I'm used these days to push drivers to the max, holding them in my hand, playing agressive pure tones in them... some in the lot scared me. The 18FH500 was the scariest, obviously, but that 15W0v3 pushes air like a real massive pistonic device. You barely can keep it steady in your hands. Really another ball game compared to the 8, 10 and 12'' i tried recently.
Second follow-up of the night 
Side-by-side comparison between the Dayton PS180 and the TB W5-2143.
Finally, the PS180 is not bass shy. Problem is, peaks are so brutal (in the mid range) that stopped me pushing it. It's naturally unbalanced. Like i said: it needs to be EQd for optimal results.
While the W5-2143 is pretty enjoyable uncorrected. Smooth, detailed but not harsh, well-balanced. A nice little driver. Would be my first choice for a modest kit crossover-less and EQ-less (basically on an amplifier with a volume control).
There is a lot of energy coming from the PS180 and my guess is: once EQd, it will deliver terrific results. Midbass seems meaty and the top end sparkles a lot. So, that's a stallion that needs to be whiped. Reminds me of the Visaton B200 in a way... with better 10khz+.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Side-by-side comparison between the Dayton PS180 and the TB W5-2143.
Finally, the PS180 is not bass shy. Problem is, peaks are so brutal (in the mid range) that stopped me pushing it. It's naturally unbalanced. Like i said: it needs to be EQd for optimal results.
While the W5-2143 is pretty enjoyable uncorrected. Smooth, detailed but not harsh, well-balanced. A nice little driver. Would be my first choice for a modest kit crossover-less and EQ-less (basically on an amplifier with a volume control).
There is a lot of energy coming from the PS180 and my guess is: once EQd, it will deliver terrific results. Midbass seems meaty and the top end sparkles a lot. So, that's a stallion that needs to be whiped. Reminds me of the Visaton B200 in a way... with better 10khz+.
Hi Jon. I read many good reviews of this TB driver, but find few enclosures or builds for it. What FR enclosure would you recommend, for someone like me who would like to take my first plunge into the world of FR? And aiming for a FAST (or WAW) setup eventually.
I am planning to use a B1 + ACA to drive them.
I always like to use an aperiodic midTL for dedicated WAW midTweeters. It should ideally be at least the volume of the sealed box you might use.
If one uses a sealed box, and intends on using the 2nd order roll-off as the HP filter or 2 poles of it, then one would want something like a 6.5-7 litre stuffed box with a turnover point of just over 100 Hz.If you don’t want to use that roll-off then a filter at least an octave above would be recommended, but that will ideally depend on baffle step point and quarter-wave separation with the woofer.
dave
Attachments
Second follow-up of the night
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Side-by-side comparison between the Dayton PS180 and the TB W5-2143.
Finally, the PS180 is not bass shy. Problem is, peaks are so brutal (in the mid range) that stopped me pushing it. It's naturally unbalanced. Like i said: it needs to be EQd for optimal results.
While the W5-2143 is pretty enjoyable uncorrected. Smooth, detailed but not harsh, well-balanced. A nice little driver. Would be my first choice for a modest kit crossover-less and EQ-less (basically on an amplifier with a volume control).
There is a lot of energy coming from the PS180 and my guess is: once EQd, it will deliver terrific results. Midbass seems meaty and the top end sparkles a lot. So, that's a stallion that needs to be whiped. Reminds me of the Visaton B200 in a way... with better 10khz+.
I'm having better luck with the PS65LP than I did with the PS180. Smoother response with very wide dispersion.
Jon - sorry, do not want to hijack your thread. And you are probably too busy catching up on the DAC ABX thread. It is like a runaway train.
Dave - thanks, I will try to digest your answer in the coming months and years. As a newbie / noob, I did not understand much of your post. I guess I was hoping for a few simple suggestions. Something like this - should work great in a FHXL, or try a OB of x by y inches.
rb132333 - thanks, that box does look simple. I assume it is just a small sealed box? Dimensions?
Could a simple BR work? I find it strange that there are so few builds on this forum using this W5-2143 driver.
Dave - thanks, I will try to digest your answer in the coming months and years. As a newbie / noob, I did not understand much of your post. I guess I was hoping for a few simple suggestions. Something like this - should work great in a FHXL, or try a OB of x by y inches.
rb132333 - thanks, that box does look simple. I assume it is just a small sealed box? Dimensions?
Could a simple BR work? I find it strange that there are so few builds on this forum using this W5-2143 driver.
Last edited:
The overall dimensions are 10" H x 9.5" W x 8" D. It is a sealed box because as I stated previously it is my opinion that we should always use a good subwoofer (or 2). It just provides that visceral feeling to the low end of the music that I expect.
I am sure that you are aware of this but the Parts Express page provides box sizes - sealed and vented.
Tang Band W5-2143 5" Paper Cone Full Range Driver 8 Ohm
The other thing that I was experimenting with with the baffle shape. It is not recommended to have a square shape due to baffle edge issues but I wanted to try the last shape illustrated in this link.
The Science of speaker cabinets-Diffraction - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
That is why I included the overall frequency response. I think that it looks pretty good without any major anomalies even though my overall size is much less than in the illustrations. It is still an interesting link.
I am sure that you are aware of this but the Parts Express page provides box sizes - sealed and vented.
Tang Band W5-2143 5" Paper Cone Full Range Driver 8 Ohm
The other thing that I was experimenting with with the baffle shape. It is not recommended to have a square shape due to baffle edge issues but I wanted to try the last shape illustrated in this link.
The Science of speaker cabinets-Diffraction - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
That is why I included the overall frequency response. I think that it looks pretty good without any major anomalies even though my overall size is much less than in the illustrations. It is still an interesting link.
The W5-2143 in an XKi is currently one of my favorite high sensitivity full rangers with HF capability and some real oomph in the bass department. Very smooth. Well built and surprisingly clean sounding.
I imagine as a wide band sealed top in a FAST, XO above 120Hz, it would be very nice indeed.
I imagine as a wide band sealed top in a FAST, XO above 120Hz, it would be very nice indeed.
It should work well in an FHXL, but you wouldn’t use that for a WAW (aka FAST), as the box goes low, lower than you would need for a midTweeter. You could add a subWoofer but it would only cover the bottom octave or an octave & a half — i am (slowly) working on a stealthWoofer specifically for it.
OBs,i an not much into (we’ve built a few and something just doesn’t sound right), so i’m not th eone to make suggestions. MJK’s OB primers are a good place to start. OB Theory
dave
Then do so, the construction is easy and cheap, the main problem is positioning. I use Jordan Eikonas in open baffle and U-frame woofers, very happy with the result
Whether I go OB or XKi, the addition of helper woofers are also my aim. H or U frames seems tempting. I will PM you later for more info on your U frames,since we are OT here now. Thanks Matt.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.