|
|
|||||||
| Home | Forums | Rules | Articles | Store | Gallery | Blogs | Register | Donations | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read | Search |
| Multi-Way Conventional loudspeakers with crossovers |
|
Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.
Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: austin, tx
|
Anyone had a chance to audition these two midrange drivers? Assume that the x-over will limit both drivers to within their Xmax, say over a range of 350Hz to 3-4kHz.
Thanks. |
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Athens
|
I haven't listened to them actually
but in the Hobby Hifi Magazine they said that Excel M15CH001 performed better than this list of drivers:Audax PR170Z0 Audax PR170M0 Focal 6WM Focal 7k6411 Scan-Speak 12M 4631G00 Scan-Speak 15m 4531k00 Beyma 605 ND Visaton TI 100 M & four cheaper Visaton drivers Also Sherwin noticed that the Excel M15CH001 had almost the same qualities with the Accuton C^2 79. BTW it is very intresting that the Sonus Faber Stradivari uses the C-Quenze 15H with the Scan-speak ring-radiator and some modified (?) Seas 10". While the TAF Oss Royal Excalibur uses the M15CH001 with the Scan-speak ring-radiator, with a Excel Paper 8" and a 10" woofer. Here there are some intresting links: http://www.taf-oss.nl/indexuk.htm (TAF Oss Site) www.hsi-luidsprekers.nl/Sherwin.htm (Sherwin's loudspeakers) here is the TAF Oss Royal Excalibur picture: |
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: austin, tx
|
Thanks for the feedback.
The M15 rear magnet assembly design looks like there would be very little in the way of internal reflections. I plan on optimizing the rear enclosure cavity in my next design. The 15H on the other hand has a magnet assembly almost as large as the cut out making this difficult. My only concern with the M15 is the 1mm xmax. |
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
|
I agree. Xmax could be the decision maker. I was faced with the same choice some time ago, and decided to go for the CQuenze 15H to meet my SPL requirements when using a 2nd order highpass filter at 250Hz.
So it depends on the crossover freq and slopes you have in mind, and the cost of course. www.geocities.com/gattiweb/delta |
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: austin, tx
|
David,
I have been following the progress on your Delta project with great interest. I am still 50/50 between these two drivers. I look forward to your results. Good luck! |
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
|
Hi Slogan. You must be patient!
Progress has been a little slow and at this rate it's going to be Christmas before I'm listening to them. Back to the topic, I often wonder how significant the rear internal reflections off the magnet are. I haven't really seen any hard data to support the interference theories, and I think it could only come into play above about 2kHz. |
|
|
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
|
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| WTB: Seas M15CH001 drivers | pkpickard | Swap Meet | 16 | 11th December 2008 11:26 AM |
| Seas Excel W15 & W22 | cdoggy81 | Swap Meet | 7 | 19th December 2006 01:47 AM |
| Peerless HDS 134 or Seas M15CH001 Hexadym | stimpies | Multi-Way | 2 | 6th September 2005 01:49 AM |
| Seas Excel W26 compaired to Seas L26 (10") | harruharru | Subwoofers | 9 | 11th March 2005 09:47 PM |
| New To Site? | Need Help? |
| Page generated in 0.09883 seconds (71.96% PHP - 28.04% MySQL) with 11 queries |