recommended mid - driver to go with SEAS drivers

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
L

loheswaran

Member
Joined 2009
#1
I am gonna make a floorstanding three-way. I already have:

1. SEAS w22 ex001
2. Seas Excel millenium tweeter

I am gonna make a sealed three-way floorstander. I am going to use the w22 for bass, and therefore require a good mid unit.

It is going to have external cross-overs, because I may make them into active's at a later stage.

I am after a very neutral mid range driver that images and times very well. My ears are accustomed to Yamaha NS1000M's.

With that in mind what should I buy:

SEAS W18's?
ATC's
Scanspeak
Audiotechnology

anything else?

Help me please

I am wondering which mid unit will go with the
 
#4
I would prefer smaller driver than W18 for the midrange (to be crossed around 700Hz). First option is W11, second is W15. First it must be simulated to find which one will most probably fit better with your tweeter. This can be your last speaker.

If you're not sure you can design a good speaker, better choose W15 because I think many others have used this W22-W15 combo. Troels' Poor Man's Stradivari is one example. But smaller driver such as W11 in my prediction will make a wonderful top quality speaker if you don't mind to "work hard".
 
#7
dewardh said:
Why not just cross at 1400 LR4 electric, notch at 4.8kHz, and skip the mid altogether? T25 and W22 sound pretty good together without any "help" . . .
Click to expand...

Agree. That what I will do. But this is difficult if you don't have good ears. You can make one that measures good but with complex filter the chance to sound good (enjoyable, no fatigue) is small.
 
#9
Jay said:
You can make one that measures good but with complex filter the chance to sound good (enjoyable, no fatigue) is small.
Click to expand...
The "chance" does not have to be "small" . . . the Linkwitz crossover used in ORION works well (with a few obvious adjustments, like no dipole correction, but baffle step instead), and it is easy to replicate.

jerome69 said:
In the case of a 2 ways, the kit trym exists : THE ART OF SOUND PERFECTION BY SEAS - Trym

Note a 3 ways will sound better, specially in the high midrange, low treble.
Click to expand...
That a three-way will necessarily sound "better" is open to some argument, and depends a lot on the crossover design (see my comment to Jay, above), among other things. There are some benefits, and some disadvantages. Overall it may well be a wash, or even favor the two-way. In this case I think it does favor the two-way . . .
 
#10
dewardh said:
That a three-way will necessarily sound "better" is open to some argument, and depends a lot on the crossover design (see my comment to Jay, above), among other things. There are some benefits, and some disadvantages. Overall it may well be a wash, or even favor the two-way. In this case I think it does favor the two-way . . .
Click to expand...

For a 3 ways, Troels did a good job. His comments are very instructive 😉
SEAS TJL3W

Have fun.
 
#11
dewardh said:
The "chance" does not have to be "small" . . . the Linkwitz crossover used in ORION works well (with a few obvious adjustments, like no dipole correction, but baffle step instead), and it is easy to replicate.
Click to expand...

Oh, you're talking about active crossover. I thought the Orion xo is not openly published.

dewardh said:
That a three-way will necessarily sound "better" is open to some argument, and depends a lot on the crossover design (see my comment to Jay, above), among other things. There are some benefits, and some disadvantages. Overall it may well be a wash, or even favor the two-way. In this case I think it does favor the two-way . . .
Click to expand...

When 3-way is possible, like in this case I suppose, no way a 2-way can equal a 3-way. There's no disadvantage with 3-way except for higher degree of design difficulty.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom