-within reason (price-wise):
It says it's a "4" diameter driver, and it totals about 4.7 inches.. BUT it has a lot of frame and surround to it, so it almost certainly qualifies for 3.5" (or less).
Haven't heard it, but it looks rather good accepting where it needs correction (most notably above 5 kHz):
Products | AX-CE04 | gradient-acoustics.com - Products > Gradient Ceramic > AX-CE04
It says it's a "4" diameter driver, and it totals about 4.7 inches.. BUT it has a lot of frame and surround to it, so it almost certainly qualifies for 3.5" (or less).
Haven't heard it, but it looks rather good accepting where it needs correction (most notably above 5 kHz):
Products | AX-CE04 | gradient-acoustics.com - Products > Gradient Ceramic > AX-CE04
-my guess is that they wanted something that wasn't going to distort heavily with a lower/shallower cross-over freq. and significant spl..
What's most disapointing to me, taking into account the kind of driver it is (modest eff.), is that the rise in response nearing fs didn't start higher in freq. to combat the typical narrow-baffle pressure loss.
(..I would have preferred it around 600-700 Hz, something Dave's choice (Alpair) usually has.)
Last edited:
The ATC SM75-150S is probably the winner as far as distortion is concerned. The problem with it however is that the motor is physically enormous so you can't achieve any better centre-to-centre spacing with the tweeter than you would with a 7" woofer. That takes some of the attraction away for me since part of the magic of a small midrange is to achieve closer spacing with the tweeter therefore reducing the dip that occurs in the off axis response. ATC also stopped selling to the DIY market so anyone who still has stock will be asking a premium for it.
My personal favourite at the moment is the Dayton RS52AN dome. Basically ruler flat frequency response where you want to use it. Crossed at 700Hz LR4 will go to high SPL for a 2" driver while still having almost a complete lack of any high order harmonics. That makes it sound very clean.
The Fountek FR88EX is also very good. The only downsides are the very fragile cone/dustcap (not child friendly without a grille), and having very small screw holes (3mm) that are spaced close to the basket. Also requires a bit more crossover work to get a flat response. Again about 700-800Hz LR4 is where you want to cross to keep it clean at high SPL. Might be able to run an MTM config of these with reasonable CTC spacing, and this would allow a lower crossover point, perhaps 550-600Hz.
My personal favourite at the moment is the Dayton RS52AN dome. Basically ruler flat frequency response where you want to use it. Crossed at 700Hz LR4 will go to high SPL for a 2" driver while still having almost a complete lack of any high order harmonics. That makes it sound very clean.
The Fountek FR88EX is also very good. The only downsides are the very fragile cone/dustcap (not child friendly without a grille), and having very small screw holes (3mm) that are spaced close to the basket. Also requires a bit more crossover work to get a flat response. Again about 700-800Hz LR4 is where you want to cross to keep it clean at high SPL. Might be able to run an MTM config of these with reasonable CTC spacing, and this would allow a lower crossover point, perhaps 550-600Hz.
Last edited:
I use domes often, and i like them. Dayton aluminum dome can have face plate easily removed, its only gently held in place by glue. I do put protection grille back, that dome is extremely fragile. Recently build 4 way with hivi planar tweeter, two dayton domes (mtm), two dayton 6" midbass, one 15"...for my upstairs messy diy room. Those speakers turned out great, they measure very well, on and off axis, including phase, they sound amazing, would deserve better room.
Interesting. I heard the big ATC at the Munich show this year - and I did not hear anything special - at all, that I could not get with relative cheap standard drivers in other well designed speakers.
My biggest concern with a midrange - is the integration with the tweeter in relation to size and power response. This is where the filter/x-over and frontpanel of the cabinet, come into play.
@Porsche:
Any thoughts on the cabinet design and the rest of the drivers?
Well - what can you do in a show - other than listen? Besides - by now, most speaker manufaturers, should know that acoustics, is a big deal, when listening to music. So if they want me to discover their wonderfull midrange, then they should have done something about the poor bass performance - simple. They want me to pay an extreme amount of money - then I want better performance - not just a name and a few bla bla. about special materials and many hours of research
Vandersteen sounded very good and was at the same time informative and actually had some kind of 1400 dollar midrange - but it sounded great - so fair enough. But he also took care of the bass, so I actually could hear this special midrange
I do not argue that your suggestion might be great and all. But I do still think it is rather important which design the OP has in mind. Because I do hope that we can agree that it is rather important to construct a front baffel that suits the given midrange and the rest of the drivers too - right?
Ah, interesting, I hadn't heard of that driver before. Awfully high Qts even for a XBL^2 motor. Still would love to play with it to hear what happens when that motor topology is combined with a ceramic cone.
To go XBL^2 with that size format, I was thinking Illusion Audio's C3, but I think they only use the topology on their 10" woofers and larger. Starke Sound uses a modernized version (LMF is just XBL^2 with a deeper notch, Wiggins is still behind it) in their 4" drivers, but even if one could talk them out of just the drivers affordable is not the word to use for it. For both, there is Stereo Integrity's new M3 3.5" midrange, but I've not seen distortion measurements on it yet.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.