| smallangryboy |
I wouldn't say I want the moon on a stick but something close :)
I'm looking for a high quality 4" or 5" driver, low distortion, reasonable power handling [45w - 90w] that can reach between 80hz/100hz - 20Khz. It also has to be shielded for AV use.
I wonder if anyone could suggest likely manufacturers ?
cheers
SAB |
|
|
| Josephjcole |
The closest I can think of is the Fostex fe127. 4.5", shielded, you could almost reach a -3dB of 100Hz in a large sealed enclosure. I'm not so sure about 90watts though. But you really don't need to give it that much power to reach adequete levels. If you need more I would check out the fe167(you didn't specify a price range, but if you're willing to spend more check out the Jordans)
Joe |
|
|
| gmilitano |
| quote: | Originally posted by smallangryboy
I wouldn't say I want the moon on a stick but something close :)
I'm looking for a high quality 4" or 5" driver, low distortion, reasonable power handling [45w - 90w] that can reach between 80hz/100hz - 20Khz. It also has to be shielded for AV use.
I wonder if anyone could suggest likely manufacturers ?
cheers
SAB |
The Tang Band W4-930SA looks like it would fit your requirments.
http://www.tb-speaker.com/detail/1208_03/w4-930sa.asp
4", Shielded, 40W RMS, 80W max, wide frequency response.
Cheers,
Gio. |
|
|
| johninCR |
SAB,
You really need to factor in driver sensitivity into your search. Start with how loud do you want it to go. For example, a driver with 96db of sensitivity will go louder with 10watts than an 86db sensitivity driver with 80 watts. Each doubling of power only gets you 3bd more output from a driver. |
|
|
| Timn8ter |
| The FE127E almost meets your criteria except for power handling. The CSS WR125S or the Jordan JX92S should work for you. |
|
|
| Eaglesbush |
Hi There
I'm new to this forum but I thought I'd chime in here ..
I use JX 92 & I am very comfortable with them though I find they are best and more involving when driven.
The advantage of the jordan system is its modular so you can develop easily eg stage 1 92 / stage 2 add 125's / stage 3 add 53's. The whole lot can be driven reasonably well from a modest amp ~ I now use a Cyrus 1 but have used Arcam Alpha 5
Also I note you want 20 KHz ~ (regarding the frequency limitations of the JX 92 I've read about elsewhere in other threads) it is first your own hearing which is the limiting factor When I did a test I can only say i was stunned at my limit of 13.5 Khz only my 9 year old daughter could hear above 16 Khz. So can I ask how many of you have analysed your own hearing abilities?
(Takes courage to find out.)
I enclose a photo of the Linear Array JX 53 range coupled to pair JX 125
(The top box in birch ply is not part of my system .. for those that are real fans this box is 4 unit linear array & was made for the man himself Ted Jordan ~ designed for his lounge & to be wall mounted and placed about 2.4 m apart front angled 60 deg.
6 Litre enclosure for 53's & I think 60 L ported for the 125's ~
It's been my intention to redo the 125's into 45/50L sealed
My favourite set up is with the JX 92 & I use these with the 125's pictured without crossover |
|
|
| smallangryboy |
Thanks everyone for your advice. In answer to your question, price isn't really a factor, quality of sound is. The speakers have to open, very natural sounding. I currently use Monitor Audio Silvers and I'm looking for the same sound.
This is the bit where everyone falls off their chair laughing, this is the design I want to build :
 
It isn't going to be straight forward and I'm going to have to rely heavily on help advice and other peoples skills, but I want to build a single driver closed design. I've included a render I've done of what it may loo like with a 4" driver, and sketch ideas of how it may be put together... |
|
|
| smallangryboy |
Timn8ter
Just checked out the CSS website and it looks like these drivers may be the way forward, do you have any specific info on the CSS WR125S as there is none I could find on their site.
cheers |
|
|
| Eaglesbush |
I know the aspirations & have doodled similar ~
JX92 can fit into 3Litre ~ mine are in 6L
The problem with your design is in making it ~ you could try using a mould for resin & burning out / dissolving inner core
or if you are lucky you may find suitable premade container which you can adapt |
|
|
| Timn8ter |
| quote: | Originally posted by smallangryboy
Timn8ter
Just checked out the CSS website and it looks like these drivers may be the way forward, do you have any specific info on the CSS WR125S as there is none I could find on their site.
cheers |
I tried a few different enclosures and the best appears to be .25 cubic feet as they recommend on the website. In my testing they worked better with SS than tube but it may be my EL-34 push-pull is a bad match. I know others have used tubes and been ok. I don't see any reason why a sphere couldn't be used. I heard a pair of bowling balls housing Adire AV3s and they were marvelous.
The specs for the WR125S are found
here. |
|
|
| johninCR |
| I'd go with some type of open back for "open" and "natural sounding". You're going to need stereo subs anyway. Construction becomes much more simple because some significant issues go away (focused reflections back to the cone, tiny volume to work with). A reasonable Q driver like that little Jordan should be able to get you down to 200hz or lower with a little EQ and retain that compact size or smaller. |
|
|
| planet10 |
I've always liked spheres easthetically... i have a pr of Electrohome shperes loade dup with a close relative of the RS40-1197 and a set of Apple's crystal spheres with the 35mm Harmon odessey in them.
The CSS WR125 is a sweet driver -- you may find it a bit HF challenged, but it will certainly go low enuff. Getting 80-100 Hz at one end and 20k is a serious challenged -- in the real world you will need to compromise at one end.
The sphere lends itself to having a little nautilus-like housing on the top to hold one of those little nea 10mm (nominal) tweeters... one of the Gold Audaxes or even the ApexJr bargian T (althou some would scoff at adding a 50 cent tweeter to an expensive quaiFR, you might well be surprised).
dave |
|
|
| Josephjcole |
I would be carefull of circular enclosures. Very aesthitically pleasing and good for diffraction, but internally can be a problem. I made some small sealed enclosures out of clay that were somewhat circular, they ended up having something around a -15dB dip at 1kHz, due to internal reflections. Just make sure to diffuse internal reflections. As far as drivers are concerned if money is not that big of a concern I would go for the Jordans.
Joe |
|
|
| Timn8ter |
| quote: | Originally posted by Josephjcole
I would be carefull of circular enclosures. Very aesthitically pleasing and good for diffraction, but internally can be a problem. I made some small sealed enclosures out of clay that were somewhat circular, they ended up having something around a -15dB dip at 1kHz, due to internal reflections. Just make sure to diffuse internal reflections. As far as drivers are concerned if money is not that big of a concern I would go for the Jordans.
Joe |
The inside doesn't have to be a sphere. |
|
|
| navin |
smallangryboy,
u could vent the rear of the sphere and bleed the air pressure. |
|
|
| Timn8ter |
| quote: | Originally posted by jimbones
who has them? |
Nobody in North America. |
|
|
| kneadle |
| quote: | Originally posted by Timn8ter
The inside doesn't have to be a sphere. |
This is a very important, and often overlooked, insight. Whole worlds have opened up to me since the time I realized that the outside of an enclosure doesn't have to be a larger version of the inside dimensions.
Right now I'm pursuing design ideas that take this into account while taking into consideration the effects, if any, that variable enclosure thicknesses may have on performance.
There are two questions right now, aside from that one: 1) I want the enclosure to look like x; what can I fit inside? 2) How will the driver be oriented in shape x?
Dave |
|
|
| planet10 |
| quote: | Originally posted by kneadle
while taking into consideration the effects, if any, that variable enclosure thicknesses may have on performance. |
Variable wall thickness, in general should make it more difficualt for the walls to excite or sustain a resonance
dave |
|
|
| synergy |
just thinking about the whole variable thickness route
i seem to remember there being a post a while back from someone who'd done an enclosure shaped like a tulip?
the whole thing was made up from layers of MDF and then sanded smooth
using the same technique a completely different contour could be designed for the inside of the box
another thought that came to mind was that you could infact make them layers identical and put a 3/4" round over on the top and bottom of the inside edge giving a corrugated effect to the inside and diffusing the sound
just a thought
dave |
|
|
| Timn8ter |
| quote: | Originally posted by synergy
just thinking about the whole variable thickness route
i seem to remember there being a post a while back from someone who'd done an enclosure shaped like a tulip?
the whole thing was made up from layers of MDF and then sanded smooth
using the same technique a completely different contour could be designed for the inside of the box
another thought that came to mind was that you could infact make them layers identical and put a 3/4" round over on the top and bottom of the inside edge giving a corrugated effect to the inside and diffusing the sound
just a thought
dave |
....or use a CNC router. :D |
|
|
| synergy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Timn8ter
....or use a CNC router. :D |
lucky ****!
haven't got any toys like that in my shop just have to make do with a plunge!
dave |
|
|
| Timn8ter |
| quote: | Originally posted by synergy
lucky ****!
haven't got any toys like that in my shop just have to make do with a plunge!
dave |
I don't either but there are places that will rent you the time. On the other hand, if you don't mind putting in the time just make a jig and have at it!
(btw, that's an interior shot of Steve Margolis' Nonsuch loudspeaker system.)
http://www.seventh-veil.com |
|
|
| planet10 |
| quote: | Originally posted by synergy
i seem to remember there being a post a while back from someone who'd done an enclosure shaped like a tulip? |
Andy Graddon built a set of tulips... e is alergic to retangular boxes
dave |
|
|
| Ric Schultz |
| Anthony Gallo is showing a new micro ball at CES right now (the new Micro T). It is a 3 inch full range titanium driver with a paper dust cap. He claims it is very flat to 22K. It is mounted in a 4" ball and will be $400 the pair retail. He has a powered $400 sub that he is showing with them at CES. Apparently only 1.5 grams moving mass. Anthony says in some ways he prefers them to the Referece IIIs. The sub has a 200uf cap and .1 bypass that goes to the micros that cuts them off around 100hz....the sub does the rest.....of course you can run them wide open but power handling would be diminished as well as I would think clarity with all that bass bouncing around in the sealed balls. Cannot wait to get a pair and play. 4 of them in a mini line source would be nice. If you are at CES I would check them out (Anthony says it will be mind blowing).....driven by a 15 watt a channel $129 Teac? shelf system.....he he. fun little things. |
|
|
| navin |
| quote: | Originally posted by Ric Schultz
He claims it is very flat to 22K. It is mounted in a 4" ball and will be $400 the pair retail....4 of them in a mini line source would be nice. .....driven by a 15 watt a channel $129 Teac? shelf system..... |
$1600 ($400 x 4) of speaker driven by $129 amp...kinda odd. |
|
|
| Ric Schultz |
| The four balls per side was just my idea of fun (mini line source).....Anthony Gallo is demoing just one pair of balls with woofer ($800 total retail) with the shelf system at CES......What I want to do when I get a pair is hardwire them directly with great wire (no binding posts on any speaker I have had since 1979) and also try cutting the ball in half and mounting it to a 5 inch diamater damped PVC pipe maybe a foot or so long so the back wave is slowly absorbed and also has a port of some sort in the rear so the ball is not in a sealed box....I am looking for maximum transparency. One of the best speakers I ever heard was 9 three inch damped Audax full range drivers in series parallel/line source with a couple of modified Fostex ribbon tweeters crossed in about 10K.....sounded like a super modified full range electrostat with incredible dynamics....maybe I can convince Anthony to let me have 18 of them to try it.....he he. |
|
|
| navin |
| quote: | Originally posted by Ric Schultz
...One of the best speakers I ever heard was 9 three inch damped Audax full range drivers in series parallel/line source with a couple of modified Fostex ribbon tweeters crossed in about 10K.....sounded like a super modified full range electrostat with incredible dynamics....... |
any particular brand or DIY? |
|
|
| navin |
| quote: | Originally posted by Ric Schultz
.......What I want to do when I get a pair is hardwire them directly with great wire (no binding posts on any speaker I have had since 1979) and also try cutting the ball in half and mounting it to a 5 inch diamater damped PVC pipe maybe a foot or so long so the back wave is slowly absorbed and also has a port of some sort in the rear so the ball is not in a sealed box.... |
the drivers might not like the loading. i think gallo has his drivers custom made for his boxes. i suspect he first came up with an acceptable WAF solution and then designed the system around this. most of us (incl all my systems) get the drivers we can afford first and then build boxes. the result usually does not very high WAF. It was WAF that got me thinking fullrange. |
|
|
|
