Thanks. Yard sale buy in 2001 in factory new condition incl the case. You don't wanna know what I paid for it, but lets say, the same as a small number of pizzas.
I'm predominantly a bass player and would rather play my Steinberger guitar but it's nice and an investment to be parted with in a few years. The 78 Greco LP I have, every guitarist of note who's played both has preferred, and it's been on a few albums (not mine). My brother has it on loan, but I'm going to take it back soon. I'm going to start building instruments again and would like to use it as a reference - I'm already doing pickups, and onboard electronics for bass.
Look my tech geek is not going to help me sort through various xover notch settings, cap/ coils testings etc.
I'm on my own here
Doing the best I can with very limited geek knowledge.
For this reason I'm going Full Range.Don't need to know how to tweak a xover.
Just hook it up and its done.
All I have to do is find the ones that I like best.
So thats why i post alot of YT vids on various Full range drivers, So others can hear how they perform.
What I get in the DLVX8 might not be up to the Vox wood cone driver,,but its sure a heck lot less cash.
I tried selling the Thors cheap on Ebay , no takers,, Glad they did not sell, The Magnesium cones make a great assist woofer.
So all in all it was nota total loss on the Thors/upgrades. And i get to recycle the W18E001's into the design.
I'm really very happy how things worked out.
Had I gone with a Seas 3 way with the CH15001 or CH15002 dedicated midrange I know it would not beat these 2 Davidlouis.
Glad my tech geek texted back when asked should I go 3 way with CH15 either magnesium or Nextel cone **Ya got to be joking**
Adding a pair of Full Range to the Thors made all the difference.
I've leaned alot on this site and appreciate everyone patience with my **rough on the edges** tech knowhow postings.
Decades ago when my colleague told me that, they were very wise.
I'm old and cranky now, so I say it now and I'll say it later.
Yes. If you pull off a decent fr design you may hesitate to return to multiway.
Depends on what you listen to and how your ears n brain are wired.
Most of this forum may as well be devoted to proving merlot superior to shiraz as only oenophiles can rival audiophiles for pure bs.
Depends on what you listen to and how your ears n brain are wired.
Most of this forum may as well be devoted to proving merlot superior to shiraz as only oenophiles can rival audiophiles for pure bs.
I hear you but that's DIY. Sorting through crossover parts and measuring/listening is how you get where you want to be. It's painstaking but it really works. I'm sure I'm not the only one that does it.
You start with calculated values and take it from there. Listen, measure, make a change. Rinse, lather, repeat.
Full ranges are not the magic bullet you think they are. They still respond to attention to diffraction etc. And they can still be improved with crossovers! Yes BSC and notch filters can really smooth them out.
They have advantages and disadvantages. They have a cult following but that's for the same reasons you cite. As already recommended, you should hang out in the Full Range forum.
I'm actually trying to encourage you. Save the marketing mumbo jumbo for your buds at audio karma or whatever it is. It's a tradition to ridicule that kind of drivel here. We're engineers, not geeks or marketing goons.
Yes. If you pull off a decent fr design you may hesitate to return to multiway.
Depends on what you listen to and how your ears n brain are wired.
Most of this forum may as well be devoted to proving merlot superior to shiraz as only oenophiles can rival audiophiles for pure bs.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thanks
Yes I can not ever go back to any multi way w/o a Full Range somewhere in the system.
Once you heard a higher end FR , there's no going back to a sound w/o it.
Now look all joking aside (One member says my speaker sounds like crap)) but all joking aside,,what ya really think of the DLVX8 and DLW4??
Seriously, I take any opinion.
Good and the bad??
What I want to know is , has anyone heard a superior FR to these 2 Davidlouis.
I've looked over Tang band only the 2145 holds my interest.
Mark Audio, hummm iffy there and quite expensive
Fostex only the 8 llestest model maybe,,but again its not cheap.
Honestly I think the DL VX8 and DLVX 6 (which have not heard) are 2 best bangs for the buck in all FR drivers.
Sumed up in one word :Musical
Note the DL W4 is out of production, something about the EU supplier of the special cone is Out of stock.. makes no sense to me, surely the DL lab can find another supply in vast china.
For $175 pair its really a higher end speaker, i have no complaints.
Althernative is the Tang band 1878 W3
G
Depends on what you listen to and how your ears n brain are wired.
Most of this forum may as well be devoted to proving merlot superior to shiraz as only oenophiles can rival audiophiles for pure bs.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thanks
Yes I can not ever go back to any multi way w/o a Full Range somewhere in the system.
Once you heard a higher end FR , there's no going back to a sound w/o it.
Now look all joking aside (One member says my speaker sounds like crap)) but all joking aside,,what ya really think of the DLVX8 and DLW4??
Seriously, I take any opinion.
Good and the bad??
What I want to know is , has anyone heard a superior FR to these 2 Davidlouis.
I've looked over Tang band only the 2145 holds my interest.
Mark Audio, hummm iffy there and quite expensive
Fostex only the 8 llestest model maybe,,but again its not cheap.
Honestly I think the DL VX8 and DLVX 6 (which have not heard) are 2 best bangs for the buck in all FR drivers.
Sumed up in one word :Musical
Note the DL W4 is out of production, something about the EU supplier of the special cone is Out of stock.. makes no sense to me, surely the DL lab can find another supply in vast china.
For $175 pair its really a higher end speaker, i have no complaints.
Althernative is the Tang band 1878 W3
G
haha
WEll yeah I know I'm on the *wrong* forum as I;'m more about FR vs the xover types.
But since my design is a morph of the 2 , i figured there's something to be said about this new design.
Yes I am a FR cultist, fan-atic. I'll stay over on that page .
Glad we could continue the OP from 2013.
My guess is the wave of the future will be this intergrative design.
Very surprised it has not occured yet.
I'm ahead of the curve.
WEll yeah I know I'm on the *wrong* forum as I;'m more about FR vs the xover types.
But since my design is a morph of the 2 , i figured there's something to be said about this new design.
Yes I am a FR cultist, fan-atic. I'll stay over on that page .
Glad we could continue the OP from 2013.
My guess is the wave of the future will be this intergrative design.
Very surprised it has not occured yet.
I'm ahead of the curve.
Your last sentence could make for a great signature Fast Eddie D!
Mozartfan, we are, for most of us, here to learn things, whatever they are. 🙄 😀
I'm sure lurking here you'll learn how to tweak your crossover, there is a number of members which are very great at this game and willing to help.
And we are lucky to even have access to great (and free) tools like Xsim, Vituix cad and other to help the process.
I'm with Fast Eddie D and encourage you to follow your own path. 🙂
Maybe you are ahead of the curve, maybe not. 😉
Anyway with guys like Planet10 and Scottmoose ( or other members) which can 'review' and be critical to your choice you are in good hands imho.
Mozartfan, we are, for most of us, here to learn things, whatever they are. 🙄 😀
I'm sure lurking here you'll learn how to tweak your crossover, there is a number of members which are very great at this game and willing to help.
And we are lucky to even have access to great (and free) tools like Xsim, Vituix cad and other to help the process.
I'm with Fast Eddie D and encourage you to follow your own path. 🙂
Maybe you are ahead of the curve, maybe not. 😉
Anyway with guys like Planet10 and Scottmoose ( or other members) which can 'review' and be critical to your choice you are in good hands imho.
Last edited:
You're a subjectivist and that's fine. But you probably already know that such a position is frowned upon here.
In case you missed it, my designs start with science and finish with art. It might surprise you to know that I dirty up some of my designs because they're too damn clean. 😉
Subjective is all over the forum… so is objective and everything in-between. it is the blather that is a bother. FastEddie said it pretty well.
Objective gets us to the point where we can start being subjective.
dave
Objective gets us to the point where we can start being subjective.
dave
I think that's another way of saying what I said. I start with science, finish with art.
It's worth noting that a lot of active members here are engineers. For the sake of the OP and other posters, engineers typically have animosity towards the C suite, and blatant contempt for the marketing department. The feeling goes both ways, believe me.
Marketing goons pump customers full of feelgood lies, innuendo, and good old fashioned BS. I consider marketing and advertising people the lowest forms of life. And it cuts both ways, because engineers (good ones anyway) burst their fantasy bubbles of BS with cold hard facts. Personally, I am repulsed by their flowery waxing BS; it is an insult to your intelligence. I was always upfront about this, which garnered reactions of fear and loathing, and an uneasy respect. I've been called many things (and I'm proud of it), with polite colleagues calling me "aggressive" and "abrasive." It never slowed my roll.
Marketing goons pump customers full of feelgood lies, innuendo, and good old fashioned BS. I consider marketing and advertising people the lowest forms of life. And it cuts both ways, because engineers (good ones anyway) burst their fantasy bubbles of BS with cold hard facts. Personally, I am repulsed by their flowery waxing BS; it is an insult to your intelligence. I was always upfront about this, which garnered reactions of fear and loathing, and an uneasy respect. I've been called many things (and I'm proud of it), with polite colleagues calling me "aggressive" and "abrasive." It never slowed my roll.
If you have plenty of it, and its cheap, you need sales department to come up with justification why you use it. Even if it is inferior to almost everything.
Hmm, if there's a capped off [super] tweeter it's a [4] way since the DLVX8 has acoustic XOs at the cone/whizzer junction and another between it and the dust cap/VC = [3] way, which defines most so-called 'FR' vintage designed single drivers.
mozartfan good for u if u found the best speaker for your listening pleasure. I been playing with speakers for 40 years and got crazy about full range driver during the 80 s when as a partimer doing electronic sale i get to test 100 s of mini components and hifi system. After testing for months I found a JVC 4in full range speaker from a mini system that sounds great. Its not powerful but sounds very smooth compared with the rest irrespective of price. needless to say I bought it and was happy with it for awhile until I got a good 2 way than a 3 way and never look back. I still have one jvc speaker driver which I measure using REW .Response is quite flat but jagged all over . The cone is ceramic paper with a very thin 2cm aluminium centre dome .
We can generally tell what works by the long term trends of design eg Mdf is universally used as its very well damped and cheap , all very high end speakers hv big or multiple woofers for a very important reason. I built a horn woofer but was dissapointed with the result long long ago n never really like the sound of horns during the 70 s and early 80 s. So probably its my bias preference here.
Go listen to everything and play around with the settings to really test them. If we already have a preset idea and refuse to have an open mind then we will never progress. Lastly a lot of equipment seller use dirty tactics to make certain thing sound and looks good. Its rampant here and is the reason why a lot of overprice rubbish sell very well.
We can generally tell what works by the long term trends of design eg Mdf is universally used as its very well damped and cheap , all very high end speakers hv big or multiple woofers for a very important reason. I built a horn woofer but was dissapointed with the result long long ago n never really like the sound of horns during the 70 s and early 80 s. So probably its my bias preference here.
Go listen to everything and play around with the settings to really test them. If we already have a preset idea and refuse to have an open mind then we will never progress. Lastly a lot of equipment seller use dirty tactics to make certain thing sound and looks good. Its rampant here and is the reason why a lot of overprice rubbish sell very well.
I would like to reiterate to the OP the importance of addressing diffraction in a full range design. Using a full range driver does not give you a get out of jail free card. It responds to the same tricks as a multi way speaker.
-Round off the edges of the enclosure with a router roundover bit.
-Use felt on the baffle.
-Place the speakers in the room to mitigate baffle step.
No free lunch.
-Round off the edges of the enclosure with a router roundover bit.
-Use felt on the baffle.
-Place the speakers in the room to mitigate baffle step.
No free lunch.
Yeah I'll chill out
Hope some of my enthusiasm re-energizes some interest in these newer FR designs.
I have no test equipment other than my subjective listening.
btw do you guys know of other FR designs where dual or a trio of FR are housed in each cabinet.
Wondering if I am the 1st in this design.
I'm sure if Carlson's lab does testing he'll say **too much over lapping of certain fq's, sorry its a bomb..**
But thing is
I hear it as a winning team.