I never said it did. Please stop with the fallacies. The idea behind my post is that a stronger motor, with all else equal, would likely have less distortion.
Linear discussion isn't being discussed here except that EQ can fix that. Can you please stop with the constant fallacy? Flat response from a system isn't the discussion goal of this topic, except for the mention that EQ can adjust the over damped output of a high QTS system. EQ can't fix other distortion characteristics.
So what? Is this somehow a disqualifier? Why are you so hell bent on being argumentative and grasping at straws in this topic?
Yes, you did:
I pointed to a simple fact that stronger motors do not produce less distortion and explain what is the real source of non-linear distortion in loudspeakers:
No, your idea is wrong. Stronger motor will not produce less distortion, see above and read AES papers by W. Klippel - he is the authority on this.
Yes, EQ can fix any linear distortion, but it will increase wattage absorbed by the woofer - this very important consequence was completely forgotten by the OP and several other posters here (including you). Also, I pointed to the fact that here, and everywhere in any loudspeaker topic, we must not forget that, whatever we do, we have to end with a flat frequency response.
EQ can fix all linear distortion characteristics, including over-damped (low Qts) output of OP's loudspeaker system/idea.
Yes, it is a disqualifier - with OP's idea/system you have to by high-amperage (high-wattage) pro amplifier, to be able to use its inherent high-voltage capability. Good high-wattage pro amplifier is very expensive (LabGruppen, Crown, Powersoft, ...). Dirty-cheap ones (like t.amp 2400 MK-X, from Thomann, only 333 EUR) are dirty-cheap for a reason, starting with a non-switchable noisy fan...
No... No I did not. I'm the authority on what I said. If it's not clear, then it should be now. Now that I've confirmed, TWICE, that I didn't say that, you would be remiss carrying on.
Nope. I never made that binary claim.
How about you, instead of pointing vaguely at some papers, provide a specific quote to show evidence of this point you're making, which you took out of context.
My indirect evidence? Look at klippel results of PA speakers vs typical hifi speakers. You often see they have less compression, have much higher headroom, and output less distortion at SPL. What do they typically have in common? Stronger motors. Now, before you take this out of context and argue yet another fallacy, notice that I never once said strong motors WILL cause less distortion, I said likely, and it's usually because of the design philosophy and other factors related. So do us a favor and stop misrepresenting positions. It's understood this isn't a simple topic.
Well no kidding! What happens when you increase voltage? You get more wattage? Holy cow! I had no idea! However, with a stronger motor, it's likely that with EQ, you'll still have less wattage consumed.
No one is forgetting anything. We understand that. For some reason, you seem to think it's you duty to keep going on and on about it.
That was a sarcastic question of mine designed to catch you, and it worked.
So? There is nothing wrong with that.
By what definition of good and what definition of expensive? Yours definitions? Why do yours matter?
Dirty according to who? Cheap according to who? Noisy according to who? Yours? Why do yours matter in this thread?
If all of those things are disqualifies this discussion for you, you're free to exit this thread.
Now do you have anything constructive to comment?
No worries. I put him on ignore.You are reminded to keep the discourse civil, or you will find yourselves muted. Fair warning.
@Crashpc Aside from the 115 model by BC do we have any examples of large woofers that have a very strong motor but a suspension that isn't so stiff?
It was Sonce who came with name calling, stirs it all, and attacks anyone, mind you.
Noone ignores more power going to the driver after EQ. But the absolute power at desired SPL will still be lower due to the efficiency of the woofer.
The T.Amp is a PA amp, and cooling is preferred before noise. Yet it is not very loud in this class, QSC amps are notoriously louder. Having RMX 2450,1850HD and others, borrowed PL. Thomann is quieter. While tuning the amp, I tuned the cooling system too of course. It is now usable at home without issue. And switchable. At these SPLs though, the fan cannot be heard.
Anyways this is yet another gaslighting attempt, as it has nothing to do with the topic of efficiency.
@Velocipede: I am not aware of such driver, although RCF drivers are tad better in this regard. LF21N551 was. Just a liiiitle. Maybe the stiff suspension indeed serves for stability, avoiding rocking and such.
I would recommend locking or deleting this thread anyways. Please, Pano. Many thanks.
Noone ignores more power going to the driver after EQ. But the absolute power at desired SPL will still be lower due to the efficiency of the woofer.
The T.Amp is a PA amp, and cooling is preferred before noise. Yet it is not very loud in this class, QSC amps are notoriously louder. Having RMX 2450,1850HD and others, borrowed PL. Thomann is quieter. While tuning the amp, I tuned the cooling system too of course. It is now usable at home without issue. And switchable. At these SPLs though, the fan cannot be heard.
Anyways this is yet another gaslighting attempt, as it has nothing to do with the topic of efficiency.
@Velocipede: I am not aware of such driver, although RCF drivers are tad better in this regard. LF21N551 was. Just a liiiitle. Maybe the stiff suspension indeed serves for stability, avoiding rocking and such.
I would recommend locking or deleting this thread anyways. Please, Pano. Many thanks.
OK, sure:
This picture, explaining sources of THD in loudspeakers (from nonlinearities in Bl and Kms in the low-frequency range) is taken from:
https://www.klippel.de/know-how/measurements/nonlinear-distortion/harmonic-distortion.html
Apples and oranges.
How about Kilppel results of low Qts PA speaker vs medium Qts PA speaker? Or low Qts hi-fi speaker vs medium Qts hi-fi speaker?
Last edited:
Qts is measured using small signal. The pole and coil geometry will cause the outcome to be different between speakers in excursion. For some drivers, including SW line of the speakers B&C does, they do split winding coils having a void in the middle, to "artificially" broaden and flatten the BL curve.
With IPAL processing, they do not have to though, as they have at least two tools to negate it. I.E.: "expander" function in the processing, to partially reverse the BL curve, and pressure sensor, pushing the speaker to generate certain outcome, instead of getting what it just spitsout. This could help any speaker, mind you, but others do not do that. The alternative is servodrive ...
With IPAL processing, they do not have to though, as they have at least two tools to negate it. I.E.: "expander" function in the processing, to partially reverse the BL curve, and pressure sensor, pushing the speaker to generate certain outcome, instead of getting what it just spitsout. This could help any speaker, mind you, but others do not do that. The alternative is servodrive ...
I thought why can't we meet half way - Say hello to the new A26RE4-not-so-wimpy-anymore.
I added a magnet (repelling the original magnet) and it did some interesting things. Not only did it reduce the peaks somewhat, it made the midbass more snappy and a little more magical. Probably very close to the woofer in the Devore Orangutan O/96 now. Roxy Music - Avalon at 1:20 minutes in was amazing. Same thing happened to the W26FX002 when I added the maget to those.
Box is 75L with 28Hz tune, when not closed with foam.
Measured with Umik-1 from 50cm. The dip at 500 Hz can be ignored as it is only at this spot. The dip comes and goes in the room.
I managed to not move the microphone at all while changing drivers and magnets.
Colours are for different settings Open Port, Closed Port, With magnet, No Magnet. See the coloured text in the bottom of the graph.
Lets start with Seas A26RE4:
I added a magnet (repelling the original magnet) and it did some interesting things. Not only did it reduce the peaks somewhat, it made the midbass more snappy and a little more magical. Probably very close to the woofer in the Devore Orangutan O/96 now. Roxy Music - Avalon at 1:20 minutes in was amazing. Same thing happened to the W26FX002 when I added the maget to those.
Box is 75L with 28Hz tune, when not closed with foam.
Measured with Umik-1 from 50cm. The dip at 500 Hz can be ignored as it is only at this spot. The dip comes and goes in the room.
I managed to not move the microphone at all while changing drivers and magnets.
Colours are for different settings Open Port, Closed Port, With magnet, No Magnet. See the coloured text in the bottom of the graph.
Lets start with Seas A26RE4:
Last edited:
God forbid. You made it stronger and more efficient. Beware! No way this sounds good.
//sarcasm.
Great job. Attack on all fronts!
Positioning of the box, positioning of the listener, room treatment, EQ, driver choice/upgrade. That's how it's done.
//sarcasm.
Great job. Attack on all fronts!
Positioning of the box, positioning of the listener, room treatment, EQ, driver choice/upgrade. That's how it's done.
Same thing for the W26FX002. The difference was a lot more subtle, but I feel the drums are definately more snappy and a little more magical. 10% less tired and grey sounding, 10% more live sounding. Reminds me of the qualities of a good midbass horn.
Box is 75L with 28Hz tune, when not closed with foam.
Measured with Umik-1 from 50cm. The dip at 500 Hz can be ignored as it is only at this spot. The dip comes and goes in the room. I managed to not move
the microphone at all while changing drivers and magnets.
Colours are for different settings Open Port, Closed Port, With magnet, No Magnet. See the coloured text in the bottom of the graph.
Box is 75L with 28Hz tune, when not closed with foam.
Measured with Umik-1 from 50cm. The dip at 500 Hz can be ignored as it is only at this spot. The dip comes and goes in the room. I managed to not move
the microphone at all while changing drivers and magnets.
Colours are for different settings Open Port, Closed Port, With magnet, No Magnet. See the coloured text in the bottom of the graph.
Last edited:
A26RE4 VS W26FX002 DEATHMATCH:
BEST SETTINGS, IMHO: 75 liter box, closed, and with extra magnet (repelling the original magnet).
WINNER: SEAS W26FX002
Reason: Even if A26RE4 improved the most, its bass was still a bit flabby and unfocused. The W26FX002 went from behaved, on the verge of boring, to almost as intense as a PA woofer can sound. But the difference between W26FX with and without an extra magnet was very subtle, like the feeling of stronger kick drum attack. It could be just in my head, because I have not been able to measure it in these graphs.
BEST SETTINGS, IMHO: 75 liter box, closed, and with extra magnet (repelling the original magnet).
WINNER: SEAS W26FX002
Reason: Even if A26RE4 improved the most, its bass was still a bit flabby and unfocused. The W26FX002 went from behaved, on the verge of boring, to almost as intense as a PA woofer can sound. But the difference between W26FX with and without an extra magnet was very subtle, like the feeling of stronger kick drum attack. It could be just in my head, because I have not been able to measure it in these graphs.
Last edited:
Fantastic work, bravo!
Because of the room gain and sympathetic room modes, bass range is elevated, so the best loudspeaker alignment for both woofers is overdamped vented box, or better yet, overdamped closed box with Qtc<0.707. Ideally, the best one is, so called, "critically damped" closed box alignment with Qtc=0.5.
Seas A26RE4 (no additional magnet) in 75 liters closed box has Qtc=0.703, which is on the verge of very good. Additional magnet helps to lower Qtc a bit, so it is comfortably in the very good territory.
Seas W26FX002 (no additional magnet) in 75 liters closed box has Qtc=0.573, which is almost perfect Bessel alignment (Qtc=0.577) and very close to the "critically damped" alignment, even without additional magnet. But you already know that... 🙂
Your measurements and subjective assessments show progress toward better sound as you moved from vented box, to (more damped) vented with additional magnet, to overdamped closed box. From where that progress comes from? From flatter frequency response! This is another evidence for the utmost importance of flat frequency response - and I am preaching that all the time (in contrast to some others who don't pay attention on that, obsessed with the high efficiency only). This is very evident in the flatter frequency response of Seas W26FX002 (black) vs Seas A26RE4 (blue):
Although Seas W26FX002 (black graph) has lower efficiency/sensitivity bellow 200Hz, it sounds better than Seas A26RE4 (blue graph) because of... drum roll please... flatter frequency response! (God forbid! 😉)
Thanks! I aim to please.
Last word is not said for A26RE4. If your goal is to use a subwoofer below, the sweeter midrange of the untreated and light blue paper cone can be quite seductive. And no crossover point from 70Hz up to 1200Hz, or to 1500Hz, with a driver that actually is clean enough to do it, is pretty pretty great. No wonder the Devore Orangutan O/96 is so popular.
Ofc, Devore already thought about all this.
My bet is that a Lowther can do 200Hz and up (not too high) with way more detail. The modified Lowther cone made by Zolt in Serbia, is 3 gram bringing Mms to maybe 7 gram. And I want fine detail if I am to out it in a 180Hz horn.
Last word is not said for A26RE4. If your goal is to use a subwoofer below, the sweeter midrange of the untreated and light blue paper cone can be quite seductive. And no crossover point from 70Hz up to 1200Hz, or to 1500Hz, with a driver that actually is clean enough to do it, is pretty pretty great. No wonder the Devore Orangutan O/96 is so popular.
Ofc, Devore already thought about all this.
My bet is that a Lowther can do 200Hz and up (not too high) with way more detail. The modified Lowther cone made by Zolt in Serbia, is 3 gram bringing Mms to maybe 7 gram. And I want fine detail if I am to out it in a 180Hz horn.
Last edited:
I had to A/B test via iphone recording, because the difference is so subtle. I think without a bucking magnet, the bass is a bit more boomy.
With a bucking magnet the bass is faster, snappier, more like a whip.
With a bucking magnet the bass is faster, snappier, more like a whip.
Or just usual high power 100v Public adress amplifiers...I actually dismantled two quite professional 130 watts class AB PA amps a few years ago and now I feel guilty, but I still have the parts 🙂 An output transformer will do wonders below 500Hz.
Having heard an ultralow efficiency speaker like mm27 driven by up to 800 watts independent hypex class D amplifiers in the past I can only say that out of phase subwoofers work pretty well if your only aim is flat response, canceling completely nonlinearities due to spider or elastics used there , but I never really understood how is that the membranes can withstand such pressures cause they constantly create vacuum and pressure in a very small space so all the stress is on the moving parts which are the softests ones :
https://floatingpoint.audio/gb/monitoring-speakers/barefoot-microsub45
https://floatingpoint.audio/gb/monitoring-speakers/barefoot-microsub45
Nice try, but no cigar... although it certainly will smoke any 100V amplifier, if you connect it to a regular loudspeaker. 🙂
100V amplifiers have their limits on the minimal loudspeaker impedance - for 130W amp it is 76.9 ohms minimum across the whole audio bandwidth! Because regular woofers have minimum impedance in the order of 4 - 8 ohms at the tuning frequency of the vented box (which is in the working bandwidth!), it will damage the output transformer or output transistors (or both) of the 100V amplifier.
I thought you said smth about higher impedance woofers...If you were to make it itwould probably be in the 16...32 ohms range that was kind of normal in the 50's when magnets weren't too good.