Good morning.
The SB Acoustics SB12 MNRX2-25 seems interesting. On paper its nearly identical to my old favorite, the SS 8640. Maybe it's made by the same people? Anyone heard it? Would the MW13 be worth the extra cost?
I plan to build a vintage-inspired 3-way standmount with a single Satori MW19, a SB12M and an OWI, crossed around 600Hz / 3500Hz.
The SB12 doesn't have Symmetric Drive, like the 8640 and the MW13, but how important is that when you nearly move the voicecoil and only use it for 2,5 octaves?
We bath in High-End 6-7" midwoofers and 1" tweeters. Good 4-5" midranges and ¾" tweeters are harder to spot ….
The SB Acoustics SB12 MNRX2-25 seems interesting. On paper its nearly identical to my old favorite, the SS 8640. Maybe it's made by the same people? Anyone heard it? Would the MW13 be worth the extra cost?
I plan to build a vintage-inspired 3-way standmount with a single Satori MW19, a SB12M and an OWI, crossed around 600Hz / 3500Hz.
The SB12 doesn't have Symmetric Drive, like the 8640 and the MW13, but how important is that when you nearly move the voicecoil and only use it for 2,5 octaves?
We bath in High-End 6-7" midwoofers and 1" tweeters. Good 4-5" midranges and ¾" tweeters are harder to spot ….
Attachments
4″ SB12NRXF25-4 / Norex – Sbacoustics
I have a pair of these with the foam surround (supposed to be better for midrange than rubber surround). They do a good job. If you want more resolution and articulation, you could consider a 3 or 4 inch fullrange. I have had better luck with FR; at least I prefer the sound quality better.
I think there are some designs out there already that use the SB12 you are considering; I'm thinking maybe Troels??? (possibly others as well). [Just do some searching to confirm]. This may not be very helpful for you but it is what came to me without benefit of more morning coffee wake up!
I have a pair of these with the foam surround (supposed to be better for midrange than rubber surround). They do a good job. If you want more resolution and articulation, you could consider a 3 or 4 inch fullrange. I have had better luck with FR; at least I prefer the sound quality better.
I think there are some designs out there already that use the SB12 you are considering; I'm thinking maybe Troels??? (possibly others as well). [Just do some searching to confirm]. This may not be very helpful for you but it is what came to me without benefit of more morning coffee wake up!
I'm with you on both the foam surround and the 3-4" fullrange alternative. I've built three smaller 3-way standmounts in the past, one pair with the SS 10F, one with the old Seas MCA11 (paper cone & foam surround) and one with the SS 8640, and I preferred the 8640, it managed to combine the details and 3D-insight from the 10F with the warmth and "soft, relaxed comfort" from the MCA11. I found the 10F to be a little thin/weak sounding below 1000Hz, but that might be due to the impementation. I'm no expert.
I too like a lot of detail; what I sometimes call micro-detail. A driver that goes way into the mix and can really sort out the finest nuance. The trick of course is that you still want it to sound like real music and not be OVER analytical; this is a delicate balance and not that many drivers can pull this off; especially those in the lower and mid price ranges. I am very found of the Mark Audio Pluvia 7 PHD (paper cone). Many people don't seem to like these because of the top end roll off. I use them as broad band mids; they do what I like best; detail and musical both! The price is a steal for the performance in my opinion.
I'm using this driver (SB12MNRX2-25-4), there is a bump in the FR that might be caused by diffraction of the surround. It shows in my on baffle measurement and raw FRDs. Beyond that I like the sound and can't hear the wiggle between 1k and 2k. Attached is my measurement, I can't find the raw driver measurement, but the wiggle was there, you can also see it on the spec sheet.
Attachments
Thank you for the measurements, mtidge. I agree that the dip in the FR might be due to some cone/surround energy storage problem, but Satori and Audio Technology drivers have similar dips, and I haven't heard anyone complain about their midrange performance. I guess the designers at SB Acoustics could have damped the dip away if they wanted, maybe they found out that low Rms sounds better than flat FR, which is ok by me.
My reason for posting is that I can't buy the brilliant 8640, and the SB12M seems like a close alternative - in theory. My aim is to achieve the detail and 3D-magic of the 10F combined with the "calmness" and organic fullness you get with a bigger midrange, maybe like the Satori MR13.
About micro-details, the most impressive midrange I've ever heard came from an Audax HM130Z0 aerogel midrange driver laying on its back on the floor, with no cabinet and only one driver playing, and it sounded shockingly 3D all by itself. Clean resolution in spades. Unfortnunatly the HM13 was impossible to implement, I wasnt' able to design a well sounding cabinet to it, nor did I manage to filter it. But that driver has potensial. If the SB12M has some of that magic, and is easier to implement, then I'm on it.
My reason for posting is that I can't buy the brilliant 8640, and the SB12M seems like a close alternative - in theory. My aim is to achieve the detail and 3D-magic of the 10F combined with the "calmness" and organic fullness you get with a bigger midrange, maybe like the Satori MR13.
About micro-details, the most impressive midrange I've ever heard came from an Audax HM130Z0 aerogel midrange driver laying on its back on the floor, with no cabinet and only one driver playing, and it sounded shockingly 3D all by itself. Clean resolution in spades. Unfortnunatly the HM13 was impossible to implement, I wasnt' able to design a well sounding cabinet to it, nor did I manage to filter it. But that driver has potensial. If the SB12M has some of that magic, and is easier to implement, then I'm on it.
I also had a pair of those Audax; I agree, they had some real magic to them. I tried in a box but with an open back filled with foam; it worked well. It's a shame the Audax brand is barely represented in the US and Canada other than a few tweeters. I thought the HDA (Aerogel) cone was very good technology.
I have some Monacor SPH135KEP 5 1/4 inch coming today. They have a very wide band width. Right now, my mids are the MA Pluvia 7PHD in parallel with Satori MR16. This gives me a very accurate wide band midrange. The MR16 mids obviously do better with the lower mids while the P7P obviously do better with the higher mids. Eventually, I want to get a pair of the new Satori TexTreme MR13TX mids. They haven't even been released yet. The Monacors should do nicely; I'm very curious how they will compare to my P7P and MR16, as separates and together.
I ordered these from France and they shipped less than 4 days ago; that's faster than I get some drivers from suppliers 2 and 3 states away from me! These were on sale so I just went for it; even with shipping, the price was a very good deal.
Long story but maybe these would fill your need?
They are mid woofers and not mid range but they get great reviews; can go quite low and quite high both and are said to be very musical...we'll soon find out...fingers crossed!
I ordered these from France and they shipped less than 4 days ago; that's faster than I get some drivers from suppliers 2 and 3 states away from me! These were on sale so I just went for it; even with shipping, the price was a very good deal.
Long story but maybe these would fill your need?
They are mid woofers and not mid range but they get great reviews; can go quite low and quite high both and are said to be very musical...we'll soon find out...fingers crossed!
I have one of the Monacors going now. It is a 6.5 L plastic food storage container. It sounds really good, not as clean or accurate as either the Satori MR16 or MA P7P but it's not broken in yet either. The label on the magnet says 50 WRMS, 80 W max. Full range right now it is pretty impressive, certainly goes deep enough in the bass and high enough in the treble. I have a 100 uF Solen cap I can strap in or out of the circuit quickly. If we assume 8 Ohms, this give us a HP at -3 dB right at 200 Hz. The enclosure is good enough for test purposes; I have some felt on order to line the inside so that should help.
I would say these are BETTER sounding than the SB12 model that I have; more definition and resolution. By comparison, my SB12s are rather dull and boring. Is there a huge difference here? Hard to say at this point; I can certainly do an A/B at some time in the near future though if that helps...more later...
This may or may not help your cause; I picked up on this thread for multiple reasons
I would say these are BETTER sounding than the SB12 model that I have; more definition and resolution. By comparison, my SB12s are rather dull and boring. Is there a huge difference here? Hard to say at this point; I can certainly do an A/B at some time in the near future though if that helps...more later...
This may or may not help your cause; I picked up on this thread for multiple reasons
realy strange what you write...i have a disagreement against you: the sb12 are another world vs monacor
monacor are good bur realy far by sb12!
you don't done accurate tests.
I have just gotten them, no testing yet, literally less than an hour on them. I have the SBNRXF25-4 and am doing this by memory so far. Compared to what I remember; these Monacor SPH135KEP are better overall. I can do an A/B at some later point. Which specific SB12 are you referring to? Which specific Monacor are you referring to?
I now have them side by side; both running full range. The SB12 is more distorted but has more high frequency energy than the Monacor. I realize I would need to do a proper test and have as many things equal such as HP, LP, etc. I think the Monacor has a better tonal balance overall. Again, just a quick and dirty A/B here; music only (acoustic jazz; a recording I am very familiar with).
realy fun....the sb12 that distort...i realy think there are some problems in the tests you do 😕
are the 13 M series just 10F on a different (larger) face plate???
13M/8636 or 13M/8640 Replacement Midrange Scan-speak
Seems like a lot of extra money for a 10F just to fit a bigger existing hole to me. Or am I missing something here?
13M/8636 or 13M/8640 Replacement Midrange Scan-speak
Seems like a lot of extra money for a 10F just to fit a bigger existing hole to me. Or am I missing something here?
I am listening to acoustic jazz I am very familiar with, SB12 on one channel, SPH135KEP on the other channel. I am just listening in mono, 1st SB, then Monacor, back and forth. The SB is more distorted and there is nothing wrong with what I am doing here. Granted, these are being run full range without and HP or LP filters. There is nothing wrong with the SB, it just distorts much earlier. I am a retired Engineer, Technician and Musician and have been doing this 50+ years.
Again, I am not measuring anything here at all; I don't need to for this simple comparison. So; again, to do a proper test, we would need to choose a reasonable band pass as they might be used in the intended system then make accurate measurements.
I am not driving either of these very hard; well within the power intended.
Again, I am not measuring anything here at all; I don't need to for this simple comparison. So; again, to do a proper test, we would need to choose a reasonable band pass as they might be used in the intended system then make accurate measurements.
I am not driving either of these very hard; well within the power intended.
your test is clearly nonsense
neither monacor nor sb are full range so they need filter, but different
there are lot of engineers, this does not scare me
Last edited:
eureka!!!
so in this situation you will verify that the sb will be more better than monacor.
seeing is believing
I think you guys are missing the point here. I am doing a simple comparison, side by side. I am trying to break in the Monacor. I most likely will stick with my original format of the Satori MR16 in parallel with the MA P7P; they are both MUCH more accurate and musical than either the SB12 or Monacor. By themselves they do very well; combined; I find them very hard to beat.
The Monacor SPH135KEP and SB12NRXF25-4 are both listed as mid-woofers. Curiously, the same exact SB12 is ALSO listed as a mid-range.
I bought the Monacors because they were on sale at a good price and I was always curious. Eventually, I want to try the Satori TexTreme MR13TX (for my main system).
I stand by my comments already; I prefer the sound of the Monacor over the SB12. I am not going to use either one of them in my main system; they are for auxiliary use and possible systems I might design for friends, family, etc.
So, if someone is serious about a real test here, go for it. I'm not going to do that for myself.
Since the Monacor can go lower; it would probably match well with a 10 or 12 inch in a 3-way. Since the SB12 seems to have more treble; it would probably match better with a 6, 7, 8 or 9 inch in a 3-way.
CHEERS!
Either way, a proper crossover design would obviously be necessary.
The Monacor SPH135KEP and SB12NRXF25-4 are both listed as mid-woofers. Curiously, the same exact SB12 is ALSO listed as a mid-range.
I bought the Monacors because they were on sale at a good price and I was always curious. Eventually, I want to try the Satori TexTreme MR13TX (for my main system).
I stand by my comments already; I prefer the sound of the Monacor over the SB12. I am not going to use either one of them in my main system; they are for auxiliary use and possible systems I might design for friends, family, etc.
So, if someone is serious about a real test here, go for it. I'm not going to do that for myself.
Since the Monacor can go lower; it would probably match well with a 10 or 12 inch in a 3-way. Since the SB12 seems to have more treble; it would probably match better with a 6, 7, 8 or 9 inch in a 3-way.
CHEERS!
Either way, a proper crossover design would obviously be necessary.