Woofer for Manger

[Richard Moon]

Enclosure

...

 

[inertial]

Hi Richard

IMO that M12 is not the best option.
Do you know Aurum Cantus woofers? Carbon sandwich cone
I am sure a single AC250mk2 - a 10"!!-( i hope to remember weel the numbers)
can be sufficent - in closed box!- even if you listen AC/DC or Man at work or U2 full volume

If you require more SPL, sure your sistem are sounding NOT-OPTIMAL
( to be kind, eh!).

your x-overs are suspect IMO in the LCR for MSW, check it.

Again your MSW is too low, ( see the Manger Swing loudspeakers for example)

Again ,the woofers are shacking your beautiful MSW-cabinet/head. No good thing. ( I know all commercial speakers are so made, but they are wrong the same....)
Decouple the head.

hope this can help,

Paolo

 

[Richard Moon]

your x-overs are suspect IMO in the LCR for MSW, check it.

> It's for 4 ohm MSW. It would be very helpful if you you suggest some values.

Again your MSW is too low, ( see the Manger Swing loudspeakers for example)

> What frequency would you recommend?. I considered 300 Hz.
Do you have the design of Swing?

Again ,the woofers are shacking your beautiful MSW-cabinet/head. No good thing. ( I know all commercial speakers are so made, but they are wrong the same....)
Decouple the head.

> I know. But, it's confirmed.

Hi Richard

IMO that M12 is not the best option.
Do you know Aurum Cantus woofers? Carbon sandwich cone
I am sure a single AC250mk2 - a 10"!!-( i hope to remember weel the numbers)
can be sufficent - in closed box!- even if you listen AC/DC or Man at work or U2 full volume

If you require more SPL, sure your sistem are sounding NOT-OPTIMAL
( to be kind, eh!).

your x-overs are suspect IMO in the LCR for MSW, check it.

Again your MSW is too low, ( see the Manger Swing loudspeakers for example)

Again ,the woofers are shacking your beautiful MSW-cabinet/head. No good thing. ( I know all commercial speakers are so made, but they are wrong the same....)
Decouple the head.

hope this can help,

Paolo

 

[inertial]

your x-overs are suspect IMO in the LCR for MSW, check it.

> It's for 4 ohm MSW. It would be very helpful if you you suggest some values.

Aaahhh, then probabily it is ok.
But why are you using the 4 ohm version?

For the x-overs, since you have the 4 ohm version of the MSW, you will must be attenuate a lot the MSW...... a real pity.

why not use a "plate amp" for the two woofers ?
I remember something a very flexible product, strange name,....reckhorn maybe (?) - I'm starting become old, guys!

Again your MSW is too low, ( see the Manger Swing loudspeakers for example)



> What frequency would you recommend?. I considered 300 Hz.
Do you have the design of Swing?
[/B]

Excuse my bad english, I was referring to center of the MSW height from the floor !

You need at least 95-100 cm , but 110 is better unless you are seated on very low sofa........

Again ,the woofers are shacking your beautiful MSW-cabinet/head. No good thing. ( I know all commercial speakers are so made, but they are wrong the same....)
Decouple the head.

> I know. But, it's confirmed.


[/B]

perdone me, I do not undersand here

Cheers,
Paolo

 

[Richard Moon]

Thank you for your advice.

.. 4 ohm.. is same as the woofer. And I just want it 4 ohm.

What do you expect the efficiency of 4 ohm MSW?

I guess I don't have to attenuate MSW, because M12 is 94 dB.

.. Plate amp ... it's active. I will make another version for active..

.. The height of MSW would be the ear level. Yes. I would like to change the shape.

I will post another picture, soon.

Regards
Moon

Aaahhh, then probabily it is ok.
But why are you using the 4 ohm version?

For the x-overs, since you have the 4 ohm version of the MSW, you will must be attenuate a lot the MSW...... a real pity.

why not use a "plate amp" for the two woofers ?
I remember something a very flexible product, strange name,....reckhorn maybe (?) - I'm starting become old, guys!


Excuse my bad english, I was referring to center of the MSW height from the floor !

You need at least 95-100 cm , but 110 is better unless you are seated on very low sofa........




perdone me, I do not undersand here

Cheers,
Paolo

 

[inertial]

Thank you for your advice.

you are welcome.

.. 4 ohm.. is same as the woofer. And I just want it 4 ohm.
[/B]

Excuse but do you have jet the MSW or do you have planned to purchase it in the short future?

What do you expect the efficiency of 4 ohm MSW?
[/B]

Neodimum version? Mah, there are no a lot information about this IMO.
Foggy I see I expect about 91-92 dB/2,83V/1m....not sure but!

I guess I don't have to attenuate MSW, because M12 is 94 dB.
[/B]

Wrong. You have to considerate 6 dB of full baffle step compensation first. And after the rest.........

.. Plate amp ... it's active. I will make another version for active..
[/B]

As you prefer, of course.

.. The height of MSW would be the ear level. Yes. I would like to change the shape.

I will post another picture, soon.
[/B]

We are tuned

Regards
Moon

[/B][/QUOTE]

Hi

 

[Telstar]

Doing dipole is no good fore bass, I know many are happy with it
OB would only make sense to me with subs
And dipole subs would be as big as IBs

I beg to differ. Bass is where dipoles shine. The Manger needs a FAST and tight bass. That's either IB or OB.
The woofer that you have looks very good.
Of course you need to actively cross, EQ, and amp it, but it's worth the effort IMO.

Since you have two pairs of woofers, it would be interesting to hear comparisons when using only one or two.

 

[Telstar]

passive or active hmmm
i have a dbx 260 so active is doable
i have 2xstereo amps of nelson pass f5 in progress which i could use to biamp the system in either passive or active mode im just not sure about the power needed

Active with very steep highpass for the Manger.
And two identical amp is very good considering the relatively high XO point.

I wont discard the OB idea, though

 

[tinitus]

1. I beg to differ. Bass is where dipoles shine.

2. The Manger needs a FAST and tight bass. That's either IB or OB.

3. Since you have two pairs of woofers, it would be interesting to hear comparisons when using only one or two.

1. It was from the suggestion to use SMALL midwoofers to get good mid transistion to the Manger

2. See above
But why would it be different on that from other drivers

3. Fore best result I would not use double woofers to be crossed in midbass

Could be interesting to try to cross one woofer active just below 100hz....and cross the other top woofer passive a bit higher

But I would probably use those SS woofers for a sub, and find another good driver fore midbass, maybe with sensitivity around 92-94db
Maybe even a cheap Eminence Beta 8 would work

 

[Telstar]

1. It was from the suggestion to use SMALL midwoofers to get good mid transistion to the Manger

Yep, that's an option. But i still dont like crossover points above 200hz. So, if that's the case, would it really be needed a midwoofer?
Or can a good woofer no bigger than 12" such as ATC do the job?

I hope Overkill will chime in in this thread. He does exactly what you propose, highpassing the Manger at 400hz (which is way too high for me).

2 But why would it be different on that from other drivers

Because it has a faster inpulse response than any other driver that I know.

Could be interesting to try to cross one woofer active just below 100hz....and cross the other top woofer passive a bit higher

Yes, this should work. I think all depends on how higher is that.

But I would probably use those SS woofers for a sub, and find another good driver fore midbass, maybe with sensitivity around 92-94db
Maybe even a cheap Eminence Beta 8 would work

Hmm i dont know. I would go for a kevlar/carbon cone anyway.

So, are you getting the Mangers or not?

 

[tinitus]

So, are you getting the Mangers or not?

Who?...me, nah, Im set on building Rubanoide

But same problem with a woofer

 

[inertial]

Hi,

Active with very steep highpass for the Manger.
/B]

This will give you bad step response...

And two identical amp is very good considering the relatively high XO point.

"high" is a BIG words in this case IMO. ( 200 Hz?)
And active biamplification with 2 identical amps is a pity...don't you think?

I wont discard the OB idea, though [/B]

Dipoles,...... don't we have jet listened "enough" of they ? : ( hironic here)


Cheers,
Paolo

 

[Telstar]

Ciao Paolo,

This will give you bad step response...

Not necessarily... and it's a protection for the delicate MSWs.

"high" is a BIG words in this case IMO. ( 200 Hz?)

Yes, 200hz is "high" for me, because it's within the midrange.

And active biamplification with 2 identical amps is a pity...don't you think?

Yes, but did you try to use completely different amps (i.e. SS and tubes) with a high XO point? the different sonic signature can be very distinguishable. I have tried with 400hz and the results where horrible. I cannot say the exact XO point when it becomes irrelevant, but I'm sure it's under 200hz.

Dipoles,...... don't we have jet listened "enough" of they ? : ( hironic here)

Never enough

 

[inertial]

Ciao Paolo,

This will give you bad step response...

Not necessarily... and it's a protection for the delicate MSWs.

Ciao,
Unless you are talking about SDTP filters or similar , I think you have to use FIR to validate your statement; what type of filters are you referring ?

"high" is a BIG words in this case IMO. ( 200 Hz?)

Yes, 200hz is "high" for me, because it's within the midrange.[/B]

This is "philosophy" IMO .Important aspect for an audio designer. Maybe the most important.
Anyway still most important is the final result,no?

And active biamplification with 2 identical amps is a pity...don't you think?

Yes, but did you try to use completely different amps (i.e. SS and tubes) with a high XO point? the different sonic signature can be very distinguishable. I have tried with 400hz and the results where horrible. I cannot say the exact XO point when it becomes irrelevant, but I'm sure it's under 200hz.[/B]

I have to 100% disagree here.
Excuse me, IMO is possible maybel you was not full capable to realize 100% of system's potential.
I use 400 Hz in my sistem ( SS and tubes/hybrid) and it sounds better than anything "one amp" alone. Not listened alls, of course but "enough") :

The different sonic is IMO exactly you need! .
Do you use two identical loudspeaker drivers for your 2-way?
No, of course: one is a wf and one is a tweeter ( or widerenge or extended, etc) ! And thus?

Dipoles,...... don't we have jet listened "enough" of they ? : ( hironic here)

Never enough [/B]

OK, question of preferences.......

Cheers,
Paolo

 

[tinitus]

Do you use two identical loudspeaker drivers for your 2-way?
No, of course: one is a wf and one is a tweeter ( or widerenge or extended, etc) ! And thus?

Cheers,
Paolo

Why not
I have actually thought about a MTM, with all identical drivers

Just teasing

Seriously, I believe that if a speaker system is designed with biamping it should work ok
But just to transform any passive speaker into biamped is not going to be so straightforward at all

But these days its a bit confusing
Fore many years "biamping" meant a passive with each driver having their own amp, but still passive xo
Today, biamping seems to be a term also commonly used about active xo as well

 

[inertial]

Why not
I have actually thought about a MTM, with all identical drivers

Just teasing

ha ha ha !!! Bad guy!!!!

Seriously, I believe that if a speaker system is designed with biamping it should work ok
But just to transform any passive speaker into biamped is not going to be so straightforward at all
[/B]

Not in mine experience. Stock commercial budget- projects are "not so optimized" IMO and not so performant also! :
Serious speakers are different of course;
Think at Pass Rushmore for example....

But these days its a bit confusing
Fore many years "biamping" meant a passive with each driver having their own amp, but still passive xo
Today, biamping seems to be a term also commonly used about active xo as well [/B]

Confusion is responsability of magazines IMO.
They bla bla bla about.........what?
passive biamping is a good way to sold double number of amplifiers!
True bi ( or multi) amplification IMO is the maximum expressium of specializations ( like drivers T,M,W) and no-compromise design.
Sure you multipling the variables and thus things can become much more complicated BUT not necessarily more expansive!
At least these are results/conclusions I have obtained in my experimentations.
Complicated but possible........
Result depends of skills of audio designer of course.


Cheers,
Paolo