To recap:
The FaitalPRO 5" 5FFE120 has the HF extension of the Peerless 4" (830870 / 830992) but the bass response of the Peerless 5 1/4" drivers such as the 830991, but in a smaller cabinet, and slightly better sensitivity (1 dB) and more power handling.
As a mid-woofer, the 5FE120 seems to have a clear advantage, especially since all of these drivers are running $40 here.
The FaitalPRO 5" 5FFE120 has the HF extension of the Peerless 4" (830870 / 830992) but the bass response of the Peerless 5 1/4" drivers such as the 830991, but in a smaller cabinet, and slightly better sensitivity (1 dB) and more power handling.
As a mid-woofer, the 5FE120 seems to have a clear advantage, especially since all of these drivers are running $40 here.
That is the thread title, but there has been some power creep, see this:
BTW, I think I have given up on the 4".I'm really kind of entranced by the 5" FaitalPRO line. really nice extension AND dispersion.
Regarding excursion,
The published tests (in Voice Coil, Jun 2012), describe how the 15M has decent excursion for the type:
"Since this is a small diameter driver with the short Xmax of a
mid-range (1.5 mm), I was surprised that the 6-V data was not
too nonlinear for LEAP 5 to curve fit."
[...and...]
"Increasing the voltage input to the simulations until the maximum
linear cone excursion was reached generated a surprising
(for a mid-range with no high-pass filter) 102 dB at 7 V for
the smaller sealed enclosure simulation and 98.5 dB with a 5-V
input level for the larger sealed enclosure."
mid-range (1.5 mm), I was surprised that the 6-V data was not
too nonlinear for LEAP 5 to curve fit."
[...and...]
"Increasing the voltage input to the simulations until the maximum
linear cone excursion was reached generated a surprising
(for a mid-range with no high-pass filter) 102 dB at 7 V for
the smaller sealed enclosure simulation and 98.5 dB with a 5-V
input level for the larger sealed enclosure."
The FaitalPRO 5FE120 that Erik is looking at has >triple the linear excursion.
No. The SB12NRX does not have copper in the gap. SB tell you if the driver does on their website, there's nothing about copper. The SB12MNRX is exactly the same, Zaph has measured this, and it's distortion performance is poor.
I've seen claims that lower xmax allows for different design decisions (different types of surround, tighter tolerances between the motor and voice coil) that result in better sound quality. I dunno how true this is - my suspicion is that it may just result in higher efficiency which seems better on a quick comparison ("more lively" "more detail") - but those differences probably become very minimal once the drivers are bandpassed and level matched.
The 15M is definitely lighter and is a bit more efficient. You're not aiming for a high efficiency design, so that's not really a selling point.
Note that 1.5mm isn't tiny for a dedicated mid. Audax PR170MO is a widely used pro mid and has only 0.5mm.
I've got a flock of them on my desk, and the copper is visible. Also it's obvious from the spec. NRX has 0.14mH inductance for 4 ohm, while PFC has 0.26mH.
If its a BMW, don`t, only the neo version fits
Indeed, a Beamer it is. With a shoe horn and some light violation of door panel, I do believe it's ok
)
Shorter voice coil needs less copper, less glue and less vc former material which makes for a lighter voice coil and lower Mms. Less inertia from moving system as a product of low mass allows for softer spider and therefore more detailed/responsive driver. Also, shorter coil demands thinner wire to keep the impedance high enough and that allows for motor to be redesigned for tighter magnetic gap and therefore stronger magnetic field which, along with lower mass of moving system, leeds to increase in sensitivity.
1.5mm xmax is quite enough for a dedicated midrange and, as can be seen from test done in VC magazine, it can go quite loud for home listening. If it's not enough, take two or a larger (more sensitive) midrange.
Last edited:
http://www.zaphaudio.com/temp/SBAcoustics-SB12MNRX25-4-HD.gif
..driven broad-band the distortion performance worsens above 1kHz, but it's not bad (..it's not good either).
(Note: I've seen copper in multiple positions and poorer performance above 1 kHz is almost always an attribute of the cone geometry and surround assuming the coil is sitting in the gap properly *for smaller drivers*. So I'm not sure how relevant the motor is in drivers similar to this one.)
Still,
-what's critical is how it's used.
IF we are using it fullrange then sure, the rising 5th order distortion is troublesome. The rising 2nd and 3rd above 1kHz is troublesome (along with 5th). The overall distortion profile is troublesome below 200 Hz (..but it is for most pure mid-ranges).
HOWEVER,
IF you have a low-pass AND high-pass filter on this driver and are perhaps pass-banding it between 300 Hz and 2 kHz (with sufficient filtration), then I'd very much doubt there would be anything to really complain about. ie. it would NOT be a "bad" driver (at least in the context of harmonic distortion).
In other words, I sometime see this statement that there are "BAD" drivers that are perhaps sub-par (not really *bad*) in certain respects when driven fullrange that turn out to be rather good when used in a properly designed loudspeaker.
-I think people miss this very important point.. a LOT.
What's really telling as far as harmonic distortion is concerned is when it's in the design and then you start testing at higher and higher power levels. IF you get a lot of added distortion that substantially increases with input level (..that's actually worse than your tweeter), THEN you've got a problem.
I'll add this one to the list:
Test Lautsprecherchassis Tiefmitteltoner - Eton 4-612/C8/25 RP
Note: sometimes and add pops-up that add blockers represent as blank that covers most of the driver's measurements with white-space. So if you are using an add blocker then look for an "X" in the right-hand side of the page as you scroll down (and click on it).
Test Lautsprecherchassis Tiefmitteltoner - Eton 4-612/C8/25 RP
Note: sometimes and add pops-up that add blockers represent as blank that covers most of the driver's measurements with white-space. So if you are using an add blocker then look for an "X" in the right-hand side of the page as you scroll down (and click on it).
I like that. I cut the door of my last one with a hole saw to fit a bigger midrange
All should go if its for audio Charles Darwin said:
Where do you get the Faitals for £22?
Thinking of them in this little odd project that doesn´t this far got much of attention: High class On wall - TV-bench/Speaker combo
Here you go:
PAIR PACK (x2) Faital PRO 5FE120 8ohm 5 80watt PA Speaker
Faital Pro 5FE120 5" Speaker Driver 80W 8 Ohm PS21.73 IN STOCK (16 Aug 2017)
As midwoofers they work well for me ported in around 6L and tuned to Fs.
Two for £42 or £21.73each.
Last edited:
Thanks CD.
A quick look through the thread will sum up in these fairly much mentioned drivers with their pros and cons, considered by a number of you. If any of you have any experience with several of them it would be nice to hear about the differencies.
Peerless NE123. €70
Scan-Speak 15M. €55
Peerless 830991. €40
Faital Pro 5Fe120. €35
Dayton RS125-8. €30
Faital Pro 4Fe32. €30
Faital Pro 5Fe35. €30
Faital Pro 3Fe22. €25
Faital Pro 3Fe25. €25
One of these should be used, propably together with the Scan-Speak D2608/913000 tweeter in an MTM set up. And together with some LF driver which i haven´t figured out just yet.
This sounds familiar - see post 85
Are you confident that the "more detailed/responsive driver" thing is the end result? That is, can you tell the difference once the driver is part of a system?
Some people would say no:
Me, I'm undecided, but I do take more notice of blind tests than sighted ones - particularly sighted tests where the tester has something to gain, such as convincing themselves that their recent big $ purchase was wise.
I recently got a pile of 6.5" Audax clones (good drivers and cheap locally), partly with this last idea in mind - run multiples, with the additional drivers supporting the lowest octave, to let them cover a slightly wider band than a single driver could.
In quick one-on-one tests vs. the ScanSpeak 15M (triple the $), my clones sound a little better ...but that's without EQing, and not as part of a system.
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.