Well, I had a nice surprise today.
I have been playing with some WWMTM three ways recently that use the Peerless 12” XLS drivers for bass, the PHL 1340s for the midrange and the Morel 110s for treble.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=38036
Overall, they sounded good. Very solid bass, good midrange and a great top end.
My only complaints where MTM configurations bug me because of the vertical dispersion limitations and I knew the PHL 1120 midrange drivers I had sitting in the closet could easily outperform the PHL 1340 bass midrange drivers I was using for midrange.
The reason I went with the configuration I did, was that I wanted really high bass SPL headroom and really good quality and I did not think that standard throw drivers, drivers that could get up to the 400hz crossover point needed for the 1120 midrange drivers could produce the bass I was after. Given this, I compromised and went with the 1340 bass midrange drivers crossed over to the Peerless XLS drivers at 120hz.
Today the MTM limitations got the better of me, so I hacked some midrange cabinets and mounted the PHL 1120 midrange drivers with the Morel tweeters, MT style.
For the bass, I got some other cabinets from another project that use the Eminence Kappa Pro 15LF-2 drivers. These are 110L ported boxes.
Measured everything up, went with 400hz 12db LR slopes for the bass to mid and 3100hz 12db RL sloped for the mid to tweeter. I also EQ’ed the bass flat to 30hz at the listening position.
This is where I got the real surprise. I knew the 1120 midrange drivers would easily outperform the 1340s, but what I was not expecting was an improvement in the bass. Yes, tweeters and midranges affect bass…a lot… but I doubt to the extent I am hearing. The Eminence drivers are more detailed and just sound cleaner than the Peerless setup. There is a visceral quality to the bass now that was missing with the Peerless setup. What is also interesting is that the Eminence drivers are in ported boxes where the Peerless are in sealed.
All that said, the Eminence setup does not go as low. The Peerless could easily go to 20hz at the listening position, where 30hz is all that’s possible with the Eminence with similar levels of EQ. Another oddity is that at 30hz, the Eminence is operating below its free air resonance where you would think it would sound awefull
Oh well, this seems like a case where theory does not work with reality….
Branwell
I have been playing with some WWMTM three ways recently that use the Peerless 12” XLS drivers for bass, the PHL 1340s for the midrange and the Morel 110s for treble.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=38036
Overall, they sounded good. Very solid bass, good midrange and a great top end.
My only complaints where MTM configurations bug me because of the vertical dispersion limitations and I knew the PHL 1120 midrange drivers I had sitting in the closet could easily outperform the PHL 1340 bass midrange drivers I was using for midrange.
The reason I went with the configuration I did, was that I wanted really high bass SPL headroom and really good quality and I did not think that standard throw drivers, drivers that could get up to the 400hz crossover point needed for the 1120 midrange drivers could produce the bass I was after. Given this, I compromised and went with the 1340 bass midrange drivers crossed over to the Peerless XLS drivers at 120hz.
Today the MTM limitations got the better of me, so I hacked some midrange cabinets and mounted the PHL 1120 midrange drivers with the Morel tweeters, MT style.
For the bass, I got some other cabinets from another project that use the Eminence Kappa Pro 15LF-2 drivers. These are 110L ported boxes.
Measured everything up, went with 400hz 12db LR slopes for the bass to mid and 3100hz 12db RL sloped for the mid to tweeter. I also EQ’ed the bass flat to 30hz at the listening position.
This is where I got the real surprise. I knew the 1120 midrange drivers would easily outperform the 1340s, but what I was not expecting was an improvement in the bass. Yes, tweeters and midranges affect bass…a lot… but I doubt to the extent I am hearing. The Eminence drivers are more detailed and just sound cleaner than the Peerless setup. There is a visceral quality to the bass now that was missing with the Peerless setup. What is also interesting is that the Eminence drivers are in ported boxes where the Peerless are in sealed.
All that said, the Eminence setup does not go as low. The Peerless could easily go to 20hz at the listening position, where 30hz is all that’s possible with the Eminence with similar levels of EQ. Another oddity is that at 30hz, the Eminence is operating below its free air resonance where you would think it would sound awefull
Oh well, this seems like a case where theory does not work with reality….
Branwell
Most certainly mids and trebble affect the bass. A "faster" mid and trebble makes the bass sound more tuneful and powerful with greater impact and detail. Odd I know but thats what it does.
Another thing to note is that chest thump come at about 120hz, where you were crossing over the mids to teh XLS. If there was any kind of cancellation happening, that could account for what you are hearing.
Having said that there are a number of things that could affect it. Have you tried using the XLS up to 500hz or something close to it and actually see how it performs in place of the eminence?
Another thing to note is that chest thump come at about 120hz, where you were crossing over the mids to teh XLS. If there was any kind of cancellation happening, that could account for what you are hearing.
Having said that there are a number of things that could affect it. Have you tried using the XLS up to 500hz or something close to it and actually see how it performs in place of the eminence?
5th Element,
Without doing an apples to apples test, a fair comparison of the two bass drivers is not really possible and I should not have attempted to do so.
Regarding your question about running the XLS drivers up to 500hz.
In earlier tests while setting the crossover up for the XLS / 1340 combination, the XLS drivers did not sound there best above 150hz. I tended to run them lower at 120hz because I felt that was about optimal sound wise for the given setup.
Branwell
Without doing an apples to apples test, a fair comparison of the two bass drivers is not really possible and I should not have attempted to do so.
Regarding your question about running the XLS drivers up to 500hz.
In earlier tests while setting the crossover up for the XLS / 1340 combination, the XLS drivers did not sound there best above 150hz. I tended to run them lower at 120hz because I felt that was about optimal sound wise for the given setup.
Branwell
Low Xmax
Who thinks Zaph's Woofers with lower Xmax sound better theory is playing a part in this?
XLS 12 - Xmax = 40mm
Kappa Pro 15 - Xmax = 3.2mm
Who thinks Zaph's Woofers with lower Xmax sound better theory is playing a part in this?
XLS 12 - Xmax = 40mm
Kappa Pro 15 - Xmax = 3.2mm
sources of Xmax:
erm,
maplin for the, Kappa 15 pro
and http://www.speakerenco.nl/ for the XLS, page 24 of 48; "XLS-12 gietkorf lange slag tot 40 mm!", which i took to mean xmax, because i could not find it on the Peerless website.
erm,
maplin for the, Kappa 15 pro
and http://www.speakerenco.nl/ for the XLS, page 24 of 48; "XLS-12 gietkorf lange slag tot 40 mm!", which i took to mean xmax, because i could not find it on the Peerless website.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.