How does the Audax HM100Z0 compare with the Scanspeak 10F for midrange for a 500Hz-3000Hz range in terms of sound quality? With the 6dB higher efficiency, can I expect the Audax to be more dynamic and play louder before compression than the Scanspeak?
Thanks
Thanks
A wild guess - Audax has much lower distortion as same spl. I have a pair of Audax HM100Z0 aerogels in the shelf waiting...
No, just a wild guess based on higher efficiency and bigger Sd of Audax. I haven't seen comparable measurements anywhere. Here is the dedicated thread of Audax with my distortion measurement (sorry I don't remember distance and I have no idea of voltage) http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/243385-audax-hm100z0.html
Because the Sd of the 10F and in your shoes I would compare both with the 10F starting at 700/800 Hz...only! If what you have below can climb off axis to 700/800 Hz (10" max ?)...
Maybe the best trade off could be to blend the 10F with no attenuation in relation to the woofer while dealing with the bafle step.... certainly not an easy task without DSP !
two cents...
PS : you have also the Juhazi way : Open Bafle with a 12" without front bafle from around 180 Hz to 800 Hz.... then adding your 10F (or Audax) which has a relative high XMax (why not a Linkwitz bafle 😉.... but don't remember about the Audax and its T/S (not so easy to source, even in France !)
Maybe the best trade off could be to blend the 10F with no attenuation in relation to the woofer while dealing with the bafle step.... certainly not an easy task without DSP !
two cents...
PS : you have also the Juhazi way : Open Bafle with a 12" without front bafle from around 180 Hz to 800 Hz.... then adding your 10F (or Audax) which has a relative high XMax (why not a Linkwitz bafle 😉.... but don't remember about the Audax and its T/S (not so easy to source, even in France !)
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.