Many like the 15W, but I'm interested in the 15M as a midrange in a 3-way. The "research" I've done so far includes finding comments from people such as- "the Scan 15M is difficult to get the crossover right, to . . . the 15M is bettered by SEAS 5" paper midrange. . . . "
What are your thoughts and is it really worth the $205 price tag? Also, if you used this driver and replaced it with a different driver, what did you replace it with and why?
Thanks,
Jed
What are your thoughts and is it really worth the $205 price tag? Also, if you used this driver and replaced it with a different driver, what did you replace it with and why?
Thanks,
Jed
Here are some comments on a Dutch forum:
http://www.hear.nl/forums/lofiversion/index.php/t8413.html
The alternatives they posted are Accuton C12 or C79 and C-quenze 15H52 06 13 SD...the 15M is said here to be fast enough to combine with a ribbon tweeter..And it is said to have good lower octave output, it can be used from 100 hz and up.... and another source describes it to be the only driver he knows that can produce a 'prescense' of reality, really low distortion and enormous dynamics...
My
....
http://www.hear.nl/forums/lofiversion/index.php/t8413.html
The alternatives they posted are Accuton C12 or C79 and C-quenze 15H52 06 13 SD...the 15M is said here to be fast enough to combine with a ribbon tweeter..And it is said to have good lower octave output, it can be used from 100 hz and up.... and another source describes it to be the only driver he knows that can produce a 'prescense' of reality, really low distortion and enormous dynamics...
My
....Yes, this appears to be a very fine midrange unit with plenty of positives... thank you for the feedback. I've tried SEAS W15CH, Eton 4-300, and a number of others, but currently looking to build a second system to increase detail and resolution in the critical midrange. I've never used Scanspeak before, but this 15M has my interest. I'd imagine it would be a better choice for a midrange than other Scanspeak woofer/mid drivers like the 15W.
Jed
Jed
Just curious...
Why are either of these better than the CSS WR(FR)-125? Now, to be fair, I'm shooting from the hip. I haven't looked at the graphs for the SEAS. But, I'm willing to bet that the XBL2 stuff fares pretty well. Cheap too, for the difference. I guess, in the end, thatt's the decider.
I'm 50 - I don't hear as much as I used to. In fact, most of the US population has "less-than-perfect" hearing. I may build audio gear that I know, by spec, is miles above what I can typically hear but I am also aware (by experience and formalism) that a 20 year old would hear more than I do - de-facto.
If you are a speaker builder I wonder if there is a "diminishing-point-of-returns" when it comes to the age distribution of your intended listeners versus the accuracy of your loudspeakers.
Fascinating...
What you do you think?
Regards,
Tom
Why are either of these better than the CSS WR(FR)-125? Now, to be fair, I'm shooting from the hip. I haven't looked at the graphs for the SEAS. But, I'm willing to bet that the XBL2 stuff fares pretty well. Cheap too, for the difference. I guess, in the end, thatt's the decider.
I'm 50 - I don't hear as much as I used to. In fact, most of the US population has "less-than-perfect" hearing. I may build audio gear that I know, by spec, is miles above what I can typically hear but I am also aware (by experience and formalism) that a 20 year old would hear more than I do - de-facto.
If you are a speaker builder I wonder if there is a "diminishing-point-of-returns" when it comes to the age distribution of your intended listeners versus the accuracy of your loudspeakers.
Fascinating...
What you do you think?
Regards,
Tom
Well, I'm 29 and my hearing is good up to 20K.... not that that is a conclusive reason to buy a $205 driver where something else might be just as good at 1/4 the price. The Scan Speaks do have very low distortion and especially the odd order types. That to me is a positive attribute unlike its metal cone counterparts.
Thanks Harry3. Very interesting links, but they only mention 15W.
So still, does anybody know any projects with the 15M4531G00?
I have only heard it once, which was when I visited Troels Gravesen a couple of years ago. He had just begun a project with the 15M as an open baffle midrange. I remember the sound as being extremely fast and the transients almost threw you against the back wall.
Eventually Troels gave up this project because he was not satisfied with it.
So still, does anybody know any projects with the 15M4531G00?
I have only heard it once, which was when I visited Troels Gravesen a couple of years ago. He had just begun a project with the 15M as an open baffle midrange. I remember the sound as being extremely fast and the transients almost threw you against the back wall.
Eventually Troels gave up this project because he was not satisfied with it.
http://www.zelfbouwaudio.nl/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1102
This is a very extensive project using the 15M, too bad it's in Dutch...
This is a very extensive project using the 15M, too bad it's in Dutch...
IEC Baffe in Link. Should have similar conditions as Scan Speak's measuring conditions in published graphs. Picture of IEC baffle
I am Dutch and spent some time reading in that thread, though it's not quite clear it appears to be measured in a non-enclosure (free-air) IEC baffle.... The different enclosures showed much more dramatic changes in the measurements than the different stuffings...The threadstarter suspects some cone break-up or hte driver has not enough 'breathing space' at the rear....
It all seems not very conclusive, and I personally don't find the measurements extremely different from the manufacturers specs...(we all know that most manufacturers pick a driver well and measure it several times to be able to show the best graphs (commercially...) many of'em even 'smooth-out' the curves.....or make'em 'genuinely' rough...
It all seems not very conclusive, and I personally don't find the measurements extremely different from the manufacturers specs...(we all know that most manufacturers pick a driver well and measure it several times to be able to show the best graphs (commercially...) many of'em even 'smooth-out' the curves.....or make'em 'genuinely' rough...
Sounds kinda like you're thinking of a high-definition 3 way, which I've been pondering as well. My thoughts are a pair of Peerless 830881 (4" HDS Exclusive) in a MTM to get the sensitivity up, with something like a Vifa XT19 or another 3/4" dome crossed around 3000hz. The bottom half of the 3 way would be either a Seas L26 or a pair of Usher 8955a.
Turbo,
I just bought a pair of usher 8955a. I modelled them in a 3-way with Scan Speak 12m and Peerless HDS tweeter LR2 at 300HZ and 2.5K. I used a crossover topology like DLR, and the results look promising. I plan on obviously measuring the system in-box when everything is done, but the simulations help me see what I'm getting into.
I've used the Peerless 881, but I'm hoping the Scan Speak 12M is better- more detail. I haven't bought the 12M and tweeter yet- still thinking.
I just bought a pair of usher 8955a. I modelled them in a 3-way with Scan Speak 12m and Peerless HDS tweeter LR2 at 300HZ and 2.5K. I used a crossover topology like DLR, and the results look promising. I plan on obviously measuring the system in-box when everything is done, but the simulations help me see what I'm getting into.
I've used the Peerless 881, but I'm hoping the Scan Speak 12M is better- more detail. I haven't bought the 12M and tweeter yet- still thinking.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.