-Quenze) and the MR13P is just too small to really impose its will with the other drivers (cone area probably to small).
Maybe the MR16P is better that the MW16P but I would think it would only be marginal better – and I am not sure that paper (papyrus) is neutral enough for a midrange – paper is in my experience not dynamic and neutral even though it can be great sounding.
Several Scan-Speak and other SB Acoustics midranges has been through my crunching machine without real success. I have tried a couple of Accuton and Seas drivers but have not been impressed with the sound characteristics in generally – but maybe there is a gem out there I might have missed?
I have been searching far and wide (including the countless threads here on diyaudio) but I have not found anything that really pops out as an great replacement.
There is a lot of suggestions everywhere but I rarely see more substantiated suggestions backed up with real life tests, constructions and experiences. Usually it is just loose based claims with no hands on experiences.
I have been through many drivers and I am an experienced loudspeaker builder so I am really looking for some qualified suggestions.
I really want to spare myself of the money and time consumption of just testing several drivers, more or less randomly because of loose based suggestions – I have been through that process several times before.
Right now I am having a 70+ midrange driver stock and I really do not want to increase my stock.
Am I sounding cranky?
Not my intention
– I just would like the suggestions to be followed up by describing the setup in which they were used and some subjective description of the strengths.So…
Any suggestions?
- I dare you
I just think a smaller driver would be too small to reach the 2x8" drivers with enough body in the lower frequencies.
I have tested with the Satori MR13P with a mere sd of 70cm2 and I think that is just too small.
The C-Quenze have more potential energy in the lower regions with its 96cm2.
But I see your point if you cross over that high.
RAAL themselves mention that the 70-20X can be crossed over as low as 1,8KHz (24dB filter) - Not that it is recommended though...
I have great success between 2,2KHz and 3KHz with both 24dB and 48dB filters.
I guess that Face is right, if your sound may be improved, that will happen making an ideal use of your ribbon, which is much above 2.2 khz.
What Accuton did you tested? Have you experience with the truly best ones? Those with Neo motors?
You may consider this one, http://www.accuton.com/drivers/detail.php?driver=57&matID=4&appID=2 which would allow you to cross higher between 3 and 4 khz, much better for you ribbon.
One last thing about the Accutons: the dome is extremely thin and needs a cabinet able to absorb internal reflections, otherwise the definition of this driver gets ruined.
If you can use a good digital crossover, possibly with FIR filters (shallow at cross point and very steep above and below), you can avoid the typical harshness of the rigid cones/domes resulting from the excitation of the breakup frequency (eg. crossover not steep enough). They have a superior midrange definition that can't be matched by soft membrane.
When a rigid cone disappoints, it's probably because of a bad motor (whose distortion products excite the break up frequency) and/or a bad overall design.
What Accuton did you tested? Have you experience with the truly best ones? Those with Neo motors?
You may consider this one, http://www.accuton.com/drivers/detail.php?driver=57&matID=4&appID=2 which would allow you to cross higher between 3 and 4 khz, much better for you ribbon.
One last thing about the Accutons: the dome is extremely thin and needs a cabinet able to absorb internal reflections, otherwise the definition of this driver gets ruined.
If you can use a good digital crossover, possibly with FIR filters (shallow at cross point and very steep above and below), you can avoid the typical harshness of the rigid cones/domes resulting from the excitation of the breakup frequency (eg. crossover not steep enough). They have a superior midrange definition that can't be matched by soft membrane.
When a rigid cone disappoints, it's probably because of a bad motor (whose distortion products excite the break up frequency) and/or a bad overall design.
Last edited:
Daniels
I've been thru 6 midranges lately on a fully active system similar to your.
I'm using 300-1.8khz (see my signature for detail)
-Satori 13mw4
-SB12MNRX25-4
-Revelator 18w8531
-Max fidelity pr65neo
-Yamaha berylliym 3" dome (crossed at 500hz)
-Eton 3-400
few Audax Kevlar and others Chinese's mfg less worthy of mentioning.
My best by far is a paper one, the now discontinued pr65neo (available on BO but no delivery date known yet)
http://solen.ca/wp-content/uploads/pr65neo.pdf
Second best is the 3" Eton but it's SPL is limited and unless I use 2, I can't use it on my main system.
Since the Maxfidelity is unknown delivery date, I would look for those 2 that are similar:
Beyma 6G40ND (less efficient unfortunately)
Audax PR170 (higher qts vs the Max, not sure they really compare)
Another subject, I used to use the raal as well. (the 70-10)
Have you looked at the competition before settling?
I've moved back to dome (SS illuminator textile and Tlabs beryllium) swapping them routinely depending on my mood.
I'm awaiting a TPL150 delivery soon, very promising on paper...
I've been thru 6 midranges lately on a fully active system similar to your.
I'm using 300-1.8khz (see my signature for detail)
-Satori 13mw4
-SB12MNRX25-4
-Revelator 18w8531
-Max fidelity pr65neo
-Yamaha berylliym 3" dome (crossed at 500hz)
-Eton 3-400
few Audax Kevlar and others Chinese's mfg less worthy of mentioning.
My best by far is a paper one, the now discontinued pr65neo (available on BO but no delivery date known yet)
http://solen.ca/wp-content/uploads/pr65neo.pdf
Second best is the 3" Eton but it's SPL is limited and unless I use 2, I can't use it on my main system.
Since the Maxfidelity is unknown delivery date, I would look for those 2 that are similar:
Beyma 6G40ND (less efficient unfortunately)
Audax PR170 (higher qts vs the Max, not sure they really compare)
Another subject, I used to use the raal as well. (the 70-10)
Have you looked at the competition before settling?
I've moved back to dome (SS illuminator textile and Tlabs beryllium) swapping them routinely depending on my mood.
I'm awaiting a TPL150 delivery soon, very promising on paper...
I really like the PR65Neo as well. QC is... chinese, though, so one must be careful to match them well. But for dynamics, it's better, IMO, than the famed Audax PR17OMO.
Nasty breakup around 5khz too so that must be managed around.
Badman,
I know about the breakup, this why I cross them at 1.8Khz at 48db and do not try to go higher. I even put a notch on the DSP at 4Khz to be safe
If the PR65 is also one of your favorite, could you let us know of 2 others driver you affectionate? (midrange, midwoofer)
If you know anything that beat a pr65neo on the details/dynamic, I have my Master Card ready...
Daniel,
If you hope to stay with the Raal (like I was initially) match isn't the best with the pr65NEO
either the midrange or ribbon will distort in the 2.2-2.8khz area...
I know about the breakup, this why I cross them at 1.8Khz at 48db and do not try to go higher. I even put a notch on the DSP at 4Khz to be safe
If the PR65 is also one of your favorite, could you let us know of 2 others driver you affectionate? (midrange, midwoofer)
If you know anything that beat a pr65neo on the details/dynamic, I have my Master Card ready...
Daniel,
If you hope to stay with the Raal (like I was initially) match isn't the best with the pr65NEO
either the midrange or ribbon will distort in the 2.2-2.8khz area...
Last edited:
That Accuton driver does look very interesting, but I would like to see an actual construction/application with it - it is not one I will buy just to test it
I have had some of the older versions (cannot remember the model numbers) in 2" and 5" a couple of years ago. So not the neo versions. Those were very good drivers but I did seem to like the Audio Technology drivers better at that time.
When I do measurements on the RAAL driver, it has no problems with lower crossovers down to 2KHz.
I think I must disagree about the need for crossover as high as 3 to 4KHz.
I started in that range and kept lowering the crossover and it sounded great. Now I have ended on about 2,8KHz.
It is no problem going FIR instead of IIR but that is probably an entirely different discussion.
A good friend of mine has good experiences with Faital drivers in horn constructions - but I do think they lack some in sound quality.
I have not heard the driver in question though.
I am a bit biased because of the low price which might indicate that the quality is not an the same level as the other drivers I am using.
I have a dedicated listening room which is fully acoustically treated with absorbers, diffusers etc..
I do not believe the room is an issue.
It sounds great – but you can always improve on things…
That Max Fidelity looks kind of strange in my eyes… Looks very cheap (and is cheap) and more like a Pro driver than a “HiFi” driver – with the pros and cons that follows.
Atlas, some Pro drivers can sound great, I am just a little sceptic about that driver…
Can it really be on the same level as the other drivers I am using?
High efficiency is always great but in this case I will probably have to lower it 6dB at least so I will not be taking advantage of that…
I have had different versions of the Audax Aerogel drivers, and they were all great considering price/performance – but I never found them on par with the Accuton or Audio Technology drivers.
So I do not consider them a worthy replacement of my current Audio Technology driver since I actively choose the Audio Technology’s as an improvement over the Audax’s.
I still have a pair of Scan-Speak beryllium drivers on stock and just recently I sold off another construction with them. I really like them and will rate them as being among some of the best.
But in my current construction I find the RAAL a tad better.
Is it a common opinion that the RAAL 70-20X needs to be crossed over above 3KHz?
I have done a lot of measurements and listening tests with other DIY builders and no one has mentioned anything about hearing that it would improve if crossed over a higher frequency (?)
I have even heard some recommend a cross over close to 2KHz in order to use the full potential of the RAAL ribbons (!!)
I did like the solution Verity Audio made with the RAAL and Audio Technology midrange in one of their speakers. Maybe I should stop by a friend and make some measurements on his Verity Lohengrins – just to get an idea of what they have done (?)
In general it is interesting suggestions I get here.
It was my impression that Audio Technology was among some of the best drivers, so I am a little surprised to see the suggestions of very low cost drivers (?)
Are they really on the same level?
Great if they are!
I am willing to try out one of the low cost suggestions – but I am very sceptic based on previous experience with cheap drivers.
I am not a high-price-snob but build quality costs money as do pairing and consistency, and I have a difficult time believing there is much room for that with drivers sub the $100 mark.
I have done a lot of measurements and listening tests with other DIY builders and no one has mentioned anything about hearing that it would improve if crossed over a higher frequency (?)
I have even heard some recommend a cross over close to 2KHz in order to use the full potential of the RAAL ribbons (!!)
I did like the solution Verity Audio made with the RAAL and Audio Technology midrange in one of their speakers. Maybe I should stop by a friend and make some measurements on his Verity Lohengrins – just to get an idea of what they have done (?)
In general it is interesting suggestions I get here.
It was my impression that Audio Technology was among some of the best drivers, so I am a little surprised to see the suggestions of very low cost drivers (?)
Are they really on the same level?
Great if they are!
I am willing to try out one of the low cost suggestions – but I am very sceptic based on previous experience with cheap drivers.
I am not a high-price-snob but build quality costs money as do pairing and consistency, and I have a difficult time believing there is much room for that with drivers sub the $100 mark.
Badman,
I know about the breakup, this why I cross them at 1.8Khz at 48db and do not try to go higher. I even put a notch on the DSP at 4Khz to be safe
If the PR65 is also one of your favorite, could you let us know of 2 others driver you affectionate? (midrange, midwoofer)
If you know anything that beat a pr65neo on the details/dynamic, I have my Master Card ready...
Daniel,
If you hope to stay with the Raal (like I was initially) match isn't the best with the pr65NEO
either the midrange or ribbon will distort in the 2.2-2.8khz area...
I used the Scan-Speak beryllium in one of my previous speakers with great succes.
Loka Audio - Nirvana
The RAAL just fits better in my current construction.
There's an epic build using the C90 over on HTGuide here
http://www.htguide.com/forum/showthread.php?43291-Kurosawa-Koncept-System
http://www.htguide.com/forum/showthread.php?43291-Kurosawa-Koncept-System
I heard the TB sandwich cone 4-inch mid in the Dan Neubecker’s Scimtars
Tang Band W4-1757SB 4" Aluminum Cone Driver
Which I thought sound better than the Satori MW16P in Jeff Bagby’s Testarossas.
The 6 inch TB sandwich cone is on clearance at PE for an impulse buy.
Tang Band W4-1757SB 4" Aluminum Cone Driver
Which I thought sound better than the Satori MW16P in Jeff Bagby’s Testarossas.
The 6 inch TB sandwich cone is on clearance at PE for an impulse buy.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.