|
|||||||
| 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 |
|
|
#11 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Toronto, ON, Canada
|
What's so good about a titanium cone?
|
|
|
|
#12 | |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Santa Cruz, California
|
Quote:
I'm not sure about translating that to cone drivers. I'd like to see higher resolution graphs made by a third party, especially since the impedance curve shows a couple of interesting kinks in the midrange. Nonetheless, I'm not surprised the first major indicated resonance is a bit above 13 kHz or so, since the distance from the voice coil to the cone edge is about 2/3 that of the Seas W15CY001, and that one's first resonance is about 9 kHz (modulo the speed of sound being the same in Mg and Ti). I wouldn't use it much above 4 kHz because the peak would amplify any harmonics caused by distortion, and that could make the upper mids sound a bit zippy. Most metal cone drivers have that problem, which the Seas curves show it extraordinarly well: http://seas.no/excel_line/excel/e0015.pdf I'd bet the thing would probably be nicely detailed below there, though. Francois. |
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Québec, Québec
|
I've read that aluminium is slightly ahead of titanium in the ultrasonic resonance department...
__________________
DIYaudio for President ! |
|
|
|
#14 |
|
diyAudio Member
|
I do remember reading a post some time back which discussed cone material. and according to the characteristics of titanium, some of which were strength, weight, and speed of sound, and some other parameters which i cant remember:see below for post
In case anyone wonders why i am excited about this driver, its because it seems to me it has the makings of a fantastic driver for playing midrange at very low distortion. rigid cone, underhung motor, and the overall quality of a cast frame really appeals to me. Hence i thought i'd spread the word. Of course, nothing beats having the speaker measured for distortion performance(i did request tangband for distortion measurements but was not replied to ) and thats the only thing which prevents me from picking up a pair at this point in time.Regards |
|
|
|
#15 |
|
diyAudio Member
|
Found the thread!
Here it is: driver engineering, materials technology Specifically, with due credit to LineSource for this post: "Magnesium, due to its lightness, slow sound transportation, and natural dampening from low hardness, would seem the best metal for cones with modest physical stress. i.e. tweeters, midranges and low Xmax high efficiency woofers. A Mg bell would not ring very well. Titanium is significantly heavier, denser, and stronger, than magnesium. This would make Titanium well suited to subwoofers. Aluminum's physical properties are close to magnesium. Al is 1.6x heavier, but has lower tensile strength unless alloyed, and absorbs less vibrational energy. Aluminum is much cheaper than magnesium. Most Al alloys, like 6000 series, have higher tensile strength than Mg. Al cone break-up modes are slightly worst than MG due mainly to the higher mass/strength ratio. Carbon fiber appears to be the best long term cone material for midrange and high efficiency woofers. The ideal carbon fiber cone would likely be a curve-linear profile woven from continuous fiber before thermoset in resin. When a Tiawan company invests in this technology, we could see a new plateau in cone technology. Today, most carbon fiber cones use coarse random fibers in resin, or a cut sheet glued into a linear profile. Today, low cost Kevlar fibers are smoother and easier to weave than carbon fiber, and hence top labs like B&W have been able to bring up manufacturing lines for woven midrange cones. The weaving technology, cone profile, and resin strongly determine the break-up modes. element ....Density.....Velocity...Young.. Rigity..Bulkmod..mineral... Brinell..Tensile Strength Titanium ......4057...... 4140...... 116...... 44...... 110...... 6...... 716...... 345 Aluminum ......2700...... 5100...... 70....... 26....... 76.... 2.75..... 245...... 179 Magnesium .....1738 ......4602 ......45 .......17 .......45 .....2.5 .....260 ......275 Beryllium .....1848 .....13000 .....287 ......132 ......130 .....5.5 .....600 ......300 Carbon Fiber ..1780 .....3200 ......250 .......38 .......80..... 2.6 .....235 ......276 DensityKg m-3 Velocity sound m/s Young’s modulus /GPa Rigity modulus /GPa Bulk modulus /GPa Mineral hardness Brinell hardness /MNm-2 Tensile Strength MPa" |
|
|
|
#16 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Raleigh/Atlanta
|
I contacted Parts Express and asked them about the TB W3- 1231SH and told them that DiY audio was interested in these new speakers and wanted a good prices. The guy I talked to said they had ordered the TB W3 - 1335s and they will be there at the begining of June and they might order the W3 0 1231sh if all goes well with the W3 1335s. He understands that the xmax is not as high and the efficiency is not quite as good but they are a good introduction to the titanium speakers. The W3 1335s will be $34 or $32 each (can't remember which). He said he can make a special order, but if more people request the W3 1231SH he will order them.
Just thought I would ask them and inform you all of that. blackreplica, thanks for the info, I really enjoyed the stats. Thanks, Josh |
|
|
|
#17 |
|
diyAudio Member
|
my pleasure josh. Since the speaker you mentioned above is retailing for about $35, i expect the 1231SH should retail for a little more. You can order direct from tangband and it will probably come out cheaper, but the shipping would be another story. I am in australia which is a little nearer to where the speakers are located(taiwan) so i might take the plunge and order the speakers direct from TB. I'm waiting on a shipping quote at the moment. if its reasonable i'll pick myself up a set of em.
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
diyAudio Member
|
Hi
Tang Band posted a even better basket option (for a while)for arrays giving you a 4.2k crossover point or so, namely the w3-1231SB. Also the W3-532sg has centre to centre of 81mm or so. The 532sg QTS of 0.61 is much higher than the titaniums. With 16 x W3-532s/panel I am getting a good 109db at 2 meters in a dipole array tapered configuration and there is probably more available! Wonder about the 1285SB too. Pity Tang Band does not have a really suitable tweeter for arrays if you want to use domes. There is a TB25-381s but the PE Daytons look better! The cast baskets for the new TBscould be in some sort of nylon mentioned in the 1231SB spec but the word nylon is missing from the 1231sh spec! Perhaps the SH is a rethink as listed QTS has dropped down to 0.30 as opposed to 0.38. Regards AnthonyPT |
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| New Tangband DIY Kit | Solve | Full Range | 27 | 31st January 2011 11:19 AM |
| help... please....Tangband W3-871 | yepper | Full Range | 4 | 17th December 2004 04:06 AM |
| Tangband in the UK | Kram | Full Range | 9 | 29th November 2004 10:37 PM |
| Tangband 871 and what to do with them | Bylie | Multi-Way | 4 | 13th August 2004 05:51 AM |
| Anyone ever tried a tangband TL? | JoeBob | Multi-Way | 2 | 30th March 2003 03:03 AM |
| New To Site? | Need Help? |