Ported 15L seems like a good option for deeper bass and more power handling at the expense of higher group delay. Not much else you can do if you want (passive) deeper bass besides maybe a tapered TL with critical damping.
Tl sounds good, but he want's a monitor.
A properly designed BR can sound really nice too. And nice group delay gets all destroyed by the xo and room anyways, not that I'm dismissing the merits of low group delay and sealed bass quality.
satx/xrk,
I am trying to finalize the box design in unibox. First of all, I am looking at vented box only. I am using "design by Vb, Fb, Q" option in unibox.
I entered driver parameters from Zaph's site as they may be better than ones from spec sheet. I entered the box volume as 15 litres and tuning frequency as 44Hz and asked it to optimize. Port diameter was entered as 5cm. It gave port length as 17.3cm. I noticed larger the port diameter, longer the length became. Does this make sense?
Am I going in right direction? Gurus please advise.
I am trying to finalize the box design in unibox. First of all, I am looking at vented box only. I am using "design by Vb, Fb, Q" option in unibox.
I entered driver parameters from Zaph's site as they may be better than ones from spec sheet. I entered the box volume as 15 litres and tuning frequency as 44Hz and asked it to optimize. Port diameter was entered as 5cm. It gave port length as 17.3cm. I noticed larger the port diameter, longer the length became. Does this make sense?
Am I going in right direction? Gurus please advise.
Yes, larger the port, the longer it will need to be fro the same tuning. The larger the box, the shorter the port will be assuming the same diameter and tuning.
I never use the optimizer really, but I suppose it works. Are you using a passive xo? Did you enter the rough values including R of the inductor?
You can click on the tab at the bottom for vented and see the port airspeed, excursion etc. you'll need to increase your input voltage (under where you enter T/S) to see power handling and if your port is sized correctly.
Yes. If you double the diameter, you need to double the length. Small diameter (but too small equates to sealed box) is not preferred because there will be choking noise from the air. Bigger diameter requires longer port so that at some point it will be too close to the back panel.
I think it may be cross sectional area that scales with length of vent. So double the dia is 4x the length?
Using a box modeling program is very helpful here and most will get you in the ballpark. Sometimes it takes manual fine tuning of port length to taste (or measurement).
Here is my latest amp I am testing on this 10F/RS225 speaker: my dead bug Pass ACA class A amp. Running with a 19.5v laptop SMPS (22mV ripple) and sounds fine. Max volume is a bit limited (5w amp) but what you have sounds very nice. The bass is surprisingly deep as the amp impedance is very low (dual IRFP240 MOSFET's in a SE class A mode).
If you have a pair of IRFP240's, a 2SK170, and XTX450 on hand plus a handful of odds from your parts bin, you can make one in an hour no PCB needed.
Nice sounding amp.
Using a box modeling program is very helpful here and most will get you in the ballpark. Sometimes it takes manual fine tuning of port length to taste (or measurement).
Here is my latest amp I am testing on this 10F/RS225 speaker: my dead bug Pass ACA class A amp. Running with a 19.5v laptop SMPS (22mV ripple) and sounds fine. Max volume is a bit limited (5w amp) but what you have sounds very nice. The bass is surprisingly deep as the amp impedance is very low (dual IRFP240 MOSFET's in a SE class A mode).
If you have a pair of IRFP240's, a 2SK170, and XTX450 on hand plus a handful of odds from your parts bin, you can make one in an hour no PCB needed.
Nice sounding amp.
Virtual Auditioning of Amps with 10F/RS225 FAST
This speaker is being used as the reference speaker for a virtual auditioning of several nice class AB solid state amps that I have built.
Thread is here:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/solid-state/295286-virtual-audition-very-simple-quasi-mosfet-amp.html
Amps tested:
Similar protocols were used here as for the Subjective Blind driver comparison threads with same source, same DAC, same PSU (except for one amp), same speaker (the 10F/RS225 FAST), same mic - and mic/speaker position untouched.
Please join in on the fun. There's no voting or anything - feel free to discuss your impressions openly.
This speaker is being used as the reference speaker for a virtual auditioning of several nice class AB solid state amps that I have built.
Thread is here:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/solid-state/295286-virtual-audition-very-simple-quasi-mosfet-amp.html
Amps tested:
- JFET Circlophone
- VHEX+
- FX8 Bimo Mod
- FH9 xrk971 mod
- JK VSSA
- Simple MOSFET-BJT Quasi Complimentary
Similar protocols were used here as for the Subjective Blind driver comparison threads with same source, same DAC, same PSU (except for one amp), same speaker (the 10F/RS225 FAST), same mic - and mic/speaker position untouched.
Please join in on the fun. There's no voting or anything - feel free to discuss your impressions openly.
Any recent thoughts on adding the Dayton Audio AMT Mini-8 Air Motion Transformer Tweeter to these?
No, not really. I have some Dayton AMT pods - they are more like super tweeters and are for use above 3.5k. I suppose it would add some top end to the 18kHz of the 10F. Maybe simple single cap high pass filter above 6k so?
I can't hear that high (18Khz+), I have just enough high frequency hearing left to get a headache from the hot treble if I listen to something like high end B&W speakers at an audio boutique. I am sure I could hear a difference in the treble if the tweeter is adding significant output below 10Khz or so though...
One of my two favorite speakers is/was omni-directional up to a few Khz though I do very much like another speaker which would have similar dispersion/power response/reflections as your speaker here, except with an added rear-firing tweeter.
I was thinking more about A) just satisfying curiosity and B) better dispersion as you get up to frequencies where the 10F starts to beam?
I have both the RS225 and 10F drivers in my collection so this thread is of particular interest to me. I have to do more testing, but, from some preliminary listening I think I prefer the bass of dual Anarchy 6.5" woofers over 1 RS225 - perhaps because I have the Anarchy's in a far more advanced and stiffer enclosure whereas the 225 is in a simple MDF cabinet with just a few braces. I will explore further...
My reason for finding your thread was this question I had: Can the 10F be part of an exceptionally well liked speaker?
It [the 10F] measures well, and, all sorts of praise is thrown about towards any "decent" DIY speaker because there's an immense amount of satisfaction from both having "done it yourself", and, having not spent $10,000 - $20,000 on a pair of "high end" speakers. However, I imagine you've listened to your speakers enough to get over that initial thrill and found that they're actually quite pleasing in the long term?
One of my two favorite speakers is/was omni-directional up to a few Khz though I do very much like another speaker which would have similar dispersion/power response/reflections as your speaker here, except with an added rear-firing tweeter.
I was thinking more about A) just satisfying curiosity and B) better dispersion as you get up to frequencies where the 10F starts to beam?
I have both the RS225 and 10F drivers in my collection so this thread is of particular interest to me. I have to do more testing, but, from some preliminary listening I think I prefer the bass of dual Anarchy 6.5" woofers over 1 RS225 - perhaps because I have the Anarchy's in a far more advanced and stiffer enclosure whereas the 225 is in a simple MDF cabinet with just a few braces. I will explore further...
My reason for finding your thread was this question I had: Can the 10F be part of an exceptionally well liked speaker?
It [the 10F] measures well, and, all sorts of praise is thrown about towards any "decent" DIY speaker because there's an immense amount of satisfaction from both having "done it yourself", and, having not spent $10,000 - $20,000 on a pair of "high end" speakers. However, I imagine you've listened to your speakers enough to get over that initial thrill and found that they're actually quite pleasing in the long term?
Last edited:
The 10F is about as good as it gets. Seriously - I have over 3 dozen drivers in my collection and it's one of top 3. It currently resides as the main fullrange driver in my main FAST system connected to my main amp for regular and critical listening. That speaker has sat on its stand in my lab for almost 2 years since it was built, which is a testament to how good it is. Most speakers come and go. I have my Trynergies which are also excellent but require miniDSP and I am in a passive XO phase right now with all my class AB and class A amp building.
Amps testing and comparo's goin on here in case you are interested - and all done with this thread title speaker:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/solid-state/295286-virtual-audition-very-simple-quasi-mosfet-amp.html
There are several more amps of late but I have not had time to update thread.
So long term is very pleasing. I don't have much hearing above 16kHz either - but, when it's there - it makes a difference in the crispness of the attack on transients. I can't actually hear a 22kHz tone, but a good dome tweeter that reaches that gives cleaner more accurate transient perfect response. Perhaps the most demanding percussion that is hard for a speaker to recreate accurately is a hard drumstick rimshot. The crack it makes is almost a perfect impulse function with damped decay from the wooden shaft and residual vibrations from the drum rim. A high reach tweeter makes this crack very clear and distinct. I can't hear 22kHz but I can hear an improved clean rimshot sound.
One thing about the 10F is it is very smooth - there is not an ugly bump anywhere to be found. Some call this "boring" - I call it accurate and representative of the source material.
Let me know if you need more info on the 10F, but the simple passive first order XO I have shown works exceptionally well with it and the RS225-8. It costs almost nothing in parts so you should really try it.
Amps testing and comparo's goin on here in case you are interested - and all done with this thread title speaker:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/solid-state/295286-virtual-audition-very-simple-quasi-mosfet-amp.html
There are several more amps of late but I have not had time to update thread.
So long term is very pleasing. I don't have much hearing above 16kHz either - but, when it's there - it makes a difference in the crispness of the attack on transients. I can't actually hear a 22kHz tone, but a good dome tweeter that reaches that gives cleaner more accurate transient perfect response. Perhaps the most demanding percussion that is hard for a speaker to recreate accurately is a hard drumstick rimshot. The crack it makes is almost a perfect impulse function with damped decay from the wooden shaft and residual vibrations from the drum rim. A high reach tweeter makes this crack very clear and distinct. I can't hear 22kHz but I can hear an improved clean rimshot sound.
One thing about the 10F is it is very smooth - there is not an ugly bump anywhere to be found. Some call this "boring" - I call it accurate and representative of the source material.
Let me know if you need more info on the 10F, but the simple passive first order XO I have shown works exceptionally well with it and the RS225-8. It costs almost nothing in parts so you should really try it.
Last edited:
Ok then, some further questions - "traditional" speakers with front firing drivers in box enclosures don't present to me the kind of 3d "you are there" imaging that I hear from a quasi-omni directional design, but, the speakers that have been able to best reproduce music in a non-fatiguing natural sound [as far as I have heard] have been of the "traditional" type.
Do you think you're sacrificing anything in terms of imaging, with this "FAST" 10F + RS225 speaker?
You've heard the Morel MDM-55 and prefer the 10F?
Do you prefer the 10F in an enclosure, as opposed to just on an open back baffle (dipole)?
EDIT: Praxis measurement software can show you the difference between your source material and your speaker's playback, free download here: http://libinst.com/praxis_downloads.htm
Do you think you're sacrificing anything in terms of imaging, with this "FAST" 10F + RS225 speaker?
You've heard the Morel MDM-55 and prefer the 10F?
Do you prefer the 10F in an enclosure, as opposed to just on an open back baffle (dipole)?
EDIT: Praxis measurement software can show you the difference between your source material and your speaker's playback, free download here: http://libinst.com/praxis_downloads.htm
Last edited:
Imaging has to do with phase accuracy of the speaker and minimal diffraction effects from the baffle, among other things. FAST designs tend to have excellent phase coherence as the telephone and presence band originate from a single point source. The smoothness of the frequency spectrum, and the lack of baffle diffraction artifacts, help to give good imaging and soundstage. On this 10F/RS225 speaker, I offset the 10F to reduce diffraction artifacts, and flush mounting it helps a bit more too.
I find open baffle to have worse imaging due to the additional "spray" of reflected sound which diffuses the soundstage. It may sound more natural, like you are there because of ambiance, but imaging is less pin-point.
10F works in OB or sealed (with good dissipation of back wave) or in a front loaded horn like a tractrix or a synergy (Trynergy). The best imaging is from the tractrix front loaded horn Trynergy due to controlled directivity and less spray from walls and ceilings.
My best experience with 10F is what I did in this thread - the Dagger tall 3-sided pyramid stuffed with fiberglass. It absorbs the back wave very well and replicate response of an infinite baffle if mounted on a baffle with Dagger on the back.
I have not heard any Morels so can't comment on MDM-55. But it is a large format fabric dome mid that measures well. It is a pure mid though so will not have any highs and no mid bass. It cannot be used in a FAST and requires a 3-way I think. I would be curious to hear one though - could it be a lower cost version of venerable ATC SM75-150S? Those are on my must try list of drivers.
Last edited:
Conceptually my problem with trying to achieve "lack of spray" (as you put it) is that this controlled directivity is somewhat unnatural, isn't it? I mean, I wonder how it sounds to listen to speakers in an anechoic chamber? I never felt like I could be transported to the venue when listening with headphones, but when listening to the appropriate recordings with omni speakers, in a "typical" home room I got a sense of actually being there (wherever "there" was, that the recording was made). I think most instruments (and vocals) are closer to omnidirectional [however obviously it sounds different to be listening behind a singer than in front].
On the other hand, it's also clear that most "typical" home room is far from optimal listening environment, so what you're describing may enable us to mitigate that somewhat? Almost like using headphones, except we're sitting in the sweet spot between two speakers.
I think most of us, most of the time, will want music playing as we do things such as move around, or at least not sitting in a purpose built "listening room" only sitting and listening.
Lower cost, and, smaller faceplate/neo magnet so it can be more easily fit between woofer and tweeter allowing less problems with alignment when the listener moves around or is not in the sweet spot/standing up.
I'm not sure why Parts Express stopped selling the CAM-558 (version of the Morel MDM-55 with round faceplate). Though I did buy two pairs of them before they were discontinued. I also have a pair of the EM 1308 which I had meant to sell, but never actually got around to doing, perhaps because the price is a little too high for these.
On the other hand, it's also clear that most "typical" home room is far from optimal listening environment, so what you're describing may enable us to mitigate that somewhat? Almost like using headphones, except we're sitting in the sweet spot between two speakers.
I think most of us, most of the time, will want music playing as we do things such as move around, or at least not sitting in a purpose built "listening room" only sitting and listening.
Lower cost, and, smaller faceplate/neo magnet so it can be more easily fit between woofer and tweeter allowing less problems with alignment when the listener moves around or is not in the sweet spot/standing up.
I'm not sure why Parts Express stopped selling the CAM-558 (version of the Morel MDM-55 with round faceplate). Though I did buy two pairs of them before they were discontinued. I also have a pair of the EM 1308 which I had meant to sell, but never actually got around to doing, perhaps because the price is a little too high for these.
Attachments
Last edited:
I used to think the same, but my recent experiment with a FAST (sealed sub/OB fullrange) setup proved it otherwise. I've had the best pin-point imaging I've heard listening to that pair. Not just side to side, but front to back as well. One little change I made was to add a "roof" to the OB, minimising the ceiling reflections.
Adding the ambiance I get from the OB, enhanced the "you are there" feeling, and I wasn't listening music through speakers, but I was in the place where the music was recorded.
Might try that Praxis software for fun on that setup.
It is still a work in progress, with enclosures not finalized yet, but it's coming along quite nicely.
Here: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/301601-small-ob-fast-setup.html
Here: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/301601-small-ob-fast-setup.html
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
X, if it wasn't for wanting to test out your amps directly to the speaker would you have still returned to using a low order passive XO after you have said the Harsch is so much better sounding ?
Is it even feasible to do the Harsch passively ?
The 10F seems to be key to your long-term satisfaction, has it beaten out the TC9FD convincingly ? Do you ever feel tempted by the PRV 5MR450 anymore ?
Is it even feasible to do the Harsch passively ?
The 10F seems to be key to your long-term satisfaction, has it beaten out the TC9FD convincingly ? Do you ever feel tempted by the PRV 5MR450 anymore ?
Last edited:
The Harsch is quasi transient perfect and great for DSP crossover with higher order slopes. What I have now is passive first order which is transient perfect. You can't make a passive Harsch crossover very easily because the requirement of a large delay equal to half the XO frequency period means large physical offsets and not possible to do with passive electronics. With 1st order the offset is a manageable 3in. I achieve this by putting 10F under the RS225. Distance to my ear is then farther for lower driver.
I would like to use 5MR450NDY again - probably as a mid in a high SPL 3 way.
So since I found a passive transient perfect XO, I won't need to go back to a DSP FAST with Harsch.