I did say overdamping could be the cause of the smooth impedance curve and that could also be why the FR curve is so smooth. The impedance curve is the greatest clue.
Tweeters with heavy ferrofluid often have VERY smooth impedance curves, and some designers have said they used the versions without because they have greater detail/
dave
re: WT2 - when one of the leads was connected to an amp, the device drew enough current to smoke and burn up - S&L fixed my first unit for about nothing - then I accidentally fried the second unit - was too ashamed to ask what to do with it after that point. I know it used to take a long time in the most precise mode to draw out a whole curve. If I ever get one again then will try not to let it touch another chassis. A DATS/WT3 might fry too (?) - I can't afford to find out 😀
Who knows -- a completely different design by a different designer. Except for PE stealing the name they are not related.
dave
PE could have been a bit more inventive in their choice of name 😱 I'm not able to check nor repair the circuit board. With the cover pulled and input jacks facing towards my body, the upper left corner of the circuit board has a burnt device which appeared to have 3- lower terminals and (?) 3 terminals on the right of its body- its crispy and carbonized in that ~1/2" x 3/8" area 🙁 (have to charge my camera's batteries)- - - wish they had some way to protect against grounding - know it shouldn't ever happen
Last edited:
after frying two WT2 in a row, I was glad to get the Dayton unit - about 1 second for a sweep vs 15minutes
- why would these fry if one of its leads contacted an amp chassis (or ground)?
- why would these fry if one of its leads contacted an amp chassis (or ground)?
Last edited:
Now that Mark Audio is gone for good, we can concentrate on drivers rather than personal attacks.
I put a pair of CHN70's in small TL's actually intended for A7.3's. Crossed them over to a pair of Dayton RSS315hf-4's at 250Hz lr4. EQ's them to pretty well match the EQ I put of the A7.3's and gave them a long listen. They sounded fine. No particular bad features, nothing notable. I ran girl-and-a guitar, 70's rock, classical, the gamut. Then I swapped to the A7.3's. Day and night difference. The A7.3 have depth of sound stage that the HN70 can;t compare. I'm very leery of audiophile adjectives, but you really have to hear the two side by side to understand. The CHN70 are good, cheap drivers. The the A7.3 are clearly worth the price differential.
Cheap drivers well implemented sound like cheap drivers well implemented. But then, I am a sock puppet for Mark Audio.
Bob
I put a pair of CHN70's in small TL's actually intended for A7.3's. Crossed them over to a pair of Dayton RSS315hf-4's at 250Hz lr4. EQ's them to pretty well match the EQ I put of the A7.3's and gave them a long listen. They sounded fine. No particular bad features, nothing notable. I ran girl-and-a guitar, 70's rock, classical, the gamut. Then I swapped to the A7.3's. Day and night difference. The A7.3 have depth of sound stage that the HN70 can;t compare. I'm very leery of audiophile adjectives, but you really have to hear the two side by side to understand. The CHN70 are good, cheap drivers. The the A7.3 are clearly worth the price differential.
Cheap drivers well implemented sound like cheap drivers well implemented. But then, I am a sock puppet for Mark Audio.
Bob
Last edited:
That is what I have in my MTM's. Appart from taking a long term to come to grips with some of their response anomalies (which were not in the manufacturers plots at the time) Once I tamed them I have been VERY happy with their sound 🙂
Tony.
hey Bob - do you think part of the difference is from the relative lack of highs for CHN70? - eq may get the response similar but the aural result may fall flat. I'm going to attempt adding a tweeter to my CHN70 when it comes - may not blend. Do you like 7p as much as 7.3? or does p run a tad "bright"? I have a solid state op-amp RIAA stage - sounds a million miles from a tube with solid state CCS preamp - tubes have so much more texture - doubt if the eq is all that much off between them. Can only use this particular tube preamp for dubbing lps as the 6SL7 is pretty much like a microphone - hahaha
Last edited:
I don't blame him leaving. The CHN-70 measurements in the first post and the singling out was nothing more than chum in the water. I refuse to believe anyone who is a serious member of this forum read those first few posts and didn't know it would turn into a ******* match. All this despite the fact that the CHN is obviously promoted as a driver for specific market and tastes who are not interested in a flat, 'objective' driver. But it got singled out anyway.
At the end of the day you have to ask yourself is it worth it to expend energy you're never going to get back defending your integrity to a black hole of armchair opinions and faceless avatars that bring up the same obsessive, pathological arguments again and again in numbers that never diminish because like zombies, the fallen are replaced immediately by the newly infected, hungry for more (objective!) brains.
His leaving is a loss to be sure but it's a long time coming. Good for him.
I share your observation, if you will look closely it's the same group of people. I see them make this type of comments countless of times in different threads.
Because this is a thread about objective measurements, can you posted gated measurements of your two drivers? It would be great to see what you heard. Seems like you applied EQ, so I'm guessing you measured the response first.
Dear oh dear what a soap opera.😱
Can we please get on to the next set of objective measurements. What's up next X?
Can we please get on to the next set of objective measurements. What's up next X?
Last edited:
I am preparing a set of sound clips recorded from the same FAST system with the different drivers tested. The XO will be fixed at same frequency and no EQ will be applied other than the same baffle step compensation. The drivers will be adjusted for the same level output (relative to baseline SPL - not peak values) and several tracks will be recorded. Then I will post the recordings only labeled as A/B/C etc for a blind listening test.
We are going way off topic here, but I feel compelled to respond. Earl Geddes and Nelson Pass also write on these forums. But they don't hide behind their degrees, nor do they censor posts that question their approach. If you read Nelson's articles on the Lowthers, which have a non-flat response, he has always measured them and applied EQ to correct their response. He even sells products that help DIYers improve the non-ideal response of their full range drivers. Just take a look at firstwatt.com.
Just looking at this thread, some explanation of why the published specs do not agree with what others are measuring would have gone a long way towards assuaging the concerns of DIYers. Another option would have been to put up a measurement with a scale of 50 db. None of this is forthcoming. Instead, the guys who are doing the thinking and measuring and providing data get blamed for being "disrespectful." Is thinking a crime? Am I not to question measurements that clearly appear suspect? Is it wrong to point out that you can get better performance from a $11 driver than a driver costing more than twice as much?
I would urge all the fellow members, whether you "believe" in measurements or not, to study up on the body of knowledge that exists today with regard to the relationship between objective measurements and their subjective implications. A lot of work has been done in this area to correlate measurements with subjective impressions. Rather than listening to me, or a manufacturer on diyaudio, why don't you gain the knowledge straight from the horse's mouth? You will find that there is indeed a relationship between flat response and improved subjective impression. Large speaker makers, such as JBL, Genelec, and folks such as Nelson Pass, Sigfried Linkwitz, Jeff Bagby, and others, are not foolish to chase after a flat, more neutral response.
I also look forwards to comparisons = better than conjecture or mere words - it cost money to explore a bunch of drivers - - folks comment all the time on Youtube videos of speakers homemade and factory so it would only seem natural to have such comparisons available in a speaker forum. It would be good to know the approximate spl at the microphone and perhaps have some suggested headphones for the task.
There should be some room for discussion of "measurements" whether the ones today are fully adequate or not. When I posted an on axis graph of a Nirvana Super10 in a 70 liter 41Hz tuned reflex with no BSC vs a Behringer 2031P "monitor", there was quite a difference - subjectively I did not like either - but they did sound different - and perhaps something like their curves.
There should be some room for discussion of "measurements" whether the ones today are fully adequate or not. When I posted an on axis graph of a Nirvana Super10 in a 70 liter 41Hz tuned reflex with no BSC vs a Behringer 2031P "monitor", there was quite a difference - subjectively I did not like either - but they did sound different - and perhaps something like their curves.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.