| sma |
| Anyone know where i can buy this bandor full range driver? |
|
|
| Colin |
Their website is
www.bandor.co.uk
The miniature driver is an approximately similar but less developed version of the Jordan 50mm unit, whose current incarnation is the JX53, details at www.ejjordan.co.uk. Neither are true full range (yet), needing a bass unit to take over from 100Hz downwards. The Jordan JX92 is a larger development of the idea, which operates down to 45Hz or below, depending on cabinet.
Hope this helps.
Colin |
|
|
| sma |
Thank you Colin for information.
I contact bandor via e-mail but they don't replay.I already receive they price list and i want to order now,but i don't know how i can contact them.
If you at England ,maybe you can let me know where i must contact..is any distributor on line ...
for jordan i will try contact them |
|
|
| sma |
| From your opinion,which driver have better sound JORDAN or Bandor,?i looking similar models and basic. |
|
|
| Colin |
When I heard both ranges at a UK hi fi show a few years ago, I thought the Jordans sounded more natural. I know that they've been developed considerably since then. I currently use some of their units in a 2-way design and have yet to find anything to match them, apart, possibly, from electrostatics. I've also heard the JX92 and have been impressed with this unit too, but haven't yet tried a side-by-side comparison.
The Bandor units are quite small (equivilant to the Jordan JX53s), whereas the JX92 is a 4" diameter unit and covers the full range, requiring only a sub. There are several threads on here describing enclosures which use them.
This site has some quite good details on the enclosure on the Jordan site
http://www.audio-resolution.com/zhorn/jordan.html
The Bandor units are used by www.seventhveil.co.uk in their speakers, in a linear array format.
How are you planning to use the units?
Colin |
|
|
| sma |
I am still looking costruction for this driver,but i want try the sound first.I am use fostex now but this China manufacture.i want to hear UK speaker....i fell will be better
I have DIY club here.so if the jordan sound good.i interest for buy in qty.so i looking the distributor. |
|
|
| Colin |
| quote: | Originally posted by sma
I have DIY club here.so if the jordan sound good.i interest for buy in qty.so i looking the distributor. |
Have a search on DIYaudio for comments on the Jordan driver. If you're looking for fullrange, the Bandor and Jordan JX92 are different beasts (the JX92 is specifically a fullrange device, the Bandor requires a bass unit). Regarding quantity discount, it's always worth contacting Jordan. Their site has a list of distributors or they could email details. They aso sell direct.
sixmoons.com recently published a review by Nelson Pass on various fullrange drivers, mentioning the JX92 in passing (it didn't really fit the criteria but Nelson sneaked it in anyway). He commented on and measured a number of Fostex models so this may give you a starting point.
Colin |
|
|
| _henry_ |
hello sma,
just finished my pair jx92s in fullrange with GM's ML-TL design.
ur welcome if u want to hear them.
right now my setup is this
arcam alpha7se
nad c370
i bought them from dutaban audio in Jakarta.
i think they are very good driver.
u have a club? can i join the club?
i'm considering to buy gc kit from Peter to mate them.
but the customs have a bit problem with importing stuff
:( |
|
|
| sma |
Hi,
where your location Henry?I am at Jakarta.I am interest for hear the jordan sound.you can join us,next month i will try for on line.
i have several premium crossover parts if you interest,so many hobbyist buy parts from me,for electronic i plan will start next year.
several my friend is hobbyist.please leave your phone number and i can contact you ,so we can meet for listening your jordan.
i am still hear fostex and lowther sound,and want hear jordan. |
|
|
| MarkMcK |
Greetings all,
I am curious about the comment made that the Bandor's were not as developed. What generally counts as development in a driver?
The Bandors could sound better. The man who uses them in his commercial speakers has talked about coating them with varnish to tame a cone resonance. The Bandors, like all other cone drivers, have cone and dust cap vibration modes.
I know a little something about material vibration modes. I believe I could make the Bandors better. Would this constitute more development?
While the technical skill required to control vibration modes in metal cones makes such development impractical for the diyer, Bandor likely has the capacity to incorporate the needed changes in their production.
Now, I find a great deal of practical guidelines for living a good life in Adam Smith's book "Theory of Moral Sentiment." In this earlier publication Smith explains both the "invisible hand" of the free marketplace and puts forth a very humane perspective on competition. Following those tenants, I suppose I should offer my services to Bandor.
If anyone has contacts with Bandor and would like to see a more developed Bandor driver, perhaps they would be interested in helping to make introductions.
Just a thought,
Mark |
|
|
| _henry_ |
hi,
i'm at bekasi.
i would love to hear the fostex and lowther, especially in good system.
looking forward to it
u can email me at chen_henry218@hotmail.com
or 0816-1969589 |
|
|
| _henry_ |
hello mack,
interestingly about a year ago, i had a chance to listen to jx92 with treated cone, it looks like cement or some kind of sealer.
it makes the cone really stiff, and they were pair with a ceramic tweeter.
they sound very good. it was the moment that i want to use the jordans;) |
|
|
| _henry_ |
oops, sorry mark i thought yourname was mack
forgive me ;) |
|
|
| Colin |
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkMcK
Greetings all,
I am curious about the comment made that the Bandor's were not as developed. What generally counts as development in a driver?
Mark |
Hi Mark
I made this comment based on what I know of the Jordan drivers and what I've seen of the Bandors since. Perhaps I should have said, the Jordans have undergone further development since I heard them at the same hi-fi show as the Bandors. In the JX53s case, this doesn't just relate to the cone material.
| quote: | Originally posted by _henry_
hello mack,
interestingly about a year ago, i had a chance to listen to jx92 with treated cone, it looks like cement or some kind of sealer. |
Interesting idea but Jordan are adamant that if a coating would help their drivers, they'd be using it. The whole idea of the Jordan cones is that they flex in a controlled, carefully designed fashion in order to extend their range into the HF region. Making them stiff would wreck one of the major design aims behind them.
If the JX92 sounded good, it was probably despite the coating.
Colin |
|
|
| _henry_ |
hi colin,
i know, they told this to me too.
i think the vendor treated the cone, because they're using it as a wide range not a full range, because they add ceramic T to it.
right now my jordan is playing fullrange, and i'm not gonna treated them:D because i don't think i can afford to do it.
how about adding neodymium magnets? |
|
|
| sma |
Dear Henry,
Are you already compare between jordan and lowther driver?How about characteristic different? |
|
|
| _henry_ |
sma,
no, haven't heard the lowthers, but i own loth-x entry level, paper cone with short kind of TL by the size of bookshelf. i prefer the jordans allaround.
what system do u have right now? right now i'm trying to tweak the jordan a bit to the most optimum.
and i'm thinking to use L and R as jordan's website suggested.
because the mid is very dominant, it clouded the bass a bit. |
|
|
| Colin |
I'm not qualified to comment re adding magnets to the JX92S, but I do know it has been refined quite carefully so any mods to the driver itself may unbalance the sound. The L and R suggested on the website are a good idea. The other is to make sure they are set up correctly, axis of each driver crossing well in front of the listening postion, again as recommended on the website.
Colin |
|
|
| MarkMcK |
Hi _henry_ and Colin,
My offer was not to modify the Jordan but to help develop the Bandor.
I know all about Jordan's theory of how his driver operates and have made comment on it before. Whether for the Bandor or the Jordan I would not be coating the cone material. I can demonstrate the low utility of this approach for any cone material. No, I have more of an integrated redesign in mind that would produce much larger improvements than cone coating.
From my perspective (my theory) the major holdback to improved loudspeaker performance is uncontrolled material vibration modes. Unlike so many of the other variables that manufacturers speak of, the vibration modes come close to equaling the accurate acoustic output of the driver. This is not just in case of the inexpensive TBs for which I have provided easy and inexpensive modifications, it is a problem for all transducers, including ribbons, planars, electrostic planars, and yes cone and dome designs. It is just that the techniques needed to control vibration modes is different for each type of transducer.
Anyway, the offer still stands for redesigning the Bandor's cone if Bandor is interested.
Best,
Mark |
|
|
| _henry_ |
mark,
can u give me a hint, what kind of mods to eliminate the vibration?
if a loudspeaker is free of unwanted vibration, i think it would be the ultimate goal, isn't it?
but less vibe = less bass?
cheers |
|
|
| MarkMcK |
It would be the same kind of modifications I have provided for the TB polypropylenes, except for that which is effective with metal.
To put it in terms of second order acoustic oscillators, you can play with spring rate or mass (or both). My free modifications alter both spring rate and mass of specific areas of the cone. My goal for the Bandor would be to alter only the spring rate, and only at the critical areas of the cone surface. And the second goal is to control the triggers altering as little surface area as possible.
The difficulty is always in the details. The big global statements are easy to make, just hard to implement.
Now, in terms of big global statements, I would agree with you that elimination of material vibration modes in loudspeaker drivers is a worthy goal. Yet, Jordan wants cone "flexure." Not the same goal.
Mark |
|
|
|
