I listened to this track on my 3 way that uses the SB mid. Maybe this isn't the best test track. It seemed the vocals wash out the instruments. During the instrumental parts that there aren't actually that many instruments playing, I picked out a guitar, bass and drums, are there more?
@mtige
is it a good track ? i dont know.😱 i like tracks with reverb. you can check on it really fast when the speaker (the whole one) is not good. its missing the depth.
another "you never thought about to use it as test track" is everthing dies from typo negative.
you need a really good speaker to survive the intro. its a cacophony. (also here:separation of instuments) this intro ends either with rain or with applause. depending how good your speaker is 😉
also when he starts to sing, you should hear 2 times a noise from his lips as he opens the mouth.
but yes , this kind of testing needs a second pair of speaker to compare or you need to know the tracks well.
😉 when im able to replace my broken grafik card i will try to do a recording between the SB12MNRX2 and the L16rnx3.
with headphones there should be a chance to hear the differences.
@viper i will test it when im at this stage.
i used the SB12 as midrange in my setup and well, at least it helped me one step forward making a decision. i will stay at metal cones 😉
i like it clear. not colored. (paper signature)
at the moment im thinking about the Seas w12cy001.
is it a good track ? i dont know.😱 i like tracks with reverb. you can check on it really fast when the speaker (the whole one) is not good. its missing the depth.
another "you never thought about to use it as test track" is everthing dies from typo negative.
you need a really good speaker to survive the intro. its a cacophony. (also here:separation of instuments) this intro ends either with rain or with applause. depending how good your speaker is 😉
also when he starts to sing, you should hear 2 times a noise from his lips as he opens the mouth.
but yes , this kind of testing needs a second pair of speaker to compare or you need to know the tracks well.
😉 when im able to replace my broken grafik card i will try to do a recording between the SB12MNRX2 and the L16rnx3.
with headphones there should be a chance to hear the differences.
@viper i will test it when im at this stage.
i used the SB12 as midrange in my setup and well, at least it helped me one step forward making a decision. i will stay at metal cones 😉
i like it clear. not colored. (paper signature)
at the moment im thinking about the Seas w12cy001.
oderered for testing:
W4-1337SDF
W12CY001
SB12CACS25-08
im hoping that in this package is one piece that satisfies my taste 😱😱😉
W4-1337SDF
W12CY001
SB12CACS25-08
im hoping that in this package is one piece that satisfies my taste 😱😱😉
I'm interested in your opinion of the SB12CACS25-08 because I almost used this as the midrange on my 3 way but used the SB12MNRX2-25-04 instead because it seemed to measure better. I used the SB15CAC30-4 for my towers and they sound great, but I crossed them at 300hz and 3khz vs. the SB12MNRX2-25-04 that I crossed at 450hz and 4.2khz.
http://sbacoustics.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/2.5in-SATORI-MD60N-6.pdf
New dome mid Satori. I didn't read the entire thread. Someone reported they heard these new dome mids and thought they were VERY good (I don't remember where this was written up at). Of course, domes don't usually go as low in frequency as cones but this might be exactly what would give you very good resolution. I am also about "micro-detail" I like to call it; very accurate and with very low distortion of ANY kind...
New dome mid Satori. I didn't read the entire thread. Someone reported they heard these new dome mids and thought they were VERY good (I don't remember where this was written up at). Of course, domes don't usually go as low in frequency as cones but this might be exactly what would give you very good resolution. I am also about "micro-detail" I like to call it; very accurate and with very low distortion of ANY kind...
Here's some data for W4-1337SDF
TB SPEAKERS W4-1337SDF (Full-range 4", 8 Ohm, 50 Wmax)
Just make sure you treat those resonance peaks (Fs and breakup) and relieve the back of the baffle so the driver can breathe.
TB SPEAKERS W4-1337SDF (Full-range 4", 8 Ohm, 50 Wmax)
Just make sure you treat those resonance peaks (Fs and breakup) and relieve the back of the baffle so the driver can breathe.
Last edited:
hello all, time for the update for the battle of metal 😉
the shipment took some time as the w4-1337 got delayed.
in the meantime, small boxes where glued, rockwool stuffing made and last but not least, hearing test done.
i did this test as i read a lot in the internet: this and that driver isn't worth the money, a cheaper one can do this also. it's always just a question how you want to use a driver.
well,...
all driver are burned in, an individual box was made for each driver and adjusted to qtc 0.58 with rockwool.
amps and xover from 500 too 2500 where done with the hypex FA123 module.
lets start with the w4-1337 SDF.
really, optical the best looking dude in town.
a short burn in, TSP are close to the factury once.
the desired volume for a closed QTC of 0,58 was also near the simulations.
so, prince charming !
the mms is 3,9 grams, could be really interessting.
first thing i checked was the cone.
it isn't really a cone. it's more like a membrane, a foil.
im not an expert but i thought this might be not so good.
and it wasn't good.
lack in details, 2 dimensional -- sounded like it was behind an heavy invisible curtain.envelopes are not fully played.
you hear what you pay for.
SB12CACS25-8
My biggest hope !!
available in differnet sizes and this really cool white color... a multiway would look really interesting. the price is low and the cone harder than the w4-1337sdf.
burn in, TSP measuring > this driver showed me the middle finger.
burn in like SB acoustic said to do, nothing. 15 hours later: well its like a mosquito screaming to an "elephant ill eat you raw !!" this driver doesn't care.
TSP are far away from factory (more like star strek: where no mankind was bevor) but that was i expected cause they measure with 2 Volt and i use the dats 3.
another annoying thing: simulations with factory TSP said 4,69Liters for the QTC of 0,58. Reality said: you need to use 14,4 liters...
so it took nearly a week to get this driver to the hearing test.
and at least, my biggest hope got destroyed.
playing detail wise, it's defently a step up from the w4-1337SDF. but it seems this driver ignores his own midrange and plays only the upper parts.
also flat 2 dimensional image with missing details. envelopes are not fully played.
another - you hear what you pay for.
*************
insert:
i stuffed the enclosure of the SB12RNX2-25-4 to 100% and tested it with qtc 0,58 too.
it has a paper signature which is like a layer, but it beats the both above when it comes to details.defently a more quality driver.
sad thing, my teenager cats destroyed the surround....
R.I.P SB12RNX2-25-4 !
************
W12CY001
well, i the datasheet state its designed in 2007.
i thought this driver could be outdated by others in the meantime.
the most expensiv one in this test, and to be honest, its ulgy and wouldn't win a model show.
the membrane is hard like a metal sheet, TSP like dire straits: so far way from me, but they also measure it with 2 volts.
I don't believe that the FS of 61hz and qts 0,54 of can be measured down to 45hz and a qts of 0,36 with 2 volts measurments and i really don't like such differences.
other companies are able to supply real tsp.(or at least update their datasheets)
as much as i dislike such things, as good as the details this driver are playing.
3 dimensonal, envelopes are played. its clear/transparent, not dull.
this is the material to build an exeptional good speaker.
only downside, the bill will increased like hell.
so the speaker will be build with those magnesium cones.
its a lot of text for the simple resume, money changes everthing.🙂
regards
Richard
the shipment took some time as the w4-1337 got delayed.
in the meantime, small boxes where glued, rockwool stuffing made and last but not least, hearing test done.
i did this test as i read a lot in the internet: this and that driver isn't worth the money, a cheaper one can do this also. it's always just a question how you want to use a driver.
well,...
all driver are burned in, an individual box was made for each driver and adjusted to qtc 0.58 with rockwool.
amps and xover from 500 too 2500 where done with the hypex FA123 module.
lets start with the w4-1337 SDF.
really, optical the best looking dude in town.
a short burn in, TSP are close to the factury once.
the desired volume for a closed QTC of 0,58 was also near the simulations.
so, prince charming !
the mms is 3,9 grams, could be really interessting.
first thing i checked was the cone.
it isn't really a cone. it's more like a membrane, a foil.
im not an expert but i thought this might be not so good.
and it wasn't good.
lack in details, 2 dimensional -- sounded like it was behind an heavy invisible curtain.envelopes are not fully played.
you hear what you pay for.
SB12CACS25-8
My biggest hope !!
available in differnet sizes and this really cool white color... a multiway would look really interesting. the price is low and the cone harder than the w4-1337sdf.
burn in, TSP measuring > this driver showed me the middle finger.
burn in like SB acoustic said to do, nothing. 15 hours later: well its like a mosquito screaming to an "elephant ill eat you raw !!" this driver doesn't care.
TSP are far away from factory (more like star strek: where no mankind was bevor) but that was i expected cause they measure with 2 Volt and i use the dats 3.
another annoying thing: simulations with factory TSP said 4,69Liters for the QTC of 0,58. Reality said: you need to use 14,4 liters...
so it took nearly a week to get this driver to the hearing test.
and at least, my biggest hope got destroyed.
playing detail wise, it's defently a step up from the w4-1337SDF. but it seems this driver ignores his own midrange and plays only the upper parts.
also flat 2 dimensional image with missing details. envelopes are not fully played.
another - you hear what you pay for.
*************
insert:
i stuffed the enclosure of the SB12RNX2-25-4 to 100% and tested it with qtc 0,58 too.
it has a paper signature which is like a layer, but it beats the both above when it comes to details.defently a more quality driver.
sad thing, my teenager cats destroyed the surround....
R.I.P SB12RNX2-25-4 !
************
W12CY001
well, i the datasheet state its designed in 2007.
i thought this driver could be outdated by others in the meantime.
the most expensiv one in this test, and to be honest, its ulgy and wouldn't win a model show.
the membrane is hard like a metal sheet, TSP like dire straits: so far way from me, but they also measure it with 2 volts.
I don't believe that the FS of 61hz and qts 0,54 of can be measured down to 45hz and a qts of 0,36 with 2 volts measurments and i really don't like such differences.
other companies are able to supply real tsp.(or at least update their datasheets)
as much as i dislike such things, as good as the details this driver are playing.
3 dimensonal, envelopes are played. its clear/transparent, not dull.
this is the material to build an exeptional good speaker.
only downside, the bill will increased like hell.
so the speaker will be build with those magnesium cones.
its a lot of text for the simple resume, money changes everthing.🙂
regards
Richard
I have not followed this thread for a while, but if you are interested in well behaving, read no nasty breakups, and flat mid, this one looks interesting.
I have not used it yet, but i am tempted.
Peerless TPY05W08O0088 5-1/4" Heritage Family Woofer 8 Ohm
I have not used it yet, but i am tempted.
Peerless TPY05W08O0088 5-1/4" Heritage Family Woofer 8 Ohm
@Richard
It would be interesting if you wrote with which tweeter and woofer have you tested these midranges and few measurements would be good also. Just to see they all were listened at same loudness and with same acoustic slopes.
It would be interesting if you wrote with which tweeter and woofer have you tested these midranges and few measurements would be good also. Just to see they all were listened at same loudness and with same acoustic slopes.
How did you listen to these? In a 3-way? Just the driver? Filtered? Adjusted to match a target frequency?
Actually, it was IN FRONT OF a big heavy invisible curtain.
Try it on large baffle with no enclosure to actually here what (any) driver can do. 😉
(..with of course proper filtering and eq..)
Note that there are midrange/midbass drivers that are relatively insensitive to the enclosure and stuffing, but most are not.
On paper, I like it better than the fancy 12MU for the 250-2500 Hz telephone BW, which has too much 'snap' for me and my tinnitus, though would prefer a bit bigger 6.5-7" driver for a more 'robust' low end.
GM
lots of questions 😉
I did the tests in a 3 way setup.
Tweeter seas noferro 650, a modified 900. i think it was a OEM tweeter for a speaker shop.
Bass driver: seas L16RNX3.and yes, the spl was controlled/adjusted.
problem here, the tweeter and the bass could match better to a specific midrange, this might an error source. feel free to give your input.
so, i think the best idea is, you should judge by yourself.
its not easy as details/resolution can't be measured so i think this is a valuable way:
below, 2 flac files one from SB12CACS25-8 and one from the W12CY001.
no tweeter, no bass. midrange only. a simple recording with my dayton omnimic
conditions:
xo 500-2500hz
1min 30 sec nearfield recording, distance of the microphone: 10cm
pro: no Bafflestep, no Baffle diffraction.
con:harder to listen at details.
Song "Illusion of you" from Jihae.
W12CY001
Microsoft OneDrive - Access files anywhere. Create docs with free Office Online.
SB12CACS25-8
Microsoft OneDrive - Access files anywhere. Create docs with free Office Online.
I did the tests in a 3 way setup.
Tweeter seas noferro 650, a modified 900. i think it was a OEM tweeter for a speaker shop.
Bass driver: seas L16RNX3.and yes, the spl was controlled/adjusted.
problem here, the tweeter and the bass could match better to a specific midrange, this might an error source. feel free to give your input.
so, i think the best idea is, you should judge by yourself.
its not easy as details/resolution can't be measured so i think this is a valuable way:
below, 2 flac files one from SB12CACS25-8 and one from the W12CY001.
no tweeter, no bass. midrange only. a simple recording with my dayton omnimic
conditions:
xo 500-2500hz
1min 30 sec nearfield recording, distance of the microphone: 10cm
pro: no Bafflestep, no Baffle diffraction.
con:harder to listen at details.
Song "Illusion of you" from Jihae.
W12CY001
Microsoft OneDrive - Access files anywhere. Create docs with free Office Online.
SB12CACS25-8
Microsoft OneDrive - Access files anywhere. Create docs with free Office Online.
@augpro
yes, xo is done by dsp
as the mic distance is 10cm, nearfield measurements with an digital 4th order LR between 500 and 2500hz are pretty useless. you will get the same curve of all the speakers.
yes, xo is done by dsp
as the mic distance is 10cm, nearfield measurements with an digital 4th order LR between 500 and 2500hz are pretty useless. you will get the same curve of all the speakers.
I'm just curious how closely the responses were matched. I've done these comparisons a lot in the past and it is easy to be led astray when the responses are "close enough". I'd find differences that went away I adjusted a crossover for example, so the roll off was exact vs being "only" 1 or 2 dB off prior (which looks pretty tiny in the roll off region).
really close. the SB12CACS25-8 in the 3 way combination was 1,2db louder between approx 700 to 1khz than the W12CY001. (measured 40cm distance) the rest was identical on a spl check with 1/3 smoothing.
..around 1.5 kHz (and up to about 7.5 kHz, person dependent) - just a change of .5db can be heard. My guess is that a change of 1 db can be heard from 300-1.5 kHz for most people.
Still, I don't think that accounts for the major subjective differences in soundstage and image set-back between the drivers.
ex.:
My Fostex FE 108EZ project, Part 2
Still, I don't think that accounts for the major subjective differences in soundstage and image set-back between the drivers.
ex.:
My Fostex FE 108EZ project, Part 2
Last edited: