hi- im new to full range but want to get a first hand experience in the subject-
i have small cabs- made from plywood- they have 10mm of bitumen and 50mm foam-
27cm x43cm x 19cm- my amp is dynaco sca-35
can you suggest a driver - i dont min putting a new front panel and port if required
price is not a huge issue as i can sell on if i dont like them
i have small cabs- made from plywood- they have 10mm of bitumen and 50mm foam-
27cm x43cm x 19cm- my amp is dynaco sca-35
can you suggest a driver - i dont min putting a new front panel and port if required
price is not a huge issue as i can sell on if i dont like them
Almost 17 litres. Inside measurements? Any bracing?
This would be my 1st choice:
Alpair 10P full range driver | KJF Audio
Scott has a similr size design posted, which will give an idea of th event size. A good match with your Dynaco.
If that is external size, then inside will be smaller which gives more choices without major work.
Fostex FF165wk would also fit. Fostex FF165WK Size 166x166mm
That it is pricier (besides that i personally prefer the A10p) puts it at a disadvantage.
dave
This would be my 1st choice:
Alpair 10P full range driver | KJF Audio
Scott has a similr size design posted, which will give an idea of th event size. A good match with your Dynaco.
If that is external size, then inside will be smaller which gives more choices without major work.
Fostex FF165wk would also fit. Fostex FF165WK Size 166x166mm
That it is pricier (besides that i personally prefer the A10p) puts it at a disadvantage.
dave
Do you really want a full-range driver with this a poor & erratic SPL level at these whole bunch of frequencies? This would do just fine as a mid-range driver, as its response is "most tamed" within a narrow band of frequencies, (1500-5000 htz)
All these full-range aficionados will tell you, "your just measuring it wrong", or , "we can work with this just fine", or, "just listen, you'll hear the magic"...
Sorry, I will use the technology, not "the magic" to measure it & berate it for its awful ragged response...a giant saw-blade of response swinging up & down in dozens of decibels all over the map...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------Rick........
All these full-range aficionados will tell you, "your just measuring it wrong", or , "we can work with this just fine", or, "just listen, you'll hear the magic"...
Sorry, I will use the technology, not "the magic" to measure it & berate it for its awful ragged response...a giant saw-blade of response swinging up & down in dozens of decibels all over the map...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------Rick........
Attachments
Last edited:
Many of my favourite FRs are Mark Audio.
It is worth noting that the ones in the SOTA boxes are not the same ones that we diyers can get.
The one there would sort of be a Pluvia 11, Alpair 11ms would be a step up.
dave
ALL of audio is a compromise - you simply choose your compromises the best you can, through at least some understanding of what you give up on one hand, in order to have on the other.
Take all-analog vs all-digital for example...
Take using a miniDSP in an otherwise all analog system...
I'd also say flatness of response is but one dimension of a good sounding system. Is it the master dimension? One would think so, until you experience a system that "sounds great, measures lousy". Such things do exist.
Avoid getting hung-up on a particular aspect - there's so many dimension at play
Take all-analog vs all-digital for example...
Take using a miniDSP in an otherwise all analog system...
I'd also say flatness of response is but one dimension of a good sounding system. Is it the master dimension? One would think so, until you experience a system that "sounds great, measures lousy". Such things do exist.
Avoid getting hung-up on a particular aspect - there's so many dimension at play
Last edited by a moderator:
+1
If the only tool you have is a hammer then everything starts looking like a nail.
Rick continues to judge these FRs by a measure of the FR, yet would have you use a speaker with an XO. You trade the cohesiveness, the magic of a FR and disrupt that with an XO. Compromises.
To improve the HF a smaller driver is often better, but it cannot do sufficient bass. Go larger for more bass, the HF goes for a dump. The sweet spot, IMO, is in the 4-5” range. And we see a growing number of WAWs, where woofer support is added to a FR as a midTweeter. Being a 2-way, yes this brings an XO into the picture, but at a frequency where many of their evils go away. One of the compromises? Usually price goes up, often WAY up. But you can add as much and as deep a bass as you can afford, and the FR, shorn of bass duties, does midTop better. And it can be done, if desired or found needing, as step two in your system’s development.
It is hard, very hard, to get a single driver to cover the entire frequency range. Issues with top end uneveness are common, but do they intrude into YOUR listening experience. Only you can tell us that.
You have to choose your own set of suitable compromises. Many, and a growing number, are finding that what a good FR brings to the party suits their needs.
dave
It is. Just in different ways to alternatives. There's no such thing as a speaker devoid of compromise.
One way of achieving what, though? And what 'technology' in particular? The point behind that being: what do you want to achieve?
See above. But even with an answer to that, the short answer is still no. Everything is a compromise. It depends which fall in line with a given system requirement, and what sacrifices have been made elsewhere in order to realise them. Most reasonable people will note qualities where they are apparent, but that doesn't mean that they will necessarily be appropriate in every case.
Last edited:
Using technology...achieving what?...what technology?, ...the point, what do you want to achieve?
Our music should be as fully accurate, an exacting copy...from the stage, studio...to our listening rooms.
By simply saying one should just listen, fully aware of its shortcomings, giant spikes in SPL response, spot on a frequency of say, an Oboe, that instrument is technically & audibly highlighted. The listener can now say, "it just brings out that Oboe in the piece!" Cause & effect....with an incorrect conclusion as to why & how.
I have often listened to music that is "flat", uninspiring & hard to listen to...I attribute this to poor recordings & mixing.
When an individual says a system "measures good, but sounds bad"...I will attribute that poor sound to the aforementioned poor recording...
We as humans, think ourselves superior in thought, vision, hearing, touch...all our senses...those attributes that can be measured, we fall very far down the totem pole of these abilities. Time & again, under strict testing, void of possible errors, we really hear rather poorly....the moniker, just listen, is appealing to a fully unscientific endeavour...we are not in this case listening for accuracy, but we are listening with emotion, ego & bravado.
------------------------------------------------------------------Rick..........
Our music should be as fully accurate, an exacting copy...from the stage, studio...to our listening rooms.
By simply saying one should just listen, fully aware of its shortcomings, giant spikes in SPL response, spot on a frequency of say, an Oboe, that instrument is technically & audibly highlighted. The listener can now say, "it just brings out that Oboe in the piece!" Cause & effect....with an incorrect conclusion as to why & how.
I have often listened to music that is "flat", uninspiring & hard to listen to...I attribute this to poor recordings & mixing.
When an individual says a system "measures good, but sounds bad"...I will attribute that poor sound to the aforementioned poor recording...
We as humans, think ourselves superior in thought, vision, hearing, touch...all our senses...those attributes that can be measured, we fall very far down the totem pole of these abilities. Time & again, under strict testing, void of possible errors, we really hear rather poorly....the moniker, just listen, is appealing to a fully unscientific endeavour...we are not in this case listening for accuracy, but we are listening with emotion, ego & bravado.
------------------------------------------------------------------Rick..........
But Rick, the data you are using to make those comments is far from complete (and the ea==measure was taken under unknown conditions) so it is hard to make any conclusions from it, We can assume that it is an on-axis measure, but it is rarey the case that one listens to these on-axis.
You can argue all you want but, unless you have actually listened to these for an extended time you are shooting at shadows.
dave
You can argue all you want but, unless you have actually listened to these for an extended time you are shooting at shadows.
dave
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.