Pretty much exactly the path I went down - though when I saw the size of the port required for a four driver ported enclosure I didn't bother to build a box. Would love to have heard the results though!
Currently I've got one pair bodged together on opposing faces of a ~40 litre sealed enclosure, which is producing nice results. The goal would be for the bottom of the new speakers to each sport one of these boxes.
No idea why they discontinued the PR though, as even their own info sheets on the driver showed the best configurations (in terms of # of drivers vs. wattage vs. decent output at low frequencies) were with the PR.
I'm scratching my head at the absence of the PR? It was a natural choice for end users and I can't see a reason why Peerless would choose to do that. Since it shares all of its parts with the XLS10 it can't be a manufacturing issue as they're still cranking that model out. I can only assume it wasn't popular enough.
Shame that, as you say, there aren't any reasonably priced alternatives and the visual match was a bonus too imo.
Shame that, as you say, there aren't any reasonably priced alternatives and the visual match was a bonus too imo.
Last edited:
Yep that's the sort of direction I could go without the faceplate. I'd be a bit concerned about the cavity created by overlapping the surround. Could be a source of resonance and reflections. Just a gut feeling and gard to say without building and measuring but that's the beauty of CAD and CNC, you can test ideas like this without much trouble at all.
The idea here is that the lengths involved are very small indeed- where resonances are a bigger concern are in the larger apeture size of the "surround inclusive" version. You could always angle the piece covering the surround if you wanted to, this is what I wound up doing when coupling domes to horns.
Bunch of small subtle changes and general polishing done.
Here's a high res image showing these: (~1Mb download)
http://www.mediafire.com/?4ytn8s4dp2kf9s2
Here's a high res image showing these: (~1Mb download)
http://www.mediafire.com/?4ytn8s4dp2kf9s2
Last edited:
Nice. One thought though - you've got a solid sheet of MDF not that far back from the mid and treble. Without lots of damping is there a risk of (some frequencies of) the rear wave from the back of the mid bouncing off that sheet and re-radiating through the mid?
My crazy plans for the next box have the nearest sheet to the back of the drivers sloped or curved; so as to try to reduce immediate reflections. One day I may even get the time to test it to prove it's actually worth doing and not just a wild guess
.
EDIT: Just looking at the render of the mid driver. I suppose the diaphragm is well protected by that huge magnet!
My crazy plans for the next box have the nearest sheet to the back of the drivers sloped or curved; so as to try to reduce immediate reflections. One day I may even get the time to test it to prove it's actually worth doing and not just a wild guess
.EDIT: Just looking at the render of the mid driver. I suppose the diaphragm is well protected by that huge magnet!
Last edited:
Hi Shin,
I have had my eyes on those Accuton C158:es for some time now.
Have you listened to them?Why did you choose the C158-6-851 over the C158-8-085? The 851 seems to have a higher odd-order distortion profile between 1-2kHz, larger mms and lower sensitivity than the 085 version. Both have a cone break-up a bit to low in frequency (4-4.5kHz) to my liking, but the break-up seems to be rather damped at least.
To me the 085 seems to be more suitable for mid-range duties, while the 851 would be better for woofer duties, but I guess you have your own reasons why to choose the 851.
Regards
/Göran
great rendering details.
so its accuton now? not skaaning anymore?
henry
Thanks Henry,
Accuton for this one and skaaning for the big guy
Solidworks comes packaged with Photoworks 360 and to be fair the latest 2012 version looks good. The old ones were average. I'm sure if I played around with it I could get some decent results now but I'm a big fan of Keyshot. Its extremely easy to use and the renders above only took 20-30 minutes yet still look good. Photoworks took forever in comparison
Hi Shin,
I have had my eyes on those Accuton C158:es for some time now.
Why did you choose the C158-6-851 over the C158-8-085? The 851 seems to have a higher odd-order distortion profile between 1-2kHz, larger mms and lower sensitivity than the 085 version. Both have a cone break-up a bit to low in frequency (4-4.5kHz) to my liking, but the break-up seems to be rather damped at least.
To me the 085 seems to be more suitable for mid-range duties, while the 851 would be better for woofer duties, but I guess you have your own reasons why to choose the 851.
Regards
/Göran
Hi Goran
I picked a pair of the 851 up from ebay for a good deal less than the new price. Was a total punt really but I'm quite taken by the sounds these make. I have them working well with the Be and textile versions of the SS 3004. I'd give the edge to the Be version but can't fault either.
I wouldn't rule out trying the 085 at all and it'd be a straight drop in replacement.
Regarding the Accuton drivers, the two that are touted as being the best of the lot tend to be the C90-6-78/79 and then the real star, the C173-6-096E. They are ridiculously expensive though, need a highish xover (250-400Hz), so wouldn't suit the side firing woofer and could really do with a wave-guide for the tweeter to make sure the off axis doesn't suffer, but just another expensive driver to add to the mix.
For about 6 years now I've been threatening to buy a pair of those. But the cost is silly now due to the neo motor. Back then it was 'reasonable' and on a par with the skaaning drivers.
There's a ferrite variant of the driver:
accuton® Carefully selected loudspeaker drivers.
And that looks to be a better value unless you absolutely need that sensitivity. Will work lower than 250hz too.
I can't understand why they charge so much more for neo magnets. They aren't *that* expensive, we buy them all the time at work - I reckon the neo magnets in a fancy seas or scanspeak tweeter are worth $20.
"R & D" and status I guess.....mostly marketing and the fact they can sell them.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.