Byrtt,
Very nice!
Congratulations!
Yours came in a real box, I got mine packed in a styrofoam slotted platter holder and taped together with cling wrap packaging wrap with no ScanSpeak box (almost like the bulk packaging). That was strange considering the price and provenance. In comparison, all the low cost Dayton drivers come nicely packaged with individual box and foam cutout to protect the face and surround.
Regarding putting this in the TC9 DCR, the T/S params are way different so you won't get clean bass (volume too big and will have probably boomy overshoot). But as a FAST test box, should be fine.
Only a pair of RS225-8? A pair for each side I assume?
MTM or more accurately WMW
If you have the space and the $, a pair of RS225's in WFW (woofer - fullrange - woofer) would be perfect as then the -6dB cut on the 10F can be eliminated and you have a true 87dB @2.83v sensitive speaker. Max SPL goes up to 103dB rms and 108dB peak I think. You will need pretty big amps for the woofers though as the TPA3116D2 won't cut it for those mas SPL's. Probably an IRS2092 based class D 250watt amp needed.
Box volume is 48 liters (not including bracing and Dagger 1.1 liter). 34 in tall speaker - is almost a floor mount, maybe put miniDSP and class D amps in a base to elevate 10F to ideal 42in to 45in high above floor?
That would be a NICE reference monitor.
Last edited:
Byrtt,
Very nice!
Congratulations!
Yours came in a real box, I got mine packed in a styrofoam slotted platter holder and taped together with cling wrap packaging wrap with no ScanSpeak box (almost like the bulk packaging). That was strange considering the price and provenance. In comparison, all the low cost Dayton drivers come nicely packaged with individual box and foam cutout to protect the face and surround.
Regarding putting this in the TC9 DCR, the T/S params are way different so you won't get clean bass (volume too big and will have probably boomy overshoot). But as a FAST test box, should be fine.
Thanks that was first step to copy your nice shared build
Interesting the bulk packaging info and that could be answer to the relative low cost in US area for a EU product.
Thanks info consequence putting 10F into DCR i had not thought upon that one but sitting into FAST config probably save downsides as you point out.
To learn and compare will keep the TC9FD/SPH-250KE FAST setup from post 63 as is and then compare measurements to 10F/SPH-250KE FAST setup.
Since post 63 with more fine tuning TC9FD/SPH-250KE FAST setup perform as below with XO set at BW1 650Hz. By the fine tuning as seen i got "Phase" and "Min phase" to be nearly overlaid area 100-2000Hz and take this as acoustic slopes are more textbook precise ones now that before and it also sound stunning but that is ofcourse my subjective opinion. The funny phase from 2000Hz and up is because of extensive use of EQ and expect 10F improve the phase area 2000Hz and up.
Only difference plots is first plot is 1/3 smoothing to show how its said our ear conceive things and second plot have 1/12 smoothing.
Attachments
Last edited:
Only a pair of RS225-8? A pair for each side I assume?
MTM or more accurately WMW
besides higher SPL will probably give a more symmetric vertical dispersion lobe.Another transient true one could be the filler driver principle set XO point between RS225 and 10F to 700Hz with LR2 and keep their wiring with normal polarity so they cancel at XO point being 180º apart and then as filler driver a TC9FD filling the hole by a band pass set at BW1 350Hz and 1400Hz.
And not to forget the night dreamer config 25 times 10F in line array.
Byrtt,
Wow, that is a very good looking absolute phase you have there. Pretty cool what can be done in mono using left and right channels of your sound card and Jriver for a full featured DSP active bi-amp solution (in mono). Why is so much EQ needed on the TC9FD? As I recall, it is fairly flat, not unlike the 10F.
Wow, that is a very good looking absolute phase you have there. Pretty cool what can be done in mono using left and right channels of your sound card and Jriver for a full featured DSP active bi-amp solution (in mono). Why is so much EQ needed on the TC9FD? As I recall, it is fairly flat, not unlike the 10F.
Yes it looks good on paper and had been there lot of times before by using EQ to have nice objective data plot, difference is this time subjective it follows objective data and actual sound stunning too even the exaggerated use of EQ. Difference is this time i EQ the individual drivers to have a precise textbook slope in acoustic domain before summing them and in that we use mild XO slope in BW1 (transients true) probably have positive influence on sound too. To have their acoustic center offset calibrated i used SR plot and sweept first digit up and down and ended at 0,6mSec, then i started second digit up and down and here SR plot is too rough and makes nearly no difference but by a coincidence discovered that the sweep up and down had one that overlaid "Phase" and "Min phase". So ended up that at 0,63mSec on axis of TC9FD will get one the measured "Phase" to be true to actual frequency response in the area 100-2000Hz.
Yes pretty cool it can handle this task and when i get the time probably next week will try make a brick wall FIR XO at same 650Hz point and see how that sounds. Know it would make pre ringing but in that its brick wall or a very steep one the pre ringing area would be limited, and compared to IRR BW1 think it would improve vertical lope and the steep slope would probably improve HD when listening at high SPL.
Maybe my strange baffle with CD covers as wave guide is some guilty there and look plot again TC9FD have higher extension that normal without a subjective side effect at present EQ settings.
That is complicated 3-way? Is there an example of this in a real speaker? Maybe I have seen this in TG's Discovery 3-way like this one ScanSpeak-3W-Discovery?
For this speaker:
That is complicated 3-way? Is there an example of this in a real speaker? Maybe I have seen this in TG's Discovery 3-way like this one ScanSpeak-3W-Discovery?
For this speaker:
Agree that speaker is really nice looking.
Did a little study for the XO.
See first REW plot it seems the XO is standard LR2 response confirmed by setting them up in my JRiver DSP engine and loop back sound card with REW listening into the chain, also if it had been the filler driver principle TG had probably shown a nice SR plot between the other measurements : )
Second plot is filler driver principle where the special thing is happening that woofer and tweeter actual use the energy and play sound in green and blue LR2 slopes but being 180º apart in phase they cansel out and present the black slope instead, then comes the band pass filler driver with BW1 slopes and they sum with transient perfect response.
Know couple examples of speakers using filler driver one is bwaslo had a revision his Syngergy. And a fun story is a friend of mine had a pair B&O RL140 (Red Line) many years ago which i really liked how they sounded and now here 20 years after i discover when seeking info for that XO type that they used such a XO config.
Attachments
Last edited:
Steen Duelund (famous for his components) had his own variation on the filler driver concept. There are some threads on here that cover his version, see attached PDF for his paper. His goal was no ringing in the crossover.
Very interesting read, But one has to wonder, wouldn't the top driver being a tweeter and for the filler driver a 10F (should do well) be a better solution in such an attempt?
That would make it a Multi way project and no longer a FAST.
The read from Duelund is worth your time though. Very interesting view on things, much like his other writings on loudspeaker builds. I've read them all for inspiration for my Array build.
One passage I found extremely intriguing:
He then moves on to explain his solution to get no ringing in the step response, using a filler driver.
Very interesting read, But one has to wonder, wouldn't the top driver being a tweeter and for the filler driver a 10F (should do well) be a better solution in such an attempt?
That would make it a Multi way project and no longer a FAST.
The read from Duelund is worth your time though. Very interesting view on things, much like his other writings on loudspeaker builds. I've read them all for inspiration for my Array build.
One passage I found extremely intriguing:
Steen Duelund in his paper said:
He then moves on to explain his solution to get no ringing in the step response, using a filler driver.
Last edited:
Looks like 10F takes 65-70Hz in DCR but let me mention they up against a wall. Below the first plot is same as before but TC9FD added to compare with 10F into same DCR box, note i pulled passive BSC filter for TC9FD when i run active FAST system. Second plot was first sweep after i switched from TC9 to 10F then suddenly 10F got more nervous than in free air, i killed that by adding lot of stuffing and as seen in first plot it helped a lot. Looking at Z curves your Dagger box present much more calm and low resonances.
Won't get further progress today and be away most of tomorrow so it gets sunday before setting up 10F for FAST system.
Listened a couple of hours and system now setup so left speaker a TC9FD in DCR and right speaker 10F in DCR and JRiver DSP padding down 10F so they throw nearly same SPL. 10F seems perform close to a real tweeter or as most of my head phones was a first thought and it sounds very open, the open sound could very well be that the box is too large and that i will keep a ear on when going smaller Dagger box. Just listened Eva Cassidy Songbird album
.10F really throw subjective delicate sound will back that up sunday by objective data and pair it a woofer for FAST system exercises.
Attachments
What is the sound of a XO? Another subjective blind listening test...
So I have tried various different XO slopes and locations since starting this project.
First was LR4 at 500Hz:
The it was LR2 at 350Hz:
Finally I went to BW1 at 350Hz:
How do these sound different? To equalize the problem, I started with a new frequency in between 350Hz and 500Hz - say, 400Hz and apply the three different XO's in succession and record the same sound clip at the same position within minutes of each other. I post the sound clips below labeled only as A, B, and C. Please have a listen and let me know what you think sounds best, and why.
Rename file extension from .asc to .mp3 to listen.
So I have tried various different XO slopes and locations since starting this project.
First was LR4 at 500Hz:
The it was LR2 at 350Hz:
Finally I went to BW1 at 350Hz:
How do these sound different? To equalize the problem, I started with a new frequency in between 350Hz and 500Hz - say, 400Hz and apply the three different XO's in succession and record the same sound clip at the same position within minutes of each other. I post the sound clips below labeled only as A, B, and C. Please have a listen and let me know what you think sounds best, and why.
Rename file extension from .asc to .mp3 to listen.
Last edited:
There is a thread by System7 where he thinks TG is indeed doing the Dueland time-aligned phase linear filter on the Discovery 3-way: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/258017-troels-gravesen-time-aligned-3-way-published.html
So I am understanding now why the midrange needs to be so high quality - it needs a huge bandwidth and the 10F is ideal for this. albeit the example by System7 uses a Visaton FRS8:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
But hey,we are getting deep into Multiway territory here...