On second look, it doesn't seem so bad that I have to reject the driver outright. I agree that I'm unhappy with the H2 peak, but it may or may not be very audible, and I'll not reject the driver outright till I try it. Higher order harmonics are significantly lower than H2 most of the time, making me feel a bit more ready to take risks. And the rest of the HD graph is not too surprising for a "normal" paper cone.
Last edited:
Have you seen the HD data for the expensive Scan Speak Revelator mid?
ScanSpeak 12M/4631G00 | HiFiCompass
The Seas data doesn't look too bad after that. 😀
No. Other way round: The ScanSpeak Revelator just looks as bad as the Sesas Excel. For better HD figures e.g. have a look at
Morel TSCM634 | HiFiCompass
But this gets off-topic now, because the starter of the thread has his Excel drivers already. So there is no use to suggest alternate drivers for this time. Hopefully he will end up with a pleasant system. Well implemented, Excel drivers can sound marvellously, anyway.
I would suggest to measure each driver and set up the xover in consequence of the distortion figures and the target max. SPL, including some dynamic reserve. There is a nice spreadsheet to calculate the frequency dependent SPL in relation to Vd and Xmax: http://www.linkwitzlab.com/spl_max1.xls
- Status
- Not open for further replies.