3 way upgrading Jamo D590 replacements and filter question

Jump to Latest
#301
After some listening it is hard to say how much difference the mdf spacers did but i Think the higher freq spreads better in the room, no need for tonecontrols now so it is getting better and better!
The sound is really open and sharp now and that was what i was after.
Next up bass!
Looking at jawens peerless woofer and the monacor kevlar woofer that is recomended for 50l box but expensive.
Anyone tried the Monacor sph-200ke?
 
#302
Belemakare said:
Alright now the modified xovers are installed and tested and wow what a difference! A brighter an clearer sound in the upper range and guitars more up front in the sound🎸👍🏻
Probably a nice thing to do even if you dont do anything else to the speakers.
So far all the modifications have been worth doing
The quest continues😉
Click to expand...

NICE !..And good job!
Im glad for you Belemakare 🙂, these quite small inexpensive mod´s give you a real good speaker and you can do it yourself.
And with the modification on the orginal xover, you get the best out from the new drivers.

Understand if you "miss" the bass a little, the orginal woofer is very weak and dont have so much "punsh"
And i really recomend the Peerlees woofer, you will not regret it...I promisse you 😉

Still very happy with my modified Jamo D590, beautiful and sounds like a much more expensive speaker.
 
#303
pelleplutt said:
Hello all of you Jamo owners! And thank you for really interesting readings. A special thank you to those of you who provided schematics of xovers. I was going insane trying to figure out how my xover was coupled. Never heard of this isobaric xover.
Been reading this for a couple of weeks but joined this forum today!

The reason is, I own a pair of Jamo 707a (yes, 'a', that´s what the label on the rear terminal says). I bought them in 1994 and it seems like Jamo kept this curved design for quite a while, as it can also be seen in 707i and D 590 models (maybe more models?) The interior changed, though.
To cut it short, I have never been a hifi diy-guy but I had to refoam the push-pulled 8" woofers, with success! (Mind you, I am 70+). Since the cabinett is very well built, IMHO, it seemed like a terrible waste to just throw them away.

I recently bought a new integrated amp, Rotel RA-1572 MK2, and the speakers sound just great. However, what to do with a 28 years old xover? I think I need some more clarity in the upper regions, or maybe it's just my aging ears. But they are the ones usually listening.

I can see from Jawens (hey, I'm from Sweden too) and Moorclos' posts that my xover should be the same isobaric 4th bandpass, with other values and names.
My capacitors are: C1 10uF, C2 72uF, C3 150 uF, C4 4,7 uF. Attaching images.

Well, stopping here before you get tired of reading. Your help will be highly appreciated!
Thank you and take care!
Click to expand...

Welcome Pelleplutt ( kul att du hittade hit)

Your Jamo 707 will play much better if you makes the modifications this tread is all about.
The tweeter SB26ADC is MUCH better and cleaner than the orginal Jamo tweeter, it´s "night and day", and the Faithal 5FE120/8 the same.
Much more microdetails fast and gives a punsh.

Did you se my earlier answer in the tread about recomend modificationation on the xover for Jamo 707 ?

Best regards John/Uppsala län/Bålsta
 
#304
Belemakare said:
After some listening it is hard to say how much difference the mdf spacers
Click to expand...

When you put your "spacers" in place and mount the driver, is the driver in the same deep as the cabinette baffle?
Or is the drivers now a little outside the "front" cabinnete baffle? ( black surface under the grills)

The Jamo D590 and 707 have a 5 mm edge ending the front baffle ( to make the grills looks perfect when mounted)
That edge affects the sound negatively, but if you put some 5mm mdf-plate in front at baffle, it will be a problem to use the original grills.

So spontaneously, I don't think your spacers will improve the sound, but maby don´t get it worse either

Regards John
 
#305
Well the tweeter and the mids are not on the same ”heightlevel”? To begin with so that carrys on with the spacers, there are couple of mm clearence for the elements to the fabric of the grill ehen everything is mounted.
I had to take off the fabric of the grill and cut away some material off the frame of the grill so it could fit around the mids and then glue the fabric back again.

What do you think of the monacor woofer?
 
  • Like
Reactions: jawen
#306
Belemakare said:
Well the tweeter and the mids are not on the same ”heightlevel”? To begin with so that carrys on with the spacers, there are couple of mm clearence for the elements to the fabric of the grill ehen everything is mounted.
I had to take off the fabric of the grill and cut away some material off the frame of the grill so it could fit around the mids and then glue the fabric back again.

What do you think of the monacor woofer?
Click to expand...

Maby the 90dB is "better" to keep up with the mids/twe, especially at low and moderate volym.
But at higher volym i think maby XMAX of 4,75 mm will make the speakers limitation. ( but don´t know for sure)


Monacor sph-200ke has -+4,75mm XMAX and 90dB...MMS 37 gram.....FS 28 hz...Power rating 80 W
Peerlees SLS-P830667 has -+8,4 mm XMAX and 86dB...MMS 34,8 Gram FS 42 hz....Power rating 90 W

Don't know Monacor and can´t find much to read about them also I've never used them, but looks a little intersting!

If you are into Monacor maby this is better with 6 mm XMAX and 120 W Power rating...90dB:
https://www.eluxson.se/produktkategorier/335-sph-225c.html

Regards John
 
#309
Belemakare said:
The sph-225 seems like a nice speaker but they recomend 22L box for it for 41hz
But maybe they could fit a bigger box also like the jamos,i dont know how to calculate speakers/havent look into it
Click to expand...

My calculation say´s around 45 liter for the sph-225 in a ported box.
I always calculate like this: VAS x QTS x QTS x 5,7 = liter
So if we calculate the sph-225 with VAS at 24 liter and QTS at 0,30
24 x 0,3 x 0,3 x 5,7 = 44, 44 liter

Also Dayton RS225P fits the box at around 45 liter ported

http://www.loudspeakerdatabase.com/Dayton/RS225P#8Ω
 
#312
Belemakare said:
And for the dayton?
Click to expand...

For the Dayton tuned to 34 hz a 3 inch port (inside its 70mm) = 16,75 cm
Will se i can find wdr file for the Monacor and come back to you

Reegards John
 

Attachments

  • Dayton 225 ported 45 lit 34 hz.png
    Dayton 225 ported 45 lit 34 hz.png
    23.9 KB · Views: 59
#315
Belemakare said:
The Dayton RS225-4 fits 45L with your formula and are on sale in sweden
What are your toughts on that one?
What port does it need to have?
Thanks for your help!🤝
Click to expand...

The 4 Ohm version have 1mm less XMAX and are rated 35-5500 hz but posetive thing is 92,9 dB
The VAS is also 46 and total QTS 0,38, so calculated 37,86 liter

8 Ohm is rated 30-7000 hz ( don´t know why) but 90,3 dB ( 89,1 dB at some pages)
The VAS is 69 and total QTS 0,34, so calculated 45,46 liter

Think both will be fine, but maby the 4 ohm version demands a more "low ohm stable" amplifier ( will se if i can check it with XSim)

Here is the 4 ohm verison tuned to 35 hz, 3" port 14,7 cm long
 

Attachments

  • RSS225P_4.png
    RSS225P_4.png
    54.4 KB · Views: 59
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom