| What would you choose for Quad ESL-63, dipole or TL? - Click HERE for Original Thread |
| tf1216 |
Hi guys,
I read what I could from threads here. I would like to know if anyone has experience of their own in the past couple of years with dipole vs. TL alignments with ESL's.
I have $1,000 to spend for the bass drivers and I have a DCX2496 ready for use.
I was thinking of using four of these in a push-pull configuration:
http://www.aespeakers.com/drivers.php?driver_id=8
Does anyone have input?
Thank you |
|
|
| qwad |
l assume you are wanting to build a subwoofer for them, some time ago in a issue of HI-FI WORLD there was a project pubished for a di pole sub using audax woofers with an active x-over, l probably still have the article but have no way of scanning it and sending it to you: :bawling: sorry l cant be more help but some of the other bright sparks on this forum might be able to suggest something else, so in a nutshell its do-able :D
cheerrs T.C. |
|
|
| LineSource |
I have two friends who added bass woofers to Quad ESL 63.
1) used stereo sealed servo woofers. Friend used stereo Entec servo woofers crossed LR4 at 60 Hz. The Rhythmik Audio servo sub has gotten good reviews in diyAudio. This sealed servo design solution can pressurize any room to 20Hz bass. amazing powerful bass
2) used dipole stereo woofers. Two low Mms 12" woofers per side in standard dipole baffle with short rear facing sides to increase effective baffle length. He put both woofers facing foward for appearance. Crossed LR4 at 80Hz. He used 12" to match the ESL-63 26: width: Dimensions: 36" H by 26" W by 6" D (base 10" D). Dipoles cannot pressurize a room, so the room dimensions will set the deepest bass wavelength - very good integration to my ears
The AES 15" infinite baffle woofer you mentioned has very high Mms, which many ESL 63 owners have commented will not match the "speed/tone" of the ESL.
AES also makes a much more expensive $279 15" dipole woofer with lower Mms and under hung motor that would likely be a better match. Low Mms and high Bl woofers are mentioned on some diy websites as necessary to match the ESL 63.
If you search diyAudio for dipole woofers with low Mms and good BL, you should find several other options. The Peerless XLS is used by designers like Linkwitz.
Lambda Infinite Baffle
Fs: 16Hz
Qms: 6.8
Vas: 439L
Cms: .45mm/N
Mms: 220g very heavy*****
Rms: 3.239
Xmax: 18.5mm
Xmech: 25mm
Sd: 830sqcm
Vd: 3.07L (p-p)
Qes: .78
Re: 5.5ohm
Le: .33mH
Bl:12.49
Pe: 500W
Qts: .7
1WSPL: 86dB
2.83V: 87.3dB
T/S specs Lambda 15" dipoles. The speaker uses an underhung motor
Fs 21.66Hz
Vas 623L
Qms 15.16
Qes 1.002
Qts 0.94
Re 12.3 ohms
Impedance 16 ohms
Bl 12.26Tm
Mms 90g
Le 0.3mH
1Wspl90dB
xmax 13mm peak
voice coil height 12.4mm
air gap 38.4mm
Sd 855cm2
Pmax ~100W |
|
|
| tf1216 |
The Lambda driver is perfect other than for it's size, two 12" subs would be optimum as you explained. Their 12" version is not quite as special for this application.
Anyone out there try an 8" or 10" driver in a TL cabinet?
If I had the resources I would try both the dipole and TL paths. |
|
|
| Mitch Alsup |
Disclaimer: My ESLs are ML CLSs revZ.
I recently bought a Velodyne DD-15 (ebay at $1200). And after getting the system setup and the sub-woofer tweeked for flat* responce, the system sound very well indeed. (*) flat is +/- 1 db from 17Hz through 135 Hz as shown on the DD-15 TV output. (This was not easy to achieve -- see below).
However, the HF roll off in the sub-woofer to power amp is slow enough (12dB/oct) that significant amounts of power are being delivered to the ESLs at the frequencies where the sub-woofer is operating (quite well). So, even though the sub-woofer has a HF filter to (partially) isolate the ESL from the sub, its not good enough. I had considerable difficulty matching sub and ESL responce as the sub passed over to the mains. Thus, the current plan is to build a (audiophile quality) LR-4 filter at 105 Hz and split the audio before the sub gets ahold of it. 105 Hz was chosen because the CLSs have a decending responce starting at 120 and bottoms out at 100, so the LR-4 filter would simply continue this decreasing responce. (Obviously QUADs will be a little different in frequency selection).
Second point: My ML CLSs do not produce big amounts of audio power (nor will most ESLs), so part of the issue with the big (1500 Watts) sub is turning it down LOW enough to mate with the speaker responce and to make recorded instruments sound like real instruments (not too much bass--just the right amount). So while my main power amp likes 2Vrms to drive the speakers as loud as my wife allows, the sub only needs 0.2Vrms. Thus attenuation is in order when I get around to building the LR-4 filter. Luckily there is a volume switch in the DD-15 to make this manageable. |
|
|
| Tosh |
| Presumably you're familiar with the bespoke Gradient dipole subs for these? Depending on the crossover, they can be very good. I would think with better drivers, they could be better still. And you can't beat the totally integrated appearance... |
|
|
| tf1216 |
Tosh, I am aware of the Gradient dipole subs. I have read mixed reviews about the integration between the Quads and the Gradients. The subwoofers can be found on the used market easily but I wanted to create my own version of the dipole subs gainphile posted in his reply to this thread.
I think the AE Speakers would take that design up a leave or two. At least I would hope. |
|
|
|
|
|
