10F/8424 & RS225-8 FAST / WAW Ref Monitor

Jump to Latest
#721
xrk971 said:
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.
Click to expand...

ah, I see the challenge.

What about using fc at 800Hz the set-back would need to be 1 inch, but that's not awful. I was thinking of angling the mid-tweet to obtain the offset (see attached sketch)


Perhaps 800Hz is too high ? - but with the 4th order Butterworth the woofer should be OK with the higher fc.

Edit: oops, not 1 inch, but 8 inches :-(
 

Attachments

  • Photo on 2017-01-07 at 7.51 PM.jpg
    Photo on 2017-01-07 at 7.51 PM.jpg
    50.3 KB · Views: 688
Last edited:
#724
That post shows the xo when he was using the Fostex - I'm not sure if it's optimal for the 10F or the Vifa.

I found one chap who doesn't like this Butterworth filter approach: http://customanalogue.com/elsinore/elsinore_17.htm

Not sure that I understand his reasoning but he does provide his preferred solution for time-aligned first order XO.
 
Last edited:
#730
I've seen a lot of talk of the TC9 throughout this thread, but haven't found any opinions about how it sounds in this set up. I have a few pairs of the TC9s and a pair of the RS-225P's. Will someone kindly point me to the thread with any info, impressions, and/or crossover on this combo, please?
Thanks
 
#731
perceval said:
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...
Click to expand...

For WAF and practicality reasons I have to build my boxes into a wall-to-wall bookshelf, defining the space for each box as 30x10x12in (ca 35litres, lying horizontally, the front being flush with the front of the filled bookshelf). Would this box be a good candidate for this arrangement and give reasonable bang for buck? If not this one, what would be your recommendation?
Mike
 
#732
xrk971 said:
The XO for the Fostex is same as 10F. Just worked out that way.
Click to expand...

Hey Xrk971........I've seen all your work on the 10F8424 and others work with the 4 ohm 10F4424, but not seen much on the "other" 8 Ohm version, 10F8414. Main difference I can see is that it has a slightly smaller motor with a 19.4mm Voice Coil vs. the 8424's 20mm coil. Spoke with Madisound people and they are insisting that the 8414 would be a better "Full Range" while the 8424 is more suited to Mid-Range duty. The 8414 is $30 cheaper so there is that incentive. Any thoughts as to whether the two can interchange?
 
#733
I don't have the 8414, so cannot say from first hand experience, but the graphs look very nice. It is not as smooth over the 1k-2k range as 8424, but has less of a rising response on-axis so will sound more laid back. I think the 8424 will be useful in a smaller box where volume is tight and you want deeper bass. But if using in a FAST and you will high pass filter it with a crossover, say above 300Hz, the 8414 is probably a fine choice. Go for it and let us know how it works.
 
#737
Eldam said:
X made a deafing test here some months ago ! 😀... It finally finishing on a civil war where the 10Fs were on the liberation of the trebles while the TC9s found the Vifa more balanced...on the level of their wallet !😉
Click to expand...

Yes well, wasn't that tests of *just* midranges playing alone - it would be a a little different implemented in a more full range system such as this 2-way.
 
#738
critofur said:
Yes well, wasn't that tests of *just* midranges playing alone - it would be a a little different implemented in a more full range system such as this 2-way.
Click to expand...

No, it was not a full range playing alone. It was a controlled test implemented as the full range in a FAST very similar to this setup. There are 6 "Subjective Blind" threads. I think the 10F and TC9 were in the earlier thread with a different sub (dual XKi) but later ones, like No 4, used the exact box here and RS225 as the bass unit.

You will want to see round 4 where there was the 10F vs TC9 vs TG9 vs B80 shootout.
Using same FAST setup as in this thread.

Here are all the links...

Subjective Blind Testing of Fullrange Drivers by xrk971

Round 1:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full...nd-comparison-3in-5in-full-range-drivers.html

Round 2:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full...d-comparison-3in-5in-drivers-round-2-a-2.html

Round 3:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full...ind-comparison-2in-4in-drivers-round-3-a.html

Round 4:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full...ind-comparison-2in-4in-drivers-round-4-a.html

Round 5:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full...d-comparison-2in-3-5in-drivers-round-5-a.html

Round 6:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full...-blind-abx-test-enabled-ff85wk-round-6-a.html
 
Last edited:
#739
Ah, thank you for reminding me of your most excellent test project - for some reason I had forgotten and was thinking about another project where they listened to just midrange units...

What did the consensus on that Alpine 3" OEM driver end up being? It looks very interesting and, like it might have better off axis performance up higher in frequency due to the unique design with the "decoupled" aluminum dome.
 
#740
IMO, not so bad from the reccordings X provided us. Need certainly a little EQ like most of the aluminium cone : make its curve a little diving (arounb - 6dB at listening position so off axis) from the low towards the Highs and you will get a better tonal balance but sill détails...

iirc the ScanSpeak was more neutral to my ears while the TC9 had a softer presentation with less détails in the highs imo but has most of the polls because its more relaxing presentation. To take with a grain of salt as it was a reccording from a mic in a room. But at iso perimiter it was my feeling when listening to them....on my hifi... in my rooms ! You take no risk choosing one of the three ! The SB Acoustic can be added to the list as well ! While the Visaton 80 is the softer and in 5th position (for my tastes) : it has the paper coloration I find not neutral, but may pad down most of the bad sounding dacs...

just my 2 cents
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom