I'm all for measuring, comparing and stuff. But all that talk (@diyaudio) about OBJECTIVITY seems to be overrated and exaggerated.
For example, I can make you nutritive, healthy and balanced meal based on pure, objective and exact science. But it's taste (for this example) will be bland, or even bad. Would you eat it regularly, or would your rather eat something less healthy, nutritionaly weaker food but with good or excelent taste?
Don't forget, listening a music, for most of us, is for personal pleasure.
I'm not complaining here, I'm just saying
Back on the objective data, how many time do you measure same driver?
Do you present single measurement or average of 5, 10 or so mesurements?
Is your data repeateable? How many other people confirmed your data?
What is your error margin?
How many working hours are on those measured drivers? How they compare regarding that parameter?
What about temperature, humidity and atmospheric conditions and variations during measurements?
What is your ambiance noise level during measurement?
At the end you are trying to be OBJECTIVE and SCIENTIFIC, right
Btw, I'm enjoying looking those graphs
Last edited:
In my humble opinion it's up to the artist and his team of producers/mixers and whatnot to create the flavour of the music. The job of the loudspeaker is to get that flavour to our ears.
If the loudspeakers spices it up intentionally it probably will not succeed to do that successfully with a wide variety of musical flavours
.We are not the ones creating the "food" after all, we're just serving it up...
If you think that the sound from a speaker playing with a response as ragged as the above magenta curve cleans the clock of the smoother red curve, you are probably the only one who would think so.
The Markaudio response reminds me of a BMR. Please see https://www.naimaudio.com/sites/def...naim_ovator-s-600_bmr_white-paper_may2009.pdf
I do have some 40+ years of experience, quite a few of those in the trenches. X has been at it for what? 2 years?
dave
Age-related hearing loss is a fact. After 40 years in this hobby you have to take into consideration that your hearing might not work as good as X's. If he really has 38 years less experience than you, his hearing might also be 38 years younger than yours. Something to consider before you make comments about the quality of a driver on a public forum.
Apart from that, more experience doesn't always equal more expertise. One more reason to look at objective measurements.
It has already been established that the Markaudio measurements are sugarcoated and suspect.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full...surements-different-measuring-techniques.html
Other manufacturers aren't much better therefore I applaud X for doing these measurements. He also provides all the details how he measured. Something no manufacturer does. Kudos to X.
Last edited:
Hi X,
Late to the party. Personally, I don't have any experience with these small fullrangers. However I very much appreciate your time and effort on this. If I start building speakers with these small drivers someday, it's all because of you. (ok, not all, but pretty much )
FWIW, I'd suggest making this a sticky, or a wiki?
Or, would it be a good idea to combine this thread and the other? http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/262687-rutchos-fullrange-measurements-database.html
Late to the party. Personally, I don't have any experience with these small fullrangers. However I very much appreciate your time and effort on this. If I start building speakers with these small drivers someday, it's all because of you. (ok, not all, but pretty much
)FWIW, I'd suggest making this a sticky, or a wiki?
Or, would it be a good idea to combine this thread and the other? http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/262687-rutchos-fullrange-measurements-database.html
Personal interested to see more drivers this comparison.
1. Scanspeak Discovery 10F/8424G same company group as TC9FD but this one a lot more expensive, could it bring less distortion an area where the brand has some patents.
2. Fostex FF105WK this one i find more interesting than FF85WK which only rated 5 watt where FF105WK is 10 watt 88dB. At same if looking at Rutcho's measurement here Fostex FF-105 WK Loudspeaker Measurements and Information there is sign of even the FR is wriggeled that the polar show EQ guys have chance to linearize by EQ up to 10kHz and maybe further up too. Rutcho has very delicate measurement gear ignore from ~20-50kHz to be shown in this thread.
3. Visaton B80, a famous top performer.
In first place most forget B80 because at present it's in back order at solen.ca.
At madisoundspeakerstore.com i can get a pair of each 10F/8424G and FF105WK included shipping to xrk971 at $US 317,08.
Is there a possibility if i pay $100 that lets say 10 other members have interest sharing the last costs $217,08.
Thought was if 10 other via PM would join that i order and pay hole pack and when arrived xrk971 they pay me via paypal.
Know one driver could fill out the test but think x deserve a pair to have some toys to investigate future box designs.
Be welcome to send PM.
1. Scanspeak Discovery 10F/8424G same company group as TC9FD but this one a lot more expensive, could it bring less distortion an area where the brand has some patents.
2. Fostex FF105WK this one i find more interesting than FF85WK which only rated 5 watt where FF105WK is 10 watt 88dB. At same if looking at Rutcho's measurement here Fostex FF-105 WK Loudspeaker Measurements and Information there is sign of even the FR is wriggeled that the polar show EQ guys have chance to linearize by EQ up to 10kHz and maybe further up too. Rutcho has very delicate measurement gear ignore from ~20-50kHz to be shown in this thread.
3. Visaton B80, a famous top performer.
In first place most forget B80 because at present it's in back order at solen.ca.
At madisoundspeakerstore.com i can get a pair of each 10F/8424G and FF105WK included shipping to xrk971 at $US 317,08.
Is there a possibility if i pay $100 that lets say 10 other members have interest sharing the last costs $217,08.
Thought was if 10 other via PM would join that i order and pay hole pack and when arrived xrk971 they pay me via paypal.
Know one driver could fill out the test but think x deserve a pair to have some toys to investigate future box designs.
Be welcome to send PM
.
FWIW, I think what we can take away from the official thread on the CHN is that it is meant to be equalized. IE you are not in danger of distortion, even if you lift the top.
The excellent off-axis performance is most probably because the diaphragm is stiffer than usual and therefore harder to exite and in turn therefore emits less HF.
The excellent off-axis performance is most probably because the diaphragm is stiffer than usual and therefore harder to exite and in turn therefore emits less HF.
So many comments that really erk me here. I just gotta say a few things. 1. Consistent polars is a sign it is NOT breaking up. Inconsistent (flipping peaks for nulls) is a sign of breakup.
2. Hearing worsens with age BUT the brain compensates with age. Unless hearing is damaged, the internal EQ will make up for it.
3. We don't pick the flavor of our drivers. We should pick accuracy. If you pick flavor, don't expect other people to agree.
4. What the heck is pistonic to resonant if it isn't breakup? Honest, not sure what that is.
5. Being a musician rarely makes a person a good judge of sound reproduction. In fact more often than not I've seen it be a handicap. That's coming from someone with a music background.
6. This isn't the first time MA drivers have been criticized for their "raw" measurements. If this is still an open question I'm amazed. I really would use their measurements without 3rd party comparisons. Their y scale is way to coarse which essentially smooths them to a useless death.
one little driver I picked up a few years ago was the Faital Pro 4FE32 - fwiw in 8ohm, it has about the nicest factory published curves of their 4" lineup, - - - I wish there were good six inch fullrange less expensive than L.Cao and Fostex.
FaitalPRO | LF Loudspeakers | 4FE32
8 ohm
16 ohm
FaitalPRO | LF Loudspeakers | 4FE32
8 ohm
16 ohm
Last edited:
Freddi,
I have been designing DCR's around the 4FE32 for a friend in China. He built them and sent me sound clips and measurements. They are great performers with very smooth response and nice sensitivity. I have not heard one in real life but they measure as advertised.
If you only need to go down to 100Hz the PRV 6MRxxxNDY and 8MRxxxNDY which are labeled as mid range drivers can probably do a decent job as a full range. They go up to about 12kHz or so and rated around 95 to 97dB sensitive. They have one heck of a stiff suspension so tough to tune anywhere close or below fs.
I have been designing DCR's around the 4FE32 for a friend in China. He built them and sent me sound clips and measurements. They are great performers with very smooth response and nice sensitivity. I have not heard one in real life but they measure as advertised.
If you only need to go down to 100Hz the PRV 6MRxxxNDY and 8MRxxxNDY which are labeled as mid range drivers can probably do a decent job as a full range. They go up to about 12kHz or so and rated around 95 to 97dB sensitive. They have one heck of a stiff suspension so tough to tune anywhere close or below fs.
Last edited:
I'm all for measuring, comparing and stuff. But all that talk (@diyaudio) about OBJECTIVITY seems to be overrated and exaggerated.
For example, I can make you nutritive, healthy and balanced meal based on pure, objective and exact science. But it's taste (for this example) will be bland, or even bad. Would you eat it regularly, or would your rather eat something less healthy, nutritionaly weaker food but with good or excelent taste?
Don't forget, listening a music, for most of us, is for personal pleasure.
I'm not complaining here, I'm just saying
Back on the objective data, how many time do you measure same driver?
Do you present single measurement or average of 5, 10 or so mesurements?
Is your data repeateable? How many other people confirmed your data?
What is your error margin?
How many working hours are on those measured drivers? How they compare regarding that parameter?
What about temperature, humidity and atmospheric conditions and variations during measurements?
What is your ambiance noise level during measurement?
At the end you are trying to be OBJECTIVE and SCIENTIFIC, right
Btw, I'm enjoying looking those graphs
Ticovski,
I welcome others to confirm my measurements. They are indeed repeatable - I take 5 to 10 measurements and they are identical so I present just one - no need to average when the SNR is good.
Temperature is set at 70 deg F and humidity is whatever ambient in Northern Virginia. I don't think T and RH affect the measurements at all in a substantive way.
So far the Japanese website Squeak pointed out confirms the plateau of 9dB from 600Hz to 7kHz in the CHN. The manufacturer's published curves confirm the rest of the measured drivers.
DiyAudio and Diy in general may not be "objective" but I want this thread to be hence the title.
Hi X,
Late to the party. Personally, I don't have any experience with these small fullrangers. However I very much appreciate your time and effort on this. If I start building speakers with these small drivers someday, it's all because of you. (ok, not all, but pretty much
FWIW, I'd suggest making this a sticky, or a wiki?
Or, would it be a good idea to combine this thread and the other? http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/262687-rutchos-fullrange-measurements-database.html
I think a sticky would be a great idea if the mods are agreeable to it. I think there is indeed a lot of general interest in this topic and I hope to provide an enduring resource for users to turn to. Given that there has been about 5000 views in 48 hrs, I think the interest is substantial. But I think the flavor and focus (3 inch to 4 inch) are different than Rutcho's excellent work so I would not want the threads to be combined.
Last edited:
Ok, I think I can take some measurements of the PRV 5MR450NDY in the same setup. The baffle cutout will need to be enlarged though. I wonder what size Sd technically is the upper limit of a 4.5in driver?
You assume that T/S (which are derived from the impedance curve) are scalars, they are curves. XRK will be measuring at a different place on the curve so his, vrs factory imp curves could both be correct because they are made under sifferent conditions. He also seems to be using DATS which, if it works at all, is of questionable accuracy,
Your comment only shows a lack of understanding of how a driver works.
My T/S measurer (Smith & Larson woofer tester 2) is very good but it measures t/s the old way (as opposed to many tools that estimate from the impedance curve) so does not produce pretty highly detailed impedance curves by default -- it can do pretty, highly accurate curve but i may have to remeasure or reprocess the (CHN & VIFA) data i have. To use it i have to reboot my MacPro into Windows XP (which is crap). I will look at getting presentable data sometime next week,
dave
1. Consistent polars is a sign it is NOT breaking up. Inconsistent (flipping peaks for nulls) is a sign of breakup.
2. Hearing worsens with age BUT the brain compensates with age. Unless hearing is damaged, the internal EQ will make up for it.
3. We don't pick the flavor of our drivers. We should pick accuracy. If you pick flavor, don't expect other people to agree.
4. What the heck is pistonic to resonant if it isn't breakup? Honest, not sure what that is.
5. Being a musician rarely makes a person a good judge of sound reproduction. In fact more often than not I've seen it be a handicap. That's coming from someone with a music background.
6. This isn't the first time MA drivers have been criticized for their "raw" measurements. If this is still an open question I'm amazed. I really would use their measurements without 3rd party comparisons. Their y scale is way to coarse which essentially smooths them to a useless death.
Agree with everything you've said, just want to add to your second point. It depends how far the damage of hair cells has progressed. When I was younger I could hear 20kHz. That ability is completely gone no matter how loud the signal is.
Wonky was used to describe the charts posted in Post #20 (and similar) and they are. All the earlier measurements done in the nearfield can also be tossed... those done under more appropriate conditions are quite different.
dave
I think Byrtt is talking about the magnitude of the impedance at the 700Hz blip. That amplitude and the peak amplitude at the driver fs is a scalar and should be consistent from factory to user as it is the value we are concerned about when determining if our amplifier can handle high impedance loads. You are too quick to accuse people of having a lack of understanding when you don't agree. Byrtt is correct about the value of impedance at the maxima being a scalar. And are we going to say that because I am using amateur equipment from Dayton that it is inaccurate? The same arguments of bad calibrations you accused my UMM-6 mic of having a long time ago. Turns out, the mic and the cal are just fine. I have checked the DATS with the Vifa and it is consistent with factory TS params published. You need to stop attacking the tool and user.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.