I am curious if anyone has had an opportunity to compare the AE TD15M with the now discontinued BD-Designs BD15. These are two top performing midrange drivers with no equal in my opinion that I am aware of. For any of you who have performed this comparison, or with any other similar quality drivers, what have been your findings? I am more interested in mid and upper midrange performance of said drivers, rather than bass performance. Which is more open and effortless sounding and with more engaging fast transient response? These drivers are adaptations or evolutions of the Altec 416, and then the JBL E120, which were industry standard for a reason. If high power handling or space savings aren't necessary criteria, the mids produced by an ultra high quality low mass 15" midwoofer 1000hz or below, are far superior to those produced by 12"/10"/8"/6.5" etc and or a high power handling 15".
In addition if one wanted to reintroduce a driver like BD15 -- an ultra low mass and highly advanced high power motor 15" midbass driver, how and with whom would one commission to produce such a device. Thank you.
In addition if one wanted to reintroduce a driver like BD15 -- an ultra low mass and highly advanced high power motor 15" midbass driver, how and with whom would one commission to produce such a device. Thank you.
Thanks for the suggestion. I should clarify that I don't conclude that the mids of a 15" are superior to smaller drivers necessarily. However at midfield distances I think a 15" makes more sense and I have observed an effortless to the mids of the 15MI100 which the BD15 is based on which is not present in various other drivers which I've tested. I recently picked up a pair of Purifi 6.5" mid woofers which are extremely clean sounding. Some amount of experimenting and testing different configurations is necessary to confirm which is superior. Many drivers have been ousted in favor of the humble 15MI100.
You may be right though the specs of the 15MI100 appear to be closer to the BD15 than the 15LW30. Keep in mind the BD15 was spec'd at 16ohms.
Have you checked out the Beyma SM115N? Specifically the older version with lower mms and inductance. It gets very positive comments for it's midrange performance. FWIW I had a pair of AE TD15M and I really don't get what all the fuzz is about. It sounds clean and is very extended, but sounds boring and uninteresting compared to Altec 416B. I even liked the lowly and inexpensive Faital 15PR400 better than AE TD15M.
Thanks for clarifying that Lament. I was considering the TD15Ms to test though I have seen several mixed opinions about the product including some issues and will look elsewhere. With that said I'm sure some of those drivers sound excellent and are a great choice for certain builds. I tested a Faital 15PR400 and there are other drivers which I prefer to it. I think it is very versatile given its bass and midrange performance, though it doesn't have the delicacy and speed that I was hoping it would. I have not tested the Beyma SM115N though I plan to eventually as their low mass drivers of various sorts have been my favorites amongst many I have tested.
I think that if the driver is quality.... and excursion is kept below a few mm or even less than 1mm, then the only things left to contemplate are things like timbre, which are related to things like cone construction
You may be better able to find what you are looking for, by focusing on that detail? Is it possible that the low qts and mms "guitar" speaker has something to offer? I barely recall something like a weaker motor force involved with this type of driver? And then I question, is that motor force necessary if just using 1-2mm and more so midrange.... a lighter mms can translate into a higher HF efficiency doesn't it?
Maybe this is the key to what you are looking for, or possibly a the material details, of the woofer construction
You may be better able to find what you are looking for, by focusing on that detail? Is it possible that the low qts and mms "guitar" speaker has something to offer? I barely recall something like a weaker motor force involved with this type of driver? And then I question, is that motor force necessary if just using 1-2mm and more so midrange.... a lighter mms can translate into a higher HF efficiency doesn't it?
Maybe this is the key to what you are looking for, or possibly a the material details, of the woofer construction
https://www.beyma.com/en/products/c/low-mid-frequency/115P80FEN8/altavoz-15p80fe-n-8-oh/ I use this driver as a midbass horn driver 100-400Hz but I think it would also make a nice general purpose mid.
I own a pair of 15P80FEn woofers which I have listed for sale. I agree they are a good general purpose option though I prefer the 15MI100 to them. I recently picked up a pair of 18Sound 15W500 which feature an ultra low mass cone at 55g for a 15" woofer. Even compared with the already clear 15MI100 the 15W500 is substantially clearer and more snappy sounding still. My conclusion at this point is that I prefer a lower mass 15" regardless of the application or crossover point. That said the 15MI100 seems equally sensitive compared with the 15W500 yet presents more weight and authority at the expense of a bit of clarity. The tonality of both drivers is particularly sweet. The 15W500 is as close as I have heard to electrostatic midrange with the advantage of being able to provide lots of electrical and mechanical headroom to a greater degree than any planar speaker I have tested in the past.
The 15W500 produces outstanding bass yet when compared with the 15MI100 bass feels somewhat insubstantial. And those two compared with the 15G40 which I also have on hand, feel insubstantial in the bass department. I am not a bass junkie and I prefer a tight musical presentation over slam, thus I think one of the former two drivers is better suited for my needs. And in the interest of avoiding the merry go round test everything five times experience, I intend to limit future explorations to low mass low xmax high efficiency 15" woofers for a main system. Having tested 12"s 8"s 6"s of the same model line and other premium varieties none are in the same league as the two mentioned here in my opinion.
In some ways the 15MI100 seems like the absolute sweet spot for natural rendering of vocals and timber in a two way system. The detail retrieval of the lighter 15W500 is unparalleled however. Yet in my very preliminary testing thus far it does not have quite the same degree of naturalness compared with the Beyma. I have a pair of 10" Seas subwoofers which are pretty heavy duty featuring an aluminum cone, big magnet, high xmax, 4 layer vc, etc, and can dig quite deep. I plan to experiment with these as supplementary subwoofers in the coming days with both the Beymas and 18Sounds to determine which voicing I prefer. In addition adding a sub takes some strain off the amplifier section of the 15" mid woofer and the midwoofer itself which should benefit the sound.
I should add that I'm not opposed to large subwoofer drivers like 18"s though I have plenty of gear to experiment with for the time being. Included is testing the the three 15" woofers which I intend to keep for now in dedicated two woofer per channel sub configurations, either as ripoles and or perhaps some horn loaded sub designs. The only thing I am missing at this point as some have observed is a proper dsp and measurement setup which I hope to incorporate sooner than later. That said I am happy to have held off on doing so thus far to allow my ears to determine which of the many drivers that I have tested are innately superior.
In addition, in the interest of not leading people astray, I have no idea how these drivers would perform in large scale live sound applications. I do test them at loud volumes to see how they do, which start to loose composure and bark, and which remain the most composed. A driver like the 15G40 with more power, at least 2000W, might begin to approach the sound quality that I hear from the 15MI100 though that is not relevant to my application. In my tests the 15G40 for example barks, sounds nasally, compressed and limited compared with the two mentioned here.
You all are aware of the trend of trying to achieve the the lowest possible crossover frequency with a compression driver horn combo in the interest of having a sensitive low mms device rendering midrange content. My conclusion as of late is that the same applies to woofers and it is possible though not concluded yet that a low mass specifically 15" woofer exceeds the performance of a horn compression driver combo for midfield listening when crossed over between 800-1000hz. Quad 57s produce the best midrange I have heard and rely on a formula similar to this, in terms of radiating surface area, crossover frequency, low low mms low excursion transducers, etc.
Drivers like the AXI 2050, B&C, BMS, Faital, etc mid compression drivers would be the ones to test against this methodology. I plan to do that in an on going capacity once I have the measurement equipment to make it worth my while as I feel the audible differences between those configurations and what I have now would be worse, equal or insignificantly better. My ultimate priority having observed the phenomena as more present with certain drivers than others is to eliminate various forms of resonances in the interest of rendering the cleanest and most effortless sound. I find that paper cones in well implemented devices render a certain characteristic of naturalness and effortlessness.
The 15W500 produces outstanding bass yet when compared with the 15MI100 bass feels somewhat insubstantial. And those two compared with the 15G40 which I also have on hand, feel insubstantial in the bass department. I am not a bass junkie and I prefer a tight musical presentation over slam, thus I think one of the former two drivers is better suited for my needs. And in the interest of avoiding the merry go round test everything five times experience, I intend to limit future explorations to low mass low xmax high efficiency 15" woofers for a main system. Having tested 12"s 8"s 6"s of the same model line and other premium varieties none are in the same league as the two mentioned here in my opinion.
In some ways the 15MI100 seems like the absolute sweet spot for natural rendering of vocals and timber in a two way system. The detail retrieval of the lighter 15W500 is unparalleled however. Yet in my very preliminary testing thus far it does not have quite the same degree of naturalness compared with the Beyma. I have a pair of 10" Seas subwoofers which are pretty heavy duty featuring an aluminum cone, big magnet, high xmax, 4 layer vc, etc, and can dig quite deep. I plan to experiment with these as supplementary subwoofers in the coming days with both the Beymas and 18Sounds to determine which voicing I prefer. In addition adding a sub takes some strain off the amplifier section of the 15" mid woofer and the midwoofer itself which should benefit the sound.
I should add that I'm not opposed to large subwoofer drivers like 18"s though I have plenty of gear to experiment with for the time being. Included is testing the the three 15" woofers which I intend to keep for now in dedicated two woofer per channel sub configurations, either as ripoles and or perhaps some horn loaded sub designs. The only thing I am missing at this point as some have observed is a proper dsp and measurement setup which I hope to incorporate sooner than later. That said I am happy to have held off on doing so thus far to allow my ears to determine which of the many drivers that I have tested are innately superior.
In addition, in the interest of not leading people astray, I have no idea how these drivers would perform in large scale live sound applications. I do test them at loud volumes to see how they do, which start to loose composure and bark, and which remain the most composed. A driver like the 15G40 with more power, at least 2000W, might begin to approach the sound quality that I hear from the 15MI100 though that is not relevant to my application. In my tests the 15G40 for example barks, sounds nasally, compressed and limited compared with the two mentioned here.
You all are aware of the trend of trying to achieve the the lowest possible crossover frequency with a compression driver horn combo in the interest of having a sensitive low mms device rendering midrange content. My conclusion as of late is that the same applies to woofers and it is possible though not concluded yet that a low mass specifically 15" woofer exceeds the performance of a horn compression driver combo for midfield listening when crossed over between 800-1000hz. Quad 57s produce the best midrange I have heard and rely on a formula similar to this, in terms of radiating surface area, crossover frequency, low low mms low excursion transducers, etc.
Drivers like the AXI 2050, B&C, BMS, Faital, etc mid compression drivers would be the ones to test against this methodology. I plan to do that in an on going capacity once I have the measurement equipment to make it worth my while as I feel the audible differences between those configurations and what I have now would be worse, equal or insignificantly better. My ultimate priority having observed the phenomena as more present with certain drivers than others is to eliminate various forms of resonances in the interest of rendering the cleanest and most effortless sound. I find that paper cones in well implemented devices render a certain characteristic of naturalness and effortlessness.
Last edited:
Milezone,
Did you have a chance to experiment with the 10” drivers as you intended, by any chance? If so, what were your observations in relation to a better fit with Beyma or 18Sound drivers?
Thanks
Hi I have not yet. I am still sorting out which drivers I prefer for the mids. Once I resolve that I will move on to woofers.
Seems an excellent choice as its specs near enough match my once hugely popular Altec 421-8H M.I. drivers.
Yes, makes sense.
Is it still deciding between 18Sound 15W500 and Beyma 15MI100, or some other drivers in the mix, too?
I presume you are relying on Beyma FD212 crossover for your tests. Are you still happy with it as far as passive crossovers go for 1200Hz XO point, and its ability to attenuate HF by up to -7.5dB for your needs?
Thanks again.
Actually one of the more interesting, modern pro mfg. large" midrange" drivers. This is not the standard 18s 10nmb420.
2" ISV voice coil (original has 2,5"), lots of copper in the gap (borrowed from the 12nmb420 design), good and light , quality cone from Kurt muller, high efficiency, and limited xmax.
Sadly you have to buy them larger quantities, despite the reasonable price.
https://www.lean-business.co.uk/esh...250-watt-8ohm-10-neodymium-driver-p-2227.html
2" ISV voice coil (original has 2,5"), lots of copper in the gap (borrowed from the 12nmb420 design), good and light , quality cone from Kurt muller, high efficiency, and limited xmax.
Sadly you have to buy them larger quantities, despite the reasonable price.
https://www.lean-business.co.uk/esh...250-watt-8ohm-10-neodymium-driver-p-2227.html