Hi everyone, I recently had a thread going around my struggles with the Radian 5210 and trying to use it to make a pair of high sensitivity speakers for use with a flea watt tube amp. As I posted in that thread, I've thrown in the towel on the Radians, and am now looking at the Beyma 12XA30ND, a 12" coax. After looking at the parameters, and modeling some enclosures in WinISD, it looks like a good candidate in an 80L box tuned to 45hz, more or less. I'm still playing with different alignments, but at least I'm in the ballpark now. I'm still considering another driver, the Faital 12HX240, but haven't modeled it yet. I have some questions. Oh boy, I'm nothing BUT questions.
First question is which alignment people usually use in enclosure modeling? I'm using SBB4 right now, but not sure what the differences are, even after reading the chapter on vented enclosures in the LDC four times. This stuff only really makes sense I think after you've designed a bunch of stuff and heard the differences, to me it's not very intuitive at this point. What is the relationship between choosing a modeling alignment and designing the crossover down the line?
Second question is really basic. Since all I've got right now is factory numbers to work with, I'll build an 80L box and do some measurements. I assume the best way to get accurate parameters is in a suitable enclosure, but is this true? I'm talking about both FR stuff in REW, and T/S parameters and impedance curves using my Dayton audio DATS device.
Thanks in advance!
Bryan
First question is which alignment people usually use in enclosure modeling? I'm using SBB4 right now, but not sure what the differences are, even after reading the chapter on vented enclosures in the LDC four times. This stuff only really makes sense I think after you've designed a bunch of stuff and heard the differences, to me it's not very intuitive at this point. What is the relationship between choosing a modeling alignment and designing the crossover down the line?
Second question is really basic. Since all I've got right now is factory numbers to work with, I'll build an 80L box and do some measurements. I assume the best way to get accurate parameters is in a suitable enclosure, but is this true? I'm talking about both FR stuff in REW, and T/S parameters and impedance curves using my Dayton audio DATS device.
Thanks in advance!
Bryan
Good luck!……once that cone gets pumping to the tuning frequency, the Doppler phasing of whatever is left of the high frequency response is gonna sound wonderful.……or in other words, add a wooded and high pass that coax to less than 1mm point to point excursion at your desired SPL.
Greets!
Yeah, the 5210 either needs a wide range 'helper' woofer or use a BLH.
Never have used the early charts as you only need a few at most, so have mostly only used the pioneer's Vb = Vas/1.44, Fb = Fs and later the Margolis/Small design routine written for an early HP handheld calculator where ~0.403 Qts' combined with the box volume [Vb] = driver compliance [Vas] and box tuning [Fb] = driver resonance [Fs], i.e. T/S max flat BR alignment, so the pioneer's ideal alignment (for their driver designs) became the cornerstone of where traditional bass reflex [BR] ends and contemporary [under-damped] speaker box design begins.
Vented net volume (Vb) (L) = 20*Vas*Qts'^3.3 (Ft^3 = (Vb)/~28.31685)
Vented box tuning (Fb) (Hz) = 0.42*Fs*Qts'^-0.96
F3 (Hz) = Fs*0.28*Qts'^-1.4
No, not really, your DATs machine will calculate all the basic box design specs; REW is primarily for in box measurements for fine tuning any vents and for XO design, fine tuning them in room, etc. (also has a T/S measurement program).
Note that the box only loads the driver to its upper mass corner (Fhm):
Fhm = 2*Fs/Qts'
Qts': 2*Fs/Fhm
(Qts'): (Qts) + any added series resistance (Rs)
Yeah, the 5210 either needs a wide range 'helper' woofer or use a BLH.
Never have used the early charts as you only need a few at most, so have mostly only used the pioneer's Vb = Vas/1.44, Fb = Fs and later the Margolis/Small design routine written for an early HP handheld calculator where ~0.403 Qts' combined with the box volume [Vb] = driver compliance [Vas] and box tuning [Fb] = driver resonance [Fs], i.e. T/S max flat BR alignment, so the pioneer's ideal alignment (for their driver designs) became the cornerstone of where traditional bass reflex [BR] ends and contemporary [under-damped] speaker box design begins.
Vented net volume (Vb) (L) = 20*Vas*Qts'^3.3 (Ft^3 = (Vb)/~28.31685)
Vented box tuning (Fb) (Hz) = 0.42*Fs*Qts'^-0.96
F3 (Hz) = Fs*0.28*Qts'^-1.4
No, not really, your DATs machine will calculate all the basic box design specs; REW is primarily for in box measurements for fine tuning any vents and for XO design, fine tuning them in room, etc. (also has a T/S measurement program).
Note that the box only loads the driver to its upper mass corner (Fhm):
Fhm = 2*Fs/Qts'
Qts': 2*Fs/Fhm
(Qts'): (Qts) + any added series resistance (Rs)
The beyma 12xa30nd has a +4 db -4 db kink from 1200 hz to 1800 hz, which is within their recommended LF passband of 1800 hz. IMHO this could be audible.
The faital 12HX240 response appears to be smoother with - 3db +2 db in that area.
Also smoother is the eminence KL3012CX-8 which has -2db @ 500 hz & +3db @1800 hz. The eminence is not sold with the CD. Eminence doesn't sell a 1-3/8" threaded CD to mate with this. The one I'm familiar with is Peavey DX14 which has a lowest crossover recommendation of 1500 hz.
The faital 12HX240 response appears to be smoother with - 3db +2 db in that area.
Also smoother is the eminence KL3012CX-8 which has -2db @ 500 hz & +3db @1800 hz. The eminence is not sold with the CD. Eminence doesn't sell a 1-3/8" threaded CD to mate with this. The one I'm familiar with is Peavey DX14 which has a lowest crossover recommendation of 1500 hz.
I don’t believe this is true.
The following eminence drivers should fit perfectly just as they do on the Beta-CX, depending on the application:
APT50
ASD1001 (as shown on the talk-bass forum)
PSD2002S
PSD2013S (as recommended by Eminence website for kappalite coax)
F110M
NSD2005S
Some relevant links in this threads-post:
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...is-is-as-good-as-it-gets.403850/#post-7468341
Last edited:
Sorry Brian…..what I really meant to say was that you’ll need/want a woofer to go with that coaxial or any coaxial if hifi performance is what you’re seeking. The ‘problem’ with a coax is that the cone is the waveguide/horn and as such must be at least stable and not move to achieve its goal. Without a woofer, the cone will be asked to move great distances to produce bass and as such, the high frequencies being emitted by the compression driver will be smeared…..you can equate it with what’s known as group delay.
The true purpose and beauty of coax drivers is for compact stage monitors where high SPL and directivity are desired and low frequency isn’t. You CAN certainly build an amazing hifi speaker using a coax,…..you just HAVE to treat the coax cone drive unit as a midrange where you need to cross it somewhere in the 250-500hz range to a woofer.
For general hifi purposes where high or extreme SPL is not desired, there’s IMO a better way to accomplish the same thing and that’s a mechanical mount co-ax arrangement using a standard 12” woofer and a dome tweeter mounted in front across the driver face…..what’s typically done in automotive speakers. In these use cases, controlled directivity is not a desired property and in all honesty, a 12” woofer doesn’t off much of that anyways unless the cone shape is curvilinear…..to my knowledge such a driver doesn’t exist. Such an arrangement for our purposes where we’re looking for the pinnacle of performance would require DSP though as you are going to have to time align the drivers with delay using the DSP. This CAN be accomplished with a passive network but it’s very complicated and requires a lot of components……DSP is so much easier.
Either way, if 12“ is your desired woofer size, the new Eminence driver is IMO the best available by a long shot with ruler flat response out to 3.5khz making a crossover very easy to a variety of tweeters and frequencies. The typical ‘rule’ of where to cross doesn’t really apply to this arrangement because of the point source co location of the drivers and how a cone operates with high frequency. Where typically one would say or suggest a 1khz crossover for a 12” woofer is the highest possible before beaming begins, not so with a coaxial arrangement. If you consider the true diam of the woofer which is to the inner edge of the surround and then subtract the diameter of the HF driver throat, you’ll have an actual diameter of around 9”. A radiating surface of this diameter allowing for point source operation can effectively be crossed over at 1.5khz no problem…..and with a home/hifi use situation very suitable for a 1” dome tweeter or Mylar diaphragm compression driver that doesn’t suffer from breakup modes like aluminum, titanium and hard plastics.
This is great stuff, thank you to everyone for the informative responses.
I'm still playing the field and plugging different drivers in to WinISD, which I've just begun to use. Vituix is just too much for me at this stage without at least a proper weekend crash course with a real teacher! It takes some time to get into the mindset to use some of these programs and their less than intuitive interfaces, but I'm learning as I go and enjoying WinISD very much even if it's not perfect.
fabricadetabaco you are absolutely right, there are multiple options for the Eminence drivers. They were the first drivers I looked at several lmonths ago when I decided to follow what Zu was doing and try to do something similar. I'll have a close look at the Eminence stuff, I'd kinda written them off as making stamped frame guitar drivers but it's apparent they've stepped up their game and maybe I'll find something there. Thanks for the additional info mayhem.
I understand what you say about the use case for pretty much all of these coax drivers, but am finding there have been a lot of successful designs that seem to use them with a good alignment and achieve modestly good bass response, 60hz or lower, while still achieving high sensitivity, coherent output. I have a REL sub that integrates beautifully in my current system, absolutely disappears, and am seriously considering a twin, so while I'd love to have mains that hit at 35, it's not essential. I'm sticking with the coax as it's something I've always wanted to do and have been a big fan for a long time. Not so worried about the modulation issues caused by the moving woofer, it's not as much of a concern when the CD is deep inside a straight-flared aluminum cone and the driver excursion in reality is less than 2mm for some of them at modest listening levels. I don't see how moving the tweeter forward really changes much, and the time alignment could be a real bugger if I understand correctly.
So tonight when I return from work, I'll be crunching more numbers and zeroing in on some other options. Right now the Faital 12HX240 is looking pretty good, but I'm going to compare it to the Eminence and also to the Radian 12", forget the model number. Radian's CDs are supposed to be very good. I have only been paying attention to the <200Hz responses so far, I'll start looking at the rest of the response curve, thanks for the heads up Indianajo.
GM - this is great info both for the historical context, but to open my mind to broader ways to approach this kind of design, I especially appreciate the ability to adjust Q like that, could be really handy with these coaxes and their limitations.
I'm still playing the field and plugging different drivers in to WinISD, which I've just begun to use. Vituix is just too much for me at this stage without at least a proper weekend crash course with a real teacher! It takes some time to get into the mindset to use some of these programs and their less than intuitive interfaces, but I'm learning as I go and enjoying WinISD very much even if it's not perfect.
fabricadetabaco you are absolutely right, there are multiple options for the Eminence drivers. They were the first drivers I looked at several lmonths ago when I decided to follow what Zu was doing and try to do something similar. I'll have a close look at the Eminence stuff, I'd kinda written them off as making stamped frame guitar drivers but it's apparent they've stepped up their game and maybe I'll find something there. Thanks for the additional info mayhem.
I understand what you say about the use case for pretty much all of these coax drivers, but am finding there have been a lot of successful designs that seem to use them with a good alignment and achieve modestly good bass response, 60hz or lower, while still achieving high sensitivity, coherent output. I have a REL sub that integrates beautifully in my current system, absolutely disappears, and am seriously considering a twin, so while I'd love to have mains that hit at 35, it's not essential. I'm sticking with the coax as it's something I've always wanted to do and have been a big fan for a long time. Not so worried about the modulation issues caused by the moving woofer, it's not as much of a concern when the CD is deep inside a straight-flared aluminum cone and the driver excursion in reality is less than 2mm for some of them at modest listening levels. I don't see how moving the tweeter forward really changes much, and the time alignment could be a real bugger if I understand correctly.
So tonight when I return from work, I'll be crunching more numbers and zeroing in on some other options. Right now the Faital 12HX240 is looking pretty good, but I'm going to compare it to the Eminence and also to the Radian 12", forget the model number. Radian's CDs are supposed to be very good. I have only been paying attention to the <200Hz responses so far, I'll start looking at the rest of the response curve, thanks for the heads up Indianajo.
I think using a sub is a good idea but most large coax will work just fine at home without a sub. See tannoy speakers. The problems mentioned above is not something I’ve experienced yet. The cones hardly move at all before my ears bleed long before peak power. Using PA drivers is good for the sensitivity and the ability to pair with tube amps and what not. Lots of fun. I’ve been playing around with 12” coax myself and while I don’t get the deepest or most powerful bass I do get the punch and dynamics of a club system which to me is the most impressive factor of a simple 2-way coax at home. I have now some experience with some of the Eminence CDs mentioned above used in the BetaCX bass. The kappalite will outperform it any day but beware that it is being discontinued as Eminence is bought by B&C (see all the threads linked above).
Some of my lofi projects, it’s a long story of various builds and edits with both coax and also traditional 3-way builds and mods. Maybe you find some relevance to your quest. I think the Kappalite+ASD1001 would be a good match competing with the Celestion coax.
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...-coaxial-upgrade-modification-options.359407/
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...lestion-ftx1225-ongoing-advice-needed.377105/
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...ome-advice-needed-on-midrange-options.382116/
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/more-edits-to-my-retro-12-heresy-coaxial-quest.399096/
Some of my lofi projects, it’s a long story of various builds and edits with both coax and also traditional 3-way builds and mods. Maybe you find some relevance to your quest. I think the Kappalite+ASD1001 would be a good match competing with the Celestion coax.
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...-coaxial-upgrade-modification-options.359407/
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...lestion-ftx1225-ongoing-advice-needed.377105/
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...ome-advice-needed-on-midrange-options.382116/
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/more-edits-to-my-retro-12-heresy-coaxial-quest.399096/
In a 20 lt closed box this driver will have an fb around 100 Hz with a Qtc around 0.71 (good candidate for an acoustic LR24 @ 100 Hz) . SPL would be around 105 dB/1m for an excursion around 1mm.
There is a commercial product available that uses it in a 2.5 way configuration with an auxiliary 12" woofer. Both drivers in reflex enclosures. And our forum member KSTR did also use it.
Regards
Charles
There is a commercial product available that uses it in a 2.5 way configuration with an auxiliary 12" woofer. Both drivers in reflex enclosures. And our forum member KSTR did also use it.
Regards
Charles
The Beyma models pretty well in WinISD at 80-100L, 45Hz, with a small sag up to 150 (-2db). The Faital 12HX240 looks very similar but goes a bit deeper and is flatter and based just on this snapshot looks like the better driver. Tonight I'm checking out the Faital and the Kappalite. Honestly I've never considered Eminence drivers because they have never seemed to be held in high regard compared to some of the pricier drivers, but I'd love to be corrected on that if it's not true. Zu audio seems to be pretty happy with Eminence, using stock CDs but definitely not stock woofers. I guess since I'm in the comparison stage I should ask if anyone else has experience with any of these 12" coaxes, because I'll probably order Monday.
Eminence have lots of great drivers in general. Their beta coaxials have been popular because they are cheap and perform quite well, plus the fact that you can change the HF makes it very fun to play around. I’ve never been fully satisfied with the betas so I tried a Celetion 12” FTX1225 (as in one of the threads above) which seems more thought through and performs very well to my ears even though the graphs looks tricky. I have not tested more expensive stuff, I play around with low-mid price Eminence, Fane, Celestion and get decent results. With DSP I’m sure I could have great success. That’s for later. BMS, B&C and even Monacor seems to have some cool stuff too but supply here is difficult.
OK, as threatened, er promised, I threw a few more drivers into WinLSD tonight and played around with the alignments to a similar pattern, one that balanced the compromises most to my liking. The boxes fall in the range between 75-100L, and almost all of them are at -1db before they start to roll off. To achieve a flat response, the compromise is a much higher rolloff point, usually around 70-90 hz. But all but one are within -2db of flat at their lowest points, and the best at -1.5, and approximately -1db at the rolloff point, which hovers around 50Hz for all but the Beyma, which shows the least pleasing curve of all of them, but is also 2-4db more sensitive. If ever there was a lesson in 'no free lunch' I'm looking at it.
Right now the three I'm focusing on are:
1. Radian 5312 tuned 77L/46Hz
2. Faital 12HX240, tuned 98L/46Hz
3. Eminence KappaLite KL3012CX-8
The reasons for these three is they all go the deepest and are all in the 95.5-97db sensitivity range. the Faital being 97. These three are shown in the second photo, and the whole bunch in the first, including my original interest, the Beyma12XA30ND, which really sags below all the rest by 1.5db for a long period and just looks like the runt of the litter in comparison, but I'm bearing in mind this is a very granular scale and the perceived differences may not be that noticeable. I do like the 98db sensitivity of this driver, and it comes very strongly recommended by Al at US Speaker, but the best I can get from it is shown in the third photo, 15-20Hz higher rolloff and 10-13Hz higher rolloff point.
At this point the next step for me is to hear feedback about these drivers if anyone has any experience with them. And I have one question about the tunings I've done - Is it OK to have that bit of raised knee at rolloff, or should I flatten it out with a smaller box/lower tuning?
APOLOGIES - the photos won't load because my new phone is apparently shooting at way too high resolution so I will try to post them tomorrow. New iphone 15 apparently shoots at 6000MP, thanks Apple.
Right now the three I'm focusing on are:
1. Radian 5312 tuned 77L/46Hz
2. Faital 12HX240, tuned 98L/46Hz
3. Eminence KappaLite KL3012CX-8
The reasons for these three is they all go the deepest and are all in the 95.5-97db sensitivity range. the Faital being 97. These three are shown in the second photo, and the whole bunch in the first, including my original interest, the Beyma12XA30ND, which really sags below all the rest by 1.5db for a long period and just looks like the runt of the litter in comparison, but I'm bearing in mind this is a very granular scale and the perceived differences may not be that noticeable. I do like the 98db sensitivity of this driver, and it comes very strongly recommended by Al at US Speaker, but the best I can get from it is shown in the third photo, 15-20Hz higher rolloff and 10-13Hz higher rolloff point.
At this point the next step for me is to hear feedback about these drivers if anyone has any experience with them. And I have one question about the tunings I've done - Is it OK to have that bit of raised knee at rolloff, or should I flatten it out with a smaller box/lower tuning?
APOLOGIES - the photos won't load because my new phone is apparently shooting at way too high resolution so I will try to post them tomorrow. New iphone 15 apparently shoots at 6000MP, thanks Apple.
+/- 3dB is considered 'flat' to us humans in general and the lower you go the greater the variance, so don't 'sweat' the small stuff, though if added/subtracted to other resonances can conceivably sum to audible.
Historically one 'critically' damped the vent.
Math for flattest response:
Vented net volume (Vb) (L) = 20*Vas*Qts'^3.3 (Ft^3 = (Vb)/~28.31685)
Vented box tuning (Fb) (Hz) = 0.42*Fs*Qts'^-0.96
F3 (Hz) = Fs*0.28*Qts'^-1.4
(Qts'): (Qts) + any added series resistance (Rs)
(Qts'): (Qts) + any added series resistance (Rs): http://www.mh-audio.nl/Calculators/newqts.html
Historically one 'critically' damped the vent.
Math for flattest response:
Vented net volume (Vb) (L) = 20*Vas*Qts'^3.3 (Ft^3 = (Vb)/~28.31685)
Vented box tuning (Fb) (Hz) = 0.42*Fs*Qts'^-0.96
F3 (Hz) = Fs*0.28*Qts'^-1.4
(Qts'): (Qts) + any added series resistance (Rs)
(Qts'): (Qts) + any added series resistance (Rs): http://www.mh-audio.nl/Calculators/newqts.html
Attachments
Wow thanks for that GM, I'll scribble some of those maths tomorrow. I'll be able to post screen shots tomorrow to show examples of ruler flat vs minus 1.5-2db, it's quite a huge difference in F3 and Fo if that's a thing, the rolloff point. like 20 hz lower for the latter, and 30-50% bigger boxes, which I don't mind up to 100L.
Just for curiosity it would cool if you could plot the Celestion FTX1225 in there too.
https://celestion.com/product/ftx1225/
Sd
530.93cm2 / 82.29in2
Fs
47.3Hz
Mms
53.501g / 1.89oz
Qms
4.214
Qes
0.437
Qts
0.396
Re
5.39Ω
Vas
84.59I / 2.99ft3
BI
14.00Tm
Cms
0.212mm/N
Rms
3.77kg/s
Le (at 1kHz)
3.36mH
Xmax
6mm / 0.24in
https://celestion.com/product/ftx1225/
Sd
530.93cm2 / 82.29in2
Fs
47.3Hz
Mms
53.501g / 1.89oz
Qms
4.214
Qes
0.437
Qts
0.396
Re
5.39Ω
Vas
84.59I / 2.99ft3
BI
14.00Tm
Cms
0.212mm/N
Rms
3.77kg/s
Le (at 1kHz)
3.36mH
Xmax
6mm / 0.24in
Last edited:
Well seems like you‘re taking the single driver solution so the only other thing to add here is to remind you that your low frequency simulations are for free space…..your room and placement will have a profound effect on what happens from 125hz on down. Room gain can be as much as 12db per octave depending on dimensions but there’s just too many variables for there to be a truly effective simulator to predict.
My dual 15 dipole subs in my 13ft by 20ft control room have a simulated f3 of 45hz and yet at the midfield listening position of clients, we’re all flat to 25hz. which is pretty much on target with the 1/2 wavelength of the 20ft long dimension for the peak gain so roughly 3-4 db gain at 50hz and so on. My room is treated with traps so I have 50-100hz under control but below that, it’s really difficult and expensive to manage so the big dipole subs are the only solution.
DIY affords you ONE true advantage in that you can design for your specific use which includes your listening preferences, 3D space and budget……..commercial systems can’t match that. I would strongly suggest before you go any further on predicted f3 alignments to get a sense of how your room is going to behave or you’ll wind up chasing your tail after the build. And worse, this is a two way so you WILL NOT have the luxury of the flexibility of placement to control bass and midbass response……not only can you wind up with a heavy bloated and modal low end, but a weak mid bass where there’s little to no percussive slam.
My dual 15 dipole subs in my 13ft by 20ft control room have a simulated f3 of 45hz and yet at the midfield listening position of clients, we’re all flat to 25hz. which is pretty much on target with the 1/2 wavelength of the 20ft long dimension for the peak gain so roughly 3-4 db gain at 50hz and so on. My room is treated with traps so I have 50-100hz under control but below that, it’s really difficult and expensive to manage so the big dipole subs are the only solution.
DIY affords you ONE true advantage in that you can design for your specific use which includes your listening preferences, 3D space and budget……..commercial systems can’t match that. I would strongly suggest before you go any further on predicted f3 alignments to get a sense of how your room is going to behave or you’ll wind up chasing your tail after the build. And worse, this is a two way so you WILL NOT have the luxury of the flexibility of placement to control bass and midbass response……not only can you wind up with a heavy bloated and modal low end, but a weak mid bass where there’s little to no percussive slam.
The box tuning doesn't really affect the crossover, only the low end. I would go with maximally flat or extended shelf.
I would suggest using the manufacturers T/S to model the enclosure you.dont really need to measure them yourself unless you have a reason not to trust them.
I would suggest using the manufacturers T/S to model the enclosure you.dont really need to measure them yourself unless you have a reason not to trust them.
... Unless you're only planning on hitting them with a few watts. Cone excursion will still be pretty minimal.
At higher SPLs, the HF problems can become audible. FWIW, though, having pushed a pair of Faital 10HX230 all the way to Xmax when running full-range in a PA situation, it's not a huge problem. If you compare it to a conventional 2-way, it does some things better and other things worse.
Chris
Well thanks for the inputs guys. Mayhem - just want to respond to your insightful info. Right now I'm using the graphs mostly to compare one driver to the next and to begin to internalize "what happens if I do this?", and get a bit more intuitive. My limited experience. combined with in-room measurements, doesn't warn me off following this way of working. I'm also comparing the alignments in WinISD to what I've generally seen and read people have ended up with, and it seems to be in the heighborhood. So lacking the depth of expertise, I just have to keep going and learn from my mistakes. For me it's better to keep moving and keep it playful at this point! I'm going to try again to post some comparison graphs now that I'm on a PC and not my Mac, I hope it works. In the second shot you'll see a cluster of 3 drivers - Faital 12HX240, Radian 5312, and Eminence KappaLiteKL3012CX-08. It surprised me to see how close I could get them all with very similar tunings and box sizes, although the Radian is 75L, the other 2 closer to 100. All tuned 45Hz+/-. The fourth driver in bold black is the Beyma12XA30ND, my original choice.
The first screen shot shows the same drivers with a much flatter alignment, higher tunings and smaller enclosures. I'm curious which way people would go? I love the looks of those flat responses, but it's giving up a LOT of extension. Bear in mind the graph is very granular so in the first everything is within 2db of flat. Is this acceptable? Here goes:
The first screen shot shows the same drivers with a much flatter alignment, higher tunings and smaller enclosures. I'm curious which way people would go? I love the looks of those flat responses, but it's giving up a LOT of extension. Bear in mind the graph is very granular so in the first everything is within 2db of flat. Is this acceptable? Here goes: