I think that paper from Adire is written mainly for bass drivers, which tend to have large inductances in their voice coils. Big inductance limits the fast-changing current -- that current provides the force to push the cone in a "transient" way. In woofers, by math (or measurement), it's just a more significant factor than the moving mass.
See that? "fast-changing" means (relatively) high frequencies. So a "fast" woofer is actually a wide range one which can produce relatively higher frequencies than the "slower" one.
It's not that the moving mass is not important, it's just the inductance (in a woofer/Midbas) is even more important in this regard.
Of course if you have a 'woofer' that has low inductance, strong motor, and also a good light cone (with a set of magical suspension to harmonize all these), you got a champion!
OTOH, most wide-(full-)rangers have small and short voice coils with low enough inductances. In this case the factor of limiting the transient speed is no longer those (not very different) inductances, but among many other things...
See that? "fast-changing" means (relatively) high frequencies. So a "fast" woofer is actually a wide range one which can produce relatively higher frequencies than the "slower" one.
It's not that the moving mass is not important, it's just the inductance (in a woofer/Midbas) is even more important in this regard.
Of course if you have a 'woofer' that has low inductance, strong motor, and also a good light cone (with a set of magical suspension to harmonize all these), you got a champion!
OTOH, most wide-(full-)rangers have small and short voice coils with low enough inductances. In this case the factor of limiting the transient speed is no longer those (not very different) inductances, but among many other things...
I don't understand why light cones are used in full range speakers. They can't play loud anyway, what's the benefit of extra sensitivity?
I'd rather have less sensitive full range driver with well damped heavy cone than wildly resonating light paper cone.
besides, I've never heard large paper cone (from 6in and up) that can sound good above 1khz, unless you apply a lot of damping material to the cone(at least it lets you listen to it at moderate volume).
I'd rather have less sensitive full range driver with well damped heavy cone than wildly resonating light paper cone.
besides, I've never heard large paper cone (from 6in and up) that can sound good above 1khz, unless you apply a lot of damping material to the cone(at least it lets you listen to it at moderate volume).
F=ma
So, set a particular acceleration value "a", you got infinite combinations of F & m.
That is, [strong force + heavy cone] and [weak force + light cone] can both yield a same acceleration.
But to ears, I guess the sound characters of both will be very different.
Compare to woofers of the same size, most widerangers have lighter cones. I think this is not a coincidence, but for some reasons.
So, set a particular acceleration value "a", you got infinite combinations of F & m.
That is, [strong force + heavy cone] and [weak force + light cone] can both yield a same acceleration.
But to ears, I guess the sound characters of both will be very different.
Compare to woofers of the same size, most widerangers have lighter cones. I think this is not a coincidence, but for some reasons.
ranger3 said:
Scottmoose said:
When using a single driver for anything that approaches full range, and to me that means 40-10kHz, the overall efficiency of the speaker is going to be determined by the cabinet, not the driver. It is the cabinet that determines the bass efficiency. The more gain you get from the cabinet at the bottom, the more driver efficiency you can keep at the top.
The problem that you face with the DXx is that it has a severely rising response. Regardless of what kind of cabinet you put it in, you are going to arrive at a point where excess top end has to be attenuated or you will have an overly bright, harsh, in-your-face speaker. I use MLTL cabinets that quite by 500Hz, so I have to attenuate to that level, around 92-93dB/w/m. A well designed backhorn might work up to 1000Hz and you gain a couple of dB's. Note, as Scottmoose did, a backhorn is going to attenuate some of the high end automatically, so it is doubtful that you can ever get the Lowther claimed efficiency.
Whether you do it electrically or mechanically, you have to throw away some of the top end. Lately, I have gone to digital EQ prior to the DAC, but the result is the same. The overall efficiency is determined by the available Xmax at low frequencies.
Bob
BTW I know that I have used efficiency instead of sensitivity, but so do most.
Audio Nirvana Cast 10" Full-Range
I am piecing-together a Mono LP system for our largely unused "parlor" (front rooms), and decided to try a pair of AN 10" Cast Frame speakers (hey, I might want stereo too sometimes, I'm not a fanatic!)
NB my "main" system is Altec 811 horns over 15" University HC woofers in sealed cabs. Woofers fall-off naturally (no cross-over) and the horns are padded and use a ~900 hz 1st-order cross-over. All of this is in a VERY large room (roughly 28x15x12) with large doorways (sort of a suburban loft), so it's a good use of a quasi A-7 system. Most of my amps are tube (either SET or ultra-linear PP). Generally, have lots of FR and high eff speaker experience, including lots of vintage, open baffles, MFQTs, stuff like that (just sold a nice pair of Fostex 164s in cherry BR cabs).
I put the 10" ANs in modified "2.8" cabs, (a) cut down a little so I could get 2 from one sheet of 3/4" birch ply and (b) with ONE 3" port according to UniBox software (2" long IIRC). Veneered in ash, finished in tung oil, simple black grille, very high WAF.
Findings: [using (1) my 7355 PP redone HK 500 amp (converted to ultralinear OPTs) and (2) my single Darling 1626 SET]
After about 60-70 hours, I think we're still in the break-in period, so they are QUITE stiff to start with. After 5-10 hours they started to sing pretty well and have steadily loosened up since.
"Directionality" is quite pronounced. Inside the (relatively small) sweet spot, the sound stage is quite spectacular. JUST OUTSIDE that sweet spot is startlingly mediocre. Speaker placement seems VERY critical, especially w/r/t adjoining walls. I find that it helps to give MORE toe-in than AN recommends (e.g. from listening position, just see the outside of the speaker). That being said, I am currently listening to Wagner "Valkyries" thru the Darling (all of 3/4 W) from the big back room, and it sounds superb. So I guess that early returns say either (a) plan your listening position carefully or (b) get out of Dodge; they sound GREAT from the edge of town. [note that I did first try these speakers in the big room (UNDER the built-in Altecs) and they sounded thin and reedy; couldn't get a focus. Thought I had made a big mistake. Moved them to the smaller, lower ceiling front rooms and BAM, terrific.] I am tempted to say that they are more like musical instruments than normal speakers; say a cornet with a mute.
VERY good bass for a FR speaker, VERY tight. Highs (arias, strings, etc) and midrange (Wynton Marsalis trumpet concertos) are way above average, I would say EXCELLENT for the money, but they emphatically aren't Altec horns.
Haven't run a freq response yet (dB meter and audio generator are buried someplace in packing boxes) but have no reason to doubt the AN curves. HOWEVER would like to see off-center curves like fostex provides, as I suspect big drops up high when off-center even a little.
BIG pluses in my book: (1) cast frames lke the 15HCs (2) cloth surrounds, also like the 15HCs (3) phase plugs (I WAS thinking of plugging my Fostexes, but sold them and bought these instead!)
As others have noted, the AN box designs are nuts; a one-box does everything it'll be OK approach. I liked the 2.8 for the speaker height and WAF, but I re-designed for wood economy and tuned for a nice FLAT curve, not a BASSY hump as predicted for the stock design.
Conclusion: one of the best values I've seen in speakers. My Darling amp is making SHARP BASS for once; sort of wish I had kept my 45 SET now. I had all but pushed SETs to the back burner: now reconsidering another 45 (say the Bugle) or a 2A3 Class A PP, something naughty like that.
The directionality, however, is weird and disconcerting. For a dedicated listening room with a fixed listening position (and I mean ONE CHAIR WIDTH, maybe two), OR with the "whole house attenuation" I am apparently experiencing, they are awesome. At the other end of the spectrum (e.g.Home theatre, esp for a crowd of folks), NOT so good.
My woodshop is 24x28, with homosote-lined ceiling, so pretty good accoustics. These speakers sounded TERRIFIC in there; seriously considering another pair (this time in a smaller box of MY design, thanks) as a "reference" speaker for my amp building projects.
Now Playing: Boston Pops, Stars & Stripes Forever. SPECTACULAR piccolo, and super-tight tuba (phleugelhorn?). Get a pair.
I am piecing-together a Mono LP system for our largely unused "parlor" (front rooms), and decided to try a pair of AN 10" Cast Frame speakers (hey, I might want stereo too sometimes, I'm not a fanatic!)
NB my "main" system is Altec 811 horns over 15" University HC woofers in sealed cabs. Woofers fall-off naturally (no cross-over) and the horns are padded and use a ~900 hz 1st-order cross-over. All of this is in a VERY large room (roughly 28x15x12) with large doorways (sort of a suburban loft), so it's a good use of a quasi A-7 system. Most of my amps are tube (either SET or ultra-linear PP). Generally, have lots of FR and high eff speaker experience, including lots of vintage, open baffles, MFQTs, stuff like that (just sold a nice pair of Fostex 164s in cherry BR cabs).
I put the 10" ANs in modified "2.8" cabs, (a) cut down a little so I could get 2 from one sheet of 3/4" birch ply and (b) with ONE 3" port according to UniBox software (2" long IIRC). Veneered in ash, finished in tung oil, simple black grille, very high WAF.
Findings: [using (1) my 7355 PP redone HK 500 amp (converted to ultralinear OPTs) and (2) my single Darling 1626 SET]
After about 60-70 hours, I think we're still in the break-in period, so they are QUITE stiff to start with. After 5-10 hours they started to sing pretty well and have steadily loosened up since.
"Directionality" is quite pronounced. Inside the (relatively small) sweet spot, the sound stage is quite spectacular. JUST OUTSIDE that sweet spot is startlingly mediocre. Speaker placement seems VERY critical, especially w/r/t adjoining walls. I find that it helps to give MORE toe-in than AN recommends (e.g. from listening position, just see the outside of the speaker). That being said, I am currently listening to Wagner "Valkyries" thru the Darling (all of 3/4 W) from the big back room, and it sounds superb. So I guess that early returns say either (a) plan your listening position carefully or (b) get out of Dodge; they sound GREAT from the edge of town. [note that I did first try these speakers in the big room (UNDER the built-in Altecs) and they sounded thin and reedy; couldn't get a focus. Thought I had made a big mistake. Moved them to the smaller, lower ceiling front rooms and BAM, terrific.] I am tempted to say that they are more like musical instruments than normal speakers; say a cornet with a mute.
VERY good bass for a FR speaker, VERY tight. Highs (arias, strings, etc) and midrange (Wynton Marsalis trumpet concertos) are way above average, I would say EXCELLENT for the money, but they emphatically aren't Altec horns.
Haven't run a freq response yet (dB meter and audio generator are buried someplace in packing boxes) but have no reason to doubt the AN curves. HOWEVER would like to see off-center curves like fostex provides, as I suspect big drops up high when off-center even a little.
BIG pluses in my book: (1) cast frames lke the 15HCs (2) cloth surrounds, also like the 15HCs (3) phase plugs (I WAS thinking of plugging my Fostexes, but sold them and bought these instead!)
As others have noted, the AN box designs are nuts; a one-box does everything it'll be OK approach. I liked the 2.8 for the speaker height and WAF, but I re-designed for wood economy and tuned for a nice FLAT curve, not a BASSY hump as predicted for the stock design.
Conclusion: one of the best values I've seen in speakers. My Darling amp is making SHARP BASS for once; sort of wish I had kept my 45 SET now. I had all but pushed SETs to the back burner: now reconsidering another 45 (say the Bugle) or a 2A3 Class A PP, something naughty like that.
The directionality, however, is weird and disconcerting. For a dedicated listening room with a fixed listening position (and I mean ONE CHAIR WIDTH, maybe two), OR with the "whole house attenuation" I am apparently experiencing, they are awesome. At the other end of the spectrum (e.g.Home theatre, esp for a crowd of folks), NOT so good.
My woodshop is 24x28, with homosote-lined ceiling, so pretty good accoustics. These speakers sounded TERRIFIC in there; seriously considering another pair (this time in a smaller box of MY design, thanks) as a "reference" speaker for my amp building projects.
Now Playing: Boston Pops, Stars & Stripes Forever. SPECTACULAR piccolo, and super-tight tuba (phleugelhorn?). Get a pair.
InclinedPlane said:
Well, I'm not sure if I agree. For OB bigger cone is usually better, and not only for bass performance. Probably the 12" is the better, thanks also to its Qt of 0.7.
Moreover, the response of the 10" and 12" units is more linear, it doesnt bump so much on HFs.
BTW, the new Super 8" AlNiCo has impressive specs
inrank said:has anyone heard the 12" cast version, i was going to go for the Omnes Audio L8, but seeing the cast version, looks very tempting, and would not need any bass augmentation (in Open Baffle)
Did you get the 12" cast frame?
I think they would still need a bass augmentation woofer in OB, but should be very pleasant without too.
If you went for them, please let me know your feedback.
JandG said:
Thanks, I didnt know them.
Do you have a response graph? Cannot find one.
Hi! I have built the cabinet that Scottmoose suggested in post 35. This is my first build and I find them to be harsh sounding. Maybe I have done something wrong building them, like to much/little lining/damping... They sound good (occasionally wonderful) on some classical recordings, like Paganini for violin and guitar, but on voices on rock music, like Steve Earle, words are frequently earpiercing, like if some words was recorded with fingernails on the black board. And the over all feeling is a little like listening to a clock radio. My amp is an Abrahamsen V2.0.
I am thinking about using a BSC-filter, and I used the Calculator in the link. With f3=337.8 (4560/Wb) and an attenuation of 6 dB (which I have no clue if that is reasonable or not) I got L=3.4mH and R=7.2 ohm. Am I on the right track, or should I try some other values?
http://diyaudioprojects.com/Technical/Baffle-Step-Correction-
Circuit-Calculator/
Another BSC-circuit (link below) also uses a resistor and capacitor in series parallell to the speaker. Is this something I should use? What values do you recommend?
http://www.quarter-wave.com/Project05/BSC_Circuit.pdf
Cheers to Scottmoose (and all of you!) for helping guys like me!
//Martin
I am thinking about using a BSC-filter, and I used the Calculator in the link. With f3=337.8 (4560/Wb) and an attenuation of 6 dB (which I have no clue if that is reasonable or not) I got L=3.4mH and R=7.2 ohm. Am I on the right track, or should I try some other values?
http://diyaudioprojects.com/Technical/Baffle-Step-Correction-
Circuit-Calculator/
Another BSC-circuit (link below) also uses a resistor and capacitor in series parallell to the speaker. Is this something I should use? What values do you recommend?
http://www.quarter-wave.com/Project05/BSC_Circuit.pdf
Cheers to Scottmoose (and all of you!) for helping guys like me!
//Martin
That's nothing to do with the box; it's only operating below 100Hz, assuming you lined or stuffed it as suggested (if you didn't use enough you might have some harmonic nulls rippling up to about 600Hz at evey odd multiple of the cabinet 1st mode). Everything else is the direct output of the AN driver, including the vocals you mention so the harshness is from the driver itself. You may need a shelving filter as the 10in does peak up sharply above ~1KHz, although you can mitigate that to an extent be listening a few degrees off-axis.
Use the Excel file on Martin's page to calculate the values required -it's a good starting point. The Zobel (series - parallel bit) is optional, although useful.
Use the Excel file on Martin's page to calculate the values required -it's a good starting point. The Zobel (series - parallel bit) is optional, although useful.
Thank you for your answer. I will try a BSC-filter with 6 dB attenuation. But I also want to try the Zobel circuit. When using the calculator for the Zobel circuit, I have to know the voice coil inductance Lvc. But there are no such information on the specifications for the driver, so I mailed the seller and got a graph of the inductance vs freq. How can I use this graph to find the inductance value to use? Is there a specifik freq, like a standard freq or a freq from where I "want something to happen", or is it the freq at the highest peak (which is in the low end)? Tried to attach the graph but it was to big.
Cheers!
//Martin
Cheers!
//Martin
Hi! Thank you all for your help so far! I have tried a bsc-filter (a resistor and inductor parallell with each other, and connected to + on the speaker, right?) with the values 1.6 mH and R between 2 to 7 ohm, and there was a great improvment, much fuller/warmer sound. Best result to calm down the shouty high freq was with 7ohm, but then it was a little to dull over all, even though still a little sharp in the high freq. I think it will improve even more if I start attenuate at a higher freq than I do now. Is a lower value of the inductor the right way to go?
Using the calculator (see link) I should use a 0.16 mH inductor together with 13 ohm resistor when starting the attenuation at 1 kHz and maximum attenuation (I choosed 6 db) at 10 kHz. Am I using the calculator the right way? Link to the specifications for the cast frame AN 10" below.
http://www.diyaudioandvideo.com/Calculator/Contour/
http://www.commonsenseaudio.com/an10cfspecs.jpg
Also, Scottmoose, I saw that you wrote in post 49 that this MLTL design that you have done is for the regular stamped AN. Well, I have missed that because I have built this for the cast frame 10" I have. Is this the reason for my speakers sounding harsh, or should my cast frame work good in this box anyway? As mention above, I´m on the right track with trying filters, but if another box would be better, I have no problem with building a new one. If so, is it to much to ask for the recommended dimensions for that box...
I tried different angles for the speakers, nothing that solved the harsh sound. And I haven´t figured out how to get correct values with Martin´s (at quarterwave) calculator. What I need I guess is to attenuate from somewhere between 1-2 kHz all the way up to 15 kHz, and experiment with resistors for the amount of attenuation. Suggestions for values? The 1.6 mH with 3 ohm you recommended in post 77 was for a bsc-filter, but that is what I started with for my filter. I think it starts to attenuate at to low freq as mentioned above, and not enough at the shouty freq, but on the right way though. I have my speakers in the corners.
Thank you for your help!
Cheers!
Martin
I have tried a bsc-filter (a resistor and inductor parallell with each other, and connected to + on the speaker, right?) with the values 1.6 mH and R between 2 to 7 ohm, and there was a great improvment, much fuller/warmer sound. Best result to calm down the shouty high freq was with 7ohm, but then it was a little to dull over all, even though still a little sharp in the high freq. I think it will improve even more if I start attenuate at a higher freq than I do now. Is a lower value of the inductor the right way to go? Using the calculator (see link) I should use a 0.16 mH inductor together with 13 ohm resistor when starting the attenuation at 1 kHz and maximum attenuation (I choosed 6 db) at 10 kHz. Am I using the calculator the right way? Link to the specifications for the cast frame AN 10" below.
http://www.diyaudioandvideo.com/Calculator/Contour/
http://www.commonsenseaudio.com/an10cfspecs.jpg
Also, Scottmoose, I saw that you wrote in post 49 that this MLTL design that you have done is for the regular stamped AN. Well, I have missed that because I have built this for the cast frame 10" I have. Is this the reason for my speakers sounding harsh, or should my cast frame work good in this box anyway? As mention above, I´m on the right track with trying filters, but if another box would be better, I have no problem with building a new one. If so, is it to much to ask for the recommended dimensions for that box...
I tried different angles for the speakers, nothing that solved the harsh sound. And I haven´t figured out how to get correct values with Martin´s (at quarterwave) calculator. What I need I guess is to attenuate from somewhere between 1-2 kHz all the way up to 15 kHz, and experiment with resistors for the amount of attenuation. Suggestions for values? The 1.6 mH with 3 ohm you recommended in post 77 was for a bsc-filter, but that is what I started with for my filter. I think it starts to attenuate at to low freq as mentioned above, and not enough at the shouty freq, but on the right way though. I have my speakers in the corners.
Thank you for your help!
Cheers!
Martin
like to have a cab suggestion
hi,
i bought some AN super 12 cast frame and like to have a cab suggestion because i get the feeling the 2.8 is not optimal. i dont mind going huge if it s worth it but ideally the smaller the better. i m looking to get the best from that driver and ideally a flat response. i dont mind if the bass doesnt go deep.
thanks!
-pierre
hi,
i bought some AN super 12 cast frame and like to have a cab suggestion because i get the feeling the 2.8 is not optimal. i dont mind going huge if it s worth it but ideally the smaller the better. i m looking to get the best from that driver and ideally a flat response. i dont mind if the bass doesnt go deep.
thanks!
-pierre
This could be the right thread to ask my question. I am looking at the super 12" or the super 10" to use in an open baffle. My idea is to roll them off 1st order at about 500 - 600 Hz. They will be augmented by two Eminences rolled of at a higher rate at around 200 - 250 hz. It does not appear that in this setup the low xmax of the ANs will be an issue. I wonder though what they would sound like at higher levels. Do full range speakers get harsher as the sound level rises?
jamikl
jamikl
I think that rolled off first order it will still be contributing a large amount until somewhat lower frequencies and if this is the case I think the bigger drivers sound better on instruments like piano which have a lot of power. 12" is probably overkill but my concept has always been to use a 10" but I do wonder how much the breakup to give the higher frequences will get harsher at higher power. I intended to use a rear moujnted tweeter of some sort as well. The 10" super looks smoother than the 8" or even the alnico".
jamikl
jamikl
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.