What does FH3 mean?
The plan was to use the same woofer with the conventional speaker and the wideband speaker so that differences are kept to a minimum. Could use a different crossover if low order crossovers and/or low crossover frequencies are considered part of a good wideband driver approach. I am not getting much traction with wideband driver enthusiasts and the subjective design approach rather than engineering approach makes it very difficult for me to make decisions about what would be considered a good speaker by wideband speaker enthusiasts. I am becoming discouraged.
I think the key word there is "relatively". Lots of cheap drivers manufactured in China, make MA drivers seem expensive by comparison.
jeff
What Jeff says. MA has always sold their drivers for less than you would expect. Going for penetration instead of profits (on each individula unit).
The drivers are assembled in China, with parts primaroly from Taiwan, Japan, and China. I don’t know whether they have to go to Hong Kong before they get distribution in China.
What is an example price of an MA in China, we can then compare to the cost in NA and Europe.
dave
The drivers are assembled in China, with parts primaroly from Taiwan, Japan, and China. I don’t know whether they have to go to Hong Kong before they get distribution in China.
What is an example price of an MA in China, we can then compare to the cost in NA and Europe.
dave
Last edited:
Well…
i had one of the most “correct” measuring speaker from harman group: jbl lsr6332
what a piece of crap.
off axis is important, but its like the first watt, who cares about the smooth off axis response if the on axis response which is flat gives bad sound?
what does that say about supposed superiority of perfect FR when it doesnt translate to good sound?
who cares if you have 1000 watts if the first watts sucks
who cares for a flat last oftave if you had to put some coils and caps and resistors in the signal path?
those questions are rethorical, dont go thinking im confused lol
edit: off axis response being smooth is great, but it will never adress the fact that all early reflections are detrimental to SQ and MUST be absorbed.
once absorbed, the off axis response of any speaker is irrelevant, they have been absorbed by the early reflections panels.
ultimate sq needs a free reflective zone…and a FRZ render completely useless the off axis response of any speakers.
Last edited:
Same could be said about guitars, acoustic or electric. Top brands can make big mistakes too at least as some point in their line up.
Thanks, response looks good, just under $100/pr on taobao.
For comparison (per pair): MAOP7 $400, MAOP11 $550; SB dome $65, ring radiator $120 (occasionally $100), Satori ring radiator $280; local mid-size AMT 26x50 2khz 90dB $90; local fiberglass honeycomb similar to Mivoc 4" $25, 8" $60, 5.5" $40 (actual Eve Audio driver). My HeilEve 7L 1m TL cost $150 plus first-order-series XO using hoarded parts (else > rest); my LXmidi XO-less folded-concentric-TL cost $100. My favorite drum-paper fullrange 4.5" in piano-black-cab $60, 5.5" in fingered-oak $150 (notch filter $100), 8" flat-response whizzer drivers $100 -- variously labelled MKHIFI/Hifi-bird/Michael's/ISRED, these are extremely detailed and jaw-dropping dynamic.
Last edited:
I can’t talk to the other prices but the MA ar ein line, my MAOP 7 cost $400+$100 ship from Hong Kong, A5.3 are just a touch over $100/pr at Madisound.
dave
dave
I think we have a clear winner, million kudos Dave!
Though not necessarily "representive" -- for I just listened to lots of audioclips at MA's taobao store and checked their FR charts -- to my ears there is strong agreement/correlation (5-6khz sense of dynamics, 9khz sense of speed/pace, 6-8khz tonality, 8-11khz metallic/steely-ness), and only the Alpair 5.3 sounds pretty natural/realistic (perhaps a tad resonant) and is flat to 12khz.
I'd like to go for it, any difference gray vs copper-color cone? Truth be told, I have contemplated OP's thesis for quite some time (and ended up with rather rare vintage alnico bigbutts).
Last edited:
Just to confirm. The 3" driver is to be preferred to the 4" when crossed at 300 Hz to a woofer. Would a low order slope be preferred to a 4th order? What kind of baffle is preferred given the likely use of 1 x 12" or 2 x 8" woofers?
The A5.3 is Fo=95hz and only 86dB (84dB according to another product page, in 20x20 shallow waveguide). I was thinking 6.5" sub-capable woofer in a modest cab, the MA in the tweeter hole with its own tiny sealed compartment for high Fb.
And on the side, running fullrange MarKen/MLTL/TLonken for comparison hehe.
And on the side, running fullrange MarKen/MLTL/TLonken for comparison hehe.
Last edited:
The objective is to compare against conventional 3 way speaker/s. I have a 5" coaxial midrange+tweeter which I intend to soon replace with a midrange+tweeter with a narrower beamwidth due to currently having an acoustically awkward room. So with luck there will be 3 speakers to compare with the same bottom but different tops (if plans don't change which they usually do).
It is better all the way up (by a tiny bit) better dispersion, won’t play as loud. We have used both 1st and 4th order XOs. Narrow baffle and wide baffle.
dave
So low order slopes are not an inherent part of the wideband design approach as mentioned earlier in the thread? No particular preference for baffle width is helpful. That leaves the likely inability of a delicate 3" 5W driver crossed at 300 Hz being able to play loud enough to take part in a listening test at standard levels involving a few people in a medium sized room. Perhaps the level could be reduced to just below where the distortion becomes intrusive. A 4" 15W driver should be a significant improvement in this respect. As would raising the crossover frequency but I am fairly sure that would be going against the wideband approach? Don't know but leaning towards the 4" (or dropping the exercise).
Last edited by a moderator:
If you can achieve it yes, but the XO point is low enuff that phase deviations caused by 4th order are much less noticeable. We used both 1 & 4 on the big MTM (widish baffle), active is 1, passive is 4, the 1 order series did some things a bit better but overall did not work as well. With the smaller Tysen V2 (narrow baffle) 1 on both active and passive althou the passive ended up almost an octave higher. My favorite WAW has a fairly wide baffle, better cosmetics, and in the same league as the big MTM. Gotta put the MAOPs in these, drag them upstairs, get a PS for the XO Adason donated to the cause and get them playing again. Wide baffle supports a lower XO.
As are, for most people, the delay in the lowest notes in a horn or TL.
dave
As are, for most people, the delay in the lowest notes in a horn or TL.
dave
Your following my train of thoughts
i opted for the fe108e∑ paired with a 12” xo at 300hz first order series xo
Last edited by a moderator: