That's interesting, the 8 ohm version's motor is orientated just like the TC9, rather than at a 45 degree angle or something.
I am not sure how a manufacturer would go about reducing or eliminating resonance or compression issues with pole vents. With tweeters felt or foam plugs are added either inside the vents or on top of them. SB acoustics added a felt dome to the top of the pole piece with the SB65WBAC. The SB65 doesn't have a pole vent though as it uses venting around the voice coil former instead. Nevertheless they thought it was worth adding. It's distortion performance speaks for itself though.
Here's the driver at 2.83v
And at +10dB from 2.83v
Well maybe not quite as many as you Cal!
Last edited:
Picture in the link which point to rotation as TC9 is sadly wrong, the 8 ohms pair received has only 3 support legs and 45º rotated compared TC9, sorry didn't think about that when linked.
Really nice stock 🙂. . . can we request sound clips 😡.
Last edited:
Haha... nice! I have at least as many as Cal! Though I bet that is not his entire stash! In a secret bunker somewhere.... 🙂
excuse my fat fingers, that should have been 15 - to which I think Cal can attest
5th Element - thanks for the explanation. I have measured the TC9 in free air and in cabinets at different drive levels - never noticed anything anomalous at 500Hz before. The distortion is high below 300hz but starts decreasing above that through 800Hz where it settles to a pretty low level. I know that on TC9, the pole vent is radiused and the hole is quite large - not sure if there was a design change there.
The Peerless 830986 aluminum cone Nd magnet drivers arrived. They look really high tech - never seen such an open vented rear spider and small magnet combo like this - should have very little back reflection. The Al cone is very thin - feels like thin paper. Should be interesting.
I just want to thank the member who got me these to try - I would like to give you public thanks if ok.
You're quite welcome 🙂
I have enjoyed these drivers in the past, and I think they reproduce sound quite well. Sadly they seem to the quite unknown in these forums, but this will probably change it. Hopefully more people will discover these nice and tidy 3" drivers!
I'm looking forward to see how they fare up against others in the comparison and other tests.
I have enjoyed these drivers in the past, and I think they reproduce sound quite well. Sadly they seem to the quite unknown in these forums, but this will probably change it. Hopefully more people will discover these nice and tidy 3" drivers!
I'm looking forward to see how they fare up against others in the comparison and other tests.
The amount of venting that the rear spider has is larger than any other driver I have seen. I just measured them on DATS and the TS parameters are basically spot on with published.
Here is an initial comparison with TC9FD with 4ms gate at 0.5m away (blue with BSC applied and red with EQ to reduce peaks)
Here is an initial comparison with TC9FD with 4ms gate at 0.5m away (blue with BSC applied and red with EQ to reduce peaks)
Attachments
Last edited:
Ive used the P830986 in quite a few applications, but it needs some xover contouring to sound nice, its smaller sibling P830983 is good for mid and tweeter duty as well, I am surprised these drivers haven't been mentioned earlier but I assumed they had been dismissed from measuring/listening because of some preconceived bias but now it seems it is because you didn't know about them.
Arthur.
Arthur.
I thought I remembered it from somewhere but that one is one digit removed.
Scaena (from the big expensive line arrays) is said to use the:
peerless 830987 3" full range 8 ohm in their line arrays (a modified version of coarse) as the midrange driver.
Can't really make it out on this photo though... But it's the wrong one anyway.
Source for photo: http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?1190-Scaena-install
Scaena (from the big expensive line arrays) is said to use the:
peerless 830987 3" full range 8 ohm in their line arrays (a modified version of coarse) as the midrange driver.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Can't really make it out on this photo though... But it's the wrong one anyway.
Source for photo: http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?1190-Scaena-install
Last edited:
I think that these little fellows would be interesting to try out too https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/approx-2-fullrange/sb-acoustics-sb65wbac25-4-2.5-full-range/
The dip between 1Khz and 2Khz might just be counteracted by the typical baffle step hump of small baffles too.
Obviously they would need to be in a FAST system but they look like they may do well.
Tony.
The dip between 1Khz and 2Khz might just be counteracted by the typical baffle step hump of small baffles too.
Obviously they would need to be in a FAST system but they look like they may do well.
Tony.
MCM's little $10.39 five inch speaker probably would have some general use
MCM Audio Select 5'' Full Range Monitor Driver | 55-1595 (551595) | MCM Audio Select
MCM Audio Select 5'' Full Range Monitor Driver | 55-1595 (551595) | MCM Audio Select
Yes, Dave is my mentor and ra7 is right, those pics are just the little guys as this is a small speaker thread.
Tony those are the SB65WBAC that I've been harping on about in this thread and posted distortion measurements for above. They are very well made and work surprisingly well even when run full range. Sure you will need to FAST them, like any of these small full rangers imo, if you are wanting to get high SPLs out of them, but apart from that they are quite lovely. I would really like to make a floor to ceiling line array out of them, but that would be rather ridiculous with our high ceilings.
It will be interesting to see how they measure. Years ago Zaph measured a driver from the same 'series' and they performed quite badly. This isn't to say that the more recent offerings are going to be hindered by similar shortcomings, but Zaph's measurements have cautioned me into steering clear, especially when you can get other drivers that perform like champs.
Another driver that could be included within this test is this, it's quite costly and has upper end breakup issues, which isn't surprising considering its aluminium cone, maybe the SB65WBAC would be a better choice. The SB does have less cone area, but it makes up for that perhaps with greater linear excursion. Still the NE driver is built like a tank and the rest of the drivers from the NE series, at least with respect to their midrange performance have stellar HD.
Tymphany NE95W-04 3" Full Range Woofer
Last edited:
Don't forget to look at sensitivity ratings. The little SB65WBAC25 is only 83.5dB @ 2.83V, and it's 4 ohm. Power rating is 20 watts. I would find it hard to use.
Tymphany/Peerless/Vifa has a wide range of full range products. I was just browsing their website the other day, planning for a floor to ceiling line array. There are a number of products that look good, measure good. Check it out:
Transducers | Tymphany
You can filter by range/type and by driver size. The TC9 is in there too.
I really like this one:
Transducer Detail | Tymphany
Flat response and because of the 2 inch size, the off-axis doesn't fall apart as early as the 3.5 inch TC9. But it's quite expensive for a line array. Might work as a mid-tweet. 85db/2.83V and 25W power handling. Probably won't go very loud. But it is intended to be used in "television soundbars."
Transducers | Tymphany
You can filter by range/type and by driver size. The TC9 is in there too.
I really like this one:
Transducer Detail | Tymphany
Flat response and because of the 2 inch size, the off-axis doesn't fall apart as early as the 3.5 inch TC9. But it's quite expensive for a line array. Might work as a mid-tweet. 85db/2.83V and 25W power handling. Probably won't go very loud. But it is intended to be used in "television soundbars."
- Status
- Not open for further replies.