Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Planars & Exotics

Planars & Exotics ESL's, planars, and alternative technologies

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
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12th April 2013, 04:20 PM   #11
diyAudio Member
 
picowallspeaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Moreover, the art of good sound reproduction must pass through isolation of the transducers from the environment.
Also the absorption of the back wave, it can only be good with the use of natural wool or felt, as it has the characteristics for the duty.
Just make a tall frame and hang the drivers with rubberbands, using also the magnet for pivoting it on axis . Use lots of wool or felt on the back to absorb the backwave.
That's it !
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th April 2013, 04:51 PM   #12
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Sweden
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudolf View Post
I believe that nobody but me would give a pair of those drivers (per side) any chance in a dipole, but you can risk it if you
What's the main problem with the driver, too low Qts value?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudolf View Post
You should have a small H-frame around them - shallow enough to allow an upper Xover at ~500 Hz. The H would be about 25 cm wide. I could give you precise dimensions when the project takes off.
Thanks. Do you have some link to info on how to calculate the dimensions for an H frame?
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th April 2013, 09:18 PM   #13
Rudolf is offline Rudolf  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Rudolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Germany
Quote:
Originally Posted by phazer99 View Post
What's the main problem with the driver, too low Qts value?
There is no problem with the driver itself. But most people would consider two Peerless SLS 10 per side as the minimum. They have >4 times the air moving capability compared to two HiVis.

Quote:
Thanks. Do you have some link to info on how to calculate the dimensions for an H frame?
I do it with the H frame worksheet of Martin J King:
Quarter Wavelength Loudspeaker Design
Look at http://www.quarter-wave.com/OBs/U_and_H_Frames.pdf too. Page 3 gives a basic calculation for the frame depth.
__________________
www.dipolplus.de
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th April 2013, 09:42 AM   #14
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Sweden
Did a first test with the Neo8s yesterday. I mounted it on a 20 cm wide open baffle and active XO with a 10" woofer in a sealed box. First impression was that this driver is loud (had to turn it down about 8 dB compared to the woofer)! The measurement showed the expected peak at about 11 kHz. After Audyssey XT32 calibration the frequency response was pretty flat and integration with the woofer was good. In this setup with digital EQ there's no problem in running the Neo8s from 400-500 Hz to 20 kHz. Below that it dips quite steeply.

The driver sounds good. Comparing the sound with an Acoustat Spectra 11 ESL panel I would say it's a little bit brighter (maybe because my Acoustat panels are old), but with less detail and not as clean separation of sounds. I would say I prefer the sound of the ESL but the Neo has much wider dispersion, is easier on the amp and of course doesn't require separate power, so it's to work with for sure.

Is there a break in period for the Neo8s and can I expect the sound to change much over time?
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th April 2013, 04:45 PM   #15
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Sweden
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudolf View Post
There is no problem with the driver itself. But most people would consider two Peerless SLS 10 per side as the minimum. They have >4 times the air moving capability compared to two HiVis.
I don't understand how you came to that result. The SLS 10 has an effective area of 346 cm2 and xmax of 8.3 mm giving a volume displacement of 287 cm3. The M8N has an effective area of 214 cm2 and xmax of 5.8 mm giving a volume displacement of 124 cm3. So the SLS moves about 2.3 times more air than the HiVi. Or did I calculate incorrectly?

I've looked at many woofers and currently the SLS 10" and the ScanSpeak Discovery looks like reasonable priced alternatives. The main differences are that the SLS has larger xmax and thus moves more air, but the ScanSpeak has higher Qms, lower Qts and is more sensitive. I figured lower Qts means more control of the cone and might be an advantage when using the driver up to 300-400 Hz. Is this a correct assumption? Are there any other important differences between the woofers when using them in an open baffle? Are there any other good 8" or 10" woofer alternatives?
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th April 2013, 02:45 PM   #16
Rudolf is offline Rudolf  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Rudolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Germany
Quote:
Originally Posted by phazer99 View Post
I don't understand how you came to that result. The SLS 10 has an effective area of 346 cm2 and xmax of 8.3 mm giving a volume displacement of 287 cm3. The M8N has an effective area of 214 cm2 and xmax of 5.8 mm giving a volume displacement of 124 cm3. So the SLS moves about 2.3 times more air than the HiVi. Or did I calculate incorrectly?
From String mounted dipole I got the impression that you were thinking about 2 HiVis total - not pairs. Your calculation is correct of course.
Quote:
... but the ScanSpeak has higher Qms, lower Qts and is more sensitive. I figured lower Qts means more control of the cone and might be an advantage when using the driver up to 300-400 Hz. Is this a correct assumption?
I find the Discovery tempting because of the cast frame and the lower Fs. But I don't buy into this "cone control" thing at all. And Qts has absolutely lost any meaning four octaves above Fs.

Rudolf
__________________
www.dipolplus.de
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
String noise/squeek Robert Kesh Instruments and Amps 10 17th January 2013 05:46 PM
An omni with dipole bass, upwards mounted U-frame as midbass? OllBoll Multi-Way 9 13th July 2012 03:09 PM
Air on the G string CarlyBoy Music 1 22nd May 2011 09:35 PM
Advice Needed On Dipole/Bipole Wal Mounted Surround Loudspeaker philiprst Multi-Way 9 7th October 2008 06:51 PM
HELP me re-string my Telefunken 4530 lskelly1 Parts 1 24th March 2008 08:35 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:23 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2